The compromises of rewilding

The purpose of this thesis is to explore how rewilding has emerged as a new alternative to classic nature conservation to reconcile humans with wild nature. The study will explore what are the compromises required for rewilding in a Swedish context. It will focus on the expectations and the processes leading to the rewilding projects and how human expectations for landscapes, animals and nature have to compromise. Most of our modern landscapes being tamed and domesticated, they correspond more to an idea of beautiful, in opposition with the sublime which can designate the wilderness, which is, in Kant’s terms, untamed, wild, and sometimes ugly and terrifying. If Kant considers that the only way for humans to enjoy this sublime nature is pure disinterest, we will look at how rewilding can be a way to restore autonomy and ecological integrity to ecosystems while offering to humans an experience of the sublime nature and letting them benefit from it. This paper will look at Rewilding Lapland as a case study, it proposes to rewild a large area in Northern Sweden by supporting some keystone species like the beaver and restoring key areas of the landscape like rivers and grazing lands. The stated aim of this Rewilding Lapland is to develop a naturebased economy where entrepreneurship and economical activities are combined with nature conservation. Thus, public awareness, local communities approval and nature-based economies around rewilding will be studied as compromises between nature and people

Domestic Livestock and Rewilding: Are They Mutually Exclusive?

Human influence extends across the globe, fromthe tallestmountains to the deep bottom of the oceans. There is a growing call for nature to be protected from the negative impacts of human activity (particularly intensive agriculture); so-called “land sparing”. A relatively new approach is “rewilding”, defined as the restoration of self-sustaining and complex ecosystems, with interlinked ecological processes that promote and support one another while minimising or gradually reducing human intervention. The key theoretical basis of rewilding is to return ecosystems to a “natural” or “self-willed” state with trophic complexity, dispersal (and connectivity) and stochastic disturbance in place. However, this is constrained by context-specific factors whereby it may not be possible to restore the native species that formed part of the trophic structure of the ecosystem if they are extinct (e.g., mammoths, Mammuthus spp., aurochs, Bos primigenius); and, populations/communities of native herbivores/predators may not be able to survive or be acceptable to the public in small scale rewilding projects close to areas of high human density. Therefore, the restoration of natural trophic complexity and disturbance regimes within rewilding projects requires careful consideration if the broader conservation needs of society are to be met. In some circumstances, managers will require a more flexible deliberate approach to intervening in rewilding projects using the range of tools in their toolbox (e.g., controlled burning regimes; using domestic livestock to replicate the impacts of extinct herbivore species), even if this is only in the early stages of the rewilding process. If this approach is adopted, then larger areas can be given over to conservation, because of the potential broader benefits to society from these spaces and the engagement of farmers in practises that are closer to their traditions. We provide examples, primarily European, where domestic and semi-domestic livestock are used by managers as part of their rewilding toolbox. Here managers have looked at the broader phenotype of livestock species as to their suitability in different rewilding systems. We assess whether there are ways of using livestock in these systems for conservation, economic (e.g., branded or certified livestock products) and cultural gains

Domestic Livestock and Rewilding: Are They Mutually Exclusive?

Water is fundamental to human well-being, social development and the environment. Water development, particularly hydropower, provides an important source of renewable energy. Water development is strongly affected by poverty, but only few attempts have been made to understand the links between water development and poverty from a global water development point of view. In this work, this linkage was explored using reservoir construction, hydroenergy and water use data along with six derived indicators. We used association rule mining and classification and regression trees (CART) to identify the links. Random forests were employed to search for factors sensitive to poverty. This study shows that the reservoir density is significantly related to poverty, and reservoir densities are lower in countries with higher poverty rates. Countries with a higher use of small hydropower (SHP) systems are generally more prosperous as follows: an SHP utilization.JR-L is supported by GRAZELIFE, a LIFE Preparatory Project on request of the European Commission (LIFE18PRE/NL002). LNis supported by the German Centre for integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig, funded by the German Research Foundation (FZT 118)

