contemporary geographic approaches geography 870 · geography 870 fall 2016 contemporary geographic...

Contemporary Geographic Approaches Geography 870 Fall 2016 3 credits

Meets: Wednesday 4:30-7:10 pm Location: Bolton 487 Instructor: Ryan Holifield Office Location: Bolton 434 Phone: 229-4868 Email: [email protected] Office Hours: Tues/Thurs 1-3 pm, or by appointment

Introduction to the course As a geography graduate student at UWM, one of your responsibilities is to become familiar with geography as an academic discipline. That is to say: while you are busy becoming a specialist in some particular aspect of geographic study—whether soils or phenology or urban social movements or parks or brownfields or GIS or something else—you are also expected to gain some understanding of what it means, more generally, to think geographically. How is geography related to other disciplines? What sets it apart? Does it have a distinctive object? Or is it simply a different set of perspectives on the world? Geography is an exciting discipline; it's also a fragmented one. Human, physical, and techniques specialists often go their own separate ways, and although we've been in dialogue for years about how we can bring the different fields together, it can be difficult to detect progress in that direction. Why so little progress? In part, it's because of increased specialization in narrow empirical topics (substantive or topical difference). In part, it's because the methods we use are so different (methodological difference). But it's often also because of deeper philosophical differences, pertaining to such "big questions" as what the world is made of (ontology) and how we can come to know anything about it (epistemology). This class will focus on the third of these: what does it mean to "think geographically"? What are the key concepts that geographers share? What philosophies and theories do geographers bring to their research? What are the strengths, weaknesses, and basic assumptions of these philosophies? What kinds of questions do they allow us to ask? What kinds of questions do they foreclose? Our “way in” will be an exploration of some of the key concepts that have animated geographic research since its establishment as an academic discipline in this country: space and time, scale, place, nature, structures and systems, landscape, and others. Although you will learn about the history of geographical thought along the way, the course is not organized chronologically, and the emphasis is on contemporary approaches to geographic research, rather than those that are no longer prominent. Some of our reading, by necessity, will be rather abstract and philosophical. Some of our reading will consist of empirical studies that we can use to help us understand the philosophy and theory informing them. The following

mailto:[email protected]

Geography 870 Fall 2016 Contemporary Geographic Approaches Syllabus, page 2

will be one of our guiding questions for the semester: Can human, physical, and techniques-oriented geographers work together to conceptualize and research the world? If so, how? If not, why not?

There are no specific course prerequisites for this class, but priority for enrollment goes to geography graduate students. Geography 870 is a required course for the master’s and Ph.D. degree programs in geography at UWM.

Required and recommended materials (1) The following book is required for this class: Clifford, N.J., Holloway, S.L., Rice, S.P., and Valentine, G., eds. (2009). Key Concepts in Geography, Second Edition. London, Thousand Oaks, CA, and New Delhi: SAGE Publications. Copies are available in the UWM virtual bookstore, but you may want to search the Internet for used or discounted copies. Please make sure to order the Second Edition. Other required readings will be available via the class D2L site. (2) The following books are strongly recommended for this class, but not required. Essential reference books for geographers: Castree, N., Kitchin, R., and Rogers, A., eds. (2013). Oxford Dictionary of Human Geography. Oxford, UK:

Oxford University Press. Gregory, D., Johnston, R. J., Pratt, G., Watts, M., and Whatmore, S., eds. (2009). The Dictionary of Human

Geography (5th ed.). Oxford, UK and Malden, Mass.: Blackwell Publishers. Thomas, D. S. G., and Goudie, A., eds. (2000). The Dictionary of Physical Geography (3rd ed.). Oxford and

Malden, Mass.: Blackwell Publishers. Standard guides to Anglo-American human and physical geography: Johnston, R. J., & Sidaway, J. D. (2010). Geography and Geographers: Anglo-American Human Geography

Since 1945 (7th ed.). London and New York: Arnold/Oxford University Press. Aitken, S. and Valentine, G. (2006), eds. Approaches to Human Geography. London, Thousand Oaks, CA,

and New Delhi: SAGE. Gregory, K. J. (2000). The Changing Nature of Physical Geography. London and New York: Arnold/Oxford

University Press. Recommended resources on academic reading and writing: Adler, M. J., and Van Doren, C. L. (1972). How to Read a Book (Rev. and updated ed.). New York: Simon and

Schuster.


