Part of the monitoring process are still poorly covered by QA and revealed weaknesses in design and implementation and more comprehensive, formal and stringent QA procedures are necessary in international monitoring initiatives.
Abstractâą The quality of monitoring is defined by its ability to provide data that (i) allow estimates of the status of the target resource with defined precision level, (ii) permit change detection with defined power, and (iii) are comparable through space and time. To achieve these requirements a Quality Assurance (QA) perspective is essential.âą To what extent QA was considered and data quality achieved in international forest monitoring programmes in East Asia and Europe? What is missing?âą Past and present QA activity in forest monitoring in East Asia and Europe revealed that most attention was given to evaluate and promote comparability of measurements, with special emphasis on analytical chemistry. Much less attention was given to field sampling and to the overall monitoring design. QA approaches were unbalanced among the various investigations, and several problems with data comparability remained over years.âą Despite considerable work on data quality control, parts of the monitoring process are still poorly covered by QA and revealed weaknesses in design and implementation. More comprehensive, formal and stringent QA procedures are necessary in international monitoring initiatives. Steps currently being undertaken for a more comprehensive QA approach are presented.RĂ©sumé⹠La qualitĂ© de la surveillance est dĂ©finie par sa capacitĂ© Ă fournir des donnĂ©es qui (i) permettent des estimations de lâĂ©tat de la ressource cible, dĂ©finie Ă un niveau de prĂ©cision, (ii) permettent la dĂ©tection des changements de puissance dĂ©finie et (iii) sont comparables Ă travers lâespace et le temps. Pour satisfaire Ă ces exigences dâassurance qualitĂ© (QA) la perspective est essentielle.âą Dans quelle mesure lâassurance qualitĂ© a Ă©tĂ© examinĂ©e de mĂȘme que la qualitĂ© des donnĂ©es obtenues dans les programmes internationaux de surveillance des forĂȘts en Asie de lâEst et lâEurope? Quâest-ce qui manque?âą LâactivitĂ© passĂ©e et prĂ©sente dans lâassurance qualitĂ© de surveillance des forĂȘts en Asie de lâEst et Europe a rĂ©vĂ©lĂ© que la plus grande attention a consistĂ© Ă Ă©valuer et promouvoir la comparabilitĂ© des mesures, avec un accent particulier sur la chimie analytique. Beaucoup moins dâattention a Ă©tĂ© accordĂ©e Ă lâĂ©chantillonnage sur le terrain et au modĂšle de surveillance globale. Les approches de QA ont Ă©tĂ© dĂ©sĂ©quilibrĂ©es entre les diffĂ©rentes enquĂȘtes, et plusieurs problĂšmes avec la comparabilitĂ© des donnĂ©es sont restĂ©s au fil des annĂ©es.âą MalgrĂ© un travail considĂ©rable sur la qualitĂ© des donnĂ©es de contrĂŽle, des parties du processus de suivi sont encore mal couvertes par lâassurance qualitĂ© et des lacunes de conception et de mise en Ćuvre ont Ă©tĂ© rĂ©vĂ©lĂ©es. Des procĂ©dures dâassurance qualitĂ© plus complĂštes, structurĂ©es et rigoureuses sont nĂ©cessaires dans les initiatives internationales de surveillance. Les Ă©tapes actuellement entreprises pour une approche plus globale dâassurance qualitĂ© sont prĂ©sentĂ©es.