Skip to the content


Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss


Data extracted in April 2025.

Planned article update: June 2026.

Highlights


Goal-level assessment of SDG 15 on “Life on land” showing the EU has made a slight movement away during the most recent five-year period of available data.
EU trend of SDG 15 on life on land

This article is a part of a set of statistical articles, which are based on the Eurostat publication ’Sustainable development in the European Union — Monitoring report on progress towards the SDGs in an EU context — 2025 edition’. This report is the ninth edition of Eurostat’s series of monitoring reports on sustainable development, which provide a quantitative assessment of progress of the EU towards the SDGs in an EU context.

SDG 15 seeks to protect, restore and promote the conservation and sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems. This includes efforts to sustainably manage forests and halt deforestation, combat desertification, restore degraded land and soil, halt biodiversity loss and protect threatened species.

Life on land in the EU: overview and key trends

SDG 15 is one of the key goals at the international level that addresses biodiversity and ecosystems. In the EU, this goal ensures that the health and functioning of terrestrial ecosystems and the delivery of ecosystem services remain a priority, especially in the face of global trends such as population growth, accelerating urbanisation and an increasing need for natural resources, as well as the impacts of climate change. Monitoring SDG 15 in an EU context focuses on alterations in ecosystem status, land degradation and biodiversity. Over the five-year period assessed, the EU has experienced a number of negative developments in the indicators analysed here, showing a movement away from the sustainable development objectives in SDG 15. While the EU’s forest area has grown slightly and the biochemical oxygen demand in rivers has improved, phosphate pollution of EU rivers has worsened again. Land degradation continues, with increasing land take and drought impact. Biodiversity indicators show a long-term and continued decline in common birds and grassland butterflies in the EU. Moreover, the designation of new terrestrial protected areas has stagnated, meaning that, at the current pace, the EU will not achieve the respective 2030 target.

  • A table showing the indicators measuring progress towards SDG 15 in the EU.

    Table 1: Indicators measuring progress towards SDG 15, EU

  • A table showing the Explanation of symbols for indicating progress towards SD objectives and targets.

    Table 2: Explanation of symbols for indicating progress towards SD objectives and targets

Ecosystem status

Humans benefit greatly from many ecosystem services, such as clean air, purified water and food provision. In addition, terrestrial ecosystems provide natural resources used in industrial processes and cultural services such as outdoor recreation. Other services ecosystems offer include protection from natural disasters, such as flooding, and mitigation of the negative effects of climate change. Human activities that degrade ecosystems, including pollution and the overuse of resources, threaten animals and plants and, as a result, the provision of ecosystem services and their benefits to human well-being [1].

In 2019, the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) released a Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. The report’s key findings indicate that negative trends in biodiversity and ecosystem services are expected to hinder progress towards the 2030 Agenda and its SDGs. As such, current global conservation and sustainability goals will not be met unless transformative change is implemented. In 2021, the European Commission published the report Accounting for ecosystems and their services in the European Union (INCA), which delivered an integrated system of ecosystem accounts for the EU. The report’s key findings suggest that between 2000 and 2018, changes in the extent of most ecosystem types have been small in relative terms. However, urban ecosystems have seen a significant increase in their extent, indicating a continued expansion of urbanised areas at the expense of semi-natural ecosystems and farmland. The report also suggests that sites in the Natura 2000 network tend to have a higher degree of ecosystem stability than those outside the network [2].

Some types of terrestrial ecosystems (for example, wetlands, heathlands and scrub) and the pressures placed on them (such as invasive species, habitat fragmentation, and noise and light pollution) are not monitored in this report due to data shortcomings. It is therefore important to recognise the limitations in presenting a full and complete picture of Europe’s terrestrial ecosystems, the status of which cannot be fully assessed with the long-term datasets that are currently available.

The share of forest area in the EU is growing slowly

Europe’s forests provide multiple benefits, such as enhanced soil fertility and soil moisture conservation, carbon storage, and habitats for animals and plants. They also provide employment in rural areas and help mitigate climate change and regulate the microclimate. In 2022, forests covered 38.7% of the EU’s total area. Between 2017 and 2022, the proportion increased only slightly, by 0.3 percentage points. It needs to be noted that these figures are not comparable with the data presented in previous editions of this report, which were based on a different methodology and included both forests and other wooded land (while the figures presented here refer to forests only).

