ArticlePDF Available

Retrospective on Nature–Society Geography: Tracing Trajectories (1911–2010) and Reflecting on Translations

Annals of the American Association of Geographers

December 2010
100(5):1076-1094

DOI:10.1080/00045608.2010.523343

Authors:

Karl S. Zimmerer

Pennsylvania State University

This study uses an intellectual history approach to construct a retrospective on Annals nature-society geography during the past century (1911-2010). It begins by identifying six areas of topics and approaches that have emerged as primary clusters in the 1990s and 2000s: (1) environmental governance and political ecology; (2) environmental hazards, risk, and vulnerability science; (3) land use and cover change science; (4) human-environment interactions; (5) environmental landscape history and ideas; and (6) scientific concepts and environmental management. A combination of continuity and change involving the core areas of human-environmental scholarship is found to distinguish Annals publications during recent decades (1990-2010) vis-a-vis preceding periods (1911-1969, 1970-1989). The current plurality and partial intersection of core topics and approaches is mostly a contrast to previous predominance and distinctness of the Sauerian Berkeley School and the Chicago School of hazards research. Reflection on this intellectual history sheds light on issues of the timely role of nature-society within the geographic discipline and in relation to environmental interdisciplinarity and policy. Using the concept of translating across knowledge domains, Annals writings demonstrate the expanded, multistranded intellectual spaces of nature-society geography.

Visualization of intellectual spaces of nature–society geography.

…

Figures - uploaded by Karl S. Zimmerer

Content may be subject to copyright.

Content uploaded by Karl S. Zimmerer

Content may be subject to copyright.

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

This article was downloaded by:

[Zimmerer, Karl]

On:

24 November 2010

Access details:

Access Details: [subscription number 929822311]

Publisher

Routledge

Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-

41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Annals of the Association of American Geographers

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:

http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t788352614

Retrospective on Nature-Society Geography: Tracing Trajectories (1911-

2010) and Reflecting on Translations

Karl S. Zimmerera

a Department of Geography and Environmental and Earth Systems Institute (EESI), The Pennsylvania

State University,

Online publication date: 19 November 2010

To cite this Article Zimmerer, Karl S.(2010) 'Retrospective on Nature-Society Geography: Tracing Trajectories (1911-2010)

and Reflecting on Translations', Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 100: 5, 1076 — 1094

To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1080/00045608.2010.523343

URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00045608.2010.523343

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or

systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or

distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents

will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses

should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,

actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly

or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Retrospective on Nature–Society Geography:

Tracing Trajectories (1911–2010) and Reﬂecting on

Translations

Karl S. Zimmerer

Department of Geography and Environmental and Earth Systems Institute (EESI), The Pennsylvania State University

This study uses an intellectual history approach to construct a retrospective on Annals nature–society geography

during the past century (1911–2010). It begins by identifying six areas of topics and approaches that have emerged

as primary clusters in the 1990s and 2000s: (1) environmental governance and political ecology; (2) environ-

mental hazards, risk, and vulnerability science; (3) land use and cover change science; (4) human–environment

interactions; (5) environmental landscape history and ideas; and (6) scientiﬁc concepts and environmental

management. A combination of continuity and change involving the core areas of human–environmental schol-

arship is found to distinguish Annals publications during recent decades (1990–2010) vis-`

a-vis preceding periods

(1911–1969, 1970–1989). The current plurality and partial intersection of core topics and approaches is mostly

a contrast to previous predominance and distinctness of the Sauerian Berkeley School and the Chicago School

of hazards research. Reﬂection on this intellectual history sheds light on issues of the timely role of nature–

society within the geographic discipline and in relation to environmental interdisciplinarity and policy. Using

the concept of translating across knowledge domains, Annals writings demonstrate the expanded, multistranded

intellectual spaces of nature–society geography. Key Words: environmental interdisciplinarity, environmental policy,

history of geography, human–environment geography, nature–society geography.

Este estudio se vale de un enfoque de la historia intelectual para construir una retrospectiva de la geograf´

ıa de la

naturaleza–sociedad durante el pasado siglo (1911–2010). Se empieza con la identiﬁcaci´

on de seis ´

areas de t´

opicos

y enfoques que han aparecido como concentraciones primarias en los a˜

nos 1990 y 2000: (1) administraci´

on am-

biental y ecolog´

ıa pol´

ıtica; (2) riesgos ambientales, cat´

astrofes y ciencia de la vulnerabilidad; (3) uso del suelo y

ciencias del cambio de coberturas; (4) interacciones humano–ambientales; (5) historia e ideas del paisaje ambi-

ental; y (6) conceptos cient´

ıﬁcos y manejo ambiental. Se dispone de una combinaci´

on de continuidad y cambio

que involucra los n´

ucleos de ´

areas de erudici´

on humano–ambiental para distinguir las publicaciones de Annals en

d´

ecadas recientes (1990–2010) frente a los per´

ıodos precedentes 1911–1969, 1970–1989). La actual pluralidad e

intersecci´

on parcial de t´

opicos y enfoques medulares es m´

as que todo un contraste con el predominio y singular-

idad previos de la saueriana Escuela de Berkeley y la Escuela de Chicago de investigaci´

on azarosa. La reﬂexi´

sobre esta historia intelectual arroja luz sobre aspectos del papel hist´

oricodelatem

atica naturaleza–sociedad en

la disciplina geogr´

aﬁca y en relaci´

on con la interdisciplinariedad y las pol´

ıticas ambientales. Utilizando el con-

cepto de traslaci´

on a trav´

es de los dominios del conocimiento, los escritos de Annals demuestran lo expandido y

multitrajinado de los espacios intelectuales de la geograf´

ıa naturaleza–sociedad. Palabras clave:interdisciplinariedad

ambiental, pol´

ıtica ambiental, historia de la geograf´

ıa, geograf´

ıa humano–ambiental, geograf´

ıa naturaleza–sociedad.

Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 100(5) 2010, pp. 1076–1094 C

2010 by Association of American Geographers

Published by Taylor & Francis, LLC.

Downloaded By: [Zimmerer, Karl] At: 19:50 24 November 2010

Retrospective on Nature–Society Geography 1077

During the past two decades the Annals has pub-

lished more than 175 articles in the domain of

nature–society and human–environment geog-

raphy. Dozens of additional Annals articles in this time

have shown extensive overlap across the ample sub-

disciplinary borders within geography. This study con-

structs an intellectual history of Annals publications in

nature–society geography, as broadly deﬁned, spanning

the recent decades (1990–2010) and preceding periods

(1911–1969, 1970–1989).1The study’s goal is twofold:

to (1) create a retrospective tracing the topics and ap-

proaches of nature–society geography in the Annals

(1911–2010); and (2) reﬂect brieﬂy on current issues

facing nature–society geography. As an brief essay in

intellectual history, the study is focused on overarching

trajectories and selective reﬂections. To do so requires

a reverse chronology with sections of the article de-

voted ﬁrst to the intellectual history of recent decades

(1990–2010), then to preceding periods (1970–1989

and 1911–1969) and an overall summary (1911–2010),

followed by general reﬂection on current nature–society

geography.2Findings of all sections are incorporated

into the conclusion.

The bulk of this study consists of a retrospective

of nature–society geography based on a careful review

of a large number of Annals publications (Figure 1).3

This retrospective is used to identify principal trajec-

tories through the analysis of principal core topics,

100

120

1910-19 1920-29 1930-39 1940-49 1950-59 1960-69 1970-79 1980-89 1990-99 2000-09

Number of Articles

Figure 1. Estimated number of Annals

articles in nature–society geography by

decade (1911–2010).

approaches, and chronological distinctions. Combined

change and continuity are found to characterize the

intellectual history of one century’s worth of Annals

writings. The concept of translation is used to reﬂect

on issues currently facing nature–society geography as

a consequence of the multiple strands of topics and

approaches deﬁning this intellectual history.4In geog-

raphy the concept of translation is used to describe the

exchange of knowledge across diverse epistemic net-

works, both within the academy and through interfaces

with society (Stole 1994; Bracken and Oughton 2006).

The concept of translation is used in this study to reﬂect

on issues of nature–society geography in the discipline,

the subﬁeld per se, and the context of environmental

interdisciplinarity and policy.5

Lastly, the study’s reﬂection on current issues is

guided by the recent trajectory of nature–society geog-

raphy in the Annals and elsewhere. Publications have

expanded its academic role and relevance to modern

environmentalism and policy concerns. Such issues

include climate change responses and mitigation; bio-

diversity and environmental conservation; energy and

impact assessment; sustainable resource management

and agriculture; urban and industrial environments,

planning, and design including topics such as “smart

growth” and transportation; and environmental eco-

nomics, justice, and social movements (Kates 1987,

1995; B. L. Turner 1989, 2002a; Wilbanks 1994;

Downloaded By: [Zimmerer, Karl] At: 19:50 24 November 2010

1078 Zimmerer

National Research Council 1997; Straussfogel 1997;

Liverman 1999; Zimmerer 1999; Robbins 2004; Skole

2004; Yarnal and Neff 2004; Neumann 2005; Easterling

et al. 2007). Relevance of these nature–society issues

to future geography and sustainability is featured in

the just-released report of the U.S. National Research

Council (2010).

Nature–Society Geography in the Annals:

1990–2010

This section presents evidence that a group of

intersecting topics and approaches have emerged as

core areas of nature–society publications in the Annals

(Figure 2): (1) environmental governance and political

ecology; (2) environmental hazards, risk, and vulner-

ability science; (3) land use and cover change science;

(4) coupled human–environment interactions; (5)

environmental landscape history and ideas; and (6)

scientiﬁc concepts in environmental management and

policy.

Environmental Governance and Political Ecology

Geographic studies of environmental governance

have generated critical understandings of policy initia-

tives and political issues associated with sustainability,

globalization, global change, and neoliberal manage-

Environmental

Governance

and

Political Ecology

Environmental

Hazards, Risk,

and Vulnerability

Science

Land Use

and Cover

Change Science

Coupled Human-

Environment

Interactions

Environmental

History

Landscapes

and Ideas

Scientific Concepts

and Environmental

Management

Figure 2. Core topics and intersections of nature–society geography

(1990–2010) in the Annals.

ment (Liverman 1999, 2004; Giordano 2003). Political

ecology is commonly used, although it is not the sole

approach.6Governance institutions and landscapes

examined include: (1) community- and user-based

management (nationally and internationally inﬂu-

enced) of ﬁsheries, marine organisms, and forestry and

range resources (Robbins 1998; St. Martin 2001; Young

2001; Mutersbaugh 2002; Mansﬁeld 2004; McCarthy

2006; Campbell 2007); (2) water resources in urban

planning, international relations, and irrigation,

including response management and mitigation of cli-

mate change (Emel and Roberts 1995; Perreault 2008;

Birkenholtz 2009; Feitelson and Fischhendler 2009;

Norman and Bakker 2009; Gober et al. 2010); (3) bio-

diversity and environmental conservation (Zimmerer

1999; Campbell 2007; Roth 2008); (4) agriculture, land

tenure, land change, pesticide use, and agrarian reform

and policy institutions, including urban and periurban

food production (Bebbington and Carney 1990; Gross-

man 1993; Muldavin 1997; Schroeder 1997; Awanyo

2001; Freidberg 2001; Hovorka 2005; Unruh 2006;

Galt 2010; Jepson, Brannstrom, and Filippi 2010);

(5) modern environmentalism and justice movements

(Bowen et al. 1995; Pulido 2000; Liu 2008); (6) state

environmental and energy agencies (Feldman and

Jonas 2000; Heiman and Solomon 2004); and (7) in-

dustrial and manufacturing regulation (Willems-Braun

1997; R. A. Walker 2001; Prudham 2003).7

“Market environmentalism” has been detailed as

a principal form of environmental governance under

recent neoliberal policies (Bakker 2005; Klooster 2006;

Bailey 2007). It often pivots on the roles of nongovern-

mental organizations (NGOs) and diversifying local

livelihoods (Coomes and Barham 1997; Bebbington

2000; Klooster 2006). Studies have revealed the

geographic dynamics of certiﬁcation programs, such

as the sociospatial and environmental dynamics of

sustainable forestry certiﬁcation (Klooster 2006) and

payments for ecosystem services (McAfee and Shapiro

2010). Precursors to recent “green” certiﬁcation are

practices such as viticultural terroir (Gade 2004) and

“sustainable tourism” (Zurick 1992). Other important

Annals writings on environmental governance have

used the perspective of critical geography to address a

variety of topics dealing with the social power, politics,

and political economy of resources, environment, and

property (Katz 1995; Yapa 1996; R. T. Walker and

Solecki 1999, 2004; Harner 2001; Meindl, Alderman,

and Waylen 2002; Mutersbaugh 2002; Blaikie and

Muldavin 2004; Simmons 2004; Wolford 2004;

Simmons et al. 2007; Le Billon 2008; Blomley 2009).

Downloaded By: [Zimmerer, Karl] At: 19:50 24 November 2010

Retrospective on Nature–Society Geography 1079

Such environmental governance occurs in diverse

sectors encompassing industrial growth and regulation,

international trade and diplomacy, communities and

other local collectivities, antipoverty programs, and

clandestine global commodity networks.

