Tree planting, natural colonisation, hybrid approaches: Land manager decisions explored

Le résumé fourni par la source

Abstract There is a global drive to protect biodiversity and help combat climate change. In the UK, this is expressed in a number of policy initiatives and tools that include increasing tree cover as an important nature‐based solution to achieving national policy targets. Ambitious tree planting targets have been announced by each national government, and these will fall mostly to private landowners and managers to achieve. Although incentive schemes and other support have been on offer for tree planting schemes for many years, recent strategies relying on ‘natural processes’ (such as natural colonisation) are also being promoted and offered material support. This presents a complex decision‐making landscape for land managers. We conducted empirical socio‐ecological research (2020–23) using mixed methods with c.100 land managers and advisors in different ecological and land use contexts across the UK to investigate perceived risks and benefits associated with the two approaches. We used the Theoretical Framework of Acceptability to code and analyse our data and found three broad land manager identity types. The land manager types rate bundles of risks and opportunities for resilience, carbon sequestration, biodiversity and land restoration differently, impacting the acceptability and uptake of different approaches. Rather than a polarisation between ‘tree planters’ and those choosing natural processes, we found the majority of land managers appreciate a blend of active ‘tree planting’ with a degree of passive ‘natural colonisation’ to increase tree cover, regardless of their identity. These hybrid approaches were preferred by many as a way to reduce the risks associated with natural processes and to increase the certainty of outcomes. We show how knowledge intermediaries and policymakers need to take into account the language and narratives used to describe and promote natural processes as these influence land managers decision‐making. We suggest too, the need for better evidence‐based ecological understanding of natural processes leading to woodland creation, and clear acceptance of hybrid approaches within those organisations providing advice and guidance to land managers, as well as those designing policy. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.