Opportunities and Challenges for Monitoring Ecosystem Restoration in Protected and Conserved Area
- July 11th, 2025
- Scientific production
- Print Article
The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA) and the IUCN Species Survival Commission (SSC) Species Monitoring Specialist Group have published a new technical note, Opportunities and Challenges for Monitoring Ecosystem Restoration in Protected and Conserved Areas, offering critical guidance for practitioners, policymakers, and decision-makers involved in ecosystem restoration worldwide.
As global attention focuses on reversing environmental degradation and achieving ambitious restoration targets under the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, effective monitoring has emerged as a cornerstone of successful ecosystem recovery and long-term conservation.
The Azores case study, featured in the report, demonstrates the successful use of an arthropod-based Index of Biotic Integrity (IBI) to monitor restoration outcomes in native forests within the LIFE BEETLES and LIFE SNAILS projects, providing a robust measure of habitat quality and restoration success for endemic and threatened species
Key Findings
The report highlights that while ecosystem restoration is essential for improving protected and conserved areas (PCAs), restoring biodiversity, and delivering on global commitments to restore at least 30% of degraded ecosystems, monitoring efforts often fall short due to a range of persistent challenges. These include:
-
Overemphasis on Outputs, Underemphasis on Outcomes: Monitoring has traditionally prioritized simple quantitative outputs (e.g., number of trees planted) over meaningful ecological and social outcomes, such as biodiversity recovery, habitat quality, and benefits to local communities.
-
Insufficient Funding and Capacity: Restoration monitoring is frequently underfunded, with insufficient resources dedicated to long-term data collection, local capacity building, and integrating innovative and context-appropriate technologies.
-
Lack of Clear Objectives and Harmonised Indicators: The absence of standardized definitions, objectives, and indicators impedes comparison, data aggregation, and adaptive management across sites and projects.
-
Neglect of Indigenous and Local Knowledge: Top-down scientific approaches often sideline valuable Indigenous and local perspectives that are critical for effective, locally adapted restoration monitoring.
-
Short-Term Monitoring: Many projects lack baseline data and are constrained by short funding cycles, limiting the ability to assess progress and inform future action.
Practical Solutions and Way Forward
The Technical Note identifies a suite of emerging solutions and best practices for improving restoration monitoring, including:
-
Integrated Frameworks and Tools: The adoption of frameworks such as the State–Pressure–Response–Benefit (SPRB) model, and the use of international standards for ecological restoration, are recommended to guide indicator development and monitoring protocols.
-
Innovative Technologies: Remote sensing, unmanned aerial vehicles (drones), and environmental DNA (eDNA) are increasingly being used to monitor restoration progress, though these tools must be paired with ground-based observations and local knowledge.
-
Participatory and Inclusive Approaches: The report advocates for the integration of Indigenous and local knowledge, and the engagement of local communities in participatory monitoring, to build local capacity and ensure the long-term sustainability of restoration projects.
-
Case Studies: Successful examples from the Azores (Portugal), Brazil, Colombia, and South Africa demonstrate the value of multidisciplinary approaches that combine scientific rigor with local knowledge and stakeholder engagement.
Implications for Restoration Practice
To achieve impactful ecosystem restoration, the report recommends:
-
Setting clear, measurable, and feasible ecological and social objectives aligned with PCA conservation values.
-
Choosing appropriate indicators that reflect both ecological and social outcomes.
-
Ensuring sufficient capacity, funding, and partnerships for long-term monitoring.
-
Embedding restoration monitoring into broader management, policy, and community practices.
-
Using monitoring data to inform adaptive management and share lessons learned within and beyond individual sites.
Quote
“Effective monitoring is essential to ensure that ecosystem restoration delivers real, lasting benefits for biodiversity and people. This technical note provides practical solutions and international case studies to help restoration practitioners and policymakers overcome common barriers and adopt more impactful monitoring approaches.”
— Dr. Paulo Borges, lMember of Azorean Biodiversity Group (CE3C)
About the Technical Note
This publication is a collaboration between the IUCN WCPA and the SSC Species Monitoring Specialist Group, with contributions from leading restoration experts. It is available online:
Citation:
Stephenson, P.J., Mansourian, S., Borges, P.A.V., Correa, D.C.V., Polanco Fernández, A., Watson, K.M., & Dudley, N. (2025). Opportunities and Challenges for Monitoring Ecosystem Restoration in Protected and Conserved Areas. Technical Note No. 24. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN WCPA & IUCN SSC Species Monitoring Specialist Group. [12pp.]