Boice, R. (1990) Professors as Writers: A Self-Help Guide to Productive Writing. Stillwater, OK: New Forums Press.

Strunk, W., and White, E. B. (1959). The Elements of Style. New York: Macmillan. Williams, J. M. (1989). Style: Ten Lessons in Clarity and Grace. Glenview, IL, Boston, and London: Scott, Foresman & Company.

Course learning objectives and assignments By the end of the course, you should be able to do the following:

(1) Discuss and explain the basic arguments, assumptions, and premises of dominant contemporary approaches to geographic concepts, research, and theory.

(2) Compare, contrast, and critically evaluate these approaches, both in general and in relation to a

particular substantive area of research.

(3) Work with others to facilitate productive discussions of geographic thought, with a focus on discussions across subdisciplines (physical, human, GIS, etc.).

The components of your class grade are linked closely to these learning objectives. Your final grade will be determined by the following:

1. Regular class participation (30%) [All objectives] This class will operate primarily as a discussion-oriented seminar, and regular attendance and participation are crucial to the success of this course. By class participation, I mean the following: showing up regularly, being prepared for every class (i.e., having carefully read the assigned readings, reaction papers, etc.), and participating actively and productively in discussions. “Participating actively” does not mean talking constantly—in fact, dominating discussions is a problem—but it typically requires at least speaking up in each class session. That said, participation is notoriously difficult to evaluate, and grades should not simply reflect personality or cultural differences. In this seminar, your grade will be determined by a combination of self-evaluation (50%) and instructor evaluation (50%), and it will be based on your progress in reaching goals that we’ve set early in the semester. You won’t be graded by your classmates, but I will solicit anonymous peer feedback at least once during the course of the semester to help us evaluate your progress.

2. Two classes as discussion co-facilitator (10%) [Objective 3] You will be required to co-facilitate two discussions during the course of the semester, in consultation with the instructor. You and your partner(s) should arrange to meet before the class to talk about the format; I will also help you identify formats for leading discussions. You will prepare outlines / reaction papers for the two weeks in which you lead discussion (see the assignment instructions). As with participation, part of the discussion co-facilitation grade will be based on self-evaluation.


3. Four outlines / reaction papers (30%) [Objectives 1 and 2] You will be required to prepare four outlines of assigned readings, along with brief “reaction papers” (500-750 words). You will be responsible for distributing your outlines and papers to your instructor and your classmates via the D2L site, no later than 5:00 pm on the Tuesday before the class session. Discussion leaders for a session will be required to review the outlines and reaction papers submitted each week; we’ll use these as launching points for discussion. Everyone else should make an effort to review these as well if time permits. You will receive your assignments, along with further instructions for preparing the outlines and reaction papers, in a separate handout (also on D2L).

4. Term paper and peer review (30%) [Objective 2] Your final assignment for the semester will be to prepare a term paper of 4000-5000 words in length. The purpose of this term paper is to help situate your dissertation, thesis, or internship project (or a possible research project, if you are still undecided) with respect to specific, relevant, and contemporary geographic concepts, approaches, debates, research programs, and/or traditions. To put it another way: this assignment is designed to help you answer the common question, “But how is what you’re doing geography?” What this will mean in practice is writing a critical review of geographic literature on or related to your topic, focusing on one or more of the concepts and themes discussed in this course. For instance, you might examine how recent geographic research on immigration (or forest ecology, or tourism, or water quality, or whatever your topic happens to be) has addressed the concept of place (or scale, or landscape, etc., or a combination of themes). What are some of the key debates in your area of substantive interest? Are there competing approaches to researching your topic? If so, what are they, which do you propose to use, and why? This will be a critical literature review in the sense that it will evaluate the merits of different approaches and take a clear side in relevant debates. Ideally, this literature review will help you develop your thesis or internship topic and help prepare you to connect your empirical analysis productively with one or more geographic literatures. In some cases, it may wind up as part of a thesis—or even as a separate publication. Note: this is not an empirical research paper – that is, it is not one in which you will analyze data you have gathered. The purpose of the paper is to enable you to review and engage with geographical scholarship relevant to your topic, and in greater depth than we can in the seminar meetings themselves. You will receive more information about the term paper assignment, including the peer review of a classmate’s first draft, in a separate handout. Timeline:

