This commentary responds to Bassens et al.'s call for a ‘foundational economy’ agenda in economic geography around the ‘fallen below’ and foundational liveability. I argue that their critique of the ‘left behind places’ literature lands and that their geographical synthesis of systems of provision, everyday lifeworlds, and political subjectification offers a promising research agenda for the present moment. However, I argue, the concept of ‘fallen below’ is a more destabilising category than they currently account for.
BassensDFroudJJohalS, et al. (2025) Geography, the foundational economy, and the fallen-below. Dialogues in Human Geography0(0). 10.1177/20438206251388515.
2.
BaylissKFineB (2021) Who Gets What, How and Why: A Guide to the Systems of Provision Approach. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan.
3.
BenthamJBowmanAde la CuestaM, et al. (2013) Manifesto for the Foundational Economy. CRESC Working Paper No. 131.
4.
CalafatiLFroudJHaslamC, et al. (2023) When Nothing Works. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
5.
Foundational Economy Collective (2018) Foundational Economy: The Infrastructure of Everyday Life. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
6.
GerrandVGingDRooseJM, et al. (2025) Mapping the neo-manosphere(s): New directions for research. Men and Masculinities28(5): 443–464.
7.
Gibson-GrahamJK (2006) A Postcapitalist Politics. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
8.
GidronNHallPA (2017) The politics of social status: Economic and cultural roots of the populist right. British Journal of Sociology68(S1): S57–S84.
9.
GrayMBarfordA (2018) The depths of the cuts: The uneven geography of local government austerity. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society11(3): 541–563.
10.
HägerstraandT (1971) What about people in regional science?Papers in Regional Science24(1): 7–21.
11.
HallSM (2019) Everyday Life in Austerity Britain. Cambridge: Polity Press.
12.
IammarinoSRodríguez-PoseAStorperM (2019) Regional inequality in Europe: Evidence, theory and policy implications. Journal of Economic Geography19(2): 273–298.
13.
MacKinnonDKemptonLO’BrienP, et al. (2022) Reframing urban and regional ‘development’ for ‘left behind’ places. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society15(1): 39–56.
14.
MacKinnonDKinossianNPikeA, et al. (2024) Spatial policy since the global financial crisis. European Urban and Regional Studies32(3): 243–260.
15.
MarquetOAnguelovskiINello-DeakinS, et al. (2025) Decoding the 15-minute city debate: Conspiracies, backlash, and dissent in planning for proximity. Journal of the American Planning Association91(1): 117–125.
16.
PikeABéalVCauchi-DuvalN, et al. (2024) ‘Left behind places’: A geographical etymology. Regional Studies58(6): 1167–1179.
17.
RobertsonM (2023) Rent and financialisation as concrete totality: The case for provisioning approaches as method of abstraction. Progress in Human Geography48(1): 18–34.
18.
Rodríguez-PoseA (2018) The revenge of the places that don’t matter (and what to do about it). Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society11(1): 189–209.
19.
SammanA (2023) The desire called libidinal economy. In: SammanAGammonE (eds) Clickbait Capitalism: Economies of Desire in the Twenty-First Century. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.
20.
SchafranASmithMNHallS (2020) The Spatial Contract: A New Politics of Provision for an Urbanized Planet. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
21.
SloterdijkP (1988) Critique of Cynical Reason. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
22.
StandingG (2011) The Precariat: The New Dangerous Class. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
23.
SwyngedouwE (2018) Promises of the Political: Insurgent Cities in a Post-Political Environment. Boston: MIT Press.
24.
ThompsonMSouthernAHeapH (2020) Anchoring the social economy at the metropolitan scale: Findings from the Liverpool city region. Urban Studies59: 4.
25.
TomaneyJBlackmanMNatarajanL, et al. (2023) Social infrastructure and ‘left-behind places’. Regional Studies57(8): 1237–1250.
26.
VidalLGarcía-DuchM (2024) The limits to working-class property ownership: The case of Spain’s ‘society of owners’. Economy & Society53(4): 675–700.
27.
WeissPKobanKMatthesJ (2025) A narrow gateway from misogyny to the far right: Empirical evidence for social media exposure effects. Information, Communication & Society28(13): 2377–2395.