Geography Compass最新文献

Starting from the observation that the notion of “multiple geographies” has gained considerable traction in geographical research in the past years while its theoretical foundations have often remained abstract, in this paper we contribute toward elaboration of multiple geographies as a research perspective, recognizing its potential as a valuable framework for analyzing divergent spatial relations. Initially, we provide an overview of the diverse applications of multiple geographies through a review of relevant literature, focusing on papers within the realms of political geographies that mention the term in their title or abstract. Subsequently, we categorize these papers thematically, identifying three main theoretical strains: post-colonial geographies, uneven geographical development, and feminist geographies. We then propose a theoretical scaffold for navigating the complexities of multiple geographies by engaging with broader discussions on plurality and multiplicity in relation to the aforementioned strains. Finally, we synthesize the insights garnered from this analysis, exploring the potential of a multiple geographies research perspective to contribute to a nuanced understanding of the diverse ways in which space is produced and experienced. Our contribution aims to enrich ongoing debates within human geography on how space can be redefined in more relational, decolonial, socially just, feminist, and diverse ways, opening pathways for pluralistic geographical imaginations.

This paper draws together elements of the academic literature on policy mobilities on the one hand, and on the ‘digital turn’ on the other. It argues that COVID-19 accelerated the digitalization of everyday life asking we think through how those already existing informational infrastructures supporting the mobility of policies are continuing to evolve, as are the methods available for researching them. This has potential consequences for how cities practice policy comparison exchange, and learning and how these processes are studied. This paper sets out a three-pronged schema to take seriously the intersection of policy mobilities and the digital. They are policy mobilities through the digital, policy mobilities produced by the digital and policy mobilities of the digital. It concludes by outlining fruitful areas for a future research agenda.

Whilst China's aid and development model has been traditionally understood as divergent from the dominant post-1945 liberal development model, scholars are also increasingly exploring convergence between features of the two development models. Recently, scholars from a range of disciplines including development studies, development geography and international (business, environment and legal) studies have explored a process whereby China's Belt and Road Initiative and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals converge (‘BRI-SDG integration’). This paper brings these multidisciplinary strands of scholarship together and places them in dialogue with social sciences convergence theory to understand how BRI-SDG integration aligns with or challenges previous conceptualisations of Chinese-dominant development convergence. The paper first demonstrates that BRI-SDG integration proposes a novel and deliberate convergence process - which the paper names ‘complementary convergence’. However, BRI-SDG integration also underscores the need for more multidirectional frameworks that reject Eurocentricity for evaluating the contemporary Chinese-dominant relationship, and an enhanced focus on how China is influencing dominant development institutions. Finally, BRI-SDG integration reiterates the methodological difficulties of delineating between ‘development models’ in an increasingly interrelated global governance of development.

The 21st century in Latin America began with a widespread shift to the left politically, a phenomenon called the ‘pink tide’. Following a period of right-wing re-ascendancy, left wing governments are again gaining traction across the continent. This article analyses the end of the last pink tide via a dialogue between the post-extractivism and degrowth literature by examining Bolivia, Ecuador, and Brazil. This is done through a look at the impacts of both economic growth as a normative policy aim and extractivism as the engine to produce this growth on political developments in these countries. In the tradition of Gramsci this is interpreted as a hegemonic force, recast here as growth-through-extraction, that serves to perpetuate the interests of wealthy classes despite political changes. This article concludes with a brief analysis of how academic debates and political processes have moved on since Escobar 2015 and what this might mean for the new left-wing governments of Latin America.

Building upon a review of geographic research agendas and concepts related to the uneven geographies of COVID-19, this first of three articles debates the benefits of geographic analyses to the syndemic approach and, vice versa, of a syndemics perspective to geographic analyses. The syndemics perspective was proposed by critical medical anthropologists. It seeks to deepen the understanding of the structural dimensions and processes that lead to the convergence and cascading of multiple epidemics in specific population groups. Geographers have also highlighted the intersections of multiple health or other crises during COVID-19, when the pandemic and global health emergency coincided with and escalated existing structural inequalities produced by the climate crisis, environmental degradation, political conflicts and war, socio-economic disparities and poverty, social divisions, racism, hatred and violence, mental health problems and stress. Geographers have mobilized concepts such as scale, territory, borders and intersectionality to unravel the uneven unfolding and consequences of the global health emergency for diverse population groups. We therefore argue that geography has a lot to contribute to the understanding of the spatial and contextual dimensions of COVID-19 as a pandemic as well as a syndemic – but it has so far not actively employed the latter concept's analytical lens. Mobilizing the syndemics approach can contribute to more comprehensive accounts of the structural dimensions and processes that continue and cascade in pandemics.

