INFO NOTE

Monitoring and reporting

suggestions for Target 2
of the post-2020 Global
Biodiversity Framework

A contribution of the Task Force

on Monitoring of the UN Decade
on Ecosystem Restoration
 Monitoring and reporting
suggestions for Target 2
of the post-2020 Global
Biodiversity Framework

A contribution of the Task Force

on Monitoring of the UN Decade
on Ecosystem Restoration

2
Contents
Abbreviations and Acronyms 4
Summary 5
Part 1: Background information 6
1. Introduction 6
2. Relevant initiatives supporting restoration monitoring 6

[Link] Decade on Ecosystem Restoration 6

[Link] Framework for Ecosystem Restoration Monitoring 7
[Link] Forest Resources Assessment and Restoration Monitoring 7
[Link] Land Degradation Neutrality Targets and National Reporting Process 7
[Link] on Earth Observation Land Degradation Neutrality initiative 8
[Link] on Earth Observation Biodiversity Observation Network 8
2.7. The G20 Global Initiative on Reducing Land Degradation and Enhancing
Conservation of Terrestrial Habitats 8
[Link] Strategic Plan 2016 – 2024 9
[Link] Coral Reef Initiative 9

3. Monitoring guidance 10

[Link] 10
[Link] period for monitoring 11
[Link] technical options 11
[Link] ecological connectivity 12

Part 2: Draft methodology for area-based estimates 13

1. Rationale 13
2. Workflow summary 13

3. Data parameters 14

4. Method for compiling data and calculating total area 16

5. Quality assurance and quality control 17

References 18
Annex 19

3
 Abbreviations and Acronyms
ABT Aichi Biodiversity Target

BIP Biodiversity Indicators Partnership

CBD Convention on Biological Diversity

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

FERM Framework for Ecosystem Restoration Monitoring

GBF Global Biodiversity Framework

GCRMN Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network

GPG Good Practice Guidance

GPI Global Peatlands Initiative

GRO Global Restoration Observatory

ICRI International Coral Reef Initiative

IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature

NBSAP National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan

Ramsar Ramsar Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat

SBSTTA Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice

SDG Sustainable Development Goal

SEEA System of Environmental Economic Accounting

SEPAL System for Earth Observation Data Access, Processing and Analysis for Land Monitoring

SER Society for Ecological Restoration

UNCCD United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification

UNEA United Nations Environment Assembly

UNEP United Nations Environment Programme

WCMC World Conservation Monitoring Centre

4
Summary
This Information Document is prepared by the Food and parts: Part 1 provides relevant background information on
Agriculture Organization of the United Nations as part of Target 2 of the post-2020 global biodiversity framework (GBF)
the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration Task Force on and monitoring guidance; Part 2 proposes a draft methodology
Monitoring, in collaboration with BIP, CBD, GRO, ICRI, IUCN, based on the guidance.
Ramsar, SER, UNCCD and UNEP-WCMC. It contains two main

5
 Part 1: Background information

1. Introduction
The Twenty-fourth meeting of the Subsidiary Body on
Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice (SBSTTA) to
the CBD3 was held in Geneva from 14 to 29 March 2022 to
discuss a proposed list of indicators, including for Target 2,
At the fifteenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP) for consideration in developing the monitoring framework
to the CBD, Parties are expected to adopt a post-2020 global for the post-2020 global biodiversity framework. SBSTTA-24
biodiversity framework1 as a roadmap towards the 2050 Vision recommended to establish an ad hoc technical working group
of “Living in harmony with nature”. In its decision 14/342, the to advise on further operationalization of the monitoring
COP adopted a comprehensive and participatory process for framework for the post-2020 global biodiversity framework4.
the preparation of the post-2020 global biodiversity framework.
As part of that process, documents relating to the development The Secretariat of CBD has requested FAO, under the mandate
of the post-2020 global biodiversity framework have been of the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration Task Force
shared with and negotiated by Parties and stakeholders. on Monitoring, to prepare this Information Document with
methodological guidance for monitoring Target 2.
The negotiated formulation of Target 2 of the post-2020
global biodiversity framework after Open Ended Working

2. Relevant initiatives
Group (OEWG) 4th meeting in Nairobi, 21-26 June 2022 is:

“Ensure that [at least] [20] [30] [per cent]/ [at least [1]
billion ha] [globally] of [degraded] [terrestrial,] [inland
supporting restoration
waters,] [freshwater], [coastal] and [marine]] [areas]
[ecosystems] are under [active] [effective] [ecological]
monitoring
restoration [and rehabilitation] [measures] [, taking into
account their natural state as a baseline [reference]],
[with a focus on [restoring] [nationally identified] [[priority The Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020, composed of
[areas] [ecosystems]] such as [threatened ecosystems] 5 strategic goals and 20 targets (collectively known as the
and [areas of particular importance for biodiversity]]] in Aichi Biodiversity Targets), was adopted during CBD COP10
order to enhance [biodiversity and ecosystem functions in 2010. It served as a flexible and overarching framework
and services] [[ecological] integrity, connectivity and guiding the previous UN Decade on Biodiversity (2011-2020).
functioning] and [biocultural ecosystems managed by In its mission, the Strategic Plan pointed out that “pressures on
indigenous peoples and local communities] [, increase biodiversity are reduced, ecosystems are restored, biological
areas of natural and seminatural ecosystems and to resources are sustainably used”. Parties have been actively
support climate change adaptation and mitigation], [with developing National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans
the full and effective participation of indigenous peoples (NBSAPs) and strengthening capacities to address the
and local communities] [*] [and through adequate means biodiversity targets. The following sections present several
of implementation] [*]” ongoing initiatives supporting restoration monitoring, starting
from the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration.
Headline Indicator 2.0.1: [Percentage][Area] of degraded
[and] [or] converted ecosystems that are under
[ecological] restoration 2.1. UN Decade on Ecosystem
Component indicator 2.2.1: Maintenance and restoration Restoration
of connectivity of natural ecosystems
On the 1st of March 2019, under Resolution 73/284, the United
Nations General Assembly (UNGA) proclaimed 2021–2030

3 [Link]
1 [Link] [Link]
[Link] 4 [Link]
2 [Link] [Link]

6
to be the United Nations Decade on Ecosystem Restoration
(hereafter ‘the UN Decade’), with the primary aim being to 2.3. Global Forest Resources
prevent, halt and reverse the degradation of ecosystems
worldwide. To support implementation and scaling up, the Assessment and
UN Decade has established 10 principles serving to underpin
restoration efforts5. Principle 9 ‘Monitoring and Management’
Restoration Monitoring
highlights the importance of effective monitoring and
reporting and is also essential to all three of the pathways FAO Global Forest Resources Assessment (FRA) is a
described within the UN Decade Strategy, namely, building a well-established country-driven process of collection and
global movement, generating political support, and building compilation of and reporting on global forest resources, their
technical capacity (United Nations, 2021). management and uses. The FRA is based on official statistical
data reported by the countries through a global network of FRA
Monitoring the UN Decade’s progress has the overall objective National Correspondents. The full FRA reporting cycle is five
of contributing to the implementation of the UN Decade as years, but FAO has been requested to develop a more flexible
well as to the UN Secretary-General’s reporting to the UNGA at reporting process that would allow countries to provide more
its eighty-first session (A/RES/73/284) in 2025. frequent voluntary updates on the key indicators.