Environmental governance writings, like the other

nodes discussed, have commonly engaged other princi-

pal themes (Figure 2). Indeed, issues of governance have

become so widespread that they are addressed as co-

emergent elements—see lines in Figure 2—across top-

ics and approaches involving environmental hazards

(e.g., Adger 2000), land use and cover change (e.g.,

Klooster 2006), coupled human–environment systems

(e.g., Goldman 2009), environmental landscape history

(e.g., Becker 2001), and scientiﬁc concepts in environ-

mental management and policy (e.g., Prudham 2003).

Environmental Hazards, Risks, and Vulnerability

Science

An important core of Annals publications in nature–

society geography is comprised of studies on environ-

mental hazards, risk, and vulnerability. Recent Annals

writings have advanced approaches of vulnerability sci-

ence (Cutter, Mitchell, and Scott 2000; Cutter 2003),

human dimensions of global change including social

“winners and losers” (O’Brien and Leichenko 2003;

Polsky 2004), and, to a lesser albeit signiﬁcant extent,

political ecology (Mustafa 2005), among still other per-

spectives. They have treated such diverse topics as insti-

tutional adaptation to environmental risk in Vietnam

(Adger 2000), natural disasters and the gender gap in

life expectancy (Neumayer and Plumper 2007), and an

environmental vulnerability index applied to hazards

(Barnett, Lambert, and Fry 2008). Such works have es-

tablished a view of these topics as emerging through

interactions of human behaviors with multilayered

social actors and institutions.

Land-Use and Land-Cover Change

Geographic analyses of land-use and land-cover

change (LULCC), and most recently land change

science (LCS), have used concepts and methods

developed from human and cultural ecology, human di-

mensions of global change, regional science, GIScience,

remote sensing, and landscape science and ecology.8

This wide-ranging approach couples the economics and

socioeconomic interactions of land-use decision making

and spatial analysis with the evaluation of land-cover

change (typically via remotely sensed images; Rindfuss

et al. 2007). Geographic studies focus primarily on

deforestation in conversions to pastureland and agricul-

ture (Mertens and Lambin 2000; M¨

uller and Munroe

2008). Some of the well-known Annals studies in this

area model how tropical, frontier-type deforestation

is driven through combined micro- and macrolevel

economic and political forces ranging from Chayano-

vian household labor availability to national and

international economic policies (R. T. Walker 2003;

Caldas et al. 2007; Rindfuss et al. 2007). Understanding

combined household and policy parameters has also

been framed through innovative use of the concepts

of agricultural intensiﬁcation and the structuration of

land-use decision making (Zimmerer 1991; Laney 2002;

Chowdhury and Turner 2006; Brenner forthcoming).

Expanded forest cover in new “secondary forest transi-

tions” has become increasingly common (Ramankutty,

Heller, and Rhemtulla 2010), along with reduced

environmental complexity and continued utilization

in some cases (Rudel, Bates, and Machinguiashi 2002;

Klooster 2006; Farley 2007). It depends, moreover,

on land use, as seen in contrasting forest cover under

private and public ownership (Medley, Pobocik, and

Okey 2003). Another prominent advance published in

the Annals is spatially explicit agent-based simulation

modeling of land-use decision making (Parker et al.

2003).

Coupled Human–Environment Interactions

Annals publications have opened various new

avenues in understanding the complexity of multidirec-

tional systems of human–environment interactions—

hence the emphasis on “coupled”—amid scenarios of

environmental change (degradation, sustainability, or

both). “The Earth as Transformed by Human Action,”

synopsized in the Annals (B. L. Turner, Kates, and

Meyers 1994), was a landmark global-scale study. More

recent Annals writings have expanded emphasis on

human–environment interactions in relation to biodi-

versity, with special attention to analysis of prospects for

environmental conservation with sustainable use (Zim-

merer 1999; Cowell and Dyer 2002; Naughton-Treves

2002; Jiang 2004; Voeks 2004; Byers 2005; Campbell

2007; Goldman 2009). A series of path-breaking

studies of herding, livestock, and range ecology in

Africa have forged signiﬁcant new understandings of

the coupled interactions of resource use with political

and ecological changes at the local, regional, and global

scales (Bassett 1988; Dougill, Thomas, and Heathwaite

Downloaded By: [Zimmerer, Karl] At: 19:50 24 November 2010

1080 Zimmerer

1999; M. D. Turner 1999; Benjaminson et al. 2006;

Butt, Shortridge, and WinklerPrins 2009).

Interactions in the form of agricultural responses to

climate change have been shown as signiﬁcantly differ-

entiated both geographically and historically, as well as

in seasonal time spans (Liverman 1990; Endﬁeld and

O’Hara 1999; Polsky 2004). Advancing new modes of

historical analysis—such as event ecology—is integral

to Annals studies of coupled human–environment in-

teractions (Walters and Vayda 2009; see also Meyer

2005). Another important example of understanding

coupled human–environment interactions is the inno-

vative analysis of both local or citizen knowledge along

with the use of ecological and environmental science in

multimethod approaches (Robbins 1998, 2001; Bassett

and Koli Bi 2000; Voeks 2004; Goldman 2009; Walters

and Vayda 2009). Multiple systems of environmental

knowledge are often socially entwined and frequently

politically contested; the latter emphasis both builds on

and is a general contrast to an earlier “ethnoscience”

perspective.9

Environmental Landscape History and Ideas

Debunking the so-called Pristine Myth was a fruitful

focusofmultipleAnnals publications in nature–society

geography. It led to the 1992 special issue, The

Americas Before and After 1492: Current Geographical

Research (e.g., Butzer 1992a, 1992b; Denevan 1992;

Doolittle 1992; Gade 1992; Whitmore and Turner

1992). Subsequently pursued further (Sluyter 2001;

Boyd 2002; Butzer 2002b; Dunning et al. 2002; Butzer

and Helgren 2005; Dull 2007), these studies have used

multicentury historical frameworks to demonstrate the

resilience of anthropogenic landscapes and environ-

mental properties across the time span of European

colonial conquests. They are cast as a contrasting and

often impassioned counterinterpretation of purportedly

cataclysmic colonial-historical environmental events.

Resilience of “traditional”-appearing land use is shown

also to offer potentially innovative contributions to the

design of human–environmental sustainability (e.g.,

Zimmerer 1991; Sluyter 1994; Denevan 1996).

Annals writings on this topic have focused also

on such historical and cultural landscapes as early

twentieth-century tree planting in Hawai’i (Woodcock

2003), wood canoe industry and transportation in

Central America (McSweeney 2004), colonial forestry

in Mali (Becker 2001), and the geography of Paciﬁc Is-

land origin myths (Nunn 2003). Cultural and political

perspectives on nature have been recognized as more

powerful than many had thought previously, although

still subject to geographic parameterization (on modern

environmentalism, see Bendix and Liebler 1999). Of

special note are the collected essays on humanistic

views of landscape (“The Lowenthal Papers”) in

recognition of geographer David Lowenthal’s career

as one of the world’s leading scholars of the history,

inﬂuence, and intricacies of ideas of humanized nature

(Bunkse 2003; Cosgrove 2003; Lowenthal 2003; Olwig

2003a, 2003b; Tuan 2003; see also Olwig 1996).

Scientiﬁc Concepts in Environmental Management

and Policy

Science and technology have gained new salience

in recent Annals works. Geographic and nature–society

perspectives on this topic have probed and offered

new insights on ecological carrying capacity (Sayre

2008), the hydrologic cycle (Linton 2008), biological

conservation corridors (Goldman 2009), the science

of back-to-nature farming (Ingram 2007), scientiﬁc

forestry management and politics (Willems-Braun

1997; Prudham 2003), and equilibrium and nonequi-

librium concepts in ecological science with reference to

geographic models of adaptation and carrying capacity

(Zimmerer 1994; Dougill, Thomas, and Heathwaite

1999; Goldman 2009). These works analyze the

power of scientiﬁc ideas as deriving both from their

geographic dimensions and their usefulness to environ-

mental management as so-called boundary concepts

and place-based sites of interaction, negotiation, and

dispute. Such scientiﬁc concepts thus help govern inter-

actions between environmental science and scientists,

on the one hand, and environmental management,

policymakers, and broadly deﬁned stakeholders on the

other hand. Geographic analysis of technology has also

become an area of increased focus considering such

topics as hydrologic dams in Greece (Kaika 2006) and

irrigation tubewells in India (Birkenholtz 2009).

Annals publications have also produced important

new works on the geography of science and environ-

mentalism. Works range from those in a special fo-

rum on the theme of “Science, Policy, and Ethics”

(e.g., Harman, Harrington, and Cerveny 1998; Proctor

1998a; Shrader-Frechette 1998) to the politics, history,

and philosophy of science related to global warming

(Demeritt 2001a; see also Demeritt 2001b; Schneider

2001). Case-study examinations have focused on sci-

ence and environmental ideas in Russia and the So-

viet Union (Bassin 1992; Shaw and Oldﬁeld 2007),

survey science and the legacy of John Wesley Powell

Downloaded By: [Zimmerer, Karl] At: 19:50 24 November 2010

Retrospective on Nature–Society Geography 1081

(Kirsch 2002), and European colonial encounters and

early scientiﬁc ideas of climate, botany, plant breeding,

and ﬁre management (Butzer 1992a; Galloway 1996;

Richardson 1996; Endﬁeld and Nash 2002).

More generally, the Annals provided a venue for

the advance of concepts fusing environmental and

social scientiﬁc perspectives on nature–society issues.

For example, the approach of political ecology was

advanced in the Annals beginning in 1988 (Bassett

1988; Grossman 1993). Other concepts have in-

cluded applied philosophical pragmatism (Wescoat

1992, 2002) and social constructivism (Proctor 1998b;

Willems-Braun 1997; Demeritt 2001a). In addition, the

concept of socio-environmental “hybridity” has been

advanced in Annals studies of the political-ecological

history of Spain’s water crisis (Swyngedouw 1999),

the production and perception of “invasive” trees

in modern forest management (Robbins 2001), and

networks of protected areas designed for sustainable

use (Zimmerer 1999).

Summary (1990–2010)

In summary, Annals publications between 1990

and 2010 demonstrate a high level of productivity

(Figure 1), propelling the growth and diversiﬁcation

of topics and approaches (Figure 2). The number of

nature–society articles is estimated to have increased

more than twofold in the 1990s alone. The diversity of

topics and approaches signals the partial cross-cutting

of methodologies and concepts as a characteristic of

nature–society geography. Quantitative and qualita-

tive techniques are utilized in each node, as is a mix

of positivist and diverse nonpositivist theoretical ori-

entations. This methodological and theoretical plural-

ity emerged through rapid growth and diversiﬁcation

of nature–society geography. Yet cross-cutting of the

nature–society nodes in the Annals did not detract from

fundamentally important distinctions. Sharp contrasts

are rooted in vital differences of knowledge domains

in nature–society geography and cognate sciences and

humanities (e.g., LULCC modeling in contrast to dis-

course analysis in political ecology; economic science

in contrast to postcolonial studies). In sum, the mix of

multiple topics and approaches, together with the pace

of Annals publications, has demonstrated both change

and continuity of nature–society geography as conse-

quences of its intellectual history.

Nature–Society Geography in the Annals:

1911–1969 and 1970–1989

Prior to 1990, nature–society geography in the An-

nals was robust, even though, as we shall see, it was also

decidedly thinner. Into the 1960s it was dominated by

the Berkeley School of Sauer and the Chicago School

of hazards scholars, including, notably, Harlan Barrows

and Gilbert White, along with their prodigious off-

shoots in the discipline.10 During the 1970s and 1980s,

Annals publications foreshadowed a diversiﬁcation of

topics and approaches, including urban development

and irrigation landscapes (Vandermeer 1968; Hobbs

and Woolmington 1972; Wescoat 1986), environmen-

tal conservation (Vale 1987), environmental health

(Meade 1976; Frenkel and Western 1988), resource

institutions (Emel and Brooks 1988), political ecology

(Bassett 1988; Grossman 1993), and household models

of development (Veeck and Pannell 1989).

Other prescient nature–society advances in the An-

nals in the 1970s and 1980s were concentrated in cul-

tural ecology (Knight 1971; Grossman 1977, 1981; B. L.

Turner, Hanham, and Portararo 1977; Doolittle 1984;

B. L. Turner 1989), urban ecology (Entrikin 1980),

ecological science (Fosberg 1976), and environmen-

tal ideas and attitudes (Tuan 1973; Chappell 1975;

Bunkse 1978). These publications beneﬁted from ex-

changes with the interdisciplinary realms of develop-

ment studies, world systems, and political economy, in

addition to ecology, urban studies, and environmental

studies and philosophy.11 Intellectual borderlands were

also expanded with the other geographic subﬁelds. Re-

lated physical geography, for example, incorporated hu-

man activities as triggers of disturbance events inducing

processes and pathways of vegetative and geomorphic

change (Knox 1977; Veblen and Lorenz 1988; Savage

1991).

Between 1911 and the 1960s, nature–society publi-

cations were rooted primarily in either a cultural and

historical interpretation of rural landscapes (Sauerian

Berkeley School) or the natural hazards approach to

government planning and public awareness (Chicago

School). The Berkeley School of cultural and envi-

ronmental geography became well known for studies

of such topics as historical dynamics of anthropogenic

vegetation (Parsons 1955; West 1956) and the distri-

butions, dynamics, and historical development of food

production technologies and landscapes (Sopher 1964;

Spencer and Stewart 1973). It applied the concepts

of ecology (such as carrying capacity) to geographic

Downloaded By: [Zimmerer, Karl] At: 19:50 24 November 2010

1082 Zimmerer

interpretations of environmental change (Denevan

1967; Barrett 1974). Meanwhile, Annals publications

of the Chicago School focused on ﬂoodplain hazards,

management, and policy (G. F. White 1985). More

generally, international framing of nature–society

research during these decades aligned with the post–

World War organization of “areas studies” and Cold

War geopolitics. Period pieces were published on land

reform, agrarian development, and tropical lowland

colonization, as well as water resources and irrigation

(Spate 1959; Greenwood 1965; Vandermeer 1968).

