Perspectives in Human Geography-1

Geography With Sandeep Sir
Perspectives in Human Geography
Evolution of geographical thought in India

India is the home of one of the earliest civilizations; it has been observed by
number of scholars that in India geographical studies date back to those times. The
contributions of Indian scholars by no means are less than that of Greeks, Romans and
Chinese. In Hindi geography is called “Bhugol”, where ‘bhu’ means ‘earth’ and ‘gol’ means
‘round’ that is study of round earth. The word Bhugol is derived from two Sanskrit words. It
means that from ancient times Indian scholars considered earth to be round; a notion contrary
to the other ancient civilizations which considered earth as a flat disc. This becomes evident
when one dwells upon the fact that many scholars of that time had expertise in various
disciplines relate to earth. The below table provides the information on different disciplines
which were popular among these ancient scholars.
The Earliest Known Indian Scholars and Their Field of Interest
Name Field
Acharya Kapil (3000 BC) Cosmology
Acharya Bharadwaj (800 BC) Aviation technology
Baudhāyana, (800 BC) Mathematics
Acharya Charak (600 BC) Medicine
Acharya Kanad (600 BC) Physics (Atomic Theory)
Acharya Sushrut (600 BC) Medicine (Surgery)
Gautama Buddha (563 to 483 BC) Philosophy
Pānini (400BC) Grammar
Nagarjuna (100 AD) Chemistry
Âryabhatta I (476–550 AD) Mathematics & Astronomy
Varahamihir (499-587 AD) Astrology & Astronomy
Brahamgupta (598-668) Mathematics & Astronomy
Bhāskara I (600 - 680) Mathematics & Astronomy
AdiShankara (788 AD - 820 AD) Philosophy
Aryabhata II (about 920) Mathematics & Astronomy
Sridharacharya (AD 991) Mathematics
Brahmadeva (1060- 1130) Mathematics & Astronomy
Bhaskaracharya (1114-1183 AD) Algebra
1
The above table clearly shows that the ancient scholars in India made
significant contributions to the discipline of geography through their works in philosophy,
cosmology, astrology, mathematics, medicine and linguistics. These works have largely
benefited the branches of regional geography, physical geography, climatology and practical
geography. Example can be cited of works of Aryabhatta; what Copernicus and Galileo
suggested nearly 1500 years ago was originally propounded by him.
As during those times the means of communication were poor, the scholars
had limited knowledge about the earth. In spite of that some description is available on the
various regions of the world; these regions were known as the dwipas. Seven dwipas have
been mentioned in the Puranas. These are Jambu Dwipa, Krauncha Dwipa, Kusha Dwipa,
Plaksha Dwipa, Pushkara Dwipa, Shaka Dwipa and Shalmali Dwipa. Jambu dwipa formed
the centre of Geography as a discipline was not developed at a formal level during ancient
times; the earliest mention of geography is made in the 8th century Puranic text – Bhagwat
Purana.
During the medieval period the geographical boundaries of the known world
extended for Indians. They migrated to lands like Cambodia and even set up trade links with
china on one end to Greece on the other. The most significant feature of this period was that
the Indians came into contact with the Arabs. The influence became more prominent
when the Muslims established their empire in India. One of the most important writings
of this time is Al-Beruni’s Tarikh – i – Hind where he describes the geography of India.
Other scholars of this period include Al-Beruni, Ibn-Batuta and Abul Fazl. The
contribution came through ‘Kitab ‘l Hind’ of Al-Beruni;’s Travels in India and China, a
travelogue of Ibn Batuta; and ‘Ain-i - Akbari’ the third volume of Akbarnama, of Abul
fazl-i-Allavi.
To promote their knowledge of the territories and the resources the Britishers
set up a number of Surveys like the Survey of India followed by Geological, Zoological,
Botanical, Linguistic, Archaeological and Anthropological Surveys. Further, the gazetteers,
the reports of the Geological, Archaeological as well as Anthropological survey of India, the
Census data and reports, and statistical reports were produced periodically. The climatic data
from the Indian meteorological department of Government of India was also published at
regular intervals and therefore became a reliable source of geographical information.
At the end of the British period, the discipline of geography was still in its pre-
embryonic stage as Indian scholars were not interested in this field; the possible reason may
be lack of professionalism of the discipline vis-a-vis the continued relevance of geology in
the earth studies.
The progress of geography as an independent discipline in India can be best

understood through its development in a series of sequential phases as suggested by Rana
(2013). These phases are:
1. The Formative Stage: Pre-1950s;

2. The Informative Stage: The 1950s;
2
3. The Confirmative Stage: The 1960s; and

4. The Reformative Stage: Since 1971.
The Formative Stage: Pre-1950s
There is no wonder that the first generation of the Indian geographers were
those who were trained in other related disciplines. They chose geography only as their
professional career; among these who left their marks on the history of geography in India are
H.L. Chhibber, S.P. Chatterjee, R.N.Dubey, M.B. Pithawalla, G. Kuriyan, K.S. Ahmad, S.M.
Ali, N.K. Bose and C.D. Deshpande. Their wide-ranging research interests covered the
various branches of geography but their methodology was similar – the descriptive
ideographic way to describe and interpret the heterogeneity and unevenness that prevailed
over the earth surface. The geographical associations and societies founded during the
colonial period played a vital role in disseminating geographical knowledge and promoting
geographical research.
The Informative Stage: The 1950s
The second phase immediately after Independence gave geography a national

base, though it followed the prototype framework as followed during the preceding stage.
The torch bearers in this stage were O.H.K Spate and D.L Stamp. The monumental work of
Spate India and Pakistan (1952) laid strong foundations for the discipline. Apart from this
the work of R.L.Singh Banaras: An Urban Geography (1955) brought urban geography in
the forefront. In this phase the year 1956 holds a significant place as several goals were
achieved. The National Atlas and Thematic Organisation (NATMO) was established in 1956
under the leadership of S.P.Chatterjee. The National Atlas Organisation was also set up,
which gave impetus to the growth and development of geographical teaching and research at
universities.
The Confirmative Stage: The 1960s
The most important event of this stage was the 21st International Geographical
Congress held in New Delhi in 1968 under the presidentship of Prof. S.P. Chatterjee. Apart
from these now nearly 36 universities started offering geography as a postgraduate subject.
Number of societies and associations also increased and this time they came up with
academic journals also. Several branches of geography came up; important being Economic
geography, Human geography, Physical geography, Regionalisation and regional planning,
Cartography, Geographical thought and Historical geography.
The Reformative Stage: Since 1971
In 1972, the Indian Council of Social Science Research (ICSSR), New Delhi
came up with a project report with a title “Survey of research in Geography”; and stated that
eight branches of geography have reached their development. These are – economic
geography; geography and planning; human geography; historical geography; political
geography; regional geography, methodological review and research methods. This report
identified the salient features of the Indian geography as:
3
 Concern with regards to the problems of planning and development

