In recent years, the profile of rewilding, a conservation approach emphasising reduced human interventions in ecosystems, restored ecosystem processes and autonomous nature, has increased. This has prompted critiques of how wildness, nature, and non-human co-existence with humans, are conceptualised within rewilding. Yet so far, there has been no detailed empirical exploration of the views held by rewilding advocates on what rewilding is, and how it should be done. Here we present an analysis of the views of rewilding practitioners and advocates across Europe, using Q-methodology. We identify two distinct visions, one focusing on extensive radical transformation of rural landscapes towards wilder states, and another focused on pragmatism, embracing different forms of rewilding in different places. Divisions over pragmatism versus radical transformation have not previously been identified in studies of rewilding but have critical implications for how rewilding is enacted. These differences also map onto distinct positions in whether rewilding compliments or challenges existing conservation practice. Beyond these distinctions, we find important areas of consensus, such as seeing humans as part of nature, which challenges arguments that rewilding strives for people-free wildernesses or facsimiles of past ecosystems. Overall, our analyses suggest greater coherence within rewilding than has previously been identified.

中文翻译：

---

什么是荒野，应该怎么做，为什么？欧洲野蛮拥护者所持观点的Q方法研究

近年来，野外保护的轮廓日益突出，一种保护方法强调减少人类对生态系统的干预，恢复的生态系统过程和自主性。这引发了人们对在野外如何概念化野生性，自然和非人类与人类共存的批评。然而，到目前为止，对于野蛮的拥护者关于什么是野蛮以及应该​​如何进行野蛮的拥护者持有的观点，还没有进行详细的实证研究。在这里，我们使用Q方法对整个欧洲野外实践者和拥护者的观点进行分析。我们确定了两种截然不同的愿景，一种着眼于乡村景观向荒野国家的广泛彻底转变，另一种着眼于实用主义，在不同地方怀有不同形式的野营。实用主义与彻底变革之间的分歧以前在野蛮研究中尚未发现，但对如何实施野蛮具有至关重要的意义。这些差异也反映出不同的立场，无论是夸奖还是挑战现有的保护实践。除了这些区别之外，我们还找到了重要的共识领域，例如将人类视为自然的一部分，这挑战了野蛮为无人野外或过去生态系统的迷恋而努力的论点。总体而言，我们的分析表明，野外的连贯性比以前确定的要强。这些差异也反映出不同的立场，无论是夸奖还是挑战现有的保护实践。除了这些区别之外，我们还找到了重要的共识领域，例如将人类视为自然的一部分，这挑战了野蛮为无人野外或过去生态系统的迷恋而努力的论点。总体而言，我们的分析表明，野外的连贯性比以前确定的要强。这些差异也反映出不同的立场，无论是夸奖还是挑战现有的保护实践。除了这些区别之外，我们还找到了重要的共识领域，例如将人类视为自然的一部分，这挑战了野蛮为无人野外或过去生态系统的迷恋而努力的论点。总体而言，我们的分析表明，野外的连贯性比以前确定的要强。