In our work, nature‑based solutions, incentives, and market‑based instruments are treated neither as panaceas nor as inherently problematic, but as context‑dependent conservation strategies. We approach these interventions from a pluralistic value perspective, recognising that conservation decisions are shaped by ecological, cultural, relational, health‑related, and economic values that do not always align.
Rather than endorsing a single conservation logic, our research asks when, where, and for whom different approaches support biodiversity, climate mitigation and adaptation, human well‑being, and livelihoods—and when they risk narrowing conservation to predominantly economic framings or reinforcing existing inequalities. This stance allows us to work across different policy and management contexts while maintaining normative clarity and critical distance.
Research in this theme is centred on modelling and scenario‑based approaches that link biodiversity, ecosystem functioning, ecosystem services, and societal benefits under environmental change. We combine biodiversity inventories and ecosystem data with ecological–economic and ecosystem‑service modelling to assess how management options, incentive structures, and policy scenarios influence conservation outcomes. This includes mapping and modelling ecosystem services, analysing the impacts of incentives on their provision, and using species composition and functional traits to model ecosystem functioning and outcomes such as carbon storage, emissions, and nutrient dynamics. Climate change is explicitly incorporated both as a stressor affecting ecosystem processes and service provision, and as a mitigation and adaptation target of nature‑based solutions. Throughout, we account for context, values, and equity, recognising that conservation outcomes depend not only on ecological processes but also on how benefits, costs, and risks are distributed and valued.
Our work spans diverse social–ecological contexts, from boreal forests to Mongolian rangelands, and from African savannas to European seas. In forest systems, we study how biodiversity, forest structure, and management influence carbon storage, timber production, and human health and well‑being, contributing to debates on multifunctional forestry and the limits of sustainable forest use. Complementary research evaluates voluntary conservation schemes and incentive‑based approaches, including payment for ecosystem services and rangeland conservation with herders, examining when such instruments support biodiversity and when they risk prioritising narrow economic objectives.
Beyond managed landscapes, we investigate how species shape ecosystem services and climate outcomes. Research on African elephants links diet, plant functional traits, and vegetation modification to carbon and nutrient dynamics, highlighting the role of megafauna in ecosystem functioning and climate mitigation. In marine contexts, work on ecosystem services and spatial planning examines how marine ecosystems contribute to biodiversity conservation and societal benefits under different management regimes. Together, these studies illustrate how nature‑based solutions and incentives operate across ecosystems and cultures, and why their outcomes depend critically on ecological processes, institutional design, and value pluralism.
Related projects:
Affiliated researchers:
Stoltz J, Burgas D, et al. (2024) Forests for Health Promotion : Future Developments of Salutogenic Properties in Managed Boreal Forests. Forests.
Mönkkönen M, ... & Burgas D (2024) Ecologically and economically sustainable level of timber harvesting in boreal forests–defining the safe operating space for forest use. bioRxiv.
Batpurev K et al. (2025) Private land conservation through voluntary biodiversity conservation schemes: lessons from a payment for ecosystem services scheme in Finland. BioScience.