For effective forest biodiversity monitoring in FAO Sub-regional Office for Central Asia (SEC) countries (Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Türkiye), it is important to develop cost-effective and efficient monitoring methods. The main purpose of the guidelines on forest biodiversity monitoring methodologies is to support FAOSEC countries in their efforts to detect changes in forest biodiversity and to ensure that appropriate measures are taken for sustainable forest management. The monitoring process begins with the assessment of monitoring requirements and the establishment of specific goals for the subsequent development of the monitoring approach. Subsequently, essential factors such as indicators, methods and tools for monitoring, team composition, frequency of monitoring, and data management are identified to shape the monitoring initiative, integrating aspects related to the state, impact, and response. The monitoring process is then concluded through the practical implementation of the program via field investigations, analysis and interpretation of the gathered information, and dissemination of resultant reports to pertinent stakeholders. The guidelines for forest biodiversity monitoring methodologies employ this comprehensive five-step monitoring cycle as a foundation for crafting an efficient forest biodiversity monitoring program. The guidelines on forest biodiversity monitoring methodologies are designed to take into account the changes in pressure, state and response indicators especially for biodiversity monitoring with the contributions of subject-matter experts. This study uses the "Pressure-State-Response" framework that has been frequently used in different global, regional, and national monitoring programs. In the guidelines, monitoring targets for species, habitats, ecosystem services, and forestry practices are defined for each monitoring component by using relevant indicators. Using Türkiye’s national biodiversity database (Noah’s Ark Database) and its monitoring tables as samples, the indicators are tabulated with detailed information on the following topics: •Monitoring Level •Monitoring Period and Frequency •Monitoring Area •Monitoring Method •Monitoring Team/Expertise •Target / Success Criteria For effective implementation of the guidelines, a governance mechanism is also proposed for the participation of regional and national stakeholders. The guidelines serve as a comprehensive framework for monitoring forest biodiversity in FAOSEC countries with the aim of providing practical guidance and recommendations for establishing effective forest biodiversity monitoring systems in those countries. The guidelines also emphasize the importance of harmonization and standardization of biodiversity indicators and methods across countries, enhancing comparability and facilitating regional and global reporting.

In collaboration with its partners, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) leads the integration, in a structured, holistic and coherent manner, of actions for the conservation, sustainable use, management and restoration of biological diversity across agricultural sectors at national, regional and international levels. Against this background, FAO has developed a series of instruments and tools related to biodiversity for food and agriculture (BFA) that can contribute to the implementation of the FAO Global Strategy on Mainstreaming Biodiversity across Agricultural Sectors, Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework and the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration 2021–2030, and in alignment with the mitigation and adaptation agenda of the UNFCCC. In line with its programming and operationalization mandate to address regional priorities, the FAO Regional Office for Europe and Central Asia (REU) via the Regional Initiative n°3 on Managing natural resources sustainably and preserving biodiversity in a changing climate, developed the Regional Action plan for biodiversity mainstreaming across agricultural sectors in 17 programming countries of Europe and Central Asia. During 2022–2023, it aims at addressing the priority regional challenges.

