TY - JOUR
T1 - Perspectives: State of national forest damage survey programmes in Europe and ways toward improved harmonization and data sharing
AU - Hlasny, Tomas
AU - Perunova, Michaela
AU - Modlinger, Roman
AU - Blake, Max
AU - Brazaitis, Gediminas
AU - Csoka, Gyorgy
AU - de Groot, Maarten
AU - Duduman, Mihai-Leonard
AU - Faccoli, Massimo
AU - Georgieva, Margarita
AU - Georgiev, Georgi
AU - Grodzkii, Wojciech
AU - Hartmannjkl, Henrik
AU - Hirka, Aniko
AU - Hoch, Gernot
AU - Jactel, Herve
AU - Jonsell, Mats
AU - Kolsek, Marija
AU - Krokene, Paal
AU - Melin, Markus
AU - Milanovic, Slobodan
AU - Okland, Bjorn
AU - Pernek, Milan
AU - San Marti, Gilles
AU - Schroeder, Martin
AU - Seidl, Rupert
AU - Vakula, Jozef
AU - Ylioja, Tiina
PY - 2025
Y1 - 2025
N2 - Recent increases in forest damage across Europe have challenged national forestry sectors and threatened progress toward Europe's climate and bioeconomy goals. Although developments in remote sensing now allow large-scale wall-to-wall monitoring of forest conditions, reliable damage assessments still require robust terrestrial data. Yet, existing data often remain inconsistent and fragmentarily distributed across institutions and countries. Based on consultations with national experts, we here provide an evaluation of national forest damage survey programmes in 19 European countries, identify obstacles that hinder more effective use of data, and formulate recommendations to overcome these barriers. We examined five aspects of national forest damage surveys: (i) legal and institutional frameworks, (ii) data acquisition methods, (iii) damage attribution, (iv) data quality and consistency, and (v) data accessibility. We found that half of the examined programs have changed protocols since 2000 and only 53 % of countries currently have survey programs covering their entire forest area. In 26 % of countries, legal constraints hamper data accessibility to the broader international community, while in 89 % data are available only in the respective national languages. In 84 % of countries, the absence of adequate metadata hinders the usability of the data without inside knowledge. Some of Central European countries operate the most consistent and open systems, while western and northern countries generally exhibited lower levels of openness and consistency. The implementation of coordinated structural changes in national programs that would enable consistent monitoring of forest damage at European level is unrealistic in the foreseeable future. However, certain critical gaps in data coverage, completeness, and consistency can be addressed through extensive data post-processing and integration with remote sensing. Overcoming barriers, such as limited awareness of the importance of transnational assessments, requires improved communication efforts and targeted funding programs. Establishing a coordination unit by leveraging existing policy processes in Europe appears essential to advancing these efforts.
AB - Recent increases in forest damage across Europe have challenged national forestry sectors and threatened progress toward Europe's climate and bioeconomy goals. Although developments in remote sensing now allow large-scale wall-to-wall monitoring of forest conditions, reliable damage assessments still require robust terrestrial data. Yet, existing data often remain inconsistent and fragmentarily distributed across institutions and countries. Based on consultations with national experts, we here provide an evaluation of national forest damage survey programmes in 19 European countries, identify obstacles that hinder more effective use of data, and formulate recommendations to overcome these barriers. We examined five aspects of national forest damage surveys: (i) legal and institutional frameworks, (ii) data acquisition methods, (iii) damage attribution, (iv) data quality and consistency, and (v) data accessibility. We found that half of the examined programs have changed protocols since 2000 and only 53 % of countries currently have survey programs covering their entire forest area. In 26 % of countries, legal constraints hamper data accessibility to the broader international community, while in 89 % data are available only in the respective national languages. In 84 % of countries, the absence of adequate metadata hinders the usability of the data without inside knowledge. Some of Central European countries operate the most consistent and open systems, while western and northern countries generally exhibited lower levels of openness and consistency. The implementation of coordinated structural changes in national programs that would enable consistent monitoring of forest damage at European level is unrealistic in the foreseeable future. However, certain critical gaps in data coverage, completeness, and consistency can be addressed through extensive data post-processing and integration with remote sensing. Overcoming barriers, such as limited awareness of the importance of transnational assessments, requires improved communication efforts and targeted funding programs. Establishing a coordination unit by leveraging existing policy processes in Europe appears essential to advancing these efforts.
KW - Data harmonization
KW - Data quality
KW - Europe
KW - Forest damage assessment
KW - Institutional and legal settings
KW - Questionnaire-based survey
KW - Data harmonization
KW - Data quality
KW - Europe
KW - Forest damage assessment
KW - Institutional and legal settings
KW - Questionnaire-based survey
UR - https://res.slu.se/id/publ/143817
U2 - 10.1016/j.foreco.2025.123111
DO - 10.1016/j.foreco.2025.123111
M3 - Journal article
SN - 0378-1127
VL - 597
JO - Forest Ecology and Management
JF - Forest Ecology and Management
M1 - 123111
ER -