Metadata Factsheet

3. Goals and Targets addressed

3a. Goal

N/A

3. Target

Headline indicator for Target 2: Ensure that by 2030 at least 30 per cent of areas of degraded terrestrial, inland water, and marine and coastal ecosystems are under effective restoration, in order to enhance biodiversity and ecosystem functions and services, ecological integrity and connectivity.

5. Definitions, concepts and classifications

5a. Definition

15. Ecosystem degradation is a global challenge spanning all ecosystems. The UNCCD has estimated land degradation to span over 1.5 billion hectares in 2019 (UNCCD, n.d.). 66 percent of world’s ocean area is impacted by human activities, including fisheries and pollution (IPBES, 2019).

16. Given the magnitude of global degradation, the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (KMGBF) Target 2 aims to bring at least 30 percent of degraded terrestrial, inland water, and marine and coastal ecosystems under effective restoration by 2030.

17. Achieving this target by 2030 requires urgently scaling up ecosystem restoration. Given that recovery of ecosystems requires time (e.g. often decades or more), the target does not stipulate that areas are fully restored; rather it promotes actions and activities that result in effective ecosystem restoration have been initiated and are being implemented and monitored.

18. To track global progress towards the target, robust and harmonized monitoring systems that utilize various tools and approaches such as remote sensing data and field data are essential for generating reliable information on where restoration is happening, how much area is under restoration, and the effectiveness of the restoration activities. It is also key to use appropriate tools and approaches to collect complete and systematic geospatial data on the location and extent of restoration initiatives.

19. Ecosystem restoration contributes to the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and a wide number of other global policies and instruments. In 2019, the United Nations General Assembly proclaimed 2021–2030 the Decade on Ecosystem Restoration (UNGA, 2019). The UN Decade outlines the expected contributions of ecosystem restoration during the decade to a wide variety of policies and multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs), including United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD), United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), Convention on Migratory Species (CMS) and the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands (FAO, SCBD & SER, 2024).

20. In response to growing global momentum for ecosystem restoration, FAO, as the custodian agency of the headline indicator for Target 2, has led the development of methodologies, guidance, and a strategic Target 2 Road Map implementation through COP16 and beyond. With a renewed mandate to accelerate this work, endorsed in CBD COP Decision 16/35, the Target 2 Road Map serves as a platform to coordinate, support, and scale restoration monitoring (CBD/SBI/6/INF/4)

21. The headline indicator for Target 2 is the first global mechanism to compile country-reported, area-based data on ecosystem restoration across all ecosystems. The indicator measures the physical extent of a site where the previously degraded ecosystem is recovering as the result of a wide array of activities and interventions along the restorative continuum (FAO, SCBD & SER, 2024).

22. The indicator includes restoration areas at all spatial scales (from local site-level to landscape and seascape level) that have ongoing interventions or are under a monitoring scheme when interventions have been completed and the ecosystem continues its recovery. Ecosystem restoration can take years, decades, even centuries to recover biodiversity, integrity, functions and services, and connectivity. Therefore, it is important to have monitoring efforts in place after interventions are completed to avoid new degradation and to implement adaptative management strategies to combat renewed ecosystem degradation.

23. The indicator encompasses restoration interventions that fall within the categories of ecological restoration and ecosystem rehabilitation along the restorative continuum. Ecological restoration includes efforts to increase the area of a natural ecosystem and its integrity through recovering an ecosystem that has been degraded or destroyed, this includes conversion of non-natural transformed ecosystems back to a natural state. Ecosystem rehabilitation includes efforts to increase ecosystem functions and services of transformed ecosystems.

24. The indicator is an absolute number and does not directly measure the percentage of degraded ecosystems under restoration. To estimate a percentage in line with the target, countries would need a national estimate of the area of total degraded ecosystems (baseline) and then compare it with the reported area under restoration.

25. Increases in the value of the indicator over time will reflect a combination of a) actual increases in area under restoration, and b) improved data collection and reporting on areas under restoration. This is an important limitation or caveat for interpretation of the indicator.

