Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2016 Dec;45(8):857-871.
doi: 10.1007/s13280-016-0799-0. Epub 2016 Jun 22.

State-of-the-art practices in farmland biodiversity monitoring for North America and Europe

Felix Herzog  1 , Janet Franklin  2
Affiliations
Review

State-of-the-art practices in farmland biodiversity monitoring for North America and Europe

Felix Herzog et al. Ambio. 2016 Dec.

Abstract

Policy makers and farmers need to know the status of farmland biodiversity in order to meet conservation goals and evaluate management options. Based on a review of 11 monitoring programs in Europe and North America and on related literature, we identify the design choices or attributes of a program that balance monitoring costs and usefulness for stakeholders. A useful program monitors habitats, vascular plants, and possibly faunal groups (ecosystem service providers, charismatic species) using a stratified random sample of the agricultural landscape, including marginal and intensive regions. The size of landscape samples varies with the grain of the agricultural landscape; for example, samples are smaller in Europe and larger in North America. Raw data are collected in a rolling survey, which distributes sampling over several years. Sufficient practical experience is now available to implement broad monitoring schemes on both continents. Technological developments in remote sensing, metagenomics, and social media may offer new opportunities for affordable farmland biodiversity monitoring and help to lower the overall costs of monitoring programs.

Keywords: Agricultural landscape; Ecosystem service; Essential biodiversity variables; Monitoring budget; Stakeholder need; Survey design.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Design choices needing to be addressed when a farmland biodiversity monitoring program is conceptualized. Major stakeholders are usually also involved in funding. Once the indicators have been selected, the number, spatial distribution, and size of the sample have to be defined as well as the temporal resolution. Those choices are usually made under budget restrictions
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Austin MP, Heyligers PC. Vegetation survey design for conservation: Gradsect sampling of forests in North-eastern New South Wales. Biological Conservation. 1989;50:13–32. doi: 10.1016/0006-3207(89)90003-7. - DOI
    1. BDM Coordination Office. 2014. Swiss Biodiversity Monitoring BDM. Description of Methods and Indi-cators. Federal Office for the Environment, Bern. Environmental Studies No. 1410, 103 pp. Retrieved 14 January, 2014, from http://www.bafu.admin.ch/publikationen/publikation/01766/index.html?lang=en.
    1. Benton TG, Vickery JA, Wilson JD. Farmland biodiversity: Is habitat heterogeneity the key? Trends in Ecology & Evolution. 2003;18:182–188. doi: 10.1016/S0169-5347(03)00011-9. - DOI
    1. Bonter DN, Cooper CB. Data validation in citizen science: A case study from Project FeederWatch. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 2012;10:305–307. doi: 10.1890/110273. - DOI
    1. Bradley, R.S., and P.D. Jones (eds). 1992. Climate since A.D. 1500. London: Routledge, 707 pp.

MeSH terms