FAO is the UN custodian agency for 21 SDG indicators. FRA is

2.2. The Framework for Ecosystem directly responsible for compiling the data for and reporting on

Restoration Monitoring the indicators 15.1.1 and 15.2.1 and leads the data production
and reporting for the indicator 15.4.2.

In March 2020, the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration At the 25th session of COFO in 2020, countries requested that
Task Force on Monitoring (hereafter the Monitoring Task “FAO in cooperation with Country Programming Framework
Force) was launched. Structured as a core Monitoring Task (CPF) members and other restoration initiatives, prepare an
Force and with three sub-Task Forces (Terrestrial; Aquatic and information note for the 26th session of COFO that analyzes
Transitional; and Socio-Economic), it brings together hundreds if and how reporting on restoration-related indicators to
of technical experts from over 100 organizations tasked with future FRA reports can streamline reporting for countries
collaboratively developing a monitoring framework for the UN between multiple restoration initiatives”. The information
Decade. The monitoring framework for the UN Decade intends note6 aims at assessing the potential value of using the FRA
to support monitoring and reporting of the progress and process to collect data on restoration potential, pledges,
achievements of ecosystem restoration for the UN Decade and implementation. Such reporting through the FRA
(2021–2030). The framework was subsequently created and could contribute to the improved monitoring and reporting
named the Framework for Ecosystem Restoration Monitoring mechanism of ecosystem restoration, an overall objective of
(FERM). A description of the Task Force can be found here: the UN Decade and more specifically to the FERM.
TF link.

2.4. UNCCD Land Degradation

Through an extensive consultative and analytical process, Neutrality Targets and
a set of 20 headline indicators were identified from existing
formal country data collection processes. The report on
National Reporting Process
headline indicators (FAO and UNEP, 2022), was launched at
the XV World Forestry Congress in May 2022 and will also be The UNCCD 2018-2030 Strategic Framework7 contributes to the
presented in the High-Level Political Forum on Sustainable 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, in particular to SDG
Development (beginning of July 2022). Headline indicators 15 and target 15.3: “by 2030, combat desertification, restore
will allow monitoring of the progress of the decade using degraded land, including land affected by desertification,
existing country statistical data collected through SDG drought and floods, and strive to achieve a land degradation-
reporting processes and will be reassessed on an annual neutral world”. Land degradation neutrality is defined as a “state
basis by the Monitoring Task Force for relevant updates. whereby the amount and quality of land resources necessary to
Additionally, the FERM registry was launched at the XV World support ecosystem functions and services and enhance food
Forestry Congress to harmonize and collect information on security remain stable or increase within specified temporal
ecosystem restoration projects and programs ([Link] and spatial scales and ecosystems8”. It promotes a dual-
[Link]/). The FERM data visualization geoportal has been pronged approach of measures to avoid or reduce degradation
developed to visualize progress and provide indicators and
data to help practitioners to monitor ecosystem restoration
([Link]
6 The information note is available at: [Link]
[Link]
7 UNCCD decision 7/COP.13 ([Link]
sessions/documents/2019-08/7COP13_0.pdf)
5 [Link] 8 UNCCD decision 3/COP.12 ([Link]
ecosystem-restoration-guide-united-nations-decade-2021-2030 sessions/documents/2019-08/3COP12_0.pdf)

7
 of land, combined with measures to reverse past degradation.
As of December 2021, 129 countries had committed to set their 2.6. Group on Earth
voluntary targets for achieving land degradation neutrality, and
in 106 countries, governments had already officially endorsed Observation Biodiversity
these targets. Observation Network
Through the UNCCD national reporting process, country
Parties regularly report information on the proportion of land In addition to GEO LDN, the Biodiversity Observation Network
that is degraded over total land area (i.e. SDG Indicator 15.3.1), within the GEO family (GEO BON) represents biodiversity and
beginning in 2018 and every four years thereafter. In addition, is recognized as a partner by the CBD. One of its goals for
starting from the 2022 reporting process, country Parties will 2025 is to foster and make functional a strong, balanced
be urged to report geospatial information on the location and and sustained biodiversity observation community, based on
extent of their voluntary land degradation neutrality targets shared resources and increased capacity.
and related implementation actions, thereby ensuring that they
are quantifiable, spatially explicit and time-bound. National Together with its scientific partners, GEO BON has introduced
reporting is facilitated through the Performance Review and a set of global indicators integrating biodiversity observations,
Assessment of the Implementation System, now at its fourth remote sensing data, and models to address important gaps in
edition (PRAIS 4). the understanding of biodiversity change across local, national
and global spatial scales. One such indicator that directly
addresses restoration is the Global Ecosystem Restoration
2.5. Group on Earth Observation Index (GERI). It is a composite index that integrates structural

Land Degradation and functional aspects of the ecosystem restoration process.

It was created to monitor and assess Aichi Biodiversity Target
Neutrality initiative 15: Restoration of 15 percent of degraded ecosystems.

Currently, GEO BON is focusing its efforts on the

The Group on Earth Observation (GEO), with its over implementation and adoption of the Essential Biodiversity
100 national governments and over 100 Participating Variables (EBVs) and related monitoring guidelines and
Organizations, is supporting country efforts to monitor interoperable data management systems and through
land degradation through the Group on Earth Observation targeted capacity building efforts at the national and regional
Land Degradation Neutrality (GEO LDN) Initiative. Launched level. By 2025, GEO BON aims to facilitate the development or
at the GEO Week in 2018, the GEO LDN Initiative promotes enhancement of at least 25 national biodiversity observation
collaborative development, and supports provision and use systems that can contribute to regional and global biodiversity
of Earth Observation datasets, quality standards, analytical assessments.
tools and capacity building to avoid, reduce, and reverse land
degradation with the aim of achieving LDN in all countries by
2030. With the GEO LDN Initiative, they have taken on one of 2.7. The G20 Global Initiative on
the most difficult challenges countries face: harmonizing the
myriad of data options and analytical tools into a work stream Reducing Land Degradation
that is open to all, and capable of meeting the needs for
international comparability while ensuring national ownership.
and Enhancing Conservation
of Terrestrial Habitats
Tools such as such as [Link] - an open-source GIS
plugin which supports the computation of SDG Indicator Launched at the G20 Leadership Summit in November 2020,
15.3.1 and its sub-indicators - help countries adhere to the initiative sets a collective ambition of 50% reduction in
global standards while taking end-to-end ownership of the degraded land by 20409. The communiqué summarizing
monitoring process, even when local capacity for analysis the agreed focus of the Initiative explains that it aims to
may be limited. Through the working groups of the GEO LDN support existing efforts to prevent, halt, and reverse land
Initiative, additional support tools that are inter-operational degradation and habitat loss through sharing of knowledge
with [Link] are being developed, such as the System and best practices on protecting, conserving, sustainably
for Earth observations, data access, Processing and Analysis managing, restoring, and rehabilitating degraded land, and
for Land monitoring (SEPAL) module for SDG indicator 15.3.1. by showcasing and disseminating publicly available data and
These aim to broaden the utility of SDG Indicator 15.3.1 and information on degraded lands and conservation/restoration
its sub-indicators for environmental analysis and decision efforts10. The initiative will also contribute to capacity building
support at the global, national and sub-national levels. and encourage greater private sector support and public
engagement in land restoration efforts. The initiative focuses

9 See para 30 in the G20 Leaders Declaration: [Link]

ca/2020/[Link]
10 See para 9 in the G20 Environmental Ministers Communiqué: [Link]
[Link]/2020/[Link]

8
on complementing and supporting existing efforts while
striving to avoid any duplication of efforts. The Initiative will 2.9. International Coral
seek synergies with existing relevant initiatives including the
UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration and the implementation Reef Initiative
of the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework.
The International Coral Reef Initiative (ICRI) is a global
partnership with a membership of countries and organizations
This vision has been supported by a decision taken by the to preserve the world’s coral reefs and associated
UNCCD Conference of the Parties, at its fifteenth session ecosystems. The 45 member countries are custodians of
(COP15) in May 2022, which requests the UNCCD secretariat over 75% of the world’s coral reefs. ICRI has engaged with the
to collaborate with appropriate secretariats and other CBD Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework since 2018. In
initiatives, as well as relevant scientific and technical partners, the ICRI Resolution on Restoration (2019) “ICRI recognises
to produce an interactive report on the total global ambition that reef restoration is a valid management option in areas
for land restoration, including all measures to avoid, reduce when natural recovery is eroded, and that restoration can
and/or reverse land degradation, aggregated from the array complement other actions to support reef resilience”. Within
of area-based commitments (quantifiable in hectares and the Recommendation on inclusion of coral reefs within the
spatially explicit with a clear reference year, or in a percentage Post-2020 GBF (2020) ICRI reiterated the important role that
that is translatable into hectares) countries have made under restoration must play in achieving the objectives of the GBF.
different conventions, goals and targets11.
In 2021, ICRI adopted an addendum to its consensus
recommendation for the inclusion of coral reefs in the GBF in 2020.
2.8. Ramsar Strategic The addendum focuses on the relevance of Target 2 to coral reef

Plan 2016 – 2024 ecosystems and in particular recommended the inclusion within
the monitoring framework of an indicator to measure the integrity
of the area of coral reefs under restoration “Live Coral Cover in
In 2016 the 4th Ramsar Strategic Plan12 was launched restored coral reef areas”. This proposed indicator is a composite
after countries agreed, in 2015, for the first time a set of indicator that combines information from the Live coral cover
coherent policies, frameworks, and commitments across the metric (already recommended by ICRI and reported on by the
international community. The aim of the 4th strategic plan is Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network (GCRMN) In the 2020 Status
to be congruent both with all the SDG goals, particularly SDG of Coral Reefs of the World Report, an Essential Ocean Variable
targets 14.2 and 15.1 and with the Aichi Biodiversity Target 15 identified by the UNESCO Intergovernmental Oceanographic
(many of which have in turn been incorporated into the SDGs) Commission’s Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS) and
(Ramsar Convention Secretariat, 2016). widely implemented and included within the draft GBF monitoring
framework), with the Restored Reef Areal Dimension (RRAD)
Among the different Ramsar Strategic Plan Targets, Target indicator, which is recommended as a Universal Metric by the
12 specifically contributes to the restoration of the wetland Coral Reef Consortium. This indicator provides an approximation
ecosystems with the following definition: of the overall reef area in which corals are planted and the area that
restored corals have contributed to increased live coral cover over
“Restoration is in progress in degraded wetlands, with priority time. This metric is valuable as it provides guidance for reporting
to wetlands that are relevant for biodiversity conservation, standardized project size and area of restored reef to gauge the
disaster risk reduction, livelihoods and/or climate change overall impact and success of a restoration project.
mitigation and adaptation.”
It is noted this indicator provides valuable initial information
Ramsar provides baselines in terms of a) 68% of Parties that on the action aspect of the target, but it is not sufficient to
have identified priority sites for restoration and b) 70% of Parties measure an outcome of improved ecological integrity or
have implemented restoration programmes, both as informed connectivity. Further guidance is available in the recent ICRI/
through national reports to COP12. The convention suggests UNEP publication “Coral Reef Restoration as a strategy to
using indicators to monitor the progress of wetland restoration improve ecosystem services –A guide to coral restoration
by measuring a) % of Parties that have established restoration methods13” and information available in CRC Coral Restoration
plans or activities in the priority sites or b) % of Parties that have Database14 (Appendix 3), and 2) An Evaluation Tool for Coral
implemented effective restoration projects. It is also suggested Restoration (modified from Lirman et al., 2017).
further development on indicators that can measure the extent
of wetland restoration possibly using remote sensing techniques
(Ramsar Convention Secretariat, 2016).

