Researching Militarized Landscapes: A Literature Review on War and the Militarization of the Environment

Abstract

This article critically assesses literature on militarized landscapes (sites that are partially or fully mobilized to achieve military aims). It argues that alongside increasing public and media attention, militarized landscapes are a burgeoning area of inquiry in a variety of disciplines, including geography, history, earth sciences and archaeology. To allow for an analysis of different disciplinary perspectives around common themes, this article is structured around the areas of preparing for war, the battlefield, and the ‘homefront’. In light of the research identified in this article, it is no longer possible to treat war and landscape as separate realms. Instead, the challenge is to explore how war and landscapes reciprocally reproduce each other across time and space. The common themes that exist across the scholarly disciplines also indicate the potential for extensive interdisciplinary research into militarized landscapes.

Key Words:

• War
• militarization
• landscape
• environment
• military environmentalism

Notes

The Imperial War Museum in London hosted an exhibition entitled ‘The Animal's War’, which ran from 14 July 2006 to 22 April 2007 (see http://www.iwm.org.uk/upload/package/74/AnimalsWar/index.htm). For a recent film on war and the environment, see Scarred Lands & Wounded Lives: The Environmental Footprint of War (Alice & Lincoln Day, 2008, see http://www.scarredlandsfilm.org).

For a policy-orientated overview of research into defence geographies, see Coulson (1995) and for a legal analysis, see Wilcox (2007).

For similar developments in geography, see Flint (2005).

On landscape and war in the non-Western world, see Gordon (2004), Levine (2004), Shapiro (2001), Taylor (2007), Vayda (1974) and Weinberg (1991). On war, architecture, and urban landscapes, see Bevan (2006), Farish (2003), Lutz (2001) and Weizman (2007). Aben and Rouzier (2001) and Bateman and Riley (1987) focus mainly on defence and urban geographies and economies.

For historical periods, see Hupy (2008) and Tucker (2004). For the contemporary era, see Vadort (2005).

For the US Cold War landscape, see Vanderbilt (2002).

Mark Fiege (2007) shows how walking and climbing in the mountainous landscape around Los Alamos inspired and motivated the scientists to develop the atomic bomb during the Second World War. The relationship between the environment and military scientists and engineers also deserves greater exploration.

For a more recent account of attempts to ‘green’ the Pentagon, see Durant (2007).

For the case of Holland, see Vertegaal (1989).

On this matter I disagree with Tivers (1999); military landscapes are more than a text to be read.

Alongside Paul Gough's work on how gardens and trans-national peace parks become sites in which to promote peace and co-operation (Gough, 2000), Helphand's research points to fruitful avenues of inquiry into war and gardening (2006). For more on peace parks, see Ali (2007).

Although Westing (1989) has acknowledged some of the environmental ‘benefits’ of war.

The links between war and the rise of contemporary environmentalism are worthy of further exploration. See Robertson (2008).

On the links between army bases and nature reserves, see Russell (2010).

I borrow the concept of contact zones from Haraway (2008).