Working topic, question, and thesis due by 11:59 pm Thursday, September 15 (1%) Working outline, bibliography, and “zero draft” due by 11:59 pm Thursday, October 27 (2%) First complete draft, ready for peer review, due by 11:59 pm Tuesday, November 22 (5%) Peer review due by 11:59 pm on Tuesday, November 29 (2%) Final draft due by 11:59 pm on Tuesday, December 20 (20%)


Estimated time for course components

Hours

Time in the classroom* (14 sessions) 37

Time spent reading seminar materials 50

Time completing outlines and reaction papers 10

Time preparing discussion facilitation 3

Time preparing term paper 44

Total for semester (@3 credits x 48 hrs/credit hour) 144

University policies For the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee’s official policies on disabilities, religious observances, active military duty, incompletes, discriminatory conduct, academic misconduct, complaint procedures, and grade appeal procedures, please see the following web site: http://www.uwm.edu/Dept/SecU/SyllabusLinks.pdf. Geography 870 adheres to all of these policies. If you have questions or concerns about the class, please do not hesitate to contact the instructor.

Schedule of required readings * = Textbook reading or overview All readings that are not in your textbook will be available on D2L as PDFs or as links to online PDFs. NOTE: Readings are subject to change, especially later in the semester. Sometimes I make changes as I get to know the particular interests of the class. However, I will warn you at least one week in advance when I make changes.

1) Introducing academic geography – September 7 UW-Madison Writing Center (2003). Acknowledging, paraphrasing, and quoting sources.

http://writing.wisc.edu/Handbook/Acknowledging_Sources.pdf *Heffernan, M. (2009) Histories of geography. In N. J. Clifford, S. L. Holloway, S. P. Rice & G. Valentine

(Eds.), Key Concepts in Geography, 2nd edition (pp. 3-20). London and Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE. Johnston, R. J. (2005). Geography - coming apart at the seams? (Extended version). In N. Castree, A.

Rogers & D. J. Sherman (Eds.), Questioning Geography: Fundamental Debates. Malden, MA: Blackwell. Use this link: http://www.ggy.bris.ac.uk/personal/RonJohnston/CurrentPapers/Other/other25.pdf

http://www.uwm.edu/Dept/SecU/SyllabusLinks.pdf

http://writing.wisc.edu/Handbook/Acknowledging_Sources.pdf

http://www.ggy.bris.ac.uk/personal/RonJohnston/CurrentPapers/Other/other25.pdf


Viles, H. (2005). A divided discipline? In N. Castree, A. Rogers & D. J. Sherman (Eds.), Questioning Geography: Fundamental Debates (pp. 26-38). Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub. (PDF on D2L)

Castree, N. (2005). Is geography a science? In N. Castree, A. Rogers & D. J. Sherman (Eds.), Questioning

Geography: Fundamental Debates (pp. 57-79). Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub. (PDF on D2L)

2) Geography’s traditions – September 14

Introducing geography’s traditions *Richards, K. (2009). Geography and the physical sciences tradition. In N. J. Clifford, S. L. Holloway, S. P.

Rice & G. Valentine (Eds.), Key Concepts in Geography, 2nd edition (pp. 21-45). London and Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE.

*Johnston, R. J. (2009). Geography and the social science tradition. In N. J. Clifford, S. L. Holloway, S. P.


*Blunt, A. (2009). Geography and the humanities tradition. In N. J. Clifford, S. L. Holloway, S. P. Rice & G.

Valentine (Eds.), Key Concepts in Geography, 2nd edition (pp. 66-82). London and Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE.

Sui, D. Z. (2004). GIS, Cartography, and the “Third Culture”: Geographic Imaginations in the Computer Age.

The Professional Geographer, 56(1), 62-72.

Turner, B. L., II (2002). Contested identities: human-environment geography and disciplinary implications in a restructuring academy. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 92(1): 52-74.

3) Space (-time) in geography – September 21

Introducing space in geography *Thrift, N. (2009). Space: The fundamental stuff of geography. In N. J. Clifford, S. L. Holloway, S. P. Rice &

G. Valentine (Eds.), Key Concepts in Geography, 2nd edition (pp. 85-96). London and Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE.

*Kent, M. (2009). Space: Making room for space in physical geography. In N. J. Clifford, S. L. Holloway, S. P.


Space, time, and representation in human geography Harvey, D. (1990). The time and space of the Enlightenment project. Ch. 15 in The Condition of

Postmodernity: An Enquiry into the Origins of Cultural Change. Oxford: Blackwell. (pp. 240-259)


Woodward, K., Jones, J. P., & Marston, S. A. (2012). The politics of autonomous space. Progress in Human Geography, 36(2), 204-224.

