No abstract

The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details.

Coda: Territory as a Political Technology Notes Index C6196.indb vii C6196.indb vii 2/21/13 3:15:45 PM 2/21/13 3:15:45 PM Uncorrected Proofs for Review Only ix T his book has been in gestation for many years, and would have taken many more had it not been for the award of a Leverhulme Major Research Fellowship. I am extremely grateful to the Leverhulme Trust for this wonderful opportunity. Although I have been employed by Durham University for almost all of the time I have been working on this project, research leave and the Leverhulme award have meant that I have spent time elsewhere in visiting posts. I would like to thank the

In this article, we offer an account of how the French Marxist philosopher and sociologist Henri Lefebvre can be read as a theorist of territory. While Lefebvre’s writings on state space have generated some interest in recent years, the territorial dimensions of his thinking on this issue have not been explored. Meanwhile, the question of territory has been oddly undertheorized in the post‐1970s literatures on international relations and spatialized political economy. Against this background, we suggest that Lefebvre’s work contains some insightful, if unsystematic, observations on the relationship between states, space and territory. Following consideration of Agnew’s (1994) influential injunction that social scientists transcend the “territorial trap,” we develop this reading of Lefebvre with reference to three key dimensions of his approach to state space as territory—first, the production of territory; second, state territorial strategies; and third, the “territory effect,” namely, the state’s tendency, through its territorial form, to naturalize its own transformative effects on sociospatial relations. Thus construed, Lefebvre’s approach productively raises the issue of how the territorial trap is actually constructed and reproduced.

In this paper I discuss Foucault's two recently published courses, Sécurité, Territoire, Population and Naissance de la Biopolitique. Foucault notes that he has undertaken a genealogy of the modern state and its different apparatuses from the perspective of a history of governmental reason, taking into account society, economy, population, security, and liberty. In the “Governmentality” lecture—the fourth of the first course—Foucault says that the series of the title—that is, security, territory, population—becomes “security, population, government”. In other words, territory is removed and government appended. And, yet, the issue of territory continually emerges only to be repeatedly marginalised, eclipsed, and underplayed. A key concern of the course is the politics of calculation which Foucault discusses through the development of political arithmetic, population statistics, and political economy. Explicitly challenging Foucault's readings of Machiavelli and the Peace of Westphalia, I argue that territorial strategies should themselves be read as calculative, with the same kinds of mechanisms brought to bear on populations applied here too. I therefore discuss how Foucault's discussions of political economy, the police, and calculation are useful in thinking the history of the concept of territory.