RESEARCH
How does ecology and economics shape productivity, profitability, and persistence of forests?
Forests support biodiversity, cultural values, and livelihoods. Yet, deforestation and degradation continue to disrupt the social and ecological systems that depend on them. Global initiatives aim to restore forests, but we still lack scalable, accessible models that integrate ecological dynamics and socioeconomic trade-offs.
Our research focuses on understanding how to restore and manage forests in a manner that makes sense from both ecological and economic perspectives. We use a combination of field experiments, spatial modeling, and large-data synthesis to investigate forest recovery across scales—from individual tree growth to regional restoration planning.
How will climate change reshape the diversity-productivity relationship?
How will climate-change driven shifts in productivity shape long-term forest profitability?
Where do ecological constraints and financial feasibility align to sustain forests under a changing climate?
By addressing these questions, our research aims to inform evidence-based decision-making at both global and local scales. A core component of our work involves developing spatial maps that identify which tree species are most suitable for restoration in different regions, based on biophysical and climate data. These tools help guide species selection and planting strategies that align with local ecological conditions and future climate scenarios.
While current models emphasize ecological suitability, we are building toward integrated tools that can incorporate social and economic data—supporting more holistic landscape planning and restoration initiatives. Ultimately, our goal is to design restoration and payment for ecosystem service strategies that are both environmentally effective and socially just.
Can forest restoration work economically?
In our Nature Communications study, we tested whether timber-based forest restoration in Panama “pencils out” for landholders—with and without carbon payments. On timber alone, profitability was mixed: some native-species plantations could be viable, but secondary forests and enrichment plantings often weren’t. Adding a simple, flat carbon payment (US$130/ha/yr) flipped the math for many cases—especially secondary forests, where net present values turned strongly positive—showing that modest, predictable carbon payments (and cost-sharing of upfront costs) can make restoration a financially realistic choice on low-fertility tropical soils. Below, the yellow shows the value of different options without a carbon payment and the green shows the value when the flat carbon payment is included
Check out a few of our current projects below
Enrichment planting with native tree species
Ngäbe-Buglé comarca
Community science project with middle school students
El Jiral, Panama
Economics of forest restoration
Agua Salud Project