 Inter-mingling with other sister disciplines
 Adopting quantitative methods in geography
 Lack of generalization
 Application of western models on Indian geographical studies.
This shows that the Indian geography since independence has moved much
ahead as rather being dependent on Anglo-American geography it is moving in different
directions without the baggage of dualisms and dichotomies. By 2000, there were as many as
50 societies and associations and they are playing pivotal role in disseminating and
promoting geographical studies and research throughout the country.
To conclude it can be said in India lacks the tendency of developing

indigenous models and methodologies and are dependent on the western world geography in
India has come a long way. After independence it has established itself as an independent
field and made its place among the science dealing with the reality through its contribution to
development and regional planning.
Determinism in Geography
The relationship between man and environment has been of increasing interest
to geographers throughout its history. One can say that the idea of geography as the study of
man-environment relationship has a long history and has led to a long-standing debate about
the position of man in relation to nature. In the history of geographical thinking, human –
nature dialogue has been studied and analyzed from a number of different perspectives and
views. The first amongst these approaches to deliberate on the human-nature relationship was
determinism. In the words of Platt (1948) determinism, refers to the idea that everything in
human life is caused inevitably by previous events or conditions.
Determinism is one of the most important philosophies, which continued in

one form or other till World War II. In the context of this paradigm, it is believed that due to
the difference in the natural environment, the variations in human behaviour in different parts
of the world can be described. The spirit of deterministic ideology is that the level of
development of history, culture, lifestyle and social group or nation is solely governed by the
physical components of the environment at any scale.
Determinists generally consider humans as a passive agent on whom physical

factors are working continuously and thus determine their approach and decision-making
process. In short, the determinists believe that most human activities can be explained as a
response to the natural environment.
In the discipline of geography, the paradigm of environmentalism had stirred

considerable debate in the emerging field of geography. In this discipline, the terms
‘environmentalism’ and ‘determinism’ have often been used as synonyms with the simple
definition that the natural environment is responsible for all human actions.
4
In the context of the effect of natural conditions, the first attempt was made by
Greek and Roman scholars explaining the physical characteristics and character traits of
different people and their culture. At that time this effort was not contained only among
geographers rather included scholars from different fields like the doctor Hippocrates,
philosopher Aristotle, and Historians Thucydides, Polybius, and Herodotus. In the Greco-
Roman era, regional studies were closely tied with the study of history; Thucydides and
Polybius saw Athens's natural conditions and geographical position as factors for its
greatness. For example, Aristotle explained the difference between Northern Europe and
Asian people in the context of climate causes, while explaining the greatness and greatness of
Rome, while mentioning similar incidents of Strabo.
Strabo argued that the cold weather in Europe was the reason for their bravery.
Aristotle thought that people living in hot weather in Asia were wise but there was a lack of
soul and therefore time to time subjected to slavery. Because humans often consider their
home as the best place, it is not surprising that Aristotle believed that the best combination of
all possible worlds was in the centre of space, Greece (Glacon, 1967). Aristotle strongly
advocated the progress of some countries is the result of their favorable environmental
conditions.
In the Middle Ages, Montesquieu explained that in cold weather people are
less physically strong, more courageous, clear, less susceptible and less cunning than those in
hot weather. He quotes that people in hot weather are terrible, weak in body, dull and
inactive.
Deterministic approach dominated the writings of Arab scholars. They divided the
world into seven terrestrial zones on the basis of climate and highlighted the physical and
cultural characteristics of the castes and castes of these regions. Al-Baruni, Al-Masudi,
IbnHawkal, Al-Idrisi and Ibn Khaldun attempted to correlate the environment with human
activities and living conditions within the conceptual domain of determinism.
In the eighteenth century, historian George Tatham, also explained the

differences among the people, in relation to the differences between the countries in which
they lived. Kant was also a determinant who had said that people of New-Holland (East
Indies) kept half-closed eyes and till they did not touch their back, they would not see their
head at any distance without bending. Thomas Malthus was a scientific determinant (1766-
1834) he not only emphasized the effect of different environments but also emphasized the
boundaries that were imposed on social milieu because of these different environments.
Deterministic reasoning continued in the 19th century when geography itself

was related to other sciences. Carl Ritter, a German geographer adopted an anti-human
approach and laid the philosophical base of determinism in geography. Ritter tried to
make a difference in the physical constitution of the body, body, and health of men
living in the different physical environment. Many geographers of their school had
declared that their main task was to identify the influence of physical cultural geographical
conditions and the political fortunes of residents of any area in both East and present.
Alexander von Humboldt, one of the founders of 'Modern Geography' and a contemporary
5
of Ritter, also said that the life of the residents of a hill country is different from those in the
plains.
At the end of the 20th century, in American geography, the prevalent view that
well fitted into the intellectual environment was the doctrine of determinism. Most of these
were influenced by Darwin's ideas which were further developed by William Morris Davis
during the cycle of erosion model. The primary concern was with documenting the control or
influence of the environment on human society.
Friedrich Ratzel, the founder of 'new' determinism, supplemented the

'classical' geographical determinism with the elements of 'Social Darwinism' and developed
the state's theory as an organism. He believed in the existence of a qualification and saw the
'man' as the end product of development - a development which was natural selection of type
according to the ability to adjust itself to the physical environment of the environment. He
along with his disciple Ellen Churchill Semple became the most vocal expression of the
deterministic approach in geography.
Semple in her book Influences of Geographical Environment (1911) writes:

Man is a product of the surface of the Earth; this book had a widespread, long-lasting use in
geographic education. She dominated the environmentalist period of the discipline in the
early twentieth century (Hartshorne 1939) and "trained a large proportion of those who
became leaders of the profession during the period between the two World Wars" . Her
essential scientific position was as follows: ‘in every problem of history, there are two main
factors, variously stated as heredity and environment, man and his geographic conditions,
the internal forces of race and the external forces of habitat. Now the geographic element
in the long history of human development has been operating strongly and operating
persistently. Herein lies it's importance. It is a stable force. It never sleeps. This natural
environment, this physical basis of history, is for all intents and purposes immutable in
comparison with the other factor in the problem-shifting, plastic, progressive, retrogressive
man’ (Semple 1911).
She further elaborates that man was a passive subject who bears direct
environmental influence at early stages of development. As they became more active, the
indirect influences that mold’s his mind and character through the medium of his economic
and social life became more important. Through her writings, she explained national
superiority in the new terms of natural "science," by providing an environmental version of
"scientific racism".
The doctrine was further established by Ellsworth Huntington and Griffith

Taylor. Huntington in his book 'The Principles of Human Geography' (1945) and articles on
climate and civilization demonstrated man’s preference for ethnic-type structures and
environmentalist explanations. However, he repeatedly repeated the importance of a genetic
constitution and threw his weight behind various genetic enterprises. He took the most
decisive step since the time of Hippocrates and decided to make some results in the thinking
of environmental causes.
6
Taylor (1880-1963) was more cautious in relating man and environment. He

believed that the environment has set the limits of human development. Their determinism
was compared to the traffic control system, which set the rate, but did not give the direction
of progress, which came to be known as Neo-determinism or Stop and Go Determinism. He
states that man is able to speed, slow or stop the speed of any country's (regional)
development. But he should not be, if he is intelligent, departing from the instructions
according to the natural environment. He (man) is like a traffic controller in a big city, which
changes the rate but does not give the direction of progress.
Criticisms
After World War II, this philosophy was vehemently criticized in the United
States, UK, Canada and many other countries. Geographers observed that this approach
exaggerated the active role of nature while interpreting human history. The determinists only
consider humans capable of being adapted but man's efforts reveal many facts which the
forces of the environment cannot explain.
Barrows (1923) initiated a meek criticism from within the environmentalist

