What is described by the idea of urban wild things as discussed by Hinchliffe and colleagues?

• A. Urban nature is dynamic, unpredictable, and includes non-human actors.
• B. Non-human life has no role
• C. Humans are sole actors
• D. Wild animals should be removed

Answer: (A)

The idea being tested is that urban nature is dynamic, unpredictable, and populated by non-human actors. Hinchliffe and colleagues emphasize that cities aren’t neat, controlled spaces for nature; they are tangled, ever-changing ecologies where plants, animals, microbes, weather, infrastructure, and human practices all interact. In this view, non-human life has agency and helps shape urban outcomes just as people do. Wildness in the city arises from these ongoing interactions and the ways people respond to them, not from a fixed, human-centered plan.

That’s why describing urban nature as dynamic and unpredictable, and including non-human actors, best fits the concept. The other ideas—that non-human life has no role, that humans are the sole actors, or that wild animals should be removed—ignore or contradict the sense of urban wild things as co-produced by multiple actors and processes.