Ongoing Management, Monitoring, and Evaluation

evaluate and manage

Ongoing Management

Management of the restoration site is vital to ensure the successful outcomes of the implementation component. Without revisiting, projects are likely to fail in providing ecological, cultural, and socioeconomic benefits. Management should start as soon as possible after implementing the project to preserve the restored ecosystem as much as possible 1.

 

Adaptive Mangement

As variables within a restoration project will be constantly changing, flexible management in project implementation and monitoring is vital. Adaptive management is a “learning by doing” systematic approach that works to improve the practice of restoration but should not be confused with “trial by error”. When applied correctly, adaptive management can improve our understanding of restoration by

  1. Enabling stakeholders to explore alternative ways to meet restoration objectives
  2. Predicting the outcomes of alternatives based on the current state of knowledge
  3. Implementing one or more of these alternatives
  4. Monitoring to learn about the impacts of restorative actions
  5. Using the results to update knowledge and adjust restoration practices

Adaptive management should be the standard approach for any ecological restoration project, irrespective of how well-resourced that project may be. Fully implementing an adaptive management approach requires timely monitoring and evaluation of results, as well as funding for ongoing restoration 2.

 

Monitoring and Evaluation

Due to anthropogenic climate change and other unpredictable events, it is crucial that the project results, outcomes, or impacts are monitored and evaluated after the project implementation. Specifically, there are three components that should be examined during the monitoring and evaluation phase.

  1. The extent to which restoration activities were implemented as planned by measuring indicators such as results, outcomes, and impact of the project. These can be evaluated throughout and up until at the end of the project.
  2. The degree to which the restoration targets are projected to be recovered with continued monitoring, the progress of project goals and objectives towards the future goals past the end of project, and the establishment of a timeline for proper monitoring
  3. The ecological, cultural, or socioeconomic results, with a focus on quantifying results when possible

Monitoring and evaluation of the restoration site in turn contributes to adaptive management, which considers new challenges to the ecosystem, implements effective actions, and stops using ineffective actions. This preserves the progress of the original implementation of the project1.

Steps to think about during monitoring and evaluation

Using the SER Ecological Recovery Wheel

A great resource to visualise ecosystem recovery over the monitoring period is the SER Ecological Recovery Wheel. The wheel can be customised to compare the restored ecosystem attributes to a reference model. The example below, taken from the SER webpage, shows an example of how you can visualise recovery through the wheel.

You can access the Ecological Recovery wheel through the following tools:

Example of the SER Recovery Wheel with a comparison of a baseline ecosystem and its status 10 years later
Example of the SER Recovery Wheel with a comparison of a baseline ecosystem and its status 10 years later
monitoring
IMTA igafa
DSC00246

References

1. FAO, SER, IUCN CEM (2023) Standards of practice to guide ecosystem restoration. A contribution to the
United Nations Decade on Ecosystem Restoration. Summary report. https://doi.org/10.4060/cc5223en
2. Gann GD, McDonald T, Walder B, Aronson J, Nelson CR, Jonson J, et al. (2019) International principles and standards for the practice of ecological restoration. Second edition. Restoration Ecology, 27:1–46. https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.13035