Two icebergs: Difference in feminist political economy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In economic geography and beyond, a call for attention to difference or multiplicity – of logics, subjects, geographies – within capitalist and economic relations is often interpreted as a critique in the vein of JK Gibson-Graham: a call to explore capitalism’s alternatives, weaknesses – ‘cracks and fissures’. But there are feminist political economists for whom the multiplicity within and outside capitalism is a source of capitalism’s power; capitalism functions, accumulates and reproduces itself through heterogeneity. In this commentary, we focus on a particular underused theorist who exemplifies such an approach: Maria Mies. We put Mies in conversation with the much better-known Gibson-Graham via each of their depictions of economic relations as an iceberg. We consider each iceberg (and the understanding of capitalism they represent) in relation to capitalist natures scholarship in particular, drawing on our research on the production of emaciated caribou natures in Canada as a mini ‘field test’ for where the icebergs direct our analytical attention. We present these icebergs as a small step towards opening up a broader terrain of feminist theorisations of capitalism and difference than is sometimes recognised in economic geography and political ecology.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".