Loading...
Loading...
Loading...
Loading...
Loading...
Loading...
Loading...
Loading...
Loading...
In order to receive Ecological Outcome Verification, a land manager follows these general steps:
Start
Contact the Savory Institute via our website or contact your regional Savory Hub.
Baseline
The regional EOV Verifier schedules a farm/ranch visit, prepares farm mapping, and creates a short-term monitoring (STM) plan. Using STM data, the verifier finalizes the farm monitoring plan by locating where to establish long-term monitoring (LTM) sites. LTM data is then collected. The combination of the initial STM and LTM data provides a baseline.
Every Year
A regionally accredited EOV Monitor visits the farm/ranch to conduct the annual STM. If results trend positively in the context of the ecoregion, verification is granted or renewed and farms with eligible products have the opportunity to participate in Land to Market.
Subsequent 5-Year Intervals
On a five-year interval, an accredited EOV Monitor returns to the farm to conduct LTM. If data confirms STM positive trends, verification is granted or renewed.
The main steps in EOV include regional calibration, creating a monitoring plan, conducting short-term and long-term monitoring, quality assurance review of the data, and reporting data to land managers. This section provides a brief overview of the process for creating a monitoring plan.
Mapping is an essential first step in creating plans for short- and long-term ecological monitoring, assessing resources under management, and identifying different soil strata. Strata boundaries are defined and their area calculated. This is done by an accredited EOV Monitor in collaboration with the land manager.
A stratified monitoring plan is produced by an accredited EOV Monitor. The plan determines the number and location of both short-term and long-term monitoring sites.
Short-term monitoring is an assessment of EHI score, with a minimum of 10 sites spread across the farm, according to strata proportions. Optionally, STM can include add-ons of going through all the paddocks and assessing forage quantity and quality. Farmers need to provide information about livestock numbers, secondary production, and management activities for this extra component, which is very informative for grazing planning.
The number of long-term monitoring sites will depend on the number of strata and their acreage. The accredited EOV Monitor will define the number, type, and location of LTM sites according to the size and heterogeneity of the land base.
The minimum number of LTM sites is one for small, homogeneous farms, with up to 12 on large, heterogeneous landbases. These are assigned proportionally to the relative area of strata. Average EHI per strata from short-term monitoring is used to inform long-term site locations.
The main steps in EOV include regional calibration, creating a monitoring plan, conducting short-term and long-term monitoring, quality assurance review of the data, and reporting data to land managers. This section provides a brief overview of short-term monitoring and long-term monitoring.
STM focuses on leading indicators across the land base and gives the necessary information to inform management adjustments and verify ecological health trends on an annual basis. STM is designed to be simple, inexpensive, and quick while being scientifically robust.
A landbase monitoring plan identifies and distributes short-term monitoring (STM) sites throughout the farm or ranch.
Each STM site is analyzed by assessing the leading indicators on the Ecological Health Matrix. These have predictive value about the direction of changes and are very useful for informing management. The accredited monitor walks the land base, preferably with the farmer, and works through the indicators comparing visual observation with the indicator descriptors on the Evaluation Matrix. This evaluation is easy to learn and meaningful, requiring about ten minutes per checkpoint. Producers and professionals can learn to conduct STM in a three to five-day training resulting in reliable EHI scores less than a standard deviation of 10 points among monitors.
The Ecological Health Index (EHI score) is the sum of the scores for each indicator. The final score is dependent on the Evaluation Matrix for a given ecoregion. For example in an ecoregion leaning toward the non-brittle end of the brittleness scale it can range between -140 and +120 points. The EHI includes:
Live canopy abundance
Microfauna
Warm season grasses (Vigor and reproduction of a functional group)
Cool season grasses (Vigor and reproduction of a functional group)
Forbs and legumes (Vigor and reproduction of a functional group)
Trees and shrubs (Vigor and reproduction of a functional group)
Contextually desirable species
Contextually undesirable species
Litter abundance
Litter decomposition
Dung decomposition
Bare soil
Soil capping
Wind erosion
Water erosion
Long-term monitoring sites are permanent benchmark sites, located at representative areas of the farm or ranch. LTM monitoring begins with the establishment of the landbase baseline and is then repeated every 5 years.