Effects of large herbivores on fire regimes and wildfire mitigation

Review1. Abandonment of agricultural land is widespread in many parts of the world, leading to shrub and tree encroachment. The increase of flammable plant biomass, that is, fuel load, increases the risk and intensity of wildfires. Fuel reduction by herbivores is a promising management strategy to avoid fuel build-up and mitigate wildfires. However, their effectiveness in mitigating wildfire damage may depend on a range of factors, including herbivore type, population density and feeding patterns. 2. Here, we review the evidence on whether management with herbivores can reduce fuel load and mitigate wildfires, and if so, how to identify suitable management that can achieve fire mitigation objectives while providing other ecosystem services. We systematically reviewed studies that investigated links between herbivores, fire hazard, fire frequency and fire damage. 3. We found that, in general, herbivores reduce fuel load most effectively when they are mixed feeders, when grazing and browsing herbivores are combined and when herbivore food preferences match the local vegetation. In some cases, the combination of herbivory with other management strategies, such as mechanical clearing, is necessary to reduce wildfire damage. 4. Synthesis and Applications. We conclude that herbivores have the capacity to mitigate wildfire damage, and we provide guidance for grazing management for wildfire mitigation strategies. As areas undergoing land abandonment are particularly prone to wildfires, the maintenance or promotion of grazing by domestic or wild herbivores is a promising tool to reduce wildfire risk in a cost-effective way, while also providing other ecosystem services. Relevant land-use policies, including fire suppression policies, agricultural and forest(ry) policies could incentivise the use of herbivores for better wildfire prevention.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Biodiversity post-2020: Closing the gap between global targets and national-level implementation

National and local governments need to step up efforts to effectively implement the post-2020 global biodiversity framework of the Convention on Biological Diversity to halt and reverse worsening biodiversity trends. Drawing on recent advances in interdisciplinary biodiversity science, we propose a framework for improved implementation by national and subnational governments. First, the identification of actions and the promotion of ownership across stakeholders need to recognize the multiple values of biodiversity and account for remote responsibility. Second, cross-sectorial implementation and mainstreaming should adopt scalable and multifunctional ecosystem restoration approaches and target positive futures for nature and people. Third, assessment of progress and adaptive management can be informed by novel biodiversity monitoring and modeling approaches handling the multidimensionality of biodiversity change

Grazing for wildfire prevention, ecosystem service provision, nature conservation and landscape management

