A new report emerging from the Endangered Landscapes & Seascapes Programme’s Dialogue on Restoration and Human Wellbeing explores how human wellbeing can be meaningfully integrated into ecosystem restoration monitoring, and why this matters for people, nature, and long-term restoration success.
Ecosystem restoration is increasingly recognised not only as a response to biodiversity loss and climate change, but also as a way to support human wellbeing. Yet while ecological outcomes are often carefully measured, the social dimensions of restoration are frequently harder to track and are sometimes overlooked entirely.
Published by Trillion Trees in partnership with BirdLife International, the Endangered Landscapes & Seascapes Programme, the Cambridge Conservation Initiative (CCI), and the Climate and Land Use Alliance (CLUA), the report draws on discussions held during the Dialogue on Restoration and Human Wellbeing convened by the Endangered Landscapes & Seascapes Programme and CCI in January 2026.
The report, Integrating Human Wellbeing Metrics into Ecosystem Restoration, presents a practical framework for embedding human wellbeing into restoration planning and monitoring from the outset, alongside nine key recommendations for practitioners and funders.
Restoration is a social process
Forest and ecosystem restoration involve far more than ecological recovery alone. Restoration can reshape livelihoods, governance systems, access to land and resources, and the everyday lives of Indigenous Peoples and local communities.
Measuring restoration success through ecological indicators alone therefore tells only part of the story. Understanding whether restoration is truly effective also means understanding how it affects the people living within and around restored landscapes.
The report argues that wellbeing monitoring should not be treated simply as a reporting requirement. When embedded early, wellbeing metrics can help shape project design, governance, and adaptive management throughout the restoration process.
A multidimensional approach to wellbeing
Human wellbeing is complex and context-specific. It includes material conditions such as income, food security, and access to resources, alongside non-material dimensions such as cultural identity, social relationships, and agency.
No single metric can fully capture wellbeing across all restoration contexts. Instead, the report identifies six core domains relevant to restoration work: health, education, living standards, safety and security, agency, and social, cultural, and spiritual wellbeing.
Rather than attempting to measure every aspect of wellbeing, the report encourages practitioners to focus on two or three priority domains based on local contexts and project objectives.
A two-tier monitoring framework
One of the report’s central contributions is a two-tier monitoring framework designed to reflect the long timescales over which restoration takes place.
The first tier focuses on short-term, project-level indicators such as participation quality, trust, inclusion, and community engagement. These indicators provide feedback that can support adaptive management during a project’s lifespan.
The second tier considers longer-term societal outcomes, including socio-economic change, health, and land-use trends. These outcomes may draw on national or global datasets and recognise that restoration contributes to change alongside many other factors.
Together, the framework helps projects balance immediate learning needs with longer-term understanding of restoration impacts.
Data justice: not just what you measure, but how
A key theme throughout the report is that wellbeing monitoring is not only about what data are collected, but also how those data are gathered, governed, and used.
Data are never neutral. Decisions about whose knowledge is included, who defines success, and how findings are interpreted can reinforce or challenge existing inequalities.
The report therefore introduces draft guidance on applying data justice principles throughout the full data lifecycle, from research design to governance and use. Participatory approaches are highlighted as essential, with monitoring systems designed to support local priorities rather than simply extract information for external reporting.
Key recommendations
The report outlines nine recommendations for embedding wellbeing metrics into ecosystem restoration initiatives:
- Embed wellbeing considerations from the earliest stages of restoration planning
- Adopt multidimensional frameworks that reflect both material and non-material aspects of wellbeing
- Invest in qualitative methods to capture subjective and non-material dimensions
- Implement two-tier monitoring systems aligned with theories of change to address both short- and long-term wellbeing outcomes
- Combine standardised and locally defined indicators to balance comparability and local relevance
- Apply data justice principles to support ethical and equitable data practices
- Prioritise co-design and meaningful participation with local communities
- Focus on a manageable set of high-quality indicators linked to decision-making needs
- Strengthen capacity for data collection, analysis, and interpretation
An invitation to practitioners and funders
Effective restoration requires human wellbeing to be treated as a core part of project design and evaluation, not as an afterthought.
This report contributes to a growing conversation across the restoration sector, drawing on the expertise of researchers, practitioners, and community representatives working across different landscapes and contexts.
We invite practitioners, partners, and funders to explore the findings and join us in developing restoration approaches that are as rigorous about people as they are about ecosystems.
You can read the full report on our resources page. This project was supported by the Endangered Landscapes & Seascapes Programme, managed by the Cambridge Conservation Initiative in partnership with Arcadia, with additional funding from the Climate and Land Use Alliance (CLUA).