Assessing lagging indicators through LTM is important to detect structural changes of the land base and track the functionality of the ecosystem processes which cannot be assessed with STM for attributes such as soil carbon and botanical composition as these demonstrate slower, more incremental changes and consequently are considered lagging indicators.
LTM encompasses the processes below. All indicators are measured using acknowledged scientific methodologies.
Evaluating vegetation and water infiltration change with a photographic plot and two transects which provide data regarding:
A third transect comprised of all the STM criteria for evaluating the Ecological Health Index (EHI) score with quantitative sampling.
Soil carbon and health (3)
Note both short-term and long-term monitoring procedures are linked by the Ecological Health Index, calculated using the Evaluation Matrix (Scorecard) for the associated ecoregion.
The main steps in EOV include regional calibration, creating a monitoring plan, conducting short-term and long-term monitoring, quality assurance (QA) review of the data, and reporting data to land managers. This section provides a brief overview of the quality assurance data review and the roles in EOV.
Data is recorded from each landbase and uploaded to the Savory Global EOV Platform.
Regional calibration data is sent to Global Quality Assurance for global analysis and additional audit planning. Landbases cannot be monitored until regional calibration data is approved by Global QA.
Results for each landbase are sent to the producer with follow-up, if necessary.
Hub Verifier audits are determined by EOV Quality Assurance. Landbase audits are determined by both Hub Verifiers and EOV QA.
EOV is supported by sound quality assurance procedures and protocols. Each monitoring activity is carried out by accredited Verifiers and Monitors with deep knowledge and experience in the given regional context. Data uploaded onto the EOV platform is reviewed and analyzed by a regional Hub Verifier or Master Verifier. On an annual basis, all participating farms and verifiers are subject to an on-site audit. The selection of farms to be audited are a result of data analysis.
There are two categories of EOV Monitors: short-term and long-term. Both categories are represented by individuals with proven experience in rangeland and pasture management in the regions they are serving. They are trained and qualified to provide independent annual short-term monitoring (STM) and long-term monitoring (LTM) services for Savory Hubs and their producer networks. The training is designed as a combination of hands-on and webinar sessions, and provides a deep understanding of the ecological indicators involved in the protocol and their assessment process, the scientific data collection mechanism for each monitoring technique (short-term and long-term) and associated methodologies, and how to make appropriate data records (including photographic records) in the digital platform.
Hub Verifiers are experienced land managers, and practitioners of Holistic Management and regenerative agriculture. It is a prerequisite that they are accredited as a Field Professional with Savory Institute to ensure a thorough understanding of the effectiveness of ecosystem processes and health. Hub Verifiers receive additional training in the EOV protocol to ensure the development of consistent, robust, and repeatable monitoring practices across the globe. Hub Verifiers play an important quality assurance role as well as two other primary roles:
Regional calibration – Required to engage in EOV, this includes defining ecoregions, functional groups, states, and transitions, establishing reference areas, and calibrating the Evaluation Matrix (scorecard) in each ecoregion.
Quality Assurance – Hub Verifiers are a central piece of EOV QA. They have direct responsibility for the validity and consistency of the data uploaded to the EOV digital platform. They may receive Hub Audits from Savory Institute. Hub Verifiers then create the report for the farmers.
Training – Hub Verifiers train and provide QA of STM and LTM in their regions.
Note that Hub Verifiers cannot have a conflict of interest with the landbase/entity being monitored.
These are highly experienced land managers and Verifiers. They are Savory Accredited Field Professionals and practitioners of Holistic Management with experience in regenerative agriculture in an extensive range of ecological settings. Master Verifiers are responsible for training HUB Verifiers and facilitating the set-up of the Hub regions with their ecoregions. These individuals provide Quality Assurance and support for the network of Hub Verifiers worldwide, particularly in areas without Hub presence and areas in need of additional EOV capacity.
