Forests are vital for climate regulation and biodiversity, yet they face unprecedented threats from human activities and climate change. Understanding what drives tree species diversity is essential for conservation. While factors like temperature, rainfall, and soil fertility have been widely studied, the role of mutualistic interactions, particularly mycorrhizal symbioses, remains underexplored. A recent paper by Feng Jiang et al. (with input from WILDCARD’s partner Wageningen University & Research), published in Science Advances (2025) delves more deep into the topic.
Mycorrhizal fungi form partnerships with trees, exchanging nutrients for carbon and offering protection against pathogens. Two major types dominate: ectomycorrhizal (EcM) and arbuscular mycorrhizal (AM) fungi. EcM fungi tend to provide stronger protection and alleviate negative plant-soil feedbacks more effectively than AM fungi. This has led to the EcM dominance hypothesis, which predicts that forests dominated by EcM trees will have lower species richness. Conversely, the mycorrhizal mixture hypothesis suggests that diversity peaks when both EcM and AM trees coexist, due to complementary nutrient acquisition strategies. A third view, the integrated hypothesis, proposes that both mechanisms operate together, with diversity peaking in mixed communities but declining in EcM-dominated forests.
Until now, these hypotheses lacked global-scale testing. Jiang and colleagues addressed this gap by analyzing over 400,000 forest plots worldwide, examining how EcM tree proportion relates to species richness across latitude and aridity gradients.
Key Conclusions
The study revealed that the relationship between EcM tree proportion and species richness varies with environmental conditions:
Low latitudes & moist conditions: A strong negative relationship supports the EcM dominance hypothesis. Here, EcM fungi reduce negative plant-soil feedbacks, favoring conspecific survival and lowering overall diversity.
High latitudes & arid conditions: A unimodal relationship supports the mycorrhizal mixture hypothesis. Stressful environments weaken negative biotic interactions, making niche partitioning between EcM and AM trees more important for coexistence.
Intermediate conditions: A negatively unimodal pattern aligns with the integrated hypothesis, suggesting both mechanisms operate simultaneously.
Overall, the study concludes that mycorrhizal symbioses are a critical, yet overlooked, driver of global forest diversity, interacting with climate and soil factors. This insight expands our understanding of biodiversity maintenance from an aboveground perspective to include belowground mutualisms.
In the quiet forests of Northeastern Romania, near the town of Suceava, a remarkable rewilding story is unfolding.
This short film takes us into the heart of Vânători Neamț Nature Park, where the European bison, once extinct in the wild, is once again roaming free. The journey began in the 1970s, when the first bison were brought to Romania by the National Forest Administration. But it wasn’t until 2003, with support from a World Bank project, that the dream of rewilding took real shape, with infrastructure built and the first animals arriving in the park.
By 2012, the first five bison were released into the wild. Since then, more have followed, year after year, slowly rebuilding a population that had vanished. But this isn’t just about restoring a species. It’s about restoring balance between open fields and forest, between people and nature.
The European bison is more than a keystone species. It’s a national symbol, deeply woven into Romanian and Moldavian heritage. Its presence now supports local economies, from eco-tourism to traditional crafts, and fulfills important EU conservation goals.
And while the term “rewilding” may be new to some, the idea isn’t. As Laura Bouriaud from the Stefan cel Mare University of Suceava says, “we are living with nature. Even if we didn’t put this name on it, rewilding is part of our life.”
The WILDCARD partner Silva Tarouca Research Institute for Landscape (VUKOZ) organizes a workshop on soil sampling with the objective of familiarizing our WP2 and WP3 members, along with external service providers, with the soil survey protocol of WILDCARD.
The workshop will take place on April 9 and 10, 2025, at the Department of Forest Ecology of VUK, Czechia.
Don’t miss this opportunity to test the protocol in the field.
For rewilding to occur, a combination of conditions must be met. Various factors may come into play, from agricultural abandonment to new forest set-asides and policy decisions on nature protection. But all things considered, which regions of Europe are most likely to experience significant rewilding?
This is one of the central questions WILDCARD researchers set out to answer, particularly through the work of our project partners at VU Amsterdam. While a robust conclusion requires extensive investigation and will only be available at the end of the project, their preliminary findings are already shedding light on potential rewilding hotspots. These insights, though early, help satisfy our curiosity and guide the progress of our other research streams while we wait for more precise answers!
Their approach is to analyse land cover in Europe through two lenses or modalities: rewilding through natural forest expansion, capturing agricultural areas that are likely to undergo rewilding following abandonment, and through proforestation, which occurs once forest management ceases, allowing forests to regenerate naturally. Both past and projected abandonment were considered. So, what do the results tell us?
Agricultural abandonment hotspots
For agricultural abandonment, Southern andEastern Europe emerged as the regions with the most extensive potential hotspots in the future. Considering both partial and full agricultural abandonment, predictions point that the Iberian Peninsula (Spain and Portugal), Romania (central and southern), Bulgaria, Croatia, Serbia, and the Alps (northern Italy, Switzerland, and Austria) will emerge as hotspots for this process, with large agricultural areas projected to transition into natural ecosystems by 2050.
Additional notable regions include parts of Western Europe, particularly central and southern France and central areas of the United Kingdom. Most abandoned territories in the Alps and Eastern Europe are expected to experience full abandonment, leading to the establishment of new unmanaged or low-intensity forests. In contrast, most abandoned areas in Western Europe and the Iberian Peninsula are projected to undergo partial abandonment, resulting in mosaic-shaped ecosystems rather than forests. In Eastern European countries, partial agricultural abandonment is also widespread, especially in Romania and, to a lesser extent, Albania.
Proforestation/ forest set-asides
In contrast, for proforestation, the most prominent and constant hotspots appear to be located in Northern Europe, with a focus on northern Finland and fragmented locations along Norway and northern Sweden.
In Eastern Europe, the highest frequencies of proforestation were observed in Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Montenegro. Western, Central, and most of Southern Europe do not exhibit significant proforestation according to our preliminary results.
Underlying scenarios and methodology
Our preliminary findings are grounded in analyses of past data as well as projected land abandonment. The historical data analysis uses satellite data on land cover, coupled with existing maps and databases from former projects and initiatives. Future projections used models aligned with IPBES’ Nature Futures Framework, which outlines three scenarios of land use between 2020 and 2050 (“Nature for Nature”, “Nature for Society”, and “Nature as Culture”).
The areas most likely to be rewilded are those that consistently appear across all three scenarios.
In the next three years of WILDCARD, these results will be refined by updating the models and accounting for specific scenarios that represent different options of forest management strategies and implementation of biodiversity and carbon targets. These are aimed at improving our estimates of the potential for rewilding as well as depicting what locations could benefit from rewilding under alternative policy options.
For more information, read our report “Preliminary scenarios of potentially available land for rewilding due to agricultural abandonment and set-aside forests” by clicking the button below.
Learn how to collect soil data with our new video guide!
While many studies have explored how the presence of vegetation and animals change during rewilding, the hidden world of soil has received far less attention. Yet, soils represent the largest terrestrial carbon pool, and accommodate more than half of the Earth’s biodiversity. There’s still a lot we don’t know about how carbon stocks and soil biodiversity respond when nature is left to recover on its own. This is partly because soil is incredibly complex, expensive to study, and varies greatly from place to place.
The WILDCARD project is working to close this gap. By collecting data on soil carbon and biotic communities, the latter using advanced environmental DNA (eDNA) techniques, we aim to better understand how soils respond to rewilding. This will help us learn more about the role of soil in storing carbon and supporting biodiversity.
Instructional videos
To support the WILDCARD consortium and other organisations involved in the project, our partner Research Institute for Nature and Forest (INBO) created a series of videos that explain the steps for collecting soil samples. These videos complement the project’s written soil sampling guide, developed by INBO and the Silva Tarouca Research Institute (VUKOZ), making it easier to follow the process in the field. The information gathered will help us track changes in soil carbon and biodiversity as rewilding progresses in forests where management was halted and on abandoned farmland. The videos and soil sampling protocol can aid other projects and researchers in doing similar investigations, thus generating consistent and harmonised data across different initiatives.
