2016
DOI: 10.1177/0309132516681702
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Social geography(ies) III

Abstract: This report examines how social geography engages with nonhuman subjects; in this case, bugs. The report focuses on how social geography is rethinking its core concepts of difference and inequality through scholarship that examines the relations between bugs and human inequality, bug management and molecular intervention on/in bugs, and the biosocial relations bugs help forge. It does so while opening up what bugs – not just insects, but also a wider range of bugs, such as viruses, bacteria, and parasites oper… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 44 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It references the failures of the past, but when and what the future will bring remains uncertain across the world. Researching COVID‐19 is thus a Sisyphean task in which analysis and interpretation are constantly being upended and inverted by events (Will, 2020), as well as the ‘bug’ itself (Del Casino Jr, 2018). Yet, at the same time, COVID‐19 should, as Sparke and Anguelov rightfully argue, be ‘contextualised geographically’, especially given how the pandemic has unearthed an array of ‘uneven geographies’ (Sparke & Anguelov, 2020, p. 498).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It references the failures of the past, but when and what the future will bring remains uncertain across the world. Researching COVID‐19 is thus a Sisyphean task in which analysis and interpretation are constantly being upended and inverted by events (Will, 2020), as well as the ‘bug’ itself (Del Casino Jr, 2018). Yet, at the same time, COVID‐19 should, as Sparke and Anguelov rightfully argue, be ‘contextualised geographically’, especially given how the pandemic has unearthed an array of ‘uneven geographies’ (Sparke & Anguelov, 2020, p. 498).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other troubled relationships with non-human companions have been explained elsewhere, either as pathogens, microbes and viruses (Crosby, 2004; Del Casino, 2018; Guthman, 2019; Paxson, 2008), slugs (Ginn, 2014) or mosquitoes and other insects (Beisel, 2010; Beisel et al, 2013) – creatures that have been defined as stubborn (Marder, 2013), monstrous (Ginn, 2014), or fugitive (Robbins, 2004b). Weeds, and all the species with undomesticated lives, pose ethical, technical, or health barriers to the advance of human social life; they ‘shout challenges to stability’ (Tsing, 2017: 4).…”
Section: The Persistent Lives Of Weedsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…More-than-human geographies contribute insightful assemblage-based case studies, including Sundberg’s (2011) examination of cats, desert thornscrub, and border security personnel in the southwestern USA and Lorimer’s (2010) exploration of bacteria and viruses linking elephants and humans in Sri Lanka. Del Casino (2016) reviews the relations between bugs (insects, viruses, bacteria, parasites) and humans via management strategies, molecular interventions, and biosocial relations. These case studies extend studies of the nonhuman and bring micro-organisms, plants, and technologies into the study of human-animal relations (Smart and Smart, 2012).…”
Section: Animal Networkmentioning
confidence: 99%