NbS Triple Win Toolkit: Biodiversity Indicators in Context 30 that ecosystem integrity is not compromised. Equally, to demonstrate the intention for substantial recovery and count towards the proposed indicator, a project must document: Relevant ecosystem attributes at the project site and at anear-natural reference site (this could be based on field datafrom a reference site in a similar habitat with low humanimpacts, or on other sources e.g. historical data, expert opinion). Clear and plausible intervention logic and timeline on how the project will cause a substantial change in the relevant ecosystem attributes towards a more natural state. To represent ‘substantial recovery’this should be designed over the long-term to achieve and maintainat least 4 stars on the SER scale. Evidence that the project activities necessary to achieve the improvement in ecosystem attributes have been implementedand maintained. A suitable plan for monitoring changes in the ecosystem attributes. Important Note: This indicator measures implementation rather than how implementation translates into changes in ecosystem attributes. See Limitations and Challenges for further discussion of this point. Applicability across systems and projects The indicator uses standardised definitions and in principle can be applied in any terrestrial, freshwater, or marine ecosystem in which restoration is being planned at a measurable scale. However, thereare four broad areas to note with respect to applicability: i) Not all restoration projects will aim to improve ecosystem integrity to a sufficient level to meet the criteria for this indicator. For example, restoration as a general term can also be applied to activities focused primarily on the recovery of production (e.g. in commercial forestry or agriculture) or a specific ecosystem function (e.g. soil erosion prevention). Whilst these activities are potentially important for economic reasons if used appropriately, the benefits to biodiversity are not a given and may be limited. As such, the indicator does not automatically apply to all projects that involve any form of restoration. ii) Although the standard is high, it does not preclude human use or management – it is possible to achieve 4 stars on the SER scale in human-modified systems. Some projects that do not explicitly involve or aim for full ecological restoration may still result in substantial recovery of ecosystem attributes, and so potentially count towards this indicator. For example, conversion of plantation to shade grown coffee is not designed to restore a fully functioning natural ecosystem, but if implemented and managed well it is potentially possible to achieve 4 stars on the SER scale33,34. iii) Projects that aim for more limited effects on ecosystem attributes such as NbS in landscapes that involve high levels of ongoing human use (e.g. urban or agricultural areas) are unlikely to count towards this indicator. Although these projects are not automatically excluded from the indicator, in practice it will probably be difficult to achieve 4 stars on the SER scale in such environments. As such, it is not appropriate to aggregate projects that provide comparatively minor benefits with those that are expressly designed to have substantial positive effects on biodiversity. Note also that other important benefits from projects in environments with high levels of human use may be identified through indicators such as ICFKPI 17: Hectares of land that have received sustainable and management practices as a result of ICF.