Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Enclosure and Exclusion Within Emerging Forms of Energy Resource Extraction: Shale Fuels and Biofuels

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Palgrave Handbook of the International Political Economy of Energy

Part of the book series: Palgrave Handbooks in IPE ((PHIPE))

Abstract

This chapter examines enclosure and exclusion within emerging forms of energy extraction and uses two case studies to illustrate five intersecting mechanisms that enable these expressions of territoriality. The first case study examines shale gas extraction in the USA. Enclosure and exclusion facilitate extraction through the coordination of historically contingent surface and subsurface ownership rights, extractive technologies, and the materiality of shale gas. The second case study analyzes enclosure and exclusion within recent biofuel promotion in India. Efforts have called for restricting cultivation of lands labeled ‘marginal’ or ‘wastelands’, rendering the commons ‘empty’, and ‘making space’ for biofuel plantations. Showing how mechanisms of enclosure and exclusion intersect, the chapter offers frameworks to contend with the spatial (re)configurations of power within emerging forms of energy extraction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 259.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agrawal, B. (1986). Cold hearths and barren slopes: The woodfuel crisis in the Third World. New Delhi: ZedBooks.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andrews, E., & McCarthy, J. (2014). Scale, shale, and the state: Political ecologies and legal geographies of shale gas development in Pennsylvania. Journal of Environmental Studies and Science, 4, 7–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bailis, R., & Baka, J. (2011). Constructing sustainable biofuels: Governance of the emerging biofuel economy. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 101, 827–838.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baka, J. (2013). The political construction of wasteland: Governmentality, land acquisition and social inequality in South India. Development and Change, 44, 409–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baka, J. (2014). What wastelands? A critique of biofuel policy discourse in South India. Geoforum, 54, 315–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baka, J. (forthcoming). Making space for energy: Wasteland development, energy plantations, and enclosures DOI: 10.1111/anti.12219.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baka, J., & Bailis, R. (2014). Wasteland energy-scapes: A comparative energy flow analysis of India’s biofuel and biomass economies. Ecological Economics, 108, 8–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bakker, K., & Bridge, G. (2006). Material worlds: Materiality and the ‘matter of nature’. Progress in Human Geography, 30(1), 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barry, A. (2006). Technological zones. European Journal of Social Theory, 9(2), 239–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bebbington, A., & Bury, J. (Eds.). (2013). Subterranean struggles: New dynamics of mining, oil, and gas in Latin America. Austin: University of Texas Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blomley, N. (2003). Law, property, and the geography of violence: The frontier, the survey and the grid. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 93(1), 121–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blomley, N. (2007). Making private property: Enclosure, common right and the work of hedges. Rural History, 18, 1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blomley, N. (2008). Enclosure, common right and the property of the poor. Social and Legal Studies, 17(3), 311–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borras, S. M., McMichael, P., & Scoones, I. (2010). The politics of biofuels, land and agrarian change: Editors’ introduction. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 37, 575–592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borras, S. M., Fig, D., & Saurez, S. M. (2011). The politics of agrofuels and mega-land and water deals: Insights from the ProCana case, Mozambique. Review of African Political Economy, 38, 215–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bridge, G. (2011). Past peak oil: Political economy of energy crises. In R. Peet, P. Robbins, & M. Watts (Eds.), Global political ecology (pp. 307–324). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butler v. Charles Powers Estate, 65 A.3d 885 (Pa. 2012).

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. E., Lobell, D. B., Genova, R. C., & Field, C. B. (2008). The global potential of bioenergy on abandoned agriculture lands. Environmental Science & Technology, 42, 5791–5794.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cotula, L., Dyer, N., & Vermeulen, S. (2008). Fuelling exclusion? The biofuels boom and poor people’s access to land. In L. Secondary Cotula, N. Dyer, & S. Vermeulen (Eds.), Secondary fuelling exclusion? The biofuels boom and poor people’s access to land. London: IIED/FAO.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Schutter, O. (2011). How not to think of land-grabbing: Three critiques of large-scale investments in farmland. Journal of Peasant Studies, 38, 249–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Desbiens, C. (2014). Power from the north: Territory, identity, and the culture of hydroelectricity in Quebec. Vancouver: UBC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunham v. Kirkpatrick, 101 Pa. 36, 40 (Pa. 1882).