They were found also in the regional framing of nature–

society studies of the Soviet Union (Harris 1951),

Korea (Dickinson 1952), and Brazil (James 1953).

Important Annals publications of the 1950s and

1960s also provided sustained focus on such core

concepts as community ecological science (Morgan

and Moss 1965), Darwinian theory (Stoddart 1966),

and comparative case-study design and methodology

(Brookﬁeld 1962). Emphasis on agriculture, resources,

and rural societies traced to inﬂuences of the Saue-

rian Berkeley School (Sauer 1921, 1924). It was ev-

ident among geographers associated with this subﬁeld

(Hart 1968) as well as among disciplinary leaders whose

later contributions were centered in other geographic

subﬁelds (Gould 1963; Harvey 1966). Early landmark

publications featured such topics as soil erosion (Ben-

nett 1931) and agricultural regions (Hartshorne and

Dicken 1935). Internationally, various writings on such

regions as Latin America focused on resources and trade

and reﬂected a variety of political and economic in-

terests as well as imperial and colonial (and postcolo-

nial) concerns of the United States and Europe (Bengt-

son 1924; Bennett 1925, 1926; Whitbeck 1926, 1928;

Bowman 1932).

Chicago School topics were similarly interwoven in

nature–society geography during the founding decades

of the Annals. Studies of riverways (Brown 1913)

and economic resource regions (Whitbeck 1912; Dryer

1915) served the interest of government policy and

management. Conceptually this approach coalesced

in the presidential call for geography to adopt the

conceptual framework of human ecology (Barrows

1923). Building on earlier geographic views of human-

social response to the environment as well as inter-

disciplinary inﬂuences (Herbertson 1905; Davis 1906;

Entrikin 1980), the vision of Barrows spurred the

discipline-shaping inﬂuence of the Chicago School (G.

F. White 1985; Kates 1987, 1995). Annals writings

also featured core topics such as resource conserva-

tion (Whitaker 1940, 1941) and the role of indigenous

agriculture in anthropogenic environmental change

(Bryan 1941). They also focused on major ecological

concepts associated with autoecology, adaptation, and

proto-landscape ecology (Gleason 1922; Raup 1942;

Troll 1949). Notwithstanding these accomplishments,

a separate strand derived from the environmentally

determinist concept of “climate and geographic inﬂu-

ences” signiﬁcantly tarnished nature–society geography

throughout the time period (Huntington 1924; Semple

1922). It was distinct and conspicuously distanced in

the deﬁnitions and development of the Sauerian Berke-

ley School and the Chicago School of hazards research.

Retrospective Summary: 1911–2010

This article distinguishes a chronology beginning

with an intellectual landscape made up of the well-

deﬁned channels of the Sauerian Berkeley School and

the Chicago School of hazards research that had formed

within a decade of the founding of the Annals in 1911.

This pair of predominant traditions, each with ample

depth and continuity, functioned ﬁguratively as gorges

in the intellectual landscape of nature–society geog-

raphy into the 1980s (G. F. White 1985). During the

1970s and 1980s, increased blurring occurred in the pre-

dominantly two-channel intellectual landscape of early

nature–society geography. This transition phase—a dis-

cernibly second chronological period—corresponded

with a general reconﬁguring of many genres of aca-

demic thought during this period (“blurred genres” of

Geertz 1983). By the 1990s it had begun to recontour

the intellectual landscape into several intersecting core

topics and approaches (Figure 2). As a result, recent

nature–society geography evokes the image of multiple

braided streams, in contrast to the earlier dichotomous

conﬁguration.

The multiple strands of nature–society geography

during the 1990s and 2000s reveal the combination of

continuity and change. For example, topical continuity

is inscribed in vulnerability-and-risk studies via traces

to the Chicago School, whereas historical-cultural and

landscape-based environmental inquiry tends to suggest

traces to the Sauerian Berkeley School. Continuity is

less evidenced in other core areas. For example, the case

for continuity might argue environmental governance

and policy concern are rooted in Chicago School inﬂu-

ences and LULCC stems in part from cultural ecology

and thus Sauerian Berkeley School tracings. Yet the

close examination of inﬂuential Annals publications on

environmental governance (Bakker 2005; McCarthy

Downloaded By: [Zimmerer, Karl] At: 19:50 24 November 2010

Retrospective on Nature–Society Geography 1083

2006) and LULCC (Rindfuss et al. 2007), for example,

does not show direct inﬂuence of either the Chicago

or Berkeley schools as described earlier.12

Reﬂection on Nature–Society Geography

within the Discipline

The rich intellectual history of nature–society

geography in the Annals from 1911 to present can

be used to reﬂect on a few timely issues. One issue

is centered on the contribution of the Annals that is

arguably most notable in this intellectual history. It

is the designation in 2001 of Nature–Society within

an editorial structure of “four-ﬁeld geography” along

with People, Place, and Region (human geography),

Environmental Science (physical geography), and

Models, Methods, and GIS (predominantly GIScience

and cartography). This decision reﬂected the growth

and diversiﬁcation of nature–society publications in

the 1990s. It also responded to the argument posed

in Annals publications that human–environment

interaction is a predominant identity of the discipline

(Barrows 1923; Kates 1987, 2002; B. L. Turner 1989,

1997, 2002a, 2002b; Butzer 2002a; Wescoat 2002).

As a result, translating nature–society as a subﬁeld has

become increasingly important to conceptualizing the

intellectual spaces of geographic knowledge (Zimmerer

2007).13 For example, there are alternative frameworks

that distinguish the geographic discipline as either

two-ﬁeld (human and physical) or three-ﬁeld (human,

physical, and techniques) and thus might underplay

the position of nature–society geography.14

A second timely issue is the nature of distinc-

tions within nature–society geography. As sketched in

Figure 3, a pair of general themes, human–environment

Figure 3. Visualization of intellectual spaces of nature–society

geography.

interactions and nature–society relations, has emerged

as important epistemic centers made up of the multiple

strands of topics and approaches during recent decades.

Human–environment interaction is comprised chieﬂy

of LULCC along with hazards, risk, and vulnerability

science—all advanced signiﬁcantly in Annals writings.

It tends to tie to physical geography and economic

approaches. By contrast, the area of nature–society

relations is centered most conspicuously on political

ecology and environmental governance, along with

connections favoring critical human geography.

Characterization of these intellectual spaces as

evidencing the dynamics of coexistence, in addition

to contention, has recently become vital to nature–

society geography (Zimmerer 2007; B. L. Turner

and Robbins 2008).15 Here the intellectual history

of Annals publications suggests a contrast to the

dichotomous intellectual spaces that might otherwise

be inferred.16 For example, signiﬁcant overlap of

coexisting intellectual spaces is suggested in a number

of topics and approaches (Table 1) as well as the actual

works of many individual practitioners (Figure 3).

Examples of this cross-cutting appear in Annals writings

on nature–society relations that are integrated with

signiﬁcant use of environmental science (Liverman

1990; Zimmerer 1994; M. D. Turner 1999; Bassett and

Koli Bi 2000; Naughton-Treves 2002; Campbell 2007;

Goldman 2009; Galt 2010) and human–environment

analysis that integrates the roles of policy and politics

through the structuration concept (Laney 2002;

Chowdhury and Turner 2006; Brenner forthcoming).

In sum, the duality of discernable intra-subﬁeld intel-

lectual spaces is of potential heuristic and pedagogic

use while it must be seen to have deﬁning limitations

(Figure 3).17

Environmental Interdisciplinarity and

Policy

Reﬂection on environmental interdisciplinarity and

policy is timely in light of major challenges and oppor-

tunities facing nature–society geography. Interdisci-

plinarity holds unprecedented importance to the Annals

as a consequence of the restructuring of the academy (B.

L. Turner 2002a, 2002b) and the expansion of interdis-

ciplinary environmental programs (Baerwald 2010).18

Translating in the context of interdisciplinarity requires

the practitioner to identify with a home base of sub-

disciplinary knowledge (Zimmerer 2007). At the same

time, ﬁgurative journeying is increasingly common in

Downloaded By: [Zimmerer, Karl] At: 19:50 24 November 2010

1084 Zimmerer

Table 1. General level of reliance on core themes in nature-society geography (1990–2010)

Human–environment interactions Nature–society relations

Environmental governance and political ecology Moderate High

Environmental hazards, risks, and vulnerability science High Moderate

Land use and cover change science High Moderate

Human–environment interaction Moderate-high Moderate-high

Environmental landscape history and ideas Moderate Moderate

Scientiﬁc concepts in environmental policy and management Moderate High

the intellectual spaces of interdisciplinary “environ-

mental borderlands.”19 Here nature–society geography

has long furnished a subdisciplinary home for Annals

publications spanning across important interdisci-

plinary spaces (e.g., with environmental and ecological

anthropology, see Grossman 1977; Knapp 1994).

The vital role of Annals nature–society publications

can be illustrated with speciﬁc reference to the following

interdisciplinary realms: (1) earth system and ecological

science, (2) broad environmental social science, and (3)

environmental history.

First, earth system and ecological science is bridged

primarily to the theme of human–environment in-

teraction (Pitman 2005; Marston 2008). It recognizes

humans as currently “integral [in] virtually every ecosys-

tem” and hence a present-day anthropocene (Redman,

Grove, and Kuby 2004, 161). This area of interdisci-

plinary exchange both historical (Brookﬁeld 1962) and

illustrated in recent contributions. It is advanced, for

example, in the increasingly sophisticated and interdis-

ciplinary integration of land use decision-making with

socioeconomic and environmental complexity (Parker

et al. 2003; R.T. Walker 2003; Caldas et al. 2007;

Rindfuss et al. 2007). Strong interdisciplinary ties are

thus suggested in environmental borderlands beyond

the space of nature–society geography per se (Figure 3).

A second interdisciplinary engagement corresponds

to critical approaches in environmental social sciences

and humanities. Outside geography this area is illus-

trated in the advance of critical social-environment

theory (Goldman and Schuurman 2000; Belsky 2002)

and conceptual frameworks of modernity and subjec-

tivity involving society–environment relations and

knowledge (e.g., Latour 1993; Agrawal 2005; Agrawal

and Lemos 2006). Ties to nature–society geography are

illustrated in the social theoretic frameworks of post-

structural and postcolonial discourse, actor-network,

and power-knowledge theories of environmental

science, and technology, along with environmental

policy and management (Swyngedouw 1999; Robbins

2001; Birkenholtz 2009; Graham et al. 2010; Shaw,

Robbins, and Jones 2010; see also Figure 3).

A third interdisciplinary borderland is made up of

environmental and spatial history along with humanis-

tic and design approaches to environmental issues (R.

White 2004), including the formative history of geog-

raphy in the context of interdisciplinarity (Zimmerer

2006). It tends to cut across the intellectual spaces of

human–environment interactions and nature–society

relations (Table 1). The central role of the concept of

the “agency of nature” offers linkages to the former,

whereas sustained focus on political and social power

is a tie to the latter. Vibrant exchange is promised, for

example, in historically framed works that are broadly

engaged with science, technology, and the past and

present interplay of diverse environmental knowledge

systems (B. L. Turner, Kates, and Meyers 1994; Gal-

loway 1996; Richardson 1996; Endﬁeld and Nash 2002;

Kirsch 2002; Etter, McAlpine, and Possingham 2008).

Translation of nature–society geography is equally

vital in relation to environmental policy. Recent An-

nals publications on environmental governance offer

abundant examples, and early policy writings abounded

in the ﬁrst decade of Annals publications (e.g., Brown

1913) and later the Chicago School (G. F. White

1985). Subsequent nature–society writings in the An-

nals have offered a broad appeal to policy (Kates 1987,

1995; Wescoat 1992). Annals publications and closely

related nature–society geography have underscored the

importance of the pursuit of pragmatic applicability,

especially those pertaining to sustainability science

(Kates 1995), vulnerability science (Cutter 2003),

human dimensions of global environmental change

(B. L. Turner 1991), and climate change in particular

(Easterling et al. 2007), as well as socially sustainable

conservation geographies (Zimmerer 1999). The goal

of translating nature–society geography in policy has

spurred these endeavors.20

Downloaded By: [Zimmerer, Karl] At: 19:50 24 November 2010

Retrospective on Nature–Society Geography 1085

Conclusion: Beyond Binaries in

Nature–Society Geography

This study’s retrospective and reﬂection illustrate

how nature–society geography in the Annals has been

intellectually rich and varied since the founding of the

journal in 1911. One principal trajectory has been the

shift from binary intellectual spaces. It shows the emer-

gence of a multistrand conﬁguration of nature–society

geography in the 1970s and 1980s that has ﬂourished in

recent decades (1990–2010). Speciﬁc reﬂection illus-

trates the shift to postbinary intellectual structures also

in the Annals establishment of nature–society as a dis-

tinct subﬁeld and intellectual space in the design of four-

ﬁeld geography. It highlights, moreover, the intellectual

spaces within nature–society geography as consisting of

overlapping human–environment and nature–society

epistemic centers but not restricted to them. Finally,

it emphasizes the role of multiple strands, rather than

dichotomous spaces, in the links of nature–society geog-

raphy to environmental interdisciplinarity and policy.

