Categories are all around us: Towards more porous, flexible, and negotiable boundaries in conservation-production landscapes

References

• Adams, W.M. 2003. Future Nature: A Vision for Conservation. London: Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Carpelan, B. 1955. Inledning till dikturval. Carlsson, S. (ed.) 40 år Finlandssvensk Lyrik: Från Edith Södergran till 50-talet, 151. Stockholm: Folket i Bilds förlag.
   Google Scholar
• Cloke, P. & Johnston, R. (eds.) 2005a. Spaces of Geographical Thought: Deconstructing Human Geography's Binaries. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Cloke, P. & Johnston, R. 2005b. Deconstructing human geography's binaries. Cloke, P. & Johnston, R. (eds.) Spaces of Geographical Thought: Deconstructing Human Geography's Binaries, 1–20. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Cronon, W. 1996. The trouble with wilderness; or, getting back to the wrong nature. Cronon, W. (ed.) Uncommon Ground: Rethinking the Human Place in Nature, 69–90. New York: W.W. Norton.
   Google Scholar
• Dahlberg, A. 2014. Reservat, jordbruk, aktör och värden: Flexibla kategorier för en hållbar landskapsvård. Wästfelt, A. (ed.) Begagnade landskap: Använt, vårdat och värderat, 41–63. Stockholm: Riksantikvarieämbetet.
   Google Scholar
• Dahlberg, A.C., Rohde, R. & Sandell, K. 2010. National parks and environmental justice: Comparing access rights and ideological legacies in three countries. Conservation and Society 8, 209–224.
   Google Scholar
• Fall, J. 2002. Divide and rule: Constructing human boundaries in ‘boundless nature’. GeoJournal 58, 243–251.
   Google Scholar
• Goldman, M.J. & Turner, M.D. 2011. Introduction. Goldman, M.J., Nadasdy, P. & Turner, M.D. (eds.) Knowing Nature: Conversations at the Intersection of Political Ecology and Science Studies, 1–23. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Goldman, M.J., Nadasdy, P. & Turner, M.D. (eds) 2011. Knowing Nature. Conversations at the Intersection of Political Ecology and Science Studies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Government Offices of Sweden. 2015 The Swedish Environmental Code: ID-number: Ds 2000:61. http://www.government.se/legal-documents/2000/08/ds-200061/ (accessed 2 June 2015).
   Google Scholar
• Hickey, M. & Lawson, V. 2005. Beyond science? Human geography, interpretation and critique. Castree, N., Rogers, A. & Sherman, D. (eds) Questioning Geography, 96–114. Oxford: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Historic England. 2015. Historic England's Role. https://www.historicengland.org.uk/about/what-we-do/historic-englands-role/ (accessed 2 June 2015).
   Google Scholar
• Jones, R. 2009. Categories, border and boundaries. Progress in Human Geography 33, 174–189.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lundgren, L.J. 2009. Efterord: Naturvård – ett skyddat område? Lundgren, L.J. (ed.) Naturvård bortom 2009: Reflektioner med Anledning av ett Jubileum, 281–302. Brottby: Kassandra.
   Google Scholar
• Macnaghten, P. & Urry, J. 1998. Contested Natures. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Natter, W. & Zierhofer, W. 2002. Political ecology, territoriality and scale. GeoJournal 58, 225–231.
   Google Scholar
• Naturvårdsverket. 2010. Naturreservat i Sverige. Stockholm: Naturvårdsverket. https://www.naturvardsverket.se/Nerladdningssida/?fileType=pdf&downloadUrl=/Documents/publikationer/620-8233-7.pdf (accessed 2 June 2015).
   Google Scholar
• Newman, D. 2006. Borders and bordering: Towards an interdisciplinary dialogue. European Journal of Social Theory 9, 171–186.
   Google Scholar
• Oxford Dictionaries. 2014. Category. http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/ (accessed 21 August 2014).
   Google Scholar
• Peet, R., Robbins, P. & Watts, M. 2011. Global nature. Peet, R., Robbins, P. & Watts, M. (eds.) Global Political Ecology, 1–47. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Perfecto, I. & Vandermeer, J. 2010. The agroecological matrix as alternative to the land-sparing/agriculture intensification model. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 107, 5786–5791.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perfecto, I., Vandermeer, J. & Wright, A. 2009. Nature's Matrix: Linking Agriculture, Conservation and Food Sovereignty. London: Earthscan.
   Google Scholar
• Phalan, B., Onial, M., Balmford, A. & Green, R.E. 2011. Reconciling food production and biodiversity conservation: Land sharing and land sparing compared. Science 333, 1289–1291.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pressey, R.L., Cabeza, M., Watts, M.E., Cowling, R.M. & Wilson, K.A. 2007. Conservation planning in a changing world. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 22, 583–592.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Proctor, J.D. 1998. Geography, paradox and environmental ethics. Progress in Human Geography, 22, 234–255.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Proctor, J.D. 2001. Solid rock and shifting sands: The moral paradox of saving a socially constructed nature. Castree, N. & Braun, B. (eds.) Social Nature. Theory, Practice and Politics, 225–239. Oxford: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Riksantikvarieämbetet. 2015. Förteckning. http://www.raa.se/kulturarvet/landskap/kulturreservat/forteckning-3/ (accessed 2 June 2015).
   Google Scholar
• Robbins, P. 2001. Fixed categories in portable landscape: The causes and consequences of land-cover categorization. Environment and Planning A 33, 161–179.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robbins, P. & Maddock, T. 2000. Interrogating land cover categories: Metaphor and method in remote sensing. Cartography and Geographic Information Science 27, 295–309.
   Google Scholar
• Rocheleau, D., Ross, L., Morrobel, J., Malaret, L., Hernandez, R. & Kominiak, T. 2001. Complex communities and the emergent ecologies in the regional agroforest of Zambrana-Chacuey, Dominican Republic. Ecumene 8, 465–492.
   Google Scholar
• Sandell, K. 2005. Access, tourism and democracy: A conceptual framework and the non-establishment of a proposed National Park in Sweden. Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism 5, 63–75.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, J.C. 1998. Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed. London: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Setten, G. 2005. Who owns the concepts? Notes on the product, practice, property and power of writing. Peil, T. & Jones, M. (eds.) Landscape, Law and Justice, 3–13. Oslo: Novus.
   Google Scholar
• Soper, K. 1995. What is Nature? Oxford: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Vargas, F. 2008. This Night's Foul Work. Translated by S. Reynolds. New York: Penguin Books.
   Google Scholar
• Whatmore, S. 2002. Hybrid Geographies: Natures, Cultures, Spaces. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Wästfelt, A. 2003. Minnet av det bortglömda landskapet. Jansson, U. (ed.) Med Landskapet som Centrum: Kulturgeografiska Perspektiv på Nutida och Historiska Landskap, 301–314. Stockholm: Kulturgeografiska institutionen, Stockholms universitet.
   Google Scholar
• Wästfelt, A., Saltzman, K., Gräslund Berg, E. & Dahlberg, A. 2012. Landscape care paradoxes: Swedish landscape care arrangements in a European context. Geoforum 43, 1171–1181.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zimmerer, K.S. 2000. The reworking of conservation geographies: Nonequilibrium landscapes and nature-society hybrids. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 90, 356–369.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zimmerer, K.S. 2006. Cultural ecology: At the interface with political ecology – the new geographies of environmental conservation and globalization. Progress in Human Geography 30, 63–78.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar