@georgeiorda.bsky.social
PI of #ERCStG #GreenFrontier 🔎#politics of #conservation in #EU #Rewilding conflicts @FNPWUR 🌳 #EnvJustice #Commons & #IllegalLogging @ULBSibiu 🐻 #WildlifeCrime @BeastlyProject @ShefUniPolitics #StopGenocide
Our systematic overview of how rewilding is practiced in Europe has been published in @consletters.bsky.social. We found five distinct strategies differing in goals, interventions, and people's role as part of the rewilding process.
Read more here👇
conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/...
Fieldwork can be a unique opportunity, but it can also be a very significant challenge to well-being. My colleagues have developed this interactive reflection tool to help manage well-being whilst on fieldwork, preparing to fieldwork, and when you get back
inclusivefieldwork.leeds.ac.uk/wellbeing/
🚨#History #envhist Job Alert: My Department is hiring an Assistant Professor in Environmental History.
🗃️
Come work with us at Warwick. You'll get both excellent colleagues and great students!
See details below... And do not hesitate to spread the word...
👇👇👇
www.jobs.ac.uk/job/DPK289/a...
CfP POLLEN26 - please join our panel, "Historicizing Geopolitical Ecologies of War" - see for more details and how to submit a proposal before 5th of December here; nomadit.co.uk/conference/p...
@casesofyou.bsky.social @pollenetwork.bsky.social @nicosananes.bsky.social
Some more days before submission deadline on 5 December - please join us if you can!
21.11.2025 16:44 — 👍 2 🔁 1 💬 0 📌 0
🚨 Just one week left to apply for one of the THREE postdoc positions in the #GreenFrontier project hosted at @fnp-wur.bsky.social
#conservation #EnvJustice #wilderness #rewilding #rural #underdevelopment #LandAbandonment
Deadline 25 November!
Full details 👉 www.wur.nl/en/research-...
Apply now — Antipode’s 10th Institute for the Geographies of Justice, “Organizing and Solidarity in a Polycrisis”, deadline 20 December 2025 antipodeonline.org/2025/11/13/a...
13.11.2025 11:57 — 👍 13 🔁 13 💬 0 📌 1
CALL FOR PHD APPLICANTS ON CIVET ONE HEALTH.
Collaborative PhD with Civet One Health Programme.
Interested in applicants wanting to examine civet trade, consumption, farming, value chains, and One Health issues relating to and across these. @pollenetwork.bsky.social @jeshooper.bsky.social
👇SEE AD👇
New @ids.ac.uk bulletin on Struggles for Justice in the Energy Transition: Views from the Frontlines
www.ids.ac.uk/publications... @suspol.bsky.social @sussexfss.bsky.social
Very much looking forward to this talk next week in Prague hosted by the DEA's Ecological Anthropology Seminar series.
All details for registration are below
#GreenFrontier #PoliticalEcology #Wilderness
A table showing profit margins of major publishers. A snippet of text related to this table is below. 1. The four-fold drain 1.1 Money Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis, which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024 alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher (Elsevier) always over 37%. Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor & Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3 billion in that year.
A figure detailing the drain on researcher time. 1. The four-fold drain 1.2 Time The number of papers published each year is growing faster than the scientific workforce, with the number of papers per researcher almost doubling between 1996 and 2022 (Figure 1A). This reflects the fact that publishers’ commercial desire to publish (sell) more material has aligned well with the competitive prestige culture in which publications help secure jobs, grants, promotions, and awards. To the extent that this growth is driven by a pressure for profit, rather than scholarly imperatives, it distorts the way researchers spend their time. The publishing system depends on unpaid reviewer labour, estimated to be over 130 million unpaid hours annually in 2020 alone (9). Researchers have complained about the demands of peer-review for decades, but the scale of the problem is now worse, with editors reporting widespread difficulties recruiting reviewers. The growth in publications involves not only the authors’ time, but that of academic editors and reviewers who are dealing with so many review demands. Even more seriously, the imperative to produce ever more articles reshapes the nature of scientific inquiry. Evidence across multiple fields shows that more papers result in ‘ossification’, not new ideas (10). It may seem paradoxical that more papers can slow progress until one considers how it affects researchers’ time. While rewards remain tied to volume, prestige, and impact of publications, researchers will be nudged away from riskier, local, interdisciplinary, and long-term work. The result is a treadmill of constant activity with limited progress whereas core scholarly practices – such as reading, reflecting and engaging with others’ contributions – is de-prioritized. What looks like productivity often masks intellectual exhaustion built on a demoralizing, narrowing scientific vision.
A table of profit margins across industries. The section of text related to this table is below: 1. The four-fold drain 1.1 Money Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis, which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024 alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher (Elsevier) always over 37%. Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor & Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3 billion in that year.
The costs of inaction are plain: wasted public funds, lost researcher time, compromised scientific integrity and eroded public trust. Today, the system rewards commercial publishers first, and science second. Without bold action from the funders we risk continuing to pour resources into a system that prioritizes profit over the advancement of scientific knowledge.
We wrote the Strain on scientific publishing to highlight the problems of time & trust. With a fantastic group of co-authors, we present The Drain of Scientific Publishing:
a 🧵 1/n
Drain: arxiv.org/abs/2511.04820
Strain: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
Oligopoly: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
@geofrancismasse.bsky.social
07.11.2025 14:39 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0Interested in doing a PhD on #zoonotic diseases & #wildlife trade within a #politicalecology approach? Look no further, @geofrancismasse.bsky.social seeks a potential candidate to be based at @durham.ac.uk 👇
07.11.2025 09:01 — 👍 6 🔁 3 💬 1 📌 0The Globalizing Wildlife volume emerging from the Moving Animals project is out soon. I was a great experience to contribute a chapter on #brownbear diplomacy during Cold War 🐻.
