Cited by 19

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Connectivity as a multiple: In, with and as “nature”

Hodgetts, Timothy·2018·Area

Abstract

Connectivity is a central concept in contemporary geographies of nature, but the concept is often understood and utilised in plural ways. This is problematic because of the separation, rather than the confusion, of these different approaches. While the various understandings of connectivity are rarely considered as working together, the connections between them have significant implications. This paper thus proposes re‐thinking connectivity as a “multiple”. It develops a taxonomy of existing connectivity concepts from the fields of biogeography and landscape ecology, conservation biology, socio‐economic systems theory, political ecology and more‐than‐human geography. It then considers how these various understandings might be re‐thought not as separate concerns, but (following Annemarie Mol) as “more than one, but less than many”. The implications of using the connectivity multiple as an analytic for understanding conservation practices are demonstrated through considering the creation of wildlife corridors in conservation practice. The multiple does not just serve to highlight the practical and theoretical linkages between ecological theories, social inequities and affectual relationships in more‐than‐human worlds. It is also suggestive of a normative approach to environmental management that does not give temporal priority to biological theories, but considers these as always already situated in these social, often unequal, always more‐than‐human ecologies.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/area.12353

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Drawing upon adjacent developments in the conservation social sciences will likely enable the identification of new objectives and parameters for models to fit better with the realities of conservation practice.

    “Doing so will likely enable the identification of new objectives and parameters for models to fit better with the realities of conservation practice58–63.”

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

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 48

  1. 10.1111/tran.12103 · DOI
  2. 10.7312/ande13410 · DOI
  3. Berkes F., 2008, Navigating social‐ecological systems: Building resilience for complexity and change
  4. 10.1080/14649365.2014.883637 · DOI
  5. Brockington D., 2008, Nature unbound: Conservation, capitalism and the future of protected areas
  6. 10.1080/10455752.2012.674149 · DOI
  7. 10.4324/9780203448410 · DOI
  8. 10.1068/a3999 · DOI
  9. 10.1098/rstb.2004.1592 · DOI
  10. 10.1017/CBO9780511754821 · DOI
  11. 10.1177/0263276413496852 · DOI
  12. 10.1080/13549830601133169 · DOI
  13. 10.1017/9781107050327 · DOI · Paper page
  14. 10.1016/j.landusepol.2016.04.003 · DOI
  15. 10.1111/tran.12043 · DOI
  16. Guerrero A. M., 2016, Using a social‐ecological framework to inform the implementation of conservation plans, Conservation Biology, 31, 290, 10.1111/cobi.12832 · DOI
  17. 10.1890/1051-0761(2002)012[0321:ACGOFR]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
  18. Hanski I., 1996, Metapopulation biology: Ecology, genetics and evolution
  19. Haraway D, 2008, When species meet
  20. Hilty J., 2006, Corridor ecology: The science and practice of linking landscapes for biodiversity conservation
  21. 10.1068/d351t · DOI
  22. HM Government, 2011, The natural choice: Securing the value of nature
  23. 10.1111/cobi.12811 · DOI
  24. 10.1177/0309132508089825 · DOI
  25. 10.1017/CBO9780511606762 · DOI
  26. Kareiva P., 2012, Conservation in the Anthropocene Breakthrough Journal, 2, 26
  27. 10.1023/A:1015633830223 · DOI
  28. Latour B, 2005, Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor‐network‐theory, 10.1093/oso/9780199256044.001.0001 · DOI · Paper page
  29. 10.4324/9780203481141 · DOI
  30. Lawton J., 2010, Making space for nature: A review of England's wildlife sites and ecological network
  31. 10.1068/d71j · DOI
  32. 10.1177/0309132511435352 · DOI
  33. 10.1215/22011919-3527722 · DOI
  34. Louv R, 2005, Last child in the woods: Saving our children from nature‐deficit disorder
  35. MacArthur R. H., 1967, The theory of island biogeography
  36. 10.1215/9780822377559 · DOI
  37. 10.1215/9780822384151 · DOI · Paper page
  38. 10.1016/j.geoforum.2011.03.001 · DOI
  39. 10.1017/S0030605303000383 · DOI
  40. 10.1016/j.ecolind.2010.06.011 · DOI
  41. 10.1017/CBO9780511754821.028 · DOI
  42. 10.1038/nature02121 · DOI
  43. 10.4324/9780203946565 · DOI
  44. Wallace A. R, 1869, The Malay Archipelago: The land of the orang‐utan and the bird of paradise; a narrative of travel, with studies of man and nature
  45. 10.4159/9780674045231 · DOI
  46. Wilson E. O, 2016, Half‐earth: Our planet's fight for life
  47. 10.4324/9781849774727 · DOI
  48. 10.5822/978-1-61091-551-9 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Hodgetts, T.
Affiliations
School of Geography and the Environment University of Oxford Oxford UK
Venue
Area
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-05-24
Volume
50
Issue
1
Pages
83-90
ISSN
  • 0004-0894
  • 1475-4762
Cited by
19
References
0
Language
en
Funders
Economic and Social Research Council

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