26. In its current formulation, the indicator does not measure biodiversity, effectiveness, restoration results, ecosystem functions and services or connectivity. Therefore, additional indicators and monitoring methods are needed to measure these aspects.

27. Indicator 2.1 is intended to be used and interpreted in the context of other ecosystem-related indicators of the GBF. The five headline indicators that deal most directly with ecosystems are A.1 Red List of Ecosystems, A.2 Extent of natural ecosystems, B.1 Services provided by ecosystems, 2.1 Area under restoration, and 3.1 Coverage of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures. This set of indicators can together provide a well-rounded picture of the state of ecosystems, their benefits to society, and interventions to protect, conserve and restore ecosystems. They should be interpreted collectively rather than individually, with each providing different but complementary information (see also 9. Related goals, targets and indicator).

28. At the national level, using a common national classification system for ecosystem types across these five headline indicators will greatly facilitate bringing information from this set of indicators together to provide a coherent narrative and to be most useful for policy and implementation. For coherence in global reporting and analysis, it is useful for countries to crossreference their national ecosystem classification to the Global Ecosystem Typology, as discussed in section 5.b.

5b. Method of computation

29. The proposed workflow for monitoring the indicator consists of five components: 1) target setting and planning, 2) data compilation, 3) review and validation, 4) monitoring and reporting, and 5) cross-sectoral and society engagement and capacity development, which underpins the overall process.

30. Once national targets on restoration are set, in the data compilation step, countries are encouraged to develop a database of restoration actions, making use of existing monitoring systems (such as national forest monitoring systems), when possible. Reporting guidelines and standards can be provided to collect consistent information across restoration actions. Additionally, workshops and consultations can be organized to collect project-level data.

31. Restoration projects, initiatives and policies are long- or short-term efforts aimed at achieving specific restoration goals and objectives in defined geographic locations. In the metadata, the terms restoration projects and restoration initiatives are used interchangeably. Monitoring and reporting areas under restoration that are not project based but a result of policy actions, natural regeneration or other factors can be done using a variety of methods and data, including remote sensing, field surveys, and cadastral data. Before official reporting, data in the database or monitoring system need to be processed, reviewed, and validated to ensure quality and alignment to the metadata.

32. Below are some recommended parameters for a restoration project database. Depending on the specific context, they may be named and/or defined slightly differently. Additional parameters for building a project database can be found in the Restoration Project Information Sharing Framework (Gann et al, 2022):

(a) Restoration target includes pledges, targets or commitments and can be reported as time-bound absolute values with units, e.g. to restore 500 hectares by 2030. This parameter will not be counted as area under restoration but will serve as a reference to monitor restoration progress.

(b) Area under restoration describes the extent of a restoration initiative or project in appropriate units (e.g. number of hectares of forests, number of kilometers of rivers). The area under restoration is typically the area where restoration interventions take place. In some circumstances, the broader impact area (where biodiversity, ecological integrity, ecosystem functions, and services and connectivity have been improved) may better represent area under restoration, than the direct intervention area. It is important to specify whether the area under restoration represents the intervention area or a broader impact area.

(c) Geometry is geospatially explicit points or polygons that represent the restoration areas of an initiative or project. Well-delineated polygons are strongly recommended as they can be used to approximate area under estimation, therefore important for spatial analysis, enhanced data quality and transparency (see also paragraph 6).

(d) Start year and end year of the initiative or project

(e) Ecosystem(s) of the restoration initiative or project. When an initiative or project contains multiple ecosystem types, it is recommended to also collect areas under restoration disaggregated by ecosystem to be aligned to the reporting requirement. The IUCN Global Ecosystem Typology (GET) (Keith et al. 2022) is a hierarchical ecosystem typology recommended by CBD decisions for reporting disaggregation of multiple KMGBF targets. When possible, area under restoration should be disaggregated using level 2 or level 3 of the typology, or by national or local ecosystem types. Guidelines for cross-walking ecosystem classifications to the IUCN GET are available (IUCN, 2025). Furthermore, to understand and monitor ecosystem transitions, both the current ecosystem type and the target ecosystem type can be documented in the database.

