Rewilding and farmland: conservation imperative or elite environmentalism?
Conservation charities are buying agricultural land for rewilding projects across the UK. Supporters see a biodiversity emergency demanding bold action. Critics see rural communities displaced by wealthy organisations pursuing a vision of nature that excludes the people who live in it.
The debate in brief
Conservation charities and private landowners are acquiring agricultural land across the UK to pursue rewilding -- the large-scale restoration of natural processes, allowing ecosystems to recover with minimal human intervention. The RSPB, Wildlife Trusts, National Trust, Rewilding Britain, and private estates such as Knepp in West Sussex have become prominent advocates and practitioners. England alone has lost 97% of its wildflower meadows since the 1930s, and the State of Nature reports have documented severe, ongoing declines in species abundance. The environmental case is urgent. But rewilding is also a land-use decision, and land-use decisions create winners and losers. When a charity buys a hill farm and removes the sheep, the ecological outcome may be positive. The economic and social consequences for the farming family, the local school, the village shop, and the community that depended on that farm are another matter entirely.
Quick takeaways
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| What is rewilding? | The large-scale restoration of natural processes -- reintroducing species, allowing natural regeneration of vegetation, reducing or removing livestock grazing, and restoring hydrology. It differs from traditional conservation by emphasising self-sustaining ecosystems rather than managed habitats. |
| How much land is involved? | Rewilding Britain's goal is to see rewilding across 30% of Britain's land and sea by 2030 -- around 17 million acres. Currently, active rewilding projects cover a much smaller area, though the trajectory is upward. |
| Which charities are involved? | The RSPB manages over 160,000 hectares of nature reserves. The Wildlife Trusts collectively manage around 112,000 hectares. The National Trust owns 250,000 hectares. Rewilding Britain, Trees for Life, and the Woodland Trust are also significant. Private estates such as Knepp and Highlands Rewilding add to the total. |
| What is the economic concern? | That rewilding removes productive farmland, eliminates tenant farming positions, reduces local employment, and concentrates land ownership in the hands of wealthy organisations or individuals pursuing environmental objectives. |
| Is there government support for rewilding? | The Environmental Land Management scheme (ELM) in England, including the Landscape Recovery component, provides public money for large-scale habitat restoration. Scotland and Wales have their own agri-environment programmes with rewilding-compatible elements. |
| What about food security? | Critics argue that taking farmland out of production during a period of food price inflation and supply chain disruption is irresponsible. Supporters counter that much rewilded land is marginal for food production and that nature restoration underpins long-term agricultural sustainability. |
The arguments
The biodiversity imperative
The UK is one of the most nature-depleted countries in the world. The State of Nature 2023 report, compiled by more than 60 conservation organisations, found that 16% of species are threatened with extinction from Great Britain and that species abundance has fallen by an average of 19% since systematic monitoring began in 1970. Hedgehog numbers have halved since 2000. Farmland bird populations have declined by 62% since 1970. River water quality has deteriorated, with only 14% of English rivers classified as in good ecological condition.
Against this backdrop, conservation charities argue that rewilding is not a luxury but a necessity. Natural England's evidence base shows that well-managed rewilding projects deliver measurable outcomes: increased species diversity, improved water quality through natural flood management, carbon sequestration in restored peatlands and woodlands, and reduced soil erosion. The Knepp Estate in West Sussex, which began the transition from intensive farming to a rewilding project in 2001, has recorded extraordinary recoveries in species including turtle doves, nightingales, and purple emperor butterflies -- all species in severe national decline.
The Wildlife Trusts' "30 by 30" campaign aligns with the UK government's commitment under the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework to protect 30% of land and sea for nature by 2030. Meeting this target is not achievable through existing protected areas alone. It requires significant expansion of land managed primarily for nature, which means converting some agricultural land.
The rural displacement critique
The counter-argument is not anti-conservation. It is about process, power, and who bears the cost. The Tenant Farmers Association and the National Farmers' Union have raised persistent concerns that rewilding projects eliminate tenancies, remove agricultural employment, and hollow out rural communities that are already fragile. When a conservation charity purchases a farm, the shepherd, the stockman, and the contractor lose their livelihoods. The feed merchant, the livestock market, and the agricultural supplier lose custom. The village loses a family.
