Armel Campagne
I am a colonial, environmental and social historian, currently researching the history of coal mining and other carbon intensive industries in the French colonial empire.
I am Lecturer/Assistant Professor in Environmental History at University College Dublin (UCD), after having worked 2 years at Sciences Po as a Teaching Fellow (2023-24) and Assistant (2022-23). At UCD, I currently teach two modules on global environmental history as well as a Master's module on the global origins of capitalism.
I hold a PhD in History from the European University Institute (Florence), after having been trained in Science & Technology Studies and environmental history at the School for Advanced Studies in the Social Sciences (EHESS) in Paris. My main contributions are in the history of French energy imperialism, racial capitalism in colonial Vietnam and Algeria, the moral economy of colonialism, workers' resistances to work, the history of the 1936-37 strikes in colonial Vietnam, the biopolitics of French colonialism, and the history of environmental tensions in the French colonial empire.
I have published a book manuscript on the Capitalocene (2017) as well as several articles and book chapters in global environmental history. My larger research interests include the global history of capitalism, the Anthropocene, and the history of class, gender and race.
I am currently working on transforming my PhD dissertation into a book manuscript.
I am Lecturer/Assistant Professor in Environmental History at University College Dublin (UCD), after having worked 2 years at Sciences Po as a Teaching Fellow (2023-24) and Assistant (2022-23). At UCD, I currently teach two modules on global environmental history as well as a Master's module on the global origins of capitalism.
I hold a PhD in History from the European University Institute (Florence), after having been trained in Science & Technology Studies and environmental history at the School for Advanced Studies in the Social Sciences (EHESS) in Paris. My main contributions are in the history of French energy imperialism, racial capitalism in colonial Vietnam and Algeria, the moral economy of colonialism, workers' resistances to work, the history of the 1936-37 strikes in colonial Vietnam, the biopolitics of French colonialism, and the history of environmental tensions in the French colonial empire.
I have published a book manuscript on the Capitalocene (2017) as well as several articles and book chapters in global environmental history. My larger research interests include the global history of capitalism, the Anthropocene, and the history of class, gender and race.
I am currently working on transforming my PhD dissertation into a book manuscript.
less
Related Authors
InterestsView All (17)
Uploads
Books by Armel Campagne
Seconde Guerre mondiale, comme une “civilisation du charbon”,
parce que le charbon demeure tout au long de cette période au cœur du
“système énergétique” impérial britannique – c’est-à-dire au cœur d’un
écheveau de relations sociales, économiques et culturelles qui lui
confèrent un rôle aussi déterminant dans l’économie que dans le
quotidien et les représentations [MATHIS, 2021]. Plus généralement,
le charbon a été au cœur des principaux systèmes énergétiques mondiaux
(états-unien, français, allemand, etc.) des années 1880 au milieu des
années 1930. Cette période représente même l’apogée du charbon relati-
vement aux autres énergies, puisque c’est alors qu’il devient la
principale source d’énergie à l’échelle globale, devant le bois, et encore
loin devant le pétrole. Le charbon ne se substitue pas pour autant au bois,
dont l’utilisation explose au XIXe siècle, ce qui démontre qu’on a affaire
non pas à une “transition énergétique”, mais plutôt à une “addition
énergétique” [FRESSOZ, 2022].
Le charbon fut aussi dans la deuxième moitié du XIXe siècle et au début du XXe siècle à la fois le carburant de la colonisation occidentale du monde
et de l’intégration forcée de l’Asie à la mondialisation capitaliste,
une ressource nécessaire au renforcement de la domination occidentale en
Asie, un motif de conquête et un secteur d’économie fortement
mondialisé.
pour moderniser l’agriculture, concentrer les productions, et réduire paradoxalement le pouvoir politique d’un certain monde agricole.
