It is essential to prioritize restoration measures in the field. Not all interventions can be carried out simultaneously or in every location. The selection and sequencing of actions must be aligned with on-site feasibility, the safety and well-being of implementers, and the extent to which ecosystem recovery processes are supported or enhanced. Therefore, implementation must be targeted and flexible, supported by clear decision-making criteria, visual aids (such as maps and work zones), and field-oriented planning tools.
Legal and policy frameworks play a role in setting priorities. European and national legislation such as the Habitats Directive, the EU Nature Restoration Regulation, and national forest laws impose conditions on management activities e.g. in protected or sensitive areas. These include requirements to avoid damage to protected species and habitats or to obtain permits for specific interventions. Restoration actions must therefore be not only ecologically sound but also compliant with applicable regulations.
From a practical standpoint, it is important to consider site conditions, weather, and the required expertise. In some cases, adjustments are necessary to the planned interventions, for instance when soil compaction proves more severe than expected or when certain species spontaneously emerge. Some interventions, such as timber harvesting or hydrological restoration, are significant operations. In these cases, it is necessary to assess both the ecological pros and cons and the operational risks, for example, when working in a heavily visited area. Planning the appropriate sequence of actions such as establishing access routes or working zones (e.g., thinning paths) can reduce risks and increase efficiency.
Moreover, the goal is to leverage natural recovery processes as much as possible. Restoration strategies based on natural regeneration or spontaneous establishment of native species can be both ecologically resilient and cost-effective, provided site conditions and an appropriate wildlife management allow. Intervening where necessary but remaining cautious where possible helps to prevent unintended damage to vulnerable species, soil structure, or microclimates.
Despite increasing evidence suggesting mixed-species plantations promote biodiversity, a comprehensive quantitative analysis of this knowledge is lacking. The authors systematically reviewed 71 studies to evaluate the effects of mixed versus pure tree plantations on biodiversity using descriptive statistics and meta-analyses.