A new framework could help managers prioritize which lands to restore for biodiversity. This cost-benefit approach to restoration provides a flexible option for land managers to get the best bang for limited conservation bucks. 

This framework can analyze multiple parcels of land to determine which would be most suitable for a species of concern. It takes into account where a species was found historically, where it might be found in the future under climate change projections, what types of habitat it prefers, and where that habitat was historically located, as well as the cost of restoration. 

Ecosystem restoration can be costly, as it involves acquiring land, labor and materials for implementing restoration actions, and long-term management. Land managers are faced with tough decisions about where to put limited resources and this framework can help them better understand how those costs stack up against the benefits to species. 

While other optimization approaches exist, the benefit of this new framework is its flexibility in the types of data that can be input. “We’ve thought through how to consider lots of different factors to measure potential benefits to biodiversity, including habitat preferences, climate suitability, and dispersal ability,” says Sarah Weiskopf, primary author and research ecologist at the USGS National Climate Adaptation Science Center. 

Any species can be input into the framework, and different constraints like the type of land you want to consider for restoration can also be included as an input. It’s this flexibility that makes the framework such an efficient option for managers in diverse contexts. 

This approach has important implications for biodiversity conservation, as the framework includes a calculation for how much restoring different parcels of land would benefit biodiversity. Biodiversity is essential for the health and resilience of ecosystems, which in turn supports human health, strengthens food security, and helps regulate the climate. Global biodiversity goals seek to protect and restore ecosystems, but limited resources mean it is important to prioritize the efficiency of conservation and restoration projects. 

“We have limited resources, in terms of the time and money that can be spent on restoration, so you want to pick the places that are going to be most beneficial overall,” Weiskopf explains, “our framework really thinks through how to prioritize the most efficient restoration sites in a straightforward way.” 

The paper, “Restoration based on cost–benefit optimization: A grasslands pilot study” was published in Ecological Applications on January 29, 2026. The paper was co-authored by Toni Lyn Morelli, from the USGS Northeast Climate Adaptation Science Center, Tina G. Mozelewski, from the Spatial Informatics Group, Alexey N. Shiklomanov, from the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Susannah B. Lerman from the USDA Forest Service Northern Research Station.

This research was supported by the U.S. Geological Survey’s National Climate Adaptation Science Center.