Articles by Armel Campagne
Extended Abstract (for French and Spanish, see in the PDF)
Colonial empires played a significant role in the history of Capitalocene through their appropriation and exploitation of cheap natures, cheap labor and cheap energies in the extra-European world. In this way, colonial empires contributed to the creation of a world-ecology characterized by unequal economic and ecological exchanges on a global scale. This article, drawing on Jason Moore’s conceptual framework, archival sources and the historical literature, examines the contribution to modern world-ecology of the two main colonies of the French colonial empire, Algeria and Vietnam, with their respective fossil, forest and agricultural resources as case studies. In the first part, the compared analysis of fossil fuel productions in colonial Algeria and Vietnam aimed to test the world-ecology hypothesis of a colonial production of energy characterized as systematically cheap and exported to western capitalist centers. In the second part, the joint history of Vietnam’s rubber plantations and of Algeria’s settler agriculture sought to determine to what extent colonizers succeeded in creating capitalist natures producing cheap tropical goods for western countries. Finally, in the third part, the combined study of the colonial exploitation of Vietnam and Algeria’s forest resources intended to assess to what extent French colonial environmentalism interfered with the production of cheap wood exported to the world-ecology.
The first section of the article establishes that in the case of Algeria, the colonial production of fossil energy was not always cheap. In the case of coal, exploited in Kenadsa between 1917 and 1962, it was neither cheap nor exported to western capitalist centers due to its remote location, its high extraction and transportation costs and its rebellious and scarce workforce, making it uncompetitive even in Algeria with cheaper British coals. In the case of oil and gas resources, although their exploitation from 1956 was profitable for private companies and exported mainly to France until the 1970’s, their price was higher than Middle East’s hydrocarbons and their State-assisted development was undertaken due to strategic considerations (‘energy security’ and the possibility of paying oil in francs rather than in dollars) and despite the costs it implied – and not because it was cheap. This demonstrates that although peripheries of the capitalist world-ecology tendentially produce cheap energy for the western centers, it is not always the case, with even sometimes the reverse situation.
The second section of the article shows that although Vietnamese coal was cheap and profitable to exploit for some – but not all – colonial companies, it was mainly exported to Asian countries. This indicates that cheap energy produced in colonies and based on unequal ecological exchange did not always benefit exclusively western capitalist centers.
The third section of the article exposes that French colonizers failed to create capitalist natures producing cheap tropical goods for western countries, only succeeding to cultivate similar agricultural goods (like wine) than those produced by western centers. This manifests that colonial agricultural productions can sometimes, despite the cheapness of colonial workforce in both cases, be neither cheap nor environmentally complementary to those of western centers. However, colonial agriculture in Algeria did achieve to bolster French settler colonialism economically, although it was costly for the metropolis outside of underproduction crisis.
The fourth section, by contrast, exhibits the successes of colonial scientists to acclimate hevea brasilianis to Vietnam and that of companies, with the assistance of the colonial administration, to produce cheap tropical raw materials for western industries. However, rubber plantations in Vietnam favored the spread of malaria amongst workers, a socio-ecological contradiction that was not too costly for plantations at first but that eventually led Vietnamese workers, frustrated by the absence of substantial reforms to better their life conditions, to revolt against plantations during the Indochina War (1946-1954). Hence, the success of French colonizers in Vietnam to create capitalist natures producing cheap tropical goods was far from absolute, with falling profits during the Indochina War due to the destruction of one tenth of rubber plantations.
The fifth section of the article uncovers that despite the environmentalist rhetoric that France had conquered Algeria to restore the alleged granary of Rome, the cheap appropriation and exploitation of Algerian forests by private colonial companies at the expense of local populations, especially that of cork trees, was not impeded by colonial environmentalism, but rather justified by it. This proves that, even in that case, colonizers were more concerned with economic considerations than with ideological ones. Similarly, the environmentalist stance of the colonial forestry administration in Vietnam never obstructed the cheap exploitation of local forest resources by private colonial companies, but only justified the colonial appropriation of Vietnam’s forests at the expense of local populations.
