lnu.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Meaningful yet useless? Factors behind the retention of questionable concepts in human geography
University of Gothenburg, Sweden.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-6936-342X
University of Surrey, UK.
2018 (English)In: Geografiska Annaler. Series B, Human Geography, ISSN 0435-3684, E-ISSN 1468-0467, Vol. 100, no 3, p. 195-219Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Sustainable development
SDG 4: Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all
Abstract [en]

The concepts ‘rural’ and ‘urban’ have long been criticized by geographers for their lack of analytical and explanatory power, yet have remained a vital source for conceptual guidance in human geography. Realizing that the continued use of questionable concepts inadvertently runs the risk of compromising communication, misdirecting resources and downgrading social theory, the current status of ‘rural/urban’ creates a paradoxical epiphenomenon of progress-making in geography. We disentangle this paradox in two dimensions. Firstly, we show how a conflation between meaning and utility is what renders us desensitized to the problem. Secondly, we outline twelve extra-scientific factors likely to actuate the binary’s persistent retention. We finally sketch a sensuous template set out to minimize its undesired impact. We concede that the confusion surrounding ‘rural/urban’ in human geography cannot be understood unless the influence of extra-scientific factors is fully taken into account, revealing the concepts’ vestigiality. This, we argue, is the only way forward if we truly want to embrace the rationale of the scientific approach. The principal contribution of our paper is laying the groundwork for this particularly underresearched dimension of ‘rural/urban’ amidst an exceptionally rich conceptual literature on what ‘rural/urban’ are or mean.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Taylor & Francis, 2018. Vol. 100, no 3, p. 195-219
Keywords [en]
rural, urban, concept retention, knowledge production, extra-scientific factors, geographers
National Category
Human Geography
Research subject
Humanities, Human Geography
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-108620DOI: 10.1080/04353684.2017.1419071OAI: oai:DiVA.org:lnu-108620DiVA, id: diva2:1620492
Available from: 2021-12-16 Created: 2021-12-16 Last updated: 2024-04-23Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full text

Authority records

Dymitrow, Mirek

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Dymitrow, Mirek
In the same journal
Geografiska Annaler. Series B, Human Geography
Human Geography

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 20 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf