nuts: Administrative areas according to NUTS and OSM, rasterized to provide one single hierarchical code as pixel value for each county in EU.

332: Scree, cliffs, rock outcrops, including areas of active erosion, rocks and reef flats situated above the high-water mark, inland salt planes.

123: Infrastructure of port areas (land and water surface), including quays, dockyards and marinas.

122: Motorways and railways, including associated installations (stations, platforms, embankments, linear greenery narrower than 100 m). Minimum width for inclusion: 100 m. The general requirement of 100 m delineation accuracy is not sufficient in mapping 122. The tolerable shift in delineation is maximum 50 m. In delineating 122 a maximum 15-20% exaggeration of width is allowed, meaning that real width of the road including associated land should be at least 80 m to be included in CLC. In such cases the exaggerated width should be as close as possible to 100 m.

Overview: Potential Natural Vegetation (PNV): potential probability of occurrence for the Austrian pine from 2018 to 2020 Traceability (lineage): This is an original dataset produced with a machine learning framework which used a combination of point datasets and raster datasets as inputs. Point dataset is a harmonized collection of tree occurrence data, comprising observations from National Forest Inventories (EU-Forest), GBIF and LUCAS. The complete dataset is available on Zenodo. Raster datasets used as input are: monthly time series air and surface temperature and precipitation from a reprocessed version of the Copernicus ERA5 dataset; long term averages of bioclimatic variables from CHELSA; elevation, slope and other elevation-derived metrics and long term monthly averages snow probability. For a more comprehensive list refer to Bonannella et al. (2022) (in review, preprint available at: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1252972/v1). Scientific methodology: Probability and uncertainty maps were the output of a spatiotemporal ensemble machine learning framework based on stacked regularization. Three base models (random forest, gradient boosted trees and generalized linear models) were first trained on the input dataset and their predictions were used to train an additional model (logistic regression) which provided the final predictions. More details on the whole workflow are available in the listed publication. Usability: Probability maps are particularly useful when compared with existing products of potential distribution of species or when combined with maps of realized distribution: gaps in potential and realized distribution can be identified and used as information for future programs of tree planting or forest restoration. Uncertainty quantification: Uncertainty is quantified by taking the standard deviation of the probabilities predicted by the three components of the spatiotemporal ensemble model. Data validation approaches: Distribution maps were validated using a spatial 5-fold cross validation following the workflow detailed in the listed publication. Completeness: The raster files perfectly cover the entire Geo-harmonizer region as defined by the landmask raster dataset available here. Consistency: Areas which are outside of the calibration area of the point dataset (Iceland, Norway) usually have high uncertainty values. This is not only a problem of extrapolation but also of poor representation in the feature space available to the model of the conditions that are present in this countries. Positional accuracy: The rasters have a spatial resolution of 30m. Temporal accuracy: The maps cover the period 2018 - 2020 Thematic accuracy: Both probability and uncertainty maps contain values from 0 to 100: in the case of probability maps, they indicate the probability of occurrence of a single individual of the target species, while uncertainty maps indicate the standard deviation of the ensemble model.

osm: Farmland rasterized from OSM landuse polygons, first to 10m spatial resolution and after downsampled to 30m by spatial average.

osm: Commercial building aggregated and rasterized from OSM polygons, first to 10m spatial resolution and after downsampled to 30m by spatial average.