11 For the advance limited distribution version of this decision, see para 13 [Link]
9 in ICCD/COP(15)/CST/L.3: [Link] handle/20.500.11822/34810;jsessionid=1AECEACC84CA23FBF90B3
files/2022-03/ICCD_COP%2815%29_CST_3-[Link] AD2373EEECF
12 [Link] 14 [Link]
hb2_5ed_strategic_plan_2016_24_e.pdf html?appid=666410e8008744cab5847421eb5f70d6

9
 3. Monitoring guidance
a. Ecosystem16:

Within the article 2 of the CBD, ecosystem is defined as:

The CBD acknowledged the challenges of measuring “Dynamic complex of plant, animal and micro-organism
ecosystem restoration, specifically for Aichi Biodiversity communities and their non-living environment interacting as
Targets (ABTs) 5 and 1515. Expanding from the information a functional unit.”
document Updated Assessment of Progress Towards Aichi
Biodiversity Targets 5 and 15, relevant practical challenges
and lessons learned are highlighted: b. Degraded ecosystem:

Many different metrics (very eco-specific) exist to measure No definition was found from the CBD or other conventions, it
degradation and restoration, but baselines and targets are is defined by (Dunster and Dunster (1996) as:
needed.
“An ecosystem where, due to any process or activity, the
• Restoration cannot be achieved without addressing viability of ecosystem functions and processes, and hence
the underlying drivers of degradation. biodiversity, have been removed or lessened.”

• Separate targets might be needed for the reduction of

ecosystem loss and degradation and for the restoration c. Ecosystem restoration:
of ecosystems.
Within the UN Decade, ecosystem restoration is defined as:
• A successor target to ABT 15 could focus on benefits
for biodiversity and other benefits expected from ”The process of halting and reversing degradation, resulting
ecosystem restoration, rather than area alone. in improved ecosystem services and recovered biodiversity.
Ecosystem restoration encompasses a wide continuum of
• A successor target to ABT 15 could include sub- practices, depending on local conditions and societal choice
targets for the restoration of a variety of ecosystems, (UNEP, 2021).
avoid the transformation of natural ecosystems or
to the notion of representativeness of a variety of Within the CBD post-2020 process, ecosystem restoration is
ecosystems in the restoration process. described as follows17:

• A successor target to ABT 15 could use several “Restoration may include: (a) restoring converted areas back
rather than one single metric to set the bar of global to natural states; (b) improving the ecological integrity of
ecosystem restoration efforts. degraded natural areas; and (c) rehabilitating converted and
degraded areas (e.g. degraded agricultural lands) to improve
both productivity and integrity.”
I. Large-scale, quantitative, spatially-explicit
conservation planning exercises help to evaluate where
conservation activities can achieve the greatest benefits d. Ecological restoration:
and identify scenarios with different alternatives.
Ecological restoration is one specific type of ecosystem
Observing these limitations and recommendations, although restoration. According to CBD, it is defined as:
not responding to all the needs, this section proposes a
methodological approach with the use of indicators that can “The process of managing or assisting the recovery of an
respond to some of the needs to report on restoration in all ecosystem that has been degraded, damaged or destroyed as
ecosystems. a means of sustaining ecosystem resilience and conserving
biodiversity.”

3.1. Definitions The Society for Ecological Restoration (SER) defines ecological
restoration as “the process of assisting the recovery of an
It will be necessary to use a common definition at least of ecosystem that has been degraded, damaged, or destroyed.”
the following concepts to allow for a joint and manageable (Gann et al., 2019).
monitoring and reporting process, and comparable results.
The CBD Secretariat and SER have provided a glossary to help
distinguish different versions of restoration and explain how
they intersect (CBD Secretariat and SER, 2019).

16 [Link]
15 [Link] 17 [Link]
[Link] [Link]

10
 e. Rehabilitation: integration into existing reporting procedures,
will facilitate linkages between existing reporting
Management actions that aim to reinstate a level of ecosystem processes. The reporting should be country-driven and
functioning on degraded sites, where the goal is renewed based on best available data. The indicators should
and ongoing provision of ecosystem services rather than the have reasonably good global and regional coverage
biodiversity and integrity of a designated native reference and they should be reported using standard quality
ecosystem (Gann et al., 2019). flags of the SDG reporting.

Rehabilitation is another type of ecosystem restoration. A way • Spatial data is important for calculating total area
to distinguish ecological restoration and rehabilitation is to and connectivity. To support [spatially explicit] country
distinguish between ecosystems that are in their natural state reporting, FAO could compile country-validated data
and transformed ecosystems. through the existing reporting procedures and make
available relevant geospatial and other data. These
data could include:
f. Ecological connectivity is defined as18:
1. Extent of restoration initiatives in all ecosystems
“The unimpeded movement of species and the flow of natural evaluated based on compilation of spatially explicit data
processes that sustain life on Earth”. available in the FERM registry (e.g. flagship initiatives,
formally submitted by countries), and in coordination with
other restoration platforms ensuring interoperability.
g. Ecosystem integrity definition19:
2. Connectivity metrics calculated for restoration areas
“An ecosystem is generally understood to have integrity when as identified in the previous point.
its dominant ecological characteristics (e.g. elements of
composition, structure, function, and ecological processes) • Reporting of restoration results is recommended to
occur within their natural ranges of variation and can withstand be centralized through the FERM registry, which aligns
and recover from most perturbations.” with other restoration platforms and inter-governmental
processes under MEAs aiming to remove duplicity.
Ecosystem integrity is an essential element in Goal A.
Discussion is going on regarding whether to have it in the final • Interim to the formal 5-yearly reporting, a dashboard
negotiated version of Target 2. Parties to the CBD are also of progress will be used to show annual progress using
working to adopt a consistent and accurate method to define, existing country data (20 headline indicators) and
measure and operationalize it. voluntary information on restoration initiatives, such
as the Restoration Flagships submitted by countries
and regional, governmental entities through the FERM
3.2. Time period for monitoring Registry.

Monitoring area under restoration is planned for a 10-year • FAO and partners will provide assistance to activate
period (2021-2030) in accordance with the duration of the the necessary capacity building actions, platforms and
UN decade on Ecosystem Restoration. This period coincides methodologies to support the reporting of target 2 and
with the one proposed by the post-2020 GBF to stabilize the the communication of results.
trends that have exacerbated biodiversity loss in the next 10
years (by 2030), and therefore allow for the recovery of natural • Non-official data from scientific literature and
ecosystems in the following 20 years, with net improvements other platforms could also be potential data sources.
by 2050 to achieve the Convention’s vision of “living in The FERM registry can compile such data for country
harmony with nature by 205020”. validation before reporting. For example, resources
developed by ICRI’s ad hoc committee (guidelines,
restoration database etc.) on restoration to highlight
3.3. Proposed technical options best practices and guidance on coral reef restoration
as well as monitoring protocols, which are made
• To the extent possible, restoration monitoring available via the ICRI Restoration Hub. This will increase
workflow should build on existing and well-established technical capacity. The GCRMN may be able to support
reporting processes, practices and principles. this further to validate the indicators.
Methodological guidance, training materials and

18 [Link]
res.12.26_rev.cop13_e.pdf
19 [Link]
[Link]
20 [Link]
[Link]

11
 3.4. Monitoring ecological
connectivity
After the Twenty-fourth meeting of the Subsidiary Body on
Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice (SBSTTA) held
in Geneva in March 2022, an expert workshop (Ecological
connectivity –Insights for application and measurement from
20 to 21 of April 2022) was held to discuss indicators for
ecological connectivity. The indicators proposed were divided
into component and complementary.

