Advanced biodiversity monitoring for results-based and effective agricultural policy and transformation

Newsletter #3 | July 2024

 
Dear Reader,
 
Welcome to our biannual BioMonitor4CAP project newsletter. In this edition, we would like to give you a review of our annual meeting in Lisbon in March this year and share our findings with you. This newsletter also provides you an overview of biodiversity indicators in agriculture that we have identified and that will be used in the project. We invite you to explore the latest developments of BioMonitor4CAP.
BioMonitor4CAP partners gather for the annual consortium meeting in Lisbon
 
In mid-March, the first annual meeting of BioMonitor4CAP took place in Lisbon. The three-day meeting was hosted by Food4Sustainability CoLAB, the Portuguese project partner.
 
The annual meeting marks a significant milestone for the BioMonitor4CAP project: the first project year passed by, initial data has been collected, and the second biodiversity monitoring season was about to begin. The meeting provided a valuable opportunity to summarise the results achieved in the last year, discuss upcoming challenges, and strategize activities in the years to come.
 
”I was excited to finally see everyone again at our Annual Meeting in Lisbon. It was a great time out at Companhia das Lezírias farm, looking at soil eDNA sampling and discussing biodiversity monitoring devices for future EU CAP. The project is well on track and I am looking forward to the coming sampling season”, summarized Professor Dr Christoph Scherber, head of the Centre for Biodiversity Monitoring and Conservation Science at the Leibniz Institute for the Analysis of Biodiversity Change (LIB) and coordinator of BioMonitor4CAP project, at the end of the meeting.
 
Figure 1: Demonstration of taking soil samples for eDNA analysis
 
During the meeting the final preparations and coordination for biodiversity monitoring on the BioMonitor4CAP study sites in Portugal, Finland, Bulgaria, Austria, Germany, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Poland, and Peru were made. Compared to 2023, this year a significantly larger number of research sites will be sampled, with additional monitoring systems deployed to collect extensive data on bird and insect diversity, as well as soil parameters. These data will be incorporated into the BioMonitor4CAP web GIS platform, where spatial information on habitats, species, and soil carbon on the study sites will be accessible in the future. A big milestone was achieved last autumn, when the geo-database went online. However, due to ongoing improvements, it is not yet publicly accessible.
 
To ensure that the monitoring systems developed during the project are indeed practical for agricultural application, farmers and agricultural advisors have been involved from the beginning. In so-called focus group interviews, these stakeholders are interviewed about biodiversity in agriculture and the use of new biodiversity monitoring technologies. A first round of interviews in Finland showed a general interest from agriculture in biodiversity monitoring measures. However, an important contribution of the BioMonitor4CAP project to a more sustainable agriculture will be to convince farmers of the benefits of biodiversity and thus the importance of biodiversity monitoring and the implementation of measures.
 
Throughout the meeting, project partners intensively discussed the development of new biodiversity indicators for implementation in policies. After a comprehensive list of biodiversity indicators for soils, insects, birds, and remote sensing data was compiled through systematic literature review in the first year of the project, the next step is to identify indicators that can be measured with the biodiversity monitoring systems tested in the project while also being applicable and meaningful for agricultural practices.
 
In addition to the technical discussions, the meeting was also an opportunity for consortium members to strengthen the team and facilitate dialogue. “The most important thing, of course, was to meet all the people you have spent countless online meetings with and get to know them better.”, said Ilja Svetnik, Junior Science Researcher at Carinthia University of Applied Sciences/Fachhochschule Kärnten in Austria.
 
Figure 2: BioMonitor4CAP consortium in the oak trees at Companhia das Lezírias farm
 
The first annual meeting was a great success for the BioMonitor4CAP project, both to look back and recognize what progress and milestones have been achieved.and which challenges occurred. But also to look ahead and plan the project years to come.
Biodiversity Indicators
 
In December 2023, BioMonitor4CAP reached another target and delivered a new report, "Review on Farmland Biodiversity Indicators" (D1. 2). This report presents a systematic literature review of relevant indicators for monitoring in-situ biodiversity in agricultural areas, considering above and below ground biodiversity, related policies and socioeconomic indicators. It provides a meta-analysis of existing methods, indicators, and tools to assess farmland biodiversity, evaluating their alignment with national and EU policies and rural development programs. Supporting the full operationalization of the BioMonitor4CAP project, the report outlines methodologies for a baseline data collection to monitor farmland biodiversity and evaluate the impacts of current agricultural policies. This provides a valuable foundation for subsequent project phases and for achieving the BioMonitor4CAP project's expected outcomes.
 