paradigm where he argues that the relations between man and environment should be seen
from the standpoint of human adjustment as this was "more likely to result in the recognition
and proper valuation of all the factors involved, and especially to minimize the danger of
assigning to the environmental factors a determinative influence which they do not exert.
Sauer (1963) had a stronger reservation where he states that "natural law does
not apply to social groups"; instead what man did in an area involves the active agency of
culture that shapes of the landscape. Sauer's critique played the internal role in diminishing
the place of determinism as the hegemonic theory of geography and initiated redefinition as a
"social science, concerned with areal differentiation.
In the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s geography drifted towards a regional

perspective as determinism was being critiqued without being effectively replaced.
Determinism was redefined, refined, reviewed, and redirected, but never completely
dislodged.
The alternatives to determinism were less than satisfactory. Though there were
potential replacements for determinism in the form of environmentalism, possibilism,
probabilism, cultural ecology, and chorology. Among these, the most prominent were
possibilism and probabilism, each of which presumed that humans were free agents who
made choices from the innumerable factors available in the environment.
7
Possibilism in Geography
Determinism and possibilism are the two mutually elite philosophies in
geography which are centered on a man and his place in nature. Both these doctrines try to
place man within the ambit of the environment and deliberate on the issue whether a man
should be looked upon as a ‘passive’ agent or an ‘active force’ while interacting with the
environment. In this process, he not only adapts to the environment but also brings changes
within it.
The deterministic point of view states that human activities are controlled by
the environment. They propose that man is just a passive force in front of nature as nature
determines man’s activities and in no way, man is free to control his life. Possibilism, on the
other hand, argues that the relationship between man and nature is not so as human beings
have the capacity to choose between a range of possible responses to physical conditions.
Ratzel (1844-1904) propagated new determinism where he emphasized that

man holds a higher position than other organisms; still accepting that determinism is a
dominant force in explaining the man-environment relationship. In the second volume of
‘Anthropogeographie’, he analyzes socio-economic activities and culture of man in relation
to the physical environment. This concept at the later stage became an inspiration for Vidal
de la Blache.
Apart from determinism, scientific concepts like deductive approach,

Darwin’s theory of evolution, Newtonian cause and effect relationships in the latter half of
the ninetieth century and early twentieth century influenced a number of geographers in
France. This led to the foundation of the modern school in France (France School of
Geographical Thought) which had its roots in the philosophy of possibilism.
Vidal de la Blache, Gallois, Brunhes, Demangeon, Emmanuel De Martonne,

Blanchard, and all advocated the paradigm of possibilism. This philosophy is in direct
contrast to determinism and puts a man in the first place that is a man and no longer the earth
or climate influences man’s habitability. Thus, presents man as an active rather than the
passive agent.
The Rise of Possibilism
The doctrine of possibilism tries to explain the relationship of a human being

with the environment in a different way; it puts human at a higher level and regards it as an
active agent. It is a principle which claims that environment provides opportunities and man
being an economic man chooses from those possibilities.
Febvre (1932) in ‘A Geographical Introduction to History’ stated ‘there are

no necessities, but everywhere possibilities; and man as the master of these possibilities, is
the judge of their use’.
The roots of possibilism can be traced back to the works of Plato, who is
considered the master of deductive reasoning. Though his idea went into gloom for hundreds
of years; the contrasting doctrine of determinism continued to grow and flourished. It got
8
support in the writings of French scholar of the eighteenth century – Montesquieu, who is
credited with developing a doctrine analogous to modern paradigm of possibilism. He opined
that man possesses free will and has the ability to choose from a series of opportunities.
Similar thoughts were also put forward by another eighteenth-century French philosopher,
Comte de Buffon. He believed that man was ordered to conquer the earth and even transform
it. Their views laid the base for cryto-possibilistic hypothesis.
In the nineteenth century, George Perkins Marsh and Kirchoff made an

attempt to put forward a non-deterministic approach to human geography; they focused on
the man himself. It was only in the latter half of the nineteenth century that under the
leadership of Vidal De la Blache (1845 – 1918), a possibilistic view of man-environment
developed. The focus of this philosophy was “Nature has set boundaries and has provided
possibilities for human settlement, but the way a person responds to these conditions or
adjusts it depends on the traditional way of life." Vidal rejected the concept of material
determinism and advocated favourability. He even rejected Durkheim’s opinion of human
geography as social morphology rather insisted that man was a partner and not a slave of the
environment. He was critical of Darwinian Ratzelian heritage which proposed environmental
determinism and put forth the concept of possibilism. He sought a scheme for understanding
the interaction of nature and culture that eschewed both environmental determinism and
radical possibilism to seek answers or solution for the dichotomy between the human and the
environment.
He vehemently rejected the idea that society and nature stood out as
adversaries in the human-nature confrontation. For him, the man was part of nature and
therefore, its most active collaborator. To resolve this dichotomy he generated the concept of
‘genre de vie’. ‘Genre de Vie’ (way of life) includes all activities, practices, and techniques
that characterize the adaptation of a human group to the milieu – the natural surroundings of
their habitat. Vidal pointed out that the same genre de vie had different interpretations for
various human groups.
Possibilism was further flourished by acclaimed historian Lucien Febvre

(1878-1956). He puts forward - “Whatever the men do in their own environment, they cannot
completely get rid of themselves completely." Febvre emphasized human initiative and
motivation against the environment, destroying the environmental deterministic reasoning
and as part of the environment of any group, as well as other humans, because they belong to
the next group's cultural surroundings or the constraints of the environment are influenced by
such thinking. He stated that in the view of possibilists, a homogeneous region does not
necessarily result in a homogeneous society. This is because people residing in any area have
the choice of possibilities time to time and also in the quantity they want.
Bruhnes followed Blache’s ideas and took it to next step; he not only
transmitted Blache’s philosophy in France but also disseminated it to different parts of the
world. In 1910, his monumental work La Geographie de L'Histoire was published. His prime
focus was on the actualities of exploitation of the earth by man. Commented: "The power that
is meant is limited, and it meets in it the bounds of nature that it cannot cross human activity
9
can change within its boundaries and its environment. But it cannot be removed from its
environment, it can only modify it, but it can never cross it, and it will always be conditioned
by it. “He also stated that - "Nature is not compulsory but the approval."
Criticisms
Despite the fact that humans have many possibilities in some physical setting,
they cannot go against the instructions set by the physical environment. Many contemporary
thinkers have criticized the possibilistic approach. Griffith Taylor, criticizing the possibility,
said that the society should elect entirely, and since only one advisory role has been assigned
to geography, therefore their work is not "plan of explanatory nature". Taylor was fairly right
when he wrote that the work of geography is not the study of all the problems related to
natural environment and humans, human or 'cultural landscape'. Apart from this, the
possibilities do not encourage the study of the physical environment and promote humanism
in geography.
Probabilism in Geography
The concept of probability was put forward by the O H K. Spate (1957) is the
idea that the physical environment does not specifically determine human activities, yet it
gives some reaction to others. This word was proposed as a mid-route between Ratzel's
complete environmental determinism and a revolutionary prospect of Febvre, La Blache, and
Sauer. While the environmental determinants, influenced by the cause and effect of Darwin,
said that human activities are controlled by the physical environment, according to the
possibilities, the physical environment provides the opportunity for many possible human
reactions and enough conscience to choose people is among them.
According to Spate, "human action was not said in the case of all or some kind
of compulsion, but rather the balance of the possibilities". For example, there is a possibility
that the use of land in the Sutlej-Ganga field decreases intensity from market centers;
Population density decreases away from metropolitan centers in all directions; With the
settlement of the village, the crop yields less than a few walking distances. However, there
can be exceptions for each of these generalizations, and in many cases, there is a limit to the
boundaries that they keep right.
After this concept, probability theory is considered as an essential component