Space, time, and representation in physical geography Raper, J., & Livingstone, D. (1995). Development of a geomorphological spatial model using object-

oriented design. International Journal of Geographical Information Systems, 9(4), 359-383. Perry, G.L.W. (2002). Landscapes, space and equilibrium: shifting viewpoints. Progress in Physical

Geography, 26(3): 339-359.

4) Time (-space) in geography – September 28

Introducing time in geography *Thornes, J. B. (2009). Time: Change and stability in environmental systems. In N. J. Clifford, S. L. Holloway,

S. P. Rice & G. Valentine (Eds.), Key Concepts in Geography, 2nd edition (pp. 119-139). London and Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE.

*Taylor, P. J. (2009). Time: From hegemonic change to everyday life. In N. J. Clifford, S. L. Holloway, S. P.


Time-space in human geography, physical geography, and GIS Davis, W. M. (1899). The geographical cycle. The Geographical Journal, 14(5): 481-504. Brunsden, D., & Thornes, J. B. (1979). Landscape sensitivity and change. Transactions of the Institute of

British Geographers, 4, 463-484. Kwan, M-P. (1998). Space-time and integral measures of individual accessibility: A comparative analysis using a point-based network. Geographical Analysis, 30:3, 191- 216. Massey, D. (1999). Space-time, 'science' and the relationship between physical geography and human

geography. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 24(3), 261-276.

5) Place in geography – October 5 Introduction *Castree, N. (2009). Place: Connections and boundaries in an interdependent world. In N. J. Clifford, S. L.

Holloway, S. P. Rice & G. Valentine (Eds.), Key Concepts in Geography, 2nd edition (pp. 153-172). London and Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE.


*Gregory, K. (2009). Place: The management of sustainable physical environments. In N. J. Clifford, S. L. Holloway, S. P. Rice & G. Valentine (Eds.), Key Concepts in Geography, 2nd edition (pp. 173-198). London and Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE.

Place in human and environmental geography Massey, D. B. (1994). Space, place, and gender. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. (Selection:

Chapter 6, “A global sense of place,” pp. 146-156). Phillips, J. D. (2001). Human impacts on the environment: Unpredictability and the primacy of place.

Physical Geography, 22(4), 321-332. Larsen, S. C., & Johnson, J. T. (2012). Toward an open sense of place: Phenomenology, affinity, and the

question of being. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 102(3), 632-646. Brown, G., & Raymond, C. (2007). The relationship between place attachment and landscape values:

Toward mapping place attachment. Applied Geography, 27(2), 89-111.

6) Scale in geography – October 12 Overviews of geographical concepts of scale *Burt, T. (2009). Scale: Resolution, analysis, and synthesis in physical geography. In N. J. Clifford, S. L.


*Herod, A. (2009). Scale: The local and the global. In N. J. Clifford, S. L. Holloway, S. P. Rice & G. Valentine

(Eds.), Key Concepts in Geography, 2nd edition (pp. 217-235). London and Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE.

Debating scale in human and environmental geography Marston, S. A. (2000). The social construction of scale. Progress in Human Geography, 24(2), 219-242. Brenner, N. (2001). The limits to scale? Methodological reflections on scalar structuration. Progress in

Human Geography, 25(4), 591-614. Moore, A. (2008). Rethinking scale as a geographical category: from analysis to practice. Progress in

human geography, 32(2), 203-225. Marceau, D.J. (1999). Remote sensing contributions to the scale issue. Canadian Journal of Remote

Sensing 25(4): 357-366. Manson, S. M. (2008). Does scale exist? An epistemological scale continuum for complex human-

environment systems. Geoforum, 39(2), 776-788.


7) Systems in geography – October 19 Introduction

*Katz, C. (2009). Social systems: Thinking about society, identity, power and resistance. In N. J. Clifford, S.

L. Holloway, S. P. Rice & G. Valentine (Eds.), Key Concepts in Geography, 2nd edition (pp. 236-250). London and Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE.

*Harrison, S. (2009). Environmental systems: Philosophy and applications in physical geography. In N. J.

Clifford, S. L. Holloway, S. P. Rice & G. Valentine (Eds.), Key Concepts in Geography, 2nd edition (pp. 251-264). London and Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE.

