A forest can remain green in a photograph and yet raise questions that the image cannot answer: which habitats are there, how are they changing, and are conservation measures producing the expected effects? Observation from space provides some of the answers. It becomes more useful when combined with surveys carried out on the ground.
In a presentation published on 5 November 2026, after COP17 on biodiversity in Yerevan, the European Space Agency sets out the role it wants satellite data to play in monitoring the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. The aim is not simply to produce new maps, but to enable countries to track changes using comparable methods.
A map first tells us about an environment
According to the ESA, Earth observation can help map the extent of ecosystems, their condition and how they change over time. This information can be used to identify degraded areas, set priorities and monitor restoration efforts.
These functions need to be distinguished. Measuring an area is not enough to describe everything it contains. Tracking a change does not automatically make it possible to identify its cause. And finding that a habitat exists at two different dates does not prove that all its characteristics have remained the same.
This distinction explains the importance of bringing together observations from space and observations on the ground. The ESA places this at the heart of its cooperation with biodiversity-monitoring networks. The information complements itself: it does not become interchangeable simply because it appears on the same dashboard.
A “virtual constellation” is a coordination mechanism
The phrase may suggest a new fleet of satellites. In the arrangement described by the ESA, the CEOS Biodiversity Virtual Constellation is a coordination mechanism. It is intended to bring agencies’ activities closer together, identify gaps in observation and promote common standards.
According to the ESA, this work involves a network of more than sixty civil space agencies and associated organisations. The aim is, in particular, to better link satellite data with ground observations, in connection with GEO BON and the secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity.
For readers, the distinction matters: announcing cooperation is not the same as presenting a new measure that already demonstrates an improvement in biodiversity. The expected benefit is primarily better quality, continuity and use of the information available.
Making data usable beyond the world of specialists
Having images is not enough if national teams cannot process them or update their maps. The ESA is therefore also emphasising open tools and reusable processing methods.
Two platforms are part of this initiative. BON-in-a-Box, led by GEO BON, helps produce biodiversity indicators using shareable processing workflows. The UN Biodiversity Lab provides access to geographical data and analysis tools for planning and monitoring.
The agency also describes the development of the World Ecosystem Extent Dynamics project, or WEED. The toolkit is intended to help countries produce, update and maintain their ecosystem maps. These functions should be distinguished from conservation outcomes themselves: better monitoring of an environment facilitates action, but does not replace its management.
Why “30%” is about more than colouring in a map
Target 3 of the Kunming-Montreal Framework aims, worldwide, to conserve at least 30% of terrestrial and inland water areas, as well as marine and coastal areas, by 2030. The text of the Convention does not stop at the percentage.
It also calls for effective conservation, representative areas of ecosystems, good connectivity between areas and equitable governance. The rights of Indigenous peoples and local communities are among the conditions to be respected.
So two maps showing a comparable proportion of conserved areas would not be enough to conclude that the situations were equivalent. It would still be necessary to look at which environments are involved, and how they are connected, managed and monitored. This is where indicators become useful, provided the goal is not reduced to the aspect that is easiest to count.
Three questions to ask when reviewing a conservation assessment
Before reading a map as evidence of success, three checks can help put it in perspective:
- what does the indicator measure: an area, a change in habitat or an observed outcome for living things?
- which dates and method make the comparison possible?
- what surveys and management information complement the spatial data?
The progress to be expected is less spectacular than a planet fully understood from orbit, but more tangible: measurements that can be compared, updated and checked against conditions on the ground. Conservation can then be judged by what these measurements help to show, not by the visual precision of the map alone.
Illustrative photograph: forest in the Mullerthal near Echternach, in May 2019. It does not constitute a measurement of the current state of this environment.