of geographic analysis because "a general mode of discussion" was provided for “the
scientific study of the scenario". This view, in fact, is completely consistent with the original
Vitalian concept. Geologists started using probability theory to determine human and
environmental relations and also carried scientific studies of the landscape.
The probability theory was criticized on many grounds. For example, a

complete knowledge about the environment cannot be available; The available data about
resources and their use cannot be reliable; The perception about resources (environment)
differs from humans to community, community to region, and country to country, prospective
10
model's application, due to these constraints, can be difficult and thus the results obtained
cannot be authentic Are close to the ground reality.
Cultural or Social Determinism in Geography

Cultural or social determinism emphasizes the human element: "Our thoughts
determine our actions, and our actions determine the nature of the world's last". Since there is
a difference in human interest, desires, prejudices and group values, therefore there is
a difference in the level of cultural landscape and socio-economic development. The
amendment of an environment depends on our perception, thoughts and decision-making
processes.
This philosophy made by American scholars can be explained in principle,

according to which "the significance of man's physical and biological features of his
residence is an act of man's own views, objectives, and technical skills". For example, a
country that is financed by a hunter's perspective can be poor for an agricultural person; The
importance of coal is not the same as those who cannot use it. All these truths are self-
evident. It is also true that as technology develops, the importance of the environment is not
reduced, but the change becomes more complex.
The philosophy of cultural determinism is quite broad among American

geographers. For example, Eduard Wellman wrote that "the environment is essentially
neutral; its role depends on the level of technology, the type of culture and the other
characteristics of the changing society". For example, mountain pass estimation, which is for
horses, automobiles, airplanes, will be different for them; Assessment of fertility of soil will
not be similar to the perspective of a Japanese farmer, on the other hand, or an Amazonian
Indian. Similar natural conditions can say different reactions on human part, and in similar
circumstances, different cultures can occur. George Carter is out of three fundamental factors
in human geography; he has given more emphasis on cultural forces and wrote that "staying
as a primary reason for changing the ideas ..., these are the ideas that determine the human
use of the physical world We do". He also said that human beings are the decisive factor.
After World War II, schools of social determinism became very popular in
Austria, Holland, and Sweden. Social geography relates to the spatial distribution of society.
This, however, is not able to gain a deeper understanding of social relations or landscape.
Social groups can be isolated in the context of ethnic, religious, professional and some other
characteristics, whereas social change is only mentioned, but seldom is associated with any
fundamental economic causes or society's class structure.
The study of the effect implemented by these groups on the scenario reduces
in the definition of purely external factors of the cultural landscape (deployment and
deployment of homes, land uses, type patterns etc.), which in the form of morphology and
Under the functional changes, boundaries of the same road are infinitely the use of such
'macroregional' research is usually used in the character. Motivated and cannot provide any
basis of scientific findings of real importance. Thus social or cultural determinism does not
adequately assess environmental factors, that is, the effect of the natural environment on
11
'cultural geographical differences'. Thus, social determinism is thus rigorous as the

environmental fatalism and therefore cannot be accepted in its raw form.
To sum up, the major debate among the geographical thinkers is whether
people are an active or passive agent in the man-nature relationships. The entire debate
revolves around two issues – Firstly, resource exploitation is inevitable for the survival of
human beings which means that he will take more and return less. Secondly, there is hope
that morality will win as human beings will vote for greater gains than meagre personal
benefits. The doctrine of sustainable development leads towards both these issues as it is
based on the theme that development means meeting the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of the future generations to meet their own needs (Report on World
Commission on Environment and Development, 1987)
Darwin’s Impact on Geography

It would not be wrong to say that Darwin was primarily concerned with the
mechanism of change or, as The Origin was subtitled, "the preservation of favoured races in
the struggle for life". This element that brings forward the concept of struggle was applied
particularly in human geography under the paradigm of determinism. This gave new impetus
to concepts of biological origin in geography (what Ritter was talking about) leading to the
development of ecology which brought new insights in some of the branches of geographical
thought.
Stoddart opines that Darwin’s impact can be best understood if one takes these
four themes into deliberations that undergo in the theoretical framework of geography. The
themes are:
1) the idea of change through time;
2) the idea of organization;
3) the idea of struggle and selection;
4) the randomness or chance character of variations in nature
Time and evolution:
The idea of defining geography in terms of man and environment relationship

developed on scientific lines in the latter part of the 19th century after the publication of The
Origin of Species (1859) by Charles Darwin. This seminal work gave a new direction to the
discipline of geography. The theory of evolution held that all living species have evolved
from pre-existing forms. His geological observations and theories had one thing in common:
the idea that things in nature change with time. Darwin’s theory of the transformation of
fringing reefs - barrier reefs – atolls over time by slow subsidence brought ‘cyclic” ideas in
geomorphology.
The one who got most influenced by Darwin was William Morris Davis who
took evolution as his inspiration in his idea of the geographical cycle. In his paper on the
12
development of landforms (1884) he refers to a “cycle of life", and explains this through birth,
youth, adolescence, maturity, old age, second childhood, infantile features and further
emphasizes on the analogy of an organism that undergoes a sequence of changes in its form
over a period of time. It was after 1900 that Davis started putting more emphasis on
orderliness and development through a time where he uses the term evolution. His work was
so popular that it brought a revolutionary change not only in the studies of landforms or
denudation chronology but an entire field of geomorphology.
When in 1899, Davis wrote his paper on Cycle of erosion, he singled out time
as the most important factor although he talks of three factors – structure, process and time.
The cyclic approach in geomorphology is based on the fact that there is a systematic
irreversible change of form through time. In Stoddart’s (1966) view, ‘what for Darwin was a
process became for Davis and others a history’.
Organization and Ecology:
The second major idea of Darwin that highly influenced Geography as a

discipline was the idea of inter-relationships between all the living things and its environment
be it physical or socio-cultural. This became the major theme in ecology.
In 1869, Haeckel used the term ‘ecology’ and thereafter the concept of human
ecology was used to study the relationship between man and his environment. Park (1936)
further elaborates on this concept when he discusses the scope of human ecology. For him,
human ecology explores the processes involved in maintaining the biotic balance; where man
interacts with his environment through his culture and developments and innovations in
technology.
The most influential work on this theme was that of H.H. Barrows who in his
Presidential address to the Association of American Geographers in 1923 described
“Geography as the science of human ecology”. He made it clear that Geography as a science
should focus on relationships existing between natural environments and the distribution and
activities of man.
Selection and Struggle:
Most of the writers in the pre-Darwinian period discussed the man-

environment relationship as a cause-effect relationship. They did not ponder into the
processes involved in this relationship.
Davis tried to incorporate this idea of causality into the definition of

