Rethinking ecological restoration from the perspective of local communities and their ancestral knowledge

Evaluation of indicators in restoration projects is essential to measure their progress and effectiveness. This requires the selection of metrics such as abundance, coverage, or species richness, as well as indicators that reflect the incorporation of traditional knowledge and ancestral wisdom, so that they reflect the objectives set for each stage of the process.

Although indigenous communities have the greatest knowledge of ecological cycles to understand the natural restoration of our ecosystems through ancestral knowledge and have the potential to close information gaps unknown even to academia, there are still no agreed-upon indicators that measure the non-quantitative contribution to restoration. The quantification of the contribution of indigenous peoples to ecosystem restoration must be based on respect for their free, prior, and informed consent, protecting their knowledge even within national regulatory frameworks. This should translate into community monitoring, allowing for the adjustment of strategies, improvement of results, and justification of the investment made, culminating in the documentation of the achievements.

Furthermore, it is necessary to remember that not only degraded ecosystems require restoration; restoration must also prevent the catastrophic scenarios that climate change would generate. It must also promote the improvement of the livelihoods of local and ancestral communities, the empowerment of governance, and its intergenerational transmission.

The guidelines discussed in items 5 (a) and (b), as well as the implementation of KMGBF target 2 and the actions within the framework of the United Nations Declaration on the Decade of Ecosystem Restoration, need to incorporate a documented measurement of the contribution of indigenous peoples, through clear and measurable indicators based on the objectives set, recognizing the role of indigenous peoples and
local communities, as well as the incorporation of scientific and technical knowledge for the scaling up of these practices. It is important to conceive of restoration as more than simply repairing degraded areas, recognizing its different approaches and purposes beyond water supply, but also ensuring the strengthening of soil health, natural ecological cycles, disease control, and reducing the risk of natural disasters.

It is necessary to rethink ecological restoration as a comprehensive and collective process in which the contribution of indigenous peoples is distinguished and quantified in order to achieve greater coordination based on local knowledge and efforts, moving from seeing communities as agents of restoration to living voices and knowledge that must not be lost because it is vital for cultural identity, environmental sustainability, and adaptation to climate change. Only through this can we preserve invaluable information for our ecosystems and the continuity of the benefits they provide to humanity.