(f) Restoration activity, sometimes called intervention, describes what is being implemented on the ground in order to achieve restoration goals and objectives.

(g) Restoration status, characterized by three phases, in preparation, in progress and post-completion monitoring.

(h) Restoration type indicates the group of activities in the restorative continuum. Target 2 includes rehabilitation and ecological restoration. Ecological restoration includes efforts to increase the area of a natural ecosystem and its integrity through recovering an ecosystem that has been degraded or destroyed, this includes conversion of non-natural transformed ecosystems back to a natural ecosystems state. Ecosystem rehabilitation includes efforts to increase ecosystem functions and services of transformed ecosystems.

(i) Protected area status, such as whether the restoration initiative or project is in one or more protected areas or OECMs, and the extent of the overlap.

(j) Tenure status of the initiative and project sites, and the extent of the overlap with an Indigenous and traditional territory.

33. The reference period of the GBF is 2011-2020 (CBD/COP/DEC/15/5.2) and the monitoring period is 2021-2030. This reference period should be used to establish the baseline, which is the spatial extent of degraded areas, taking into consideration that concepts of degradation are different between natural and production ecosystems. Restoration within the reference and monitoring periods, 2011-2030, can be counted and reported for indicator 2.1. Restoration initiatives may start before the reference period, and either the restoration activities must be within the monitoring period or there are documented monitoring efforts and actions to ensure there is no degradation within the areas and the ecosystem has recorded improvements towards reaching the intended outcomes (i.e., biodiversity, ecological integrity, ecosystem functions and services, and connectivity).

34. Total area under restoration can be estimated by summing up the area of non-overlapping individual restoration initiatives and projects that have either ‘in progress’ status (i.e. with ongoing restoration activities) or ‘post-completion monitoring’ status (i.e. with monitoring efforts in place).

35. Data cleaning is an important step to prevent duplicated data and double counting when aggregating restoration data. Accurate delineation of restoration areas (Parameter C: Geometry) enables transparent identification and removal of duplicate records and overlapping areas, ensuring that each area is only counted once in the total area under restoration. Tabular data without spatial information on the location of restoration initiatives pose challenges and risks for duplicate and overlapping areas and data often cannot be directly aggregated.

36. To support transparent reporting and monitoring of ecosystem restoration, the Framework for Ecosystem Restoration (FERM)14 was collaboratively developed and launched in 2022 through the joint efforts of the UN Decade FAO-led Task Forces on Monitoring and Best Practices. The FERM provides a comprehensive monitoring framework for tracking global restoration progress, assessing progress for the UN Decade and KMGBF Target 2.

37. The FERM is comprised of four main components:

(a) A registry that harmonizes and collects area-based data on ecosystem restoration initiatives and projects, interoperable with similar platforms that collect restoration project level data;

(b) A geospatial tool for visualizing restoration areas on the map and curated global datasets relevant to ecosystem restoration

(c) A search engine for consulting restoration initiatives and good practices; and

(d) A data review functionality to support Parties in compiling and reviewing data on ecosystem restoration for reporting.

38. Countries are invited to enter data on restoration projects and initiatives directly in the FERM registry or through its API. The API is designed to facilitate uploading many initiatives automatically and thereby reducing errors in manual data entry 15.

39. The FERM can be used by countries as a restoration initiative database, to transparently share restoration progress. This can be complementary to national databases or countries without national databases can use the FERM as a national monitoring system.

40. In addition, FAO has been compiling data on areas under restoration in the FERM to reduce reporting burden for countries and making it available through the data review functionality. The default data for area under restoration is data compiled from different sources that show the amount of restoration across all ecosystems in each country. It is designed to support national reporting and provides more information and context on restoration progress beyond area-based estimates, including the restoration objectives, activities, tenure status, project specific indicators, and other parameters.

41. The default data for area under restoration utilizes an interoperability framework to integrate restoration data from various available data sources. Currently, the data sources include:

(a) the FERM registry,

(b) Global Forest Resources Assessment16 (FRA),

(c) Ramsar Convention on Wetlands17,

(d) National monitoring systems and databases for selected pilot countries,

42. Additional data sources that are being integrated include:

(a) the World Database on Protected Areas

(b) UNCCD PRAIS,

(c) IUCN Restoration Barometer,

(d) and other platforms.

