This analogy irritates me because it's based around a misunderstanding of what the 'bailey' is: the bailey is within the motte; it's not the surrounding lands. I can only assume that the writer is confusing the motte with the keep or something.
"A motte-and-bailey castle was made up of two structures, a motte, a type of mound–often artificial–topped with a wooden or stone structure known as a keep; and at least one bailey, a fortified enclosure built next to the motte."