geography itself. This notion was not accepted by many scholars as they were of opinion that
no science can be confined to the study of a specific relationship.
Fluere was deeply influenced by Darwinism and opined that the man-
environment relationship should be studied from the physiological point of view and while
delineating human regions; he applies Darwin’s ideas of natural selection through
13
environmental influence to human groups. Huntington too looked into this theme and applied
it to human population while studying it at the global level.
In geography, particularly, political geography, these ideas of struggle and

selection were used significantly. Ratzel (1896) applied this concept to his seven laws for the
growth of state which later developed as the concept of Lebensraum. He states that as plants
and animals struggle for their existence, a nation too, clash for their struggle to capture more
territory. The organic analogy derived by Ratzel along with the theme of struggle and
selection provided a strong model in analytical political geography which had scientific
justification in man’s political behaviour. Semple tried to omit the concept of organic analogy
in her writings but it seemed that she was still touched by it, as these themes penetrated in her
writings.
Kjellen (1942) in his work on states was highly influenced by Ratzelian ideas.
His Geopolitik is an example where he writes that states are biological manifestations not
only morally but also organically as they experience lust. He was also supportive of
Spencer’s writings which are visible in his Staten sam Lifsfarm (1944). The over-dependence
of political geography on the organic analogy, the ideas of struggle and Lebensraum brought
disgrace to this branch, especially in the 1930s.
Randomness and Chance:
Laplace laid the base of probability in natural sciences in the beginning of the
twentieth century. This was further strengthened by Quetelet and Buckle. In most of the
scientific studies of that time, the tilt was towards chance as is visible in the works of
Herapath, Clausius, Maxwell, Galton, Pearson, Fisher and Haldane. Then why all the
geographical interpretations were deterministic. Interestingly some part of the answer is with
Darwin only. The concept of chance was somewhat even ignored by Darwin as the word
‘random’ was hardly used by him in his writings. He virtually discarded the core theme of
randomness and concentrated on selection.
To sum up, Darwin contributed by making science more empirical and

inductive in nature; this dismisses the role of teleology also. The biggest contribution of
Darwinism in geography is in establishing man’s place in nature and at the same time making
a study of man a scientific learning.
Stoddart (1966) opined that Darwin himself made a clear-cut division between
the way evolution was affected by others and the course of evolution; geography as a
discipline ignored the former and embraced the latter. As a result, geography became highly
inclined in understanding history and progressive change only with relation to ‘evolution’.
Geographers in recent times, by and large, have not advocated this concept as they argue that
factors like transport conditions, population growth or even disease ecology may be
influenced by Darwinism but several other factors like geopolitics, cultural barriers are
inherently geographical with a significant geographical dimension.
14
Dualism and Dichotomy in Geography

The word ‘dualism’ simply connotes the state of being divided. For any
domain of knowledge therefore, it means two conceptually contrasted stances. Dualism
finally leads to ‘dichotomy’ which means the bifurcation of any subject into branches of
knowledge.
Some of the most conspicuous dualisms known to have existed in geography were:
 General (Systematic) Geography versus Regional Geography.

 Physical Geography versus Human Geography.
 Historical Geography versus Contemporary Geography.
Systematic Geography versus Regional Geography
The dichotomy between systematic and regional geography was essentially

rooted in another dualism that existed in the approaches to study geography. This dualism
was between the Idiographic or Inductive Approach and the Nomothetic or Deductive
Approach. The dichotomy between the two approaches may be explicated as—the
idiographic or empirical approach did not seek to develop laws but mainly focused on the
description of particular places in the context of their lands, seas or places and attempt to find
its relation with other places. The nomothetic or deductive approach on the other hand,
sought to establish laws and made general deductions based on those laws.
Dualism in geography was formally introduced in the 17th century which is

often described as the classical period of modern geography by the German geographer,
Bernhard Varenius. Varenius in his ‘Geographia Generalis’ partitioned geography into-
Special geography essentially concerned with the description of particular places on

the basis of direct observations. This branch of geography was assumed to have great
practical importance for governance and commerce.
General geography based on universally applicable mathematical or astronomical
laws.
Gradually, general geography evolved into systematic geography by

incorporating the methods of the systematics sciences, while special geography evolved into
regional geography. In simple words, the two may be expounded as----the study of the natural
vegetation of the world is a systematic approach while the study of a continent with respect to
its natural vegetation, landforms, climate etc. is a regional approach.
According to Carl Ritter, a contemporary of Humboldt, geography was concerned with
‘lokalverhaltnisse’ or local conditions which described a spatial unit on the basis of three
characteristics---
 topographical, concerned with the delineation of natural divisions on the earth’s
surface;
 formal, which dealt with the distribution and movement of such phenomena as water,
air etc. that constituted the bases of human life;
 material, which dealt with the distribution of biotic life, minerals etc.
15
Ritter provided the above purpose of geography in his famous ‘Erdkunde.’ It

was Ritter who introduced the inductive method in geography. He sought to develop a
regional geography for which he used ‘erdteile’ or continents as his units of study.
Richtofen differentiated between general or systematic geography as analytic

and regressive that was based on general concepts and, special or regional geography as
synthetic and descriptive dealing with the unique and peculiar.
Alfred Hettner distinguished between systematic geography as that which

was interested in formulating general laws and theories and, regional geography as concerned
with the study of peculiarities in which the generalisations were tested to improvise on the
existing theories.
The regional tradition was again revived by the French geographer Vidal de la
Blache. He introduced the concept of ‘pays’ or small local units as ideal units of study for the
geographers which could even be used to arrive at general conclusions.
The dichotomy between systematic and regional geography subsequently led

to the Hartshorne-Schaefer debate. While Hartshorne in his ‘Nature of Geography’
advocated that geography was regional in its essence and put forward his concept of areal
differentiation’, his views were refuted by Schaefer as ‘Hartshorian Orthodoxy’ who called
for a systematic scientific approach for geographical studies.
Physical Geography versus Human Geography
It was Varenius again as one of the first scholars to highlight on the

differences in the nature and content of physical and human geography. He himself however
was not much interested in the latter since human geography could not be subjected to
mathematical laws to generate universal principles. He believed that the methods of the
natural sciences could be successfully used to draw conclusions about natural phenomena
with precision to a considerable extent. But they could not be applied to human groups
because they were more subject to probability than certainty.
According to Kant, physical geography not only included the features visible
on the earth’s surface created by natural processes but also by human actions. Kant opined
that physical geography was the first part of knowledge of the world and was essential to
develop the basic understanding of the earth as the abode of humans and for furthering
philosophical studies.
After Kant, it was Humboldt who stressed upon the study of physical
geography. Since he believed in the ‘unity of nature,’ in his opinion, physical geography was
the study of phenomena arranged on the earth’s surface and mutually related to each other
that constituted the ‘natural whole.’ Humboldt was of the view that differences in the
economic, social and political conditions of different spatial units were largely a function of
differences in natural conditions. Thus, according to him, human factors were subordinate to
the natural factors. On the contrary, by upholding the teleological view that sought to provide
a philosophical interpretation for geographical phenomena, Ritter’s view of geography was
anthropocentric in nature. Ritter conceived the earth as created by God with a ‘purpose’ to
educate humans and facilitate in their development. Ritter’s anthropocentric geography stated
that the way natural phenomena of any spatial unit affected its inhabitants, the inhabitants
could also have an influence on the land.
16
Under the impact of Darwinian ideas, geographers focused more and more on
physical geography. In 1848, Mary Somerville authored her ‘Physical Geography’ and in
1877, Thomas Henry Huxley authored ‘Physiography’ as the study of nature. In the second
half of the 19th century, more and more geographers were inclined towards physical
geography. It is believed that Hettner accorded greater importance to the physical
environment in comparison to cultural environment. German geographer, Albrecht Penck
coined the term ‘geomorphology’ as the study of landforms and established it as a distinctive
sub-field of physical geography. It was Penck who formulated the principles of ‘landform
evolution.’ He also highlighted on the importance of relief maps in the systematic study of
geographical elements. Subsequently, American geographer William Morris Davis also put
forward his ‘normal cycle of erosion.’ There were other scholars like Koppen, Martonne,
Mill, and Dokuchaiev who put greater emphasis on landforms or climate as the major focus
of geography. Semple went forward to explain humans as ‘product of the earth’s surface.’
Mackinder, Chisholm, Herberton and Huntington----all of them recognized physical
geography as the core of the discipline of geography. Over the years, several sub-fields of
physical geography have evolved like geomorphology, climatology, oceanography, pedology,
biogeography and environmental geography.
The human element in geography was formally introduced in the work of

