“Whose knowledge counts?” Accountability and multiple knowledge systems in rewilding and restoration in Britain

Purpose This paper examines how accountability is enacted in rewilding and restoration projects in Britain, with particular attention to how different forms of knowledge shape accountability relationships. Design/methodology/approach This paper draws on semi-structured interviews with 17 project-side actors directly involved in the design, management and delivery of rewilding and restoration projects across Britain, including project managers and community engagement practitioners. The analysis followed an inductive approach, reflecting the exploratory nature of the paper. Findings Accountability in rewilding and restoration projects is shaped by which forms of knowledge are recognised, and by whom. Knowledge structures these relationships, shaping who is positioned to demand an account, what counts as a valid account and the direction accountability takes. Scientific and technical knowledge anchors upward accountability to funders. For local communities, accountability remains largely informational. Knowledge feeds into engagement activities but does not extend to shaping project priorities. Site-based expertise opens more negotiated relationships with farmers and other locally knowledgeable actors. Originality/value The paper contributes to the accountability literature by showing that knowledge does structural work in accountability relationships, with power and cultural context shaping accountability largely through their influence on which knowledge is recognised. The paper also extends accountability research into the underexplored yet timely context of rewilding and restoration.