Currently, forests are affected by pressures from habitat degradation and loss, invasive alien species, pollutants and excessive nutrient loads, as well as climate change [3], which has led to persistent droughts and heatwaves. This means that EU efforts to retain and sustainably manage its forested areas are increasingly important. According to the 2020 State of Nature in the EU assessment, forests covered by the Habitats Directive account for about 27% of the total forest area in the EU. Only 14% of these forests are in good conservation status, while the rest are in a poor or bad condition. Nevertheless, the report highlights that forest habitats show the highest proportion of improving trends compared with the assessments of other habitat types.

Organic and phosphate pollution levels in EU rivers have decreased over the long term, even though short-term trends have been more mixed

The ecological status of European water bodies gives an important indication of how Europe’s natural environment is faring in the face of pressures from human use. Two indicators monitor progress in this area: biochemical oxygen demand in rivers and phosphate in rivers. While these indicators paint a somewhat favourable picture of the EU’s progress in making rivers cleaner over the past 20 years, the short-term developments have been less clear-cut.

Biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) in rivers is an indicator of organic water pollution and the effectiveness of water treatment. When a high level of oxygen (O2) is required for the microbiological decomposition of organic compounds in water, less O2 is available for other river species. As such, biochemical oxygen demand provides an indication of a river system’s overall health. Available data for 17 Member States show an overall decline in BOD in EU rivers, from 3.0 milligrams per litre (mg/L) in 2007 to 2.7 mg/L in 2022. The trend, however, has not been continuous. While BOD levels were showing a downward trend up to 2011, they had climbed back to 3.2 mg/L by 2015 before falling again. Since 2018, BOD levels have stabilised at around 2.7 mg/L. Overall, BOD levels in EU rivers have fallen by 9.9% since 2007 and by 6.2% since 2017. Between 2017 and 2022, 11 out of 17 reporting Member States saw reductions in BOD in their rivers. The overall decrease in BOD values is mainly linked to a general improvement in wastewater collection and treatment throughout Europe.

Phosphate (PO4) in rivers can originate from agricultural production, urban wastewater and industrial discharges. Heavy loads of phosphate in rivers can harm the environment by causing biodiversity loss and water eutrophication. Data on phosphate concentrations in EU rivers are available for 15 Member States. They show a marked improvement between 2007 and 2011, after which, however, the trend levelled off and even started increasing again. Thus, while the phosphate concentration of 0.074 mg/L recorded in 2022 is considerably below the values reported in the early 2000s of around 0.093 mg/L, it is 10.4% higher than in 2017.

The overall positive long-term trend is to some extent the result of measures implemented under the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive, especially the introduction of phosphate-free detergents [4]. The recent turnaround may be related to the slower decrease in phosphorus emissions from the agricultural sector and increasing phosphorus fertiliser consumption at the EU level [5]. Of all the reporting Member States, rivers in Sweden and Finland on average had the lowest phosphate concentrations between 2017 and 2022. This is likely to be a result of their low population densities and high levels of wastewater collection and treatment. In contrast, relatively high concentrations were found in some Member States with high population densities and/or intensive agriculture. The higher short-term values observed, particularly in Belgium, Spain, Lithuania and Bulgaria, may lead to freshwater eutrophication [6].

Land degradation

Land degradation is linked to the long-term functionality and biological productivity of land or land-based ecosystems. It is a complex phenomenon bringing together several elements, including soil degradation and the capacity of land to sustain water resources, biodiversity and primary productivity [7]. Soil degradation by itself covers many aspects such as soil sealing and contamination, erosion by wind and water, loss of soil biodiversity, compaction and decline in organic matter, along with desertification, acidification and salination [8]. Not all of these threats to soil quality can be covered in the EU SDG indicator set, so the analysis in this report has been limited to change in imperviousness, the area impacted by drought and the risk of soil erosion by water.

