communityfix.org

Case study of

#00114 Fund native-species restoration through vetted local partners, and report multi-year survival — not seedlings planted

Global program (Ecosia GmbH, Berlin, Germany)

#00124

OngoingGlobal

Implementer

Ecosia GmbH (Berlin) funding vetted local planting partners across 35+ countries

Timeline

Since Dec 7, 2009

Location

Global program (Ecosia GmbH, Berlin, Germany)52.5200, 13.4050

Description

Ecosia funds local partner organisations in biodiversity hotspots and degraded land across 35+ countries; partners grow, plant, and nurture trees through establishment. The program uses 900+ diverse native species, explicitly avoids monocultures, and applies satellite imagery plus field visits to check survival over time. Monthly financial reports detail revenue and spending. Ecosia sits at the opposite end from failed mass-planting cases: native species vs. monocultures, local aftercare vs. plant-and-leave, hotspot targeting vs. record-chasing, and survival monitoring vs. planting-day counts. Key open question for replicators: downstream impact figures (trees alive, CO₂ removed) remain largely self-reported — independent, long-horizon third-party verification of survival and additionality is unresolved for Ecosia and the sector broadly.

Metrics

4
Trees funded since 2009230M+trees
Native species planted900+species
Countries with planting projects35+countries
Approx. searches to fund one tree~45–50searches

Funding

Ecosia search advertising revenue (ad-click share); ≥80% of profit historically directed to tree-planting, with the remainder to other climate action

Lessons learned

  • The cost of restoration is mostly the cost of keeping trees alive: spend on local partners for establishment and aftercare, plus satellite-and-field survival monitoring, is what distinguishes this from plant-and-leave campaigns that report the same 'trees planted' number and then lose most of them.
  • Native-species diversity (900+ species, no monocultures) and hotspot targeting are deliberate method choices that directly avoid the failure modes documented in mass-planting case studies.
  • Transparency is not the same as verification: monthly financial reports show where money went, but ecological outcome (trees surviving decades, real additional CO₂ removed) is still largely self-reported and needs independent, long-horizon checking.
  • Funding scales with ad-click revenue, so mission output fluctuates with the commercial engine — a steady revenue product enables the multi-year partner relationships that one-off grant cycles cannot sustain.

Documented Jun 29, 2026

Author AvatarArnaud Gissinger

communityfix.org