The comparative analysis of fossil fuel productions in colonial Algeria and Vietnam allows to relativize and complexify the idea that colonial energy productions were systematically cheap and exported to western capitalist centers. Indeed, the importance of geo-strategic considerations can and did push colonial powers, in that case France, to fund at great cost unprofitable and/or uncompetitive energy productions in their colonies. The joint study of colonial Algeria’s settler agriculture and Vietnam’s rubber plantations provides evidence for the unequal capacity of colonizers to create capitalist natures producing cheap tropical goods. This indicates that colonizers were always to a certain extent dependent on local environmental conditions to create capitalist natures, although they did achieve to significantly transform these conditions in both cases. This also shows that the development of colonial agricultural productions did not always have the same priorities, as in settler colonies the colonial administration was mainly aiming at the economic prosperity of settlers, even when their production competed with those of metropolitan farmers, while non-settler colonies it rather encouraged the production of cheap tropical goods that were not producible in the colonial metropolis. Finally, the comparative history of the exploitation of forest resources in colonial Vietnam and Algeria by private companies shows that colonial environmentalism was not an obstacle to colonial deforestation, but rather justified the dispossession and blaming of local colonized populations. Hence, although the environmental preoccupations of some colonizers, linked with racial anxieties in Algeria and scientific forestry management principles in Vietnam, were sincere and sometimes clashed with the economic interests of private companies, they almost never prevailed over the latter. The world-ecology conceptual framework thus proves analytically interesting to study French colonies and their productions, although it must nuanced and complexified by the multiplication of case studies.
This article posits that the French conquest of Vietnam was undertook notably to appropriate its coal resources for the energy supply of the French Navy, and that French imperialism was in that case an ‘energy imperialism’. This article posits that the colonization of Vietnam can be analyzed at the light of the appropriation of its coal resources, and that this appropriation was a specific form of energy imperialism. Hence, it argues that the conquest of Tonkin and Annam (1873-1885) can be investigated as notably a combined product of the French Navy, Cochinchina’s colonial administration, the pro-colonial politicians and big business ‘energo-imperialisms’. Through military, diplomatic and administrative archives and a reinterpretation of existing literature, it investigates the making dynamics of French energy imperialism in Vietnam during the conquest phase.
Français :
Cet article montre que la conquête française du Vietnam a été entreprise notamment dans l'optique de l’appropriation de ses ressources en charbon, et que l’impérialisme française était dans ce cas un « impérialisme énergétique ». Il défend ainsi l’idée qu’on peut analyser la conquête française du Tonkin et de l’Annam (1873-1885) comme étant notamment le résultat d’une combinaison des impérialismes énergétiques de la Marine, de l’administration coloniale cochinchinoise, des politiciens favorables à la colonisation et des hommes d’affaires. Au travers des archives militaires, diplomatiques et administratives et d’une réinterprétation de l’historiographie existante, il explore la dynamique de l’impérialisme énergétique français au Vietnam durant la phase de conquête.
Reviews by Armel Campagne
Papers by Armel Campagne
Thesis Chapters by Armel Campagne
Seconde Guerre mondiale, comme une “civilisation du charbon”,
parce que le charbon demeure tout au long de cette période au cœur du
“système énergétique” impérial britannique – c’est-à-dire au cœur d’un
écheveau de relations sociales, économiques et culturelles qui lui
confèrent un rôle aussi déterminant dans l’économie que dans le
quotidien et les représentations [MATHIS, 2021]. Plus généralement,
le charbon a été au cœur des principaux systèmes énergétiques mondiaux
(états-unien, français, allemand, etc.) des années 1880 au milieu des
années 1930. Cette période représente même l’apogée du charbon relati-
vement aux autres énergies, puisque c’est alors qu’il devient la
principale source d’énergie à l’échelle globale, devant le bois, et encore
loin devant le pétrole. Le charbon ne se substitue pas pour autant au bois,
dont l’utilisation explose au XIXe siècle, ce qui démontre qu’on a affaire
non pas à une “transition énergétique”, mais plutôt à une “addition
énergétique” [FRESSOZ, 2022].