These trends and trajectories are amply demonstrated

and still evolving in the dynamic intellectual history of

nature–society geography in the Annals.

Acknowledgments

In researching this article during the past couple

years, in lead-up to the project, and especially in the ﬁ-

nal writing I am grateful for comments, suggestions, and

ideas of Tom Bassett, Martha Bell, Trevor Birkenholtz,

Judith Carney, Eric Carter, Bill Cronon, Bill Denevan,

Bill Easterling, Nick Entrikin, Margaret Fitzsimmons,

Dan Gade, George Henderson, Robin Leichenko,

Diana Liverman, Kent Mathewson, James McCarthy,

Marie Price, Paul Robbins, Dianne Rocheleau, Abdi

Samatar, Laura Schneider, Bill Turner, Matt Turner,

Petra Tschakert, Michael Watts, Brent Yarnal, Ken

Young, reviewers, and seminar students (see note

2). It is dedicated to the memory of my graduate

thesis adviser, Jim Parsons. Parts of the research

were presented as colloquia in the Departments of

Geography at Penn State University (2006, 2008) and

Rutgers University (2008) and as the Ralph Brown

Honorary Lecture in the Geography Department at

the University of Minnesota (2009).

Notes

1. This study is engaged with an explicitly broad deﬁni-

tion of the nature–society subﬁeld of geography. General

nature–society geography includes various approaches

and areas of emphasis such as climate change adapta-

tions and mitigation, conservation geography, cultural

and human ecology, environmental geography, human

dimensions of global change, land change science, natu-

ral hazards, political ecology, social-ecological resilience,

sustainability science, and vulnerability science. The

term nature–society geography has been used previously

in Annals publications to refer to this broad view of the

subﬁeld (Wilbanks 1994; Hanson 1999). Other com-

mon designations in this subﬁeld have included natu-

ral hazards and resource geography. The term nature–

society geography is chosen for this study to correspond

to the editorial designation of the Nature Society section

within the editorial structure of the Annals. Although

focused on Annals writings on nature–society, the study

selectively incorporates as needed non-Annals publica-

tions in geography and in related ﬁelds.

2. The approach of intellectual history in geography (e.g.,

Bassin 1992) suggests the value of tracing backward the

role of ideas in academic, scholarly, and policy-related

discourses while taking care to counter the undesirable

inﬂuence or assumption of historiographic presentism.

Its chronological organization is also considered neces-

sary given the essay’s constraint of space.

3. These publications consist of approximately 175 and 150

that were published in the 1990–2010 and 1911–1989

periods, respectively. Most of these publications are re-

ferred to in the article, which also makes uses of a few

dozen non-Annals writings. The editorial charge neces-

sitate staying primarily within the pages of the Annals.

These guidelines do not mean to downplay the signiﬁ-

cance to intellectual history of social contextualization

and the role of broader forces (e.g., imperialism, colo-

nialism, etc.). The majority of research for this article

was conducted between July 2008 and July 2010, while

some of the readings were parts of research and teaching

dating to my ongoing studies of environmental geogra-

phy and political and cultural ecology. I am grateful to

undergraduate and graduate students in geography and

related majors and graduate programs who participated

in classes and seminars involved in reading signiﬁcant

portions of the Annals writings on nature–society geog-

raphy. Special thanks to graduate students in the sem-

inar on Human–Environment Geography (Geography

507/530) in the Geography Departments at Pennsylva-

nia State University in Fall 2009, and the seminar on

Nature Society Geography (Geography 930) taught at

the University of Wisconsin–Madison in Fall 2006.

4. Translation is a potent and abiding trope in research

scholarship and the history of ideas (Geertz 1983). It

refers generally to “expression or rendering of something

in another medium or form” (Oxford English Dictionary

1973, 2347).

5. The concept of translation within nature–society geog-

raphy offers an addition, rather than counter, to views

of this intellectual history through the principal lexicon

of contestation (e.g., Butzer 2002a; B. L. Turner 2002a,

2002b; see also Hanson 1999).

6. These Annals contributions demonstrate the differen-

tiated and historically situated social-environmental

power of institutions ranging from states to local social

groups, along with the importance of individual agency.

Downloaded By: [Zimmerer, Karl] At: 19:50 24 November 2010

1086 Zimmerer

Note that this study adopts a broad deﬁnition of environ-

mental governance as “interventions aiming at changes

in environment-related incentives, knowledge, institu-

tions, decision making, and behaviors” (Agrawal and

Lemos 2006, 298).

7. Understanding the social dynamics of governance

landscapes has beneﬁted through continued engage-

ment and advance of feminist perspectives in envi-

ronmental geography generally (Momsen 2000; Reed

and Christie 2009) and speciﬁcally in the ap-

proach of feminist political ecology (Carney 1993;

Rocheleau 1995; Rocheleau and Thomas-Slayter 1996;

Rocheleau and Edmunds 1997; Nightingale 2003;

O’Reilly 2006).

8. The latter owes to the inﬂuence of well-designed inter-

disciplinary funding programs on human–environment

interaction at the National Science Foundation

(Baerwald 2010). See also Zimmerer (2007) and B. L.

Turner and Robbins (2008).

9. Framing environmental knowledge systems as entwined

and engaged with relations of social power is one of

several examples of a critical geographic perspective be-

ing integrated into nature–society geography during this

time period (1990–2010).

10. These offshoots included a large number of individuals

who adopted and furthered the historic Berkeley and

Chicago approaches to nature–society geography in di-

verse institutions that ranged across academia in the

United States and abroad, as well as broadly deﬁned cir-

cles of environmental planning and management.

11. Examples of pioneering nature–society works not pub-

lished in the Annals included Nietschmann (1972) and

Watts (1983). These highly inﬂuential works in hu-

man ecological and political economy perspectives, re-

spectively, exerted widespread inﬂuence that included

Annals writings and extended well beyond to interdis-

ciplinary networks in anthropology, sociology, history,

ecology, and development studies (Zimmerer 1996).

12. Although the studies cited are amply situated in their in-

tellectual historical contexts, respectively, they show the

absence of speciﬁc traces, such as bibliographic citation,

to the earlier “schools.”

13. Current four-ﬁeld geography differs signiﬁcantly from

a previous well-known depiction of the quadripartite

organization of knowledge in the discipline (Pattison

1964).

14. Alternative views omit nature–society as a geographic

subﬁeld in approaches that are principally two-ﬁeld (hu-

man and physical geography; Thrift 2002; Johnston

2003; Castree, Demeritt, and Liverman 2009) or three-

ﬁeld (human and physical geography with GIScience;

Marston 2008).

15. The importance of characterizing this coexistence in-

cludes the increased need for identifying the cohe-

siveness and integrity of nature–society geography as a

subﬁeld (Yarnal and Neff 2004). Distinctness is also valu-

able in determining competencies and concentrating im-

portant advances, ranging from concepts and theory to

methods and practice, within themes. Notwithstanding

the focus here on coexisting intellectual spaces, the role

of contention through disagreement and debate is vitally

important to any description of these twin epistemic cen-

ters. Still, the coexistence described in this study runs

contrary to inﬂuential narratives that suggest a winner-

take-all struggle, with inferences of dynastic-style suc-

cession, to determine hegemonic inﬂuence over the

nature–society area (e.g., political ecology vs. human–

environment approaches). One important argument for

coexistence along a continuum of epistemic orientations

is based on recognition of the combined roles of a priori

theoretical framing and responding to the need of the

speciﬁc research question and its empirical focus (M. D.

Turner 2009).

16. Another nonbinary characterization of this coexistence

regards the role of theory. In this regard, Annals writ-

ings have traversed the spectrum from a priori framing

of research based on comprehensive theorization (e.g.,

Willems-Braun 1997; Prudham 2003) to theoretical ori-

entations and frameworks developed in conjunction

with ﬁeldwork and empirical historical analysis (e.g.,

Walters and Vayda 2009). They do not, however, corre-

spond to a simple binary distinction between human–

environment interactions and nature–society geogra-

phy. The interpretation of this study is meant to offer a

comparison to that of B. L. Turner and Robbins (2008),

who identiﬁed and differentiated a similar pair of ﬁelds

as discrete and bounded through divergent deﬁnitions.

Their interpretation holds that environmental services,

along with landscapes and meso- and global-scale fram-

ing, belong to the human–environment approach of land

cover science (LCS), whereas, in contrast, local-scale

impact on social units and groups is described as the ter-

rain of political ecology. On nonbinary interpretation of

the intellectual spaces and history of human geography,

see Warf (2007).

17. For example, the representation of twin centers, as ex-

clusive nuclei, neither demarcates discretely partitioned

intellectual spaces nor constructs a comprehensive map

of nature–society geography in the Annals. On over-

lapping human–environment and nature–society views

of vulnerabilities in climate change, see O’Brien et al.

(2007).

18. On the restructuring academy, see also Gregory, Gurnell,

and Petts (2002). On the example of interdisciplinary

urban ecology, see Petts, Owens, and Bulkeley (2008).

19. On the home-travel metaphor and interdisciplinarity,

see Friedman (2001).

20. On this “normative turn” in the discipline, see Staeheli

and Mitchell (2005).

References

Adger, W. N. 2000. Institutional adaptation to environmen-

tal risk under the transition in Vietnam. Annals of the

Association of American Geographers 90 (4): 738–58.

Agrawal, A. 2005. Environmentality: Technologies of govern-

ment and the making of subjects. Durham, NC: Duke Uni-

versity Press.

Agrawal, A., and M. C. Lemos. 2006. Environmental gov-

ernance. Annual Review of Environment and Resources

31:297–325.

Awanyo, L. 2001. Labor, ecology, and a failed agenda of mar-

ket incentives: The political ecology of agrarian reforms

Downloaded By: [Zimmerer, Karl] At: 19:50 24 November 2010

Retrospective on Nature–Society Geography 1087

in Ghana. Annals of the Association of American Geogra-

phers 91 (1): 92–121.

Baerwald, T. 2010. Prospects for geography as an interdisci-

plinary discipline. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 100 (3): 494–501.

Bailey, I. 2007. Market environmentalism, new environ-

mental policy instruments, and climate policy in the

United Kingdom and Germany. Annals of the Association

of American Geographers 97 (3): 530–50.

Bakker, K. 2005. Neoliberalizing nature? Market environ-

mentalism in water supply in England and Wales. An-

nals of the Association of American Geographers 95 (3):

542–65.

Barnett, J., S. Lambert, and I. Fry. 2008. The hazards of in-

dicators: Insights from the Environmental Vulnerability

Index. Annals of the Association of American Geographers

98 (1): 102–19.

Barrett, E. M. 1974. Colonization of Santo Domingo Valley.

Annals of the Association of American Geographers 64 (1):

34–53.

Barrows, H. H. 1923. Geography as human ecology. Annals

of the Association of American Geographers 13 (1): 1–14.

Bassett, T. J. 1988. The political ecology of peasant-herder

conﬂicts in Northern Ivory Coast. Annals of the Associa-

tion of American Geographers 78 (3): 453–72.

Bassett, T. J., and Z. Koli Bi. 2000. Environmental discourses

and the Ivorian Savanna. Annals of the Association of

American Geographers 90 (1): 67–95.

Bassin, M. 1992. Geographical determinism in ﬁn-de-si`

ecle

Marxism—Plekhanov, Georgii and the environmental

basis of Russian history. Annals of the Association of Amer-

ican Geographers 82 (1): 3–22.

Bebbington, A. 2000. Reencountering development: Liveli-

hood transitions and place transformations in the Andes.

Annals of the Association of American Geographers 90 (3):

495–520.

Bebbington, A., and J. Carney. 1990. Geography in the inter-

national agricultural research centers—Theoretical and

practical concerns. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 80 (1): 34–48.

Becker, L. C. 2001. Seeing green in Mali’s woods: Colonial

legacy, forest use, and local control. Annals of the Associ-

ation of American Geographers 91 (3): 504–26.

Belsky, J. M. 2002. Beyond the natural resource and environ-

mental sociology divide: Insights from a transdisciplinary

perspective. Society and Natural Resources 15: 269–80.

Bendix, J., and C. M. Liebler. 1999. Place, distance, and en-

vironmental news: Geographic variation in newspaper

coverage of the spotted owl conﬂict. Annals of the Asso-

ciation of American Geographers 89 (4): 658–76.

Bengtson, N. A. 1924. Some essential features of the geogra-

phy of the Santa Elena Peninsula, Ecuador. Annals of the

Association of American Geographers 14 (3): 50–158.

Benjaminson, T. A., R. Rohde, E. Sjaastad, P. Wisborg, and

T. Lebert. 2006. Land reform, range ecology, and carry-

ing capacities in Namaqualand, South Africa. Annals of

the Association of American Geographers 96 (3): 524–40.

Bennett, H. H. 1925. Some geographic aspects of Western

Ecuador. Annals of the Association of American Geogra-

phers 15 (3): 126–47.

———. 1926. Agriculture in Central America. Annals of the

Association of American Geographers 16 (2): 63–84.

———. 1931. The problem of soil erosion in the United

States. Annals of the Association of American Geographers

21 (3): 147–70.

Birkenholtz, T. 2009. Irrigated landscapes, produced scarcity,

and adaptive social institutions in Rajasthan, India. An-

nals of the Association of American Geographers 99 (1):

118–37.

Blaikie, P., and J. Muldavin. 2004. Upstream, downstream,

China, India: The politics of environment in the

Himalayan region. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 94 (3): 520–48.

Blomley, N. 2009. Privatization, property and the remaking

of nature–society relations. Annals of the Association of

American Geographers 99 (3): 629–31.

Bowen, W. M., M. J. Salling, K. E. Haynes, and E. J.

Cyran. 1995. Toward environmental justice: Spatial eq-

uity in Ohio and Cleveland. Annals of the Association of

American Geographers 85 (4): 641–63.

Bowman, I. 1932. Planning in pioneer settlement. Annals of

the Association of American Geographers 22 (2): 93–107.

Boyd, M. 2002. Identiﬁcation of anthropogenic burning in

the paleoecological record of the northern prairies: A

new approach. Annals of the Association of American Ge-

ographers 92 (3): 471–87.

Bracken, L. J., and E. A. Oughton. 2006. “What do you

mean?” The importance of language in developing in-

terdisciplinary research. Transactions of the Institute of

British Geographers (New Series) 31:371–82.

Brenner, J. forthcoming. Pasture conversion, private ranch-

ers, and the invasive exotic Buffelgrass (Pennisetum cil-

iare) in Mexico’s Sonoran desert. Annals of the Association

of American Geographers.

Brookﬁeld, H. C. 1962. Local study and comparative method:

an example from Central New Guinea. Annals of the

Association of American Geographers 52 (3): 242–54.

Brown, R. M. 1913. The ﬁnal report of the National Water-

ways Commission. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 3 (1): 88–92.

Bryan, K. 1941. Pre-Columbian agriculture in the Southwest,

as conditioned by periods of alluviation. Annals of the

Association of American Geographers 31 (4): 219–42.

Bunkse, E. V. 1978. Commoner attitudes toward landscape

and nature. Annals of the Association of American Geog-

raphers 68 (4): 551–66.

———. 2003. Commentary on “The Lowenthal papers”:

Environment, the humanities, and landscape. Annals

of the Association of American Geographers 93 (4):

882–84.

Butt, B., A. Shortridge, and A. M. G. A. WinklerPrins. 2009.

Pastoral herd management, drought coping strategies,

and cattle mobility in Southern Kenya. Annals of the

Association of American Geographers 99 (2): 309–34.

Butzer, K. W. 1992a. The Americas before and after 1492—

An introduction to current geographical research. An-

nals of the Association of American Geographers 82 (3):

345–68.

———. 1992b. From Columbus to Acosta—Science, geog-

raphy, and the New-World. Annals of the Association of

American Geographers 82 (3): 543–65.

———. 2002a. Commentary/response: Turner’s “Contested

Identities.” Annals of the Association of American Geogra-

phers 92 (1): 75–78.

Downloaded By: [Zimmerer, Karl] At: 19:50 24 November 2010

1088 Zimmerer

———. 2002b. French wetland agriculture in Atlantic

Canada and its European roots: Different avenues to

historical diffusion. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 92 (3): 451–70.

Butzer, K., and D. M. Helgren. 2005. Livestock, land cover,

and environmental history: The tablelands of New South

Wales, Australia, 1820–1920. Annals of the Association of

American Geographers 95 (1): 80–111.

Byers, A. 2005. Contemporary human impacts on alpine

ecosystems in the Sagarmatha (Mt. Everest) National

Park, Khumbu, Nepal. Annals of the Association of Amer-

ican Geographers 95 (1): 112–40.

Caldas, M., R. Walker, E. Arima, S. Perz, S. Aldrich, and

C. Simmons. 2007. Theorizing land cover and land use

change: The peasant economy of Amazonian deforesta-

tion. Annals of the Association of American Geographers

97 (1): 86–110.

Campbell, L. M. 2007. Local conservation practice and global

discourse: A political ecology of sea turtle conservation.

Annals of the Association of American Geographers 97 (2):

313–34.

Carney, J. 1993. Converting the wetlands, engendering the

environment—The intersection of gender with agrar-

ian change in the Gambia. Economic Geography 69 (4):

329–48.

Castree, N., D. Demeritt, and D. Liverman. 2009. Introduc-

tion: Making sense of environmental geography. In A

companion to environmental geography, ed. N. Castree, D.

Demeritt, D. Liverman, and B. Rhoads, 1–16. Malden,

MA: Blackwell.

Chappell, J. E. 1975. Ecological dimension—Russian and

American views. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 65 (2): 144–62.

Chowdhury, R. R., and B. L. Turner II. 2006. Reconcil-

ing agency and structure in empirical analysis: Small-

holder land use in the Southern Yucat´

an, Mexico.

Annals of the Association of American Geographers 96 (2):

302–22.

Coomes, O. T., and B. L. Barham. 1997. Rain forest extrac-

tion and conservation in Amazonia. Geographical Journal

163:180–88.

Cosgrove, D. 2003. Globalism and tolerance in early mod-

ern geography. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 93 (4): 852–70.

Cowell, C. M., and J. M. Dyer. 2002. Vegetation devel-

opment in a modiﬁed riparian environment: Human

imprints on an Allegheny River wilderness. Annals of

the Association of American Geographers 92 (2): 189–

202.

Cutter, S. L. 2003. The vulnerability of science and the

science of vulnerability. Annals of the Association of

American Geographers 93 (1): 1–12.

Cutter, S. L., J. T. Mitchell, and M. S. Scott. 2000. Reveal-

ing the vulnerability of people and places: A case study

of Georgetown County, South Carolina. Annals of the

Association of American Geographers 90 (4): 713–37.

Davis, W. M. 1906. An inductive study of the content of

geography. Bulletin of the American Geographical Society

38:67–84.

Demeritt, D. 2001a. The construction of global warming

and the politics of science. Annals of the Association of

American Geographers 91 (2): 307–37.

———. 2001b. Science and the understanding of science: A

reply to Schneider. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 91 (2): 345–48.

Denevan, W. M. 1967. Livestock numbers in 19th century

New Mexico, and the problem of gullying in Southwest.

Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 57 (4):

691–703.

———. 1992. The Pristine Myth—The landscape of the

Americas in 1492. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 82 (3): 369–85.

———. 1996. A bluff model of riverine settlement in pre-

historic Amazonia. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 86 (4): 654–81.

Dickinson, R. E. 1952. Korea: Land, volk, schicksal. Annals

of the Association of American Geographers 42:108.

Doolittle, W. E. 1984. Agricultural change as an incremental

process. Annals of the Association of American Geographers

74 (1): 124–37.

———. 1992. Agriculture in North America on the eve

of contact—A reassessment. Annals of the Association of

American Geographers 82 (3): 386–401.

Dougill, A. J., D. S. G. Thomas, and A. L. Heathwaite. 1999.

Environmental change in the Kalahari: Integrated land

degradation studies for nonequilibrium dryland environ-

ments. Annals of the Association of American Geographers

89 (3): 420–42.

Dryer, C. R. 1915. Natural economic regions. Annals of the

Association of American Geographers 5 (1): 121–25.

Dull, R. A. 2007. Evidence for forest clearance, agriculture,

and human-induced erosion in Precolumbian El Sal-

vador. Annals of the Association of American Geographers

97 (1): 127–41.

Dunning, N. P., S. Luzzadder-Beach, T. Beach, J. G. Jones,

V. Scarborough, and T. P. Culbert. 2002. Arising from

the bajos: The evolution of neotropical landscape and

the rise of Maya Civilization. Annals of the Association of

American Geographers 92 (2): 267–83.

Easterling, W. E., P. K. Aggarwal, P. Batima, K. M.

Brander, L. Erda, M. Howden, A. Kirilenko, J. Mor-

ton, J.-F. Soussana, S. Schmidhuber, and F. Tubiello.

2007. Food, ﬁbre and forest products. In Climate change

2007: Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability. Contribution

of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of

the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, ed. M. L.

Parry, O. F. Canziani, J. P. Palutikof, P. J. van der Linden,

and C. E. Hanson, 273–313. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge

University Press.

Emel, J. L., and E. Brooks. 1988. Changes in form and func-

tion of property rights institutions under threatened re-

source scarcity. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 78 (2): 241–52.

Emel, J. L., and R. Roberts. 1995. Institutional form and its

effect on environmental change: The case of groundwa-

ter in the Southern High Plains. Annals of the Association

of American Geographers 85 (4): 664–83.

Endﬁeld, G. H., and D. J. Nash. 2002. Missionaries and

morals: Climatic discourse in nineteenth-century cen-

tral southern Africa. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 92 (4): 727–42.

Endﬁeld, G. H., and S. L. O’Hara. 1999. Degrada-

tion, drought, and dissent: An environmental his-

tory of colonial Michoacan, west central Mexico.

Downloaded By: [Zimmerer, Karl] At: 19:50 24 November 2010

Retrospective on Nature–Society Geography 1089

Annals of the Association of American Geographers 89 (3):

402–19.

Entrikin, J. N. 1980. Robert Park’s human ecology and hu-

man geography. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 70 (1): 43–58.

Etter, A., C. McAlpine, and H. Possingham. 2008. Histori-

cal patterns and drivers of landscape change in Colom-

bia since 1500: A regionalized spatial approach. An-

nals of the Association of American Geographers 98 (1):

2–23.

Farley, K. A. 2007. Grasslands to tree plantations: Forest tran-

sition in the Andes of Ecuador. Annals of the Association

of American Geographers 97 (4): 755–71.

Feitelson, E., and I. Fischhendler. 2009. Spaces of wa-

ter governance: The case of Israel and its neighbors.

Annals of the Association of American Geographers 99 (4):

728–45.

Feldman, T. D., and A. E. G. Jonas. 2000. Sage scrub revolu-

tion? Property rights, political fragmentation, and con-

servation planning in Southern California under the

federal Endangered Species Act. Annals of the Association

of American Geographers 90 (2): 256–92.

Fosberg, F. R. 1976. Geography, ecology and biogeography.

Annals of the Association of American Geographers 66 (1):

117–28.

Freidberg, S. 2001. Gardening on the edge: The social condi-

tions of unsustainability on an African urban periphery.

Annals of the Association of American Geographers 91 (2):

349–69.

Frenkel, S., and J. Western. 1988. Pretext or prophylaxis—

Racial segregation and malarial mosquitos in a British

tropical colony—Sierra Leone. Annals of the Association

of American Geographers 78 (2): 211–28.

Friedman, S. S. 2001. Academic feminism and interdisci-

plinarity. Feminist Studies 27 (2): 504–9.

Gade, D. W. 1992. Landscape, system, and identity in the

postconquest Andes. Annals of the Association of Ameri-

can Geographers 82 (3): 460–77.

———. 2004. Tradition, territory, and terroir in French vini-

culture: Cassis, France, and Appellation Contrˆ

ol´

ee. An-

nals of the Association of American Geographers 94 (4):

848–67.

Galloway, J. H. 1996. Botany in the service of empire:

The Barbados cane-breeding program and the revival

of the Caribbean sugar industry, 1880s-1930s. Annals

of the Association of American Geographers 86 (4): 682–

706.

Galt, R. E. 2010. Scaling up political ecology: The case of

illegal pesticides on fresh vegetables imported into the

United States, 1996–2006. Annals of the Association of

American Geographers 100 (2): 327–55.

Geertz, C. 1983. Local knowledge: Further essays in interpretive

anthropology. New York: Basic Books.

Giordano, M. 2003. The geography of the commons: The role

of scale and space. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 93 (2): 365–75.

Gleason, H. A. 1922. The vegetational history of the Middle

West. Annals of the Association of American Geographers

12 (1): 39–85.

Gober, P., C. W. Kirkwood, R. C. Balling, A. W. Ellis, and

S. Deitrick. 2010. Water planning under climatic uncer-

tainty in Phoenix: Why we need a new paradigm. An-

nals of the Association of American Geographers 100 (2):

356–72.

Goldman, M. 2009. Constructing connectivity: Conser-

vation corridors and conservation politics in East

African rangelands. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 99 (2): 335–59.

Goldman, M., and R. A. Schuurman. 2000. Closing the “great

divide”: New social theory on society and nature. Annual

Review of Sociology 26:563–84.

Gould, P. 1963. Man against his environment—A game of

theoretic framework. Annals of the Association of Ameri-

can Geographers 53:290–97.

Graham, I., R. Shaw, P. R. Robbins, and J. P. Jones III.

2010. A bug’s life and the spatial ontologies of mosquito

management. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 100 (2): 373–92.

Greenwood, N. H. 1965. Developments in the irrigation re-

sources of the Sevan-Razdan Cascade of Soviet Armenia.

Annals of the Association of American Geographers 55 (2):

291–307.

Gregory, K. J., A. M. Gurnell, and G. E. Petts. 2002. Restruc-

turing physical geography. Transactions of the Institute of

British Geographers (New Series) 27 (2): 136–54.

Grossman, L. S. 1977. Man–environment relationships in

anthropology and geography. Annals of the Association of

American Geographers 67 (1): 126–44.

———. 1981. The cultural ecology of economic develop-

ment. Annals of the Association of American Geographers

71 (2): 220–36.

———. 1993. The political ecology of banana exports and

local food-production in St. Vincent, Eastern Caribbean.

Annals of the Association of American Geographers 83 (2):

347–67.

Hanson, S. 1999. Isms and schisms: Healing the rift between

nature–society and space society traditions in human

geography. Annals of the Association of American Geogra-

phers 89 (1): 133–43.

Harman, J. R., J. A. Harrington, and R. S. Cerveny. 1998.

Balancing scientiﬁc and ethical values in environmental

science. Annals of the Association of American Geographers

88 (2): 287–89.

Harner, J. 2001. Place identity and copper mining in Sonora,

Mexico. Annals of the Association of American Geographers

91 (4): 660–80.

Harris, C. D. 1951. The Soviet Union: Nature, people and

economy. “Minor country studies, our knowledge of the

Earth.” Annals of the Association of American Geographers

41:185–86.

Hart, J. F. 1968. Loss and abandonment of cleared farm land

in Eastern United States. Annals of the Association of

American Geographers 58 (3): 417–40.

Hartshorne, R., and S. N. Dicken. 1935. A classiﬁcation of

the agricultural regions of Europe and North America

on a uniform statistical basis. Annals of the Association of

American Geographers 25 (2): 99–120.

Harvey, D. W. 1966. Theoretical concepts and analysis of

agricultural land use patterns in geography. Annals of the

Association of American Geographers 56 (3): 361–74.

Heiman, M. K., and B. D. Solomon. 2004. Power to the peo-

ple: Electric utility restructuring and the commitment to

renewable energy. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 94 (1): 94–116.

Downloaded By: [Zimmerer, Karl] At: 19:50 24 November 2010

1090 Zimmerer

Herbertson, A. 1905. The major natural regions. The Geo-

graphical Journal 24 (3): 300–12.

Hobbs, J., and E. Woolmington. 1972. Water and urban de-

centralization in New South Wales. Annals of the Asso-

ciation of American Geographers 62 (1): 37–41.

Hovorka, A. J. 2005. The (re)production of gendered po-

sitionality in Botswana’s commercial urban agriculture

sector. Annals of the Association of American Geographers

95 (2): 294–313.

Huntington, E. 1924. Geography and natural selection. An-

nals of the Association of American Geographers 14 (1):

1–16.

Ingram, M. 2007. Biology and beyond: The science of “back

to nature” farming in the United States. Annals of the

Association of American Geographers 97 (2): 298–312.

James, P. E. 1953. Patterns of land use in Northeast Brazil.

Annals of the Association of American Geographers 43:

98–126.

Jepson, W., C. Brannstrom, and A. Filippi. 2010. Ac-

cess regimes and regional land change in the Brazilian

Cerrado, 1972–2002. Annals of the Association of Ameri-

can Geographers 100 (1): 87–111.

Jiang, H. 2004. Cooperation, land use, and the envi-

ronment in Uxin Ju: The changing landscape of

a Mongolian-Chinese borderland in China. Annals

of the Association of American Geographers 94 (1):

117–39.

Johnston, R. 2003. Geography: A different sort of discipline?

Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers (New

Series) 28 (2): 133–41.

Kaika, M. 2006. Dams as symbols of modernization: The ur-

banization of nature between geographical imagination

and materiality. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 96 (2): 276–301.

Kates, R. W. 1987. The human environment—The road not

taken, the road still beckoning. Annals of the Association

of American Geographers 77 (4): 525–34.

———. 1995. Labnotes from the Jeremiah experiment: Hope

for a sustainable transition. Annals of the Association of

American Geographers 85 (4): 623–40.

———. 2002. Commentary/response: Turner’s “Contested

identities.” Annals of the Association of American Geogra-

phers 92 (1): 79–81.

Katz, C. 1995. Major minor—Theory, nature, and politics.

Annals of the Association of American Geographers 85 (1):

164–68.

Kirsch, S. 2002. John Wesley Powell and the mapping of

the Colorado Plateau, 1869–1879: Survey, science, geo-

graphical solutions, and the economy of environmental

values. Annals of the Association of American Geographers

92 (3): 548–72.

Klooster, D. 2006. Environmental certiﬁcation of forests in

Mexico: The political ecology of a nongovernmental

market intervention. Annals of the Association of Ameri-

can Geographers 96 (3): 541–65.

Knapp, G. 1994. Review of Smallholders, householders—Farm

families and the ecology of intensive, sustainable agriculture

by R. M. Netting. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 84 (2): 314–17.

Knight, C. G. 1971. Ecology of African sleeping sickness.

Annals of the Association of American Geographers 61 (1):

23–44.

Knox, J. C. 1977. Human impacts on Wisconsin stream chan-

nels. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 67

(3): 323–42.

Laney, R. M. 2002. Disaggregating induced intensiﬁcation

for land-change analysis: A case study from Madagascar.

Annals of the Association of American Geographers 92 (4):

702–26.

Latour, B. 1993. We have never been modern. Cambridge, MA:

Harvard University Press.

Le Billon, P. 2008. Diamond wars? Conﬂict diamonds and

geographies of resource wars. Annals of the Association of

American Geographers 98 (2): 345–72.

Linton, J. 2008. Is the hydrologic cycle sustainable? A

historical-geographical critique of a modern concept.

Annals of the Association of American Geographers 98 (3):

630–49.

Liu, L. 2008. Sustainability efforts in China: Reﬂections on

the environmental uznets curve through a locational

evaluation of eco-communities. Annals of the Association

of American Geographers 98 (3): 604–29.

Liverman, D. M. 1990. Drought impacts in Mexico—

Climate, agriculture, technology, and land-tenure in

Sonora and Puebla. Annals of the Association of

American Geographers 80 (1): 49–72.

———. 1999. Geography and the global environment. An-

nals of the Association of American Geographers 89 (1):

107–20.

———. 2004. Who governs, at what scale and at what

price? Geography, environmental governance, and the

commodiﬁcation of nature. Annals of the Association of

American Geographers 94 (4): 734–38.

Lowenthal, D. 2003. Postscript. Annals of the Association of

American Geographers 93 (4): 885.

Mansﬁeld, B. 2004. Rules of privatization: Contradictions

in neoliberal regulation of North Paciﬁc ﬁsheries. An-

nals of the Association of American Geographers 94 (3):

565–84.

Marston, R. A. 2008. Land, life, and environmental change

in mountains. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 98 (3): 507–20.

McAfee, K., and E. Shapiro. 2010. Payments for ecosystem

services in Mexico: Nature, neoliberalism, social move-

ments, and the state. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 100 (3): 579–99.

McCarthy, J. 2006. Neoliberalism and the politics of alter-

natives: Community forestry in British Columbia and

the United States. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 96 (1): 84–104.

McSweeney, K. 2004. The dugout canoe trade in Cen-

tral America’s Mosquitia: Approaching rural livelihoods

through systems of exchange. Annals of the Association of

American Geographers 94 (3): 638–61.

Meade, M. 1976. Land development and human health in

West Malaysia. Annals of the Association of American Ge-

ographers 66 (3): 428–39.

Medley, K. E., C. M. Pobocik, and B. W. Okey. 2003. His-

torical changes in forest cover and land ownership in a

Midwestern U.S. landscape. Annals of the Association of

American Geographers 93 (1): 104–20.

Meindl, C. F., D. H. Alderman, and P. Waylen. 2002. On the

importance of environmental claims-making: The role of

James O. Wright in promoting the drainage of Florida’s

Downloaded By: [Zimmerer, Karl] At: 19:50 24 November 2010

Retrospective on Nature–Society Geography 1091

Everglades in the early twentieth century. Annals of the

Association of American Geographers 92 (4): 682–701.

Mertens, B., and E. F. Lambin. 2000. Land-cover-change tra-

jectories in southern Cameroon. Annals of the Association

of American Geographers 90 (3): 467–94.

Meyer, W. B. 2005. The poor on the hilltops? The vertical

fringe of a late nineteenth-century American city. An-

nals of the Association of American Geographers 95 (4):

773–88.

Momsen, J. H. 2000. Gender differences in environmental

concern and perception. Journal of Geography 99 (2):

47–56.

Morgan, W. B., and R. P. Moss. 1965. Geography and

ecology—The concept of community and its relation-

ship to environment. Annals of the Association of Ameri-

can Geographers 55 (2): 339–50.

Muldavin, J. S. S. 1997. Environmental degradation in

Heilongjiang: Policy reform and agrarian dynamics in

China’s new hybrid economy. Annals of the Association

of American Geographers 87 (4): 579–613.

M¨

uller, D., and D. Munroe. 2008. Changing rural land-

scapes in Albania: Cropland abandonment and for-

est clearing in the postsocialist transition. Annals of

the Association of American Geographers 98 (4): 855–

76.

Mustafa, D. 2005. The production of an urban hazardscape

in Pakistan: Modernity, vulnerability, and the range of

choice. Annals of the Association of American Geographers

95 (3): 566–86.

Mutersbaugh, T. 2002. Building co-ops, constructing coop-

eration: Spatial strategies and development politics in

a Mexican village. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 92 (4): 756–76.

National Research Council. 1997. Rediscovering geography:

New relevance for science and society. Washington, DC:

National Academy Press.

———. 2010. Understanding the changing planet: Strategic di-

rections for the geographical sciences. Washington, DC:

National Academy Press.

Naughton-Treves, L. 2002. Wild animals in the garden: Con-

serving wildlife in Amazonian agroecosystems. Annals of

the Association of American Geographers 92 (3): 488–506.

Neumann, R. P. 2005. Making political ecology. New York:

Oxford University Press.

Neumayer, E., and T. Plumper. 2007. The gendered nature

of natural disasters: The impact of catastrophic events

on the gender gap in life expectancy, 1981–2002. An-

nals of the Association of American Geographers 97 (3):

551–66.

Nietschmann, B. 1972. Hunting and ﬁshing focus among

Miskito Indians, eastern Nicaragua. Human Ecology

1 (1): 41–67.

Nightingale, A. 2003. Nature–society and development: So-

cial, cultural and ecological change in Nepal. Geoforum

34 (4): 525–40.

Norman, E. S., and K. Bakker. 2009. Transgressing scales:

Water governance across the Canada–U.S. borderland.

Annals of the Association of American Geographers 99 (1):

99–117.

Nunn, P. D. 2003. Fished up or thrown down: The geography

of Paciﬁc Island origin myths. Annals of the Association of

American Geographers 93 (2): 350.

O’Brien, K., S. Eriksen, L. P. Nygaard, and A. Schjolden.

2007. Why different interpretations of vulnerability mat-

ter in climate change discourses. Climate Policy 7:73–88.

O’Brien, K. L., and R. Leichenko. 2003. Winners and losers

in the context of global change. Annals of the Association

of American Geographers 93 (1): 89–103.

Olwig, K. R. 1996. Recovering the substantive nature of land-

scape. Annals of the Association of American Geographers

86 (4): 630–53.

———. 2003a. Introduction: The Lowenthal papers. Annals

of the Association of American Geographers 93 (4): 851.

———. 2003b. Landscape: The Lowenthal legacy. Annals of

the Association of American Geographers 93 (4): 871–77.

O’Reilly, K. 2006. “Traditional” women, “modern” water:

Linking gender and commodiﬁcation in Rajasthan, In-

dia. Geoforum 37 (6): 958–72.

Oxford English Dictionary. 1973. Oxford, UK: Clarendon.

Parker, D. C., S. M. Manson, M. A. Janssen, M. J. Hoffmann,

and P. Deadman. 2003. Multi-agent systems for the sim-

ulation of land-use and land-cover change: A review.

Annals of the Association of American Geographers 93 (2):

314–37.

Parsons, J. J. 1955. The Miskito pine savanna of Nicaragua

and Honduras. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 45 (1): 36–63.

Pattison, W. D. 1964. The four traditions of geography.

Journal of Geography 63 (5): 211–16.

Perreault, T. 2008. Custom and contradiction: Rural water

governance and the politics of Usos y Costumbres in Bo-

livia’s irrigators’ movement. Annals of the Association of

American Geographers 98 (4): 834–54.

Petts, J., S. Owens, and H. Bulkeley. 2008. Crossing bound-

aries: Interdisciplinarity in the context of urban envi-

ronments. Geoforum 39:593–601.

Pitman, A. J. 2005. On the role of geography in earth system

science. Geoforum 36:137–48.

Polsky, C. 2004. Putting space and time in Ricardian climate

change impact studies: Agriculture in the U.S. Great

Plains. Annals of the Association of American Geographers

94 (3): 549–64.

Proctor, J. D. 1998a. Expanding the scope of science and

ethics. Annals of the Association of American Geographers

88 (2): 290–96.

———. 1998b. The social construction of nature: Relativist

accusations, pragmatist and critical realist responses. An-

nals of the Association of American Geographers 88 (3):

352–76.

Prudham, S. 2003. Taming trees: Capital, science, and

nature in Paciﬁc Slope tree improvement. Annals

of the Association of American Geographers 93 (3):

636–56.

Pulido, L. 2000. Rethinking environmental racism: White

privilege and urban development in Southern California.

Annals of the Association of American Geographers 90 (1):

12–40.

Ramankutty, N., E. Heller, and J. Rhemtulla. 2010. Prevail-

ing myths about agricultural abandonment and forest

regrowth in the United States. Annals of the Association

of American Geographers 100 (3): 502–12.

Raup, H. M. 1942. Trends in the development of geographic

botany. Annals of the Association of American Geographers

32 (4): 319–54.

