STAPER

The Short Term Action Plan on Ecosystem Restoration (STAPER) was adopted at CBD COP 13. It is based on four main groups of activities and 24 steps. The activities listed in the Plan operate as “a menu of options, and can be implemented by countries and governmental bodies, in collaboration with international, national and local organizations, and in accordance with national legislation, circumstances and priorities.” Learn more about these four areas and STAPER at the Companion to the Short Term Action Plan on Ecosystem Restoration.

Use the search function below to find relevant projects and resources for each of the four areas.

Only one filter can be selected at a time. Please perform multiple searches if you are interested in multiple steps.


Resources

7 matching resources found.

Application of Quality Assurance and Quality Control Principles to Ecological Restoration Project Monitoring

Abstract:

This guidance is intended to encourage and facilitate the adoption of effective quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) strategies in support of ecological restoration projects. Anticipated users include ecological restoration specialists and stakeholders representing federal, state and tribal agencies, NGOs, civic and local groups, and the academic community. Although it is assumed that users will have some background in and knowledge of basic ecological restoration practices and QA/QC concepts, Chapter 2 includes a brief review of QA/QC principles that are discussed throughout the remainder of the document.

The practices, procedures, information, and concepts outlined in this guidance can provide the following benefits to practitioners and stakeholders:

  • Save time and resources by enhancing the consistency of documentation and procedures in current and future projects.
  • Improve data quality for ecological measurements and observations, aid in evaluating project success, and incorporate long-term effectiveness monitoring as feedback to adaptive management.
  • Encourage a common approach to QA/QC across multiple entities involved in ecological restoration projects to improve data comparability over time and support comparison of various restoration strategies.
  • Serve as a consolidated collection of the best QA/QC practices for ecological restoration projects across multiple agencies.
Resource Type:Technical Document
Publication Date: 2019
STAPER categories:
  • A1: Assess degraded ecosystems
  • A4: Assess the costs/benefits of ecosystem restoration
  • B4: Review, improve or establish terrestrial and marine spatial planning processes
  • B5: Consider the need for safeguard measures
  • B6: Review, improve or establish targets, policies and strategies for ecosystem restoration
  • C1: Identify appropriate measures for conducting ecosystem restoration
  • C3: Develop ecosystem restoration plans with clear/measurable objectives and goals  
  • C5: Implement the measures
  • D1: Assess the efficacy and effects of implementing the ecosystem restoration plan
  • D2: Adjust plans, expectations, procedures, and monitoring through adaptive management

Communicating Hydrological Hazard-Prone Areas in Italy With Geospatial Probability Maps

Abstract:

The present work illustrates for the first time downscaled spatial pattern probabilities of erosive density to identify damaging hydrological hazard-prone areas in Italy. The hydrological hazard was estimated from the erosivity density exceeded the threshold of 3 MJ ha−1 h−1 in Italy. To this end, a lognormal kriging (LNPK) provided a soft description of the erosivity density in terms of exceedance probabilities at a spatial resolution of 10 km, which is a way to mitigate the uncertainties associated with the spatial classification of damaging hydrological hazards. Hazard-prone areas cover 65% of the Italian territory in the month of August, followed by September and October with 50 and 30% of the territory, respectively. The geospatial probability maps elaborated with this method achieved an improved spatial forecast, which may contribute to better land-use planning and civil protection both in Italy and potentially in Europe.

Resource Type:Peer-reviewed Article
Publication Date: 2019
STAPER categories:
  • A1: Assess degraded ecosystems
  • B4: Review, improve or establish terrestrial and marine spatial planning processes
  • C1: Identify appropriate measures for conducting ecosystem restoration
  • D2: Adjust plans, expectations, procedures, and monitoring through adaptive management

Global Tree Knowledge Platform

Abstract:

The Global Tree Knowledge Platform is all about the trees in ‘treed’ landscapes. Its purpose is to support the better use of tree species – to promote the right tree in the right place for the right purpose – to bring greater benefits to humans and the environment. The Platform can be used in two ways, either based on the type of resource (Tree databases | Maps and Apps | Guidelines | Analysis packages) or by subject (Domesticating tree species | Sourcing planting material for growers | Trees and climate change | Exploring the many uses of tree species). Planters, scientists, policy makers and anyone else who is interested in trees will enjoy using the resources. For each resource, we explain its use and the user group.

