Anqa Khaliq Khan (21020643)

Critical Geographies of Infrastructure – Professor Matt Birkinshaw

21st March 2019

How should social science understand infrastructure?

Section I: Introduction

The discipline of social sciences encapsulates and combines different factors that

translate into policymaking and addressing questions relating to spatial and temporal

developments surrounding infrastructure. Large-scale developmental projects are a

prime example of modern infrastructural techniques, and will be the focus of this paper. I

will not only examine the theories presented by Harvey, Mitchell and Jarosz, but also their

shortcomings to conclude the best theoretical approach to understanding such

infrastructure facilities in post-colonial nations that are plagued by capitalism and

economic advancements. There are a number of factors that will be analyzed to

understand infrastructure and its impact in such societies, like utilization and restricting of

space, economic calculations, competition, culture, historic experiences, associated

metaphors as well as instances of subjugation and oppression. This will not only help us

understand the need and impact of these projects, but also analyze whether they are

hindering or furthering social progression and change within these societies.

Section II: Harvey, “Globalization and the Spatial Fix” – 2001

Harvey’s main argument in his 2001 paper titled “Globalization and the Spatial Fix”

revolves around how distinct geographical processes surrounding the production and
reconfiguration of space have led to the creation of specific conditions that fuels

contemporary globalization and by extension, capitalism. He describes the spatial fix as

“capitalism’s insatiable drive to resolve its inner crises tendencies by geographical

expansion and restructuring” (Harvey 2001, p. 24). He highlights a number of reasons for

why there exists a need for a spatial fix, including the inability of capitalism to survive

without being geographically expansionary, opening up new markets as well as adjusting

demands for capital and labor (Harvey 2001, p. 27). However, the arguments forwarded

are not convincing in the modern day as they fail to encapsulate the varying effects of

digital spatial fixes, the “extra-economic” means of accumulation that proceed today in a

variety of spheres as well as contradictions within capitalism whose crippling effects

disrupt the present infrastructure as it stands.

Firstly, Harvey’s theorization of the spatial fix gave three ways to resolve the impending

devaluation and local over-accumulation, each indefinitely variable: increasing the supply

and mobility of labor, create new markets abroad and export capital for production

(Harvey 2001, p. 26). This omits the inclusion and effect of digital technologies and

spaces towards the possibility of contributing towards capital accumulation and profits,

while diverging from traditional ways. Perceptions of time and space are no longer in their

traditional sense, digital capital accumulation does not need mobility of labor and fixed

capital, and the creation of affect rent is unaccounted for. Hence, Harvey’s triple meaning

of “fix” as geographical solutions to combat accumulation crises fails to account for and

thereby take diverse measures to protect the newly formed relationship between older

temporal patterns of crisis and new digital accumulation regimes.

Secondly, Harvey argues that over-accumulation of labor and capital further feeds into

the sustainability of capitalism via the spatial fix. If their combination ceased to be

profitable, the result is a massive devaluation, sometimes leading to physical destruction

and even war (Harvey 2001, p. 28). This argument of “accumulation by dispossession”

fails within a variety of environmentalist, anti-colonialist and feminist critiques of “extra

economic” means of accumulation that allows certain groups greater advantages. The

reliance of capitalists is no longer proletariat workers and their resources, but derive

greater profits from gendered labor of social reproduction through unequal pay,

exploitation of workers, laxation of labor laws and the appropriation of property that also

factors into the ability to accumulate capital and sustain it.

Lastly, Harvey could have analyzed the theorization of infrastructural projects and

transportation industries as large-scale efforts to capture relative local advantages and

increase surplus value in a better way. The visible intra-capitalist competition in this

particular fix could employ the possibility of innovations by arguing that massive

deployments of fixed capital amounts proves effective when it annihilates smaller

obstacles of time. This ensures that data transmission is pushed as close as possible to

the speed of light, in order to complete exchanges just a microsecond ahead of

competition.

Section III: Mitchell, “Rethinking economy” – 2006

In “Rethinking Economy”, Mitchell disregards the relationship between economy and

culture, arguing that there are not the big correlational objects that help construct

economic networks around us. The economy is best seen as a “meteorological project”,

or a series of rival meteorological regimes based on new calculations, representations

and measurements (Mitchell 2006, p. 1120). He argues that building an economy requires

more than just social networks. It is primarily based on socio-technical networks involving

equipment, plants, processes, calculations and a system of separating the purely

economic that helps calculate rationality of the markets (Mitchell 2006, p. 1117). Thus,

rival meteorological projects brought the economy into being, and the development of

these projects led to the urban workforce being more productive (Mitchell 2006, p. 1119).

However, he fails to take into consideration the role that money plays in establishing and

sustaining economies, the role of a network of ancillary industries contributing to

economic development surrounding metrological projects, the factors of demand, supply

and social ties in attracting investments as well as the existence of economic spheres

and networks to boost returns from new projects.

Firstly, the author ignores the role of money in development and sustainment of

economies. The developments of projects, like large-scale electricity supply, oil or any

other economic good, will be ineffective if it does not factor in monetary aspects. This not

only includes the valuation of local currency in global markets for export and imports

(given that not a single project can sustain itself independently) but also interest rates

against money borrowed, the overall consumer spending in the locality and the GDP of

the country.

Secondly, the claim that meteorological projects bring the economy into existence through

their technical arrangements is a little far-fetched to begin with, because even if they do,

small ancillary industries like those that repair equipment and machines, supply raw

materials, transport etc. start developing around these projects, forming little economies
in their own. These economies combines produce the economic structure present within

a territory, an underlying reason for the claim that is unexplored within the essay.