Downloaded By: [Zimmerer, Karl] At: 19:50 24 November 2010

1092 Zimmerer

Redman, C. L., J. M. Grove, and L. H. Kuby. 2004. Integrating

social science into the Long-Term Ecological Research

(LTER) network: Social dimensions of ecological change

and ecological dimensions of social change. Ecosystems

7 (2): 161–71.

Reed, M. G., and S. Christie. 2009. Environmental geogra-

phy: We’re not quite home—Reviewing the gender gap.

Progress in Human Geography 33 (2): 246–55.

Richardson, B. C. 1996. Detrimental determinists: Applied

environmentalism as bureaucratic self-interest in the

Fin-de-Siecle British Caribbean. Annals of the Associa-

tion of American Geographers 86 (2): 213–34.

Rindfuss, R. R., B. Entwisle, S. J. Walsh, C. F. Mena, C. M.

Erlien, and C. L. Gray. 2007. Frontier land use change:

Synthesis, challenges, and next steps. Annals of the As-

sociation of American Geographers 97 (4): 739–54.

Robbins, P. 1998. Authority and environment: Institutional

landscapes in Rajasthan, India. Annals of the Association

of American Geographers 88 (3): 410–35.

———. 2001. Tracking invasive land covers in India or why

our landscapes have never been modern. Annals of the

Association of American Geographers 91 (4): 637–59.

———. 2004. Political ecology: A critical introduction. Malden,

MA: Blackwell.

Rocheleau, D. 1995. Maps, numbers, text, and context—

Mixing methods in feminist political ecology. The Pro-

fessional Geographer 47 (4): 458–66.

Rocheleau, D. E., and D. Edmunds. 1997. Women, men and

trees: Gender, power and property in forest and agrarian

landscapes. World Development 25 (8): 1351–71.

Rocheleau, D. E., and B. P. Thomas-Slayter, eds. 1996. Fem-

inist political ecology: Global issues and local experiences.

London and New York: Routledge.

Roth, R. J. 2008. “Fixing” the forest: The spatiality of con-

servation conﬂict in Thailand. Annals of the Association

of American Geographers 98 (2): 373–91.

Rudel, T. K., D. Bates, and R. Machinguiashi. 2002. A tropi-

cal forest transition? Agricultural change, out-migration,

and secondary forests in the Ecuadorian Amazon. An-

nals of the Association of American Geographers 92 (1):

87–102.

Sauer, C. O. 1921. The problem of land classiﬁcation. Annals

of the Association of American Geographers 11 (1): 3–16.

———. 1924. The survey method in geography and its objec-

tives. Annals of the Association of American Geographers

14 (1): 17–33.

Savage, M. 1991. Structural dynamics of southwestern pine

forest under chronic human inﬂuence. Annals of the As-

sociation of American Geographers 81 (2): 271–89.

Sayre, N. 2008. The genesis, history, and limits of carrying ca-

pacity. Annals of the Association of American Geographers

98 (1): 120–34.

Schneider, S. H. 2001. A constructive deconstruction of de-

constructionists: A response to Demeritt. Annals of the

Association of American Geographers 91 (2): 338–44.

Schroeder, R. A. 1997. Re-claiming land in the Gambia:

Gendered property rights and environmental interven-

tion. Annals of the Association of American Geographers,

87 (3): 487–508.

Semple, E. C. 1922. Geographic deterrents to pastoral no-

madism. Annals of the Association of American Geographers

12 (1): 3–38.

Shaw, J. B., and J. D. Oldﬁeld. 2007. Landscape science: A

Russian geographical tradition. Annals of the Association

of American Geographers 97 (1): 111–26.

Shrader-Frechette, K. 1998. First things ﬁrst: Balancing scien-

tiﬁc and ethical values in environmental science. Annals

of the Association of American Geographers 88 (2): 287–89.

Shaw, I. G. R., P. F. Robbins, and J. P. Jones. 2010. A bug’s

life and the spatial ontologies of mosquito management.

Annals of the Association of American Geographers 100 (2):

373–92.

Simmons, C. S. 2004. The political economy of land conﬂict

in the eastern Brazilian Amazon. Annals of the Association

of American Geographers 94 (1): 183–206.

Simmons, C. S., R. T. Walker, E. Y. Arima, S. Aldrich, and

M. M. Caldas. 2007. The Amazon land war in the south

of Para. Annals of the Association of American Geographers

97 (4): 567–92.

Skole, D. L. 2004. Geography as a great intellectual melting

pot and the preeminent interdisciplinary environmental

discipline. Annals of the Association of American Geogra-

phers 94 (4): 739–43.

Sluyter, A. 1994. Intensive wetland agriculture in

Mesoamerica—Space, time, and form. Annals of the

Association of American Geographers 84 (4): 557–84.

———. 2001. Colonialism and landscape in the

Americas: Material/conceptual transformations and

continuing consequences. Annals of the Association of

American Geographers 91 (2): 410–28.

Sopher, D. E. 1964. The swidden wet-rice transition zone in

the Chittagong hills. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 54 (1): 107–26.

Spate, O. H. K. 1959. The hydraulic society. Annals of the

Association of American Geographers 49 (1): 90–95.

Spencer, J. E., and N. R. Stewart. 1973. Nature of agricultural

systems. Annals of the Association of American Geographers

63 (4): 529–44.

St. Martin, K. 2001. Making space for community resource

management in ﬁsheries. Annals of the Association of

American Geographers 91 (1): 122–42.

Staeheli, L. A., and D. Mitchell. 2005. The complex politics

of relevance in geography. Annals of the Association of

American Geographers 95 (2): 357–72.

Stoddart, D. R. 1966. Darwin’s impact on geography. An-

nals of the Association of American Geographers 56 (4):

683–98.

Straussfogel, D. 1997. Redeﬁning development as humane

and sustainable. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 87 (2): 280–305.

Swyngedouw, E. 1999. Modernity and hybridity: Nature,

regeneracionismo, and the production of the Span-

ish waterscape, 1890–1930. Annals of the Association of

American Geographers 89 (3): 443–65.

Thrift, N. 2002. The future of geography. Geoforum 33:

291–98.

Troll, C. 1949. A critique and justiﬁcation. Annals of the

Association of American Geographers 39 (2): 99–137.

Tuan, Y. F. 1973. Ambiguity in attitudes toward environ-

ment. Annals of the Association of American Geographers

63 (4): 411–23.

———. 2003. Perceptual and cultural geography: A

commentary. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 93 (4): 878–81.

Downloaded By: [Zimmerer, Karl] At: 19:50 24 November 2010

Retrospective on Nature–Society Geography 1093

Turner, B. L., II. 1989. The specialist-synthesis approach to

the revival of geography—The case of cultural ecology.

Annals of the Association of American Geographers 79 (1):

88–100.

———. 1991. Thoughts on linking the physical and human

sciences in the study of global environmental change.

Research and Exploration 7 (2): 133–35.

———. 1997. Spirals, bridges and tunnels: Engaging human–

environment perspectives in geography. Ecumene 4(2):

196–217.

———. 2002a. Contested identities: Human–environment

geography and disciplinary implications in a restruc-

turing academy. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 92 (1): 52–74.

———. 2002b. Response to Thrift’s “The future of geogra-

phy.” Geoforum 33:427–29.

Turner, B. L., II, R. Q. Hanham, and A. V. Portararo. 1977.

Population pressure and agricultural intensity. Annals

of the Association of American Geographers 67 (3): 384–

96.

Turner, B. L., II, R. W. Kates, and W. B. Meyers. 1994.

Reﬂection-response. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 84 (4): 729–31.

Turner, B. L., II, and P. Robbins. 2008. Land-change sci-

ence and political ecology: Similarities, differences, and

implications for sustainability science. Annual Review of

Environmental Resources 33:295–316.

Turner, M. D. 1999. Merging local and regional analyses

of land-use change: The case of livestock in the Sahel.

Annals of the Association of American Geographers 89 (2):

191–219.

———. 2009. Ecology: Natural and political. In A compan-

ion to environmental geography, ed. N. Castree, D. De-

meritt, D. Liverman, and B. Rhoads, 181–97. Malden,

MA: Blackwell.

Unruh, J. D. 2006. Land tenure and the “evidence land-

scape” in developing countries. Annals of the Association

of American Geographers 96 (4): 754–72.

Vale, T. R. 1987. Vegetation change and park purpose in the

high elevations of Yosemite National Park, California.

Annals of the Association of American Geographers 77 (1):

1–18.

Vandermeer, C. 1968. Changing water control in Taiwanese

rice ﬁeld irrigation system. Annals of the Association of

American Geographers 58 (5): 720–47.

Veblen, T. T., and D. C. Lorenz. 1988. Recent vegeta-

tion changes along the forest steppe ecotone of North-

ern Patagonia. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 78 (1): 93–111.

Veeck, G., and C. W. Pannell. 1989. Rural economic restruc-

turing and farm household income in Jiangsu, Peoples

Republic of China. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 79 (2): 275–92.

Voeks, R. A. 2004. Disturbance pharmacopoeias: Medicine

and myth from the humid tropics. Annals of the Associa-

tion of American Geographers 94 (4): 868–88.

Walker, R. A. 2001. California’s golden road to riches: Nat-

ural resources and regional capitalism, 1848–1940. An-

nals of the Association of American Geographers 91 (1):

167–99.

Walker, R. T. 2003. Mapping process to pattern in the

landscape change of the Amazonian frontier. Annals

of the Association of American Geographers 93 (2):

376–98.

Walker, R. T., and W. D. Solecki. 1999. Managing land

use and land cover change: The New Jersey Pinelands

biosphere reserve. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 89 (2): 220–37.

———. 2004. Theorizing land-cover and land-use change:

The case of the Florida Everglades and its degradation.

Annals of the Association of American Geographers 94 (2):

311–28.

Walters, B. B., and A. P. Vayda. 2009. Event ecology, causal

historical analysis, and human–environment research.

Annals of the Association of American Geographers 99 (3):

534–53.

Warf, B. 2007. Spaces of geographical thought: Deconstruct-

ing human geography’s binaries. Annals of the Association

of American Geographers 97 (1): 210–12.

Watts, M. 1983. On the poverty of theory: Natural hazards

research in context. In Interpretations of calamity: from

the viewpoint of human ecology, ed. K. Hewitt, 231–62.

Boston: Allen and Unwin.

Wescoat, J. L., Jr. 1986. Impacts of federal salinity control on

water rights allocation patterns in the Colorado River

Basin. Annals of the Association of American Geographers

76 (2): 157–74.

———. 1992. Common themes in the work of White,

Gilbert and Dewey, John—A pragmatic appraisal. An-

nals of the Association of American Geographers 82 (4):

587–607x.

———. 2002. Commentary/response: Turner’s “Contested

identities.” Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 92 (1): 81–83.

West, R. C. 1956. Mangrove swamps of the Paciﬁc Coast of

Colombia. Annals of the Association of American Geogra-

phers 46 (1): 98–121.

Whitaker, J. R. 1940. World view of destruction and conser-

vation of natural resources. Annals of the Association of

American Geographers 30 (3): 143–62.

———. 1941. Sequence and equilibrium in destruction and

conservation of natural resources. Annals of the Associa-

tion of American Geographers 31 (1): 129–44.

Whitbeck, R. H. 1912. Industries of Wisconsin and their

geographic basis. Annals of the Association of American

Geographers 2 (1): 55–64.

———. 1926. Adjustments to environment in South Amer-

ica: An interplay of inﬂuences. Annals of the Association

of American Geographers 16 (1): 1–11.

———. 1928. Geo- and anthropo- factors in Mexico. Annals

of the Association of American Geographers 18 (2): 73–79.

White, G. F. 1985. Geographers in a perilously changing

world. Annals of the Association of American Geographers

75 (1): 10–16.

White, R. 2004. From wilderness to hybrid landscapes: The

cultural turn in environmental history. Historian 66:557–

64.

Whitmore, T. M., and B. L. Turner II. 1992. Landscapes of

cultivation in Mesoamerica on the eve of the conquest.

Annals of the Association of American Geographers 82 (3):

402–25.

Wilbanks, T. J. 1994. Sustainable development in geographic

perspective. Annals of the Association of American Geog-

raphers 84 (4): 541–56.

Downloaded By: [Zimmerer, Karl] At: 19:50 24 November 2010

1094 Zimmerer

Willems-Braun, B. 1997. Buried epistemologies: The politics

of nature in (post)colonial British Columbia. Annals of

the Association of American Geographers 87 (1): 3–31.

Wolford, W. 2004. This land is ours now: Spatial imaginaries

and the struggle for land in Brazil. Annals of the Associa-

tion of American Geographers 94 (2): 409–24.

Woodcock, D. 2003. To restore the watersheds: Early

twentieth-century tree planting in Hawai’i. Annals

of the Association of American Geographers 93 (3):

624–35.

Yapa, L. 1996. What causes poverty?: A postmodern view.

Annals of the Association of American Geographers 86 (4):

707–28.

Yarnal, B., and R. Neff. 2004. Whither parity? The need

for a comprehensive curriculum in human–environment

geography. The Professional Geographer 56 (1):

28–36.

Young, E. 2001. State intervention and abuse of the com-

mons: Fisheries development in Baja California Sur,

Mexico. Annals of the Association of American Geogra-

phers 91 (2): 283–306.