This landcover map was produced as an intermediate result in the course of the project incora (Inwertsetzung von Copernicus-Daten für die Raumbeobachtung, mFUND Förderkennzeichen: 19F2079C) in cooperation with ILS (Institut für Landes- und Stadtentwicklungsforschung gGmbH) and BBSR (Bundesinstitut für Bau-, Stadt- und Raumforschung) funded by BMVI (Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure). The goal of incora is an analysis of settlement and infrastructure dynamics in Germany based on Copernicus Sentinel data. This classification is based on a time-series of monthly averaged, atmospherically corrected Sentinel-2 tiles (MAJA L3A-WASP: https://geoservice.dlr.de/web/maps/sentinel2:l3a:wasp; DLR (2019): Sentinel-2 MSI - Level 2A (MAJA-Tiles)- Germany). It consists of the following landcover classes: 10: forest 20: low vegetation 30: water 40: built-up 50: bare soil 60: agriculture Potential training and validation areas were automatically extracted using spectral indices and their temporal variability from the Sentinel-2 data itself as well as the following auxiliary datasets: - OpenStreetMap (Map data copyrighted OpenStreetMap contributors and available from htttps://www.openstreetmap.org) - Copernicus HRL Imperviousness Status Map 2018 (© European Union, Copernicus Land Monitoring Service 2018, European Environment Agency (EEA)) - S2GLC Land Cover Map of Europe 2017 (Malinowski et al. 2020: Automated Production of Land Cover/Use Map of Europe Based on Sentinel-2 Imagery. Remote Sens. 2020, 12(21), 3523; https://doi.org/10.3390/rs12213523) - Germany NUTS administrative areas 1:250000 (© GeoBasis-DE / BKG 2020 / dl-de/by-2-0 / https://gdz.bkg.bund.de/index.php/default/nuts-gebiete-1-250-000-stand-31-12-nuts250-31-12.html) - Contains modified Copernicus Sentinel data (2016), processed by mundialis Processing was performed for blocks of federal states and individual maps were mosaicked afterwards. For each class 100,000 pixels from the potential training areas were extracted as training data. An exemplary validation of the classification results was perfomed for the federal state of North Rhine-Westphalia as its open data policy allows for direct access to official data to be used as reference. Rules to convert relevant ATKIS Basis-DLM object classes to the incora nomenclature were defined. Subsequently, 5.000 reference points were randomly sampled and their classification in each case visually examined and, if necessary, revised to obtain a robust reference data set. The comparison of this reference data set with the incora classification yielded the following results: overall accurary: 88.4% class: user's accuracy / producer's accurary (number of reference points n) forest: 96.7% / 94.3% (1410) low vegetation: 70.6% / 84.0% (844) water: 98.5% / 94.2% (69) built-up: 98.2% / 89.8% (983) bare soil: 19.7% / 58.5% (41) agriculture: 91.7% / 85.3% (1653) Incora report with details on methods and results: pending

Overview: Actual Natural Vegetation (ANV): probability of occurrence for the Sweet chestnut in its realized environment for the period 2000 - 2021 Traceability (lineage): This is an original dataset produced with a machine learning framework which used a combination of point datasets and raster datasets as inputs. Point dataset is a harmonized collection of tree occurrence data, comprising observations from National Forest Inventories (EU-Forest), GBIF and LUCAS. The complete dataset is available on Zenodo. Raster datasets used as input are: harmonized and gapfilled time series of seasonal aggregates of the Landsat GLAD ARD dataset (bands and spectral indices); monthly time series air and surface temperature and precipitation from a reprocessed version of the Copernicus ERA5 dataset; long term averages of bioclimatic variables from CHELSA, tree species distribution maps from the European Atlas of Forest Tree Species; elevation, slope and other elevation-derived metrics; long term monthly averages snow probability and long term monthly averages of cloud fraction from MODIS. For a more comprehensive list refer to Bonannella et al. (2022) (in review, preprint available at: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1252972/v1). Scientific methodology: Probability and uncertainty maps were the output of a spatiotemporal ensemble machine learning framework based on stacked regularization. Three base models (random forest, gradient boosted trees and generalized linear models) were first trained on the input dataset and their predictions were used to train an additional model (logistic regression) which provided the final predictions. More details on the whole workflow are available in the listed publication. Usability: Probability maps can be used to detect potential forest degradation and compositional change across the time period analyzed. Some possible applications for these topics are explained in the listed publication. Uncertainty quantification: Uncertainty is quantified by taking the standard deviation of the probabilities predicted by the three components of the spatiotemporal ensemble model. Data validation approaches: Distribution maps were validated using a spatial 5-fold cross validation following the workflow detailed in the listed publication. Completeness: The raster files perfectly cover the entire Geo-harmonizer region as defined by the landmask raster dataset available here. Consistency: Areas which are outside of the calibration area of the point dataset (Iceland, Norway) usually have high uncertainty values. This is not only a problem of extrapolation but also of poor representation in the feature space available to the model of the conditions that are present in this countries. Positional accuracy: The rasters have a spatial resolution of 30m. Temporal accuracy: The maps cover the period 2000 - 2020, each map covers a certain number of years according to the following scheme: (1) 2000--2002, (2) 2002--2006, (3) 2006--2010, (4) 2010--2014, (5) 2014--2018 and (6) 2018--2020 Thematic accuracy: Both probability and uncertainty maps contain values from 0 to 100: in the case of probability maps, they indicate the probability of occurrence of a single individual of the target species, while uncertainty maps indicate the standard deviation of the ensemble model.

dtm: Hillshade derived using combined compute_edges in gdaldem