Literature Review on Biodiversity Indicators
 
The ecological complexity of farmland ecosystems poses significant challenges for biodiversity monitoring, encompassing a diverse array of microorganisms, flora and fauna species, populations and ecosystem structures and functions. To address these challenges, the report outlines effective and reliable workflows, methods and tools for systematically assessing both above and below ground farmland biodiversity, while evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of existing biodiversity indicators, methods, programs, and policies.
 
The project’s team developed a structured approach to the literature review, where scientific studies relating to agrobiodiversity indicators were divided into five key thematic areas, namely:
 
● Land Cover (i.e., remote sensing technologies),
● Soils,
● Insects,
● Birds,
● Policy/Socioeconomic.
 
Besides each thematic area, a second order cluster of search terms was based on Essential Biodiversity Variables (EBVs, Pereira et al., 2013). EBVs provide a standardized framework for assessing biodiversity, representing a robust and comprehensive framework to categorize indicators, based on the targeted biodiversity dimension, which ensures consistent reporting across regions and ecosystems. Expert groups were assigned to each thematic area, defining a list of keywords and exclusion criteria. The literature search was performed via two major databases (i.e., Scopus and Web of Science) and paper selection employed a double-review approach, via Rayyan (Yu et al., 2022; w w w. rayyan. ai). The review protocol met PRISMA* standards and workflows to identify relevant research articles (Page et al., 2021; see also w w w. prisma-statement. org). Figure 3 presents an overview of the literature review approach.
 
*PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) is a standard that provides evidence-based tools to help authors systematically review and meta-analyze a large number of sources in scientific literature.
 
Remote sensing technologies have emerged as a valuable tool for biodiversity monitoring, being able to collect large-scale data at frequent intervals, while providing valuable insights into land cover, vegetation and soil characteristics, among other ecological features. Remote sensing technologies have enhanced our ability to monitor biodiversity. The monitoring of soil biology, insect and bird communities also play a crucial role in maintaining biodiversity and ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes. Soil organisms break down organic matter, recycle nutrients, and influence plant growth and soil fertility. Insect species play a vital role in ecosystem balance, with some species assisting pollination and pest control. Furthermore, birds regulate insect populations, provide manure and disperse seeds, ensuring the continuity of plant life. As such, integrating data on these thematic areas, enables a comprehensive understanding of the intricate relationships that underpin agricultural biodiversity and ecosystem functioning.
 
Moreover, a framework of assessment for benchmarking and ranking biodiversity indicators was developed for flexible, robust and affordable biodiversity monitoring processes in line with needs at local, regional, national and EU levels. The framework of assessment considers five key quality criteria, namely:
 
● indicator relevance,
● spatial scale,
● temporal dynamics,
● data accessibility and availability,
● methods standardization.
 
Aligned with the project's objectives, the framework of assessment and ranking system assists the selection of indicators most relevant to monitor farmland biodiversity, ensuring the quality of biodiversity data and promoting the efficient use of time, labour and economic resources. This framework serves as a valuable tool for decision-makers, scientists, and policymakers to support evidence-based conservation efforts.
 
Finally, the report presents an overview of rural stakeholders’ perceptions of farmland biodiversity, assisting the understanding of how social, economic and cultural perspectives may vary across regions and society. The report further reviews the biodiversity indicators at the policy level, focusing on the EU frameworks (e.g., Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework, CMEF; and Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Framework, PMEF), that assist implementation of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), including a detailed analysis of the structure of CAP indicators from the Rural Development Programs (RDPs) and Country Strategic Plans (CSPs).
 
