Economic Geography

particularly evident in some critiques of and moves away from Marxian political
economy. This was particularly so with the rise of neo-liberalism from the 1970s,
for there is no doubt that for some being seen to be Marxist was perceived as a
career threatening move while for others having a go at Marxism was one way of
establishing one’s credentials as a safe bet. No doubt these – and other – motives
became entangled in particular ways in particular cases, but the aggregate end
result is clearly visible in the multiplicity of positions observable in contemporary
economic geography.
What then of the future of economic geography, theoretically and substan-
tively? Given the present position, I think it certain that economic geography in
the foreseeable future will continue to be characterised by a theoretical plurality
and on-going debates between protagonists adhering to different theoretical
traditions. I take this to be a good thing for the economic geographies of the late

---

The ‘new’ economic geography?
55
modern capitalist world are too complex and nuanced to be explicable simply in
terms of one all-encompassing theoretical position. What might the next ‘new’
economic geography substantively focus on? I think that there is a very fair chance
that this will involve a more serious engagement with issues of nature, the materi-
ality of economic processes and their ‘environmental footprint’ and a growing
theoretical attention to relationships between economy, environment and
nature. In saying this, I acknowledge that there have been important contribu-
tions on these issues by economic geographers but the growing threat of global
warming and other forms of ecological change induced by the economic practices
of people will force these issues more prominently onto the agendas of economic
geographers – among many others.