Discover our video guide:
Video #1 Sampling the forest floor
This video shows how to collect samples from the forest floor using a frame with a known surface area. It covers the steps of:
Identifying the fresh litter layer (OL) and fragmented and partly decomposed forest floor layer (OFH) and telling them apart from the mineral soil underneath.
Measuring the thickness of each layer.
Preparing samples to study their mass, chemical composition, and biodiversity using eDNA.
Video #2 Taking undisturbed soil samples
This video explains how to collect undisturbed soil samples from set depths (0–100 cm) using metal rings with a known volume. These samples are used to measure soil bulk density and the amount of stones (coarse material).
Video #3 Mixing composite samples and taking subsamples
This video demonstrates how to mix soil from different spots within the plot, to create a representative sample for each layer. It also shows the steps to:
Taking smaller samples for chemical and eDNA tests.
Properly bagging, labeling, and recording the samples.
Storing eDNA samples temporarily in a car-based freezer.
Video #4 Taking disturbed soil samples
Learn how to use a soil auger to collect disturbed soil samples from set depths (0–100 cm). These samples are tested for chemical properties over the entire depth range and for biodiversity, focusing on the 0–10 cm layer.
Video #5 Description and classification of terrestrial humus forms
This video explains how to classify the forest floor into different humus forms using a small soil pit. It highlights key features of the forest floor layers and the A horizon to help identify the humus form.
Where will we collect soil data?
The data collected using our soil sampling protocol will be used to study how rewilding affects carbon storage and biodiversity in different environments on the European continent, with a special focus on so-called High-Intensity Sites (HIS). These are carefully chosen locations that represent different ecological and climatic conditions, past land uses, classes of time since abandonment, and where additional data will be collected by WILDCARD.
At HIS-aboveground, our researchers use advanced tools like terrestrial laser scanning (TLS) and unoccupied aerial laser scanning (ULS) to map forest structures and explore their links to biodiversity. At HIS-belowground, the focus is on soil—sampling for chemical and physical properties and analysing eDNA from the mineral soil and forest floor in approximately 300 locations. By targeting these High-Intensity Sites, the project ensures comprehensive coverage and gathers detailed data to understand how ecosystems recover and thrive when left to rewild. This knowledge will help shape strategies for healthier landscapes and better climate solutions.
Banner photo credit: Research Institute for Nature and Forest (INBO)
The passing of the EU Nature Restoration Regulation was a landmark decision for nature. This first-of-its-kind legislation aims to restore significant areas of degraded terrestrial and marine ecosystems across the EU member states. It implies an upscaling of ecological restoration far beyond current practice, which will require novel perspectives and solutions that are environmentally effective, economically feasible, and socially acceptable.
The event will bring together leading European experts from the research and policy sectors to consider where and when nature could help create ecosystems that support biodiversity, store carbon and enhance livelihoods which will enable both nature and people to better cope with the growing impacts of modern climate change.
Join us!
Date: 19 March 2025 Venue: Hendrik Consciencegebouw, Bd Roi Albert II 15, Brussels, Belgium Format: This is an in-person event
Interested in attending?
We anticipate high demand for this event.
Indicate your interest to be the first to receive updates and information about registration and details of the event, straight to your inbox!
By Ajdin Starčević, Wageningen University and Research
On a bright May morning, I boarded the train to Schiphol Airport with my Wageningen University colleagues, researcher Silke Jacobs and European Forest Resources professor Gert-Jan Nabuurs, brimming with excitement for a journey that would take us far from bustling cities and deep into one of Europe’s most surprising natural treasures. Our destination: Bosnia and Herzegovina, a country not often recognised for its immense ecological wealth. But its hidden treasure isn’t golden—it’s a vibrant green, in the form of vast, untouched forests, some of the last of their kind on the continent.
