State of Nature - Regional Analysis
What is the regional State of Nature analysis?
Regional State of Nature analysis provides a landscape-scale view of nature conditions by summarising environmental indicators across defined geographic regions. Instead of assessing individual locations or sites, this approach evaluates the aggregated state of nature within a region’s boundaries.
Regions are currently defined as countries and sub-national administrative regions. Additional region definitions may be introduced in the future to support other use cases and spatial scales.
The regional analysis summarises the State of Nature across an entire landscape, reflecting average conditions and broad patterns rather than site-specific characteristics. As such, regional classifications describe the state of ecosystems within a region, and do not necessarily represent concerns or risks faced by a specific site.
Why use regional State of Nature analysis?
Regional analysis is designed for users who:
- Lack precise site-level location data.
- Manage very large numbers of sites or suppliers, where site-level analysis becomes impractical.
It enables:
- High-level screening and prioritisation.
- Comparison of nature conditions across regions.
- Faster initial assessments that can guide where deeper, site-level analysis is most valuable.
The regional analysis complements, but does not replace, site-level assessments. Results should be interpreted as contextual averages, not local conditions. Regional averages can conceal local hotspots or areas of high degradation or ecological importance, and regional boundaries may not align with ecological systems such as river basins or ecosystems.
How regional indicators are calculated
Regional indicators are calculated by summarising the underlying spatial datasets within each region’s geographic boundary.
Depending on the indicator, results are based on:
- Area-weighted averages,
- Shares of area, or
- Percentile-based classification relative to all regions globally.
All values represent conditions across the entire region and may mask local variation within regional boundaries.
Regional indicator methodology
Freshwater
Freshwater indicators are summarised using area-weighted statistics. The classification from Very Low to Very High is derived from the area-weighted mean of each indicator across the region and follows the same classification logic used at site level.
Freshwater Condition | Very Low = Score 0 - 2 Low = Score 2 - 4 Moderate = Score 4 - 6 High = Score 6 - 8 Very High = 8 - 10 |
|---|
Results describe landscape-level patterns and should not be interpreted as basin-specific or site-level values.
Biodiversity Intactness
Biodiversity Intactness at region level is calculated using the area-weighted mean Biodiversity Intactness Index (BII) across the region. Mean Species Abundance (MSA) is shown for additional context, but classification is based on BII.
For classification, regions are ranked globally according to their area-weighted average BII. These values are used to derive a global distribution of regional BII scores, from which percentile bands are calculated. Each region is then assigned to a class based on the percentile range it falls into, from Very Low (0–20) to Very High (80–100):
Biodiversity Intactness Index (BII) | Very Low = Percentiles 0 - 20 Low = Percentiles 20 - 40 Moderate = Percentiles 40 - 60 High = Percentiles 60 - 80 Very High = Percentiles 80 - 100 |
|---|
Example: If a region’s average BII is higher than 75% of all regional values globally, it falls into the 60 - 80 percentile band and is classified as High.
This classification reflects the state of biodiversity intactness within a region relative to other regions globally, rather than the absolute condition of regional biodiversity.
Biodiversity Sensitive Areas
Biodiversity Sensitive Areas (BSAs) at region level are summarised by:
- The number of BSAs within the region (# of BSAs)
- The total area covered by BSAs (BSA area), and
- The share of the region’s area covered by BSAs (BSA cover)
For classification, regions are ranked globally based on their BSA cover, defined as the share of the regional area covered by Biodiversity Sensitive Areas. These values are used to derive a global distribution of regional BSA cover, from which percentile bands are calculated. Each region is then assigned to a class based on the percentile range it falls into:
BSA cover | Very Low = Percentiles 0 - 20 Low = Percentiles 20 - 40 Moderate = Percentiles 40 - 60 High = Percentiles 60 - 80 Very High = Percentiles 80 - 100 |
|---|
Example: If a region has a higher share of its area covered by BSAs than 85% of all regions globally, it falls into the 80 - 100 percentile band and is classified as Very High.
Important: Low BSA coverage does not necessarily indicate a lack of biodiversity-sensitive or important areas in the region. It rather reflects limited availability of data on biodiversity-sensitive areas, with generally more comprehensive coverage in regions such as Europe compared to many other parts of the world.
Tree Cover Loss
Tree Cover Loss at region level represents the share of tree cover lost within a region since the year 2020.
For classification, regions are ranked globally based on their percentage of tree cover loss over this period. These values are used to derive a global distribution of regional tree cover loss, from which percentile bands are calculated. Each region is then assigned to a class based on the percentile range it falls into:
Tree Cover Loss | Very Low = Percentiles 0 - 20 Low = Percentiles 20 - 40 Moderate = Percentiles 40 - 60 High = Percentiles 60 - 80 Very High = Percentiles 80 - 100 |
|---|
Example: If a region has experienced a higher share of tree cover loss since 2020 than 35 percent of all regions globally, it falls into the 20 - 40 percentile band and is classified as Moderate.
These classes indicate how a region compares to others worldwide in terms of recent tree cover loss and reflect relative levels of landscape-scale forest change rather than site-specific deforestation events.