Plain Language Summary: Most citizens in Denmark look favorably upon animal rewilding, but about a third have concerns about access and safety.

By Christian Gamborg, Frank Søndergaard Jensen, Thomas Bøker Lund^,, and Peter Sandøe.

Read the full paper here.

A large majority of Danes have a positive view of rewilding involving releasing larger grazing animals into fenced-off areas open to the public. However, about a third voiced concerns about potential access limitations and personal safety within these rewilding areas.

There is much confusion, controversy, and misinformation about rewilding. Part of the debate focuses on the outdoor recreational impacts of rewilding involving animals (trophic rewilding). This new Danish study, based on a nationally representative survey conducted in 2022, examined overall attitudes, interest in visiting, and changes in intended visit frequency.

The study shows that a clear majority of the members of the Danish public had a positive attitude towards this form of rewilding, expressed a high interest in visiting rewilding areas, and indicated they would visit these areas as frequently as before they were turned into rewilding areas. A clear majority believed that these areas would benefit nature and the released animals, as well as providing outdoor recreational opportunities. People who expected these benefits typically had higher education, lived in larger urban areas, or were members of a nature conservation society. However, nearly a third of the survey respondents were concerned about costs in terms of more difficult access to the rewilded nature areas and feelings of insecurity within the rewilded areas. The study found that people who expected benefits to prevail over costs were most likely to express a positive attitude towards rewilding.

Clarifying and understanding the variety of public attitudes towards trophic rewilding is important so that policy and management can consider the views of members of the public. This can help practitioners and researchers focus their awareness efforts. This is particularly important when public debate in the media is driven by the most ardent supporters or opponents, often leaving out a larger, more silent majority.