Land take continues to rise in the EU

Land take is described as the process of transforming agricultural, forest and other semi-natural and natural areas into artificial areas. It often means an increase in settlement area over time, usually at the expense of agricultural areas. Land take can be monitored using the Copernicus CORINE land cover datasets, which have been published every six years since 2000. Net land take includes the 'reverse land take process', which occurs when artificial areas are returned to non-artificial land categories through recultivation and renaturalisation. According to data from the European Environment Agency (EEA), net land take in the EU amounted to 11 845 square kilometres (km2) between 2000 and 2018, equalling an average annual net land take of 658 km2. Even though the rate of net land take fell by 60% over the three observation periods, there is still a long way to go to meet the ‘no net land take’ policy target for 2050.

In all three observation periods, EEA data show that agricultural areas were the most likely to be converted to artificial surfaces, reducing the amount of land available for food and feed production. This increases fragmentation and loss of natural habitats. Furthermore, artificial areas create plots that are isolated from functional ecosystems and can lead to greater flood risk and more frequent rapid surface run off [9]. Moreover, sealed lands cannot store carbon and thereby contribute to greenhouse gas emissions and climate change.

Soil sealing is the most intense form of land take and is essentially an irreversible process. It destroys or covers soils with layers of partly or completely impermeable artificial material such as asphalt and concrete [10]. Increases in the area of sealed land can be used to estimate land-use change for human use or intensification. Between 2006 and 2018, the area of sealed soil in the EU grew by 3 605 km² or 3.4%. In 2018, 2.7% of the EU area was covered with impervious materials. Across Member States, the share of sealed soil area ranged from below 1% in Sweden and Finland to around 10% in Belgium and the Netherlands up to 18% in Malta.

The area at risk of severe soil erosion by water has decreased slightly in the EU

Soil is a resource that provides multiple benefits to society, including the provision of raw materials, food production, storage, filtration and the transformation of many substances, including water, carbon and nitrogen. Maintaining soil health ensures the continued provision of these benefits. While soil erosion by water is the biggest threat to EU soils, other erosion processes, including erosion from tillage, wind and crop harvesting, also contribute to soil degradation simultaneously or subsequently. Co-occurring processes may enhance and trigger each other or lead to self-reinforcing feedback loops, thus enhancing the severity of soil degradation [11].

More than 5% of the EU’s non-artificial erodible land area is estimated to be at risk of severe soil erosion by water (referring to soil loss of more than 10 tonnes per hectare per year). Overall, water erosion is the major cause of soil displacement, both quantitatively (51% of the total displacement) and spatially (57% of the total area) [12]. Hotspots are found in particular in Mediterranean areas and some Alpine regions, mainly due to a combination of steep topography and high rainfall erosivity [13]. Modelling results show that water erosion could rise by up to 22.5% by 2050 compared with today due to climate change and increased erosivity [14]. Other erosion processes are tillage erosion (36% of the total displacement), wind erosion (10%) and crop harvesting (2.7%) [15]. These processes often occur almost unnoticed without leaving substantial geomorphic evidence but may act as a trigger and enhance soil degradation. Accordingly, evidence suggests that countries such as Denmark and the Netherlands, which are relatively unaffected by water erosion, are prone to wind erosion risks [16].

Efforts to address and mitigate soil erosion by water have helped to reduce the estimated EU land area at risk of severe soil erosion by water, from 198 607 km² in 2010 to 196 853 km² in 2016, equalling a decrease of 0.9%. This represents a considerable slowdown compared with the period 2000 to 2010, when the estimated area at risk fell by 12.6%.

Between 2010 and 2016, arable land experienced the greatest reduction in area at risk of soil erosion compared with other land types [17]. Here, improvements due to the implementation of agri-environmental standards and measures under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) may have helped to reduce the mean rate of soil loss by water erosion. This includes the application of soil conservation practices such as reduced tillage, preservation of a minimum soil cover, reduction in the area of bare soils, contour farming along slopes, maintenance of terraces and stone walls, and extended use of grass margins [18]. Nevertheless, the cost of lost agricultural productivity due to water erosion in the EU is estimated at around EUR 1.3 billion annually, and the cost of removing an estimated 135 million m3 of accumulated sediment due to water erosion is estimated at roughly EUR 2.3 billion annually [19].

Drought impact eased in the EU in 2023, but the long-term trend remains worrying

Drought reduces nature's capacity to provide a wide range of environmental, social and economic benefits. It affects the EU's ability to achieve its climate change mitigation target through reduced carbon sequestration and has implications for adaptation and the implementation of biodiversity and soil strategies. Drought also hampers the ability to achieve CAP objectives and the goals of the European Green Deal, the Farm to Fork Strategy and the Biodiversity Strategy. Reducing the severity of drought impacts and strengthening the resilience of ecosystems to climate change induced droughts is thus vital.

The impact of drought on EU ecosystems eased in 2023, after the devastating effects experienced the previous year when the hottest summer and the second-warmest year were recorded. In 2023, 143 500 km2, or 3.6% of the total EU area was impacted by drought. This is still slightly larger than the 2000–2020 long-term average, which amounts to 141 225 km2 or 3.5% of the EU’s area. Despite the annual recovery in 2023, the 10-year moving average shows a 69% increase in the EU area affected by drought. A look at the underlying annual data shows strong fluctuations, with the area affected by drought almost tripling in some years. Between 2000 and 2022, there was an increasing trend in drought-impacted areas in the EU due to low precipitation, high evaporation and heatwaves. These conditions are exacerbated by climate change and contribute to worsening ecosystem conditions [20]. Large variations between countries can also be seen. In 2023, the three Baltic countries — Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia — were impacted by drought on more than 10% of their areas. This was a much larger area than has been affected in previous years. Poland was the next most impacted country in 2023, with 8% of its area experiencing drought.

Biodiversity

Terrestrial ecosystems in the EU have been protected under the Birds and Habitats Directives since 1979 and 1992, respectively, forming the foundation for biodiversity and ecosystems conservation. These Directives require EU Member States to designate and manage Special Protection Areas (SPAs; Birds Directive) and Sites of Community Importance/Special Areas of Conservation (SCIs/SACs; Habitats Directive), collectively making up the Natura 2000 network that should enable protected habitats and species to reach favourable conservation status in the EU. The Natura 2000 network is complemented by nationally designated terrestrial protected areas that are established under each Member State’s national framework. In addition, the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 includes a target to protect at least 30% of EU land. The ongoing restoration and protection efforts are further supported by the EU Nature Restoration Law, which aims to strengthen and accelerate ecosystem restoration across Europe. This law provides a vital framework for restoring degraded ecosystems and halting biodiversity decline, ensuring the achievement of the targets outlined in the EU Biodiversity Strategy for 2030 and contributing to sustaining quality of life in the EU.

The EU is not on track to reach its 2030 target for terrestrial protected areas

In 2022, the EU and its Member States protected 1 079 412 km2 of terrestrial habitats, covering 26.1% of the EU’s land area. This is an increase of only 7.6% compared with 2011, when 1 003 558 km² (equalling 24.3% of the EU’s area) were protected. The designation of new protected areas has furthermore slowed over the past five-year period, stalling at 26% since 2019. This means the EU is currently not on track to achieve its 30% target by 2030, and the rate of designation of protected areas would need to more than double by 2030 [21]. The Member States with the largest protected areas relative to country size in 2022 included Bulgaria (41.0%), Slovenia (40.5%) and Poland (39.6%). In contrast, the shares of protected areas were smallest in Finland (13.4%) and Ireland (13.9%).

The latest assessment of the State of Nature in the EU reveals that many species and habitats of European interest are still in unfavourable conservation status. The conservation status of habitats did not improve over the reporting period (2013–2018), but for species other than birds a slight improvement can be stated. Across the EU, about a quarter (27%) of species assessments and 15% of the habitat assessments show a good conservation status, compared with 23% and 16%, respectively, reported in the assessment for the period 2007–2012. The majority of the assessments considered, however, have a poor or bad conservation status at EU level (63% for species and 81% for habitats). Moreover, a look at the trends reveals that only 6% of species assessments and 9% of habitat assessments showed improving trends in the reporting period, while 35% and 36% indicated a deteriorating trend at EU level, respectively.

The State of Nature report also shows that fish and molluscs continue to have a particularly high proportion of species (around 30% each) with a bad conservation status, while reptiles and vascular plant species have the highest proportion of good conservation status (36% and 40% respectively). Habitats in dunes, bogs, mires and fens have the highest share of assessments showing a bad conservation status (around 50% each). Grasslands, which contain some species-rich habitats that are particularly suitable for pollinator species, also have one of the highest proportions of bad conservation status assessments (49%).

Common birds are in long-term decline in the EU

Birds are sensitive to both human-induced and natural environmental change, making them good indicators of wider ecosystem health. Their widespread and diverse habitats also make them ideal for monitoring the results of conservation efforts.

The EU common bird index tracks the population abundance and diversity of a selection of common bird species in the EU, further typified by common forest and common farmland bird species. The index shows a 14.9% decline of all common birds and a dramatic 42.1% fall in the abundance of common farmland birds between 1990 and 2023. Common forest birds have declined slightly, with their index falling 4.6% over the whole period.

The decline in common farmland birds has largely been attributed to agricultural intensification, which has reduced natural nesting habitats such as hedges, wetlands, meadows and fallow fields. Agro-chemicals, such as pesticides, and changes in ploughing times for cereals have also affected common farmland birds, disrupting their breeding and reducing available food sources, in particular insect populations [22]. Other factors hindering population recovery include habitat loss from land use change, fragmentation, intensive forestry, urbanization, climate change, competition for land (for example, biofuels, renewables), and illegal killing [23].

Shorter-term trends show a continued decline for all common birds and common farmland bird populations. For all common birds there has been a 7.8% decline since 2008 and a 2.6% decline since 2018, while common farmland birds continued to show an even stronger decline, by 23.2% since 2008 and 9.6% since 2018.

Grassland butterfly populations have declined by more than 50% since 1991

Butterflies, which are among the most common plant pollinators, are well suited to act as signals of environmental and habitat health. They occur in a wide range of habitat types and are sensitive to environmental change. The grassland butterfly index measures the population trends of 17 butterfly species within the national Butterfly Monitoring Schemes. According to estimates from these monitoring efforts, butterfly populations declined by 50.4% between 1991 and 2023, signifying a dramatic loss of grassland biodiversity. Most of this decline took place in the period up to 2007, while the index has fallen at a slower pace since then. Nevertheless, grassland butterfly populations still declined by 20.1% between 2008 and 2023 and by 10.5% between 2018 and 2023.

The main causes for this decline can be attributed to land use changes in rural areas, in particular stemming from intensification of agricultural grasslands, and deposition of nitrogen in protected areas, mainly in north-western Europe. In the rest of Europe, grassland abandonment is a threat [24]. The increased duration, frequency and intensity of heatwaves and droughts because of climate change have also contributed to the decline of grassland butterflies over the past decade. While moderate climate warming aided a temporary increase in butterfly populations between 2002 and 2012, the increasing frequency of extreme temperature led to even stronger declines in the subsequent years [25].

While butterflies show a decline in non-urban areas, they have been stable within urban areas across Europe, suggesting that parks and other green parts of the urban environment are becoming increasingly suitable and are being managed in a butterfly-friendly way. However, the situation of butterflies in urban areas requires further research, as different studies offer contrasting findings [26].

Main indicators

Share of forest area


The long-term evaluation of the indicator for share of forest area is not possible because the time series is too short. The short-term evaluation for the period 2017 to 2022 shows moderate progress towards sustainability objectives.

This indicator measures the proportion of forest areas in comparison to the total surface area of the country. The data used for this indicator originate from the European Forest Accounts (EFA) and are consistent with the FAO definition of forest.

A line chart showing the share of forest are in the EU from 2015 to 2022, as a percentage of total area.
Figure 1: Share of forest area, EU, 2015-2022 (% of total area)
Note: y-axis does not start at 0.
Source: Eurostat (sdg_15_11)


A double vertical bar chart showing the share of forest area, by country, in 2017 and 2022, as a percentage of total area in the EU, EU Member States and other European countries.
Figure 2: Share of forest area, by country, 2017 and 2022 (% of total area)
Source: Eurostat (sdg_15_11)

Area at risk of severe soil erosion by water


The long-term evaluation of the indicator for area at risk of severe soil erosion by water for the period 2000 to 2016 shows moderate progress towards sustainability objectives. The short-term evaluation for the period 2010 to 2016 shows no progress towards nor movement away from the sustainability objectives.