Le charbon fut aussi dans la deuxième moitié du XIXe siècle et au début du XXe siècle à la fois le carburant de la colonisation occidentale du monde
et de l’intégration forcée de l’Asie à la mondialisation capitaliste,
une ressource nécessaire au renforcement de la domination occidentale en
Asie, un motif de conquête et un secteur d’économie fortement
mondialisé.
pour moderniser l’agriculture, concentrer les productions, et réduire paradoxalement le pouvoir politique d’un certain monde agricole.
Extended Abstract (for French and Spanish, see in the PDF)
Colonial empires played a significant role in the history of Capitalocene through their appropriation and exploitation of cheap natures, cheap labor and cheap energies in the extra-European world. In this way, colonial empires contributed to the creation of a world-ecology characterized by unequal economic and ecological exchanges on a global scale. This article, drawing on Jason Moore’s conceptual framework, archival sources and the historical literature, examines the contribution to modern world-ecology of the two main colonies of the French colonial empire, Algeria and Vietnam, with their respective fossil, forest and agricultural resources as case studies. In the first part, the compared analysis of fossil fuel productions in colonial Algeria and Vietnam aimed to test the world-ecology hypothesis of a colonial production of energy characterized as systematically cheap and exported to western capitalist centers. In the second part, the joint history of Vietnam’s rubber plantations and of Algeria’s settler agriculture sought to determine to what extent colonizers succeeded in creating capitalist natures producing cheap tropical goods for western countries. Finally, in the third part, the combined study of the colonial exploitation of Vietnam and Algeria’s forest resources intended to assess to what extent French colonial environmentalism interfered with the production of cheap wood exported to the world-ecology.
The first section of the article establishes that in the case of Algeria, the colonial production of fossil energy was not always cheap. In the case of coal, exploited in Kenadsa between 1917 and 1962, it was neither cheap nor exported to western capitalist centers due to its remote location, its high extraction and transportation costs and its rebellious and scarce workforce, making it uncompetitive even in Algeria with cheaper British coals. In the case of oil and gas resources, although their exploitation from 1956 was profitable for private companies and exported mainly to France until the 1970’s, their price was higher than Middle East’s hydrocarbons and their State-assisted development was undertaken due to strategic considerations (‘energy security’ and the possibility of paying oil in francs rather than in dollars) and despite the costs it implied – and not because it was cheap. This demonstrates that although peripheries of the capitalist world-ecology tendentially produce cheap energy for the western centers, it is not always the case, with even sometimes the reverse situation.
The second section of the article shows that although Vietnamese coal was cheap and profitable to exploit for some – but not all – colonial companies, it was mainly exported to Asian countries. This indicates that cheap energy produced in colonies and based on unequal ecological exchange did not always benefit exclusively western capitalist centers.
The third section of the article exposes that French colonizers failed to create capitalist natures producing cheap tropical goods for western countries, only succeeding to cultivate similar agricultural goods (like wine) than those produced by western centers. This manifests that colonial agricultural productions can sometimes, despite the cheapness of colonial workforce in both cases, be neither cheap nor environmentally complementary to those of western centers. However, colonial agriculture in Algeria did achieve to bolster French settler colonialism economically, although it was costly for the metropolis outside of underproduction crisis.
The fourth section, by contrast, exhibits the successes of colonial scientists to acclimate hevea brasilianis to Vietnam and that of companies, with the assistance of the colonial administration, to produce cheap tropical raw materials for western industries. However, rubber plantations in Vietnam favored the spread of malaria amongst workers, a socio-ecological contradiction that was not too costly for plantations at first but that eventually led Vietnamese workers, frustrated by the absence of substantial reforms to better their life conditions, to revolt against plantations during the Indochina War (1946-1954). Hence, the success of French colonizers in Vietnam to create capitalist natures producing cheap tropical goods was far from absolute, with falling profits during the Indochina War due to the destruction of one tenth of rubber plantations.