Biodiversity protection encompasses key aspects directly related to the sustainability of our food systems: BFA provides a diverse and heterogenous biological basis for diverse and resilient production systems, for the pollination of cultures, for increased diversity of food, and is strongly linked to local and indigenous knowledge on local crops and breeds acknowledged as cultural heritage. This study examines the existence of data collection, monitoring systems, and conservation initiatives as well as legislation and policies related to biodiversity for food and agriculture in the three following regions: (1) Central Asia, (2) the South Caucasus countries, Turkey, Belarus and Ukraine and (3) the Western Balkan countries and the Republic of Moldova. From this study, it appears that none of the three studied regions currently have any solid monitoring schemes for agricultural biodiversity, nor do they have a strong legal framework for protecting farmers’ rights to seeds that would allow them, amongst other things, to maintain biodiversity. Conservation actions, policies, and legislation generally concern wild biodiversity conservation (through habitat protection) and crop genetic resources conservation but rarely address biodiversity for food and agriculture or wild biodiversity loss caused by food systems. The three regional reports conducted in the framework of this study reported a general lack of capacities and a particularly low level of involvement of farmers and other food producers in monitoring, data collection, and conservation activities. The combination of these two major observations leads us to the conclusion that the governance of BFA should be transformed to put food producers at the centre of biodiversity monitoring and conservation, in dialogue with scientists and institutional actors. Their specific expertise must be acknowledged and valued in the efforts of preserving the biodiversity that they cultivate and sustain. Beyond this needed shift in the governance of monitoring activities, we highlight the necessity of a regional articulation of monitoring efforts and a specific focus on local threatened varieties and breeds (beyond habitat conservation), while very comprehensively considering BFA and wild biodiversity impacted by food systems. Regarding biodiversity protection, we recommend – in addition to farmer-centered data collection and monitoring system implementation – addressing the root causes of biodiversity loss, adopting a systematic approach in legislations, policies, and actions while supporting agroecology, and fulfilling international instruments that guarantee the rights of producers to grow and raise local varieties and breeds.

The Europe and Central Asia Regional Synthesis for The State of the World’s Biodiversity for Food and Agriculture summarizes the state of biodiversity for food and agriculture in the region, based largely on information provided in nineteen country reports submitted to FAO as part of the reporting process for the report on The State of the World’s Biodiversity for Food and Agriculture. Biodiversity for food and agriculture is the diversity of plants, animals and micro-organisms at genetic, species and ecosystem levels, present in and around crop, livestock, forest and aquatic production systems. It is essential to the structure, functions and processes of these systems, to livelihoods and food security, and to the supply of a wide range of ecosystem services. It has been managed or influenced by farmers, livestock keepers, forest dwellers, fish farmers and fisherfolk for hundreds of generations. The report was originally prepared as supporting documentation for an informal regional consultation on the state of Europe and Central Asia’s biodiversity for food and agriculture, held in Bonn, Germany, in April 2016. It was later revised based on feedback received from the participants of the informal consultation. It provides a description of the drivers of change affecting the region’s biodiversity for food and agriculture and of its current status and trends. It also discusses the state of efforts to promote the sustainable use and conservation of biodiversity for food and agriculture in the region, including through the development of supporting policies, legal frameworks, institutions and capacities.

Arable land, deserts, mountains, forests, rivers, and coastal zones characterize the diverse regions in Eastern Europe and Central Asia (ECA). As varied as the geography is so are the policy directions taken by the region's governments concerning natural resource management. A lack of conservation measures, misuse, and poor management have impaired many of the natural resources now available in these countries. Although the pressure on natural resources in ECA is less than in other regions and the area has more abundant resources, the accessibility and utility of those resources belie the figures. Where there is arable land, the growing season is short. Where there are immense forests, the climate is harsh.To assist the Bank's client countries in ECA with sustainable use of natural resources, this volume identifies the various challenges, provides a history of the Bank's regional natural resource strategy, outlines a strategic framework, and proposes new strategies and policy instruments to implement them. Natural resources in this publication refer to "non-mineral" resources, such as, forests, rivers, and land.

This publication contains the annual review for fiscal 1996 (July 1995-June 1996) and a 10-year accounting of the project portfolio in a project matrix (Appendix). The annual review portion of the publication is divided into four sections:an overview, a series of regional review, a set of reviews on a spectrum of environmental and social issues, and a brief scan of relevant publications. The environmental and social issues discussed include:biodiversity conservation; fostering global warming solutions through energy efficiency, demand side management and renewable technologies; linking physical environmental effects to economic impacts; legal aspects of environmental management; building strategic alliance to avoid duplicating efforts in environmental work; Bank's work on pollution management and technology policy; engaging private sector into environmental investments; enhancing participatory approaches in decisionmaking; and freshwater, coastal and marine resource management. In addition, a new column called Reflection sets the context for the Bank's work in the larger global agenda drawn up in Rio's Agenda 21 in 1992.