A QA Team oversees quality control for EOV at the global scale. All data aggregated by Hub Verifiers around the world are analyzed, correlations are established, and lessons learned in the process are then reincorporated into the protocol and program. If there is data that looks inconsistent or suspicious, the specific Verifier and verification process will be audited and issues addressed.
All lessons and insights are shared with the Savory Global Network and form the basis for Network communications that inform the public, media, market partners, policymakers, and other stakeholders. A Terms of Use Agreement identifies the farmer as the owner of the EOV data, but authorizes the Savory Institute to use the data for scientific and learning purposes.
All Savory Hubs are encouraged to partner with local research institutions and scientific bodies to add layers of monitoring relevant to their context. Many Hubs are partnering with universities, conservation groups, wildlife groups, and others interested in measuring the impact of management on target indicators. This adds transparency, robustness, and additional data to the learning platform and network.
The main steps in EOV include regional calibration, creating a monitoring plan, conducting short term and long term monitoring, quality assurance review of the data, and reporting data to land managers. This section provides a brief overview of regional calibration.
The EOV process begins with regional calibration. This is required to account for the unique conditions, features, and species in the ecoregion where the monitoring will occur. This work is completed by accredited EOV Verifiers or Master Verifiers.
Regional calibration is critically important. It is necessary to generate accurate scorecards and subsequently to facilitate accurate scoring when monitoring. It enables accurate regional assessments of key species, functional groups, and the ecosystem potential needed to create detailed evaluation matrices.
A States and Transitions (S&T) catalog is developed as part of the set up. It outlines expected states land can exist in and the various tools available to facilitate the transition to the desired land state(s). This information, in turn, enables the Verifier to more accurately assess the land’s current state and to assist managers in selecting tools that will move the land toward the desired future state.
Finally, robust quality assurance requires reference areas to be able to accurately assess when factors outside of management’s control (e.g. significant weather events, natural disasters, prolonged drought, etc.) may be impacting scores in the region.
Ecoregion setup includes these four steps, which are described in greater detail below:
Ecoregion Description
States, Functional Groups, Transitions, and Tools
Reference Areas
Evaluation Matrix
Areas monitored by EOV are separated into broad ecological regions, or ecoregions. These regions contain geographically distinct assemblages of natural communities and species. The biodiversity of flora, fauna and environments that characterize an ecological region tends to be distinct from that of other ecological regions. Ecoregions are the result of climate, geology, and landforms. They have a defined degree of brittleness which dictates the region’s response to management tools.
The ecological region is selected based on an ecological map that is widely accepted in the scientific literature. Hub Verifiers must identify the ecoregions within the areas they work, then complete the preparatory steps in this section prior to monitoring. They must also ensure their monitors are familiarized with the ecoregion prior to monitoring. Ecoregion maps on a global basis are coordinated by the Savory Institute Quality Assurance team.
After the ecoregion has been defined, the Hub Verifier seeks to understand each region’s uniqueness and the impact of human influence through past management. This information is necessary to articulate the functioning of the ecological region and to recognize the challenges and opportunities for regeneration. State and Transition (S&T) catalogs are relevant for this purpose; they organize and communicate information about ecosystem changes within a relatively homogenous environment.
An S&T catalog is a way to describe the multiple states possible in an ecoregion, the ecological resilience of individual states to environmental stressors, and the role of management tools and natural processes in moving from one state to another. Ecoregions are the broadest land classification that can be used to create an S&T catalog.
Inside each ecoregion, land may exhibit different stable states, which differ in terms of vegetation structure, state of the soil surface, productivity, and ecosystem processes. States are represented as boxes in a state and transition diagram and described in the catalog. Vegetation and soil transitions are represented in the diagram by arrows. A place may move, or transition, from one state to another due to one or more management factors.