Thirdly, the author’s arguments regarding the goal of economic sociology to show that

social ties restrain the world of market rationality (Mitchell 2006, p. 1118) and that

economic calculation is not a question of figuring out the rates of supply and demand for

an existing product but rather involves modification, specification and design of product

networks is contradictory. To begin with, investor attraction to fund projects is not possible

if the product is not in demand, mere demonstrations do not appeal to them over the

possibility of profits and returns over their investments. Hence, demands for products that

these meteorological projects produce is highly crucial. Moreover, social ties help secure

contacts that provide benefits in markets, help build customer base, and promote overall

goodwill of these projects that Mitchell considers so important in formation of economies.

Lastly, Mitchell, in his overall argument surrounding rethinking economies where he

stresses upon the fact that an economy is not a preexisting sphere but a calculation of

superior networks and models (Mitchell 2006, p. 1118), fails to assess that most projects

develop in already existing markets, with ample supply of labor, commercial base,

banking networks, and proximity to infrastructure. These projects then carry out

technological innovations to increase their efficiency, which Harvey referred to as the

principle of “spatial fix” for the success of capitalism. The useful addition, thus, to Harvey’s

theory is that spatial fixes are achieved effectively by the development of these large-

scale meteorological projects.

Section IV: Jarosz, “Constructing the Dark Continent: Metaphor as Geographic

Representation of Africa” – 1992

After an analysis of readings by Harvey on “spatial fix” and Mitchell on “rethinking the

economy”, it is important to ground these two concepts in a reality case study that is

provided by Jarosz on the metaphor of Africa as the Dark Continent. The main argument

that the author’s paper revolves around is that the West has reaffirmed its dominance

repeatedly over the African continent and labelled it as the “other” to fulfill its imperialist

and economic motives (Jarosz 1992, p.105). She highlights three ways in which the West

has been successful in establishing its superiority over Africa, claiming to be the ones

who will introduce enlightenment and civilized values in the continent (Jarosz 1992,

p.105). Firstly, she argues, that language and metaphors employed by Western travelers,

journalists and media portraying African places an people as quintessential objects,

inferior and savage led to the unequal power relations and the legitimacy for domination,

oppression and intervention (Jarosz 1992, p.106). Secondly, funding and construction of

large scale developmental projects by Western donors and institutions established

African dependence on the West, increased profits for Western investors by exploiting

labor and weak government in Africa and displayed how superior nations are successful

in controlling African natural resources such as the Zambezi River (Jarosz 1992, p.108

and 109). Lastly, the metaphor of diseases like AIDS and the blame of its origination and

transmission via African travelers further increased xenophobia and racism for African

communities globally and reprimanded their culture and practices (Jarosz 1992, p.111

and 112).

Even though most of the arguments forwarded by the authority are truth and aptly display

how one powerful force destroyed positive construction of the other’s culture and practice,

there are a few far-fetched claims. Firstly, where the author discusses travel accounts of
western journalists comparing light against dark (Jarosz 1992, p. 107), the “dark” not only

referred to the absence of Christianity and enlightenment but also the skin color of the

Africans; one of the factors that helped distinguish the Euromericans from Africans, since

the time of slavery. Secondly, academic discourses did not lack subtle details and

nuances of ecological and social linkages to diseases such as AIDS (Jarosz 1992, p.

113), but the western media either chose to silence it or ensured that it did not make its

way to esteemed academic circles. Lastly, accounts of invasions and how the

Euromericans forced the Africans to adopt their ways and regulations are missing from

the paper.

Jarosz’s portrayal compliments Mitchell’s analysis of how social factors needs to be

sidelined while conceiving of, and executing, projects and policies (Mitchell 2006, p.

1117). Such was visible during the construction of the Kariba Dam during which African

linkages to communities and localities were discounted (Jarosz 1992, p. 108). This case

study also feeds into Harvey’s theory of a ‘spatial fix’ by restructuring spaces to promote

capitalist (Western) projects that brought profits to Western donors, investors, institutions

and MNCs (Jarosz 1992, p. 109).

Section V: Conclusion

With reference to the three theories of infrastructure analyzed above, Harvey’s ‘spatial

fix’, Mitchell’s ‘Reimagining economies’ and Jarosz’s metaphorical representation of the

Dark Continent, a preferred combination of approach that can help understand

infrastructure is to first analyze what purpose a particular infrastructural development or

project signifies. This might be expansionism, development, prosperity, economic

motives or even, in many cases, purely non-profit public purposes. If this significance
were clear, then it would allow social scientists to observe the factors that hinder or further

these causes, and understand the best possible way for the infrastructure to utilize that

space, whether digital or physical. Secondly, the possibilities of large scale meteorological

projects, even though based on calculations and specifications, cannot ignore the socio-

political and technical surrounding that it operates in; demand and supply, availability of

capital, monetary value, consumer ability, social ties and competition need to be

considered. Many projects will fail to be profitable if the right mix of these conditions are

not present. Lastly, to best help understand infrastructure, narratives and metaphors as

well as historical and colonial experiences play a big role in considering the impact of

such projects are likely to generate.

(Word count: 1977)

References

Harvey, D., 2001. “Globalization and the ‘spatial fix’”. Geographische revue, Volume 3,

Issue 2, pp. 23-30.

Jarosz. L., 1992. “Constructing the Dark Continent: Metaphor as Geographic

Representation of Africa”. Human Geography, Volume 74, No. 2, pp. 105-115

Mitchell, T., 2008. “Rethinking economy”. Geoforum, Volume 39, Issue 3, pp. 1116-1121.