BrierleyGJ (2010) Landscape memory: The imprint of the past on contemporary landscape forms and processes. Area42(1): 76–85.
2.
CastreeN (2008a) Neoliberalising nature: The logics of deregulation and reregulation. Environment and Planning A40(1): 131–152.
3.
CastreeN (2008b) Neoliberalising nature: Processes, effects, and evaluations. Environment and Planning A40(1): 153–173.
4.
DowlingR (2008) Geographies of identity: Labouring in the ‘neoliberal’ university. Progress in Human Geography32(6): 812–820.
5.
JuracekKEFitzpatrickFA (2003) Limitations and implications of stream classification. Journal of the American Water Resources Association39(3): 659–670.
6.
LaveR (2009) The controversy over natural channel design: Substantive explanations and potential avenues for resolution. Journal of the American Water Resources Association45(9): 1519–1532.
7.
LaveR (2012a) Fields and Streams: Stream Restoration, Neoliberalism, and the Future of Environmental Science. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press.
8.
LaveR (2012b) Bridging political ecology and STS: A field analysis of the Rosgen Wars. Annals of the Association of American Geographers102(2): 366–382.
ScheinRH (1997) The place of landscape: A conceptual framework for interpreting an American scene. Annals of the Association of American Geographers87(4): 660–680.
11.
ScheinRH (2009) A methodological framework for interpreting ordinary landscapes: Lexington, Kentucky’s Courthouse Square. Geographical Review99(3): 377–402.
12.
SimonADoyleMKondolfM. (2007) Critical evaluation of how the Rosgen classification and associated ‘natural channel design’ methods fail to integrate and quantify fluvial processes and channel response. Journal of the American Water Resources Association43(5): 1117–1131.