This indicator estimates the area at risk of severe erosion by water such as rain splash, sheet-wash and rills (soil loss greater than 10 tonnes per hectare and year). This area is expressed in square kilometres (km2) and as a percentage of the total non-artificial, erodible area in the country. The numbers are estimated using soil erosion susceptibility models. Data presented in this section stem from the JRC’s soil erosion database.

A vertical bar chart showing the area at risk of severe soil erosion by water in the EU, for the years 2000, 2010 and 2016, expressed as square kilometres.
Figure 3: Area at risk of severe soil erosion by water, EU, 2000, 2010 and 2016 (km2)
Source: Joint Research Centre, Eurostat (sdg_15_50)


A double vertical bar chart showing the area at risk of severe soil erosion by water, by country in 2010 and 2016, as a percentage of the non-artificial erodible area in the EU and EU Member States. The bars show the years.
Figure 4: Area at risk of severe soil erosion by water, by country, 2010 and 2016 (% of the non-artificial erodible area)
Source: Joint Research Centre, Eurostat (sdg_15_50)


Drought impact on ecosystems


The long-term evaluation of the indicator for area impacted by drought for the period 2009 to 2023 shows significant movement away from the sustainability objectives. The short-term evaluation for the period 2018 to 2023 also shows significant movement away from the sustainability objectives.

This indicator shows the area impacted by drought by monitoring negative anomalies in vegetation productivity in areas with a severe soil moisture deficit during the growing season (more than one standard deviation from the long-term average – observed through remote-sensing data collected at 500×500 meters resolution by the Copernicus EMS European Drought Observatory of the European Commission Joint Research Centre [27]). The indicator covers only agricultural droughts with soil moisture deficits causing reduced vegetation productivity due to insufficient precipitation, as opposed to hydrological droughts, which occur when low water supplies become apparent in streams, reservoirs, and groundwater levels, usually after many months of meteorological drought.

A line chart with two lines showing area impacted by drought in squared kilometres, in the EU from 2000 to 2023. The lines represent the annual data and the 10-year moving average.
Figure 5: Area impacted by drought, EU, 2000-2023 (km2)
Source: EEA, Eurostat (sdg_15_42)


A double vertical bar chart showing area impacted by drought as a percentage of country area, by country in 2018 and 2023, in the EU, EU Member States and other European countries. The bars show the years.
Figure 6: Area impacted by drought, by country, 2018 and 2023 (% of country area)
Source: EEA, Eurostat (sdg_15_42)


Terrestrial protected areas


The long-term evaluation of the indicator for terrestrial protected areas for the period 2011 to 2022 shows insufficient progress towards the EU target. The short-term evaluation for the period 2017 to 2022 also shows insufficient progress towards the EU target.

This indicator measures the extent of terrestrial protected areas, comprising nationally designated protected areas and Natura 2000 sites. A nationally designated area is an area protected by national legislation. The Natura 2000 network comprises both marine and terrestrial protected areas designated under the EU Habitats and Birds Directives with the goal to maintain or restore a favourable conservation status for habitat types and species of EU interest. The EU biodiversity strategy aims to protect at least 30 % of land and sea in Europe including both nationally designated sites and Natura 2000 sites. Data provided by the Member States to the European Commission — Directorate General for the Environment (Natura 2000) and the European Environment Agency (nationally designated areas) are consolidated at least yearly by the EEA.

A line chart with a dot showing terrestrial protected areas, as a percentage of total area in the EU from 2011 to 2022. The dot represents the 2030 target.
Figure 7: Terrestrial protected areas, EU, 2011–2022 (% of total area)
Note: y-axis does not start at 0.
Source: EEA, Eurostat (sdg_15_20)


A vertical bar chart showing terrestrial protected areas, by country in 2022, as a percentage of the total area in the EU and EU Member States.
Figure 8: Terrestrial protected areas, by country, 2022 (% of total area)
Source: EEA, Eurostat (sdg_15_20)

Common bird index


The long-term evaluations of the indicator for common bird index for the period 2008 to 2023 and the short-term evaluations for the period 2018 to 2023, for all common birds, both show moderate movement away from the sustainability objectives. The long-term evaluations of the indicator for common bird index for the period 2008 to 2023 and the short-term evaluations for the period 2018 to 2023, for farmland birds, both show significant movement away from the sustainability objectives.

