The objective of the intervention was to develop strategic planning to guide local investments for ecosystem and landscape restoration in an effective and efficient manner. In order to achieve this objective, a methodological framework was developed that includes four steps: 1) Mapping of relevant local actors at the territorial level, 2) Participatory analysis of the dynamics of environmental degradation, 3) Definition of objectives, goals and restoration activity and 4) placement of resources.

The mapping of relevant local actors was carried out using the GIZ "Capacity Works" cooperation model; for the analysis of environmental degradation and the definition of objectives, the "Open Standards for Conservation Practice" methodology of Conservation Measures Partnerships - CMP was used.

Silvocafe is a restoration technique that seeks to make wood production viable in coffee plantations, through the incorporation and management of a density of trees -AVC- as "shade trees". The steps to execute it are:

1. Extraction of mature trees: with a census and georeferencing of trees with DBH>10 cm, an extraction is carried out using the following criteria: frequency per hectare, phytosanitary condition, tree shape, density by species of interest and distribution.
2. Replant damaged coffee plants and incorporate HCV trees: each extracted tree affects approximately 20 coffee plants, that is, 500 to 700 plants/ha, which means a replanting of plants/ha of 10%-15% after each intervention.
3. Establish an adequate shade density of trees of high commercial value: this requires a stock of between 40 to 60 HCV trees/ha; with a recommended spacing of 12x14 m.
4. Plan thinning for shade improvement: Higher shade density (50-70% cover, 50-30% light) is justified when the crop site has high ambient and soil temperatures, low ambient and soil relative humidity, greater exposure to sunlight, poor soil fertility and low altitude above sea level.

In Helinge’er County, Systematic Conservation Planning (SCP) was used to plan ecological restoration and protection for the county with consideration of climate change forecast. Firstly, demands of regional ecosystem service functions were determined according to the national ecological function zoning and ecological red lines. Secondly, to ensure the key ecosystem types in each ecological function plot can perform long-lasting and reliable ecological service functions, historic and current status of each ecological function plot was evaluated with literature reviews and field investigations (community surveys), and ecosystem trends were predicted under different climate change scenarios. Community outreach was crucial in understanding how the lived experience of farmers and herders compared to the scientific literature and helped build trust with communities.

Targets of the protection area target were set, and the degree of human influence in the area was considered. Finally, for the important ecological function areas the current ecosystem status was compared to the key ecosystem types that can continue to play their roles. If they were consistent, they were identified as protected areas. Inconsistencies resulted in restoration areas, and the target ecosystem type for restoration could then be determined.

The environment is a continuum that is not bound by political-administrative boundaries. Unilateral measures that a country can take to protect a shared resource are generally ineffective and the unregulated use of the resource usually ends in its overexploitation and destruction.

Based on this, biodiversity conservation in areas of high ecological value in border areas should be done on the basis of cooperation and understanding between countries. However, these areas, far from the centers of decision making, are often not a priority for foreign ministries.

In these cases, civil society organizations play an important role, since they can move and articulate with a freedom that governments at different levels do not have.

To be effective, the governance of transboundary protected areas, such as the Tri-national Biological Corridor, requires the involvement of all stakeholders: local, regional and national authorities, entrepreneurs and organized civil society.

Key stakeholders such as Department of Wildlife Conservation, Divisional Secretariat & District Secretariats, Ministry of Environment, UNDP, Ocean Resources Conservation Association, University of Wayamba, IUCN, Sri Lanka Navy, Coastal Conservation Department, National Aquatic Resources Research and Development Agency were involved in this project. Together the technical knowledge and experience of experts in the field, demarcation of the Bar Reef, designing of buoys, buoy deployment and allied activities were implemented.

While above named institutions provided the neccessary technical expertise, training and awareness and input for monitoring and evaluation, key local community members, such as members of the 'Tour Boat Society' (a society which was established for tour guides in the area), were also given the opportunity to participate in the demarcation activities to identify the GPS locations of the areas to be protected at Bar reef with the participation of specialists and other stakeholders. An identified team of locals, such as tour boat operators/guides were also involved as local volunteers to assist in monitoring and maintenance of the buoys and the protected zone.

Civil society acts as the driving force and articulator of the biodiversity conservation and nature tourism development proposal.

On the other hand, participation and co-management ensure a broad base of society to implement the proposal.

Local NGOs know the reality and problems of the area and are in horizontal contact with the inhabitants. In addition to identifying the problems, they can and should contribute to their solution.

MEP used Mali’s decentralisation legislation to create, with local people, a model of “elephant-centred” CBNRM. This legislation performed a vital enabling function that resulted in a model of resource governance at the village and commune levels, that was enshrined in local and commune conventions, as well as the commune socio-economic development plans. The MEP then worked with government to further reinforce these systems by drafting new legislation that created a new protected area covering the whole of the elephant migration route using a biosphere model which supported the community conventions. The aim was to give a mandate to the government foresters to be able to support local communities in the enforcement of their conventions if need be, thereby strengthening the community systems. This aligns government and community interests to mutually reinforce each other and provide a cost-effective approach to reserve management. This top-down approach complements the bottom-up approach of community engagement.

Radical Listening initiates a paradigm shift by asking Traditional and Indigenous rainforest communities this simple question. “You are the guardians of a rainforest that is valuable to the health of the whole planet. How might the world community assist you to live in balance with this rainforest as a thank you for your guardianship of it?”  Our belief is that communities hold the key to humanity’s longevity. Traditional conservation approaches are often based on punitive measures and seldom linked to human well-being. Our approach is based on reciprocity, and valuing local people and traditional science. 

The project had a number of innovative elements. It brought together the elements of a smartphone (camera, gps, dropdown menu's) and designed a recreational site management system to utilise them - this is a world first.
It is an open system so additional devices can be added - people counters, flood monitors all via Internet of things (IOT)

The underpinning purpose of this building block is to create baseline for the entire solution. Once the site is selected for solution, primary and secondary data is collected through research and analysis. For instance, It is with the help of bathymetric data that the depth of the shortlisted ponds is identified, which further facilitates in choosing the right pond with the required depth (0.8 - 3 meters) for installing floating treatment wetland.