The condition of natural habitats is central to EU conservation policy and legislation. The Habitats Directive of 1992 established measures to protect, maintain, improve, monitor, and report habitat conditions. Article 17 of Directive 92/43/EEC mandates that Member States monitor and report the conservation status of natural habitats every six years. The most recent reporting period (2013–2018) revealed that only 14.22 % of forest habitats are in “Good” conservation status, while 53.88 % are in “Poor” and 30.6 % in “Bad” status. This essay reviews the methodology for assessing the conservation status of forest habitats, focusing on the parameter “Structure and Functions,” and discusses its impact on reporting outcomes. We found that the poor conservation status of forest habitats is largely an artefact of expert rules in the assessment method, which cascade a broad range of good habitat conditions into a bad conservation status. Consequently, the current reporting method fails to detect significant improvement and deterioration of the ecological condition on the ground of European forest habitats. While this analysis is focused on forest habitats, the insights may apply to other habitat types. The findings have implications for the reporting period from 2019 to 2024 and the implementation of the new EU Nature Restoration Law. This work explores the limitations of the assessment method and proposes adjustments to stimulate a process of continuous improvement essential for driving the significant and immediate conservation action that European forest biodiversity urgently requires.
Citation:
Harald Mauser, Magda Bou Dagher Kharrat, Bart Muys, When good forests look bad: Methodological biases in EU conservation status reporting, Biological Conservation, Volume 313, 2026, 111610, ISSN 0006-3207, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2025.111610.