{"title":"Family and space – an interpretive perspective on two central concepts in population geography","authors":"Giulia Montanari, Tino Schlinzig","doi":"10.5194/gh-77-255-2022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Introductory texts in population geography are often organized using a sociological approach to demography (Barcus and Halfacree 2018:2; Newbold 2014:6). This is particularly evident in discussions on the concept of family. Both sociology and geography center concepts like marriage, divorces, births, the number of children in a household, and the composition of households. However, many of these concepts are outdated,\nwith limited value for understanding contemporary social change. As the\neditorial to this special issue suggests, population geography must look to\nother fields for concepts that describe subjects' meaning-making.\nInterpretive family studies' conceptual and methodological approaches can\nhelp reconfigure established assumptions about the term “population”\n(Gubrium and Holstein 1993; LaRossa and Reitzes 1993; Bösel, 1980; Burgess, 1926). While classic population geography research does engage with new mobility and flexibility regimes and pluralization tendencies, it often fails to identify their consequences for lived experiences and intergenerational relationships. This limits scholars' understandings of new living conditions and practices, as well as their consequences for central concepts of mobility, for example, co-presence, absence, relocation, and residential location. This also occurs with the concept of “family”, which is generally applied to mono-local nuclear families in a household unit. In this contribution, we draw on classic and contemporary interpretive research to (re-)evaluate the multi-locality of families and theories of co-presence to extend the concepts of family and space within population geography (see also Halatcheva-Trapp et al., 2019a). By transcending standard quantitative categories (e.g., the household, fertility, simplified models of mobility), we offer interpretive insights to better conceptualize an important topic in population geography – the family.\n","PeriodicalId":35649,"journal":{"name":"Geographica Helvetica","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geographica Helvetica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5194/gh-77-255-2022","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Abstract. Introductory texts in population geography are often organized using a sociological approach to demography (Barcus and Halfacree 2018:2; Newbold 2014:6). This is particularly evident in discussions on the concept of family. Both sociology and geography center concepts like marriage, divorces, births, the number of children in a household, and the composition of households. However, many of these concepts are outdated,
with limited value for understanding contemporary social change. As the
editorial to this special issue suggests, population geography must look to
other fields for concepts that describe subjects' meaning-making.
Interpretive family studies' conceptual and methodological approaches can
help reconfigure established assumptions about the term “population”
(Gubrium and Holstein 1993; LaRossa and Reitzes 1993; Bösel, 1980; Burgess, 1926). While classic population geography research does engage with new mobility and flexibility regimes and pluralization tendencies, it often fails to identify their consequences for lived experiences and intergenerational relationships. This limits scholars' understandings of new living conditions and practices, as well as their consequences for central concepts of mobility, for example, co-presence, absence, relocation, and residential location. This also occurs with the concept of “family”, which is generally applied to mono-local nuclear families in a household unit. In this contribution, we draw on classic and contemporary interpretive research to (re-)evaluate the multi-locality of families and theories of co-presence to extend the concepts of family and space within population geography (see also Halatcheva-Trapp et al., 2019a). By transcending standard quantitative categories (e.g., the household, fertility, simplified models of mobility), we offer interpretive insights to better conceptualize an important topic in population geography – the family.
摘要人口地理学的入门文本通常使用社会学方法来组织人口统计学(Barcus and Halfacree 2018:2;纽伯尔德2014:6)。这在关于家庭概念的讨论中尤其明显。社会学和地理学都以婚姻、离婚、生育、家庭子女数量和家庭构成等概念为中心。然而,其中许多概念已经过时,对理解当代社会变化的价值有限。正如本期特刊的社论所建议的那样,人口地理学必须在其他领域寻找描述主体意义形成的概念。解释性家庭研究的概念和方法方法可以帮助重新配置关于“人口”一词的既定假设(Gubrium和Holstein 1993;LaRossa and Reitzes 1993;Bosel, 1980;伯吉斯,1926)。虽然经典的人口地理学研究确实涉及新的流动性和灵活性制度以及多元化趋势,但它往往未能确定它们对生活经历和代际关系的影响。这限制了学者对新的生活条件和实践的理解,以及它们对流动性核心概念的影响,例如共同存在、缺席、搬迁和居住地点。“家庭”的概念也出现这种情况,它一般适用于一个家庭单位的单一地方核心家庭。在这一贡献中,我们利用经典和当代的解释性研究来(重新)评估家庭的多局地性和共同存在理论,以扩展人口地理学中家庭和空间的概念(另见Halatcheva-Trapp等人,2019a)。通过超越标准的数量类别(例如,家庭,生育率,简化的流动性模型),我们提供了解释性的见解,以更好地概念化人口地理学中的一个重要主题-家庭。
期刊介绍:
Geographica Helvetica, the Swiss journal of geography, publishes contributions in all fields of geography as well as in related neighbouring disciplines. It is a multi-lingual journal, accepting articles in the three main Swiss languages, German, French, and Italian, as well as in English. It invites theoretical as well as empirical contributions. The journal welcomes contributions that specifically deal with empirical questions relating to Switzerland. The agenda of Geographica Helvetica is related to the specificity of Swiss geography as a meeting ground for different geographical traditions and languages (German, French, Italian and, more recently, a type of transnational, mainly English-speaking geography). The journal aims to become an ideal platform for the development of an informed, creative, and truly cosmopolitan geography. The journal will therefore provide space for cross-border theoretical debates around major thinkers – past and present – and the circulation of geographical ideas and concepts across Europe and beyond. The journal seeks to be a platform of debate also through innovative publication formats in its section "Interfaces", which publishes shorter interventions: reflection pieces on major thinkers as well as position papers (see manuscript types). Geographica Helvetica is promoted and supported by the following institutions: Swiss Academy of Sciences (SCNAT), Geographic and Ethnological Society of Zurich/Geographisch-Ethnographische Gesellschaft Zürich (GEGZ), and Swiss Association of Geography/Association Suisse de Géographie (ASG).