Marxian Economic Geography in Global Capitalism
Starting with a dissatisfaction of both the Walrasian and the Marshalliantraditions in dealing with space, we move towards a different literature altogether, in orderto understand spatial issues in the so-called global economy.The WaIrasian tradition-including the German school of location theory and PaulKrugmans New Economic Geography-neglects space as an element of differentiation andsee globalisation as a homogenising tendency, when market failures are overcome. TheMarshallian tradition-embracing the literature about industrial districts, milieuxinnovateur, regional systems of innovation,and the learning region-sees localness as anasset in global competition, thus speaking about glocalness. Both these traditions missesthe crucial point: the intrinsic nature of geographical uneven development of the capitalisteconomy. By contrast, the Marxian economic geography talks about capitalism as ahistorically and geographically specific form of social organisation. In this tradition, spaceis the realm of concrete and particular, within abstract and universal dimension ofcapital, because the exploitation of labor-power, the development of technological changeand the organisation of production need a coherent territorial structure, that is a spatial fix.We believe that the Marxian tradition is more suitable to explain uneven development,geographical disparities, spatial differentiations and inequalities as intrinsic features ofcapitalist accumulation, and not just as externalities and/or market failures.
Giovanna Vertova Riccardo Bellofiore
Department of Economics, Hyman P. Minsky, University of Bergamo,Via dei Caniana,224127,Bergamo Italy
国际会议
日本岛根
英文
178-192
2007-10-26（万方平台首次上网日期，不代表论文的发表时间）