Planetary Rural Geographies, Hope and Geopolitics: A Response to Feng and Dong and to Sidaway and Wójcik

Wang, Chi-Mao, Maye, Damian ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4459-6630 and Woods, Michael (2026) Planetary Rural Geographies, Hope and Geopolitics: A Response to Feng and Dong and to Sidaway and Wójcik. Dialogues in Human Geography. (In Press)

Text (Peer-reviewed version) 16527 Maye (2026) Planetary rural geographies a response.pdf - Accepted Version Restricted to Repository staff only Available under License Publisher's Licence Non-Commercial Use. Download (173kB)

Abstract

This paper responds to the commentaries by Feng and Dong and by Sidaway and Wójcik on our essay Planetary Rural Geographies. In response to Feng and Dong, we clarify our treatment of ‘hope’ in our planetary rural geographies framework and elaborate our position distinguishing ontological relationality from ethical responsibility, arguing that more-than-human relational ontologies do not diminish the distinctive ethical responsibilities humans bear toward multispecies worlds. Drawing on Indigenous worlding, more-than-human geography, and agri-food studies, we further argue that planetary rural geographies adopt an inductive and practice-based approach to hope, grounded in situated forms of care rather than abstract ethical prescriptions. In response to Sidaway and Wójcik, we highlight geopolitical dimensions of planetary rural geographies and note correspondences with a parallel planetary turn in geopolitics. Prompted by their vantage point of Singapore, we also discuss the intersection of planetary rural geographies and planetary urban geographies.

Item Type:	Article
Article Type:	Article
Uncontrolled Keywords:	Planetary rural geographies, geopolitics, more-than-human, rural–urban relations, planetary urban geographies
Subjects:	G Geography. Anthropology. Recreation > GF Human geography. Human ecology. Anthropogeography G Geography. Anthropology. Recreation > GN Anthropology H Social Sciences > HN Social history and conditions. Social problems. Social reform
Divisions:	Schools and Research Institutes > Countryside and Community Research Institute
Depositing User:	Nick Lewis
Date Deposited:	18 Sep 2026 08:34
Last Modified:	18 Sep 2026 08:45
URI:	https://eprints.glos.ac.uk/id/eprint/16527

University Staff: Request a correction | Repository Editors: Update this record