Place is a recurrent yet contested theme in the social sciences, and an emerging theme within qualitative inquiry. How one understands place has significant bearing upon the difference that place makes to methodology. Accounts that rely on fixed, bordered, and exclusionist notions of place-based authenticity are problematic. A conceptualization of place as dynamic, open, and more-than-human offers other methodological possibilities regarding the representation of the self in relation to place. It also offers a rationale for research that engages with the more intangible elements that constitute sense of place such as emotions, dreams, and imaginings, and research that engages with how people construct meaning in relation to place-based phenomena.
AndersonJ.AdeyP.BevanP. (2010). Positioning place: Polylogic approaches to research methodology. Qualitative Research, 10, 589-604.
2.
BennettJ. (2001). The enchantment of modern life: Attachments, crossings, and ethics. Princeton, NY: Princeton University Press.
3.
BoothK. (2008). Risdon Vale: Place, memory and suburban experience. Ethics, Place & Environment, 11, 299-311.
4.
BoothK. (2010). Place matters: Finding deep ecology within towns and cities (Unpublished master’s thesis). School of Geography and Environmental Studies, University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia.
5.
BoothK. (2011). In wilderness and wildness: Recognising and responding within the agency of relational memory. Environmental Ethics, 33, 283-294.
6.
BoothK. (2013a). Being prey: Dismantling the emplacement/displacement dualism. The Trumpeter, 29, 1-14.
7.
BoothK. (2013b). Deep ecology, hybrid geographies, and environmental management’s relational premise. Environmental Values, 22, 523-543.
8.
BoothK.WilliamsS. (2014). A more-than-human political moment (and other natural catastrophes). Space and Polity. Advance online publication.
9.
BoyceJ. (2008). Van Diemen’s Land. Melbourne, Australia: Black.
10.
CertomàC. (2009). Environmental politics and place authenticity protection. Environmental Values, 18, 313-341.
11.
DiehmC. (2003). The self of stars and stone: Ecofeminism, deep ecology, and the ecological self. The Trumpeter, 19, 31-45.
12.
IngoldT. (2000). The perception of the environment: Essays in livelihood, dwelling and skill. London, England: Routledge.
13.
MasseyD. (1993). Power-geometry and a progressive sense of place. In BirdJ.CurtisB.PutnamT.RobertsonG.TichlerL. (Eds.), Mapping the futures: Local cultures, global change (pp. 59-69). London, England: Routledge.
14.
MasseyD. (1997). A global sense of place. In BarnesT.GregoryD. (Eds.), Reading human geography: The poetics and politics of inquiry (pp. 315-323). New York, NY: Hodder Arnold.
15.
MasseyD. (2005). For space. London, England: SAGE.
16.
MasseyD. (2006). Landscape as a provocation: Reflections on moving mountains. Journal of Material Culture, 11, 33-48.
17.
NaessA. (1989). Ecosophy and gestalt ontology. The Trumpeter, 6, 134-136.
18.
NaessA. (2005). Reflections on gestalt ontology. The Trumpeter, 21, 119-128.
19.
NaessA. (2008). An example of a place: Tvergastein. In DrengsonA.DevallB. (Eds.), The ecology of wisdom (pp. 45-64), Berkeley, CA: Counterpoint.
20.
RelphE. (1976). Place and placelessness. London, England: Pion.
21.
RothenbergD. (1993). Is it painful to think? Conversations with Arne Naess. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
22.
RothenbergD. (2000). No world but in things: The poetry of Naess’s concrete contents. In KatzE.LightA.RothenbergD. (Eds.), Beneath the surface: Critical essays in the philosophy of deep ecology (pp. 151-168), Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
23.
SavageM.BagnallG.LonghurstB. (2005). Globalization and belonging. London, England: SAGE.
24.
SchamaS. (1996). Landscape and memory. London, England: Fontana Press.
25.
Threatened Species Unit. (2003). Eucalyptus risdonii. Hobart, Australia: Threatened Species Unit, Department of Primary Industries, Water and Environment.