• Component: 2.2.1 Maintenance and restoration of

connectivity of natural ecosystems

• Complementary indicators:

◊ T2.5 Forest Landscape Integrity Index

◊ T2.9 Connectivity Status Indicator for the

World’s Rivers

◊ T2.11 Bioclimatic Ecosystem Resilience

Index

12
 Figure 1. Workflow for data reporting of area under
restoration

Part 2: Draft methodology Restauration initiatives/activities

e.g. UN Decade Flagships,
country LDN targets

for area-based estimates

Data integration, Data submission of parameters
exchange to platforms e.g. FERM, FRA,
RESTOR, Restauration Barometer,
enable by

1. Rationale
WDPA, PRAIS, ICRI
interoperability
framework
and capacity
development Data compilation between platforms

The UN Decade intends to compile area-based estimates

of restoration, with methodological development during
2022, and the first data compilation during 2023, to support FERM Registry

annual reporting of restoration progress by December 2023. No, revise

data
Monitoring and reporting against CBD post-2020 Global
Country
Biodiversity Framework Target 2 (restoration) can also be data validation
supported, to remove duplication of effort and to ensure
Yes, validated
monitoring and reporting alignment between the UN Decade
and the CBD restoration target. As identified in the associated FERM Platform

Information Note, the UN Decade intends to leverage all

existing data collection processes, however, there is currently
Reporting to UN Decade & CBD Target 2: area under restoration
no single mechanism for collecting area-based information reported by ecosystem and by country
on ecosystem restoration. To fill this gap, the following
methodology is proposed to generate area-based estimates
for restoration for both the UN Decade and CBD Target 2.

2. Workflow summary
The primary platforms and reporting mechanisms for
collecting information on restoration areas include the
Framework for Ecosystem Restoration Monitoring (FERM),
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), Restor, Restoration
At the moment, there is no mechanism for collecting area- Barometer, UNCCD’s Performance Review and Assessment
based information on ecosystem restoration. FAO and key of the Implementation System (PRAIS), World Database
partners from the Monitoring Task Force of the UN Decade on for Protected Areas (WDPA), the Global Forest Resource
Ecosystem Restoration are defining a methodology for data Assessment (FRA), International Coral Reef Initiative (ICRI),
collection, compilation, and reporting (Figure 1). Ramsar, UNFCCC and other REDD+ reporting mechanisms.

The Monitoring Task Force will work with platform developers

to harmonize the data collected by each platform and ensure
that they are collecting the data parameters for reporting
on areas under restoration. The Project Information Sharing
Framework from the Global Restoration Observatory (GRO)21
provides a useful framework for interoperability between
platforms. The goal of interoperability between the key
restoration platforms is to enable the exchange and integration
of data from different sources, to have an API that will share
data seamlessly between platforms, reducing duplication of
effort, reporting burden, and the likelihood of double counting
of restoration areas.

Restoration initiatives, led by public entities, private sector,

civil society and individuals can share area based data and

21 [Link]
information-sharing-framework/

13
 additional parameters for reporting area under restoration data; b) approval of publishing the data as estimated data; c)
through any of the key identified platforms. FAO will compile rejection of publishing the estimated data; d) non-response
data from the key platforms and harmonize the data through - data reported as estimated data. Validated statistics,
the FERM registry so long as data providers, be they national aggregated from data validated as country data or estimated
institutions or private sector, have consented to share those data on areas under restoration will be reported to the CBD
data with the UN Decade. Spatially explicit area information and in the annual reporting mechanism of the UN Decade.
is strongly recommended; as such, information will be used
to transparently share the areas under restoration, restoration

3. Data parameters
commitments and areas successfully restored, as well as
calculate the connectivity metrics between ecosystems. The
additional parameters will assist in avoiding double counting
and providing disaggregated estimates for different reporting
mechanisms. A quality assurance quality control (QA/QC) The data parameters for area under restoration include
procedure in the FERM registry will be defined to include only information for directly deriving relevant information on area
complete and relevant data in the estimate and avoid double under restoration and additional parameters for ensuring the
counting. quality, consistency and transparency of the data reported.
Table 1 outlines the data parameters recommended for
FAO, jointly with the Task Force and the CBD secretariat, reporting area under restoration under three broad groups:
will identify country representatives that will complete the area, status, and additional information. Area is used to
data validation and reporting for Target 2 and UN Decade measure the extent of restoration and ecosystem being
area based estimates. The country representatives will be restored for aggregation and disaggregation. Status provides
presented with a pre-compiled form in the FERM registry, an indication of whether an area being reported can be
based on the data compilation from the various platforms. counted towards a reporting period. Additional information
Countries will have the opportunity to modify the information helps identify potential duplicates from multiple platforms. It
in the FERM registry, add additional areas under restoration is also used for filtering restoration initiatives and areas for
and define which information is shared through the FERM different reporting processes.
platform. Additionally, countries that have passive restoration
(natural succession) that is not being overseen by a particular Specifically:
entity will be invited to record the area of restoration through
the FERM registry. This process is referred to as country 1. Committed area to restore includes pledges, targets or
validation. commitments by country or conventions. This parameter
will not be counted as area under restoration but will serve
There will be capacity development opportunities for as a reference to monitor restoration progress. Therefore,
collecting geospatial information on restoration areas and they should be included in the reporting process, when
activities and entering data to the FERM registry. Support possible. Data type: tabular.
will be provided to UN Decade Flagships, Global Environment
Facility (GEF) projects, and additional funding will be required 2. Area under restoration and 3. Ecosystem describe
to expand capacity development efforts. the area where restoration, whether active or passive,
is happening. Area under restoration will be reported by
Depending on the data source, the compiled data by ecosystem ecosystem and by country (if the area spans multiple
is classified into tiers before the country validation process boundaries). This parameter is only inclusive of ongoing
to facilitate transparent communication of where the data restoration initiatives with ongoing restoration activities.
originates from and if it has already undergone prior country The source of the area under restoration estimates will be
validation to avoid the duplication of validation efforts. The identified based on the platform that the estimates were
tier classification will be applied to the data sources for the derived from and will distinguish officially reported data,
country validation and only officially validated data will be already validated by countries and unofficial data from non-
published in the FERM platform. The tiers for the data sources state actors. Spatially explicit information on restoration
are defined as: areas is highly encouraged but not a requirement. Two
data types are accepted, described as the following:
• Tier 1: Estimated data from non-official sources (e.g.
produced by non-government organizations or from I. Tabular
scientific literature).
Tabular value is only allowed if it is country-level data
• Tier 2: Estimated data from official sources (e.g. compiled from global or regional reporting processes. In this
produced by custodian agencies). case, only tabular data will be reported for the area under
restoration. Disaggregation by ecosystems may or may not
• Tier 3: Country data. Country directly reported data. be available, depending on the data sources.

