All That Fuss Just for Some Bloody Badgers?

The Politics of Wildlife in Infrastructure Construction

Daniel Sage, Andy Dainty, Kjell Tryggestad, Lise Justesen, Jan Mouritsen

Research output: Contribution to conferencePaperResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Across many construction projects, and especially infrastructure projects, efforts to mitigate the potential loss of biodiversity and habitat are significant, and at times controversial. In our paper we do not propose to gauge the success or failure of this effort; rather we are interested in fleshing out some conceptual approaches via Actor-Network Theory through which infrastructure projects can start to address a series of overlooked questions. Some of these questions are firmly located within the realm of construction project management: are animals considered project risks or stakeholders; is wildlife always simply a retrospective cost to a project or can it proactively benefit a project, can we ever manage wildlife, and if so how? These questions in turn lead us to engage with wider debates found in the margins between the social and biological sciences on the distinction between Nature and Politics: to what extent should we seek a place for animals in politics and how can we live with them ethically. Thus far, very little research has addressed the interplay of humans and animals within construction projects. Instead those interested in the politics and ethics of human-animal relations, or Animal Studies, have focussed far more on stable and contained sites, whether organisations like zoos, farms or laboratories, or other places like homes and parks. These largely ethnographic studies inevitably perhaps downplay the unplanned, unexpected and highly politically and ethically charged collision of hitherto rather separate human and animal geographies. Yet, as we argue here, it is often along such colliding spaces, where animal geographies are unexpectedly found at the heart of human projects, that we ask and answer many of the above questions around our respect and response to both animals, and indeed other humans. In this paper we will examine such encounters conceptually, with reference to two infrastructure projects, and discuss their relevance to both construction project management and broader work on the politics of animals.
Original languageEnglish
Publication date2013
Number of pages10
Publication statusPublished - 2013
EventThe 22nd Nordic Academy of Management Conference. 2013: On Practice and Knowledge Eruptions - University of Iceland, Reykjavík, Iceland
Duration: 21 Aug 201323 Aug 2013
Conference number: 22
https://nff2013.hi.is/

Conference

ConferenceThe 22nd Nordic Academy of Management Conference. 2013
Number22
LocationUniversity of Iceland
CountryIceland
CityReykjavík
Period21/08/201323/08/2013
Internet address

Bibliographical note

Also presented at The 29th Annual ARCOM Conference, Sep. 2-4, 2013.
Reading, UK

Cite this

Sage, D., Dainty, A., Tryggestad, K., Justesen, L., & Mouritsen, J. (2013). All That Fuss Just for Some Bloody Badgers? The Politics of Wildlife in Infrastructure Construction. Paper presented at The 22nd Nordic Academy of Management Conference. 2013, Reykjavík, Iceland.
Sage, Daniel ; Dainty, Andy ; Tryggestad, Kjell ; Justesen, Lise ; Mouritsen, Jan. / All That Fuss Just for Some Bloody Badgers? The Politics of Wildlife in Infrastructure Construction. Paper presented at The 22nd Nordic Academy of Management Conference. 2013, Reykjavík, Iceland.10 p.
@conference{ece84e332fa64d1db0e5f8b072bdba77,
title = "All That Fuss Just for Some Bloody Badgers?: The Politics of Wildlife in Infrastructure Construction",
abstract = "Across many construction projects, and especially infrastructure projects, efforts to mitigate the potential loss of biodiversity and habitat are significant, and at times controversial. In our paper we do not propose to gauge the success or failure of this effort; rather we are interested in fleshing out some conceptual approaches via Actor-Network Theory through which infrastructure projects can start to address a series of overlooked questions. Some of these questions are firmly located within the realm of construction project management: are animals considered project risks or stakeholders; is wildlife always simply a retrospective cost to a project or can it proactively benefit a project, can we ever manage wildlife, and if so how? These questions in turn lead us to engage with wider debates found in the margins between the social and biological sciences on the distinction between Nature and Politics: to what extent should we seek a place for animals in politics and how can we live with them ethically. Thus far, very little research has addressed the interplay of humans and animals within construction projects. Instead those interested in the politics and ethics of human-animal relations, or Animal Studies, have focussed far more on stable and contained sites, whether organisations like zoos, farms or laboratories, or other places like homes and parks. These largely ethnographic studies inevitably perhaps downplay the unplanned, unexpected and highly politically and ethically charged collision of hitherto rather separate human and animal geographies. Yet, as we argue here, it is often along such colliding spaces, where animal geographies are unexpectedly found at the heart of human projects, that we ask and answer many of the above questions around our respect and response to both animals, and indeed other humans. In this paper we will examine such encounters conceptually, with reference to two infrastructure projects, and discuss their relevance to both construction project management and broader work on the politics of animals.",
keywords = "Human-animal interaction, Actor-network theory, Infrastructures, Environment impact assessmen",
author = "Daniel Sage and Andy Dainty and Kjell Tryggestad and Lise Justesen and Jan Mouritsen",
note = "Also presented at The 29th Annual ARCOM Conference, Sep. 2-4, 2013. Reading, UK; null ; Conference date: 21-08-2013 Through 23-08-2013",
year = "2013",
language = "English",
url = "https://nff2013.hi.is/",

}

Sage, D, Dainty, A, Tryggestad, K, Justesen, L & Mouritsen, J 2013, 'All That Fuss Just for Some Bloody Badgers? The Politics of Wildlife in Infrastructure Construction' Paper presented at, Reykjavík, Iceland, 21/08/2013 - 23/08/2013, .

