Pragmatic or problematic? The risks and rewards of rewilding with non‐native species

Ecological replacement (ER) with non-native species is a controversial yet potentially powerful tool for rewilding through the restoration of lost ecosystem function and complexity. However, its appropriate application and associated risks remain contested.

We combined a scoping literature review with 24 expert interviews to assess the perceived risks and rewards of this approach. 21 papers covered 13 introductions across 11 locations.

Out of 13 introductions, 11 reported increased ecosystem function and/or complexity, yet interviewees also warned of unintended consequences including the disruption of native communities and animal welfare concerns. Crucially, perceptions of risk and reward varied strongly with views of rewilding, values placed on nativeness and tolerances to change and uncertainty shaped by ecological and sociocultural contexts.

Solution. We propose an organising framework to bring the potential risks and rewards of ER into a single picture, helping conservationists reflect on such perceptions. This aims to foster more pluralistic dialogue to support inclusive, context-sensitive rewilding strategies that clarify not just where and when ER with non-native species is appropriate, but also for whom and what.