Geographies of identity, power, and resistance Pulido, L. (2000). Rethinking environmental racism: White privilege and urban development in Southern

California. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 90(1): 12-40. Brown, M., & Knopp, L. (2008). Queering the map: The productive tensions of colliding epistemologies. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 98(1), 40-58. Nightingale, A. J. (2011). Bounding difference: Intersectionality and the material production of gender,

caste, class and environment in Nepal. Geoforum, 42(2), 153-162. Modeling complex systems in (and beyond) geography Manson, S. M. (2001). Simplifying complexity: A review of complexity theory. Geoforum, 32(3), 405-414. Fowler, H. J., Blenkinsop, S., & Tebaldi, C. (2007). Linking climate change modelling to impacts studies:

recent advances in downscaling techniques for hydrological modelling. International Journal of Climatology, 27(12), 1547-1578.

8) Landscape in geography – October 26 Introduction

*Gray, M. (2009). Landscape: The physical layer. In N. J. Clifford, S. L. Holloway, S. P. Rice & G. Valentine


*Morin, K. M. (2009). Landscape and environment: Representing and interpreting the world. In N. J.

Clifford, S. L. Holloway, S. P. Rice & G. Valentine (Eds.), Key Concepts in Geography, 2nd edition (pp. 286-299). London and Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE.

Cultural geographies and landscape


Sauer, C. O. (1925). The morphology of landscape. University of California Press. (selection) Wylie, J. (2005). A single day's walking: narrating self and landscape on the South West Coast Path.

Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 30(2), 234-247. Mitchell, D. (2010). Battle/fields: Braceros, agribusiness, and the violent reproduction of the California

agricultural landscape during World War II. Journal of Historical Geography, 36(2), 143-156. Landscapes in physical geography and ecology Turner, M. G. (1989). Landscape ecology: the effect of pattern on process. Annual review of ecology and

systematics, 171-197. Van Dyke, C. (2015). Boxing daze–using state-and-transition models to explore the evolution of socio-

biophysical landscapes. Progress in Physical Geography, 39(5) 594–621.

9) Nature in geography – November 2 Introduction

*Ginn, F. and Demeritt, D. (2009). Nature: A contested concept. In N. J. Clifford, S. L. Holloway, S. P. Rice &

G. Valentine (Eds.), Key Concepts in Geography, 2nd edition (pp. 300-311). London and Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE.

*Haines-Young, R. (2009). Nature: An environmental perspective. In N. J. Clifford, S. L. Holloway, S. P. Rice

& G. Valentine (Eds.), Key Concepts in Geography, 2nd edition (pp. 312-330). London and Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE.

Humans and nature: Troubles with wilderness Cronon, W. (1995). The trouble with wilderness; or, getting back to the wrong nature. In W. Cronon (Ed.),

Uncommon Ground: Rethinking the Human Place in Nature (pp. 69-90 (reprinted on web: 1-24)). New York: W.W. Norton & Co. Available on Internet at http://www.williamcronon.net/writing/Cronon_Trouble_with_Wilderness_1995.pdf

Braun, B. (2002). Picturing the forest crisis: Immutable mobiles, contested ecologies, and the politics of

preservation. In The Intemperate Rainforest: Nature, Culture, and Power on Canada's West Coast. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. (Ch 6, pp. 213-255)

Urban, M., & Rhoads, B. L. (2003). Conceptions of nature: implications for an integrated geography. In S. T.

Trudgill & A. Roy (Eds.), Contemporary Meanings in Physical Geography: From What to Why? (pp. 211-231). London and New York: Arnold, Distributed in the United States of America by Oxford University Press.

Mansfield, B., Biermann, C., McSweeney, K., Law, J., Gallemore, C., Horner, L., & Munroe, D. K. (2015).

Environmental politics after nature: conflicting socioecological futures. Annals of the Association

http://www.williamcronon.net/writing/Cronon_Trouble_with_Wilderness_1995.pdf


of American Geographers, 105(2), 284-293.

10) Globalization and global change in geography – November 9 Introduction

*Faulconbridge, J. R. and Beaverstock, J. V. (2009). Globalization: Interconnected worlds. In N. J. Clifford, S.

L. Holloway, S. P. Rice & G. Valentine (Eds.), Key Concepts in Geography, 2nd edition (pp. 331-343). London and Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE.

*Clifford, N. J. (2009). Globalization: Science, (physical) geography and environment. In N. J. Clifford, S. L.