Ratzel which actually gave rise to the dichotomy between physical and human geography.
Ratzel in his ‘Anthropogeographie’ described geography as the study of humans in the
context of different races. But, Ratzel too was influenced by the Darwinian views and
incorporated two major Darwinian tenets in his works----- (i) struggle and natural selection
and (ii) association and organization. He used these themes in drawing an analogy between
the political units and living organisms and thus came to be known as the father of political
geography. However, it was the French geographer, Vidal de la Blache who may be
regarded as the founding father of modern human geography. However, Blache was of the
opinion that human geography was a natural science. He adopted an inductive and historical
approach in putting forth his propositions of human geography. His ‘Principles de
Geographie Humaine’, had several parts each devoted to several aspects of human
geography. The introductory part analysed the principle of terrestrial
unity as well as the concept of cultural milieu. Part first focused on population clusters and
density. The second part was a description of man-milieu relationship. The third part dealt
with transport and communication which was completed later by Martonne who also added
the components of human races, diffusion of innovation and cultural regions in it. The
Vidalienne tradition was carried forward by his ardent follower Jean Brunhes who
propagated Blache’s views of human geography not only within France but in other parts of
the world as well.
French historian Lucien Febvre was also inspired by the Vidalienne human
geography. He put forward that humankind emerged as a powerful agent of modifying the
earth’s surface through centuries of their accumulated labour and decision-making. American
geographer Isaiah Bowman also championed the cause of human approach in geography. In
1924, American geographer Carl O. Sauer propounded his ‘landscape paradigm’ in which
he highlighted on humans as agent of ‘fashioning’ the natural landscape.
The dichotomy that existed between two prominent philosophies of geography

namely, environmental determinism and possibilism could be attributed to the dualism
between physical and human geography.
17
Historical Geography versus Contemporary Geography
That all history should be treated geographically and all geography historically
was asserted by the Greek scholar Herodotus. Thereafter, Immanuel Kant opined that since
any individual’s experience was restricted to a specific time and space, his knowledge had to
be supplemented with the experiences of others. Such knowledge derived indirectly from
others could be divided into two types—(i) narrative or, (ii) descriptive. While history was
narrative, geography was descriptive. Thus, history and geography made up the entire gamut
of empirical knowledge—the former that of time and the latter that of space.
Therefore, the importance of historical approach to geographical studies was

acknowledged. The dichotomy between historical and contemporary geography also came to
be regarded as an important dualism in geography. Historical geography dealt with the
geographical description of any spatial unit as it had been in the past. The work of S. M. Ali,
‘The Geography of the Puranas’ in which he endeavoured to provide a geographical account
of ancient India, could be considered as a remarkable work in this field. The contributions of
the American geographer, Ralph Brown in the field of historical geography was also of great
prominence.
The scope and content of historical geography were centred on the following themes:
 The Geographical Factor in History: In the latter part of the 19th century historical
geography was conceived to be associated with the study of the mutual relations of
phenomena over space in a particular period of time or, to study the impact of
geographical phenomena in shaping the history of a region. Whittlesey emphasized
on the study of historical factors in geography as it was thought to provide a spatio-
temporal framework to study any spatial unit.
 Changing Cultural Landscape: Historical geography was also considered to be the
study of the cultural landscape as it existed in the past in any area such as, the
settlement or the cropping patterns, house types etc.
 Reconstruction of Past Geographies: This was an important aspect of historical
geography. Since it embraced all fields of geographical knowledge, reconstruction of
past geographies was essential for contemporary geographers as it enabled them to
interpret the geographical phenomena of any spatial unit in present times in a more
comprehensive manner.
 Geographical Changes through Time: The concept of space had always been a
central focus in geography. Geographical phenomena over space, whether natural or
cultural changed with time which in turn, changed the character of space. The study of
these geographical changes with time was of utmost importance to the geographers.
Contemporary geography on the other hand included all the geographical

knowledge of modern times. In fact, contemporary geography had also witnessed the
emergence of the modern and post-modern era with a constant revamping of approaches and
methodologies in the geographical discipline. However, historical geography could not be
treated as a conventional field of geography as of contemporary geography.
Dualisms in Geography---Myth or Reality
It is a fact that methodological differences had given rise to several dualisms

in geography but the question that arises is that, whether the dichotomies that resulted from
18
such dualisms had produced exclusive fields of knowledge or whether they are mutually
related and transcended into one another.
Varenius who actually introduced the tradition of dualism in geography, while

categorizing between general and special geography asserted that they were mutually
interdependent branches of geography. He stressed on the fact that special geography
provided the database based on which general geography could infer the general hypotheses
and laws. Humboldt recognized the interdependence of areal phenomena and opined that to
understand a whole comprised of multiple phenomena it was essential to have knowledge
about the constituents of that whole. Similarly, though Ritter adopted an inductive approach
he acknowledged the contributions of Humboldt’s systematic studies that enabled him to
undertake special studies of regions. It was Hettner who actually removed the dualism of the
idiographic and nomothetic approach in geography. He stated that geography could involve
both idiographic and nomothetic methods.
Both systematic and regional geographies could be regarded as the two

extreme points of a continuum that gradually merged into the other. In regional studies, the
concept of ‘compage’ was introduced by Derwent Whittlesey to explain that regional
geography was not a mere description of phenomena characteristic of any spatial unit but
studied the functional association that existed between human beings and their physical,
biotic and social environment. Therefore, through these arguments the dualism that is known
to have existed between systematic and regional geography seemed to have been blurred. The
general could be deciphered only through the particular which in turn, was not independent of
the general.
The dualism to follow was between physical and human geography. It was not
possible to study human phenomena independent of the natural landscape and natural
phenomena without their relation with humans. So the major thrust was on the relationship
between humans and environment that constituted the central thesis of geography. In physical
geography, while explaining the normal cycle of erosion or landform evolution analogy was
drawn with the lifecycle of humans, the concept of ‘pays’ in human geography involved
small ‘natural’ regions. Thus, physical and human geography instead of being in contrast
rather complemented each other which in turn faded away the dualism between physical and
human geography.
Finally regarding the dualism between historical and contemporary geography,

it may be stated that contemporary geography would become a part of historical geography
over time. To comprehend the present it was highly essential to know the past. Therefore,
historical geography provided a base for studying contemporary phenomena and how they
have evolved over time. Hence, Mackinder asserted that historical geography was basically
the study of the historical present. So, even in case of the dualism between historical and
contemporary geography it was evident that one eventually led to the other and hence, their
dualism also stood as illogical.
19
Geography as a Chorological Science and as a Science of Morphology of

