Educating About Enclosures and Common Lands and Waterways

  • Zane Ma RheaEmail author
Part of the SpringerBriefs in Education book series (BRIEFSEDUCAT)


This chapter undertakes a close examination of the progression of human understanding of land and water through the processes of enclosure. Enclosures are now considered a key element in the transition of England from a feudal to a modern agricultural and industrial society. The idea of enclosure relies on the development of a concept of property rights held not in common but by the individual. Enclosures are the key idea around which much colonial legal and administrative logic then developed. For educators, it is critical that we understand the implications of enclosures on contemporary pedagogical approaches to teaching about land and water, particularly in places that were colonized under English law.


Enclosures Land ownership English land law Water rights Land rights Land titles 


  1. Blackstone, W. (1769). Commentaries on the laws of England, 4 vols. Oxford, England: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  2. Chase, M. (2010). Chartism and the land: The ‘mighty people’s question’. In M. Cragoe & P. Readman (Eds.), The land question in Britain, 1750–1950 (pp. 57–73). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  3. Clark, G., & Clark, A. (2001). Common rights to land in England, 1475–1839. The Journal of Economic History, 61(4), 1009–1036. Scholar
  4. Cooke, G. W. (1856). The acts for facilitating the enclosure of commons in England and Wales. London, England: V. & R. Stevens and G.S. Norton.Google Scholar
  5. Gonner, E. C. K. (1912). Common land and inclosure. London: Macmillan and Co., Limited.Google Scholar
  6. Graham, N. (2011). Owning the Earth. In P. Burdon (Ed.), Exploring wild law: The philosophy of Earth jurisprudence (pp. 259–269). Adelaide, South Australia: Wakefield Press.Google Scholar
  7. Greenwood, D. (2010). A critical analysis of sustainability education in schooling’s bureaucracy: Barriers and small openings in teacher education. Teacher Education Quarterly, 37, 139.Google Scholar
  8. Gregg, P. (1971). A social and economic history of Britain 1760–1970 (6th ed.). London: George G. Harrap & Co., Ltd.Google Scholar
  9. Hannesson, R. (2004). The privatization of the oceans. Cambridge, MA, USA, London, England: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  10. Kenklies, K. (2012). Educational theory as topological rhetoric: The concepts of pedagogy of Johann Friedrich Herbart and Friedrich Schleiermacher. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 31(3), 265–273. Scholar
  11. Marx, K. (1857–1861). Grundrisse der Kritik der Politischen Oekonomie (Outlines of the Critique of Policial Economy) (trans: Nicolaus, M.). New York, USA; Online: Penguin. Reprint, Marxist Internet Archives.Google Scholar
  12. Paley, W. (1785/2012). The principles of moral and political philosophy. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.Google Scholar
  13. Proudhon, P. J. (1876/2008). What is property? An inquiry into the principle of right and of government (trans: Tucker, B. R.). Princeton, Mass.: B.R. Tucker. Reprint, Project Gutenberg.Google Scholar
  14. Starhawk, (1982). Dreaming the dark: Magic, sex & politics. Boston, USA: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  15. Turnor, C. H. (1911). Land problems and national welfare. London and New York: John Lane.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of EducationMonash UniversityMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations