Resource geographies I

Huber, Matthew T.

doi:10.1177/0309132516670773

Cited by 82 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This study complements others recently published in Progress in Human Geography on resource geographies (Huber, 2018(Huber, , 2019Kama, 2020;Koch andPerreault 2019), indigeneity (Barker andPickerill, 2020;Radcliffe, 2017Radcliffe, , 2018Radcliffe, , 2020, and the law (Brickell and Cuomo, 2019;Carmalt, 2018;Delaney, 2016Delaney, , 2017Orzeck and Hae, 2020) by bringing into focus the power-laden nexuses among these topics. Reviewing empirical studies from geographers and anthropologists, along with theoretical literature from geography, law, political science, and sociology, this article examines dynamic interconnections between legal processes, ideologies, and power relations to shed light on the co-constitution of law and space within Indigenous-led struggles to protect significant places from industry's impacts.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 79%

Indigenous rights and the persistence of industrial capitalism: Capturing the law–ideology–power triple-helix

Horowitz

2020

Progress in Human Geography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the power relations that unfold when Indigenous-led struggles invoke settler-colonial law toward protection from industry’s impacts. Building on Critical Race Theory, I posit a ‘triple-helical’ relationship between law, power, and ideology, which coproduce one another, mediated by nudges from individual agents. I argue that the triple-helix of Indigenous rights to protection from industry’s impacts has stagnated, due to industrial capitalism’s pushback through social regularization processes as well as its capture of formal and informal regulators and of discourses and ideologies. I conclude with a research agenda for applying the triple-helix framework to Indigenous-led engagements with industry.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 79%

Indigenous rights and the persistence of industrial capitalism: Capturing the law–ideology–power triple-helix

Horowitz

2020

Progress in Human Geography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Redefining, and by extension increasingly speaking about, nature as a financial asset matters. Economic metaphors like natural capital, natural assets, ecosystem services, and ecological debt are now commonplace in environmental policy discourse (Balmford et al, 2002;Burkhard et al, 2010;Coffey, 2016;Costanza et al, 1997;Huber, 2018;Sattler & Matzdorf, 2013;Sullivan, 2012Sullivan, , 2013. In turn, this change in the frame, through which nature is defined and understood, has opened new spaces for nature's management.…”

Section: Reframing Water As a Financial Riskmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In turn, this change in the frame, through which nature is defined and understood, has opened new spaces for nature's management. Huber (2018, p. 155) highlights that financial capital is becoming “more influential in how ecosystem services are packaged and sold as conservation solutions.” Critical of one of the more extreme examples, Sullivan (2013) explains how “biodiversity derivatives” are set up, creating financial markets wherein the cost of conservation is reduced by applying derivatives to the risk of species extinction. Analyzing the effects of this wider trend of “neoliberal environmentalism,” Walker and Cooper (2011, p. 155) argue that it positions the depletion of nature as “a global security problem, the only solution to which is the securitization and financialization of the biosphere.” Thus, while the framing of water as a financial risk is new, the wider financialization of nature opens a legitimate space for a discourse of water as a financial risk to gain acceptance.…”

Section: Reframing Water As a Financial Riskmentioning

confidence: 99%

Framing water as a financial risk: Reviewing the processes shaping a narrative

Rudebeck

2022

WIREs Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Water is increasingly framed as a financial risk in equity markets. This article illustrates that this framing must be understood as a new aspect of the wider history of the financialization of the water sector. Unlike earlier instances, where water-related services, or water risks are the primary subjects to be financialized, water itself is here being reformed to fit market logic. This article reviews, unpacks, and analyses the factors that have enabled, reframed, and defined water as a financial risk. As such, the article goes beyond simply reviewing what has happened, but also presents a critical analysis of why and how, and the potential effects this may have. Drawing on advanced theoretical perspectives from the social sciences, specifically building on the constitutive nature of language, the role of expertise in the knowledge-policy interface, and the sociology of quantification, it proposes that the reframing of water into a financial risk is not a value-free exercise. Critically, it shows that the value of water, at least as it relates to company activities, could be reduced to only embody those aspects which, in quantitative terms can be shown to affect Return on Investment. To alleviate this reductive process, an ambitious multiand interdisciplinary research agenda must be developed moving forward to ensure that the multiple values of water are recognized and accounted for in equity markets and beyond.

show abstract

“…A number of publications over the past three years have recognized the importance of Marxian value theory for understanding nature-society relations at this current moment and have called for a re-engagement (Robertson and Wainright 2013;Henderson 2013;Moore 2015;Christophers 2016;Huber 2016;Walker 2016). A set of panel and paper sessions on this topic that we organized at the 2015 AAG Annual Meeting in Chicago has also ignited further interest, serving as a basis for this special issue as well as a forthcoming discussion paper (Kay and Kenney-Lazar 2017).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Each of the papers or books that have been published recently pulls at different threads of the theoretical knot that is the value-nature relationship. Some of this work is rooted in the broad tradition of green Marxism (Moore 2015;Huber 2016;Walker 2016) and builds on Marx's point that nature is a source of wealth but not of capitalist value. They argue that the problem is precisely that nature is not valued within capitalism and thus is appropriated as "free gifts," subsidizing and cheapening commodity production at the expense of the biophysical world.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Value in Capitalist Natures

Kenney‐Lazar

Kay

2017

Capitalism Nature Socialism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this special issue we seek to examine and understand the relationships between value and nature under contemporary capitalism. Value, a central concept in Marx's oeuvre, captures the social character of economic production. Yet beyond Marx value has a breadth and richness of meaning that allows for theorizing socio-natural entanglements both within and beyond capitalism. We believe that it is critically important to understand the value of capitalist natures at this historic juncture, and illustrate the value of this approach through three interrelated processes that are not sufficiently understood without a value lens. First, we are widely recognized to be living in a new geologic epoch, popularly known as the anthropocene, where human actors have come to play an unprecedented role in global environmental change. Critical scholars have coined the term "capitolocene" (Surprise 2013; Moore 2015) to describe the present situation, in order to draw attention to the fact that our large-scale environmental transformations have emerged out of the industrial production processes, social reproductive norms, and attendant socio-natural transformations that are characteristic of industrial capitalist economies. Explaining why capitalism leads to such dramatic environmental transformation requires a theoretical understanding of the fundamental processes governing how capital relates to nature, particularly how nature is or is not valued, and why that matters. Second, in recent years there have been myriad attempts to rectify the undervaluation or non-valuation of the "services" that nature provides, including carbon trading and payments for ecosystem service programs. These interventions have largely been driven by the field of environmental economics, which generally views value and price as synonymous, and which understands economic processes through consumption, not production. This raises a number of important questions and avenues for investigation, which Marxist scholars are well positioned to explore. Third, the pricing and commodification of nature have been accompanied by a parallel process of financializing nature, which brings up long-standing debates about how value is produced and accumulated by finance capital and about the relationship between the "financial" and "productive" economies. Understanding these new forms of accumulation is

show abstract

Resource geographies I

Cited by 82 publications

References 56 publications

Indigenous rights and the persistence of industrial capitalism: Capturing the law–ideology–power triple-helix

Indigenous rights and the persistence of industrial capitalism: Capturing the law–ideology–power triple-helix

Framing water as a financial risk: Reviewing the processes shaping a narrative

Value in Capitalist Natures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About