One to rule them all? Assessing the performance of sustainable forest management indicators against multitaxonomic data for biodiversity conservation

Abstract

Several regional initiatives and reporting efforts assess the state of forest biodiversity through broad-scale indicators based on data from national forest inventories. Although valuable, these indicators are essentially indirect and evaluate habitat quantity and quality rather than biodiversity per se. Besides, most of these indicators are applicable at regional or national scales, while their use at a more local level is difficult. Therefore, their link to biodiversity may be weak, which decreases their usefulness for decision-making. For several decades, Forest Europe indicators assessed the state of European forests, in particular its biodiversity. However, no extensive study has been conducted to date to assess the performance, ie. their capacity to reflect variations in biodiversity, of these indicators against multitaxonomic data. We hypothesized that no single biodiversity indicator from Forest Europe can represent overall forest biodiversity, but that several, eventually combined, indicators would reflect habitat quality for at least some taxa in a comprehensive way. We tested the set of indicators proposed by Forest Europe against the species richness of six taxonomic and functional groups (tracheophytes, epixylic and epiphytic bryophytes, birds, saproxylic beetles, saproxylic non-lichenized fungi and epixylic and epiphytic lichenized fungi) across several hundreds of plots over Europe. We showed that, while some indicators perform relatively well across groups (e.g. deadwood volume), no single indicator represented all biodiversity at once, and that a combination of several indicators performed better. Surprisingly, some indicators showed weak links with the biodiversity of the six taxonomic and functional groups. Forest Europe indicators were chosen for their availability and ease of understanding for most people. However, our analyses showed that there are still gaps in the monitoring framework, and that surveying certain taxa along with stand structure is necessary to support policymaking and tackle forest biodiversity loss at the large scale.