43. FERM will aggregate the default data according to the following logic and assumptions:

(a) If data is not reviewed by the national focal point, only official data is aggregated, where ‘official’ means officially reported by national government representatives through other existing reporting processes (i.e., MEAs, FRA, and other international instruments). If, however, data is reviewed by the focal point, then unofficial data may be aggregated depending on the input provided during the review.

(b) Total area under restoration = sum of the reported area under restoration for all the initiatives after removing duplicates and ensuring overlapping areas are only counted once

(c) Specifically, if FRA data (hectares of forest restored) is available, the default data aggregation assumes this number includes all forest biomes (equivalent to T1 and T2 in IUCN GET terminology) under restoration in the country. To address double counting, when FRA data is present, any other forest restoration initiative in the country is not counted toward the default data. Furthermore, if an initiative does not specify the biome or ecosystem information, the default data aggregation assumes it is forest restoration and the initiative is not included in the calculation and it is assumed that it is included in FRA data.

44. National focal points can access the FERM data review functionality, review the default data, add national data from the national monitoring systems (arrow a1), and aggregate them. They can also optionally use default data to complement national monitoring systems and national data collection (arrow a2). In the CBD Online Reporting Tool, national focal points can directly report national data using information from national monitoring systems (arrow b) or use the FERM default data, accessible by an API (arrow c2). The data reported by the country to the CBD will be integrated into FERM to update the default data (arrow c1).

5c. Data collection method

45. Data collection for the area under restoration indicator can be conducted using a compilation of ecosystem restoration projects and initiatives implemented in the country (described in 5b, paragraphs 2-5), as well as using remote sensing technology and field data to track increments in the extent or improvements in the condition of natural ecosystems. In addition, FAO has been compiling data in FERM (described in 5b, paragraphs 9-12).

46. According to CBD/COP/DEC/15/6, Parties will report the implementation of KMGBF directly using CBD’s online reporting tool (ORT). The reporting template for indicator 2.1 can be downloaded after logging in to ORT, under 7th National Report - My country - Indicator Data - 2.1 Area under restoration (GBF-INDICATOR-2.2) - Add data - Use national data set.

47. Two versions of template are available for indicator 2.1, a simplified version and a detailed version. The two versions are mostly identical except that the simplified version allows free text in all columns while the detailed version uses controlled vocabulary in a few columns as drop-down lists. Only one version of the two is needed for reporting national data.

48. The columns of the two versions of the template are the same, namely:

(a) A - Indicator code: prefilled, no action needed

(b) B – Indicator name: prefilled, no action needed

(c) C – Does this data row represent a disaggregation: enter or select ‘No’ or ‘Yes’

(d) D – Disaggregation type: enter or select the broader type of disaggregation

(e) E – Disaggregation: enter or select the specific name of the disaggregation

(f) F – Year: prefilled in the simplified version but can be edited; empty in the detailed version

(g) G – Unit: enter the unit of measure. Hectare is recommended but other units are also allowed

(h) H – Value: enter the cumulative total area under restoration as of the corresponding year

(i) I – Footnote: fill in as needed

49. Controlled vocabulary is used in columns C, D, and E of the detailed version of the template. The options for column C are: Yes, No and -. If ‘No’ is selected, column D and E will automatically display 'Not applicable'. If ‘Yes’ is selected, six options of the disaggregation types in column D are available: by biome - GET L2; by EFG – GET L3; by PA&OECM; by Indigenous and traditional territories; by restoration activity; and other. If by biome, by EFG, or by type of restoration activity is selected in disaggregation type, a list of biomes, ecosystem functional groups or activities will become available in column E. If by PA and OECM, by ITT or other is selected in disaggregation type, a description of the disaggregation can be entered as free text in column E.