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckholm, E. (1975). The other energy crisis: Firewood. Washington, DC: World Watch Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elden, S. (2010). Land, terrain, territory. Progress in Human Geography, 34(6), 799–817.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fargione, J., Hille, J., Tilman, D., Polasky, S., & Hawthorne, P. (2008). Land clearing and the biofuel carbon debt. Science, 319, 1235–1238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fatimah, Y. A. (2015). Fantasy, values, and identity in biofuel innovation: Examining the promise of Jatropha for Indonesia. Energy Research & Social Science, 7, 108–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Franco, J., Levidow, L., Fig, D., Goldfarb, L., Hoenicke, M., & Luisa Mendoca, M. (2010). Assumptions in the European Union biofuels policy: Frictions with experiences in Germany, Brazil and Mozambique. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 37, 661–698.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gidwani, V. (1992). ‘Waste’ and the permanent settlement in Bengal. Economic Political Weekly, 27, PE39–PE46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gidwani, V. (2008). Capital, interrupted: Agrarian development and the politics of work in India. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giodarno, M. (2003). The geography of the commons: The role of scale and space. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 93, 365–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein, J. (2013). Terra economica: Waste and the production of enclosed nature. Antipode, 45, 357–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Government of India. (1976). Report of the national commission on agriculture, part IX: Forestry. Delhi: Ministry of Agriculture and Irrigation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Government of India. (2003). Report of the committee on the development of biofuel. Delhi: Planning Commission.

    Google Scholar 

  • Government of India. (2008). The national policy on bio-fuel. Delhi: Ministry of New and Renewable Energy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hackett, R. (2015). ‘Shell games’, displacement and the reordering of boreal landscapes in Alberta, Canada. Area, 1–8. DOI: 10.1111/area.12158

    Google Scholar 

  • Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. Science, 162(3859), 1243–1248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hepburn, S. (2013). Does unconventional gas require unconventional ownership? An analysis of the functionality of ownership frameworks for unconventional gas development. Journal of Environmental and Public Health Law, 8(1), 1–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heynen, N., & Robbins, P. (2005). The neoliberalization of nature: Governance, privatization, enclosure and valuation. Capitalism Nature Socialism, 16(1), 5–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huber, M. (2015). Theorizing Energy Geographies, Geography Compass, 9(6), 327–338.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jodha, N. S. (1986). Common property resources and rural poor in dry regions of India. Economic and Political Weekly, 21, 1169–1181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jodha, N. S. (1989). Depletion of common property resources in India: Micro-level evidence. Population and Development Review, 15, 261–283.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirshner, J., & Power, M. (2015). Mining and extractive urbanism: Postdevelopment in a Mozambican boomtown. Geoforum, 61, 67–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lamarre, C. E. (2011). Owning the center of the earth: Hydraulic fracturing and subsurface trespass in the Marcellus Shale Region. Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy, 21(2), 457–487.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levidow, L. (2013). EU criteria for sustainable biofuels: Accounting for carbon, depoliticising plunder. Geoforum, 44, 211–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levidow, L., & Paul, H. (2010). Global agrofuel crops as contested sustainability, part 1: Sustaining what development? Capitalism Nature Socialism, 21(2), 64–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, T. M. (2009). To make live or let die? Dural dispossession and the protection of surplus populations. Antipode, 41(S1), 66–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Li, T. M. (2011). Centering labor in the land grab debate. Journal of Peasant Studies, 38, 281–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, T. M. (2014). What is Land? Assembling a resource for global investment. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 39(4), 589–602.

    Google Scholar 

  • Locke, J. (2011) [1680]. Second treatise of government. Hollywood, FL: Simon & Brown.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, J. (2009). Commons. In N. Castree, D. Demeritt, D. Liverman, & B. Rhoads (Eds.), A companion to environmental geography. Chichester: Blackwell Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCauley, D., Heffron, R., Stephan, H., & Jenkins, J. (2013). Advancing energy justice: The triumvirate of tenets. International Energy Law Review, 32, 107–110.