For the country validation process the data will be aggregated II. Spatially explicit
at the national scale by ecosystem, when possible. Possible
validation outcomes are: a) country validates as country

14
 A. If data is directly entered into the registry as activities and end date, if applicable. Information on
a component of an initiative, or compiled from the start and end date will be compared to the baseline
other restoration initiative platforms: a point and monitoring reporting periods for CBD reporting and
location or administrative boundary (using GAUL UN Decade reporting and enable reporting to multiple
administrative level 1 or 2) shall be provided as conventions by sub-setting the data by date. Temporal
a minimum requirement. Additional tabular data components might be difficult to define for areas with
will be required for the area under restoration passive restoration and further instructions will need to be
by ecosystem, consistent with the reporting provided. The restoration status is characterized by three
ecosystem classification system and by country. phases, in preparation, in progress and post-completion
The default IUCN ecosystem map will be provided monitoring, described as the following:
based on the overlay with GAUL and will propose
ecosystem options to be confirmed. • In preparation: enabling environment, funds
committed, area gazetted for restoration, activities
B. If spatially explicit information of a restoration have not yet begun and impacts of restoration are
initiative is provided and represents the entirety not yet measureable.
of the area under restoration (i.e. polygons of
the areas are provided), the restoration area by • In progress: ongoing restoration activities and
ecosystem and by country is calculated based on depending on the time that the activities have been
a map overlay. The default IUCN ecosystem map ongoing, impacts may start to be measurable.
will be provided and recommended for use. If the
default map is unsuitable or does not represent • Post-completion monitoring: restoration
the ecosystem under restoration, countries will activities completed and efforts in place to monitor
have the option to provide their own ecosystem the restoration results. It is acknowledged that
map, using the reporting ecosystem classification an area will not be restored as soon as activities
system. are completed, therefore, post-completion
assessments on the restoration status shall be
Full spatially-explicit data is required for calculating the made periodically. The four possible values are:
component indicator on ecosystem connectivity.
◊ restored
In exceptional cases, a restoration initiative might have neither
tabular nor spatial information on the extent. For example, an ◊ under restoration
initiative that distributes seedlings to residents. It is possible
to register such initiatives in the FERM registry, however, area ◊ degrading or degraded
under restoration will NOT be reported.
◊ unknown - no longer being monitored
It is recommended to use a global ecosystem dataset to
make the map overlay that covers aquatic and terrestrial Areas that are considered “in preparation” will count
ecosystems. Available global ecosystem maps were towards the area committed to restore. Areas with the
evaluated and the outcome of the analysis found the most status “in progress” and “post-completion monitoring-under
detailed and complete information is provided by the IUCN restoration” will be reported as “under restoration”. An area
Global Ecosystem Typology 2.0 (Keith et al., 2022). The IUCN can be considered to be “restored” when all key ecological
Global Ecosystem Typology 2.0 is the outcome of critical attributes resemble those of the natural ecosystem reference
review and input by an extensive international network of that is the target of restoration, thus requiring high ecological
ecosystem scientists, containing profiles for 25 biomes and integrity (Gann et al., 2019). For successfully restored areas,
108 ecosystem functional groups (EFGs). Biomes (level 2 of it is encouraged to continue monitoring and assessing the
IUCN typology 2.0) are components of the biosphere united status periodically. Efforts should be made to prevent new
by one or more major assembly processes that shape key degradation and maintain the restored status. They will be
ecosystem functions and ecological processes, irrespective reported as “area restored” as long as the status remains
of taxonomic identity. There are similarities between IUCN restored.
biomes and UN decade ecosystems that allow Biomes to be
used for disaggregation by ecosystems for reporting. 5. Type of restoration. The possible values are ecological
restoration and rehabilitation. This can be determined
4. Restoration status will provide an indication of by analyzing the current and target ecosystem (natural
whether the restoration area can be counted towards or transformed). Examples of transformed ecosystems
a reporting period. Restoration status is broken down are: farmlands, forest plantation and urban ecosystems.
into four components and an area specifies one status. As a useful rule of thumb, if the target ecosystem is
Each restoration status is characterized by a temporal natural, the restoration will be ecological restoration. If the
component, which includes the start date of the restoration target ecosystem is transformed, the restoration will be
rehabilitation (see Figure 2). It has not been agreed if Target
2 will include both ecological restoration and rehabilitation

15
 4. Method for compiling data
or just ecological restoration. However, regardless of
whether rehabilitation ends in Target 2, rehabilitation will
likely be a part of Target 1022. For reporting to the UN
Decade, both ecological restoration and rehabilitation will
be included. Data type: descriptive.
and calculating total area
Figure 2.
The data compiling will take place in a step-wise approach
and aim for completeness in terms of coverage by ecosystem
Ecological restoration
Natural
Degraded and by country.
Increases natural
natural ecosystem area and
ecosystem
ecosystem integrity
Table1 is a summary of the data parameters and examples
Increases natural
ecosystem integrity of data sources with corresponding tiers (tiers are defined in
Rehabilitation Section 5b). The working group will analyze each data source
Degraded
Transformed
Transformed Increases managed to extract the tabular estimates of area under restoration
ecosystem ecosystem fonction and
ecosystem services. May or may (ha). Tabular estimates form the basis of reporting and can
not have biodiversity
objectives. be strengthened by countries as they develop capacity and
ability to report on local spatially explicit data on area under
restoration. Spatially-explicit data compilation includes data
Source: Future Earth and GEO BON, 2022.
directly entered into the FERM registry, global reporting
frameworks and restoration platforms that collect spatial
6. Restoration activity describes what is being information. It is required for calculating a component
implemented on the ground in order to achieve restoration indicator on ecosystem connectivity.
objectives. Activities are adapted from the Glossary of
restoration interventions of the TEER initiative. They
are divided into two main categories (biophysical and
enabling) and secondary categories according to the
IPBES report (IPBES, 2019). Implementing enabling
activities often corresponds to the preparation stage. Data
type: descriptive.

