This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Walker, P. Articles by Fortmann, L. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Whose landscape? A political ecology of the ‘exurban’ Sierra

Department of Geography, University of Oregon

Louise Fortmann

Department of Environmental Science, Policy and Management, University of California at Berkeley

In rural places that sit at the uneasy crossroads between ‘traditional’ natural resource-based production and ‘new’ economies and cultures of aesthetic landscape ‘consumption’, ideas of landscape become increasingly important and contested. This paper examines one such conflict in Nevada County, California - a former mining and ranching community in the Sierra Nevada that has experienced rapid ‘exurban’ in-migration and gentrification. In-migrants brought with them particular ‘aesthetic’ or ‘consumption’ views of landscape that long-time residents with continuing ties to the ‘old’ production landscape viewed as political threats. These tensions have recently ignited a political firestorm over a proposal by the environmentalist-dominated county government to incorporate landscape-scale aesthetic and environmental principles into county planning. The ferocity of this contest reflects the multiple issues at stake, including competition between different forms of rural capitalism, class conflict and social control, and cultural frictions. At each level of this multi-tiered conflict, ideas of landscape are key. Together, political ecology and new cultural geographical studies of landscape provide powerful insights into the ways that the politics of landscape - revolving around the question of who ‘owns’ the landscape or decides how it ‘should’ look - become a pivotal node in the shifting human-environment dialectic.

Cultural Geographies, Vol. 10, No. 4, 469-491 (2003)
DOI: 10.1191/1474474003eu285oa


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. Woods Rural geography: blurring boundaries and making connections Progress in Human Geography, December 1, 2009; 33(6): 849 - 858. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. P. Neumann Political ecology: theorizing scale Progress in Human Geography, June 1, 2009; 33(3): 398 - 406. [PDF]

				M. G. Reed and S. Christie Environmental geography: we're not quite home -- reviewing the gender gap Progress in Human Geography, April 1, 2009; 33(2): 246 - 255. [PDF]

				N. M. Crankshaw Plowing Or Mowing? Rural Sprawl In Nelson County, Kentucky Landscape Jrnl., January 1, 2009; 28(2): 218 - 234. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. McCarthy Rural geography: globalizing the countryside Progress in Human Geography, February 1, 2008; 32(1): 129 - 137. [PDF]

				B. Braun Environmental issues: writing a more-than-human urban geography Progress in Human Geography, October 1, 2005; 29(5): 635 - 650. [PDF]

				P. A. Walker Political ecology: where is the ecology? Progress in Human Geography, February 1, 2005; 29(1): 73 - 82. [PDF]