This indicator is an index integrating the abundance and diversity of a selection of common bird species associated with specific habitats for feeding and nesting. Rare species are excluded, although some species common in certain Member States may be considered rare in others. Three groups of bird species are represented: common farmland species (39 species), common forest species (34 species) and all common bird species (168 species; including farmland species, forest species and common generalists’ species). The indices are presented for EU-aggregates only and with smoothed values. The index draws from data produced by the European Bird Census Council and its Pan-European Common Bird Monitoring Scheme programme. Data coverage has increased from nine to 25 EU Member States over the period 1990 to 2014, with 26 countries covered as of the reference year 2015.

A line chart with three lines showing the common bird index, by type of species, in the EU from 1990 to 2023, indexed to the year 2000. The lines represent the figures for all common birds, common forest birds, and common farmland birds.
Figure 9: Common bird index, by type of species, EU, 1990-2023 (index 2000 = 100)
Note: y-axis does not start at 0.
Source: European Bird Census Council (EBCC), National BirdLife organisations, Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB), Czech Society for Ornithology (CSO), Eurostat (sdg_15_60)

Grassland butterfly index


The long-term evaluation of the indicator for grassland butterfly index for the period 2008 to 2023, shows significant movement away from the sustainability objectives. The short-term evaluation for the period 2018 to 2023, also shows significant movement away from the sustainability objectives.

The EU grassland butterfly index integrates the population trends of 17 butterfly species monitored across the EU. The index is presented as an EU-aggregate with smoothed values. The data are processed and provided by the Butterfly Conservation Europe, European Butterfly Monitoring Scheme partnership, EMBRACE project. For technical details see the European Grassland Butterfly Indicator 1990–2020 report.

A line chart showing the grassland butterfly index, in the EU from 1991 to 2023, indexed to the year 2000.
Figure 10: Grassland butterfly index, EU, 1991-2023 (index 2000 = 100)
Note: y-axis does not start at 0.
Source: Butterfly Conservation Europe, European Butterfly Monitoring Scheme partnership, SPRING project, Eurostat (sdg_15_61)

