Globalism and the Enclosure of the Landscape Commons

Chapter
Part of the Environmental History book series (ENVHIS, volume 2)

Abstract

‘Enclosure,’ it will be argued, severs people from the landscape of not just the material commons, but the ‘cultural commons,’ thereby breaking the living bonds of custom that motivate sustainable use. Globalism, it will be further argued, is the contemporary manifestation of the enclosure movement, and thereby a threat to both the material and the cultural commons. Enclosure leaves behind, however, a residue of the cultural commons, as picturesque tradition, that easily dissolves into death by nostalgia. But before delving into enclosure, globalism and picturesque tradition, the meaning of the ‘cultural commons’ in relation to the material commons will be explored.

Keywords

Arable Field Material Common Land Parcel Common Land Cultural Common 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Bakhtin M (1984) Rabelais and his world. Indiana University Press, BloomingtonGoogle Scholar
  2. Barrell J (1972) The idea of landscape and the sense of place, 1730–1840. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  3. Bushaway B (1982) By rite: custom, ceremony and community in England 1700–1880. University Press, Junction Books, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. Butlin RA (1982) The transformation of rural England c 1580–1800. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  5. Casarino C, Negri A (2008) In praise of the common: a conversation on philosophy and politics. University of Minnesota Press, MinneapolisGoogle Scholar
  6. Clayden P (1985) Our common land: the law and history of commons and village greens. The Open Spaces Society, Henley-on-ThamesGoogle Scholar
  7. Cosgrove D (1984) Social formation and symbolic landscape. Croom Helm, LondonGoogle Scholar
  8. Daniels S (1989) Marxism, culture and the duplicity of landscape. In: Peet R, Thrift N (eds) New models in geography II. Unwin and Hyman, London, pp 196–220Google Scholar
  9. Edwards V (1995) The New Forest commons, Hampshire: horse-riders, mountain-bike riders, free-riders. Department of Land and Construction Management. University of Portsmouth, PortsmouthGoogle Scholar
  10. Eversley L (1910) Commons, forests and footpaths. Cassell, LondonGoogle Scholar
  11. Goldman M (ed) (1998) Privatizing nature: political strugles for the global commons. Pluto Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  12. Gudeman S (2001) The anthropology of economy: community, market and culture. Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  13. Hardin G (1968) The tragedy of the commons. Science 162:1243–1248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hardin G, Baden J (1977) Managing the commons. W. H Freeman, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  15. Herod A (2009) Geographies of globalization: a critical introduction. Wiley-Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  16. Hobsbawm E (1983) Introduction. In: Ranger T, Hobsbawm E (eds) The invention of tradition. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 1–14Google Scholar
  17. Kjærgaard T (1994) The Danish revolution, 1500–1800: an ecohistorical interpretation. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Krauss W (2010) The ‘Dingpolitik’ of wind energy in northern German landscapes: an ethnographic case study. Landsc Res 35(2):195–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lovins AB (2004) Energy efficiency, taxonomic overview. Encyclopedia of energy, vol 2. Elsevier, Oxford, pp 383–401Google Scholar
  20. Marston SA (2000) The social construction of scale. Prog Hum Geogr 24(2):219–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Meinig DW (1979) Symbolic landscapes: some idealizations of American communities. In Meinig DW (ed) The interpretation of ordinary landscapes: geographical essays. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 164–192Google Scholar
  22. Milsom SFC (1981) Historical foundations of the common law. Butterworths, LondonGoogle Scholar
  23. Nadaï A, Van der Horst D (2010) Landscapes of energies. Landsc Res 35(2):143–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. NOAD (2005) New Oxford American dictionary. McKean E (ed) Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  25. O.E.D. (1989) Oxford English dictionary. Clarendon Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  26. Olwig KR (2002) Landscape, nature and the body politic. University of Wisconsin Press, MadisonGoogle Scholar
  27. Olwig KR (2005a) The landscape of ‘customary’ law versus that of ‘natural law. Landsc Res 30(3):299–320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Olwig KR (2005b) Representation and alienation in the political landscape. Cult Geogr 12(1):19–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Olwig KR (2007) The practice of landscape ‘conventions’ and the just landscape: the case of the European Landscape Convention. Landsc Res 32(5):579–594CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Olwig KR (2008) Performing on the landscape vs. doing landscape: perambulatory practice, sight and the sense of belonging. In: Ingold T, Vergunst JL (eds) Ways of walking: ethnography and practice on foot. Ashgate, Aldershot, pp 81–91Google Scholar
  31. Olwig KR (2011a) The right rights to the right landscape? In: Egoz S, Pungetti G, Makhzoumi J (eds) The right to landscape: contesting landscape and human rights. Ashgate, Aldershot, pp 39–50Google Scholar
  32. Olwig KR (2011b) The earth is not a globe: landscape versus the ‘globalist’ agenda. Landsc Res 36(4):401–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pearson M (2006) ‘In Comes I’: performance, memory and landscape. University of Exeter Press, ExeterGoogle Scholar
  34. Plato (1961) Statesman. In: Hamilton E, Cairns H (eds) The collected dialogues of Plato. Pantheon, New York, pp 1018–1085Google Scholar
  35. Putnam MCJ (1970) Virgil’s pastoral art. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  36. Rodgers CP, Straughton EA, Winchester AJL, Pieraccini M (2011) Contested common land: environmental governance past and present. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  37. Seymour S, Stephen Daniels CW (1998) Estate and empire: Sir George Cornwall’s management of Mocas, Herefordshire and La Taste, Grenada, 1771–1819. J Hist Geogr 24:313–351Google Scholar
  38. Stiglitz JE (2003) Globalization and its discontents. Norton, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  39. Thompson EP (1993) Customs in common. Penguin, LondonGoogle Scholar
  40. Turner V (1974) Dramas, fields and metaphors: symbolic action in human society. Cornell University Press, IthicaGoogle Scholar
  41. Williams R (1973) The country and the city. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  42. Wood JS (1997) The New England village. Johns Hopkins University Press, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Landscape Architecture, Planning and Heritage Swedish University of Agricultural SciencesAlnarpSweden

Personalised recommendations