Grazing by large herbivores has the potential to provide multiple ecosystem services, depending on multiple factors. Through a range of interdisciplinary methods, including literature reviews, case studies, and semi-structured interviews, I seek to assess how grazing can contribute to sustainable landscape management, as well as how sustainable practices can be incentivised. In chapter one, I focus on the role of grazing in wildfire prevention. Through a systematic literature review, I uncover new insights into the effectiveness of large herbivores in mitigating wildfires. I find that large herbivores can reduce wildfire frequency by promoting grass-dominated landscapes and reduce fire intensity by consuming vegetation and creating landscape features that reduce fuel loads. However, the effectiveness of large herbivores depends on the type of vegetation and diet preferences of the animals, and management practices associated with livestock grazing can also influence fire ignition. In chapter two, I investigate the relationship between grazing management and ecosystem services through a literature review, focusing on synergies and trade-offs between them. I identify management practices that are beneficial to multiple ecosystem services as well as policy mechanisms that can incentivise them. In the third chapter, I use case studies to investigate the role of domestic animals in rewilding projects. I describe how domestic and semi-wild herbivores can contribute to rewilding projects and make them more inclusive for rural and indigenous communities. In the fourth chapter, I aim to identify the challenges faced by land users in performing sustainable grazing management through semi-structured interviews with 88 land users from eight case studies in Europe. I gain insights into land users' determinants of behaviour towards sustainable grazing practices using the Behaviour Change Wheel framework. Overall I suggest that grazing can be a potential solution to the challenges of the Anthropocene, but only when done in the right way. I emphasize the importance of an interdisciplinary approach in grazing research and considering socio-ecological systems. I also highlight the potential of rewilding and semi-wild grazing systems especially in areas undergoing land abandonment. The results imply a shift in meat production and consumption and potential new pathways for human-livestock relations. Finally, agricultural policies such as the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) can play a crucial role in incentivizing sustainable grazing management and should be improved to support extensive grazing and extensification.:Table of Contents i. General Introduction 6 i.i Context 7 i.i.i European grazed landscapes can provide high biodiversity and supply various ecosystem services 7 i.i.ii Challenges for European grazed systems 9 i.ii Thesis methods and outline 13 i.ii.i Literature reviews (chapters 1 & 2) 13 i.ii.ii Case studies (chapters 3 and 4) 13 i.ii.iii General approach and methodological considerations 18 i.ii.iv Research aims and questions 18 i.ii.v Thesis outline 19 i.iii Graphical abstract 21 1. Chapter One 22 1.1 Introduction 23 1.2 Literature search 25 1.3 Overall effects of herbivores on wildfire risks 26 1.3.1 Effects of herbivores on wildfire frequency 26 1.3.2 Effects of herbivores on fire intensity or severity 30 1.4 Effects of herbivores on fuel loads and fire hazard 30 1.5 Effects of vegetation characteristics on fire regimes 33 1.6 Effects of grazing-associated management on wildfires 33 1.7 Implications for management 34 1.8 Implications for policy 36 1.9 Conclusions and future challenges 37 2. Chapter Two 38 2.1 Introduction 39 2.2 Literature review: general methods 42 2.3 Results 44 2.3.1 Effects of grazing on biodiversity 44 2.3.2 Effects of grazing on climate change and its mitigation 46 2.3.3 Effects of grazing on soil quality 48 2.3.4 Effects of grazing on wildfire mitigation 49 2.3.5 Effects of grazing on cultural ecosystem services 51 2.3.6 Synergies and Trade-offs of different grazing practices and ecosystem services 52 2.3.7 Recommendations: optimizing ecosystem multifunctionality in grazed systems 55 2.4 Outlook 59 3. Chapter Three 60 3.1 Introduction 61 3.2 The Broader Theory of Rewilding and Potential Role for Livestock 64 3.2.1 Stochastic Disturbance Regimes 64 3.2.2 Trophic Complexity 65 3.2.3 Interacting Processes 66 3.3 General Case Studies 67 3.3.1 Reindeer Engineer in Swedish Lapland 67 3.3.2 Livestock Fire Brigade and Free Running Horses in the Côa Valley, Portugal 68 3.3.3 Ecotourism and Sustainable Meat at Knepp Estate, England 70 3.3.4 Oostvaardersplassen: The “Wild Experiment” 71 3.4 Conclusions 73 4. Chapter Four 77 4.1 Introduction 78 4.2 Methods 80 4.2.1 Interviews 80 4.3 Findings from interviews: Determinants of sustainable grazing decisions 81 4.3.1 Physical capability: the impact of the ‘rural exodus’ 81 4.3.2 Psychological capability: access to knowledge and understanding of administrative rules influences how land users conduct their management 82 4.3.3 Physical opportunity 83 4.3.4 Social opportunities 85 4.3.5 Motivation 85 4.4 Discussion 87 4.4.1 Intervention functions to support sustainable grazing, and associated policies 88 4.5 Conclusions and outlook 92 5. Discussion 93 5.1 Importance of the scientific, social and political context of the research 93 5.2 Societal relevance of the thesis 93 5.3 Policy relevance of grazing research 94 5.4 The value of transdisciplinary research 94 5.5 Contribution of the research 95 5.5.1 Contribution of chapter 1: large herbivores and wildfire mitigation 95 5.5.2 Contribution of chapter 2: grazing and multiple ecosystem services, trade-offs and synergies in a European context 96 5.5.3 Contribution of chapter 3: domestic livestock and rewilding 97 5.5.4 Contribution of chapter 4: drivers of decision making for sustainable grazing 98 5.5.5 Interdisciplinary approach to grazing research, grazing areas as socio-ecological systems 99 5.6 Limitations 100 5.6.1 The framework of ecosystem services 100 5.6.2 Limitations to rewilding research 101 5.6.3 The challenge of addressing different socioecological and administrative scales 101 5.6.4 Practical limitations 103 6. Outlook 104 6.1 Future research needs 104 6.2 Pathways for sustainable grazing 104 7. Conclusion 107 References 110 Summary 135 Zusammenfassung 139 Appendix 143 Appendix Chapter One 144 Appendix Chapter Two 145 Appendix Chapter Four 149 Acknowledgements 153 Author contribution statement 15

