about their ecological quality. Protected habitats are monitored in the frame of the Habitats Directive (see Section 6) and the list of grassland habitats, though exhaustive, covers about 30% of EU grassland extent. The remaining 70% is described mostly in terms of geographical distribution and biomass production. Information on species is completely lacking.
Points were surveyed on a transect of 20 m × 2.5 m (Fig. 2), if they had at least 50% grassland coverage. Walking alongside the transect line, the surveyor should survey the vegetation of 1.25 m to the left and 1.25 m to the right. The starting point and the transect should be at least 5 m inside the grassland parcel, for the surveyed vegetation to be representative of the parcel and not of the edge. The transect should always originate from a LUCAS point, but the technical specifications contained information on how to reposition the transect if, given the starting point and the required orientation, it was not completely contained in the parcel.
Figure 2 Diagram of the theoretical location of the transect and the enlarged transect with respect to the LUCAS point (Eurostat 2018).
The timing of the survey was carefully planned, according to grassland phenology in the European Union. To allow the identification of the plants, the surveyor had to visit the site before the first cut or before the start of grazing. The surveys were therefore carried out following a latitudinal time gradient, from mid-April in Mediterranean South until mid-July in Boreal Scandinavia North.
The parameters list was the product of a consultation of EC services in need of information, to support environmental, agricultural and energy EU policies. The results of the consultation were translated into parameters to be surveyed.
These included information on:
• site characteristics (altitude, exposition, inclination, type of surface, moisture),
• a general description of vegetation (vigour, layers, presence of graminoids, forbs, woody plants layer, bare ground, age – older or younger than 5 years etc.),
• a more specific description of the flowering forbs (number of flowering forb species, flower density),
• identification of EUNIS habitat type (https://eunis.eea.europa.eu/about), and
• key species (plant indicator species) and structural plant species.
Concerning the last bullet point, 41 key species or key species groups were identified, and grouped in 10 lists with 20 species groups each for the different biogeographic zones characterizing the European Union. The revised list in the forthcoming surveys is reduced to 12 key species groups, identical for all the biogeographic zones, as this number was considered to be representative and suitable for non-botanist surveyors receiving a specific training to be able to recognize individual species. Such key species lists are assumed to be a direct indicator of the grasslands’ ecological quality. A grassland module is currently planned as part of LUCAS 2022, on 20000 points.
The raising awareness of the decline of insects (Hallmann et al., 2017; Sanchez-Bayo and Wyckhuys, 2019) and pollinators in particular (Goulson et al., 2015; Potts et al., 2010), the quantification of the losses and of the impacts on ecosystem services, the increased understanding of the causes and the awareness of knowledge gaps (IPBES, 2016) are factors that have strongly influenced the availability of funds for research as well as the adoption by the European Commission, on 1 June 2018, of the EU initiative on pollinators (EC, 2018).
The main aims of the initiative are to improve the scientific knowledge about insect pollinator decline, tackle its main known causes and strengthen collaboration between all the actors concerned. The initiative is organized around three priorities:
i improving knowledge of pollinator decline, its causes and consequences,
ii tackling the causes of pollinator decline, and
iii raising awareness, engaging society-at-large and promoting collaboration.
One of the main knowledge gaps that is identified concerns species distribution and abundance of pollinators, it is estimated in fact that half of the bee species in Europe is data deficient (IEEP & IUCN, 2018). Scattered monitoring programmes for bees and butterflies are in place, but not much is known about all other pollinator species. Under the first priority it is therefore planned that a common EU monitoring scheme is developed. Once implemented, this scheme should generate data that will enable the full assessment of the problem and the effectiveness of mitigation actions. Action 1A of the pollinators Initiative explicitly states ‘The Commission will devise and test an EU-wide pollinator monitoring scheme to ensure the provision of good quality data for assessing the status and trends of pollinator species in the EU and developing a pollinator indicator. A technical expert group will be set up to support this work’.
Discussions have started (UN WCMC, 2017; IEEP and IUCN, 2018) and an expert group has been set up and work on the monitoring scheme13 and the proposal for the indicator. Common monitoring and standardization of data and approaches to monitoring are seen as essential requirements under this premise; suggested methods for monitoring are a combination of passive methods (that do not rely on attracting insects), such as standardized transect walks, and active methods (that rely on attracting insects) such as pan-trapping.
An example of standardized transect is the bumblebee transect count method, which is similar to the butterfly method, and it is structured as follows: volunteers walk fixed transects of 1–2 km (divided into 4–10 sections with different habitat types) each month from March to October (on sunny days between 11:00 and 17:00) recording all bumblebee species in an imaginary 4 m × 4 m box on either side and in front, if necessary by catching bees in net or pot (Bumblebee Conservation Trust, 2017; Comont and Dickinson, 2018).
Interesting features are that data from new recorders are not used in the first two years to ensure data quality by allowing the recorder to develop sufficient skills in identification, and to put in place a mentoring system of experienced recorders tutoring new recorders.
The bee pan-trapping method has been standardized at the EU level by the FAO (2016): it uses bowl or pan traps, which are small plastic bowls or cups, coloured white, fluorescent blue or fluorescent yellow, filled with water mixed with a small amount of detergent, which acts as a surfactant. Twenty-four bowls should be placed on a line or transect 5 m apart, alternating the three colours and left for 24 hours or a fixed shorter period (to be noted), avoiding heavy shade. Catches are sieved and placed in 70% alcohol in container or sample bag (large-bodied