Figure 3: Graphical representation of the literature review methodology, presenting the key thematic areas, the EBVs second-order cluster and the framework of assessment for ranking indicators to monitor in-situ farmland biodiversity.
 
Key Results on Farmland Biodiversity Indicators
 
Regarding land cover, most literature on sensor-based technologies focused on species distribution and abundance, species physiological roles (e.g., primary productivity) and ecosystem structure (e.g., forest vertical profile). For soil indicators, the literature mostly focused on microbiological populations (e.g., species richness and abundance), species physiological roles (e.g., contribution to nutrient cycling), species interactions (e.g., soil-plant dynamics), and their responses to ecosystem disturbances (e.g., agricultural practices). For insect indicators, most literature focused on species populations (e.g., species richness and abundance), species traits and interactions, community composition and contribution to ecosystem functioning (e.g., nutrient cycling). Regarding birds, most literature assessed bird species distribution, community composition and responses to anthropogenic factors (e.g., land-use change and land-use intensity).
 
The results showed a predominance of soil indicators, when compared to land cover, bird and insect indicators. Across all thematic areas, most articles reported on metrics pertaining community composition (34%), particularly for soil biology and insects; ecosystem function
(20%) represented by soil, insects and remote sensor-based metrics; and species populations (20%) dominated by soil biology. Important knowledge gaps were identified in the use of genetic composition metrics, across all taxa, as well as indicators on species traits, especially regarding birds. Figure 4 displays the distribution of biodiversity indicators in the literature review.
 
Figure 4: Distribution of biodiversity indicators in the literature review, as frequency of single mentions per thematic group and EBV class (A); overall percentage per thematic group (B); and overall percentage per EBV class (C).
 
From stakeholders’ agrobiodiversity perceptions to policy recommendations
 
According to the literature review, farmers were the most studied stakeholders’ group, while farm advisors were studied to a significantly smaller extent, and there were only a handful of studies on consumers’ perceptions of agrobiodiversity. Current scholarship on companies’ and authorities’ perceptions of agrobiodiversity were practically non-existent. Studies on stakeholders’ perceptions of farmland biodiversity focused on species-level farmland biodiversity, with landscape-level genetic and soil biodiversity being studied only to a limited extent.
 
Preliminary results suggest the following points need to be considered when designing agrobiodiversity policy measures, to enhance biodiversity understanding and adoption of best practices:
 
  1. theoretical and practical education on agrobiodiversity for farmers;
  2. agrobiodiversity information on food products for consumers;
  3. rewarding farmers for monitoring and enhancing agrobiodiversity;
  4. supporting cooperation between farmers and other stakeholders across the agricultural value chain;
  5. agrobiodiversity research funding and dissemination activities to increase awareness of the importance of agrobiodiversity among stakeholders.
 
In Conclusion
 
The findings presented in the “Review on farmland biodiversity indicators” (D1.2) have significant implications for conservation efforts, policy development, and decision-making. The BioMonitor4CAP project's framework for indicator assessment provides a valuable tool for selecting and prioritising farmland biodiversity indicators in a systematic way. The project's insights into stakeholder perceptions help to bridge the gap between scientific understanding of agrobiodiversity and its societal implications. Moving forward, the BioMonitor4CAP’s team will continue to refine its framework of indicators, ensuring efforts will contribute to further understanding agrobiodiversity patterns and dynamics, assisting informed decision and policy making to protect agrobiodiversity and its vital ecosystem services.
Focus group interviews – for understanding how stakeholders think about biodiversity
 
The BioMonitor4CAP project partners in six countries – Austria, Bulgaria, Finland, Germany, Poland, Portugal – have completed or are still conducting focus group interviews. These interviews consist of two farm advisors and two farmers. Each country has five focus groups representing five different agricultural sectors where there is a strong relationship or potential relationship between agriculture and biodiversity. The thematic categories are: dairy and other livestock; field crops, horticultural crops, high nature value areas or high nature value farms, and agroforestry and organic soils like peatlands. This framework provides us commonality across the countries while also giving flexibility for country-specific contexts. For example, some countries have made groups about regionally important farming such as viticulture and olive production.
 
