Hegemonic building and the paradox of over-accumulation in the Central London office market

Abstract

At every stage of urbanisation, monumental buildings have been employed as hegemonic symbols by the dominant social class. Beyond their use value and exchange value, such buildings acquire symbolic value as signifiers of status and power. They provide a medium through which the dominant class can express its collective authority, and individuals within that class can compete for supremacy. Hegemonic buildings exert a disproportionate influence on urbanisation, acting as catalysts for more extensive swathes of building investment and surviving long after most of that investment has been destroyed. Under capitalism, hegemonic buildings, like all buildings, have become commodified; their symbolic value as well as their use value has become a tradeable commodity The expected return from investing in such a building thus includes a ‘hegemonic premium’, the return on the symbolic capital invested in it. Competition amongst investors in hegemonic buildings such as office towers leads to over-accumulation, with more buildings produced than there are occupiers willing and able to fill them. This, in turn, leads to the devaluation of capital and the acceleration of obsolescence, as buildings become economically obsolete long before they reach the end of their physical life.

Key words:

• hegemonic building
• symbolic capital
• over-accumulation
• devaluation of capital
• accelerated obsolescence
• Central London office market

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank my referees for helpful comments which have enabled me to strengthen parts of the argument.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Richard Barras

Richard Barras is Visiting Professor in the Bartlett School of Planning, University College London, UK. Email: [email protected]