7. Lead entity and 8. Tenure status provide information

on the entity leading the restoration effort and legal status
of the area under restoration. Information on tenure status
should include documentation of Free and Prior Consent
(FPIC) to ensure that people’s rights are respected in the
process of restoration and adherence to the UN Decade
principles (FAO, IUCN CEM & SER, 2021) as well as the
Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of
Tenure (VGGT) (FAO, CFS 2012). Data type: descriptive.

22 Target 10 is currently worded as: Ensure all areas under agriculture,

aquaculture and forestry are managed sustainably, in particular through
the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, increasing
the productivity and resilience of these production systems. (CBD/
WG2020/4/4)

16
Table 1. Summary of data parameters and sources.

Data source examples: official

Data source examples:
Group Data parameter Data type data
unofficial data (Tier 1)
(Tier 2 & 3)
Committed area to NDCs, NBSAPs, Bonn Challenge, Nature Commitments24,
Tabular
restore (ha) Ramsar, PBL23 UN Decade Hub25
SDGs, FRA, PRAIS, REDD+
Tabular reporting mechanisms - LEAF,
Area under FCPF and Carbon Fund
restoration (ha)* ICRI, Global Mangrove
Area Spatially
FERM Registry, WDPA, PRAIS Alliance26, Restor, SER
explicit
Restoration Resource Center27

Descriptive UN Decade Ecosystems

Ecosystem
Spatially IUCN Global Ecosystem Typology
explicit 2.0 (biomes)
FERM Registry, Restoration
Status Restoration status Descriptive
Barometer, WDPA
Type of restoration Descriptive FERM Registry

Additional Activity Descriptive FERM Registry, TEER, WOCAT

information
Lead entity Descriptive FERM Registry
Tenure status Descriptive FERM Registry

* Required field

5. Quality assurance and

To calculate the total area under restoration and the coverage
using spatially explicit data, UNEP-WCMC and IUCN (2022)
provides a simplified methodology. Points will be buffered
and merged with polygons on a single layer for calculating
coverage. Overlapping areas in the spatially explicit
quality control
data where the restoration status corresponds to under
restoration will be counted only once to calculate the total
area under restoration. All data submitted directly to the FERM registry or compiled
from other platforms will go through a quality assurance/quality
control (QA/QC) process. The quality QA/QC does not intend
to verify if the area is correctly delineated or has the reported
activities. Instead, the objective of QA/QC is to ensure that
the data submitted are compliant with standards (minimum
required fields, correct data types and formats, etc).

23 PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency published a report compiling countries’ restoration commitments (Sewell A., van der Esch S. and
Löwenhardt H., 2020).
24 [Link]
25 [Link]
26 [Link]
27 [Link]

17
 References
CBD Secretariat and Society for Ecological Restoration. 2019. FAO and UN Water. 2021. Progress on Level of Water Stress.
A companion to the Short-Term Action Plan on Ecosystem Global status and acceleration needs for SDG Indicator 6.4.2,
Restoration - Resources, cases studies, and biodiversity 2021. Rome. [Link]
considerations in the context of restoration science and
practice. Montreal, Canada. Ramsar Convention Secretariat, 2016. The Fourth Ramsar
Strategic Plan 2016–2024. Ramsar handbooks for the wise
Dunster J. and Dunster K. 1996. Dictionary of natural resources use of wetlands, 5th edition, vol. 2. Ramsar Convention
management. University of British Columbia University Press Secretariat, Gland, Switzerland.
Vancouver, BC, 363 pp. + xv.
United Nations Environment Programme. 2021. Becoming
FAO and UNEP. 2022. Global indicators for monitoring #GenerationRestoration: Ecosystem restoration for people,
ecosystem restoration – A contribution to the UN Decade on nature and climate. Nairobi.
Ecosystem Restoration. Rome, FAO. [Link]
cb9982en

18
Annex
Table 2 shows a comparison between several world physiognomy. Boundaries of the EZs approximately coincide
ecosystem maps. The IUCN map is the only one with a with the map of Köppen-Trewartha climatic types, which
comprehensive coverage of Earth’s biosphere, encompassing was based on temperature and rainfall. An exception to this
terrestrial, subterranean, freshwater, marine and definition are “Mountain systems”, classified as one separate
atmospheric environments, which is fundamental to cover EZ in each Domain and characterized by a high variation in both
all UN ecosystems. It also allows the reporting of area under vegetation formations and climatic conditions caused by large
restoration disaggregated by ecosystems using a standard altitude and topographic variation” (Simons, 2001).”
terminology and definitions to promote consistent application.
Therefore, GEZ are areas used in the Global Forest Resources
The Global Ecological Zones (GEZ) developed by FAO (2012) Assessments to disaggregate the world’s forests, covering
are: the entirety of the terrestrial domain and overlapping with
many terrestrial IUCN ecosystems. An equivalence is needed
“A zone or area with broad yet relatively homogeneous natural to streamline data on forest under restoration reported in the
vegetation formations, similar (not necessarily identical) in latest and future FRA.

19
Table 2. Mapping between UN decade ecosystems, IUCN Biomes and land cover classes modeling. [NN] corresponds to the codes in the various sources. Note that aggregation of
used in various legends. classes from ESA CCI-LC to IPCC is set out in the Reporting Manual for the 2017-2018 UNCCD
reporting process (adapted from: Sims, N.C., Newnham, G.J., England, J.R., Guerschman, J.,
Table rows show how all legends can be harmonized to IPCC classes. The SEEA and GLC Cox, S.J.D., Roxburgh, S.H., Viscarra Rossel, R.A., Fritz, S. and Wheeler, I. 2021. Good Practice
Share provide a classification designed to assess the natural capital while the ESA CCI-LC Guidance. SDG Indicator 15.3.1, Proportion of Land That Is Degraded Over Total Land Area.
classification is designed around plant functional types for use in Earth system process Version 2.0. United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification, Bonn, Germany.)

