2026-06-28

About me – click my path to explore it

Why I’m here

  • The Biodiversity Section needs someone who can turn community data (plants, invertebrates, eDNA, sensors) into decision-relevant evidence
  • My work already sits at exactly that interface: NOVANA → models → spatial prioritisation → advisory output
  • I want to extend this from “where to protect” to “where AND how to restore,” linking biodiversity with ecosystem processes (Terrestrial Ecology)

Part 1: How I think about the problem

Bridging the gap between conservation and action

The grand challenge in modern conservation is bridging the gap between observation and action.

One analytical pipeline, three stages

What I bring to each stage

  • Monitoring → models: reproducible pipelines that harmonise messy, heterogeneous datasets (NOVANA-type structure) into model-ready data
  • Models → prioritisation: species distribution models, joint SDMs, ecological networks, spatial optimisation
  • Prioritisation → advice: I’ve done this end-to-end for Denmark’s 30x30 assessment (terrestrial + marine), feeding directly into Biodiversity Council reports

Part 2: What this looks like in practice

Demo 1 – From point data to a usable evidence layer

  • This is the kind of leaflet output I build directly into analysis reports and dashboards for collaborators and policy partners
  • Same approach applies to plant, invertebrate, or eDNA community data
  • Layer toggles + basemap choice let a non-specialist explore the evidence themselves

Illustrative coordinates around Aarhus – real version uses NOVANA/BioWIDE plot data, as in my Mols Bjerge rewilding monitoring work.

Demo 2 – Trade-offs are a slider, not a single map

  • Conservation/restoration prioritisation is never one “best” map – it’s a continuum of trade-offs
  • This is the same logic behind my Denmark afforestation/biodiversity-carbon optimisation work
  • I’d build the equivalent for plant/invertebrate community objectives alongside carbon and connectivity

Illustrative curves – structurally the same output as my Aarhus land-use optimisation analyses.

Demo 3 – Community structure as a network

  • Plant-pollinator and other interaction data are naturally network data
  • This is the same engine behind NetworkExtinction (CRAN package I co-developed)
  • Directly relevant to linking Biodiversity with Terrestrial Ecology’s plant-insect interaction work

Illustrative synthetic network – real pipeline removes species/links to test rewiring and robustness (Avila-Thieme et al. 2023, Methods Ecol Evol).

Part 3: Research vision for Ecoscience

Three directions

  1. Community-level monitoring → models: extend current vertebrate/vegetation-focused workflows to plant and invertebrate community data, including eDNA and sensor streams, in direct collaboration with Terrestrial Ecology
  2. Process-aware prioritisation: move spatial optimisation beyond occurrence/representation toward ecological networks, species interactions, and ecosystem resilience
  3. Reproducible advisory infrastructure: open, auditable pipelines so Ecoscience’s policy outputs (30x30, Nature Restoration Law) are transparent and updatable as new monitoring data arrives

Funding – where I’d focus, honestly

  • I know this is a gap in my profile so far – mostly contributor roles, not PI on major grants
  • Concrete plan for year 1-2:
    • Novo Nordisk Foundation (biodiversity/climate calls) – restoration-carbon-biodiversity trade-off tool, building directly on existing Danish 30x30 pipeline
    • Independent Research Fund Denmark (Sapere Aude / Nature & Universe) – methods-development angle, e.g. integrating species interaction networks into prioritisation
    • Horizon Europe / Biodiversa+ – joint proposal leveraging Ecoscience’s monitoring infrastructure and international network (Chile, US)
  • I’d actively seek a co-PI structure for the first application rather than going it alone – pairing my analytical/optimisation background with a senior PI’s grant-leadership experience

Collaboration – specific, not generic

  • Terrestrial Ecology: plant-insect interactions as a bridge from vegetation monitoring to community-level resilience metrics
  • Camilla Fløjgaard / Biodiversity Section: extending current 30x30 / restoration-prioritisation work to invertebrate and plant community objectives
  • Torben Rojle Christensen / ecosystem process groups: replacing simplified carbon proxies in my optimisation work with mechanistic ecosystem model output
  • External: continued ties to Chile (IEB) and US (UConn, Missouri) groups – a standing source of comparative high-latitude/temperate datasets and joint publication opportunities

Addressing the assessment directly

  • Funding track record → concrete near-term targets above, with a co-PI strategy for the first cycle
  • Research leadership → I’ve led delivery of national-scale, reproducible analytical products end-to-end (30x30 terrestrial + marine workflows); I’d like to grow this into leading a small project team
  • Outreach → open to building this here: dashboards and interactive tools are a natural outreach product I already enjoy making
  • Project management → the SustainScapes work has involved coordinating deliverables across institutions and timelines; happy to formalise this further

What I’m looking for in this role

  • A place where quantitative/computational work is treated as a first-class contribution to conservation science, not just a service function
  • Colleagues in Terrestrial Ecology and elsewhere to co-develop process-based, interaction-aware prioritisation tools
  • The chance to keep what I most enjoy: building reproducible, interactive tools that make biodiversity evidence usable – for scientists and for policy

Questions

Thank you – happy to go deeper into any of the demos, the funding plan, or the modelling details.