Show simple item record

Files in this item

Thumbnail

Item metadata

dc.contributor.authorWhite, Rehema M.
dc.contributor.authorMarzano, Mariella
dc.contributor.authorLeahy, Sharon
dc.contributor.authorJones, Glyn
dc.date.accessioned2019-08-21T14:30:06Z
dc.date.available2019-08-21T14:30:06Z
dc.date.issued2019-08-21
dc.identifier.citationWhite , R M , Marzano , M , Leahy , S & Jones , G 2019 , ' Are we defending the indefensible? Reflecting on policy and practice around ‘the border’ in plant biosecurity for tree health ' , Forests , vol. 10 , no. 9 , 716 . https://doi.org/10.3390/f10090716en
dc.identifier.otherPURE: 260534989
dc.identifier.otherPURE UUID: e1ff6790-8670-4c31-9f1d-f6cafd1c9a4e
dc.identifier.otherORCID: /0000-0002-9669-0012/work/64697335
dc.identifier.otherScopus: 85072576927
dc.identifier.otherWOS: 000487978700064
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10023/18348
dc.descriptionFunding: UK BBSRC grant BB/L012030/1 for the project New approaches for the early detection of tree health pests and pathogens.en
dc.description.abstractThe challenges to forest health from climate change, globalization, contemporary trade practices and new recreational patterns require effective biosecurity. We asked: How is the biosecurity border for tree health understood and enacted by state and non-state actors? What are the consequences for tree health? Semi-structured interviews (N = 10) were conducted with scientists and other relevant actors (N = 21). The border was understood variously as: a biophysical boundary, often the coast; a geopolitical boundary, usually of the European Union; the points of main inspection focus; dispersed nodes of inspection; a ‘pre-border’ outside of UK; or by the location of detection activities. A wide range of state, non-state and hybrid groups are engaged in border practices. These practices have been altered due to trade and climate changes, are subject to cost and resource priorities and reflect particular knowledge flows and the biological nature of the agents. We suggest that there is an ‘everyone’ as well as ‘everywhere’ border that demands clarification of risks, roles and responsibilities, and we offer practical recommendations. We conclude that tree health border challenges are a manifestation of wider sustainability issues that enable us to explore human–nature relationships, democratic engagement and the pursuit of more sustainable futures.
dc.format.extent20
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofForestsen
dc.rights© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).en
dc.subjectForest managementen
dc.subjectTree healthen
dc.subjectSocial scienceen
dc.subjectBiosecurityen
dc.subjectBordersen
dc.subjectPesten
dc.subjectPathogenen
dc.subjectGovernanceen
dc.subjectGE Environmental Sciencesen
dc.subjectGF Human ecology. Anthropogeographyen
dc.subjectNDASen
dc.subject.lccGEen
dc.subject.lccGFen
dc.titleAre we defending the indefensible? Reflecting on policy and practice around ‘the border’ in plant biosecurity for tree healthen
dc.typeJournal articleen
dc.description.versionPublisher PDFen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews.School of Geography & Sustainable Developmenten
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews.Scottish Oceans Instituteen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews.St Andrews Sustainability Instituteen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews.School of Geography and Geosciencesen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews.Centre for Research into Equality, Diversity & Inclusionen
dc.contributor.institutionUniversity of St Andrews.Office of the Principalen
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.3390/f10090716
dc.description.statusPeer revieweden


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record