Our latest blog post is by Solène Marion, from our Ecosystems Analysis Team. In the post, Solène reflects on the findings of a recently published report on local and national monitoring and how this monitoring can inform nature recovery.
Biodiversity is at the heart of a healthy planet, and monitoring it is crucial if we want to track our progress in tackling the ongoing biodiversity crisis. The UK is fortunate to have a wealth of biodiversity data and world-class national indicators that help us understand the state of our species and habitats. But sometimes, the big picture isn’t enough, especially when rapid decisions are needed or when early warning signals could make all the difference for nature recovery.
That’s where local monitoring comes in. Our new report, "Signals from local and national monitoring will guide us to nature recovery," explores how a more granular, place-based approach can complement national indicators and meet a range of evidence needs.
Why focus on local monitoring?
Local monitoring offers several unique benefits:
- Faster response: It reduces the lag between changes in nature and our ability to detect them, providing early indications that can guide targeted interventions.
- Context-specific data: Local data can be aggregated to track progress toward global targets, but it also helps inform decisions that are tailored to specific places and policies.
- Better conservation outcomes: By linking ecological trends to particular policies, we can improve the effectiveness of our conservation actions.
Unlocking evidence needs
Standardizing and enabling more local monitoring through learning will create a richer, more consistent evidence base that benefits everyone, from policymakers to conservationists. This combined approach means both national and local data can help with:
- Decision-making: Guiding policies, planning actions, and investing resources by providing early signs of change. Comparing how different actions affect biodiversity across local areas helps build a bigger picture of what works. Because local monitoring often has shorter time lags, effectiveness can be assessed more quickly.
- Supporting tools: Tools like models and analysis rely on solid evidence. They need data on how different actions affect species and an understanding of how strong those effects are across species.
- Tracking and reporting change: National programs often focus on specific species groups, while local monitoring can cover a wider range. This broader view increases sample size and allows comparisons between local and national trends. Combining data from many local sites also helps spot early warning signs.
Working across scales is key to understanding and reversing biodiversity loss. For example, a local knowledge of what drives biodiversity change is vital for tailoring actions to specific contexts. At the same time, large-scale evidence is crucial for shaping policy and achieving big wins.
Citizen science and remote sensing are highlighted in the report as efficient, cost-effective ways to expand local monitoring, learning from national monitoring. By involving more people and leveraging new technologies, we can gather the data needed to support informed decisions at every scale.
What’s next?
Looking ahead, the report recommends a focus on mapping available evidence, mobilizing data, and removing barriers, especially for citizen science. Enhanced coordination among stakeholders and better integration of local and national data will be key to building a robust nature evidence base for the future. Further work by JNCC with partners will explore these recommendations further.
Published: