The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Uncommon Ground: Toward Reinventing Nature
Abstract
Modern conceptions of nature tend to be flawed because too often they fail to take account of the influence of people. The essays in this text examine the problems that flow from a viewpoint that severs human beings and human activities from their place in nature.
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
Cited by
The discursive nature of nature: towards a post-modern concept of nature
Dingler, J. (2005) · Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning · doi:10.1080/15239080500339679 · Cited by 44
Wilderness ethics and political ecology: remapping the Great Bear Rainforest
Clapp, R. A. (2004) · Political Geography · doi:10.1016/j.polgeo.2004.05.012 · Cited by 33
Durney, F. (2020) · Environment and Society · doi:10.3167/ares.2020.110104 · Cited by 7
Metadata
- Authors
- Silvern, S. E., & Cronon, W.
- Venue
- Geographical Review
- Publisher
- JSTOR
- Published
- 1996-10
- Volume
- 86
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 613
- ISSN
- 0016-7428 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2314687154
- Cited by
- 500
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 15.33
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
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.