Transitions always will happen in response to the use of ecosystem management tools, so most of them are the result of management decisions. Weather and management can generate opportunities to promote desirable transitions (restoration or regeneration) or threats by promoting undesirable transitions (desertification, land degradation). The width of the arrow in the model represents the probability of any transition. Dotted lines are used to mark theoretical changes that have not been recorded or are considered unlikely to happen. Creating an S&T catalog is a valuable exercise in identifying the possible states that should be managed for (future resource base) in each ecoregion, the tools that can be used to promote transitions toward those states, and undesirable changes and the tools that promote them.
Reference areas are the best-known expression of biodiversity, site stability, and ecosystem function for a given ecoregion. They serve as an exemplar of how land with highly functioning ecosystem processes appears. Reference areas are the closest example of the desired future resource base in a particular environment for a given context.
Note that the concept of reference areas is dynamic, as proper management of land bases can generate new reference areas and change the boundaries of what can be achieved. Reference areas are established to create a benchmark and are used to develop an Evaluation Matrix of leading ecological indicators for the specific ecoregion.
The reference area is identified by a Hub or Master Verifier before creating the Evaluation Matrix for the ecoregion. Reference areas are located in relevant states of an ecoregion using local knowledge, satellite imagery, information from scientific advisors, practical experience, and visual appraisal. Identifying and describing reference areas is very important but especially so in brittle ecoregions because high variability in soil, vegetation structure, and ecosystem function is more likely to occur.
In the absence of an adequate reference area, the Evaluation Matrix will be defined using available information, the S&T catalog, and local experience with the reference area being identified later.
The Evaluation Matrix is a scorecard made up of a set of contextually relevant leading ecological indicators. Farms and ranches in the ecoregion are monitored using the Evaluation Matrix and receive an Ecological Health Index (EHI) score that is calibrated to the ecoregion.
The EHI score serves as an aggregated measure of ecosystem health. It is based on ecological indicators associated with the four ecosystem processes – water cycle, mineral cycle, energy flow, and community dynamics. Some of the ecological indicators are absolute and the rest are calibrated relative to the reference areas for each ecological region. The calibration is needed for certain ecological areas to account for differences related to the degree of brittleness of an area and its potential.
To calibrate an Evaluation Matrix, generic descriptors for the ecological indicators are reviewed by Master Verifiers or Hub Verifiers relative to the reference area in the region and their expertise of ecoregion variability. The indicator descriptions on the Evaluation Matrix are adjusted for the characteristics of each ecoregion. If an ecoregion has high internal variability in terms of environments or sites, and all have relevant states (e.g. forest and its related states, grassland and its related states, riparian areas) it is sometimes necessary to generate a different Evaluation Matrix for each of the differing environments.
Sample of short term data reportedSample of short term data reportedThe main steps in EOV include regional calibration, creating a monitoring plan, conducting short-term and long-term monitoring, quality assurance review of the data, and reporting data to land managers. This section provides a brief overview of reporting.
All field data collected on reference areas and farms by accredited EOV Monitors is uploaded to the Savory Global EOV Data Platform. It is the responsibility of the accredited EOV Monitor to upload the data to the platform in a timely and accurate manner according to local conditions and connectivity.
Data is then reviewed and approved by the a local Hub Verifier before being reviewed by the EOV Global QA team. After data is issued final approved and either a status of regenerating or not regenerating by Global QA, a results report is generated by the EOV Platform. Data summarized within the report can be given to the producer and opportunities for mentoring or adjusting management are outlined by local Hub Verifiers, if applicable.
Technical terms commonly used in the EOV protocol
Total Area: Total hectares of the property
Exclusion Area: Non-verifiable area due to topography, management, etc. Example: Rocks, water bodies, mature forests.
Verifiable Area = Total Area minus the Exclusion Area(s)
Represented Area: The number of hectares of each strata that is represented by a given LTM or STM site.
Ecological Health Index (EHI Score): The numeric score that EOV-enrolled land receives after completion of data gathering and filling of the regionally calibrated Evaluation Matrix (leading indicators only). Scores show the numerical distance to the potential of ecosystem processes of the ecoregion, expressed by the reference area.
Ecological indicators: Attributes of soil surface and vegetation that reveal the effectiveness of ecosystem processes and ecosystem health. They are included on the Evaluation Matrix where they are given an EHI score.