Relevance for the Short Term Action Plan for Ecosystem Restoration:
Various resources in the Global Tree Knowledge Platform are directly relevant for steps A, B, C or D. For example, the Agroforestry Species Switchboard provides access to 53 web-based information sources for over 170,000 plant species

Resource Type:Web-based Resource
Publication Date: 2022
STAPER categories:
  • A2: Identify/prioritize locations for meeting national contributions to Aichi Targets
  • A4: Assess the costs/benefits of ecosystem restoration
  • A6: Identify options to reduce the drivers biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation
  • B3: Promote and strengthen formal and informal education systems
  • B4: Review, improve or establish terrestrial and marine spatial planning processes
  • B10: Promote and support capacity-building, training, and technology transfer
  • C1: Identify appropriate measures for conducting ecosystem restoration
  • C2: Consider how restoration can support sustainability of agriculture/production
  • C3: Develop ecosystem restoration plans with clear/measurable objectives and goals  
  • C4: Develop explicit implementation tasks, schedules, and budgets
  • C5: Implement the measures
  • D1: Assess the efficacy and effects of implementing the ecosystem restoration plan
  • D2: Adjust plans, expectations, procedures, and monitoring through adaptive management

Moving to Industrial-Scale Coral Habitat Restoration

Abstract:

Jesper Elzinga, Van Oord Dredging and Marine Contractors, talks on ‘The Recovery of Reefs Using Industrial Techniques for Slick Harvesting and Release (RECRUIT)’ followed by Joaquim Garrabou, Spanish Research Council (CSIC), Barcelona on ‘Lessons Learned from Coral Restoration in Shallow and Deep Environments’. There is potential to assist the recovery of impacted coral habitats through marine ecosystem restoration, but can it be achieved at a meaningful scale? This webinar addressed some of the methods that might be used in restoration of coral habitats and their applicability at larger scales.

Resource Type:Webinar
Publication Date: 2020
STAPER categories:
  • A1: Assess degraded ecosystems
  • A2: Identify/prioritize locations for meeting national contributions to Aichi Targets
  • A3: Involve all relevant stakeholders
  • A4: Assess the costs/benefits of ecosystem restoration
  • A5: Assess institutional, policy, and legal frameworks & identify financial/technical resources
  • A6: Identify options to reduce the drivers biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation
  • B4: Review, improve or establish terrestrial and marine spatial planning processes
  • B6: Review, improve or establish targets, policies and strategies for ecosystem restoration
  • B9: Develop plans for resource mobilization
  • B10: Promote and support capacity-building, training, and technology transfer
  • C1: Identify appropriate measures for conducting ecosystem restoration
  • C3: Develop ecosystem restoration plans with clear/measurable objectives and goals  
  • C4: Develop explicit implementation tasks, schedules, and budgets
  • C5: Implement the measures
  • D1: Assess the efficacy and effects of implementing the ecosystem restoration plan
  • D2: Adjust plans, expectations, procedures, and monitoring through adaptive management
  • D3: Share lessons learned from planning, financing, implementing and monitoring ecosystem restoration plans

Renewing Our Rivers: Stream Corridor Restoration in Dryland Regions

Abstract:

Based on lessons learned gained from 33 stream restoration case studies from Australia, Mexico, and U.S., Renewing Our Rivers provides practitioners start to finish guidance on planning and implementing stream corridor restoration. Chapters focus on such topics as developing restoration goals and objectives, evaluating watershed conditions, protecting streamflow (environmental flow), adapting stream restoration to climate change, implementing restoration tactics, and monitoring and evaluating restoration results.

Relevance for the Short Term Action Plan for Ecosystem Restoration:
High relevance

Resource Type:Book
Publication Date: 2020
STAPER categories:
  • A1: Assess degraded ecosystems
  • A2: Identify/prioritize locations for meeting national contributions to Aichi Targets
  • A3: Involve all relevant stakeholders
  • A6: Identify options to reduce the drivers biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation
  • B1: Review, improve or establish legal, policy and financial frameworks for restoration
  • B4: Review, improve or establish terrestrial and marine spatial planning processes
  • B6: Review, improve or establish targets, policies and strategies for ecosystem restoration
  • B7: Develop accounting processes
  • B8: Promote economic and financial incentives
  • B9: Develop plans for resource mobilization
  • B10: Promote and support capacity-building, training, and technology transfer
  • C1: Identify appropriate measures for conducting ecosystem restoration
  • C2: Consider how restoration can support sustainability of agriculture/production
  • C3: Develop ecosystem restoration plans with clear/measurable objectives and goals  
  • C4: Develop explicit implementation tasks, schedules, and budgets
  • C5: Implement the measures
  • D1: Assess the efficacy and effects of implementing the ecosystem restoration plan
  • D2: Adjust plans, expectations, procedures, and monitoring through adaptive management
  • D3: Share lessons learned from planning, financing, implementing and monitoring ecosystem restoration plans

