Supporting transitions to sustainability in catchment treescapes: using Q methodology to interpret stakeholder priorities and future landscape scenarios: a report on work package three of Creative Adaptive Solutions for the Treescapes of Rivers (CASTOR) UKRI Future of UK Treescapes

Purpose of the Study:
This report presents findings from Work Package 3 (WP3) of the CASTOR project, part of the UKRI-funded Future of UK Treescapes programme. WP3 examines stakeholder priorities and values surrounding landscape management in three contrasting catchment areas in northern England: Ennerdale, Eamont, and the Colne Valley. The aim was to test Q methodology a participatory method where stakeholders rank statements to reveal shared and diverging viewpoints, as a deliberative method to explore future landscape scenarios and inform inclusive and adaptive landscape governance.

Key Findings:
Across all three landscapes, stakeholders rejected commercial forestry in favour of mixed or native woodland and consistently supported:
• Ecological restoration, especially habitat and connectivity improvements
• Community resilience and local quality of life
• Responsible recreation, supported by education for safe and sustainable landscape use
• Climate change mitigation, linked to tangible, local action
Analysis revealed three recurring value orientations:
• F1 – Ecological restoration (nature-based solutions, rewilding, ecosystem function)
• F2 – Heritage (cultural landscapes – with contextual differences, continuity of land management systems)
• F3 – People (communities, wellbeing, recreation, ecosystem services)
These orientations highlight tensions over the role of conservation versus production, whether agricultural practices hold inherent cultural value, and perceived inequities in who influences or benefits from decisions. Although shared priorities exist, barriers and opportunities differ across the three catchments, underscoring the need for place-based, context-sensitive strategies.

Top-Line Recommendations for case study areas
Ennerdale:
• Build clarity, dialogue, and transparency around rewilding goals
• Strengthen inclusive, adaptive governance to address perceived inequities
• Focus on shared priorities centred on protecting Ennerdale’s distinctive character
Eamont:
• Address pervasive overtourism and its effects on community wellbeing and landscape resilience
• Support transitions to regenerative farming linked with biodiversity and ecosystem service outcomes
• Develop a shared vision for an integrated landscape supporting nature, food systems, and human wellbeing
Colne Valley:
• Plan proactively for urban fringe pressures and infrastructure equity
• Strengthen community-oriented and social-value metrics in green infrastructure planning
• Address perceived inequities in decision-making linked to major landowners and limited engagement

Governance Implications
• Recognise and work with plural1 values, rather than seeking full consensus
• Use scenario development and deliberative tools (such as Q methodology) to clarify both common ground and trade-offs
• Enable place-based, adaptive governance that can respond to ecological and social change
• Confront power asymmetries to ensure fair representation in decision-making

Conclusion
Plural, place-based values should be understood as an asset rather than a barrier in landscape governance. The CASTOR WP3 findings demonstrate how structured deliberation can reveal shared priorities, surface tensions transparently, and support more collaborative, resilient approaches to planning future treescapes.