ABSTRACT
Resource geographers tend toward a dialectical view laid out by Erich Zimmermann: “resources are not; they become.” Our goal is usually to explain how resources are produced through cultural, technological, political, and economic processes as if each is equally important. In this chapter, I argue a Marxist approach to resource geography must highlight that the most important factor in resource “becoming” under capitalism is one overwhelming imperative: profit, or, is the resource profitable to produce? A historical materialist perspective must also understand what came before and what might come after capitalist resource production. I lay out a four-part historical understanding of resource geographies following insight from Neil Smith's “production of nature” thesis: (1) production for use, (2) production for exchange, (3) capitalist production for profit or accumulation, and (4) ecosocialist production for social need. This last section reflects on what a properly “ecosocialist” resource geography could look like, and why it must differ from the standard vision of socialist production based solely on human need.
