OOS 40-1 - The Rewilding Continuum: Making the Most out of Every Ecosystem

Although the prospect of rewilding seems to bring universal hope to alleviate some of the most pressing environmental issues of our time, such as the escalating biodiversity and climate crises, seemingly disparate definitions, methods, and objectives have been preventing the concept to be more widely adopted. Supported by the ‘pioneers’ that coined the name and molded the original concept - and most ecologists and conservation biologists - there is a more restorative approach, including all forms of trophic rewilding. On the other hand, a growing number of researchers, and urban and agroecological practitioners, are eager to develop novel biodiversity-oriented solutions for pressing human-habitat problems that cannot be solved with classic restoration approaches.
To embrace these visions, we propose a rewilding continuum that can accommodate different environments and perceptions, if rewilding can be seen as a place-based ‘boundary concept’ that should be flexible to adapt to local characteristics, yet robust enough to maintain a common identity across sites. Because rewilding science is essentially multidisciplinary, various approaches and views have prompted different definitions and understandings of its concept (restoration vs. reorganization), methods (historical fidelity vs. novel ecosystems) and dimensions (human vs. non-human). Seen through the lenses of the rewilding continuum, these apparently contradictory approaches can be connected and complementary. Some pillars of classic rewilding theory, namely, restoring wilderness, using historic baselines, and promoting “cores, corridors and megafauna” cannot be dismissed if we intend to build a common vision. Opponents to these concepts can be pacified by making the requirements to use them more flexible, as well as the recognition of their freedom to create new biotic arrangements.
Although the time-tested ecological communities and interactions that co-evolved for millions of years seem to provide the most appropriate recipes for trophic rewilding, technology and human ingenuity may find novel pathways to enhance urban habitats and specific services. Provided that, ultimately, these are for the benefit of all beings, and for improving, instead of exhausting, the biosphere’s capacity to sustain life. We argue that beyond multidisciplinarity, rewilding scientists will need to practice crossdisciplinarity – viewing one discipline from the perspective of the other – to be able to accept and build a broadly accepted vision for rewilding that can go beyond sustainable development and lay the foundations for net-positive, regenerative development.