Advertisement

GeoJournal

, Volume 58, Issue 4, pp 225–231 | Cite as

Political ecology, territoriality and scale

  • Wolfgang Natter
  • Wolfgang Zierhofer
Article

Abstract

This essay serves as an introduction to this theme issue of GeoJournal and provides a framework for the contributed papers. Territoriality and scale, the essay argues, offer key analytics in approaching the spatiality of the ecological existence of human and non-human beings in their common `house' (oikos), thus of culture-nature relations generally. Such a focus, it bears emphasis, need not reproduce a naturalization of the modern culture-nature binary, but could, as is argued, remind `we moderns' that there is not only one nature (as little as there is only one culture), but a plurality of natures, which can serve the most varied of purposes. However, these spatialities do usually not and can very often not correspond to the spatialities of human activities, particularly to the territorialities and their orders/structures of scale in politico-administrative activities. The scalar literature within political geography, however, has for the most part seen its role as addressing human social relations in its analysis of contestations over power, space, and territory. A political ecology of scale, by contrast, will of necessity need to broaden the terrain of that discussion to include a variety of actors, human and non-human, involved in this broader network. Environmental conservation offers an important illustration of this problematic. A territorial, scalar, and non-modern understanding of ecological regimes is neccesary, argues this essay and the bundle of case studies that follow, because there is no `conservation' outside of a particular politics and geography of ecology.

