La réunion annuelle des géographes américains se prépare, et il semble que ce sera un truc vraiment bien. De nombreuses sessions sont en trains de s’organiser, ça promet d’être un extraordinaire cocktail de géographies critiques et expériementales
Call for Papers (CFP) for the Association of American Geographers 2013 Annual Meeting, Los Angeles, CA
Session Title: Postneoliberalism? Neoliberal regulation in the continuing crisis: opportunities for change or just more of the same?
Session organizers: Hugh Deaner, University of Kentucky and Christopher Oliver, University of Kentucky
Neoliberalism is in crisis - or even “dead” - so say a number of academics, editorialists, and public intellectuals (Dumenil and Levy 2011; Klein 2008; Krugman 2009; Magdoff and Foster 2009; Smith 2011; Stiglitz 2008; Wallerstein 2008). Some argue that neoliberalism’s demise represents opportunities to push social regulatory policy in the direction of new and more effective forms of managed capitalism (e.g., Keynesian approaches) (Krugman 2009, 2012; Magdoff and Foster 2009; Stiglitz 2010), thereby reversing the four decade-long movement towards unfettered market-based regulation. While these claims are sometimes monolithic in nature, in other instances writers have made even more grandiose proclamations that the on-going global economic crisis has created new opportunities for changing social regulatory frameworks and, more generally, that a unique historical moment has unfolded offering various potentialities for forging a new ideological framework to social governance (e.g. Klein 2008).
Critical geographers (and critical social scientists) also have attempted to take up these issues: some argue for a possible “postneoliberal” turn, while others question the efficacy of such concepts; and still others ask whether such a transition - or radical re-envisioning - of the various neoliberal forms of social regulation is even possible (Brenner, Peck, and Theodore 2010a, 2010b; Harvey 2009; Hobsbawm 2008; Peck, Theodore, and Brenner 2009; Smith 2011). Whether or not neoliberal forms of social regulation have entered their “zombie” phase, or if changes can lead - or have led- to new forms of counter-neoliberalization is an important - and empirical - question (cf. Brenner, Peck, and Theodore 2010; Fine 2010; Harman 2010; Peck 2010). Further, whose neoliberalism (and to what end and what consequence) is of equal import (cf. Harvey 2009).
In regard to these concerns, we ask the following: Since the emergence of the 2007-2008 crisis, has there been a shift in the form, content, and practices of neoliberal institutions of regulatory governance? And if so, has this change served to lessen or diminish the role of market-based strategies of regulation, or has change merely furthered existing forms of neoliberal governance (e.g., “zombie” neoliberalism) - or has this change strengthened or even emboldened new forms of neoliberal regulatory practices (cf. Peck, Theodore, and Brenner 2012).
We seek papers that explore these issues through a number of possible theoretical and conceptual perspectives and substantive themes:
a) Theoretical discussions which examine the consequences or potentialities of various forms of restructuring within neoliberal regulatory approaches - whether global, regional, national, or local- and what, if any, effect the current and on-going crisis has played (or is playing) in restructuring these conditions (e.g., Is a Polanyian “double movement” taking place - or can it take place - within this crisis and under the current social regulatory conditions?);
b) Conceptual-based illustrations of changes in neoliberal forms of governance through detailed comparative work of varying scales and scope (e.g., Has the current crisis led to a dramatic shift in conceptual understandings of post-Fordist regulation?);
c) Single or comparative empirical-based case studies that chart shifts in neoliberal forms of regulatory governance (e.g., How has the current crisis effected the regulation of housing markets in the US and Europe?).
Though the range of possible substantive themes for the papers is open, some potential areas of work might include:
Neoliberalization/financialization of nature
Green economy policy and practices
Governance and sustainability practices
ban policy including regulation of fiscal policy
Housing policy and the regulation of mortgage markets
The regulation of financial markets
The rise (and fall) of shadow banking
Labor market regulation
Legal regulation of markets
Economic policy changes and their effects
Education policy including public-private partnerships or marketization of educational instruction
The Euro crisis and the crises in Spain and Greece (and other countries)
Please submit abstracts of no more than 250 words to Hugh Deaner athugh.deaner@uky.edu<mailto:csol222@uky.edu> by October 15, 2012.
References:
Brenner, Neil, Nik Theodore, and Neil Brenner. 2010a. “After neoliberalization?” Globalizations. 7: 327-345.
___. 2010b. "Variegated neoliberalization: Geographies, modalities, pathways. Global Networks. 10: 1-41.
Dumenil, Gerard and Dominique Levy. 2011. The Crisis of Neoliberalism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
Fine, Ben. 2010. “Zombieeconomics: The Living Death of the Dismal Science.” In The Rise and Fall of Neoliberalism: The Collapse of an Economic Order. Pp. 153-170. London: Zed Books.
Harman, Chris. 2010. Zombie Capitalism: Global Crisis and the Relevance of Marx. Chicago, IL: Haymarket Books.
Harvey, David. 2009. “The crisis and the consolidation of class power: Is this really the end of neoliberalism?” Counterpunch. Available at: ►http://www.counterpunch.org/2009/03/13/is-this-really-the-end-of-neoliberalism. Accessed September 28, 2012.
Klein, Naomi. 2008. “Wall street crisis should be for neoliberalism what fall of Berlin Wall was for communism.” Lecture at the University of Chicago. Available at: ►http://www.democracynow.org/2008/10/6/naomi_klein. Accessed September 23, 2012.
Krugman, Paul. 2009. Return to Depression Economics and the Crisis of 2008. New York: W. W. Norton and Company.
___. 2012. End This Depression Now. New York: W. W. Norton and Company.
Hobsbawm, Eric. 2008. “Is the intellectual opinion of capitalism changing?” Today program, BBC Radio. Available at: ►http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_7677000/7677683.stm. Accessed September 24, 2012.
Magdoff, Fred and John Bellemy Foster. 2009. The Great Financial Crisis: Causes and Consequences. New York: Monthly Review.
Peck, Jamie. 2010. “Zombie neoliberalism and the ambidextrous state.” Theoretical Criminology. 14: 104-110.
Peck, Jamie, Nik Theodore, and Neil Brenner. 2009. “Postneoliberalism and its Malcontents.” Antipode. 41: 94-116.
___.2012. “Neoliberalism resurgent? Market rule after the Great Recession” The South Atlantic Quarterly. 111:265-287.
Smith, Neil. 2011. “Cities after neoliberalization?” Paper available at: ►http://neil-smith.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/Neil.Smith_.AfterNeoliberalism.pdf. Accessed September 20, 2012.
Stiglitz, Joseph. 2008. “The end of neoliberalism?” Available at: ►http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/the-end-of-neo-liberalism-. Accessed October 1, 2012.
__. 2010. Freefall: America, Free Markets, and the Shrinking of the World Economy. New York: W. W. Norton and Company.
Wallerstein, Immanuel. 2008. The demise of neoliberal globalization. Available at:►http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/2008/wallerstein010208.html. Accessed September 27, 2012.