Ecoregion: Area that contains characteristic, geographically distinct assemblages of natural communities and species. The biodiversity of flora, fauna, and environments that characterize an ecological region tends to be distinct from that of other ecological regions. Ecological regions are the result of climate, geology, and landforms. They have a defined degree of brittleness and therefore have different responses to management tools.
Evaluation Matrix: A matrix of up to 15 biological indicators (rows) and five possible situations of each indicator. Determines the score for a particular site in a way that is contextualized for a specific ecoregion.
Functional Groups: A set of plant species that share the same type and ecological role. The relative proportion of functional groups of plants determines the state of the land. This includes warm-season grasses, cool-season grasses, forbs/legumes, and shrubs/trees.
HUB Verifier: A HUB Verifier is an Accredited Field Professional with the Savory Institute and working in close association with a Hub in a given region. They are trained in EOV to be able to do the preparatory work in an ecoregion including understanding and diagramming the states of land that can occur in an ecoregion, the ways to transition between states, the functional groups of plants in that ecoregion, installing reference area LTM sites, and the development of the Evaluation Matrix for the ecoregion. They also perform verification and auditing of monitoring done by EOV Monitors.
Lagging indicator: Lagging indicators are largely captured in LTM and outcome indicators. Unlike leading indicators, when we know lagging Indicator values there is little chance to make corrections quickly. Evaluating these lagging indicators can be expensive and require Long Term Monitoring to be performed. However, it provides us with strong scientific validation of the functioning of the ecosystem processes.
Leading Indicator: leading indicators are those that usually change before others, and therefore have some predictive value about the direction of changes. Leading indicators are useful for documenting and influencing management and are largely covered in Short Term ecological monitoring.
Long-Term Monitoring (LTM): Baseline monitoring in year 0 and repeated every five years. Quantitative estimations that combine , with benchmark LTM sites where plant composition and soil cover are assessed, along with EHI and water infiltration.
Master Verifier: Master Verifiers are a select group involved in the further development and refinement of the EOV methodology. Master Verifiers provide training to Hub Verifiers.
Reference Area: LTM site in any land base (within or outside producer network) that is the best-known expression of biodiversity, site stability, and good ecosystem functioning for a given state in an ecoregion. It may or may not be inside the land base being verified. These areas are benchmark points for the relevant states for the rest of the LTM sites in that ecoregion. The concept of reference areas is dynamic, as proper management can generate new reference areas and change the parameters of what can be achieved.
Short-Term Monitoring (STM): Done across each land base annually in multiple paddocks. Provides a score for each paddock and a weighted average for the farm. The weighted average is used in the EOV verification of the farm.
State: States are alternative assemblages of functional groups and plant species, that determine physiognomy (appearance), soil attributes, and ecosystem function inside an ecoregion. For example, grassland, grassland/shrubland, shrubland, cropland, and savanna could be the states within a given ecoregion.
Strata: An area of a land base that has similar properties in terms of soil and vegetation. Each strata will be represented by at least one long term monitoring site. Short term monitoring sites will be located on the land base proportional to the strata (ie if a strata represents 20% of the land base, then 20% of the STM sites will be located in that strata).
Transitions: Transitions represent the change of vegetation and soil from one state to another. If grasslands switch from one state to one that represents lower ecosystem health, that transition is undesirable. Conversely, land regeneration could be defined as the management of transitions to create the most vibrant and effective state in terms of ecological health and productivity. Transitions are always caused by the intended or accidental use of tools: technology, fire, rest, and living organisms. A transition catalog describes how the management of each tool promotes transitions.
What is Ecological Outcome Verification (EOV)?
EOV is a scientific monitoring methodology that provides metrics to land regeneration. It is the first outcome-based and contextually-relevant method for monitoring land regeneration and ecosystem health.
What are the origins of EOV?
EOV has been built on Savory’s Holistic Management (HM) comprehensive ecological monitoring methodology, increasing its scientific rigor by collaborating with scientists and research institutions that focus on the intersection of climate, water, and food security with the overarching goal of the ecological integrity of grasslands worldwide.
