Table 1.

The application of the principles underpinning ecological restoration (Gann et al. 2019) to ecological countermeasure performance standards. ^aPerformance standard feasibility needs to be considered contextually. Since every situation is unique, these standards are meant to serve as best management practice benchmarks rather than evaluation criteria for cross‐project comparison.

Ecological Restoration Principle	Recommended Performance Standardsa
1. Engages stakeholders	* Project motivated by need to protect human health * Local community is made aware of the project need, Intent, and implications * Baseline data collection employs citizen science * Plan development and review involves public input * Project feasibility analysis evaluates community acceptance and recommends acceptable measures * Implementation, monitoring, and adaptive management are stakeholder inclusive * Local community has long‐term role as ecological/health stewards
2. Draws on many types of knowledge	* Baseline data addresse biological, ecological, geophysical, and social science parameters * Plan considers Traditional Ecological Knowledge, Local Ecological Knowledge, and other community‐specific factors * Observations and knowledge are routinely captured and integrated for adaptive management, utilizing peer‐learning networks and practitioner‐researcher collaborations
3. Informed by native ecosystems, while considering environment change	* Native community assessed, with emphasis on the dynamics of relevant microbes, vertebrate hosts, land use change and associated ecological conditions, and human activity patterns * Landscape immunity measures and goals considered from a wide range of spatio‐temporal perspectives
4. Supports ecosystem recovery	* Addresses key land use change drivers * Restores and maintains landscape immunity * Ecological structure and function fostering landscape immunity becomes self‐regulating
5. Assessed against clear goals and objectives, using measurable indicators	* Considers interventions that arrest zoonotic pathogen infection, shedding, and/or spillover by restoring ecological structure and function to achieve landscape immunity * Measures and monitors wildlife stress‐related/immunological biomarkers * Measures and monitors zoonotic pathogen prevalence and exposure/infection intensity * Measures and monitors human and domestic animal host proximity to wildlife hosts
6. Seeks the highest level of recovery attainable	* Goal is to recover and maintain landscape immunity by reestablishing ecosystem structure and function * Ultimately, project succeeds in preventing land use‐induced spillover
7. Gains cumulative value when applied at large scales	* Reduces risk of disease outbreaks from local to pandemic scales
8. Is part of a continuum of restoration activities	* Meets, complements, and provides return on investment for restoration activities with explicit conservation and/or sustainable development goals