Advanced search
Publication Cover
Urban Geography Volume 44, 2023 - Issue 10: Animating The Urban
Submit an article Journal homepage
5,515
Views
9
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Articles

Cultivated, feral, wild: the urban as an ecological formation

Maan Baruaa Department of Geography, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK;b Animal Behaviour and Cognition Programme, National Institute of Advanced Studies, Bangalore, IndiaCorrespondence[email protected]
ORCID Iconhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-6539-8131View further author information
ORCID Icon &
Anindya Sinhaa Department of Geography, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK;b Animal Behaviour and Cognition Programme, National Institute of Advanced Studies, Bangalore, India;c School of Humanities, Exeter University, Exeter, UK;d Indian Institute of Science Education and Research, Kolkata, IndiaORCID Iconhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-5623-711XView further author information
ORCID Icon
Pages 2206-2227 | Received 23 Apr 2020, Accepted 15 Mar 2022, Published online: 25 Apr 2022

References

  • Amin, A., & Thrift, N. (2002). Cities: Reimagining the urban. Polity Press.
  • Amin, A., & Thrift, N. (2017). Seeing like a city. Polity Press.
  • Anand, U. (2012, March 15). Conceding defeat to monkeys, MCD says can't catch them. Indian Express.
  • Anon. (1951). Cattle Nuisance in Delhi. [Local Government/Chief Commissioner/File No. 11(36)]. Delhi State Archives.
  • Anon. (1977, November 15). Desai against export of animals. The Statesman, p. 2.
  • Anon. (1978). India bans export of rhesus monkeys. International Primate Protection League Newsletter, 5(1), 2–4.
  • Anon. (2007). Monkeys attack Delhi politician. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7055625.stm
  • Anon. (2010, September 9). We don't have enough monkey catchers: MCD. Hindustan Times.
  • Anon. (2015). Over 64k dog bite cases in Delhi, north Delhi most affected. Retrieved December 16, 2015, from http://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/over-64k-dog-bite-cases-in-delhi-north-delhi-most-affected/story-2kgHhZBAYWwpqmyGS5vz6O.html
  • Anon. (2016). Stray efforts can't solve this problem. Retrieved October 12, 2016, from https://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/27-804-stray-dogs-caught-by-ndmc-in-north-delhi-in-2018-19-119070301487_1.html
  • Anon. (2019a). 27,804 stray dogs caught by NDMC in north Delhi in 2018-19. Retrieved July 3, 2019, from https://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/27-804-stray-dogs-caught-by-ndmc-in-north-delhi-in-2018-19-119070301487_1.html
  • Anon. (2019b). SDMC shifting responsibility to trap, translocate monkeys, Delhi govt tells HC. Retrieved January 29, 2019, from https://www.outlookindia.com/newsscroll/sdmc-shifting-responsibility-to-trap-translocate-monkeys-delhi-govt-tells-hc/1467862
  • Barua, M. (2018a). Animating capital: Work, commodities, circulation. Progress in Human Geography, 43(4), 650–669.
  • Barua, M. (2018b). Animal work: Metabolic, ecological, affective. Cultural Anthropology website. https://culanth.org/fieldsights/1504-animal-work-metabolic-ecological-affective
  • Barua, M. (2021). Infrastructure and non-human life: A wider ontology. Progress in Human Geography, 45(6), 1467–1489.
  • Barua, M., Jadhav, S., Kumar, G., Gupta, U., Justa, P., & Sinha, A. (2021). Mental health ecologies and urban wellbeing. Health & Place, 69, 102577.
  • Barua, M., & Sinha, A. (2017). Animating the urban: An ethological and geographical conversation. Social & Cultural Geography, 20(8), 1160–1180.
  • Baviskar, A. (2011). Cows, cars and cycle-rickshaws: Bourgeois environmentalists and the battle for Delhi's streets. In A. Baviskar & R. Ray (Eds.), Elite and everyman: The cultural politics of the Indian middle classes (pp. 391–419). Routledge.
  • Baviskar, A. (2019). Uncivil city: Ecology, equity and the commons in Delhi. Sage Publications Pvt. Limited.
  • Belcourt, B.-R. (2016). A poltergeist manifesto. Feral Feminisms, 6(Fall), 22–32.