conservation modernity nature-culture political ecology representation scale science studies territory 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Adams W. and Mulligan M., 2003: Decolonizing Nature. Strategies for Conservation in a Post-colonial Era. Earthscan, London.Google Scholar
  2. Beck U., 1993: Die Erfindung des Politischen. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt a.M.Google Scholar
  3. Bernstein R., 1993: An Interview with Richard Bernstein. In: Jones J.P. and Natter W. (eds), Postmodern Contentions: Politics, Epochs, Space, pp. 99–112. Guilford, New York.Google Scholar
  4. Bingham N., 1996: Object-ions: from technological determinism toward geographies of relations. Environment and Planning D, Society and Space 14(6): 635–657.Google Scholar
  5. Blaikie P., 1999: A Review of Political Ecology. Issues, Epistemology and Analytical Narratives. Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsgeographie 43(3–4): 131–147.Google Scholar
  6. Braun B. and Castree N., 1998: Remaking Reality: Nature at the Millenium. Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  7. Callon M., 1991: Techno-economic Networks and Irreversibility. In: Law J. (ed.), A Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power, Technology and Domination. Sociological Review Monograph Vol. 38, London: 132–161.Google Scholar
  8. Castree N. and Braun B. (eds), 2001: Social Nature: Theory, Practice and Politics. Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  9. Derrida J., 1988: Limited Inc. Northwestern University Press, Evanston.Google Scholar
  10. Devall B. and Sessions G., 1985: Deep Ecology: Living as if Nature Mattered. Gibbs Smith Books, Salt Lake City.Google Scholar
  11. Eckersley R., 1992: Environmentalism and Political Theory. State University of New York Press, Albany.Google Scholar
  12. Escobar A., 1999: After Nature. Steps to an Antiessentialist Political Ecology. Current Anthropology 40(1): 1–27.Google Scholar
  13. Flitner M., 1999: Im Bilderwald. Politische Oekologie und Ordnungen des Blicks. Zeitschrift für Wirtschaftsgeographie, 43(3–4): 169–183.Google Scholar
  14. Forsyth T., 2003: Critical Political Ecology. Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  15. Fox W., 1990: Toward a Transpersonal Ecology. Foxhole, Dartington, Green Books.Google Scholar
  16. Gerber J., 1997: Beyond dualism — The social construction of nature and the natural and social construction of human beings. Progress in Human Geography 21(1): 1–17.Google Scholar
  17. Gottmann J., 1973: The Significance of Territory. University of Virginia Press, Charlottesville.Google Scholar
  18. Gregory D., 2001: (Post)Colonialism and the Production of Nature. In: Castree N. and Braun B. (eds), Social Nature, pp. 84–111. Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  19. Haraway D., 1991: Simians, Cyborgs, and Women. Free Association Books, London.Google Scholar
  20. Harvey D., 1996: Justice, Nature, and the Geography of Difference. Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  21. Hinchliffe S., 1996: Technology, Power, and Space — the Means and Ends of Geographics of Technology. Environment and Plannind D: Society and Space 14(6): 659–682.Google Scholar
  22. Horkheimer M. and Adorno T., 1991: Dialectic of Enlightenment. Continuum, New York.Google Scholar
  23. Howitt R., 2003: Scale. In: Agnew J., Mitchel K. and Toal G. (eds), A Companian to Political Geography, pp. 138–157. Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  24. Johnston R., 2001: Out of the ‘moribund backwater’: Territory and territoriality in political geography. Political Geography 20(6): 677–793.Google Scholar
  25. Keil R., Bell D., Penz P. and Faucett H. (eds), 1998: Political Ecology. Global and Local. Routledge, New York and London.Google Scholar
  26. Latour B., 1993: We have never been Modern. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  27. Latour B., 1999: Politiques de la Nature. La Découverte, Paris. [Available in German as: Das Parlament der Dinge. (2001) Suhrkamp, Frankfurt a.M. Forthcomming also in English.]Google Scholar
  28. Law J. (ed.), 1991: A Sociology of Monsters: Essays on Power, Technology and Domination. Sociological Review Monograph, Vol. 38, London.Google Scholar
  29. Law J. and Hassard J. (eds), 1999: Actor Network Theory and After. Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  30. Mathews F., 1991: The Ecological Self. Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  31. Merchant C., 1980: The Death of Nature: Women, Ecology and the Scientific Revolution. Harper and Row, New York.Google Scholar
  32. Meyer-Abich K., 1997: Praktische Naturphilosophie. C.H. Beck, München.Google Scholar
  33. Murdoch J., 1997: Towards a Geography of Heterogeneos Associations. Progress in Human Geography 21(3): 321–337.Google Scholar
  34. Natter W., 2004: The Climate of Globalization. In: Eliaeson, S. (ed.) Civil Society east of the Elbe. Routledge, London (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  35. Natter W., 2003: Die ‘neue’ und ‘alte’ Cultural Geography in der angloamerikanischen Geographie. Berichte zur deutschen Landeskunde 77(1): 71–90.Google Scholar
  36. Natter W., 2002: Ueber Identitaet, Global-regionalismus and Globalisierung ‘von unten’: Kentucky, eine Fallstudie. Comparativ 13(2): 93–129.Google Scholar
  37. Natter W. and Jones J.P., 1997: Identity, Space and other Uncertainties. In: Benko G. and Strohmayer U. (eds), Space and Social Theory, pp. 141–161. Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  38. Naess A., 1989: Ecology, community and lifestyle. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Mass.Google Scholar
  39. Peet R. and Watts M., 1996: Liberation Ecologies. Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  40. Pepper D., 1993: Eco-Socialism. From Deep Ecology to Social Justice. Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  41. Plumwood V., 1993: Feminism and the Mastery of Nature. Routledge, New York.Google Scholar
  42. Serres M., 1990: Le contrat naturel. Éditions François Bourin, Paris.Google Scholar
  43. Shiva V., 1989: Staying Alive: Women, Ecology and Development. Zed Books, London.Google Scholar
  44. Thrift N., 1999: Steps to an Ecology of Place. In: Massey D., Allen J. and Sarre P. (eds), Human Geography Today, pp. 295–322. Polity Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  45. Urry J., 2000: Sociology Beyond Societies. Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  46. Warren K., (ed) 1997: Ecofeminism: Women, Nature, Culture. Indiana University Press, Bloomington.Google Scholar
  47. Whatmore S., 1999: Hybrid Geographies: Rethinking the ‘Human’ in Human Geography. In: Massey D., Allen J. and Sarre P. (eds), Human Geography Today, pp. 22–39. Polity Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  48. Whatmore S., 2002: Hybrid Geographies. Sage, London.Google Scholar
  49. Zierhofer W., 2002: Gesellschaft — Transformation eines Problems. BIS, Oldenburg.Google Scholar
  50. Zierhofer W., 1997: Grundlagen für eine Humangeographie des relationalen Weltbildes. Erdkunde 51(2): 81–99.Google Scholar
  51. Zimmermann M., Callicott J.B., Sessions G., Warren K.J. and Clark J. (eds), 2001: Environmental Philosophy. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, N.J.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wolfgang Natter
    • 1
  • Wolfgang Zierhofer
    • 2
  1. 1.University of KentuckyLexingtonU.S.A.
  2. 2.University of BaselBaselSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations