How do monoculture and historically uninformed reforestation practices impact native biodiversity and ecosystem stability?

Reforestation has emerged as a central strategy in global responses to climate change, biodiversity loss, and land degradation. However, many contemporary reforestation initiatives prioritise rapid increases in tree cover over ecological suitability, often relying on fast-growing monoculture species and simplified restoration models. This paper argues that such approaches can undermine, rather than support, long-term ecological restoration. Drawing on ecological and restoration literature, the study examines how poorly aligned reforestation practices, particularly those applied to historically non-forest ecosystems, affect biodiversity, soil systems, hydrology, and ecosystem resilience. It shows that projects driven primarily by carbon sequestration metrics can lead to ecosystem simplification, reduced stability, and the replacement of self-sustaining native systems with structurally incomplete plantations. The paper further demonstrates that these outcomes are not isolated implementation failures but reflect broader policy and accounting frameworks that prioritise measurable outputs over ecological function. It concludes that effective restoration requires a shift from tree cover as a proxy for success toward context-specific approaches grounded in ecosystem history, biodiversity, and long-term functional resilience.