Sage, D; Dainty, A; Tryggestad, K; Justesen, L and Mouritsen, J (2014) Building with wildlife: Project geographies and cosmopolitics in infrastructure construction. Construction Management and Economics, 32(7-8), pp. 773-786. ISSN 01446193
Abstract
Across many construction projects, and especially infrastructure projects, efforts to mitigate potential loss of biodiversity and habitat are significant concerns, and at times politically controversial. And yet, 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 arguably focused far more on more stable and contained sites, whether organizations 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 it is often within such colliding spaces, where animal geographies are unexpectedly found at the heart of human projects, that we formulate our respect and response to both animals and indeed other humans. We develop an examination of such encounters, with conceptual reference to actor-network theory, and documented empirically through case studies of two infrastructure projects; the findings of our research are relevant to both construction project management and future animal studies.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | actor-network theory; environmental impact assessment; human-animal geographies; infrastructure |
| Index terms: | ethics, environmental impact assessment, heart, politics, biodiversity, infrastructure construction, construction project management, construction project, infrastructure project, case study, laboratory |
| Subjects: | production management, medical science and clinical practice, political science, ethical practice, research management, infrastructure and transport systems, project management theory and practice, civil engineering, environmental impact, data collection methods, biodiversity |
| Topics: | Governance, Health and Safety, Project Management, Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Sustainability |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTE |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here