Footnotes

  1. ↑ Diaz et al. (2019), Summary for policymakers of the global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on biodiversity and Ecosystem Services.
  2. ↑ Vysna et al. (2021), Accounting for ecosystems and their services in the European Union (INCA), Final report from phase II of the INCA project aiming to develop a pilot for an integrated system of ecosystem accounts for the EU, Statistical report, Publications office of the European Union, Luxembourg.
  3. ↑ European Environment Agency (2016), European forest ecosystems — State and trends, EEA Report No 5/2016, Copenhagen.
  4. ↑ European Environment Agency (2024), Nutrients in freshwater in Europe.
  5. ↑ Eurostat (2023), Statistics Explained, Agri-environmental indicator — mineral fertiliser consumption.
  6. ↑ European Environment Agency (2024), Nutrients in freshwater in Europe.
  7. ↑ European Environment Agency (2016), The direct and indirect impacts of EU policies on land, EEA Report No 8/2016, Copenhagen. European Environment Agency (2019), Land degradation knowledge base: policy, concepts and data, European Topic Centre on Urban, Land and Soil Systems (ETC/ULS) Report No 1/2019, Vienna.
  8. ↑ European Commission (2012), The implementation of the Soil Thematic Strategy and ongoing activities, COM(2012) 46 final; FAO (2015), Status of the World’s Soil Resources, Food and Drug Administration, Rome, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
  9. ↑ European Environment Agency (2017), Landscapes in transition: An account of 25 years of land cover change in Europe, EEA Report No 10/2017, Copenhagen.
  10. ↑ Prokop G, Jobstmann H, Schonbauer A (2011), Report on best practices for limiting soil sealing and mitigating its effects, European Commission, Brussels.
  11. ↑ Borrelli et al. (2022), Policy implications of multiple concurrent soil erosion processes in European farmland, Nature Sustainability, Volume 6, January 2023, 103–112.
  12. ↑ Ibid.
  13. ↑ Panagos et al. (2021), Projections of soil loss by water erosion in Europe by 2050, Environmental Science and Policy, 124: 380–392.
  14. ↑ Panagos et al. (2021), Projections of soil loss by water erosion in Europe by 2050, Environmental Science and Policy, 124: 380–392.
  15. ↑ Borrelli et al. (2022), Policy implications of multiple concurrent soil erosion processes in European farmland, Nature Sustainability, Volume 6, January 2023, 103–112.
  16. ↑ Ibid.
  17. ↑ Panagos et al. (2020), A soil erosion indicator for supporting agricultural, environmental and climate policies in the European Union, Remote Sensing 12 (9), p. 1365.
  18. ↑ Panagos et al. (2020), A soil erosion indicator for supporting agricultural, environmental and climate policies in the European Union, Remote Sensing 12 (9), p. 1365; and Panagos et al. (2016), Soil conservation in Europe: wish or reality? Land Degrad. Dev., 27, pp. 1547–1551.
  19. ↑ Panagos at al. (2024), Understanding the cost of soil erosion: An assessment of the sediment removal costs from the reservoirs of the European Union, Journal of Cleaner Production, Volume 434, 2024, 140183, ISSN 0959-6526.
  20. ↑ European Environment Agency (2024), Drought impact on ecosystems in Europe.
  21. ↑ European Environment Agency (2024), Terrestrial protected areas in Europe.
  22. ↑ Greshko (2018), Around the World, Farmland Birds Are in Steep Decline, National Geographic.
  23. ↑ European Environment Agency (2024), https://www.eea.europa.eu/en/analysis/indicators/common-bird-index-in-europe?utm_source=chatgpt.com Common bird index in Europe].
  24. ↑ Van Swaay, C.A.M., Dennis, E.B., Schmucki, R., Sevilleja, C.G., Åström, S., Balalaikins, M., Barea-Azcón, J.M. , Bonelli, S., Botham, M., Cancela, J.P., Collins, S., De Flores, M., Dapporto, L., Dopagne, C., Dziekanska, I., Escobés, R., Faltynek Fric, Z., Fernández-García, J.M., Fontaine, B., Glocovcan. P., Gracianteparaluceta, A., Harpke, A., Harrower, C., Heliölä, J., Houard, X., Kolev, Z., Komac, B., Kühn, E., Kuussaari, M., Judge, M., Lang, A., Lysaght, L., Maes, D., McGowan,D., Mestdagh, X., Middlebrook, I., Monasterio, Y., Monteiro, E., Munguira, M.L., Musche, M., Olivares, F.J., Õunap, E., Ozden, O., Pavlíčko, A., Pendl, M., Pettersson, L.B., Rákosy, L., Roth, T., Rüdisser, J., Šašić, M., Scalercio, S., Settele, J., Sielezniew, M., Sobczyk-Moran, G., Stefanescu, C., Švitra, G., Szabadfalvi, A., Tiitsaar, A., Titeux, N., Tzirkalli, E., Ubach, A., Verovnik, R., Vray, S., Warren, M.S., Wynhoff, I., & Roy, D.B. (2022), European Grassland Butterfly Indicator 1990–2020 Technical report. Butterfly Conservation Europe & SPRING/eBMS & Vlinderstichting report VS2022.039.
  25. ↑ Ibid.
  26. ↑ Van Swaay et al. (2020), Butterflies in Europe - Butterfly Indicators Revised.pdf Assessing Butterflies in Europe — Butterfly Indicators 1990–2018, Technical report, Butterfly Conservation Europe & ABLE/eBMS ([www.butterfly-monitoring.net www.butterfly-monitoring.net]).
  27. ↑ EDO (2019), Soil Moisture Anomaly (SMA), EDO Indicator Factsheet, Copernicus European Drought Observatory.

Explore further

Other articles

Database

Thematic section


Publications


Further reading on life on land

Methodology

More detailed information on EU SDG indicators for monitoring of progress towards the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), such as indicator relevance, definitions, methodological notes, background and potential linkages can be found in the introduction as well as in Annex II of the publication ’Sustainable development in the European Union — Monitoring report on progress towards the SDGs in an EU context — 2025 edition’.

External links


Further data sources on life on land


Retrieved from "https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=SDG_15_-_Life_on_land&oldid=676962"