Abstract Engaging conservation decision‐making with critical aspects of social science can enhance the equitability of conservation practice by recentring issues of social and environmental justice. Using rewilding as a conservation case in point, we identify five foundational questions to ask of rewilding projects to help align rewilding decision‐making with justice principles. We unpack these questions through five rewilding case studies: Yellowstone National Park (USA), Oostvaardersplassen (NL), Knepp Wildland (UK), Alladale Wilderness Reserve (UK) and Carpathia (RO). Applying different social science disciplines—history, anthropology, political ecology, human geography and sociology—we explore rewilding's socio‐cultural and socio‐economic dimensions; aspects that underpin rewilding decision‐making, but that remain under‐represented in the literature as well as in praxis. We show that the decisions made in these rewilding projects not only impact ecosystems but are also deeply connected to people and societies, making them inseparable from issues of social justice. In addition to the ecological goals, we highlight the social motivations driving these projects and consider what society might gain or lose—beyond increased ecological dynamism and species recovery. Bringing in different disciplinary perspectives helps us better understand the key political issues and debates raised by rewilding projects. We argue that this approach is essential for achieving both ecologically effective and socially just biodiversity governance. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.
Cary et al. (2025) studied this question.