The fifth section of the article uncovers that despite the environmentalist rhetoric that France had conquered Algeria to restore the alleged granary of Rome, the cheap appropriation and exploitation of Algerian forests by private colonial companies at the expense of local populations, especially that of cork trees, was not impeded by colonial environmentalism, but rather justified by it. This proves that, even in that case, colonizers were more concerned with economic considerations than with ideological ones. Similarly, the environmentalist stance of the colonial forestry administration in Vietnam never obstructed the cheap exploitation of local forest resources by private colonial companies, but only justified the colonial appropriation of Vietnam’s forests at the expense of local populations.
The comparative analysis of fossil fuel productions in colonial Algeria and Vietnam allows to relativize and complexify the idea that colonial energy productions were systematically cheap and exported to western capitalist centers. Indeed, the importance of geo-strategic considerations can and did push colonial powers, in that case France, to fund at great cost unprofitable and/or uncompetitive energy productions in their colonies. The joint study of colonial Algeria’s settler agriculture and Vietnam’s rubber plantations provides evidence for the unequal capacity of colonizers to create capitalist natures producing cheap tropical goods. This indicates that colonizers were always to a certain extent dependent on local environmental conditions to create capitalist natures, although they did achieve to significantly transform these conditions in both cases. This also shows that the development of colonial agricultural productions did not always have the same priorities, as in settler colonies the colonial administration was mainly aiming at the economic prosperity of settlers, even when their production competed with those of metropolitan farmers, while non-settler colonies it rather encouraged the production of cheap tropical goods that were not producible in the colonial metropolis. Finally, the comparative history of the exploitation of forest resources in colonial Vietnam and Algeria by private companies shows that colonial environmentalism was not an obstacle to colonial deforestation, but rather justified the dispossession and blaming of local colonized populations. Hence, although the environmental preoccupations of some colonizers, linked with racial anxieties in Algeria and scientific forestry management principles in Vietnam, were sincere and sometimes clashed with the economic interests of private companies, they almost never prevailed over the latter. The world-ecology conceptual framework thus proves analytically interesting to study French colonies and their productions, although it must nuanced and complexified by the multiplication of case studies.
This article posits that the French conquest of Vietnam was undertook notably to appropriate its coal resources for the energy supply of the French Navy, and that French imperialism was in that case an ‘energy imperialism’. This article posits that the colonization of Vietnam can be analyzed at the light of the appropriation of its coal resources, and that this appropriation was a specific form of energy imperialism. Hence, it argues that the conquest of Tonkin and Annam (1873-1885) can be investigated as notably a combined product of the French Navy, Cochinchina’s colonial administration, the pro-colonial politicians and big business ‘energo-imperialisms’. Through military, diplomatic and administrative archives and a reinterpretation of existing literature, it investigates the making dynamics of French energy imperialism in Vietnam during the conquest phase.
Français :
Cet article montre que la conquête française du Vietnam a été entreprise notamment dans l'optique de l’appropriation de ses ressources en charbon, et que l’impérialisme française était dans ce cas un « impérialisme énergétique ». Il défend ainsi l’idée qu’on peut analyser la conquête française du Tonkin et de l’Annam (1873-1885) comme étant notamment le résultat d’une combinaison des impérialismes énergétiques de la Marine, de l’administration coloniale cochinchinoise, des politiciens favorables à la colonisation et des hommes d’affaires. Au travers des archives militaires, diplomatiques et administratives et d’une réinterprétation de l’historiographie existante, il explore la dynamique de l’impérialisme énergétique français au Vietnam durant la phase de conquête.