Approaching globalization and global change Nagar, R., Lawson, V., McDowell, L., & Hanson, S. (2002). Locating globalization: Feminist (re) readings of

the subjects and spaces of globalization. Economic Geography, 78(3), 257-284. Sheppard, E. (2002). The spaces and times of globalization: Place, scale, networks, and positionality.

Economic Geography 78(3): 307-330.

Turner, B.L., et al (1990). Two types of global environmental change: Definitional and spatial-scale issues in their human dimensions. Global Environmental Change 1(1): 14-22.

Gregory, K. J. (2000). Global physical geography. In The changing nature of physical geography. London

and New York: Arnold/Oxford University Press. (pp. TBA).

11) Development in geography – November 16 Introduction

*Willis, K. D. (2009). Development: Critical approaches in human geography. In N. J. Clifford, S. L.


*Inkpen, R. (2009). Development: Sustainability and physical geography. In N. J. Clifford, S. L. Holloway, S.

P. Rice & G. Valentine (Eds.), Key Concepts in Geography, 2nd edition (pp. 378-391). London and Thousand Oaks, Calif.: SAGE.

Geographic approaches to development Escobar, A. (1992). Reflections on ‘development’: grassroots approaches and alternative politics in the

Third World. Futures, 24(5), 411-436.


Bebbington, A. (2000). Reencountering development: Livelihood transitions and place transformations in the Andes. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 90(3): 495-520.

Sachs, J. (2005). Why some countries fail to thrive. In The End of Poverty: Economic Possibilities for our

Time, 51-73. New York: Penguin Press. Sustainable development Adams, W.M. (2001). The dilemma of sustainability. In Green Development: Environment and

Sustainability in the Third World, 2nd ed., 1-21. London: Routledge. Kates, R.W., Parris, T.M., and Leiserowitz, A.A. (2005) What is sustainable development? Goals, indicators, values, and practice. Environment 47(3): 8-21.

12) November 23 – No class (Thanksgiving holiday)

13) Risk in geography – November 30 Introduction

*French, S. (2009). Risk: Mastering time and space. In N. J. Clifford, S. L. Holloway, S. P. Rice & G. Valentine


*Tobin, G. A. and Montz, B. (2009). Risk: Geophysical processes in natural hazards. In N. J. Clifford, S. L.


Risk and hazard in geography Bulkeley, H. (2001). Governing climate change: the politics of risk society?. Transactions of the Institute of

British Geographers, 26(4), 430-447. Zerger, A., & Smith, D. I. (2003). Impediments to using GIS for real-time disaster decision

support. Computers, environment and urban systems, 27(2), 123-141. Lane, S. N., Odoni, N., Landström, C., Whatmore, S. J., Ward, N., & Bradley, S. (2011). Doing flood risk

science differently: an experiment in radical scientific method. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 36(1), 15-36.

Frank, E., Eakin, H., & López-Carr, D. (2011). Social identity, perception and motivation in adaptation to climate risk in the coffee sector of Chiapas, Mexico. Global environmental change, 21(1), 66-76.


14) Relevance in geography – Dec 7 Introduction

*Bell, D. (2009). Relevance: Human geography, public policy and public geographies. In N. J. Clifford, S. L.


*Church, M. (2009). Relevance: The application of physical geographical knowledge. In N. J. Clifford, S. L.


Reflections on relevance in human and physical geography Harvey, D. (1974) What kind of geography for what kind of public policy? Transactions of the Institute of

British Geographers, 63:18-24. Massey, D. (2001) Geography on the agenda. Progress in Human Geography, 25:5-17. Dorling, D. and Shaw, M. (2002) Geographies of the agenda: Public policy, the discipline and its (re) ‘turns.’

Progress in Human Geography, 26: 629-646. Massey, D. (2002) Geography, policy, and politics: A response to Dorling and Shaw. Progress in Human

Geography, 26: 645-646. Staeheli, L. and Mitchell, D. (2005) The complex politics of relevance in geography. Annals of the

Association of Human Geographers, 95: 357-372. Moser, S. C. (2010). Now more than ever: the need for more societally relevant research on vulnerability

and adaptation to climate change. Applied Geography, 30(4), 464-474.

15) Wrap-up – Dec 14 TBD

contemporary geographic approaches geography 870 · geography 870 fall 2016 contemporary geographic...

Documents