Capitalism and the sea: Sovereignty, territory and appropriation in the global ocean

Campling, Liam; Colás, Alejandro

doi:10.1177/0263775817737319

Cited by 81 publications

(72 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This process is ongoing as states (including Namibia) are negotiating the delimitation of their EEZs in accordance to the extent of their continental shelves 15 , indicating that territoriality is not static, but rather it is a fluid process (Ellis 2015). The establishment of the EEZs emerged from the desire of predominately developing states to reconcile the "appropriation of nature" within the marine environment (Campling and Colás 2018). By simplifying and codifying the marine environment, through the blue economy, and thus rendering it legible to capital, the marine environment is demystified and is subsequently easier for state actors to manipulate and, therefore, to exploit (see Scott 1998: 15).…”

Section: Sovereignty Over Resourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(Interview no. 11 2017) However, as with the project of scientific forestry (footnote 11), the oversimplification of the marine environment masks both socio-economic contention and the (geo)political dynamics that exist within this space (Campling and Colás 2018) and opens the state to opposition from society -as seen in Namibiawho are looking to "modify, subvert, block and even overturn the categories imposed upon it" (Scott 1998: 49).…”

Section: Sovereignty Over Resourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While the EEZ acts as an extension to coastal state's jurisdictions, its sovereignty over this space is limited by the geophysical constraints imposed by the environment itself (Campling and Colás 2018). Liam Campling and Alejandro Colás (2018) define EEZs as "terraqueous territories" that separate the political (sovereignty) and economic (property ownership) rights which, Gordon Winder and Richard Le Heron note, enables the remapping of the ocean space as a resource for exploitation (2017: 14).…”

Section: Sovereignty Over Resourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Resource sovereignty and accumulation in the blue economy: the case of seabed mining in Namibia

Carver

2019

Journal of Political Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Following its global emergence, the blue economy agenda is now touted as a mechanism through which the Republic of Namibia can achieve long-term sustainable and equitable growth. In (re)defining the ocean, seabed mining has been central to these discussions. Drawing on fieldwork and semi-structured interviews undertaken with key actors in Namibia and South Africa, between 2016 and 2017, as well as recent policy debates and discourse surrounding the potential extraction of marine phosphate in Namibia this article critically examines the framing of the marine environment as an extractive space. The blue economy presents opportunities for new forms of capitalist accumulation and this has resulted in struggles over who can accumulate in the marine sphere. This article therefore analyses the emerging and competing claims to sovereignty over this "new" resource frontier, including by state and non-state actors, and identifies which actors have been included or excluded from the blue economy agenda. In discussing sovereignty over this frontier and resources therein, it undertakes a rigorous analysis of the complications created by the ocean as a three-dimensional, voluminous, "borderless" space.Key Words: Namibia, seabed mining, sovereignty, frontier, blue economy, EEZ

show abstract

Section: Sovereignty Over Resourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Sovereignty Over Resourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Sovereignty Over Resourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Resource sovereignty and accumulation in the blue economy: the case of seabed mining in Namibia

Carver

2019

Journal of Political Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Such engagements have strong contemporary relevance. Nikolas Kosmatopoulos's work on forms of 'terraqueous solidarity' constructed in relation to the 'maritime settler colonialism' of Gaza draws attention to the 'deployment of solidarities at sea [which] has the potential of turning the logics and limits of extra-legal state expansion into the sea into a subject of public debate and political contestation' (Kosmatopoulos 2019: 3; see also Campling and Colás 2017). By tracing the activities of Greek dockworkers involved in refitting vessels for solidarity missions to Gaza and looking at the experiences of activists aboard ships as they head 'to breach the Israeli embargo of the seaside enclave', Kosmatopoulos draws attention to how maritime solidarities open up productive forms of translocal political struggle and identities.…”

Section: Maritime Actors Geopolitical Literacy and Contested Transnamentioning

confidence: 99%

Special issue introduction: maritime networks and transnational spaces

Featherstone

2019

Global Networks

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article introduces the key contributions of the special issue on ‘Maritime networks and transnational spaces’. It draws attention to three key thematics that the papers develop. These are a set of engagements between law, space and maritime networks; a set of questions around maritime spaces, subaltern histories and transnational networks and finally a set of concerns around the forms of ‘geopolitical literacy’ articulated by maritime actors (Troutman 2005). Through drawing together these interlocking problematics the articles contribute to a broad agenda highlighting the productive intersection of work on maritime networks and transnational spaces. The introduction sets out some of the ways in which engagements with maritime contexts and scholarship can offer new perspectives on the transnational spatialities of politics, resistance and regulation.

show abstract

“…Through history, mobilities, and materialities have intimately shaped the creation of and disputes over ocean jurisdictions. This includes water, plant, and animal mobilities, and shifting location of moving vessels, divergent responsibilities between flag states and the states in whose territorial waters (industrial) activities may occur, and associated ambiguity of sovereignty and property (Campling and Colás 2017;Havice 2018;Peters et al 2018). Indeed, navies and the geopolitics and political economies of naval strategies reflect these materialities (Dittmer 2018;Linebaugh and Rediker 2013).…”

Section: Jurisdictional Frontiersmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ocean frontiers: epistemologies, jurisdictions, commodifications

Havice¹,

Zalik²

2018

Int Social Sci J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The dynamic and unfolding relationship between the oceans and humans underwrites a general narrative of oceans in ‘crisis’ and the need for new governance and regulatory frameworks to attend to it. As concerns surrounding marine space have proliferated, sovereignty, territory and property in the oceans remain imprecise and subject to controversy, presenting challenges (and opportunities) for oceans governance. This special issue employs the concept of ocean frontiers as a pivot into these concerns because of the eroding, but still frequent, portrayal of the oceans as a planetary space separate from humans and because the concept offers entry points for navigating the unfolding dimensions of ocean conservation and exploitation. Deducing from the eight contributions from the special issue, we develop four inter‐related arguments. First, while ocean frontiers pre‐exist the epistemological, jurisdictional and commodification categories that we conceptualize in this editorial introduction, we find that these categories, which may be understood as intersecting in ocean regimes, play central roles in closing the spatial and socially‐constituted ocean frontier, bringing it closer to human purview. Second, the materiality of oceans – their mobile and volumetric elements ‐ influences all of these emerging and intersecting oceanic processes. Third, contributing authors have developed innovative methodological approaches to the study of the oceans, revealing oceans not as ‘siteless’, but multi‐sited, and demonstrating that the social sciences are well suited methodologically to bring unfolding ocean processes into view. Last but not least, drawing from the insights set out by the contributors, we argue for ongoing interdisciplinary social (and natural) science research on the oceans as they and human‐ocean relations unfold in a period of dramatic change.

show abstract

Capitalism and the sea: Sovereignty, territory and appropriation in the global ocean

Cited by 81 publications

References 39 publications

Resource sovereignty and accumulation in the blue economy: the case of seabed mining in Namibia

Resource sovereignty and accumulation in the blue economy: the case of seabed mining in Namibia

Special issue introduction: maritime networks and transnational spaces

Ocean frontiers: epistemologies, jurisdictions, commodifications

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About