This expedition was inspired several months earlier during the kick-off meeting of WILDCARD, held in the scenic Italian village of Valbruna, nestled at the foothills of the Julian Alps. There, we met Renzo Motta, a seasoned ecology professor at the University of Turin who has been conducting environmental studies in Bosnia for over two decades. Discovering that I had roots in the region, Renzo enthusiastically invited us to join his annual spring field trip together with WILDCARD coordinator Giorgio Alberti and his colleagues from the University of Udine. This was a chance to reconnect with the Forestry Faculty at the University of Sarajevo and explore these ancient forests firsthand. As part of WILDCARD, our goal was to identify reference sites across Europe to study the effects of rewilding and proforestation—an approach focused on letting forests naturally regenerate without human intervention.
We arrived in Bosnia to a warm welcome from our hosts from the Faculty of Forestry of the University of Sarajevo: Cemal, Besim, Sead and Mehmed, who invited us to an evening barbecue. We gathered around as they briefed us on the plan for the days ahead, hinting that each day would reveal new wonders. We had no idea just how extraordinary those wonders would be.
Day 1: The Untouched Forests of Konjuh
Our first day began with an excursion to the Konjuh protected landscape, located in the heart of Bosnia and Herzegovina. As we drove through the rolling hills of Bijambare, lush and vibrant under the spring sun, a sense of anticipation grew.
When we arrived, our guides Dino and Mehmed led us deep into a forest area that had remained unlogged for centuries. Walking through it felt surreal, like stepping into a fairytale. Towering beech trees stretched upwards, their thick trunks forming a canopy that cast dappled shadows on a forest floor carpeted with wild garlic (Allium ursinum). It was as though the forest was suspended in time, untouched by human hands. The sight of these giant trees stretching down steep slopes toward a gentle creek was breathtaking. And yet, our hosts assured us that even more astonishing landscapes awaited us in the coming days.
Landscape of Bosnia with a medieval tombstone called stećak
Walking through the protected landscape Konjuh
Day 2: Sarajevo’s Hidden Wilderness
On our second day, we travelled closer to Sarajevo, the country’s vibrant capital. Just an hour’s drive from the urban centre lay a pristine beech, fir, and spruce forest—a natural sanctuary almost unimaginable in its proximity to the city. The forest floor was full of deadwood, some massive fallen trees stretching over 50 meters, adding layers of texture and life to the scene. Thanks to the steep terrain and the abundance of forested land nearby, this area had largely escaped human interference. Even during the post-war period, when there was pressure to exploit these resources, the Forestry Faculty in Sarajevo successfully advocated for its preservation. Their efforts allowed us to explore this magnificent site, which ultimately became one of the chosen reference sites for the WILDCARD project.
Silke Jacobs next to a huge fir tree in the primeval forest of Ravna Vala
Day 3: Sutjeska’s Primeval Wilderness
Our third day took us to Sutjeska National Park, home to one of Europe’s rarest gems—a primeval forest of over 1,400 hectares, untouched and alive with thriving biodiversity. Hiking through this ancient landscape was nothing short of extraordinary. At one point, our guide paused and pointed out a remarkable detail—just hours earlier, a bear had passed through, leaving muddy paw prints in the trail we were now following. Stumbling across these impressions in the soft earth was a humbling reminder of the wilderness that still thrives here.
Overlooking the primeval forest of Perućica with Bosnia’s highest mountain, Maglić, in the background
With our guide, we navigated the forest’s winding paths and steep slopes, descending 350 meters to encounter one of Bosnia’s natural wonders: a majestic 70-meter waterfall cascading into crystal-clear waters.
As we trekked down, the forest transformed before our eyes. The beech-fir-spruce mix gave way to cooler, fir-dominated patches, while open areas revealed beds of wild garlic, punctuated by majestic maple trees. Every turn of the trail revealed another layer of this rich ecosystem. Standing amidst such raw beauty was a proud moment for me, a reminder of the remarkable natural heritage Bosnia still holds.