Professor Michael Winter at the University of Exeter has written extensively on land-use tensions, noting that rewilding is disproportionately advocated by urban-based organisations and supported by urban donors whose own livelihoods are not affected by the changes they fund. The sociologist Neal Lawson has described a "green enclosure" dynamic in which wealthy environmental organisations effectively remove land from productive rural use in ways that mirror the historical enclosures of common land. Rewilding Britain and others have been accused of pursuing a romantic vision of wilderness that has no place for working landscapes or the people who manage them.
In Scotland, the purchase of highland estates by conservation organisations and wealthy individuals has drawn particular criticism. Highlands Rewilding, a company founded by Jeremy Leggett which purchased the Bunloit estate near Loch Ness, attracted both support and suspicion -- support for its regenerative ambitions, suspicion that it represented a new form of highland clearance dressed in ecological language.
The middle ground: rewilding with people
A growing body of practice suggests that the binary of rewilding versus farming is false. The "wilding" approach at Knepp includes extensive grazing by free-roaming cattle and pigs, making it a form of low-intensity agriculture as much as a wilderness project. The Wildlife Trusts have emphasised that their vision of nature recovery includes working with farmers, not replacing them. The RSPB's Hope Farm in Cambridgeshire is specifically designed to demonstrate that profitable farming and biodiversity recovery can coexist.
The Environmental Land Management scheme's Landscape Recovery component offers public money for large-scale habitat restoration projects that can include working farms. Regenerative agriculture -- farming practices that improve soil health, increase biodiversity, and sequester carbon while maintaining food production -- is increasingly presented as complementary to rewilding rather than opposed to it. The challenge is whether this middle ground can operate at the scale the biodiversity crisis demands.
The evidence
The State of Nature 2023 report provides the most comprehensive assessment of UK biodiversity trends, drawing on monitoring data from organisations including the British Trust for Ornithology, Butterfly Conservation, the Botanical Society of Britain and Ireland, and others. Its headline findings on species decline are not seriously disputed.
Natural England's evidence reviews on rewilding outcomes, including the "People and Nature Survey" and site-specific assessments, document measurable biodiversity gains from rewilding projects. The Knepp Estate has been the subject of detailed ecological monitoring showing significant species recovery, published in peer-reviewed journals and in Isabella Tree's widely read book "Wilding" (2018).
On the economic side, the evidence is less systematic. DEFRA's Farm Business Survey provides data on farm incomes but does not track the downstream economic effects of land-use change. The Tenant Farmers Association has documented cases of tenancy loss linked to conservation land purchases but has not published a comprehensive national analysis. Research by the Rural Services Network and the CPRE has documented the broader fragility of rural economies and services, providing context for why the loss of even a small number of farms can have disproportionate community impact.
A 2024 report by the Food, Farming and Countryside Commission argued that a "just transition" framework -- borrowed from the climate policy debate -- should be applied to land-use change, ensuring that communities affected by rewilding receive economic alternatives and are involved in decision-making.
Current context
The debate has intensified since 2024. The Labour government's land-use framework, published in 2025, attempted to balance food production, nature recovery, housing, and energy infrastructure within a coherent national strategy. The framework acknowledged the legitimacy of rewilding alongside the need to maintain domestic food production, but was criticised by environmental groups as too cautious and by farming organisations as insufficiently protective of agricultural land.
The Landscape Recovery component of ELM has approved multiple large-scale projects, including some that involve significant reduction in livestock farming. Applications have been oversubscribed, suggesting strong interest from landowners and conservation bodies. Meanwhile, biodiversity net gain requirements under the Environment Act 2021, which became mandatory for major developments in 2024, have created a market for habitat creation that may further accelerate land-use change.
In Scotland, the Land Reform Bill introduced in 2024 included provisions to increase community influence over large-scale land transactions, partly in response to concerns about conservation land purchases. The Scottish Government's position has been that rewilding should happen with community consent, not over community objection.
Last updated: April 2026
What this means for charities
Conservation charities pursuing rewilding projects face a legitimacy challenge that is distinct from the scientific evidence on biodiversity. The ecological case may be sound, but the public benefit test requires charities to demonstrate that their activities serve the public interest, not merely their organisational mission. A rewilding project that delivers measurable biodiversity gains while displacing a farming community raises a genuine question about whose benefit is being served and at what cost.
