Cultural, discursive, and technological differences notwithstanding, the peripheralization effects of plantation agriculture-based development pathways seem to be as vibrant today as during the height of the modern era's imperialism. This, at least, is what Bosma suggests, and I fully agree with him. The plantation, that modern labour-expelling periphery-making machine, is alive and kicking hard amid convergent socioecological crises nowadays. And this is an analytically but also politically salient phenomenon. Most often, development models which rely on predatory extractivism not only leave the majority of the population behind the well-being bandwagon, thereby turning a deaf ear to the pledge of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development to “leave no one behind”; they also erode the ecological base, socioeconomic fabric, and institutions that enable more just and environmentally sound life projects to blossom. Thus, the careful examination of the complex and generative interplay between the model and intensity of resource extractivism and the broader political economy, as developed by Bosma in The Making of a Periphery, calls into question any non-transformative climate stewardship and sustainable development efforts, like the “business as usual” one represented by the flex crops and commodities complexes of the twenty-first century.

中文翻译：

---

21世纪初的现代周边制造机器

尽管存在文化、话语和技术差异，但以种植园农业为基础的发展路径的外围化效应在今天似乎与现代帝国主义鼎盛时期一样活跃。至少，这是博斯马的建议，我完全同意他的看法。在当今社会生态危机趋于一致的情况下，种植园，即现代驱逐劳动力的外围制造机器，依然生机勃勃。这是一个分析上但在政治上也很突出的现象。大多数情况下，依赖掠夺性采掘主义的发展模式不仅使大多数人口落后于福祉潮流，从而对 2030 年可持续发展议程“不让任何人掉队”的承诺置若罔闻；它们还侵蚀生态基础、社会经济结构，以及使更加公正和环保的生活项目能够开花结果的机构。因此，正如博斯马在外围的制作，质疑任何非变革性的气候管理和可持续发展努力，例如以 21 世纪的弹性作物和商品综合体为代表的“一切照旧”。