Genetic monitoring of populations currently attracts interest in the context of the Convention on Biological Diversity but needs long-term planning and investments. However, genetic diversity has been largely neglected in biodiversity monitoring, and when addressed, it is treated separately, detached from other conservation issues, such as habitat alteration due to climate change. We report an accounting of efforts to monitor population genetic diversity in Europe (genetic monitoring effort, GME), the evaluation of which can help guide future capacity building and collaboration towards areas most in need of expanded monitoring. Overlaying GME with areas where the ranges of selected species of conservation interest approach current and future climate niche limits helps identify whether GME coincides with anticipated climate change effects on biodiversity. Our analysis suggests that country area, financial resources and conservation policy influence GME, high values of which only partially match species’ joint patterns of limits to suitable climatic conditions. Populations at trailing climatic niche margins probably hold genetic diversity that is important for adaptation to changing climate. Our results illuminate the need in Europe for expanded investment in genetic monitoring across climate gradients occupied by focal species, a need arguably greatest in southeastern European countries. This need could be met in part by expanding the European Union’s Birds and Habitats Directives to fully address the conservation and monitoring of genetic diversity.

Effective population size (Ne) is one of the most important parameters in evolutionary biology, as it is linked to the long‐term survival capability of species. Therefore, Ne greatly interests conservation geneticists, but it is also very relevant to policymakers, managers, and conservation practitioners. Molecular methods to estimate Ne rely on various assumptions, including no immigration, panmixia, random sampling, absence of spatial genetic structure, and/or mutation‐drift equilibrium. Species are, however, often characterized by fragmented populations under changing environmental conditions and anthropogenic pressure. Therefore, the estimation methods' assumptions are seldom addressed and rarely met, possibly leading to biased and inaccurate Ne estimates. To address the challenges associated with estimating Ne for conservation purposes, the COST Action 18134, Genomic Biodiversity Knowledge for Resilient Ecosystems (G‐BiKE), organized an international workshop that met in August 2022 in Brașov, Romania. The overarching goal was to operationalize the current knowledge of Ne estimation methods for conservation practitioners and decision‐makers. We set out to identify datasets to evaluate the sensitivity of Ne estimation methods to violations of underlying assumptions and to develop data analysis strategies that addressed pressing issues in biodiversity monitoring and conservation. Referring to a comprehensive body of scientific work on Ne, this meeting report is not intended to be exhaustive but rather to present approaches, workshop findings, and a collection of papers that serve as fruits of those efforts. We aimed to provide insights and opportunities to help bridge the gap between scientific research and conservation practice.

National, subnational, and supranational entities are creating biodiversity strategy and action plans (BSAPs) to develop concrete commitments and actions to curb biodiversity loss, meet international obligations, and achieve a society in harmony with nature. In light of policymakers’ increasing recognition of genetic diversity in species and ecosystem adaptation and resilience, this article provides an overview of how BSAPs can incorporate species’ genetic diversity. We focus on three areas: setting targets; committing to actions, policies, and programs; and monitoring and reporting. Drawing from 21 recent BSAPs, we provide examples of policies, knowledge, projects, capacity building, and more. We aim to enable and inspire specific and ambitious BSAPs and have put forward 10 key suggestions mapped to the policy cycle. Together, scientists and policymakers can translate high level commitments, such as the Convention on Biological Diversity’s Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, into concrete nationally relevant targets, actions and policies, and monitoring and reporting mechanisms.

Landscape genetics is increasingly being used in landscape planning for biodiversity conservation by assessing habitat connectivity and identifying landscape barriers, using intraspecific genetic data and quantification of landscape heterogeneity to statistically test the link between genetic variation and landscape variability. In this study we used genetic data to understand how landscape features and environmental factors influence demographic connectedness in Europe’s largest brown bear population and to assist in mitigating planned infrastructure development in Romania. Model-based clustering inferred one large and continuous bear population across the Carpathians suggesting that suitable bear habitat has not become sufficiently fragmented to restrict movement of individuals. However, at a finer scale, large rivers, often located alongside large roads with heavy traffic, were found to restrict gene flow significantly, while eastern facing slopes promoted genetic exchange. Since the proposed highway infrastructure development threatens to fragment regions of the Carpathians where brown bears occur, we develop a decision support tool based on models that assess the landscape configuration needed for brown bear conservation using wildlife corridor parameters. Critical brown bear corridors were identified through spatial mapping and connectivity models, which may be negatively influenced by infrastructure development and which therefore require mitigation. We recommend that current and proposed infrastructure developments incorporate these findings into their design and where possible avoid construction measures that may further fragment Romania’s brown bear population or include mitigation measures where alternative routes are not feasible.

Road development, traffic intensification, and collisions with wildlife represent a danger both for road safety and species conservation. For planners, deciding which mitigation methods to apply is often problematic. Through a kernel density estimate, we analyzed 715 crossing locations and wildlife–vehicle collisions (WVCs) involving brown bears, lynx, wolf, red deer, roe deer, and wild boar in the Southeastern Carpathian Mountains. We identified 25 WVC hotspots, of which eight require urgent mitigation of existing infrastructure. Moreover, many of these hotspots are in Natura 2000 sites, along road sections where vegetation is in close proximity, animal movement is the highest, and driver visibility is low. Our study is the first in Romania to recommend practical solutions to remediate WVC hotspots and benefit sustainable landscape management.