All That Fuss Just for Some Bloody Badgers? The Politics of Wildlife in Infrastructure Construction. / Sage, Daniel; Dainty, Andy; Tryggestad, Kjell; Justesen, Lise; Mouritsen, Jan.

2013. Paper presented at The 22nd Nordic Academy of Management Conference. 2013, Reykjavík, Iceland.

Research output: Contribution to conferencePaperResearchpeer-review

TY - CONF

T1 - All That Fuss Just for Some Bloody Badgers?

T2 - The Politics of Wildlife in Infrastructure Construction

AU - Sage, Daniel

AU - Dainty, Andy

AU - Tryggestad, Kjell

AU - Justesen, Lise

AU - Mouritsen, Jan

N1 - Also presented at The 29th Annual ARCOM Conference, Sep. 2-4, 2013. Reading, UK

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - Across many construction projects, and especially infrastructure projects, efforts to mitigate the potential loss of biodiversity and habitat are significant, and at times controversial. In our paper we do not propose to gauge the success or failure of this effort; rather we are interested in fleshing out some conceptual approaches via Actor-Network Theory through which infrastructure projects can start to address a series of overlooked questions. Some of these questions are firmly located within the realm of construction project management: are animals considered project risks or stakeholders; is wildlife always simply a retrospective cost to a project or can it proactively benefit a project, can we ever manage wildlife, and if so how? These questions in turn lead us to engage with wider debates found in the margins between the social and biological sciences on the distinction between Nature and Politics: to what extent should we seek a place for animals in politics and how can we live with them ethically. Thus far, very little research has addressed the interplay of humans and animals within construction projects. Instead those interested in the politics and ethics of human-animal relations, or Animal Studies, have focussed far more on stable and contained sites, whether organisations like zoos, farms or laboratories, or other places like homes and parks. These largely ethnographic studies inevitably perhaps downplay the unplanned, unexpected and highly politically and ethically charged collision of hitherto rather separate human and animal geographies. Yet, as we argue here, it is often along such colliding spaces, where animal geographies are unexpectedly found at the heart of human projects, that we ask and answer many of the above questions around our respect and response to both animals, and indeed other humans. In this paper we will examine such encounters conceptually, with reference to two infrastructure projects, and discuss their relevance to both construction project management and broader work on the politics of animals.

AB - Across many construction projects, and especially infrastructure projects, efforts to mitigate the potential loss of biodiversity and habitat are significant, and at times controversial. In our paper we do not propose to gauge the success or failure of this effort; rather we are interested in fleshing out some conceptual approaches via Actor-Network Theory through which infrastructure projects can start to address a series of overlooked questions. Some of these questions are firmly located within the realm of construction project management: are animals considered project risks or stakeholders; is wildlife always simply a retrospective cost to a project or can it proactively benefit a project, can we ever manage wildlife, and if so how? These questions in turn lead us to engage with wider debates found in the margins between the social and biological sciences on the distinction between Nature and Politics: to what extent should we seek a place for animals in politics and how can we live with them ethically. Thus far, very little research has addressed the interplay of humans and animals within construction projects. Instead those interested in the politics and ethics of human-animal relations, or Animal Studies, have focussed far more on stable and contained sites, whether organisations like zoos, farms or laboratories, or other places like homes and parks. These largely ethnographic studies inevitably perhaps downplay the unplanned, unexpected and highly politically and ethically charged collision of hitherto rather separate human and animal geographies. Yet, as we argue here, it is often along such colliding spaces, where animal geographies are unexpectedly found at the heart of human projects, that we ask and answer many of the above questions around our respect and response to both animals, and indeed other humans. In this paper we will examine such encounters conceptually, with reference to two infrastructure projects, and discuss their relevance to both construction project management and broader work on the politics of animals.

KW - Human-animal interaction

KW - Actor-network theory

KW - Infrastructures

KW - Environment impact assessmen

M3 - Paper

ER -

Sage D, Dainty A, Tryggestad K, Justesen L, Mouritsen J. All That Fuss Just for Some Bloody Badgers? The Politics of Wildlife in Infrastructure Construction. 2013. Paper presented at The 22nd Nordic Academy of Management Conference. 2013, Reykjavík, Iceland.