  • Bhattacharjee, D., Sarkar, R., Sau, S., & Bhadra, A. (2019). A tale of two species: How humans shape dog behaviour in urban habitats. arXiv:1904.07113, 106–119.
  • Bhattacharjee, D., Sau, S., Das, J., & Bhadra, A. (2017). Free-ranging dogs prefer petting over food in repeated interactions with unfamiliar humans. Journal of Experimental Biology, 220(24), 4654–4660. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0180643
  • Biermann, C., & Mansfield, B. (2014). Biodiversity, purity, and death: Conservation biology as biopolitics. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 32(2), 257–273.
  • Blecha, J., & Leitner, H. (2014). Reimagining the food system, the economy, and urban life: New urban chicken-keepers in US cities. Urban Geography, 35(1), 86–108.
  • Brenner, N., & Schmid, C. (2015). Towards a new epistemology of the urban? City, 19(2-3), 151–182.
  • Buller, H. (2014). Reconfiguring wild spaces: The porous boundaries of wild animal geographies. In G. Marvin & S. McHugh (Eds.), Routledge handbook of human-animal studies (pp. 233–245). Routledge.
  • Choy, T. (2011). Ecologies of comparison: An ethnography of endangerment in Hong Kong. Duke University Press.
  • Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1986). Nomadology: The war machine (B. Massumi, Trans.). Semiotext(e).
  • Delhi Development Authority. (1962). Master plan for Delhi. Delhi Development Authority.
  • Deshpande, A., Gupta, S., & Sinha, A. (2018). Intentional and multimodal communication between wild bonnet macaques and humans. Scientific Reports, 8(1), 5147.
  • Doron, A. (2020). Stench and sensibilities: On living with waste, animals and microbes in India. The Australian Journal of Anthropology, 32(S1), 23–41.
  • Federici, S. (2004). Caliban and the witch: Women, the body, and primitive accumulation. Autonomedia.
  • Fischer-Kowalski, M., & Hüttler, W. (1998). Society's metabolism. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 2(4), 107–136.
  • Francis, R. A., & Chadwick, M. A. (2012). What makes a species synurbic? Applied Geography, 32(2), 514–521.
  • Gabrys, J. (2012). Becoming urban: Sitework from a moss-eye view. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 44(12), 2922–2939.
  • Gandy, M. (2006). Urban nature and the ecological imaginary. In N. Heynen, M. Kaika, & E. Swyngedouw (Eds.), In the nature of cities: Urban political ecology and the politics of urban metabolism (pp. 63–74). Routledge.
  • Gandy, M. (2013a). Marginalia: Aesthetics, ecology, and urban wastelands. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 103(6), 1301–1316.
  • Gandy, M. (2013b). Entropy by design: Gilles clément, parc henri matisse and the limits to avant-garde urbanism. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 37(1), 259–278.
  • Gandy, M. (2015). From urban ecology to ecological urbanism: An ambiguous trajectory. Area, 47(2), 150–154.
  • Gandy, M. (2016). Unintentional landscapes. Landscape Research, 41(4), 433–440.
  • Gandy, M. (2021). Urban political ecology: A critical reconfiguration. Progress in Human Geography, 46(1), 21–43.
  • Ghertner, D. A. (2015). Rule by aesthetics: World-class city making in Delhi. Oxford University Press.
  • Gidwani, V. (2015). The work of waste: Inside India's infra-economy. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 40(4), 575–595.
  • Gidwani, V., & Reddy, R. N. (2011). The afterlives of “waste”: Notes from India for a minor history of capitalist surplus. Antipode, 43(5), 1625–1658.
  • Ginn, F. (2016). Domestic wild: Memory, nature and gardening in suburbia. Routledge.
  • Government of India. (2019). 20th Indian Livestock Census - 2019: All India Report. Retrieved from New Delhi.
  • Gururani, S., & Dasgupta, R. (2018). Frontier urbanism: Urbanisation beyond cities in South Asia. Economic & Political Weekly, 43(12), 41–45.
  • Gutgutia, S. (2020, November 30). Pigs, precarity and infrastructure. Ecologizing Infrastructure: Infrastructural Ecologies. https://www.societyandspace.org/articles/pigs-precarity-and-infrastructure
  • Heynen, N., Kaika, M., & Swyngedouw, E. (Eds.). (2006). The nature of cities: Urban political ecology and the politics of urban metabolism. Routledge.
