'Value' seems like an elusive and abstract concept. Nonetheless, notions of value underpin how we understand our lives, from discussions about the economic contribution of different kinds of work and productive activity, to the prices we pay for the things we consume. So what is value, and where does it come from?
In this new book, Frederick Harry Pitts charts the past, present and future of value within and beyond capitalist society, critically engaging with key concepts from classical and neoclassical political economy. Interrogating the processes and practices that attribute value to objects and activities, he considers debates over whether value lies within commodities or in their exchange, the politics of different theories of value, and how we measure value in a knowledge-based economy.
This accessible and intriguing introduction to the complexities of value in modern society will be essential reading for any student or scholar working in political economy, economics, economic sociology or management.
This book is a great overview of the different theories of value (substantialist, relational, utilitarian, institutional, autonomist and post-operaist) in what they argue and the different inadequacies, with taking a side for seeing marx as advancing a 'value theory of labour' (and not a labour theory of value!) & what this means. It's short, concise and achieves at what it sets out to do.
Just unfortunate the author's politics, which you'll discover when looking at his larger CV, is to the right of Corbyn, but can be traced from his view of a. skepticism of populism and their reliance of productive/unproductive distinction etc., including corbynism here, and opposing value as in crisis, as such seeing your basis in traditional reforms of resistance. Nonetheless, worth reading.
I’m not sure exactly what I was expecting with this text. I think I wanted a more cut and dried history of value from labor theory of value to the marginalists. That is more or less in here, but it felt like it got more esoteric to me, and less grounded in exchange. I mean, there’s not a single equation in the text, not a one. It’s a short text and was worthwhile but didn’t resolve anything for me. Instead of a brief survey it is more a starting point of an argument. Heck, the last paragraph begins with the idea that value is still up for grabs (134), so there’s always something more to learn.