Science Base and Tools for Evaluating Stream Engineering, Management, and Restoration Proposals

Abstract:

Stream management activities, even well-intentioned restoration efforts, have all too often degraded aquatic ecosystems. Site- and reach-scale habitat improvement projects have become the default solution to many habitat deficiencies and constraints, and are often planned and implemented without proper consideration of their landscape context, process drivers, or geomorphic fitness. Failure to recognize these broader scale concerns may lead to poor project selection and increased potential for project failure. To address these issues, we developed a suite of River Restoration Analysis Tool (RiverRAT) resources to guide more efficient, consistent, and comprehensive reviews of stream management and restoration proposals. Resources help determine the depth of review required, assure that a project proposal is complete, and guide reviewers through a thorough and scientifically sound project review. The RiverRAT Science Document and its Appendices provide a comprehensive synthesis of science behind stream management and restoration project development.
The ultimate, long-term goals of RiverRAT include:
• Enabling consistent, comprehensive, transparent, and documented project reviews;
• facilitating improved project planning and design;
• encouraging projects that are attuned to their watershed and geomorphic context; and
• improving the science and technology of stream restoration and management.

Resource Type:Technical Document
Publication Date: 2011
STAPER categories:
  • B4: Review, improve or establish terrestrial and marine spatial planning processes
  • C1: Identify appropriate measures for conducting ecosystem restoration
  • C3: Develop ecosystem restoration plans with clear/measurable objectives and goals  
  • C4: Develop explicit implementation tasks, schedules, and budgets
  • C5: Implement the measures
  • D1: Assess the efficacy and effects of implementing the ecosystem restoration plan
  • D2: Adjust plans, expectations, procedures, and monitoring through adaptive management

Spatial decision-support tools to guide restoration and seed-sourcing in the Desert Southwest

Abstract:

Altered disturbance regimes and shifting climates have increased the need for large‐scale restoration treatments across the western United States. Seed‐sourcing remains a considerable challenge for revegetation efforts, particularly on public lands where policy favors the use of native, locally sourced plant material to avoid maladaptation. An important area of emphasis for public agencies has been the development of spatial tools to guide selection of genetically appropriate seed. When genetic information is not available, current seed transfer guidelines stipulate use of climate‐based or provisional seed transfer zones, which serve as a proxy for local adaptation by representing climate gradients to which plants are commonly adapted. Despite this guidance, little emphasis has been placed on identifying best practices for deriving provisional seed zones or on incorporating predictions from future climate. We describe a flexible, multivariate procedure for deriving such zones that incorporates a broad range of climatic characteristics while accounting for covariation among climate variables. With this approach, we derive provisional seed zones for four regions in the Desert Southwest (the Mojave Desert, Sonoran Desert, Colorado Plateau, and Southern Great Basin). To facilitate future‐resilient restoration designs, we project each zone into its relative position in the future climate based on near‐term, RCP4.5 and RCP8.5 emissions scenarios. Although provisional seed zones are useful in a variety of contexts, there are also situations in which site‐specific guidance is preferable. To meet this need, we implement Climate Distance Mapper, an interactive decision‐support tool designed to help practitioners match seed sources with restoration sites through an accessible online interface. The application allows users to rank the suitability of seed sources anywhere on the landscape based on multivariate climate distances. Users can perform calculations for either the current or future climates. Additionally, tools are available to guide sample effort in regional‐scale seed collections or to partition the landscape into climate clusters representing suitable planting sites for different seed sources. Our tools and analytic procedures represent a flexible and reproducible framework for advancing native plant development programs in the Desert Southwest and beyond.

Resource Type:Peer-reviewed Article
Publication Date: 2018
STAPER categories:
  • B4: Review, improve or establish terrestrial and marine spatial planning processes
  • C1: Identify appropriate measures for conducting ecosystem restoration

Projects

3 matching projects found.