Gert-Jan Nabuurs and our guide in front of the Perućica waterfall
Day 4: The Rocky Slopes of Prenj
On our final day, we ventured up the rugged Prenj Mountain to experience Bosnia from a bird’s-eye perspective. This region in Herzegovina, shaped by the Mediterranean climate, presented a contrasting landscape, with hardy Bosnian pines (Pinus heldreichii) clinging to the rocky slopes. These trees, native to the Balkans, are my personal favourites—not only because they’re endemic (native) to this area but because they symbolise the resilience of the Bosnian people, standing tall and enduring challenging conditions.
Slopes of the Pernj mountain with Pinus heldreichii
As I stood on those slopes, overlooking the diverse landscapes below, I couldn’t help but feel that Bosnia and Herzegovina, like many of its Western Balkan neighbours, offers a treasure trove of research opportunities for environmental studies. Here, in a region rich in history and natural beauty, the forests stand untouched and untamed, offering glimpses into a Europe that once was—a landscape that is becoming all too rare on this continent.
Bosnia’s forests are not only a haven of biodiversity. They are a testament to nature’s resilience, a place of refuge, and an invaluable reference for understanding how ecosystems function without human interference. As we wrapped up our journey, I felt incredibly fortunate to have witnessed these landscapes and more committed than ever to supporting the conservation efforts that will ensure they remain preserved for future generations to study and appreciate.
—
Banner photo on top: The Wageningen expedition crew (Gert-Jan Nabuurs, Ajdin Starčević, Silke Jacobs)
In Europe’s rural landscape, the sight of abandoned agricultural fields is increasingly common. In some cases, the abandonment of less fertile or less accessible cultivation sites is caused by mechanisation and intensification of agriculture. In others, it is rural population exodus that leads to a decline in land management. Such transformations of the agricultural environment create a unique opportunity to study vegetation succession: the process through which the species and habitats in formerly cultivated fields change over time.
Studying vegetation succession is relevant for both environmental conservation and ecological restoration initiatives, as it provides researchers with important information such as species richness, the rate of succession, and what kinds of habitat tend to become established through natural processes. But research in the field does not come without challenges. One of them is how to observe long-term vegetation changes in a consistent and comparable manner. Another is how to cover a wide range of environmental conditions.
To better understand the strengths and weaknesses of different observation methods, WILDCARD researchers from the University of South Bohemia conducted a study gathering data from abandoned fields of the Bohemian Karst Protected Landscape Area, in the Czech Republic, since 1975. The research paper, recently published in the Journal of Vegetation Science, represents the first study of vegetation change in old fields spanning multiple decades that combines two frequently used survey methods. It compares fields in various successional stages at the same point in time (chronosequence), which results in faster acquisition of results but has limits in predicting restoration processes in disturbed sites, and the use of semi-permanent plots, which requires greater effort as researchers resurvey comparable areas at different points in time.
Our researchers found that a chronosequence approach can reliably reveal general successional patterns comparable to those obtained from semi-permanent plots. The combined method showed that both approaches studied in detail show similar succession patterns, regardless of the sampling methods used. However, to avoid pitfalls in measurement and sampling methods, the authors suggest combining different approaches to generate more reliable results. Their analysis of vegetation succession has also shown that, in fields with a moderate supply of moisture (mesic areas) a woodland landscape with the presence of trees and shrubs emerged within 25-30 years. Dry fields, conversely, continued to be dominated by perennial grasses, accompanied by scattered trees and shrubs.
Řehounková K., Tichý L. & Prach K. 2024. Succession in abandoned fields: Chronosequence data verified by monitoring of semi-permanent plots. Journal of Vegetation Science 35: e13303. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jvs.13303
On Monday, 17 June, months of deliberations culminated in the adoption of the new EU Nature Restoration Law by the Council of the European Union. The first-of-its-kind regulation aims to put measures in place to restore at least 20% of the EU’s land and sea areas by 2030, and all ecosystems in need of restoration by 2050.
What role will rewilding play in the implementation of the new legislation? We posed this and other questions to Gert-Jan Nabuurs, project partner in WILDCARD and Professor of European Forest Resources at Wageningen University and Research. Check out his answers below!
What is your first reaction to the approval of the legislation?