The practical implications are significant. Conservation charities acquiring land need to invest in community engagement that goes beyond consultation -- genuine co-design of projects with affected communities, economic transition support for displaced agricultural workers, and transparent governance of land-use decisions. The Wildlife Trusts and the RSPB have both increased their community engagement work, but the sector does not yet have a consistent standard for what responsible rewilding looks like from a social perspective.
For the wider charity sector, the rewilding debate illustrates a recurring tension: charities with strong missions can pursue their objects in ways that impose costs on specific communities, and the regulatory framework does not always provide effective mechanisms for those communities to challenge or shape charitable decisions that affect them.
Common questions
Is rewilding just about removing farmers?
No. Rewilding encompasses a spectrum of approaches, from full non-intervention to "rewilding with people" models that include extensive grazing, sustainable forestry, and nature-based tourism. The Knepp Estate retains livestock as part of its ecology. Many Wildlife Trust reserves are managed with grazing animals. The perception that rewilding means removing all human activity is inaccurate, though some projects do involve ending agricultural tenancies, which is where the sharpest conflicts arise.
Does rewilding threaten food security?
The food security argument depends on what land is being rewilded. Much of the land targeted for rewilding is upland, marginal, or unproductive for food -- hill farms running at a loss, sustained only by agricultural subsidies. Rewilding advocates argue that taking this land out of production while supporting intensive food production on more fertile lowland is a more rational approach than subsidising uneconomic farming. Critics respond that any reduction in domestic production capacity is imprudent given global supply chain vulnerabilities.
What about carbon credits and greenwashing?
Some rewilding projects generate carbon credits through woodland creation or peatland restoration, which can be sold to corporations seeking to offset emissions. This has raised concerns about "greenwashing" -- companies using offset purchases to avoid genuine emissions reductions. The integrity of UK woodland carbon credits has been questioned, with the Woodland Carbon Code working to maintain standards. Conservation charities involved in carbon markets face reputational risks if the offsets they sell are used to justify continued high-emission activities.
Do local communities have a say in rewilding decisions?
Planning permission is not typically required for changes in land management, meaning a landowner can switch from farming to rewilding without formal community consent. Environmental Impact Assessments are required for some changes, such as large-scale afforestation, but many rewilding activities fall below regulatory thresholds. In Scotland, the community right to buy and proposed land reform legislation provide some mechanisms for community influence. In England, communities have limited formal power to prevent land-use change by private landowners or charities.
How are rewilding projects funded?
Through a combination of charitable donations, grants, government agri-environment payments (particularly ELM Landscape Recovery), carbon and biodiversity credit sales, nature-based tourism, and private investment. The funding mix varies significantly by project. Large conservation charities draw on membership income and legacies. Private rewilding estates may rely on personal wealth or impact investment. The growing market in ecosystem service payments is creating new revenue streams but also raising questions about commodification of nature.
Key sources and further reading
State of Nature 2023 -- State of Nature Partnership, 2023. The most comprehensive assessment of UK biodiversity, compiled by over 60 conservation organisations using long-term monitoring data.
"Wilding" -- Isabella Tree, 2018. A detailed account of the Knepp Estate's rewilding project in West Sussex, including ecological monitoring data and the practical challenges of transitioning from intensive farming to rewilding.
Rewilding Britain Policy Reports -- Rewilding Britain. The organisation's publications on rewilding targets, policy frameworks, and case studies of projects across Britain.
Tenant Farmers Association Policy Briefings -- TFA. Briefings on the impact of land-use change on agricultural tenancies, including concerns about conservation land purchases.
Land Use Framework -- DEFRA, 2025. The government's national framework for balancing competing land-use priorities including food production, nature recovery, housing, and energy.
Environment Act 2021 and Biodiversity Net Gain Regulations -- UK Parliament. The legislative framework requiring new developments to deliver a minimum 10% biodiversity net gain, creating market demand for habitat creation.
"Our Future in the Land" -- Food, Farming and Countryside Commission, 2024. A report arguing for a just transition framework applied to land-use change in rural areas.
Natural England Evidence Reviews on Rewilding -- Natural England. Site-specific and thematic assessments of ecological outcomes from rewilding and habitat restoration projects.