An insight into economic geography

Economic Geography is concerned with the distribution of commodities. In recent decades, this branch of geography has received criticism from geographers such as Peter Dickens for being too pluralist in nature and thus ineffective at resolving specific concerns. It has been argued that geography as a discipline struggles to find its ‘scholarly niche’, and that there appears to be a trade-off between pluralism and engagement in issues. However, the reverse side of the argument, which has engaged the concept of behavioural economic geography, is that geography serves as a provider of context; this is apparent, arguably, in economic geography, particularly with the example of pensions in the UK. In this article, I shall discuss whether economic geography’s pluralist nature is a good thing or not, and whether geography holds as a discipline in its own right.

When Peter Dickens wrote the well-known book “Global Shift”, discussing globalization, he deliberately omitted from the cover the word “geography”. This was not unintentional, and in fact Dickens admitted to the fact that “most people would not have taken such a book written by a ‘mere geographer’ very seriously”. Why is this, and is there any point in continuing my writing now that you know I, too, am a ‘mere geographer’? The argument put forward by many economic geographers is that economic geography’s increasing use of theoretical and methodological approaches is contributing to a lack of engagement with the ‘real world’. An example of this is the debate about concepts of globalization. Dickens declares that the development of a ‘global community’ has contributed to a more diverse discussion, but less agreement. We are unable to reach a topical core that unites us as this so-called ‘global community’, and economic geography’s non-centered perception of the world is not helping in this. There was, for example, a distinct lack of consensus in economic geographers’ reactions to the Financial Crisis. A criticism cited of geography as a discipline is the inevitable time-lag of its presentation of findings. Geographers’ commitments to both collect primary data and assess a wide range of theoretical concepts leads to delays – many papers, for example, take between twelve and twenty four months to be published. A paper that first explored the recession’s impact on DC pension funds began in 2008, but was not published until 2011! It is therefore argued that the geographical process of investigation is flawed, both in its method and its aims, as delays in submission and attempts to contextualize even freak exogenous events lead to a superficial understanding.

However, others argue, including Tversky and Kahneman, that economic geography and geography as whole has an ability to use its specific case studies to develop a broader understanding, without losing sight of its diffuse aims. For example, Latin America was less affected than Europe and the US by the Financial Crisis. Why was this? The reason was its ability to rely on non-centered commodity maritime shipping networks, thus mitigating against any domestic falls in demand. This concept, arguably, can only be appreciated by a discipline that both contextualizes and explores the reasons behind such spatial differentiation. Institutions today are no longer isolated, but exist as widely dispersed nodes within a wider network. Therefore, Dicken’s point about globalization leading to confusion may be true initially, but it is undeniably a useful tool for appreciating ideas of this nature. Furthermore, economic geography’s concern with space and place quickly widens the framework for analysis, for example with pension decisions in the UK. Behavioral economic geography seeks to appreciate social and spatial context in savings decision-making, and moves beyond the assumption that each agent is rational and seeks utility maximization all the time (Rational Choice Theory). Family influences, imitation and even morality can alter the decisions of those contributing to pensions, away from that which may be more rational. Geography in general appreciates how socially and culturally agents are embedded, and this allows a deeper analysis of economic decision-making. Contextual factors such as these can not easily be analyzed quantitatively, and thus geography’s appreciation of it may move it beyond those other disciplines which rely on empirical testing for thesis formulation.

In conclusion, economic geography’s appreciation of a need to widen analysis on economic discourse is a good thing. This is because it moves our understanding beyond economic assumptions of rationality, and provides social and cultural context.