The DOI matches its Crossref record; 38 of the 38 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Neoliberalising Nature: Processes, Effects, and Evaluations
Open accessAbstract
This and a previous paper review systematically a new and fast-growing geographical research literature about ‘neoliberalising nature’. This literature, authored by critical geographers for the most part, is largely case study based and focuses on a range of biophysical phenomena in different parts of the contemporary world. In an attempt to take stock of what has been learnt and what is left to do, the two papers survey the literature theoretically and empirically, cognitively and normatively. Specifically, they aim to parse the critical literature on nature's neoliberalisation with a view to answering four key questions: (1) what are the reasons why all manner of qualitatively different nonhuman phenomena in different parts of the world are being ‘neoliberalised’? (2) what are the principal ways in which nature is neoliberalised in practice? (3) what are the effects of nature's neoliberalisation? and (4) how should these effects be evaluated? Without such an effort of synthesis, this literature could remain a collection of substantively disparate, theoretically informed case studies unified only in name (by virtue of their common focus on ‘neoliberal’ policies). This paper addresses questions 2, 3, and 4, while the previous paper concentrated on the first. It is argued that some unresolved issues in the published literature make it very difficult for readers and future researchers in this area to draw ‘wider’ lessons about process, effects, and evaluations. This is not so much a ‘failing’ of the literature as a reflection of its newness and the way its constituent parts have evolved. It is argued that these issues require careful attention in future so that the ‘general’ lessons of the literature published to date on nature's neoliberalisation can be made clear. Where the previous paper detected some ‘signals in the noise’ viz question 1, this paper suggests that more work needs to be done viz questions 2 to 4 for any signals to be detected.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
THE MORAL ECONOMY OF THE ENGLISH CROWD IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY
Thompson, E. P. (1971) · Past and Present · doi:10.1093/past/50.1.76 · Cited by 4,736
Justice, Nature and the Geography of Difference
Mathewson, K., & Harvey, D. (1997) · Geographical Review · doi:10.2307/215233 · Cited by 4,624
Peck, J., & Tickell, A. (2002) · Antipode · doi:10.1111/1467-8330.00247 · Cited by 3,670
Larner, W. (2000) · Environment and Planning D Society and Space · doi:10.1068/d2105ed · Cited by 1,713
Neoliberalising Nature: The Logics of Deregulation and Reregulation
Castree, N. (2008) · Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space · doi:10.1068/a3999 · Cited by 1,069
Self-citationCastree, N. (2003) · Progress in Human Geography · doi:10.1191/0309132503ph428oa · Cited by 667
Self-citationNeoliberalizing Nature? Market Environmentalism in Water Supply in England and Wales
Bakker, K. (2005) · Annals of the Association of American Geographers · doi:10.1111/j.1467-8306.2005.00474.x · Cited by 656
An Uncooperative Commodity: Privatizing Water in England and Wales
Bakker, K. J. (2004) · doi:10.1093/oso/9780199253654.001.0001 · Cited by 629
Geography and public policy: constructions of neoliberalism
Peck, J. (2004) · Progress in Human Geography · doi:10.1191/0309132504ph492pr · Cited by 564
Robertson, M. M. (2004) · Geoforum · doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2003.06.002 · Cited by 497
Cited by
Green Grabbing: a new appropriation of nature?
Fairhead, J., Leach, M., & Scoones, I. (2012) · The Journal of Peasant Studies · doi:10.1080/03066150.2012.671770 · Cited by 1,928
The new enclosures: critical perspectives on corporate land deals
White, B., Borras Jr., S. M., Hall, R., Scoones, I., & Wolford, W. (2012) · The Journal of Peasant Studies · doi:10.1080/03066150.2012.691879 · Cited by 913
Towards a Synthesized Critique of Neoliberal Biodiversity Conservation
Büscher, B., Sullivan, S., Neves, K., Igoe, J., & Brockington, D. (2012) · Capitalism Nature Socialism · doi:10.1080/10455752.2012.674149 · Cited by 607
Payments for Ecosystem Services in Mexico: Nature, Neoliberalism, Social Movements, and the State
McAfee, K., & Shapiro, E. N. (2010) · Annals of the Association of American Geographers · doi:10.1080/00045601003794833 · Cited by 476
Capitalism and Conservation: The Production and Reproduction of Biodiversity Conservation
Brockington, D., & Duffy, R. (2010) · Antipode · doi:10.1111/j.1467-8330.2010.00760.x · Cited by 395
Metadata
- Authors
- Castree, N.
- Venue
- Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2008-01
- Volume
- 40
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 153-173
- ISSN
- 0308-518X (ISSN-L)
- 1472-3409
- OpenAlex
- W2026848533
- Cited by
- 511
- References
- 38
- FWCI
- 121.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Neoliberalising Nature: Processes, Effects, and Evaluations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1068/a39100
- The paper
- Castree, N. (2008). Neoliberalising Nature: Processes, Effects, and Evaluations. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space. https://doi.org/10.1068/a39100
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.