A Value Theory of Inclusion: Informal Labour, The Homeworker and the Social Reproducon of Value Alessandra Mezzadri, accepted version, published in Anpode at hps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/an.12701?saml_referrer Abstract Critically engaging with Marxist-Feminist debates, this article argues that only interpretations of social reproduction as value-producing capture the features of contemporary informalised labour relations. Building on early social reproduction analyses and informed by debates in political economy of development and feminist geography, the article sketches a ‘value theory of inclusion’ premised on the centrality of all labour to value-generation; accounting for different forms of exploitation; and stressing the dynamic interpenetration of production and reproduction in processes of labour-surplus extraction. By re-centering the geographical focus on the Global South, the article illustrates this interpenetration by identifying three reproductive mechanisms of value-generation, based on: industrial housing arrangements; spatial processes of externalisation of reproductive costs across urban-rural divides; and processes of formal subsumption of labour, analysed with special reference to women homeworkers in India. An inclusive theorisation of value-generation is crucial for the development of inclusive politics, recognizing exploitation in its varied manifestations. Introducon A number of recent studies have brought renewed aenon to social reproducon, its role in capitalism and reorganisaon in the Global North during neoliberalism (Ferguson et al, 2016; Bhaacharya, 2017; Fraser, 2014, 2017; Ferguson, 2019). Aspiring to build bridges between Marxism and different strands of Feminism, many of these studies - organised under the name of Social Reproducon Theory (SRT) - also aim at theorising class and social oppression within a unitary theory of capitalism, avoiding dual theories conceiving patriarchy and capitalism as separate systems (Vogel, 1983; Arruzza, 2016). This aim is pursued through a tradional Marxist analycal lens, understanding social reproducon as composed of circuits lying outside processes of value generaon. Notably, here SRT breaks with Early Social Reproducon Analyses (ESRA), which instead theorised social reproducon as central to value generaon (Dalla Costa and James, 1972; Fortuna, 1982; Mies, 1982, 1986; Reddock, 1994; Picchio, 1996; Federici, 2004). SRT intervenon could not be melier given the expansion of feminist movements across the globe, the strain on social reproducon accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic, and the rise of the Black Lives Maer (BLM) movement. However, notwithstanding its important contribuons, this arcle argues that its take on value is problemac. Theorecally, its exclusion of reproducve realms and acvies from processes of value generaon is based on an overtly rigid schema separang value-producing and non-value-producing circuits, reifying the use-value/exchange value disncon and based on producvist, wage-centric understandings of exploitaon. Polically, such exclusionary takes on value may undermine efforts to build solidaries across labouring classes and polical movements, as the idenficaon of ‘hierarchies’ of contribuons to capitalism may weaken the redistribuve claims of some classes and communies (Federici, 2019). The development of inclusive theorisaons of value, instead, may not only boost solidaries but also broaden our horizon 1