  • Hinchliffe, S., Kearnes, M. B., Degen, M., & Whatmore, S. (2005). Urban wild things: A cosmopolitical experiment. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 23(5), 643–658.
  • Hinchliffe, S., & Whatmore, S. (2006). Living cities: Towards a politics of conviviality. Science as Culture, 15(2), 123–138.
  • Howell, P. (2000). Flush and the banditti: Dog-stealing in Victorian London. In C. Philo & C. Wilbert (Eds.), Animal spaces, beastly places: New geographies of human-animal relations (pp. 37–58). Routledge.
  • Howell, P. (2015). At home and astray: The domestic dog in Victorian Britain. University of Virginia Press.
  • Jasper, S. (2018). Sonic refugia: Nature, noise abatement and landscape design in West Berlin. The Journal of Architecture, 23(6), 936–960.
  • Katz, C. (2001). Vagabond capitalism and the necessity of social reproduction. Antipode, 33(4), 709–728.
  • Kumar, S. (2007). New friends colony residents vs Union of India (UOI) and Ors. on 14 March, 2007. W.P.(C) No. 2600/2001. Delhi High Court.
  • Majumder, S. S., Bhadra, A., Ghosh, A., Mitra, S., Bhattacharjee, D., Chatterjee, J., Nandi, A. K., & Bhadra, A. (2014). To be or not to be social: Foraging associations of free-ranging dogs in an urban ecosystem. Acta Ethologica, 17(1), 1–8.
  • Majumder, S. S., Paul, M., Sau, S., & Bhadra, A. (2016). Denning habits of free-ranging dogs reveal preference for human proximity. Scientific Reports, 6(1), 32014.
  • Malik, I. (1989). Population growth and stabilizing Age structure of the tughlaqabad rhesus. Primates, 30(1), 117–120.
  • Metzger, J. (2014). The moose are protesting: The more-than-human politics of transport infrastructure development. In J. Metzger, P. Allmendinger, & S. Oosterlynck (Eds.), Planning against the political (pp. 203–226). Routledge.
  • Mohnot, S. M. (1978, December). On the primate resources of India. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society, 75, 961–970.
  • Montford, K. S., & Taylor, C. (2016). Feral theory: Introduction. Feral Feminisms, 6(Fall), 5–17.
  • Moore, J. W. (2017). The capitalocene, part I: On the nature and origins of our ecological crisis. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 44(3), 594–630.
  • Nadal, D. (2019). To kill or not to kill? Negotiating life, death, and one health in the context of dog-mediated rabies control in colonial and independent India. In C. Lynteris (Ed.), Framiing animals as epidemic villains: Histories of non-human disease vectors (pp. 91–118). Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Nadal, D. (2020). Rabies in the streets: Interspecies camaraderie in urban India. The Pennsylvania State University Press.
  • Nagy, K. (2020). Plastics saturate us, inside out. Feral Atlas. https://feralatlas.supdigital.org/poster/plastics-saturate-us-inside-and-outside-our-bodies
  • Nair, J. (2013). Is there an ‘Indian’ urbanism? In A. M. Rademacher & K. Sivaramakrishnan (Eds.), Ecologies of urbanism in India: Metropolitan civility and sustainability (pp. 43–70). Hong Kong University Press.
  • Narayanan, Y. (2017). Street dogs at the intersection of colonialism and informality:‘subaltern animism’as a posthuman critique of Indian cities. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 35(3), 475–494.
  • Nath, D. (2014, May 11). Over a thousand illegal dairies in Delhi. The Hindu. https://www.thehindu.com/news/cities/Delhi/over-a-thousand-illegal-dairies-in-delhi/article5997887.ece
  • Nietzsche, F. (1982). Twilight of the idols (W. Kaufmann, Trans.). Viking Penguin Inc.
  • Palmer, C. (2003). Colonization, urbanization, and animals. Philosophy & Geography, 6(1), 47–58.
  • Parks, L. (2017). Mediating animal-infrastructure relations. In M.-P. Boucher, S. Helmreich, L. W. Kinney, S. Tibbits, R. Uchill, & E. Ziporyn (Eds.), Being material (pp. 144–153). MIT Press.
  • Philo, C. (1995). Animals, geography, and the city: Notes on inclusions and exclusions. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 13(6), 655–681.
  • Ragavan, S. (2021). Between field and home: Notes from the balcony. Cultural Geographies, 28(4), 675–679.
