Skip to main content
Login
  1. Home
  2. Fences and Biosecurity
  3. Fence and Fencibility: Using Technology to Direct Wildlife
Helsinki University Press

Fence and Fencibility: Using Technology to Direct Wildlife

  • Erica von Essen(author)
  • Manisha Bhardwaj(author)
Chapter of: Fences and Biosecurity: The Politics of Governing Unruly Nature
  • Export Metadata
  • Metadata
  • Contributors

Export Metadata

Metadata
TitleFence and Fencibility: Using Technology to Direct Wildlife
ContributorErica von Essen(author)
Manisha Bhardwaj(author)
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.33134/HUP-30-8
Licensehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
PublisherHelsinki University Press
Published on2025-03-26
Long abstract

We examine the virtual fence in terms of how it communicates with wildlife about interspecies boundaries. This is done using a biosemiotic point of departure, which regards interventions as communicative devices tailored to be ‘read’ by wild animal sensory perceptions (Umwelten). Having synthesised some current uses of such technologies in wildlife management, our chapter shows how wires cross in miscommunication across species boundaries. In particular, we show such instances as when wildlife may come to associate a deterrent and boundary marker with food or a nesting opportunity instead of ‘danger – keep out’. We interrogate the impact of technology on the design of these signalling devices. Fences and fence technology are increasingly digitally mediated through AI-based surveillance and automatic responses to ‘discipline’ animals – deterrents which use sounds, light flashes or other repellents. This minimises not only human involvement in wildlife management but also physical manifestations: a fence is no longer a visible structure but is present as coordinates in a software program, felt but not seen. This prompts us to ask whether digitisation changes the nature of fencibility – what a fence is and stands for. In the absence of visual manifestation, but materially enforced by negative stimuli when crossed, what are the implications of these digitally encoded devices for communication across the species in wildlife management?

Keywords
  • biosecurity
  • wildlife management
  • wildlife ecology
  • landscape
  • communication
Contributors

Erica von Essen

(author)
Stockholm University at Stockholm Resilience Center
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9169-0064

Von Essen’s work focuses on human–wildlife relations. She is specialised in hunting cultures, ethics, wildlife crime, conservation, digitally mediated forms of wildlife engagement, wildlife tourism and problem wildlife. von Essen is published across the fields of criminology, environmental ethics, rural sociology and animal studies. She works at Stockholm Resilience Center

Manisha Bhardwaj

(author)
Wildlife Ecology and Management at University of Freiburg
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7769-0845

Manisha Bhardwaj is a wildlife ecologist, motivated to identify and mitigate the impacts of the built environment on wildlife. She is a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Freiburg, Germany, investigating human–wildlife interactions. She completed her PhD in 2018, at the University of Melbourne, Australia, where she evaluated the impacts of roads on bats.

Export Metadata

UK registered social enterprise and Community Interest Company (CIC).

Company registration 14549556

Metadata

  • By book
  • By publisher
  • GraphQL API
  • Export API

Resources

  • Downloads
  • Videos
  • Merch
  • Presentations
  • Service status

Contact

  • Email
  • Bluesky
  • Mastodon
  • Github

Copyright © 2026 Thoth Open Metadata. Except where otherwise noted, content on this site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license.