It is extremely good news that the law has passed, even though the text is much weaker than the original, presented two years ago. The first version said 30% of the degraded habitats types shall be in good condition by 2030, while the approved text says countries shall start measures to improve the state of these habitats. So we went from a target to an intention to execute, which is a big difference. But it is still very important that this intention is written down formally as a law.
What is the potential importance of rewilding for the legislation as a nature restoration strategy?
The rewilding of abandoned lands and proforestation are important strategies in achieving the law, which contains an article with clear assessment criteria for forest restoration (Article 12), such as standing and lying deadwood, share of forests with uneven-aged structure, forest connectivity, carbon stock, among others. From now on, EU Member Countries will be tasked with finding areas whose conditions they can improve and restore, with the responsibility of locating their own funding and resources for these activities. Rewilding can gain relevance as a restoration approach because its implementation costs are relatively low compared to other approaches.
What will be some of the law’s main implementation challenges?
Member States that voted against the law will not be keen to start very quickly, and there is no penalty if they don’t achieve targets which have become a bit more vague. Additionally, we still lack knowledge on how to monitor certain indicators that need to be assessed to determine if restoration was successful, and to do it cost-efficiently.
What knowledge will be provided by WILDCARD to support the law’s implementation?
The project will provide assessments on how biodiversity responds to rewilding measures, such as which species and functional groups most benefit from it. Carbon sequestration and socioeconomic aspects will also be assessed, helping to devise recommendations on future rewilding hotspots that are ecologically important and socially acceptable.
By Davide Pettenella and Mauro Masiero (University of Padova, Italy)
In recent times, the tip of a large iceberg called rewilding has been spotted in the vast ocean of nature management and ecological restoration. Profound global and local changes have shaken this iceberg from its glacial platform, sparking ample interest in rewilding approaches. Although most attention is directed to the iceberg’s visible tip, rewilding conceals deeper complexities below the surface. Unveiling hidden depths would help a better understanding of rewilding as an emerging, wicked topic.
What are different pathways to rewilding and how do these approaches build on various ideas of human-nature relationships? We will embark on a journey to navigate these depths onboard a “socioeconomic and policy” submarine. Join our crew to gain a perspective different from – or, at least, complementary to – more ordinary periscopes.
Italy as a case study
We will explore just a part of such a vast ocean, as, for simplicity and concreteness, we will refer to Italy as a case study. Though building on a specific example and acknowledging it does not allow us to grasp the full complexity of rewilding, we will try to draw some general considerations and conclusions.
Why Italy?
With the highest biodiversity rates in Europe, vast mountainous ranges, and extensive forest coverage, Italy presents an intriguing landscape for rewilding efforts. Approximately two-thirds of the country consist of marginal areas, which are predominantly home to national forests. Moreover, Italy boasts a significant percentage of protected areas, encompassing about one-fourth of its territory. Finally, nearly half of the population resides in urbanized areas, occupying only a fraction of the national landmass. All these factors play a crucial role in shaping rewilding dynamics and trends across the country.
The Val Grande National Park, one of the many mountainous protected areas covered by lush deciduous forests in Italy. Credit: Priscila Jordão
Three pathways to rewilding
Within the targeted context three main pathways to rewilding emerge: (i) passive rewilding, (ii) rewilding as a green marketing strategy and (iii) active rewilding.
Passive rewilding can be described as rewilding unintentionally deriving from the abandonment of managed natural areas. A good example is provided by the natural reforestation of pastures and farmlands in Italian mountainous areas, which has been the main driver behind the doubling of the national forest cover in the last 70 years. Today forests cover about 37% of the country and since 2021 semi-natural areas have exceeded intensively and semi-intensively farmed lands at the national scale. This process, however, has not been envisioned by a long-term strategy, nor planned or supported through actions and investments. It is also poorly perceived by society at large. Furthermore, it does not come without risks as it might result in the spread of invasive alien species and increasing exposure to hazards associated with climate change, such as wildfires, windstorms, pest attacks etc. It might also lead to social issues, such as in the case of the spread of ticks and tick-borne diseases in the Dolomites, as well as human-wildlife conflicts (e.g. involving bears, wolves, wild boars etc.).