Coalición Restauración Ecosistemas Santurcinos, San Juan Puerto Rico

Country: Puerto Rico

Abstract: Proyect is foucus on coastal restoration on the most urbanized area of Puerto Rico at San Juan and Carolina. We identify ecosystems surrounding areas, educate about ecosystem services, and stablish contigent value. With outreach we involve the community interest to create planns for efficient management at very low cost. We need to improve the outreach becouse people sometimes get territorial and get against the proyect. For example, on the sand dunes restoration proyect the concesionaries...
STAPER categories:
  • A1: Assess degraded ecosystems
  • A3: Involve all relevant stakeholders
  • A4: Assess the costs/benefits of ecosystem restoration
  • A6: Identify options to reduce the drivers biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation
  • B1: Review, improve or establish legal, policy and financial frameworks for restoration
  • B2: Review, improve or establish a legal and policy framework for land tenure
  • B3: Promote and strengthen formal and informal education systems
  • B4: Review, improve or establish terrestrial and marine spatial planning processes
  • B5: Consider the need for safeguard measures
  • B6: Review, improve or establish targets, policies and strategies for ecosystem restoration
  • B8: Promote economic and financial incentives
  • C1: Identify appropriate measures for conducting ecosystem restoration
  • C2: Consider how restoration can support sustainability of agriculture/production
  • C3: Develop ecosystem restoration plans with clear/measurable objectives and goals  
  • C4: Develop explicit implementation tasks, schedules, and budgets
  • D1: Assess the efficacy and effects of implementing the ecosystem restoration plan
  • D2: Adjust plans, expectations, procedures, and monitoring through adaptive management

Quarries rehabilitation for landscape improvement in Kruja, Albania

Country: Albania

Abstract: A large number of abandoned quarries, which have served to produce building materials, decorative stones and various inert materials, are located, more or less, throughout the territory between Fushekruja and Kruja cities, in Albania. Albania, as in all of Europe and beyond, is taking more measures strict, imposing more environmental restrictions on the activity of quarries. Also, the decade 2021-2030, promulgated on March 1, 2019 by The United Nations General Assembly as “Decade of Nations...

Relevance for the Short Term Action Plan for Ecosystem Restoration:
Our project is in full relevance with The Society for Ecological Restoration Mission.

STAPER categories:
  • A1: Assess degraded ecosystems
  • A2: Identify/prioritize locations for meeting national contributions to Aichi Targets
  • A3: Involve all relevant stakeholders
  • A4: Assess the costs/benefits of ecosystem restoration
  • A5: Assess institutional, policy, and legal frameworks & identify financial/technical resources
  • A6: Identify options to reduce the drivers biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation
  • B1: Review, improve or establish legal, policy and financial frameworks for restoration
  • B3: Promote and strengthen formal and informal education systems
  • B4: Review, improve or establish terrestrial and marine spatial planning processes
  • B6: Review, improve or establish targets, policies and strategies for ecosystem restoration
  • B10: Promote and support capacity-building, training, and technology transfer
  • C1: Identify appropriate measures for conducting ecosystem restoration
  • C2: Consider how restoration can support sustainability of agriculture/production
  • C3: Develop ecosystem restoration plans with clear/measurable objectives and goals  
  • C4: Develop explicit implementation tasks, schedules, and budgets
  • C5: Implement the measures
  • D1: Assess the efficacy and effects of implementing the ecosystem restoration plan
  • D2: Adjust plans, expectations, procedures, and monitoring through adaptive management
  • D3: Share lessons learned from planning, financing, implementing and monitoring ecosystem restoration plans

Renature Monchique

Country: Portugal

Abstract: The primary objective of this partner-based project is to begin a process that assists private landowners within the municipal district of Monchique, Algarve Region, Portugal, affected by the wildfire of 2018. As most landowners have small-holdings, the project-based process required to access financial support is onerous and in many instances linked to reforestation legislation. The one-year project is funded by the Ryanair passengers Carbon Offset Fund. Based on ecological restoration...

Relevance for the Short Term Action Plan for Ecosystem Restoration:
Recover fire-damaged and degraded sites

STAPER categories:
  • A1: Assess degraded ecosystems
  • A2: Identify/prioritize locations for meeting national contributions to Aichi Targets
  • A3: Involve all relevant stakeholders
  • A4: Assess the costs/benefits of ecosystem restoration
  • A5: Assess institutional, policy, and legal frameworks & identify financial/technical resources
  • A6: Identify options to reduce the drivers biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation
  • B1: Review, improve or establish legal, policy and financial frameworks for restoration
  • B4: Review, improve or establish terrestrial and marine spatial planning processes
  • B5: Consider the need for safeguard measures
  • B6: Review, improve or establish targets, policies and strategies for ecosystem restoration
  • B8: Promote economic and financial incentives
  • B10: Promote and support capacity-building, training, and technology transfer
  • C1: Identify appropriate measures for conducting ecosystem restoration
  • C2: Consider how restoration can support sustainability of agriculture/production
  • C3: Develop ecosystem restoration plans with clear/measurable objectives and goals  
  • C4: Develop explicit implementation tasks, schedules, and budgets
  • C5: Implement the measures
  • D1: Assess the efficacy and effects of implementing the ecosystem restoration plan
  • D2: Adjust plans, expectations, procedures, and monitoring through adaptive management
  • D3: Share lessons learned from planning, financing, implementing and monitoring ecosystem restoration plans