    Google Scholar 

  • Medlock, K. (2014). The land of opportunity? Policy, constraints and energy security in North America. Houston: James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy, Rice University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nalepa, R., & Bauer, D. M. (2012). Marginal lands: The role of remote sensing in constructing landscapes for agrofuel development. Journal of Peasant Studies, 39(2), 403–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Wasteland Development Board. (undated). Description, classification, identification and mapping of wastelands. Delhi: National Wastelands Development Board.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Perreault, T. (2013). Nature and nation: Hydrocarbons, governance, and the territorial logics of ‘resource nationalism. In A. Bebbington & J. Bury (Eds.), Subterranean struggles: New dynamics of mining, oil, and gas in Latin America. Austin: University of Texas Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pifer, R. (2010). Drake meets Marcellus: A review of Pennsylvania case law upon the sesquicentennial of the United States oil and gas industry. Texas Journal of Oil Gas and Energy Law, 6, 47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ragsdale, T. (1993). Hydraulic fracturing: The stealthy subsurface trespass. Tulsa Law Review, 28(3), 311–347.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saigal, S. (2011). Greening the ‘wastelands’: Evolving discourse on wastelands and its impact on community rights in India. In 13th Biennial conference of the international association for the study of the commons. Hyderabad, India.

    Google Scholar 

  • Searchinger, T., Heimlich, R., Houghton, R., Dong, R., Elobeid, A., Fabiosa, J., et al. (2008). Use of U.S. croplands for biofuels increases greenhouse gases through emissions from land-use change. Science, 319, 1238–1240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sidaway, J. D. (2007). Enclave space: A new metageography of development? Area, 39(3), 331–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sovacool, B. K., Linnér, B. O., & Goodsite, M. E. (2015). The political economy of climate adaptation. Nature Climate Change, 5(7), 616–618.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sulle, E., & Nelson, F. (2009). Biofuels, land access and rural livelihoods in Tanzania. In E. Secondary Sulle & F. Nelson (Eds.), Secondary biofuels, land access and rural livelihoods in Tanzania. London: IIED.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tilman, D., Socolow, R., Foley, J. A., Hill, J., Larson, E., Lynd, L., et al. (2009). Beneficial biofuels—the food, energy, and environment trilemma. Science, 325, 270–271.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • United States Steel Corporation v. Hoge, 468 A.2d 1380, 1383–84 (Pa. 1983).

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Horst, D., & Vermeylen, S. (2010). Wind theft, spatial planning and international relations. Renewable Energy Law and Policy Review, 1, 67–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vasudevan, A., MacFarlane, C., & Jeffrey, A. (2008). Spaces of enclosure. Geoforum, 39, 1641–1646.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warner, B., & Shapiro, J. (2013). Fractured, fragmented federalism: A study in fracking regulatory policy. The Journal of Federalism, 43(3), 474–496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, B., Borras, S. M., Jr., Hall, R., Scoones, I., & Wolford, W. (2012). The new enclosures: Critical perspectives on corporate land deals. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 39, 619–647.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Geography and Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies, Penn State, University Park, PA, USA

    Arielle Hesse

  2. Department of Geography, Penn State, University Park, PA, USA

    Jennifer Baka

  3. Department of Geography, University of Guelph, Ontario, Canada

    Kirby Calvert

Authors
  1. Arielle Hesse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jennifer Baka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Kirby Calvert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Ghent Institute for International Studies, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium

    Thijs Van de Graaf

  2. University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom

    Benjamin K. Sovacool

  3. Council on Energy, Environment and Water, New Delhi, India

    Arunabha Ghosh

  4. University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom

    Florian Kern

  5. University of Massachusetts, Amherst, USA

    Michael T. Klare

Copyright information

© 2016 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hesse, A., Baka, J., Calvert, K. (2016). Enclosure and Exclusion Within Emerging Forms of Energy Resource Extraction: Shale Fuels and Biofuels. In: Van de Graaf, T., Sovacool, B., Ghosh, A., Kern, F., Klare, M. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of the International Political Economy of Energy. Palgrave Handbooks in IPE. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-55631-8_26

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation