Capitalism and resource extraction: A Marxist value-theory approach to Latin American socio-environmental conflicts

IF 3.6 2区 社会学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES
Malena Antmann
{"title":"Capitalism and resource extraction: A Marxist value-theory approach to Latin American socio-environmental conflicts","authors":"Malena Antmann","doi":"10.1016/j.exis.2025.101617","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This review-essay takes Planetary Mine by Martín Arboleda (2020) as an opportunity to analyse whether a Marxist theoretical framework can provide an adequate point of departure to understand extractive industries in an accurate way, both for theoretical and practical purposes. To this end, I address a dialogue between extractivist scholars and Marxism and evaluate the criticisms of Marxism put forth by E. <span><span>Gudynas (2015)</span></span> and M. <span><span>Duer (2017)</span></span> on this topic. These objections can be grouped into four main points: a) Marxist categories alone cannot adequately explain the allocation of primary commodity production in the Southern Cone, b) nor can they account for the colonialism that pervades the Latin American landscape; c) Marxist value-theory is anthropocentric, as it does not acknowledge the agency of non-human nature in the production of wealth; d) the Marxist framework reproduces the view of liberal economic theories, treating non-human nature as an external object. In order to respond to these objections, I explore the philosophical premises of Arboleda's investigation on the mining industry and the practical consequences which stem from this theoretical approach. Overall, I conclude that, although some metatheoretical guidelines could be further refined, the book still offers a brilliant intervention in extractivist debates.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47848,"journal":{"name":"Extractive Industries and Society-An International Journal","volume":"22 ","pages":"Article 101617"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Extractive Industries and Society-An International Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214790X25000073","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This review-essay takes Planetary Mine by Martín Arboleda (2020) as an opportunity to analyse whether a Marxist theoretical framework can provide an adequate point of departure to understand extractive industries in an accurate way, both for theoretical and practical purposes. To this end, I address a dialogue between extractivist scholars and Marxism and evaluate the criticisms of Marxism put forth by E. Gudynas (2015) and M. Duer (2017) on this topic. These objections can be grouped into four main points: a) Marxist categories alone cannot adequately explain the allocation of primary commodity production in the Southern Cone, b) nor can they account for the colonialism that pervades the Latin American landscape; c) Marxist value-theory is anthropocentric, as it does not acknowledge the agency of non-human nature in the production of wealth; d) the Marxist framework reproduces the view of liberal economic theories, treating non-human nature as an external object. In order to respond to these objections, I explore the philosophical premises of Arboleda's investigation on the mining industry and the practical consequences which stem from this theoretical approach. Overall, I conclude that, although some metatheoretical guidelines could be further refined, the book still offers a brilliant intervention in extractivist debates.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
19.40%
发文量
135
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信