50. Start with reporting total area under restoration without disaggregation (i.e. enter or select ‘No’ in column C). If the simplified template is used, leave column D and column E empty. The template automatically adds rows for years 2020-2026 in column F. It is not necessary to report a value for each year if data is unavailable or not assessed for that year. It is possible to add rows for years prior to 2020. If the detailed template is used, column D and column E will be filled automatically.

51. In column H, cumulative total area under restoration as of the corresponding year in column F should be entered. If more data points assessed at different years are available, enter those values (cumulative) and corresponding years. Therefore, a trend of total area under restoration can be produced to show progress towards the target over time.

52. To report area under restoration with a disaggregation, start with a new row and enter or select ‘Yes’ in column C. If the simplified template is used, enter the type of disaggregation in column D (e.g. ecosystem, type of restoration action) and the specific disaggregation (e.g. mangroves, natural regeneration) in column E. If the detailed template is used, dropdown lists with controlled vocabulary will be available in column D, and based on the choice of disaggregation type, specific disaggregation will become available in column E as dropdown lists. If no dropdown list is available, it is possible to provide a description in free text instead.

53. In column H, similar to reporting total area under restoration without disaggregation, enter the cumulative total area under restoration for that disaggregation as of the corresponding year. If more data points assessed at different years are available, enter those values (cumulative) and corresponding years.

5d. Accessibility of methodology

54. The methodology is not currently published in a peer-reviewed location.

5e. Data sources

55. Data sources that are currently included in the FERM default data include:

(a) the FERM registry,

(b) Global Forest Resources Assessment,

(c) Ramsar Convention on Wetlands,

(d) National monitoring systems and databases for selected pilot countries,

56. Additional data sources that are being integrated include:

(a) the World Database on Protected Areas

(b) UNCCD PRAIS,

(c) IUCN Restoration Barometer,

(d) Other platforms.

5f. Availability and release calendar

57. The indicator is currently in development. The methodology is available online and will be periodically reassessed and updated. The national reports will provide data on Target 2 in 2026 and 2029.

5g. Time series

58. Expected availability: 2021-2030. First update: Seventh National Report (NR7) in 2026.

5h. Data providers

59. The data are sourced from in-country agencies, thus leveraging in-country resources and ongoing programs. Other data may be obtained from conservation organizations, scientific societies, national and public repositories, citizen scientists, and the contributions of Indigenous Peoples, local communities, and traditional knowledge holders. The data sources in FERM default data are listed in 5e.

5i. Data compilers

60. FAO is responsible for the maintenance of the methodology and tools for use. The compilation of data and reporting is performed by in-country agencies.

5j. Gaps in data coverage

61. The data compiling will take place in a stepwise approach and aim for completeness in terms of coverage by ecosystem and by country.

5k. Treatment of missing values

62. FAO will be compiling data from existing processes and platforms. Each custodian agency and platform has its own methodology of treating missing values. Therefore, no further estimates will be made by FAO. Missing values will not be imputed or otherwise estimated.

6. Scale

6a. Scale of use

Scale of application:

• Global: Yes
• Regional: Yes
• National: Yes

43. Scale of data disaggregation/aggregation:

(a) Global/ regional scale indicator can be disaggregated to national level: No

(b) National data is collated to form global indicator: Yes

6b. National/regional indicator production 

63. The scale of indicator 2.1 is national and can be aggregated globally.

6c. Sources of differences between global and national figures

N/A

6d. Regional and global estimates & data collection for global monitoring

6d.1 Description of the methodology

64. The national, regional and global methodology and estimates are to be consistent across scales. The methodology for national, regional and global estimates and data collection can be found in sections 5b and 5c in this metadata. The FERM is central for collecting and compiling data on area under restoration for consistent monitoring across scales.

6d.2 Additional methodological details

N/A

6d.3 Description of the mechanism for collecting data from countries

7. Other MEAs, processes and organisations

7a. Other MEA and processes

66. The indicator itself is not used in other MEAs or processes. However, data are compiled from existing MEAs and processes (see also 5e. Data sources).

7b. Biodiversity Indicator Partnership

No

10. Data reporter

10a. Organisation

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)

10b. Contact person(s)

Julian Fox Julian.Fox@fao.org