Zimmerer, K. S. 1991. Wetland production and smallholder

persistence- Agricultural change in a highland Peruvian

region. Annals of the Association of American Geographers

81 (3): 443–63.

———. 1994. Human geography and the new ecology: The

prospect and promise of integration. Annals of the Asso-

ciation of American Geographers 84 (1): 108–25.

———. 1996. Ecology as cornerstone and chimera in hu-

man geography. In Concepts in Human Geography, ed. C.

Earle, K. Mathewson, and M. S. Kenzer, 161–88. Lon-

don: Rowman & Littleﬁeld.

———. 1999. The reworking of conservation geographies:

Nonequilibrium landscapes and nature–society hybrids.

Annals of the Association of American Geographers 90 (2):

356–69.

———. 2006. Humboldt’s nodes and modes of interdisci-

plinary environmental science in the Andean world. The

Geographical Review 96 (3): 335–60.

———. 2007. Cultural ecology (and political ecology) in the

“environmental borderlands”: Exploring the expanded

connectivities within geography. Progress in Human Ge-

ography 31:227–44.

Zurick, D. N. 1992. Adventure travel and sustainable tourism

in the peripheral economy of Nepal. Annals of the Asso-

ciation of American Geographers 82 (4): 608–28.

Correspondence: Department of Geography, 302 Walker Building, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, e-mail:

ksz2@psu.edu.

Downloaded By: [Zimmerer, Karl] At: 19:50 24 November 2010

What Geographers Research: An Analysis of Geography Topics, Clusters, and Trends Using a Keyword Network Analysis Approach and the 2000-2019 AAG Conference Presentations

Article

Jan 2022

Du rideau de fer au réseau écologique. Géopolitique et conservation de la nature aux frontières de l’Europe du Nord

Book

Full-text available

Nov 2024

Ian Florin

La signature en 2010 du mémorandum sur la Ceinture verte de Fennoscandie acte la volonté de la Finlande, de la Norvège et de la Russie de constituer un réseau écologique le long de leurs frontières communes. Par cet accord, les trois pays s’engagent à faire de la nature laissée intacte par les restrictions d’accès durant la Guerre froide un objet de dialogue entre l’Europe du Nord et la Russie. Basé sur une recherche documentaire et sur près de septante entretiens, cet ouvrage se propose d’étudier le développement de la Ceinture verte de Fennoscandie au prisme de la géographie politique. L’auteur met en lumière l’articulation entre conservation de l’environnement et géopolitique depuis la fin de la Guerre froide, les propositions concurrentes dont le concept de réseau écologique peut être porteur et les difficultés à impliquer les populations locales dans des initiatives de conservation de l’environnement. À l’heure où les relations russo-européennes sont gelées par la guerre en Ukraine et où l’importance des réseaux écologiques est confirmée par la Stratégie mondiale de conservation de la biodiversité, ce livre offre un éclairage original sur des enjeux d’une actualité brûlante.

The Anthropocene and Geography

Chapter

Aug 2024

Shared Space and Resource Use within a Building Environment: An Indoor Geography

Article

Full-text available

Aug 2024
GEOGR J

Indoor spaces are essential to most humans' lives. Furthermore, in many cases, buildings are shared indoor environments that contain diverse people and resources. Spatial patterns of use are important but under-examined aspects of human-building interactions. This study leverages perspectives from human-environment geography and mechanical engineering to examine spatial patterns of use within a network of shared indoor spaces in an academic building at a research university in the United States. Here we ask: (1) What spaces and resources do building users value? and (2) How are values associated with observed measures of use? We hypothesise that spatial patterns of use follow an ideal free distribution (IFD), a common ecological model of resource use. To test this, we define measures of value and use derived from mixed qualitative (n = 50) and survey-based social data (n = 196) and data from a building-based system of accelerometers. Our analyses provide some support for the IFD hypothesis. We discuss the implications of this finding and potential new avenues for geographic research in shared indoor environments.

Land cover change and socioecological influences on terrestrial carbon production in an agroecosystem

Article

Full-text available

Apr 2023
LANDSCAPE ECOL

Context This study evaluated the contributions of land cover and land use change (LCLUC) and land management to landscape carbon production through a complex cause-effect path analysis of socioecological latent variables. Socioecological contributions to landscape carbon production are essential in landscape analysis, as their processes are both independent and interactive. Objectives We quantify the coherencies of social, economic, and environmental variables and their impact on net primary production (NPP) in an agroecosystem landscape. We ask whether LCLUC contributed to increased NPP and if land management and LCLUC play a more significant role than abiotic stressors on NPP. Methods We applied a socio-environmental system framework to evaluate anthropogenic and environmental processes in the Kalamazoo River Watershed in southwest Michigan, USA from 1987 to 2017. Structural composition and functional contribution to NPP were evaluated by land cover type. We synthesized remote sensing, gridded climate, social and biophysical data in a principal component analysis (PCA) to inform a partial least squares structural equation model (PLS-SEM). Results Land cover type contributed to anthropogenic processes. Cropland contributed to Land Management, forest and water contributed to Land Cover Change, and urban to the Regional Development construct. Anthropogenic activities contributed more to NPP than abiotic processes. Attitudes of environmental stewardship strongly related to land use change likelihood. Conclusions We disentangled anthropogenic and climatic changes’ contributions to terrestrial carbon production and the societal ties to potential carbon sequestration. No single landscape metric is suitable for all study areas; however, this framework is useful for a landscape-scale analysis of socio-environmental processes.

Prácticas materiales de cuidado de la agrobiodiversidad como marco simbólico para la gobernanza ambiental en el sur de Tolima, Colombia

Article

Dec 2021

Megan Dwyer Baumann

The literature on agrobiodiversity examines in a broad way the interactions between plants and humans in farming biomes, and often includes the study of the governance of seeds as a genetic resource. This article turns its attention to agrobiodiversity as a mesh of manageable genetic resources in order to examine how the characteristics of agrobiodiversity symbolize a vision of future environmental governance. First reviewing the existing perspectives in political ecology on environmental governance and feminist ethics of care, the results of this study reveal that the established practices of «total care» of agrobiodiversity, in particular the exchange of seeds, vegetable gardens and kitchens, have become a symbolic framework for environmental governance in which Access to land, food and community cohesion are guaranteed and protected.

Aproximaciones al estudio de la relación sociedad-naturaleza en ámbitos universitarios de Argentina. Una mirada por las carreras de Geografía de la UBA y UNCuyo (1983-2001)

Article

Jan 2025

Gonzalo Ezequiel Lus Bietti

The society-nature relationship constitutes a key axis in the geographical tradition. However, a gap is recognized regarding its treatment in university settings. Within this framework, this paper aims to provide an initial approach to understanding how this relationship has been addressed in the Geography curricula at the University of Buenos Aires and the National University of Cuyo between 1983 and 2001. Adopting a perspective rooted in the history of Science and Geography, and employing archival research and content analysis methodologies, four distinct approaches have been identified, reflecting some of the unique characteristics of these curricula. Some of these perspectives, in turn, have undergone modifications and variations in response to different processes of epistemological renewal. Based on the analyses carried out, this type of study proves useful for gaining deeper insights into the environmental traditions built within Geography, as well as for exploring the specific trajectories of the discipline in Argentina.

Landscape of Lower and Middle Paleolithic sites in Ha’il province, northern Saudi Arabia

Article

Jan 2025
ANTHROPOLOGIE

L'Ecologie Humaine, carrefour des disciplines. Enjeux, pratiques, perspectives

Book

Full-text available

May 2024

Nicole Vernazza

Dans le contexte des changements globaux qui affectent la planète aujourd’hui, l’Ecologie humaine est une démarche essentielle pour interroger les interdépendances entre les populations humaines et leur environnement naturel et social. L’écologie humaine s’interroge sur la relation entre l’humanité et la nature, essentiellement à partir de la relation entre les populations humaines et leur environnement. A l’écologie générale, elle emprunte le principe de raisonner en termes de dynamiques de populations, d’interactivité avec les autres espèces et l’ensemble des conditions de milieu. Mais il est clair que les êtres humains interagissent avec le milieu en fonction de techniques, de représentations et à travers des organisations fort diverses qui n’ont aucun équivalent dans le monde animal. A ce titre l’écologie humaine est un carrefour de disciplines à la croisée des sciences de la nature et des sciences humaines. Le propos de cet ouvrage collectif dirigé par Nicole Vernazza-Licht, anthropologue spécialisée sur les questions de santé et d'environnement, est de dégager des perspectives sur les questionnements actuels de l’écologie humaine et d’en montrer les enjeux. Les textes rassemblés dans cet ouvrage font un état des lieux sur les modalités et les enjeux des approches interdisciplinaires en Ecologie Humaine. Cette réflexion est encore plus d’actualité avec la promotion du concept « One Health » qui prend en compte les liens étroits entre la santé humaine, celle des animaux et l’état écologique global de la planète, ou encore avec l’apparition récente du champ des « Humanités environnementales » qui examine, principalement sous le prisme des sciences sociales, l’impact des changements globaux. Dans une première partie, les différents auteurs exposent à partir de leur ancrage disciplinaire, leurs travaux et expériences de terrain dans les pays du Sud et du Nord, les concepts qu’ils utilisent et les pratiques qu’ils considèrent comme relevant de l’écologie humaine en France et à l’étranger. La seconde partie est consacrée aux activités d’enseignement et laisse une large part aux témoignages des étudiants et des enseignants ainsi qu’à la démarche spécifique de ce type d’enseignement. La dernière partie de l’ouvrage est consacrée à la dynamique des acteurs œuvrant dans le champ de l’écologie humaine. Elle présente une synthèse et l’analyse de deux tables rondes tenues lors des journées scientifiques 2012 de la Société d’Ecologie Humaine (SEH) sur l’interdisciplinarité et qui soulèvent des questionnements à ce jour encore loin d’être résolus. Dix-septième ouvrage produit par la Société d’Ecologie Humaine cette publication poursuit la réflexion engagée sur la place de l’écologie humaine en matière de recherche scientifique, d’enseignement universitaire et d’implication des acteurs tant dans les pays du Nord que du Sud.

Jamie Rohu PhD thesis

Thesis

Full-text available

Aug 2023

Jamie Rohu

Food, fibre and forest products.

Chapter

Full-text available

Jan 2007

W.E.Easterling, P.K. Aggarwal, P. Batima, K.M. Brander, L. Erda, S.M. Howden, A. Kirilenko, J. Morton, J.-F. Soussana, J. Schmidhuber and F.N. Tubiello, 2007: Food, fibre and forest products. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, M.L. Parry, O.F. Canziani, J.P. Palutikof, P.J. van der Linden,C.E. Hanson, Eds., Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 273-313.

Why different interpretations of vulnerability matter in climate change discourses

Article

Jan 2007

Liberating political ecology

Article

Jan 2004

Maps, Numbers, Text, and Context: Mixing Methods in Feminist Political Ecology

Article

Nov 1995

Dianne Rocheleau

Feminist post?structuralist theory, feminist empiricism, and field practice can all contribute to insights on the value of quantitative and qualitative methods in feminist geographical research. A political ecology study of gendered interests in a social forestry program in the Dominican Republic illustrates the methodological dilemmas and potentials of feminist research on environmental change. The study combined qualitative and quantitative data collection and analytical techniques. Examples from the case study address three methodological questions in feminist geography: (1) Should identity or affinity be the basis for situating ourselves and the subjects of our research? (2) How can we reconcile multiple subjectivities and quantitative methods in the quest for objectivity? and (3) Can we combine traditional positivist methods with participatory mapping and oral histories? The paper draws on theoretical literature as well as field experience to answer these questions.

Geography as a great intellectual melting pot and the preeminent interdisciplinary environmental discipline

Conference Paper

Dec 2004

David Skole

Reflection Response

Article

Dec 1994

World View of Destruction and Conservation of Natural Resources

Article

Sep 1940

J. R. Whitaker

AGRICULTURE IN CENTRAL AMERICA

Article

Jun 1926

Hugh H. Bennett

INDUSTRIES OF WISCONSIN AND THEIR GEOGRAPHIC BASIS

Article

Jan 1912

R. H. Whitbeck

Women's land rights in Gambian irrigated rice schemes: Constraints and opportunities

Article

Jan 1998
AGR HUM VALUES

J.A. Carney

This paper discusses the significance of gender-based conflicts for the failure of Gambian irrigated rice projects. In particular, it illustrates how resource control of a gendered crop, rice, shifts from females to males with the development of pump-irrigated rice projects. Irrigation imposes a radically different labor regime on household producers, demanding that they intensify labor for year-round cultivation. Yet, the Gambian farming system evolved for a five month agricultural calendar, in which women were accorded specific land and labor rights. The need to restructure family labor, specifically skilled female labor, to meet the cultivation demands of pump irrigation is crucial for understanding the pattern of gender-based conflicts in Gambian rice schemes. The case study illustrates that irrigation involves more than technology transfer. Appropriate irrigation demands sensitivity to the social structure of household production systems. The paper concludes by emphasizing the centrality of gender issues for improving food security in sub-Saharan Africa.

Retrospective on Nature–Society Geography: Tracing Trajectories (1911–2010) and Reflecting on Translations

Abstract and Figures

Recommended publications

A Faixa Terrestre da Zona Costeira e os Recursos Hídricos na Região Hidrográfica do Atlântico Sul, B...

Institutional Dynamics in Environmental Governance

Decentralization and environement in China

What Improves Environmental Performance? Evidence from Mexican Industry