Common problems or different questions: A critique of ‘assetization’
Open Access
- 28 February 2023
- journal article
- editorial
- Published by SAGE Publications in Dialogues in Human Geography
- Vol. 14 (1) , 34-37
Abstract
This commentary provides the contours of a Marxian critique of ‘assetization’. In doing so, the paper identifies a subjective approach to valuation and value which ties together Birch's and Ward's appeal to theoretical pluralism. The argument highlights how a focus on future-orientated valuation practices elide the question of class and production and, therefore, the very basis of rent and value. A call is made for geographers to better interrogate the relationship between rent and interest in the flurry of research around rentiership.Keywords
This publication has 13 references indexed in Scilit:
- Value, rent, and nature: The centrality of classDialogues in Human Geography, 2019
- Value–rent–financeProgress in Human Geography, 2019
- Value in capitalist naturesDialogues in Human Geography, 2017
- Value is Simple. Valuation is ComplexCapitalism Nature Socialism, 2017
- Risking value theory in the political economy of finance and natureProgress in Human Geography, 2016
- From Marx to market and back again: Performing the economyGeoforum, 2014
- On Materiality and Social Form: A Political Critique of Rubin's Value-Form TheoryHistorical Materialism, 2007
- Rent and Landed Property2002
- On Marx's theory of agricultural rentEconomy and Society, 1979
- Intellectual and Manual Labour1978