In a move toward the integration of social and ecological goals in land management, landscape approaches are now a part of mainstream conservation and development policy discourses worldwide. Policies for integrated landscape management in Mesoamerica have long promoted biological corridors as a way to enhance biodiversity conservation and habitat connectivity while improving livelihoods in the surrounding landscape matrix. Recently, though, the policy focus throughout the region has shifted toward landscape restoration, which subsumes and expands upon the former approach to respond more explicitly to concerns about climate change. However, the limited success and challenges of translating corridors from paper into practice raise questions about the potential of landscape restoration policies to achieve intended outcomes. Centering on the experience of El Salvador, this paper draws on policy and document analysis and interviews with professionals to compare the two approaches and explore the implications of the transition toward landscape restoration based on lessons learned from past corridor implementation challenges. The paper argues that while the two approaches share many core components and objectives, landscape restoration has different spatial and distributional implications in terms of priority-setting, distribution of resources and benefits, and the promotion of conservation management strategies and alternatives. Nevertheless, unresolved challenges of integrated landscape management revealed by decades of unsuccessful corridor implementation must be addressed if restoration policies are to make headway. Through a critical analysis of shifting policy frameworks in El Salvador, the research offers crucial insight into the limitations and possibilities of integrated landscape management in Mesoamerica and globally.

为了将社会和生态目标整合到土地管理中，景观方法现已成为全球主流保护和发展政策讨论的一部分。中美洲的综合景观管理政策长期以来一直在促进生物走廊的发展，以此作为加强生物多样性保护和生境连通性，同时改善周围景观矩阵生计的一种方式。不过，最近，整个地区的政策重点都已转移到景观恢复上，景观恢复并扩展了前一种方法，以更明确地应对有关气候变化的担忧。然而，将走廊从纸张转化为实践的成功和挑战有限，这引发了人们对景观恢复政策实现预期成果的潜力的质疑。本文以萨尔瓦多的经验为中心，结合政策和文件分析以及与专业人员的访谈，比较了这两种方法，并根据从以往走廊实施挑战中汲取的经验教训，探讨了向景观恢复过渡的意义。本文认为，尽管这两种方法具有许多核心组成部分和目标，但景观恢复在确定优先次序，分配资源和利益以及促进保护管理策略和替代方法方面具有不同的空间和分布含义。然而，要想恢复政策取得进展，就必须解决数十年的走廊实施不成功所带来的未解决的综合景观管理挑战。