Domestic Livestock and Rewilding: Are They Mutually Exclusive?

Human influence extends across the globe, fromthe tallestmountains to the deep bottom of the oceans. There is a growing call for nature to be protected from the negative impacts of human activity (particularly intensive agriculture); so-called “land sparing”. A relatively new approach is “rewilding”, defined as the restoration of self-sustaining and complex ecosystems, with interlinked ecological processes that promote and support one another while minimising or gradually reducing human intervention. The key theoretical basis of rewilding is to return ecosystems to a “natural” or “self-willed” state with trophic complexity, dispersal (and connectivity) and stochastic disturbance in place. However, this is constrained by context-specific factors whereby it may not be possible to restore the native species that formed part of the trophic structure of the ecosystem if they are extinct (e.g., mammoths, Mammuthus spp., aurochs, Bos primigenius); and, populations/communities of native herbivores/predators may not be able to survive or be acceptable to the public in small scale rewilding projects close to areas of high human density. Therefore, the restoration of natural trophic complexity and disturbance regimes within rewilding projects requires careful consideration if the broader conservation needs of society are to be met. In some circumstances, managers will require a more flexible deliberate approach to intervening in rewilding projects using the range of tools in their toolbox (e.g., controlled burning regimes; using domestic livestock to replicate the impacts of extinct herbivore species), even if this is only in the early stages of the rewilding process. If this approach is adopted, then larger areas can be given over to conservation, because of the potential broader benefits to society from these spaces and the engagement of farmers in practises that are closer to their traditions. We provide examples, primarily European, where domestic and semi-domestic livestock are used by managers as part of their rewilding toolbox. Here managers have looked at the broader phenotype of livestock species as to their suitability in different rewilding systems. We assess whether there are ways of using livestock in these systems for conservation, economic (e.g., branded or certified livestock products) and cultural gains

Domestic Livestock and Rewilding: Are They Mutually Exclusive?

Human influence extends across the globe, fromthe tallestmountains to the deep bottom of the oceans. There is a growing call for nature to be protected from the negative impacts of human activity (particularly intensive agriculture); so-called “land sparing”. A relatively new approach is “rewilding”, defined as the restoration of self-sustaining and complex ecosystems, with interlinked ecological processes that promote and support one another while minimising or gradually reducing human intervention. The key theoretical basis of rewilding is to return ecosystems to a “natural” or “self-willed” state with trophic complexity, dispersal (and connectivity) and stochastic disturbance in place. However, this is constrained by context-specific factors whereby it may not be possible to restore the native species that formed part of the trophic structure of the ecosystem if they are extinct (e.g., mammoths, Mammuthus spp., aurochs, Bos primigenius); and, populations/communities of native herbivores/predators may not be able to survive or be acceptable to the public in small scale rewilding projects close to areas of high human density. Therefore, the restoration of natural trophic complexity and disturbance regimes within rewilding projects requires careful consideration if the broader conservation needs of society are to be met. In some circumstances, managers will require a more flexible deliberate approach to intervening in rewilding projects using the range of tools in their toolbox (e.g., controlled burning regimes; using domestic livestock to replicate the impacts of extinct herbivore species), even if this is only in the early stages of the rewilding process. If this approach is adopted, then larger areas can be given over to conservation, because of the potential broader benefits to society from these spaces and the engagement of farmers in practises that are closer to their traditions. We provide examples, primarily European, where domestic and semi-domestic livestock are used by managers as part of their rewilding toolbox. Here managers have looked at the broader phenotype of livestock species as to their suitability in different rewilding systems. We assess whether there are ways of using livestock in these systems for conservation, economic (e.g., branded or certified livestock products) and cultural gains

Domestic livestock and rewilding: Are they mutually exclusive?

Human influence extends across the globe, from the tallest mountains to the deep bottom of the oceans. There is a growing call for nature to be protected from the negative impacts of human activity (particularly intensive agriculture); so-called “land sparing”. A relatively new approach is “rewilding”, defined as the restoration of self-sustaining and complex ecosystems, with interlinked ecological processes that promote and support one another while minimising or gradually reducing human intervention. The key theoretical basis of rewilding is to return ecosystems to a “natural” or “self-willed” state with trophic complexity, dispersal (and connectivity) and stochastic disturbance in place. However, this is constrained by context-specific factors whereby it may not be possible to restore the native species that formed part of the trophic structure of the ecosystem if they are extinct (e.g., mammoths, Mammuthus spp., aurochs, Bos primigenius); and, populations/communities of native herbivores/predators may not be able to survive or be acceptable to the public in small scale rewilding projects close to areas of high human density. Therefore, the restoration of natural trophic complexity and disturbance regimes within rewilding projects requires careful consideration if the broader conservation needs of society are to be met. In some circumstances, managers will require a more flexible deliberate approach to intervening in rewilding projects using the range of tools in their toolbox (e.g., controlled burning regimes; using domestic livestock to replicate the impacts of extinct herbivore species), even if this is only in the early stages of the rewilding process. If this approach is adopted, then larger areas can be given over to conservation, because of the potential broader benefits to society from these spaces and the engagement of farmers in practises that are closer to their traditions. We provide examples, primarily European, where domestic and semi-domestic livestock are used by managers as part of their rewilding toolbox. Here managers have looked at the broader phenotype of livestock species as to their suitability in different rewilding systems. We assess whether there are ways of using livestock in these systems for conservation, economic (e.g., branded or certified livestock products) and cultural gains

Effects of large herbivores on fire regimes and wildfire mitigation

1. Abandonment of agricultural land is widespread in many parts of the world, leading to shrub and tree encroachment. The increase of flammable plant biomass, i.e. fuel load, increases the risk and intensity of wildfires. Fuel reduction by herbivores is a promising management strategy to avoid fuel build-up and mitigate wildfires. However, their effectiveness in mitigating wildfire damage may depend on a range of factors, including herbivore type, population density and feeding patterns. 2. Here we review the evidence on whether management with herbivores can reduce fuel load and mitigate wildfires, and if so, how to identify suitable management that can achieve fire mitigation objectives while providing other ecosystem services. We systematically reviewed studies that investigated links between herbivores, fire hazard, fire frequency and fire damage. 3. We found that in general, herbivores reduce fuel load most effectively when they are mixed-feeders, when grazing and browsing herbivores are combined, and when herbivore food preferences match the local vegetation. In some cases, the combination of herbivory with other management strategies, such as mechanical clearing, is necessary to reduce wildfire damage. 4. We conclude that herbivores have the capacity to mitigate wildfire damage, and we provide guidance for grazing management for wildfire mitigation strategies. As areas undergoing land abandonment are particularly prone to wildfires, the maintenance or promotion of grazing by domestic or wild herbivores is a promising tool to reduce wildfire risk in a cost-effective way, while also providing other ecosystem services. Relevant land-use policies, including fire-suppression policies, agricultural and forest(ry) policies could incentivise the use of herbivores for better wildfire prevention