Focus groups started out with a simple but important question about how the participants would describe “good farming”. This seemingly simple question is both an icebreaker for opening the discussion and an important research question. From there, the participants moved on to views about biodiversity and key biodiversity challenges in their particular agricultural production sector. The next topic of discussion was possible experience with biodiversity on their farms and their views about the on-farm biodiversity monitoring technologies being researched by BioMonitor4CAP. Here, we mainly gained initial impressions about what farmers would like to know about in terms of biodiversity and what farmers might be willing to do to facilitate monitoring on the farm. Following the current interest from the EU on agroforestry, we next asked participants for their views about agroforestry and whether it is suitable for their country and their farm. The final themes of the focus group were their ideal future for farming and what advice the farmers would give to farm advisors and what advice the advisors have for farmers.
 
Feedback from the partners indicates that the focus group interactions have been very interesting for the facilitators and many report that farmers and advisors were actively engaged in the focus groups and enjoyed participating. The focus groups will be used to develop the expert co-creation workshops next year. Results from the focus group interviews will feed into an agroforestry booklet and a report on rural stakeholder perceptions.
Week of the environment in Berlin – Advancing Climate and Biodiversity Protection
 
On June 4th and 5th, the park of Schloss Bellevue hosted the Week of the environment (“Woche der Umwelt”) organized by Federal President Frank-Walter Steinmeier and the German Federal Environmental Foundation (DBU). The event featured about 190 exhibitors from industry, science, and civil society showcasing their innovative solutions for protecting the environment.
 
The LIB joined nine other Leibniz Institutes at the Leibniz Research Network Biodiversity booth, and presented the BioMonitor4CAP project, highlighting advanced biodiversity monitoring for agriculture. We showcased an AudioMoth and a compact camera, demonstrating acoustic monitoring of birds and camera-based, non-invasive monitoring of insects.
 
With more than 12,000 visitors, the park of Schloss Bellevue turned into a marketplace for sustainable environmental solutions. The event invited many influential people from politics, society, business, and science, enriching exchange of ideas and perspectives.
 
Participating in the Week of the environment was an invaluable opportunity to present the BioMonitor4CAP project, engage with interested stakeholders, and discuss technical aspects of biodiversity monitoring and its implementation in agriculture.
Woche der Umwelt at Schloss Bellevue
LIB presenting BioMonitor4CAP
Europe forges new bonds between agriculture and biodiversity – interview with Christoph Scherber, coordinator of BioMonitor4CAP
 
As the environmental and economic costs of agricultural farming systems grow, so do opportunities to spur an ecological change. Biodiversity in agriculture can make it less intensive, promising environmental and health gains. Read the interview with Christoph Scherber, Head of the Center for Biodiversity Monitoring at the Leibniz Institute for Biodiversity Change Research in Germany and coordinator of the BioMonitor4CAP project in the latest issue of Horizon Magazine.
 
» read more 
Comming up next
 
  • BioMonitor4CAP podcast - join us for some field work
  • Field season 2024 - research activities on the selected research sites
  • Field work - introduction of devices used within the project
.
 
Upcoming events
 
  • LANDSCAPE 2024 Agroecosystems in Transformation: Visions, Technologies and Actors, 17-19 Sept. 2024, Berlin (Germany)
.
 
Disclaimer: Views and opinions expressed are however those of the author(s) only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or [name of the granting authority]. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them.
Copyright 2023 BioMonitor4CAP Project. All rights reserved.
 
Obligation to inform you about the collection of your personal data
pursuant to Art. 13 + 14 GDPR
     
BioMonitor4CAP.eu | Contact us | DLG.org

DLG e.V.
Eschborner Landstr. 122, 60489 Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Tel. +49 69 24788-0, Fax +49 69 24788-110
Managing Director: Dr. Lothar Hövelmann
Societyreg.-Nr.: 50 30 Frankfurt/M.; VAT ID: DE114234905
Unsubscribe from this list