What does EOV measure?
EOV assesses five key outcomes that define land regeneration: a) ground cover, b) water infiltration, c) biodiversity, d) primary productivity, e) soil carbon and health. These are measured with valid and reliable methodologies.
How is EOV different from other certification programs?
The primary differentiation is that EOV is outcomes-based while other certification programs are process/practice-based. EOV is designed to engage farmers and ranchers around the world in continual learning and support toward their enduring success as business leaders and land stewards. To that end, the key difference between EOV and other certification programs is that EOV is driven by producers, from the bottom up, with outcome-based benchmarks, rather than from the top down, with practice-based benchmarks.
What product categories does EOV apply to?
Currently, the EOV protocol is being deployed on landbases with livestock operations, producing meat, dairy, wool, and leather. Future phases of the program may incorporate landbases dedicated to other products or offerings.
An overview of Savory Institute's land monitoring protocol
Ecological Outcome Verification (EOV) is operated by the Savory Institute, a nonprofit organization, whose mission is to facilitate the large-scale regeneration of the world’s grasslands and the livelihoods of their inhabitants, through Holistic Management.
EOV (Ecological Outcome Verification) is an empirically-based data collection protocol that serves as the cornerstone for market claims in Savory programs. It underpins the Land to Market (L2M) program—a sourcing solution that connects brands and retailers with farms and ranches worldwide verified as regenerating their land—and the Savory Foundation’s large scale, high-integrity carbon projects.
The EOV protocol was developed in collaboration with leading soil scientists, ecologists, agronomists, and an extensive network of regenerative land managers around the world.
EOV is a practical and scalable soil and landscape assessment methodology that tracks outcomes in biodiversity, water, soil health, and ecosystem function (i.e. water cycle, mineral cycle, energy flow, and community dynamics).
EOV applies to grassland environments as well as grazed orchards, silvopasture systems, mixed livestock-cropping systems, and mixed livestock-forest areas. Pure cropping systems are currently not considered.
EOV is designed to reflect the Savory Institute’s enduring commitment to farmer education and support. We strive for continuous improvement in our community of practitioners and respect for unique contexts around the world. Our guiding pillars include:
Outcomes-Based: Many certifications are process/practice-based (i.e. they inventory practices), yet the use of specific practices or tools does not guarantee land regeneration. Outcomes depend on brittleness of the landscape as well as management decisions and timing. Management depends on contextual variances in cultural, environmental, and economic conditions. EOV measures tangible outcomes and trends key indicators of ecosystem function, which in the aggregate indicate positive or negative trends in the overall health of a landscape. This in turn informs the farmer, rancher, or pastoralist with ongoing feedback and data from which to make better management decisions.
Contextually Relevant: EOV is contextualized within its given ecoregion. Each ecoregion contains its own biodiversity of flora and fauna and has unique characteristics such as climate, geology, and soil types. Using well-recognized ecoregion maps, calibration to the area occurs by first defining alternate states of soil and vegetation within each ecoregion, called a State and Transition catalog. Within an ecoregion reference areas are then identified based on a desirable state demonstrating higher biodiversity, resilience, and ecosystem function. These reference areas in conjunction with a State and Transitions catalog are used to develop an evaluation matrix of ecological indicators that assess the ecological health of a farm or ranch.
Farmer First: EOV is designed to be a learning mechanism and assessment tool for ongoing land improvement as well as assisting in market differentiation if an operation uses EOV and fulfills the requirements of the Land to Market program. EOV is implemented by Savory’s global network of regional Hubs, which are well acquainted with local environments, management styles, and operating conditions. These Hubs have personnel that work closely with land managers in their geographical areas and can assist managers seeking training or implementation support for improving land health.
The main steps in EOV include regional calibration, creating a monitoring plan, conducting short-term and long-term monitoring, quality assurance review of the data, and reporting data to land managers. Each of these topics will be covered in more depth in the following sections.
