Apparitions of neoliberalism: revisiting ‘Jungle law breaks out’

Peck, Jamie; Tickell, Adam

doi:10.1111/j.1475-4762.2012.01091.x

Cited by 25 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Whilst “naturalization” of neoliberalism is a key critique of mainstream applications of resilience and systems thinking to social processes (Cote and Nightingale ; Cretney ; MacKinnon and Derickson ; Walsh‐Dilley et al ), we can draw conceptual parallels between natural and social systems without legitimizing capitalist rationales and effects. Neoliberalism is “a highly dynamic, open system” (MacLeavy :250), and processes of neoliberalization are “always incomplete … inescapably contradictory”, and “[a]bove all … open‐ended” (Peck and Tickell :247). Local innovations produce “wildly unpredictable strategies” which can reproduce but also destabilize or transform factors previously taken for granted (Wilson :255).…”

Section: Social Change Through the Third Sector? Towards A Framework mentioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamic Resistance: Third-Sector Processes for Transforming Neoliberalization

Darby

2016

Antipode

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper proposes a holistic framework called dynamic resistance for analysing and animating third‐sector organizations’ contestations of neoliberalization. It argues that the third sector constitutes a rich terrain for transforming neoliberalization processes to promote human flourishing and social justice. Dynamic resistance comprises four elements—rejection, resilience, resourcefulness, and reflexive practice—within a cyclical process which can occur simultaneously at different organizational scales. Four vignettes, drawn from participatory action research, illustrate these processes at Oblong, a grassroots community group in Leeds which now runs a community centre. Despite engagement with neoliberal mechanisms, Oblong provides an example of dynamic resistance in practice, avoiding “mission drift” and prioritizing self‐defined core values of equality, collectivity, empowerment, sustainability, respect and care, and being community led. Dynamic resistance suggests third‐sector organizations’ capacity to construct transformative social empowerment through ever‐changing practices which are proactive and self‐directed as well as responsive.

show abstract

Section: Social Change Through the Third Sector? Towards A Framework mentioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamic Resistance: Third-Sector Processes for Transforming Neoliberalization

Darby

2016

Antipode

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Regulation theory or the "regulation approach" (Jessop and Sum, 2006) is the one obvious framework to turn to, particularly because it emphasizes the extra-economic (ie, political, social, institutional) constitution of the economic system. The regulation approach, however, is broadly concerned with the systemic regulation of capitalist accumulation, particularly regimes or temporary periods of accumulation (Jessop and Sum, 2006), which makes it a bit of a 'blunt' methodological instrument (see Peck and Tickell, 2012). This is particularly true for analysis of what Gordon Clark (1992) called "real regulation" or, in other words, specific markets and their regulatory institutions (see Jessop and Sum, 2006, page 222).…”

Section: Market and Regulation-an Inseparable Pairmentioning

confidence: 99%

Speculative boundaries: Chicago and the regulatory history of US financial derivative markets

Muellerleile

2015

Environ Plan A

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper considers the history of governance and speculation on US derivative markets from their emergence in the middle of the 19th century through their incursion into finance in the late 20th century. It explores the importance of derivatives' extended ancestry in agricultural markets before analyzing their entanglement with financial markets, which came much later in the 1970s and 1980s. The paper is particularly concerned with the institutional inheritance of a set of legal-regulatory boundaries that prioritized price making and the speculative trading that was necessary to produce a consistent flow of prices. This governance system for derivatives is set in contrast with the governance of securities markets, which during the 1930s became subject to more strict government oversight, particularly with regard to speculative trading. The legal boundaries between these two markets began to deteriorate in the 1970s when the Chicago derivative exchanges applied the speculative logic of agricultural derivative markets to financial instruments. The implications of this are twofold. First the paper argues that market mechanisms and market regulation are analytically inseparable, and ought to be studied as such. Second, employing this approach, the paper argues that US financial derivative markets are originally 'derivative' not of New York and the finance sector, but of Chicago and the agricultural sector.

show abstract

“…A 2012 volume of Area captures two opposing positions in this debate. Peck and Tickell (:247) point out the reactive nature of local economic development efforts in terms of how they are “intrinsically limited in the face of the dull compulsion of inter‐local competition” while Wilson (:254) maintains that there is a need to “identify local governances as more vibrant and active in engaging capital.”…”

Section: Conceptualizing Neoliberal Policiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Something New or More of the Same in the Bidding Wars for Big Business?

McCarthy¹

2014

Growth and Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The economic downturn that began in 2007–2008 was blamed by some commentators on neoliberalism and pro‐business policies. So we might expect U.S. state and local governments to have responded with policy changes affecting their neoliberal economic development strategies. Based on this assumption, this paper is a theoretically informed examination of recent high‐profile bidding wars in Wisconsin. The highest profile example was in 2009 when General Motors chose a plant in Michigan over Wisconsin and Tennessee for a new small car line. Wisconsin's Commerce Secretary characterized Michigan's $1.2 billion incentive offer as “absolutely crazy” (compared with his state's $409 million offer!). My main research question is how have Wisconsin state and local governments adjusted their neoliberal economic development efforts in these bidding wars given the recent economic downturn and weak economy? This paper uses the largest incentive offers in Wisconsin during the tenure of the current and previous state governors within the context of ten themes drawn from the literature to problematize the neoliberal policy of bidding for big business. It concludes by considering the implications for economic development policies.

show abstract

Apparitions of neoliberalism: revisiting ‘Jungle law breaks out’

Cited by 25 publications

References 32 publications

Dynamic Resistance: Third-Sector Processes for Transforming Neoliberalization

Dynamic Resistance: Third-Sector Processes for Transforming Neoliberalization

Speculative boundaries: Chicago and the regulatory history of US financial derivative markets

Something New or More of the Same in the Bidding Wars for Big Business?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About