Rewilding as a green marketing strategy links to the emergence of a specific market segment consisting of the so-called Lifestyle Of Health and Sustainability (LOHAS) consumers that are very sensitive to multiple sustainability aspects rather than price, and show high brand fidelity. Their purchase behaviour is driven by values like “greening”, local products, fairness etc. and they are very much attracted by wild products such as wild meat, herbs, sap water, etc. It is not by chance, therefore, that many products bear names and brands linking to their wild and natural origins, such as for example “wild” (e.g. wild asparagus, wild mint, etc.), “mountain” (e.g. mountain milk and cheese, such as mountain parmesan) or “forest”. A variety of standards, certification systems and labels have been created to ensure these products meet a range of environmental, quality, health, and socioeconomic requirements. Examples include (among others) forest certification standards like those set by the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) and even specific standards for wild products, such as FairWild.
Finally, active rewilding refers to actions taken to restore and conserve natural resources consistently with several policy initiatives aiming to mitigate climate change effects and protect biodiversity, such as the Kumming-Montreal Biodiversity Framework and policies within the EU Green Deal (e.g. the EU Biodiversity strategy for 2030, EU Nature Restoration Law, etc.). Within this framework, a strong emphasis has been given to nature-based solutions (NBS), defined by the European Commission (2015) as “solutions that are inspired and supported by nature, which are cost-effective, simultaneously provide environmental, social and economic benefits and help build resilience.” The NBS concept builds on the ecosystem approach to incorporate different forms of green interventions. Possible NBS-related actions and strategies might include active rewilding by recovering natural processes that would have occurred without human intervention (e.g., setting and maintaining strictly protected areas), proforestation, i.e. stopping forest management practices to leave forests to natural evolution dynamics (e.g., old coppice stands converted into high forests), and active and purposive land restoration to recover human-degraded areas, for example with reference to Natura 2000 sites (e.g., species enrichment, ecological connections, wetland building etc.).
Framing values behind rewilding policies
In a recent review, Himes et al. (2024) framed nature values from existing research into three main blocks: instrumental, intrinsic and relational. These blocks combine with non-mutually exclusive life frames introduced by the IPBES in 2022 to describe people-nature relationships. The “Living from nature” frame builds on the idea of nature as contributing to human needs and wants: this anthropocentric life frame mainly refers to instrumental values and links well to provisioning and regulating ecosystem services. For example, it might refer to the expected contributions of forests and natural areas in offsetting carbon emissions towards carbon neutrality. This frame mainly links to rewilding as a green marketing strategy.
The categories of intrinsic, instrumental, and relational values by Himes et al. (2024)
The “Living in nature” frame focuses on nature as a place with which people develop physical and symbolic relationships. This strongly links to relational values and cultural ecosystem services as well as to the social dimension of biodiversity conservation in terms of recognizing and respecting the worldviews, values and traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples and local communities.
The third frame, “Living with nature”, implicitly implies intrinsic values i.e., the right of each species to exist and live for their own sake and regardless of any instrumental value and utility. Such a frame reflects ongoing debates and initiatives on nature rights, and it might be associated with passive rewilding.
Finally, the “Living as nature” frame sees nature as a physical, mental and spiritual constituent of self, thus rejecting the people-nature dichotomy and, rather, seeing humans and nature as part of a broader community. This last frame, as well as the second one, seems to be more connected to the idea of active rewilding.
Concluding remarks
Like most wicked problems, rewilding is a complex and not univocal topic – so are possible approaches to it. Passive rewilding may look like an easy and low-cost option, but it may carry direct and indirect risks as well as hidden costs. On the other hand, active rewilding demands solid scientific foundations confirming positive environmental spillovers, while at the same time considering possible socioeconomic trade-offs.
Wicked problems cannot be addressed via simplistic approaches and one-size-fits-all solutions. Given the deeper complexities beneath the surface, we should keep exploring and observing from different angles. Navigating these depths requires acknowledging the intricate dynamics and embracing diverse approaches, considering multifaceted, complementary, and harmonised solutions towards rewilding.
