With legally binding targets now in place under the EU Nature Restoration Law, and a global goal to restore 30 percent of degraded ecosystems by 2030, large-scale restoration is rising up the political agenda. Across Europe, there is growing recognition that to meet the scale of this ambition, fragmented or degraded ecosystems cannot be effectively restored one site at a time.
However, scaling up is far from simple. It demands new ways of working, longer timeframes, and greater collaboration across sectors. At a 2024 symposium during the Society for Ecological Restoration – Europe conference, participants from across science, policy and practice explored what is helping and hindering progress. Three recurring challenges stood out: how knowledge is built and shared, how local voices are involved, and how restoration is funded.
Gaps in knowledge, not just nature
Many landscape-scale projects still face uncertainty when it comes to planning and tracking progress. The complexity of working at this scale is often not matched by the tools or support available. Short-term project models leave little room for early-stage collaboration or long-term learning.
“Monitoring remains a particular challenge in large-scale restoration” explains Dr Nancy Ockendon, Endangered Landscapes & Seascapes Programme Science Manager. “It is often introduced too late, underfunded, or developed without shared standards, which makes it hard to assess outcomes or compare projects. But now we’re seeing more interest in better tools and approaches that work well over the long timescales and large areas involved, for example satellite data to participatory monitoring methods.”
There is growing interest in developing an integrated monitoring framework that can support consistent and holistic assessment of restoration outcomes. While the Nature Restoration Law calls for progress to be measured, it leaves the details largely undefined. A shared framework could help fill this gap and enable better coordination across projects. Existing tools, such as the Society for Ecological Restoration’s Standards-based approach, offer a potential foundation that could be adapted to suit European needs. Improving access to monitoring data, particularly results that might otherwise remain unpublished, would also help build a stronger evidence base and support learning across different landscapes.
Who gets a say, and when?
Restoration at the scale of landscapes inevitably affects a wide range of people and land uses. Projects that do not create space for meaningful engagement risk overlooking local priorities or repeating past mistakes. While consultation is often included, it may be too narrow, too late, or too disconnected from decision-making.
Participants shared examples where early and sustained engagement had helped build trust and align goals. Approaches such as Living Labs and participatory design offer practical ways to involve people in shaping restoration activities. These methods take time and resources, but they help ensure that restoration efforts are better understood, more locally relevant, and more likely to endure.
Funding that fits the task
Finance remains a major barrier. Most restoration projects rely on short-term public funding that does not match the long timescales involved. Private investment is limited, partly because returns are often uncertain or slow to appear.
“Within Europe, investment in the protection and restoration of nature has not been prioritised” says Dr David Thomas, Director of the Endangered Landscapes & Seascapes Programme. “And most funding periods last from only one to five years, which is too short a timeframe to deliver change at landscape-scale – for many ecosystems it may take decades to see a real impact.”
There is growing interest in alternative finance models. Blended finance, biodiversity credits, and payments for ecosystem services are being explored, although many practitioners still lack access to guidance or support. One clear message from the symposium was the importance of investing in the planning phase. When coordination is supported from the outset, and when key stakeholders are able to focus on long-term financial planning, restoration partnerships are more likely to take root and deliver sustained impact. The Endangered Landscapes & Seascapes Programme’s Planning grants were highlighted as a strong example of how this kind of support can help lay the groundwork for success.
Moving forward
Restoring ecosystems at landscape scale can deliver substantial benefits for biodiversity, climate and communities. But to succeed, it requires strong foundations. That means better tools for planning and monitoring, more inclusive ways of working, and funding models that reflect the realities of long-term change.
The experiences shared at the symposium underline the need for continued exchange across projects, countries and disciplines. By learning from one another and addressing common barriers, Europe’s restoration community can help turn policy ambition into meaningful outcomes on the ground.
For a deeper look at the discussions behind these insights, including practical examples and references, read the full article published in the journal Restoration Ecology.
