A framework for monitoring ecosystem restoration at landscape scale

Successful large‐scale ecosystem restoration projects are central to achieving ambitious global and regional restoration targets, but evidence on outcomes is scarce. We developed a novel framework for monitoring landscape and seascape restoration, refined through learnings from 14 large‐scale restoration projects in Europe over 6 years. The framework captures changes at two timescales: short‐term indicators assess progress towards project management or funding period outcomes while long‐term indicators measure progress towards the ultimate vision for restored landscapes. It encompasses natural capital, ecosystem service, and socioeconomic dimensions, but allows projects flexibility to select context‐specific indicators. We provide recommendations on the framework's application and illustrate its use in a large‐scale restoration project in Scotland. The framework encouraged projects to select new indicators, particularly of social outcomes, widening their understanding. Other learnings highlighted misalignment between ecosystem restoration timescales and funding cycles, the need for flexibility, and the value of focusing on a few well‐chosen indicators.

• Publication year

  2025

• Venue

  Conservation Science and Practice

• Publication date

  2025-12-18

• Fields of study

  Not labeled

• Identifiers
  DOI 10.1111/csp2.70214
• External record

  Open on Semantic Scholar

• Source metadata

  Semantic Scholar

• No claims are published for this paper.

• No concepts are published for this paper.

• Enabling participatory monitoring and evaluation: Insights for conservation practitioners and organizations

  2025cited by this paper
• Approaches for integrating evidence of the effectiveness of actions in conservation funding to inspire more effective practice

  2025cited by this paper
• Restoration of formerly afforested blanket bog: Estimating time for vegetation recovery

  2025cited by this paper
• Overcoming barriers and leveraging opportunities to scale up landscape‐scale restoration in Europe

  2025cited by this paper
• Progress and challenges of multi-habitat marine restoration in the eastern Aegean Sea, Türkiye

  2025cited by this paper
• The added value of the long-term ecological research network to upscale restoration in Europe.

  2024cited by this paper
• Accelerating forest landscape restoration monitoring in Africa: informing tangible actions from a practical perspective

  2024cited by this paper
• Invertebrate responses to rewilding: a monitoring framework for practitioners

  2024cited by this paper
• Challenges and Limitations of Remote Sensing Applications in Northern Peatlands: Present and Future Prospects

  2024cited by this paper
• Lessons lost: Lack of requirements for post‐project evaluation and reporting is hindering evidence‐based conservation

  2024cited by this paper
• Wetland restoration: can short‐term success criteria predict long‐term outcomes?

  2024cited by this paper
• Economics of Ecosystem Restoration

  2023cited by this paper
• Integrating the resilience concept into ecosystem restoration

  2023cited by this paper
• Woodland expansion in the presence of deer: 30 years of evidence from the Cairngorms Connect landscape restoration partnership

  2023cited by this paper
• A scoping review of the scientific evidence base for rewilding in Europe

  2023cited by this paper
• Funding evidence‐based conservation

  2022cited by this paper
• Measuring and monitoring restored ecosystems: can remote sensing be applied to the ecological recovery wheel to inform restoration success?

  2022cited by this paper
• The Kunming-Montréal Global Biodiversity Framework

  2022cited by this paper
• Current and future opportunities for satellite remote sensing to inform rewilding

  2022cited by this paper
• Long‐term effects of rewilding on species composition: 22 years of raptor monitoring in the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone

  2022cited by this paper
• Conservation genetics of montane willow populations in Scotland—limited natural recovery despite long-distance gene flow and high genetic diversity

  2022cited by this paper
• The Concept, Practice, Application, and Results of Locally Based Monitoring of the Environment

  2021cited by this paper
• A counterfactual approach to measure the impact of wet grassland conservation on U.K. breeding bird populations

  2021influential reference
• Identifying conservation technology needs, barriers, and opportunities

  2021cited by this paper
• UN DECADE ON ECOSYSTEM RESTORAT ION OP IN ION ART ICLE Ten people-centered rules for socially sustainable ecosystem restoration

  2021cited by this paper
• Review for "Expert‐based assessment of rewilding indicates progress at site‐level, yet challenges for upscaling"

  2021cited by this paper
• Learning from scientific literature: Can indicators for measuring success be standardized in “on the ground” restoration?

  2020cited by this paper
• Technological advances in biodiversity monitoring: applicability, opportunities and challenges

  2020cited by this paper
• A world of possibilities: six restoration strategies to support the United Nation's Decade on Ecosystem Restoration

  2020cited by this paper
• Assessing restoration success by predicting time to recovery—But by which metric?

  2019cited by this paper
• Citizen science in data and resource-limited areas: A tool to detect long-term ecosystem changes

  2019cited by this paper
• Rewilding complex ecosystems

  2019cited by this paper
• Simple study designs in ecology produce inaccurate estimates of biodiversity responses

  2019cited by this paper
• International principles and standards for the practice of ecological restoration. Second edition

  2019cited by this paper
• Deficits of biodiversity and productivity linger a century after agricultural abandonment

  2019cited by this paper
• Statistical matching for conservation science

  2019influential reference
• Measuring rewilding progress

  2018influential reference
• A Vision for Global Biodiversity Monitoring With Citizen Science

  2018cited by this paper
• Monitoring the social benefits of ecological restoration

  2018cited by this paper
• Integrating diverse social and ecological motivations to achieve landscape restoration

  2018cited by this paper
• One hundred priority questions for landscape restoration in Europe

  2018cited by this paper
• Citizen science can improve conservation science, natural resource management, and environmental protection

  2017cited by this paper
• How economics can further the success of ecological restoration

  2017cited by this paper
• Challenges and Prospects for Scaling‐up Ecological Restoration to Meet International Commitments: Colombia as a Case Study

  2016cited by this paper
• Characteristics of participatory monitoring projects and their relationship to decision-making in biological resource management: a review

  2016cited by this paper
• Characteristics of participatory monitoring projects and their relationship to decision-making in biological resource management: a review

  2016cited by this paper
• Short-Term Projects versus Adaptive Governance: Conflicting Demands in the Management of Ecological Restoration

  2016cited by this paper
• The challenges of integrating biodiversity and ecosystem services monitoring and evaluation at a landscape-scale wetland restoration project in the UK

  2016cited by this paper
• Methods and Indicators Advances in Measuring the Environmental and Social Impacts of Environmental Programs

  2015influential reference
• Best practice for biodiversity data management and publication

  2014cited by this paper
• Making Monitoring Count: Project Design for Active Adaptive Management

  2013cited by this paper
• Distinguishing four types of monitoring based on the questions they address

  2013cited by this paper
• Evaluating Ecological Restoration Success: A Review of the Literature

  2013cited by this paper
• Using statistical power analysis as a tool when designing a monitoring program: experience from a large-scale Swedish landscape monitoring program

  2013cited by this paper
• When is Open‐endedness Desirable in Restoration Projects?

  2012cited by this paper
• Toward an Era of Restoration in Ecology: Successes, Failures, and Opportunities Ahead

  2011cited by this paper
• Monitoring and evaluating large-scale, ‘open-ended’ habitat creation projects: A journey rather than a destination

  2011cited by this paper
• Enhancement of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services by Ecological Restoration: A Meta-Analysis

  2009cited by this paper
• Adaptive management in practice: conservation of a threatened plant population.

  2009cited by this paper
• Comparing power among three sampling methods for monitoring forest vegetation

  2008cited by this paper
• Why most conservation monitoring is, but need not be, a waste of time.

  2006cited by this paper
• Synthesizing U.S. River Restoration Efforts

  2005cited by this paper
• Dynamic and static views of succession: Testing the descriptive power of the chronosequence approach

  2004cited by this paper
• Article

  2000cited by this paper
• The role of rewilding in mitigating hydrological extremes: State of the evidence

  year unknowncited by this paper

• No citing papers are available for this paper.