In light of the challenges surrounding the conceptualization and definition of spatial justice within our increasingly data-driven society, this article commences an inquiry into the convergence of space, justice, and data within human geography literature and related disciplines, focusing notably on the urban field. The paper outlines theories concerning social justice-based rights to the city, especially emphasizing the significance of existing literature that bridges such theories with recent scholarship on data justice. It supplements these discussions by deriving a theoretical framework for digital spatial justice rooted in other space-based theories, exploring the more-than-human realms of non-human entities, affect, and information.

This paper makes an argument for a geography of girlhood, located at the intersection of historical geographies of globalisation and empire on the one hand, and feminist interventions in the geography of childhood and youth on the other. A focus on girlhood, I argue, opens up a debate on the discipline's own implication in a debate on climate science, moral hierarchies of civilisation and reproductive health at which intersection the category of ‘girl’ was materialised in the 19th century. This focus extends and historicises the argument made by scholars like Nicola Ansel that geographies of childhood speak not only to intimate scales of experience - such as the home and neighbourhood—but instead suggest the ways in which everyday life is implicated in the scale of the global and the geopolitical. Drawing on an inter-disciplinary scholarship, the paper argues that debates on gender and maturity—converging on the figure of the ‘girl’—shaped raced and classed imaginaries of progress in the 19th and 20th centuries. Through this, the paper demonstrates that ‘girlhood’ is at the heart of historical geographies of urban planning, social care, and health, as well as indexing the continuities in the transition from a colonial discourse of civilisation to a mid-20th century concern with development. Finally, the paper asks how to write about girls through an archive that is almost obsessively fixated on them as subjects of education and reform, even whilst they rarely appear in it as speaking subjects. I argue that both an emergent focus on non-textual objects as sources, as well as the use of ephemeral material—including notes, creative writing exercises from the classroom, school diaries etc.—alongside the official archive might open the scholarship up to a multi-scalar analysis of girlhood as imbricated in larger global and national discursive and material practices.

The geographical concepts of scale, space and place have informed and refined the theory of “framing” in the social movement literature. Going beyond the conventional approach of understanding social movements, this article aims to bring discussions on relational ontology into conversation with the geographical literature on scale and spatial strategies in social movements, proposing a theoretical framework that goes beyond established approaches in the literature on collective action framing. This article proposes for a holistic cross-disciplinary dialog among political and development geographers and with activists and scholars from other cognate disciplines of social science to understand the complexities of framing in social movements.

In a historically colonial field, what are the possibilities of a geography informed by Indigenous and Anti-Colonial ethics and onto-epistemologies? This article suggests engaging in a critical study of data from an Indigenous geographic standpoint, with a focus on imperialism and colonialism in settler nation-states. I begin by emphasizing the pervasive and long-standing imposition of geographical data collection in Indigenous life, naming the binds of engaging with the production of data for and with colonial institutions. I then review prominent spatial analytics within critical Indigenous studies, Indigenous geography, and aligned Anti-Colonial geography, including Indigenous place-based knowledge and onto-epistemologies, (racialized) colonial dispossession, sovereignty and recognition, environmental colonialism, and mapping and cartography. Last, I suggest that studies of colonial data dynamics and Indigenous data production strengthen Indigenous and Anti-Colonial geographies by emphasizing the co-constitution of good relations and good data. Future research avenues include the need to push beyond the geo-historical bounds of the category settler colonial, and to build co-rejections of racial empire with other fields of study including Black, Queer, and Feminist geographies.

Though Geography began as a tool of empire and war, now some of us are using this master's tool to dismantle the master's house. But we are tweaking the tool in various ways to make it more liberatory. People's geography aims to take Geography to the streets, and the streets to the ivory tower. It works to popularize radical geography, and radicalize popular geography. Community geographies focus on collaborations between academics and public scholars to co-produce knowledge that serves social change. This term has grown in use recently in the US, where there is a new community geographies specialty group. The term public geography has perhaps been more often used in the UK, where the focus on “impact” by the REF has given it more weight. That sort of push from funding agencies is a growing trend internationally, though the terms used vary. Participatory research aims to foster civic engagement and look alongside research subjects, rather than looking at them. It is a strong influence on both community and public geographies, though the overlap is not exact. Other terms used are engaged research and reciprocal research. This work takes longer and is often undervalued as simply service, rather than research. Too often it has been done despite, rather than with support from, academic policies. That is beginning to change. Some terms and traditions have more resonance in some contexts than in others, but whatever the label used, it is important that we organize to honor and nurture this work.