IPCC
UN Decade
IUCN Biomes29 FAO-GEZ30 SEEA31 GLC-SHARE32 land use ESA CCI-LC34
Ecosystems28
classes33
• Tree cover, broadleaved, evergreen, closed to open (>15%) [50]
T1 Tropical-subtropical forests biome • Tree cover, broadleaved, deciduous, closed to open (>15%) [60]
T2 Temperate-boreal forests and [6] Tree-covered Tree-covered [1] Forest • Tree cover, needle leaved, evergreen, closed to open (>15%) [70]
Forests woodlands biome
All
areas areas [04] Land • Tree cover, needle leaved, deciduous, closed to open (>15%) [80]
• Tree cover, mixed leaf type, closed to open (>15%) [90]
• Mosaic tree and shrub (>50%)/herbaceous cover (<50%) [100]

[5] Grassland Grassland [03] • Grassland [130]

T3 Shrublands and shrubby
Grasslands, [8] Shrub-covered Shrubs covered • Shrubland [120]
woodlands biome
shrublands and All areas areas [05] [2] Grassland • Mosaic herbaceous cover (>50%)/tree and shrub (<50%) [110]
T4 Savannas and grasslands biome
savannahs [10] Sparsely natural Sparse • Sparse vegetation (tree, shrub, herbaceous cover) (<15%) [150]
T5 Deserts and semi-deserts biome
vegetated areas vegetation [08] • Lichens and Mosses [140]

• Cropland, rainfed: [10]

- Herbaceous cover [11]
[2] Herbaceous crops - Tree or shrub cover [12]
[3] Woody crops • Cropland, irrigated or post-flooding [20]
Farmlands T7 Intensive land-use biome All except Polar Cropland [02] [3] Cropland
[4] Multiple or layered • Mosaic cropland (>50%)/natural vegetation (tree, shrub,
crops herbaceous cover) (<50%) [30]
• Mosaic natural vegetation (tree, shrub, herbaceous cover
(>50%)/cropland (<50%) [40]

28 [Link]
29 Keith, D.A., Ferrer-Paris, J.R., Nicholson, E. et al. A function-based typology for Earth’s ecosystems. Nature 610, 513–518 (2022). [Link]
30 Simons, H., Singh, K. D., Zhu, Z., Davis, R., & Pugliese, P. (1999). FRA (Forest Resources Assessment) 2000: a concept and strategy for ecological zoning for the global Forest Resources Assessment 2000. Interim report. Forest Resources
Assessment Programme. Working paper 20.
31 [Link]
32 FAO Global Land Cover (GLC-SHARE) Beta-Release 1.0 Database, Land and Water Division, John Latham, Renato Cumani, Ilaria Rosati and Mario Bloise, 2014 ([Link]
33 IPCC 2006, 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, Prepared by the National Greenhouse Gas Inventories Programme, Eggleston H.S., Buendia L., Miwa K., Ngara T. and Tanabe K. (eds). Published: IGES, Japan.
([Link]
34 ESA. Land Cover CCI Product User Guide Version 2. Tech. Rep. (2017). Available at: [Link]
 All except: Tropical [9] Shrubs and/or Herbaceous
desert, Subtropical herbaceous vegetation, • Shrub or herbaceous cover, flooded, fresh/saline/brackish
desert, Temperate vegetation, aquatic or water [180]
Peatlands TF1 Palustrine wetlands biome desert, Boreal tundra [4] Wetlands
woodland, Boreal aquatic or regularly regularly • Tree cover, flooded, fresh or brackish water [160]
mountain systems flooded flooded [06] • Tree cover, flooded, saline water [170]
and Polar [7] Mangroves Mangroves [07]

[1] Artificial surfaces

T7 Intensive land-use biome Artificial [5]
Urban areas All (including urban and
Settlements
• Urban areas [190]
MT3 Anthropogenic shorelines biome surfaces [01]
associated areas)

Tropical mountain [11] Terrestrial barren

systems, Subtropical land Bare soil [09]
mountain systems, [6] Other • Bare areas [200]
Mountains T6 Polar/alpine (cryogenic) biome
Temperate mountain
[12] Permanent snow Snow and
Land
and • Permanent snow and ice [220]
systems, Boreal glaciers [10]
mountain systems glaciers

F1 Rivers and streams biome

F2 Lakes biome
F3 Artificial wetlands biome [13] Inland water
TF1 Palustrine wetlands biome bodies
MFT1 Brackish tidal biome [14] Coastal water Water bodies
Freshwaters All bodies [4] Wetlands • Water bodies [210]
SF1 Subterranean freshwaters biome [11]
and intertidal areas
SF2 Anthropogenic subterranean
freshwaters biome
FM1 Semi-confined transitional waters
biome

M1 Marine shelf biome

M2 Pelagic ocean waters biome
M3 Deep sea floors biome
M4 Anthropogenic marine biome
FM1 Semi-confined transitional waters
biome [14] Coastal water
Oceans and Water bodies No
Not included bodies • Water bodies [210]
Coasts SM1 Subterranean tidal biome [11] equivalence
and intertidal areas
MT1 Shorelines biome
MT2 Supralittoral coastal biome
MT3 Anthropogenic shorelines biome
MFT1 Brackish tidal biome

S1 Subterranean lithic biome

No
No equivalence S2 Anthropogenic subterranean voids No equivalence No equivalence No equivalence
equivalence
No equivalence
biome
 For the ultimate objective of reporting the total area under Additionally to allow for a correct flow and consistency in the
restoration it is important that all areas of the restoration collection of spatial data, some features widely used today
initiatives are well defined when added together and do not for the representation of spatial information at a global level
overlap with each other, otherwise it would be an error of double are also recommended. Table 3 describes some of these
counting. There are also structuring errors that it is important recommendations to provide consistency and comparability.
to avoid, such as non-polygon closure, self-intersecting lines
and a weak use of data structure or data requirements such as
using lines to delineate areas or drawing lines over polygons.

Table 3. Technical recommendations for spatially explicit information

Item Recommendations
It is recommended that the features have been subjected to a topological correction (Ubeda &
Multiple geometries/features/ Egenhofer, 1997). If errors are found in the digitization of the information, it may require correction.
points*
In the case of a multipoint feature layer, avoid the overlapping of points with the same location.

Coordinate system* WGS84 geographic coordinate system (EPSG:4326)

Format* shapefile (.shp, .shx, .dbf), .kml, or GeoJSON (.json, .geojson)

If this field is provided, specify the units used to calculate the area (ha, km2, acres…). Hectares are
Units the units recommended

Area Number of units per each polygon/area/feature.

Code Each polygon/feature/area may have an unique identifier

*Mandator

22