Rewilding: Science, Practice, and Politics

Abstract

Rewilding is being promoted as an ambitious alternative to current approaches to nature conservation. Interest is growing in popular and scientific literatures, and rewilding is the subject of significant comment and debate, outstripping scientific research and conservation practice. Projects and research are found the world over, with concentrations in Europe, North America, and on tropical islands. A common aim is to maintain, or increase, biodiversity, while reducing the impact of present and past human interventions through the restoration of species and ecological processes. The term rewilding has been applied to diverse concepts and practices. We review the historical emergence of the term and its various overlapping meanings, aims, and approaches, and illustrate this through a description of four flagship rewilding case studies. The science of rewilding has centered on three different historical baselines: the Pleistocene, the Holocene, and novel contemporary ecosystems. The choice of baseline has differing implications for conservation in a variety of contexts. Rewilding projects involve a range of practical components-such as passive management, reintroduction, and taxon substitution-some of which have attracted criticism. They also raise a series of political, social, and ethical concerns where they conflict with more established forms of environmental management. In conclusion, we summarize the different goals, approaches, tools, and contexts that account for the variations in rewilding and identify priorities for future research and practice.

Megafauna and ecosystem function from the Pleistocene to the Anthropocene

“…In looking at even wild landscapes where megafauna are long gone, imagining such landscapes as recently teeming with elephants, sabertooths, and other giant herbivores and carnivores can yield fresh perspectives on contemporary ecosystem questions, ranging from the distribution of tropical savannas and grasslands, through the natural ranges and abundance of extant animals, to the response of high latitude systems to climate change. Whether megafaunal rewilding is appropriate, acceptable, practical, or not, such a perspective challenges our thinking about what kind of nature we seek to conserve or create (33,97,98).…”

“…In parts of the world, societal changes have facilitated more or less spontaneous megafauna comebacks: e.g., brown bear (Ursus arctos) and wolf (Canis lupus) (95,96). Additionally, active restoration of the ecological function of wild megafauna is increasingly being debated and implemented under the concept of rewilding (33,97,98). Where and when megafaunal rewilding is appropriate or practical, and with what species, are the subjects of much discussion (33,(98)(99)(100).…”

New Interest in Wild Forest Products in Europe as an Expression of Biocultural Dynamics

“…Thus, rather than interpreting wild and domesticated as two contrasting states of being, it may be preferable to consider wild and domesticated species as representing outcomes of a dynamic process of people-nature interactions, as proposed by Harris (1989, 1996). Recently, the process of re-wilding was introduced to characterize new approaches to recreate more naturalistic environments by stimulating autonomous ecological processes in degraded environments (Jorgensen 2015; Lorimer et al 2015; Van Maanen and Convery 2016). The new interest in wild forest products in Europe may therefore be conceived of as a new phase of biocultural dynamics involving the addition of the process of re-wilding to the long history of domestication.…”

“…Whereas the concept of domestication refers to the process of gradual intensification in people – nature interactions and artificialization of production systems, the concept of re-wilding refers to the de-intensification of these interactions and the reintroduction of more naturalness in ecologically degraded areas (Jorgensen 2015; Lorimer et al 2015; Van Maanen and Convery 2016). The concept emerged in the USA and Europe in response to growing concerns on the negative ecological impacts of agricultural production systems on rural landscapes.…”

“…The various approaches to re-wilding have given specific attention to the role of animal species at the higher trophic levels in regulating ecological processes. Gradually several approaches to re-wilding became recognized (Jorgensen 2015; Lorimer et al 2015; Van Maanen and Convery 2016):Re-wilding through pleistocene mega-fauna replacement or taxon replacement on islands;‘Top-down’ re-wilding through reintroduction of carnivorous key stone species operating at the top of the ecological pyramid;‘Bottom-up’ re-wilding through reintroduction of naturalistic grazing by more or less wild animals. …”