Neo‐liberalism as creative destruction

By D. Harvey. 2006

559 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Finance, Geography, Planning and Development, Political Science and International Relations

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c2adeb62afba65d0b240ac28e0192f400fa19877

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Finance

In Geography, Planning and Development

In Political Science and International Relations

Citations in the corpus

Geographies of circulation and exchange: constructions of markets (2009, background): “Being “about fixity rather than motion” (Harvey 2006b: 106), the state used to reproduce itself by drawing sharp lines between social inclusion and exclusion and by projecting these spatially via the process of territorialization.”
State capitalism in international context: Varieties and variations (2020, background): “These can include allocating resources to insider interest groups, securing mass compliance through exclusivist nationalism, and paring away democratic institutions (Amable, 2011; Harvey, 2006).”
The role of place branding in local and regional economic development: bridging the gap between policy and practicality (2016, background): “Due to the zero-sum constraints of the economic system, development activity becomes an exercise in uneven development, as the market simply reorganizes capital, labour and production over space (Harvey, 2006).”
Public–private partnership as a driver of sustainable development: toward a conceptual framework of sustainability-oriented PPP (2020, background): “Neoliberals believe that a fully competitive market is most effective because private companies are more efficient than the government (Harvey 2006; Robison 2006).”
The Evolution and Trajectories of English Spatial Governance: ‘Neoliberal’ Episodes in Planning (2013, background): “…must be kept to a bare minimum because the state cannot possibly possess enough information to second-guess market signals (prices) and because powerful interests will inevitably distort and bias state interventions (particularly in democracies) for their own benefit (Harvey, 2006, p. 145).”