  • Ragavan, S., & Srivastava, S. (2020). Commoning infrastructure. Ecologizing infrastructure: Infrastructural ecologies. https://www.societyandspace.org/articles/commoning-infrastructures
  • Ruddick, S. M. (2017). Rethinking the subject, reimagining worlds. Dialogues in Human Geography, 7(2), 119–139.
  • Sandilands, C. (2017). Some ‘F’ words for the environmental humanities: Feralities, feminisms, futurities. In U. Heise, J. Christiensen, & M. Niemann (Eds.), The Routledge companion to environmental humanities (pp. 443–451). Routledge.
  • Sharan, A. (2006). In the city, out of place: Environment and modernity, Delhi 1860s to 1960s. Economic & Political Weekly, 41(47), 4905–4911.
  • Sharan, A. (2014). In the city, out of place: Nuisance, pollution, and dwelling in Delhi, C. 1850-2000. Oxford University Press.
  • Simone, A. M. (2004). People as infrastructure: Intersecting fragments in johannesburg. Public Culture, 16(3), 407–429.
  • Simone, A. M. (2019). Improvised lives. Polity Press.
  • Simone, A. M., & Pieterse, E. (2017). New urban worlds: Inhabiting dissonant times. Polity Press.
  • Singh, A. D. (2000). Common Cause (Redg Society) vs Union of India (UoI). W.P.(C) No. 3791/2000. Delhi High Court.
  • Sinha, A. (1995). Whose life is it anyway? A review of some ideas on the issue of animal rights. Current Science, 69(4), 296–301.
  • Sinha, A. (2005). Not in their genes: Phenotypic flexibility, behavioural traditions and cultural evolution in wild bonnet macaques. Journal of Biosciences, 30(1), 51–64.
  • Sinha, A., & Vijayakrishnan, S. (2017). Primates in urban settings. In A. Fuentes (Ed.), International encyclopaedia of primatology. Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119179313.wbprim0458
  • Smith, N. (1996). The production of nature. In G. Robertson, M. Mash, L. Tickner, J. Bird, B. Curtis, & T. Putnam (Eds.), Futurenatural: Nature, science, culture (pp. 35–54). Routledge.
  • Southwick, C. H., Beg, M. A., & Siddiqi, M. R. (1961). A population survey of Rhesus Monkeys in northern India: II. Transportation routes and forest areas. Ecology, 42(4), 698–710.
  • Southwick, C. H., & Siddiqi, M. F. (1994). Primate commensalism: The rhesus monkey in India. Review of Ecology, 49(3), 223–231.
  • Southwick, C. H., & Siddiqi, M. R. (1968). Population trends of Rhesus Monkeys in villages and towns of northern India, 1959-65. The Journal of Animal Ecology, 37(1), 199–204.
  • Srinivasan, K., Kurz, T., Kuttuva, P., & Pearson, C. (2019). Reorienting rabies research and practice: Lessons from India. Palgrave Communications, 5(1), 1–11.
  • Sundaram, R. (2010). Pirate modernity: Delhi's media urbanism. Routledge.
  • Wadiwel, D. J., & Taylor, C. (2016). A conversation on the feral. Feral Feminisms, 6(Fall), 82–94.
  • Webber, A. D. (2017). Commensalism. In A. Fuentes (Ed.), The international encyclopedia of primatology (Vol. I, pp. 211–212). Wiley Blackwell.
  • Whatmore, S. (2002). Hybrid geographies: Natures, cultures, spaces. Sage.
  • Whatmore, S., Degen, M., Hinchliffe, S., & Kearnes, M. (2003). Vernacular ecologies in/for a convivial city: Lessons from Bristol. Paper presented at the Urban and Regional Development of the ISA (RC21), Milan.
  • Whatmore, S., & Hinchliffe, S. (2012). Ecological landscapes. In D. Hicks & M. C. Beaudry (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of material culture studies (pp. 440–458). Oxford University Press.
  • Wolch, J. (1996). Zoöpolis. Capitalism Nature Socialism, 7(2), 21–47.
  • Wolch, J., Emel, J., & Wilbert, C. (2003). Reanimating cultural geography. In K. Anderson (Ed.), Handbook of cultural geography (pp. 184–206). Sage.
  • Wolch, J., West, K., & Gaines, T. E. (1995). Transspecies urban theory. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 13(6), 735–760.

Related research

People also read lists articles that other readers of this article have read.

Recommended articles lists articles that we recommend and is powered by our AI driven recommendation engine.

Cited by lists all citing articles based on Crossref citations.
Articles with the Crossref icon will open in a new tab.