Check out the details below 👇
Welcome back to The Netherlands, Nena! Massive congratulations 🎊
06.11.2025 08:15 — 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0Fancy coming to POLLEN in Barcelona and joining our panel on "Political Ecologies of Restoration: Reintroduction, Assisted
Migration, and Rewilding"? Then submit an abstract via the link below!
pollenpoliticalecology.network/pollen-2026/...
🙏 share please @georgeholmes.bsky.social @csandbrook.bsky.social @jonnyjjt.bsky.social @monicapons.bsky.social @sicilyfiennes.bsky.social @vdonfrancesco.bsky.social @kvinkhuyzen.bsky.social @cristianmoyano.bsky.social @amberhuff.bsky.social @darasands.bsky.social @ericavonessen.bsky.social
03.11.2025 07:46 — 👍 4 🔁 1 💬 0 📌 0Please share 🙏 @hannahdcknsn.bsky.social @charisenns.bsky.social @danbrockington.bsky.social @paulgkeil.bsky.social @jonnyjjt.bsky.social @drjesshope.bsky.social
03.11.2025 07:31 — 👍 2 🔁 1 💬 1 📌 0Please share widely! @fnp-wur.bsky.social @estherturnhout.bsky.social @esthermarijnen.bsky.social @judithverweijen.bsky.social @brambuscher.bsky.social @fletcherecology.bsky.social @rosaleenduffy.bsky.social @monicavasile.bsky.social @matthewarcher.bsky.social @jaredmargulies.bsky.social
03.11.2025 07:31 — 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0
Details for the position with Polish: www.wur.nl/en/vacancy/p...
03.11.2025 07:31 — 👍 4 🔁 2 💬 1 📌 0
Details on the position with Italian are here www.wur.nl/en/vacancy/p...
03.11.2025 07:31 — 👍 2 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0
Details on the position with Spanish are here www.wur.nl/nl/vacature/...
03.11.2025 07:31 — 👍 4 🔁 1 💬 1 📌 0
🚨 We are looking for 3 new colleagues to join the GreenFrontier team as Postdoctoral Researchers!
Deadline for applications: 25 Nov 2025
Each of the 3 openings will involve extended ethnographic fieldwork + plenty of opportunities to consolidate research & leadership skills!
Please share widely!
Our ongoing dialogue with pigs has cultivated a research approach that values non-linearity, passion, & uncertainty. We foreground diverse & overlooked resources, and are open to spontaneous, exploratory, even if frivolous paths
#rootling
rootling.place/articles/roo...
🌏 PhD in environmental politics? Wondering what’s next? @bisa-ecpwg.bsky.social has it covered - Looking forward to this discussion later today 🌍
17.10.2025 08:08 — 👍 4 🔁 2 💬 0 📌 0
This is an important petition on academic freedom, for a professor at Syracuse, NY, USA, who has been indefinitely suspended for a very mildly sarcastic four-word social media post relating to US politics.
docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1F...
DESCRIPTION In this proposed session, we welcome papers related to present currents and critiques of political ecology's engagements with Achille Mbembe's theory of necropolitics. Necropolitics, the “…contemporary forms of subjugation of life to the power of death” (Mbembe, 2005: 39), powerfully shows how politics becomes "the work of death" (Ibid., pg. 16). Necropolitics is a welcome antidote to Foucault's theory of biopolitics and its relatively anemic approach to race, the postcolony, and active geographies of death-making practices ranging from overt-geographies of violent confinement and killing such as in Palestine, to the spatial logics of the plantation and its ghostly afterlives (Mbembe, 2003). Necropolitics has quickly emerged as a powerful analytical theory embraced by political ecologists examining subjects ranging from spaces of killing in postcolonial landscapes (Cavanaugh and Himmelfarb, 2015), to climate change (deBoom, 2015), to state practices reconfiguring human relations with ecologies and nonhuman life (Adolfi and Fleishmann, 2024; Bluwstein and De Rosa, 2024; Margulies, 2019). More recently, several critiques have questioned and raised concerns about the theoretical reading of Mbembe's necropolitics within political ecology (Gibson, 2024; Peters et al., 2024), as well as the political and theoretical consequences of a necropolitical turn away from historically more popular engagements with Foucauldian biopolitics and what might be pursued otherwise as a kind of 'anti-necropolitics' (Strange, 2024). With an openness to critique, generous dialogue, and debate in mind, our session proposes to develop a timely discussion around the (mis)uses of necropolitics in political ecology, welcoming both empirically-driven papers that productively engage with necropolitics as framework and mode of analysis, as well as more theoretically-oriented works that critique or demonstrated the place of necropolitical theory in political ecology today.
The #POLLEN2026 prelim program looks amazing! With that in mind, John Casellas Connors and I are going to be looking for paper submissions for our accepted session "Critical engagements in necropolitical ecologies" -check it out!
pollenpoliticalecology.network/pollen-2026/...
🌅 How are digital technologies refashioning ecological aesthetics? 🌅
Join us for the next Digital Ecologies conference in February 2026 - CFP now open!
We're delighted to welcome Joanna Zylinska and Alexandra Daisy Ginsberg as our keynotes!
Any questions, get in touch.
This is fantastic news! Congrats, Jules!
05.10.2025 14:08 — 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0
New book review -- Christian Lund reads "The Natural Border: Bounding Migrant Farmwork in the Black Mediterranean" by Timothy Raeymaekers @cornellupress.bsky.social antipodeonline.org/category/boo...
02.10.2025 08:37 — 👍 11 🔁 3 💬 0 📌 0
