The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Antinomies of community: some thoughts on geography, resources and empire
Abstract
Community is a fundamental modality for the conduct of modern politics. This paper explores the antinomies of community in an oil nation: Nigeria. Oil states stand in relation to a particular sort of capitalism (what I call petro‐capitalism) in which a key resource (petroleum) and a logic of extraction figure centrally in the making and breaking of community. I pose the following questions: how are communities imagined (or not), territorialized (or not), identified (or not) and ruled (or not) at a multiplicity of scales and in relation to a particular natural resource, namely oil? Each community is imagined, so to say, through and with oil – the communities are ‘naturalized’ in relation to the effects, social, environmental, political, of oil exploration and production – but produces forms of rule and identity that are often fragmented, unruly and violent. The communities I address are, in a sense, all oil‐producing communities but of rather different qualities: namely, the chieftainship as a local form of customary community rule at the level of the village; the ethnic or indigenous community at the level of the region; and the nation, or more properly the nation‐state known as Nigeria. And standing at the heart of each community is a fundamental contradiction. Nigerian petro‐capitalism operates through a particular sort of ‘oil complex’ (a configuration of firm, state and community) that generates or refigures differing sorts of community, what I shall refer to as governable spaces, in which differing sorts of identities, forms of rule and territory come into play. These sorts of community emerge from oil extraction, but the dynamics of petro‐capitalism and the oil complex contribute to, and are constitutive of, a deep crisis of secular nationalist development. Imperial oil and its concessionary political economy can be read as a sort of enclosure or dispossession and it is out of this development crisis in Nigeria that particular senses of community are being constituted – with and through oil.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Putnam, R. (2000) · doi:10.1145/358916.361990 · Cited by 17,114
Social Capital: A Theory of Social Structure and Action
Lin, N. (2001) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511815447 · Cited by 4,535
Cited by
Reconfiguring frontier spaces: The territorialization of resource control
Rasmussen, M. B., & Lund, C. (2018) · World Development · doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.01.018 · Cited by 566
Fragmented sovereignty: Land reform and dispossession in Laos
Lund, C. (2011) · Journal of Peasant Studies · doi:10.1080/03066150.2011.607709 · Cited by 276
Planning, Anti-planning and the Infrastructure Crisis Facing Metropolitan Lagos
Gandy, M. (2006) · Urban Studies · doi:10.1080/00420980500406751 · Cited by 267
African Extraction, Indian Ocean Critique
Chari, S. (2015) · South Atlantic Quarterly · doi:10.1215/00382876-2831301 · Cited by 37
Lunde Seefeldt, J. (2022) · Latin American Policy · doi:10.1111/lamp.12265 · Cited by 23
Metadata
- Authors
- Watts, M. J.
- Venue
- Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2004-06
- Volume
- 29
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 195-216
- ISSN
- 0020-2754 (ISSN-L)
- 1475-5661
- OpenAlex
- W2157039266
- Cited by
- 293
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 55.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Antinomies of community: some thoughts on geography, resources and empire. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.0020-2754.2004.00125.x
- The paper
- Watts, M. J. (2004). Antinomies of community: some thoughts on geography, resources and empire. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0020-2754.2004.00125.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.