Natives and aliens: Who and what belongs in nature and in the nation?

Abstract

The distinction between native and alien species is a main tenet of various natural sciences, invasion biology in particular. However, it is also a contested one, as it does not reflect the biological features of a species, but only its place of origin and migration history. The present paper offers a brief genealogy of the native/ alien divide and argues that central to this binary is a national thinking that divides the world into distinct (national) units, enclosed by (natural) borders, with a unique (native) population attached to these spatial units. The paper illustrates this argument by looking at two interrelated processes: the nationalisation of nature, by which the national thinking intervenes as an organising principle in determining ecological inclusion/exclusion, and the naturalisation of the nation, through which the nation is given an ontological status. Taken together these two processes confirm the continuing salience of the nation as a b-ordering principle actively constituting both the social and natural world, also in times of anthropogenic changes and increasing people's mobility.

Restoration as world-making and repair: A pragmatist agenda

“…In restoration, indicators can be devised that account for stressors, constraints and benefits for human and nonhuman members of a community, and recognizes tensions and synergies between social and ecological factors. Furthermore, questionable assumptions from both a biological and sociological perspective may actually be mutually reinforcing, illustrated by the distinction between native and alien species, which has perpetuated a narrow, conservative formulation of community (Warren, 2007; Antonsich, 2021), which increased dialogue in restoration may expose to open discussion. Waterway restoration can again provide an illustration of how shared language can facilitate inquiry.…”

Beyond ‘Native V. Alien’: Critiques of the Native/alien Paradigm in the Anthropocene, and Their Implications

“…Notably, the nation is a common scale of environmental governance, but parceling up seamless nature into political spaces makes no functional ecological sense (Brown, 1997); some nations are too small, others too large, and many national borders cross-cut ecological units (Head & Muir, 2004;Taylor, 2005). But because legal responsibilities for protecting biodiversity rest with national governments, and the nativeness of species is often defined in relation to political territories, this inappropriate and inconsistent scale has become the norm for the application of the NAC (Antonsich, 2020;Fall, 2014aFall, , 2014b. That some political territories are the expression of colonial and neocolonial logics only creates further difficulties (Sinclair & Pringle, 2017).…”

“…All three rely heavily on the fiction that these concepts are given, not constructed (Biermann, 2016), and all have close linkages with identity (Fall, 2014a;Olwig, 2003). As Antonsich (2020) shows, ideas of nativeness and alienness have developed in conjunction with the nationalization of nature and the naturalization of nation, with consequent conflation of ecological and political nationalistic narratives.…”

“…This paper explores the fractious, longstanding debates between those who champion 'native nature' and those who advocate a more inclusive, cosmopolitan approach (Keulartz & van der Weele, 2009; Stanescu, 2017), one which embraces new arrivals and the novel assemblages of the Anthropocene. It adopts a geographical lens because distinguishing between native and alien species is an essentially geographical categorization, hinging on questions of scale, place, space, culture and environment which lie at the heart of geography (Antonsich, 2020;Warren, 2007). The distinction creates geographies of spatial inclusion and exclusion, defining where species belong (Cresswell, 1997).…”

Othering Mushrooms: Migratism and its racist entanglements in the Brexit campaign

“…It can be found throughout out all seasons in temperate and sub-tropical regions worldwide especially in damp and shaded areas. The reason why Jelly Ears are so prolific is also because of their host, the elder tree, which can be found almost everywhere, and is sometimes itself considered an invasive alien species (Antonsich, 2020). Elder grows on the edges of fields and woods, even in cities and towns where it is traditionally cut back.…”