32
2
Accumulation by dispossession is, however, not a new phenomenon in the Global
South. It started during colonialism. But its pace has probably increased with economic globalization. In several chapters in this book we give examples of this process: biodiversity conservation (7 Chap. 4), forest conservation as climate
mitigation (REDD) (7 Chap. 6), and large-scale agricultural investments
(7 Chap. 9). States, business interests or big conservation organizations accumulate capital, while smallholders tend to be dispossessed of access to land and natural resources. Landscapes and ‘wilderness’ are valued, while the people who have
historically inhabited these areas are seen to be in the way.
Consequently, non-capitalist spaces and resources are opened up for accumulation. Tania Murray Li has developed this idea further by proposing that it is the
places and the resources in these places that are valued, ‘but the people are not, so
that dispossession is detached from any prospect of labour absorption’ (Li 2009:
69). These places might be interesting for investments in large-scale production of
food crops or biofuels—or for the development of ‘ecotourism’ such as safari tourism. But local people are in the way of such investments. Their labour is not needed
in contradiction to the classic example of the double process of enclosures and
industrialization in England.
In Chap. 26 of volume 1 of Capital, Marx famously used the enclosures in England
in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries as an example of primitive accumulation
(Marx 1990). Many smallholders who lost access to land in this process became
labourers in the emerging textile industry in cities like Manchester and Liverpool.
The enclosures in England took place mostly between 1750 and 1850 when about
4000 individual enclosures were enacted in Parliament (Mingay 1997).
Primitive accumulation may, however, easily be understood as a historical
process that belongs to a distant past. This is why David Harvey has introduced
the term accumulation by dispossession to point out that the combination of
dispossession of vulnerable people and capital accumulation is currently an
ongoing process around the world. Hence, there is nothing ‘primitive’ about this
process. In political ecology, the introduction of this term has sparked a renewed
interest in the combination of dispossession and capital accumulation (Büscher
2009; Li 2009; Corson 2011; Kelly 2011; Benjaminsen and Bryceson 2012).
Definition
Harvey (1999) has also introduced the concept spatial fix that has increasingly
been used as an analytical tool in political ecology. This refers to the tendency of
a falling rate of profit in capital investments, which again leads to a crisis with
over-accumulation of capital (in the form of reduced investment opportunities in
the geographical space in question) as well as reduced need for labour (leading to
increased unemployment). The solution for capitalism is a spatial fix, which
Chapter 2 · Theoretical Influences and Recent Directions
2
Accumulation by dispossession is, however, not a new phenomenon in the Global
South. It started during colonialism. But its pace has probably increased with economic globalization. In several chapters in this book we give examples of this process: biodiversity conservation (7 Chap. 4), forest conservation as climate
mitigation (REDD) (7 Chap. 6), and large-scale agricultural investments
(7 Chap. 9). States, business interests or big conservation organizations accumulate capital, while smallholders tend to be dispossessed of access to land and natural resources. Landscapes and ‘wilderness’ are valued, while the people who have
historically inhabited these areas are seen to be in the way.
Consequently, non-capitalist spaces and resources are opened up for accumulation. Tania Murray Li has developed this idea further by proposing that it is the
places and the resources in these places that are valued, ‘but the people are not, so
that dispossession is detached from any prospect of labour absorption’ (Li 2009:
69). These places might be interesting for investments in large-scale production of
food crops or biofuels—or for the development of ‘ecotourism’ such as safari tourism. But local people are in the way of such investments. Their labour is not needed
in contradiction to the classic example of the double process of enclosures and
industrialization in England.
In Chap. 26 of volume 1 of Capital, Marx famously used the enclosures in England
in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries as an example of primitive accumulation
(Marx 1990). Many smallholders who lost access to land in this process became
labourers in the emerging textile industry in cities like Manchester and Liverpool.
The enclosures in England took place mostly between 1750 and 1850 when about
4000 individual enclosures were enacted in Parliament (Mingay 1997).
Primitive accumulation may, however, easily be understood as a historical
process that belongs to a distant past. This is why David Harvey has introduced
the term accumulation by dispossession to point out that the combination of
dispossession of vulnerable people and capital accumulation is currently an
ongoing process around the world. Hence, there is nothing ‘primitive’ about this
process. In political ecology, the introduction of this term has sparked a renewed
interest in the combination of dispossession and capital accumulation (Büscher
2009; Li 2009; Corson 2011; Kelly 2011; Benjaminsen and Bryceson 2012).
Definition
Harvey (1999) has also introduced the concept spatial fix that has increasingly
been used as an analytical tool in political ecology. This refers to the tendency of
a falling rate of profit in capital investments, which again leads to a crisis with
over-accumulation of capital (in the form of reduced investment opportunities in
the geographical space in question) as well as reduced need for labour (leading to
increased unemployment). The solution for capitalism is a spatial fix, which
Chapter 2 · Theoretical Influences and Recent Directions