Landscape
Chorology
Chorology in very simple words means the areal distribution of geographical

phenomena over a particular region on the surface of the earth. The interrelationship
(including causal) among the different phenomena spread over a specific and particular
region, present a maze of complicated design attached to that particular region. Study of areal
distribution of geographical phenomena is what we know as a regional approach in
geography. Chorology, as well as the areal differentiation, are essential and indispensable
components of Regional geography. Along with the Areal differentiation, a term coined and
popularized by Richard Hartshorne, chorology focuses on the variation in the distribution of
geographical phenomenon, attributes, and events in the space.
The phenomena occurring on the surface of the earth are variable in nature
creating distinct and unique areas/ regions though similar or homogenous within differing
from another significantly. The concept of areal differentiation or chorology gave birth to
‘Region , which could be defined as a unit on the surface of the earth or in the space of a
given area having homogeneity in one or more than one geographical attribute / events /
phenomena which are interrelated or are interwoven intrinsically within a boundary making it
unique in itself. A region is a manifestation of interdependence between man and nature
evolved gradually over a period of time in a given area. This relationship between man and
nature resulted in physical phenomena and Human features are interwoven indistinguishable
and recognizable yet unique interrelated phenomena and features.
The science of chorology in the writings of Hartshorne was subsumed by the concept of
Areal differentiation which is the underlying conceptual foundation of Regional geography.
Geography as a Science of Morphology of landscape
Landscape as the term is used to denote the unit concept of geography which
highlights the typically geographic association of facts, roughly equivalent to the region. The
landscape is the English equivalent of the German term largely and strictly having the same
meaning, a land shape, in which the process of shaping is by no means thought of as simply
physical. It may be defined, therefore, as an area made up of a distinct association of forms,
both physical and cultural.
The landscape is taken as having an organic quality, where it is identified on

the basis of recognizable make, bounds, and limits and having a generic relationship with
other landscapes, which is the part of the general system. The landscape is not merely a
scenic experience it is generic in nature having an individualistic identity and has relation
with other landscapes and it is true with forms that make it up. No two landscapes are quite
like each other.
Cultural landscape:
Cultural Landscape is a concrete and characteristic product of the complicated

interplay between a given human community, embodying certain cultural preferences and
potentials, and a particular set of natural circumstances. It is a heritage of many eras of
natural evolution and of many generations of human effort. Largely developed by the
20
Berkeley School of Thought, led by Carl o Sauer it signifies more precisely and specifically
humanized geographical content of the region/ space. It’s a geographical region (having a
complex interplay of phenomena) undergoing changes and modification by the man, member
of a cultural community.
The study of cultural landscape in a sense rejects the pervading influence of

environmental determinism, for it highlights and studies the differences among the
landscapes on the basis of changes and modification accrued to them because of human
agencies and not due to natural forces.
The study of cultural landscape serves some very significant complementary

purposes, which include the systematic description of the landforms, classification of types of
culture on regional basis, elaboration on the relationship enjoyed between nature and human
beings in general and human settlements in particular, role of Human agency in alteration and
modification of landscape particularly the natural landscape, enquiry into dynamics of social
and cultural groups in the space.
Landschaftskunde
It was Otto Schluter (1872-1952) of Germany who applied the term

‘Landschaftskunde’ (landscape science) to identify it with the Geography in 1906. Schluter
was of the view that geographer should look first at the things on the surface of the earth
that could be perceived through the senses and at the totality of such perceptions- the
landscape. He objected the heavy reliance upon geography as a chorological science instead
he argued for ‘landscape ‘ as the subject matter of geography, which he pointed out would
give geography a more logical identity and definition. He was also a proponent of regional
geography, however, his form of regional geography of the morphology of landscape. He
viewed that only visible and tangent spatial form (distribution of phenomena) on the surface
of the earth should only be considered as unifying theme of geography, whereas spatial
distribution of human or non-material characters, which cannot be physically verified or have
sense observable entities should be desisted from studying as an end in itself, however, they
could be incorporated as essential components while investigating the observable landscape.
The morphology of landscape is associated with ecological aspects of the landscape and it
takes into consideration the non-material human distribution like social, economic,
psychological etc conditions and characteristics only when they have relevance in the
understanding the landscape.
The concept of Location

Location denotes the geographical situation which may be a part of space or a
point or position in space where objects, organisms, fields or events may be found. For
geographical studies, the knowledge of location or situation is considered essential. The term
location and situation are generally used synonymously. ‘Location is a basic element of
spatial relationships and plays a significant role in the physical as well as cultural realms.
Location determines the interplay of climatic elements and influences the geographic
distribution of plants and animals. Location on the globe is a physical attribute which cannot
be altered by man.’ Among different concepts in geography, the concept of location is the
oldest one.
 Site: It means where the object is exactly located. For example, the site of
Kolkata city is the delta of Hooghly river.
21
 Situation: It means the location of an object in relation to others.
In general, there are two types of location: (1) Absolute Location and (2) Relative Location.
Absolute location:
It is known as a geometrical location which is presented on the map by latitude

and longitude. The latitudinal location of any place or area is of much significance. The
temperature tends to decrease with increasing distance northward or southward from the
equator. The latitude of a place determines the interplay of climatic elements and influence
the geographical distribution of plants, animals and human population and exercises a great
control on the economic, social and cultural spheres. The longitudinal location of a place has
not any significant influence on organisms or human life through the time (local or standard)
is determined on the basis of longitudinal location. Local time of a place increases eastward
and decreases westward from Prime Meridian or Greenwich Meridian (0o longitude) at the
rate of 4 minutes per degree longitude.
Relative location:
The relative location also called as the geographical situation. It is the location
of a point or place in relation to another point or place. The location determined by physical
or natural phenomena is also known as the natural situation. A natural situation or position of
a place or area may be related to continent, sea, ocean, mountain or hill, river etc. Natural
situation influences considerably human life and activities, and social, economic, political
and cultural conditions. Some examples of natural situations are the continental situation,
maritime situation, insular situation, peninsular situation, mountainous situation, foothill
situation, intermontane situation, coastal situation.
Importance of Location:
Location means the physical composition of an area. An area is differentiated from other
by its characteristics.
1. To know the exact location, we have to take help from latitude and longitude.
2. Establishment of the industry is determined by location, as it helps to know that in
which place it should be located that it got the maximum benefit.
3. Site and situation of any area are determined by location.
4. Location helps to find out the distribution of any object or resources. It also provides
us with other geographical information. For example, where the paddy cultivation is
high, there is the availability of fertile soil as well as high rainfall.
Concept of Space in Geography

Space is the boundless, three-dimensional extent in which objects and events
occur and have relative position and direction. It is no more than the collection of spatial
relations between objects in the world. Space is that which results from places taken together.
According to Harvey space is “a thing in itself”. The whole practice and philosophy of
geography depend upon the development of a conceptual framework for handling the
distribution of objects and events in space.
22
Characteristics of Space
1. It is physical and active.

2. It is existing and it is an orderly manner.
3. It is measurable and can be described.
4. It can be a point or line on a map.
Absolute Space: It is a container which holds all the earthly matters. For example village,
city, factory, forest, roads, and railways etc. Absolute conception of space in which space is a
distinct, physical and elementary real or empirical entity in itself.
Characteristics:
 It is physical, real which can be perceived through experience.

 The concept of absolute space associated with German Philosopher Immanuel Kant.
 Geographer divided the absolute space into small fragments and when these
fragments are divided unevenly then it is called an area, but when these fragments are
divided on a fixed parameter then it is a called as a region.
Relative Space: Relative concept of space in which space is merely a relation between
events, or aspects of events and thus bound to time and process.
Characteristics:
 It discusses the relationship of different events.

 Space cannot be judged only through absolute viewpoint. Space is depended on what
people see, what he thinks and in which way it can be used. It means relative space is
social space.
 It is of various types, like, social space, economic space and relational space.
Concept of Time
The concept of time is very important for understanding the phenomena over
the earth surface. In the last four decades, time geography has elaborated the conceptual and
methodological apparatus of geography. After the formulation of time concept in geography,
the society and life of humans have changed dramatically. The development and role of
information technology in the life of individuals have brought a change in the humans’
behaviour with time. The basic concept of time geography has been formulated when the
ITCs were at the beginning of their development. Originally time geography was developed
by human geographers but now it is applied in different fields like transportation, regional
planning, time-use research, anthropology, environmental science and public health.
The nature and behaviour of a human being are determined by time because each element of
the nature changing with time. The real development of time geography started after 1950’s.
GIS software such as Geo-Time has been developed to illustrate the geographic visualization
of time.
Time Model of Haggerstrand:
Swedish geographer Torstan Haggerstrand considered as the founder of time

geography in mid 1969s, based on his ideas of empirical research on human migration pattern
23
in Sweden. Haggerstrand was inspired by the concept of philosophy of physicalism. Every

living person has a life path. They deploy certain activities in a certain sequence. For
example, a person goes to his/her workplace on a specific time of the day, where they stay for
‘X’ hours of a day before they go home, do marketing, cooking, relaxing and then go to bed,
here we can see a clear pattern in the activities that every living person deploy.
Haggerstrand used following assumptions in his model of time geography:
 All physical entities have a limited life.

 Physical entities cannot be more than one place at the same time.
 Physical entities are limited to the task they can do.
 All task demands time.
 Movements use time.
 No more than two objects can occupy the same place and the same time and
 Every object or space has a biography.
Constraints
Haggerstrand noted that people were not completely free to form their paths. They had to
stick certain constraints. Therefore Haggerstrand describes three important constraints that
influence the paths of people in their life. These three constraints are:
1. Capability constraints: In the daily life of humans are committed to different things
like eating and sleeping to function well.
2. Coupling constraints: People are dependent on other persons and machine to
complete their activity. They are also dependent on the various possibilities within the
spaces. This is the result of human interactions.
3. Authority constraints: People are dependent on various laws and rules to fulfill their
activity.
New Applications of Time Geography: It appears that time geography is getting attention
from a wide range of fields (i) Public health (ii) Social network (iii) Transportation and
logistics (iv) Social justice (v) National security (vi) Location-based service (vii) Marketing,
etc.
Areal Differentiation
Areal Differentiation is the study of the distribution of phenomena both human
and physical and how they are causally related to other phenomena in proximity, in a
geographical region or area expressed in the space. The concept of areal differentiation,
which later on translated into a regional approach, is considered one among the three
significant approaches to understand or study the discipline of human geography. The other
two may be considered as Spatial Analysis and Landscape approach. Both, the spatial
analysis is also known as systematic science approach and morphology of landscape
approach were quite popular and claimed themselves to be the science of the study of
geography. An influential modern statement of geography as areal differentiation, drawing
from arguments of Hettner in particular, was made in Richard Hartshorne’s ‘The Nature of
Geography’ (1939). According to him the concept of areal differentiation in geography is
about showing how unique regions reveal the co-variance of phenomena that can only be
understood through identifying regions. A central concept of areal differentiation is that the
24
surface of the earth may be divided into regions, which may be distinguished and categorized
using various spatial criteria.
The areal differentiation, which is among the few significant classic

approaches to study Geography, traces its origin to the ancient period in the works of Strabo
to Ptolemy. The idea of variable characteristics of the surface of the earth found a more
pronounced expression in the works of Bernhard Varenius substantial work ‘Geography
Generalis’. Varenius is credited with the initiation of another debate/ dichotomy or
controversy in geography related to the approach or methodology of the subject. This debate
between Regional Geography and Systematic Geography continued for long and found new
advocates in Richard Hartshorne and Prof. Schaeffer for and against the regional approach,
respectively.
The chorological outlook of the geography which transformed into regional

approach found its strongest champion in the writings of Richard Hartshorne. The term is
used and popularised by Richard Hartshorne, who defined Geography as the science of the
study of Areal differentiation. He viewed that geography is concerned with the differences or
variations of different areas/ regions of the earth surface. According to Hartshorne, the
concept of areal differentiation entails three concepts; interrelations of different kinds of
phenomena, the variable characteristics of these phenomena and the complex they form, in
the different areas of the earth and last but not the least the areal manifestation or
expression of phenomena/complexes. Hartshorne is credited with the use, patronage, and
propagation of the concept of Areal differentiation, which appeared in his seminal work ‘the
Nature of Geography’.
Areal differentiation, in other words, is about establishing the degree of

sameness/homogeneity as well as differences between regions the exponents of the spatial
analysis/ systematic science accused him of seeing locations as unique and justifying a
traditional regional geography in which areal differentiation dominated geography at the
expense of areal integration.
The concept of areal differentiation argues that the surface of the earth can be
divided into various regions on the basis of spatial arrangements of the phenomena over a
piece of land. Demarcation of a geographical region is on the basis of unifying factor of
homogeneity in one or more than one geographical attribute or event or phenomena and
which is unique in itself. The division of earth surface into regions with an expression of
some degree of homogeneity in terms of spatial arrangements of phenomena within the given
boundary and which is distinct and unique from other such regions is the central idea of the
concept of areal differentiation.
The concept of areal differentiation interchangeably used with ‘chorology’ gradually

translated itself into the ‘Regional Approach’ in Geography whilst the systematic approach
seems to have evolved and graduated from the concept of spatial synthesis in general and
particularly from spatial organisation/integration.
Spatial Organisation:
The spatial organization is the study of geography expressed in the pattern and
process of the phenomena. It is to understand the form or nature and cause of the areal
differentiation or variation on the surface of the earth. American Science Congress 1965
defined geography as the study of ‘Pattern and Process’.
25
The concept of spatial organization talks about the spatial dimensions and
manifestations of phenomena. The process is the temporal aspect of the result of the certain
explicit expression. The face of the earth divided into various units/ regions/areas/ natural
landscape at times cultural and social landscape on the basis of areal differentiation, present a
spatial synthesis. Spatial synthesis here concerns the ‘complex whole made up of a number of
parts unified’.
The spatial synthesis of a whole comprises various distinct and unique regions
and the spatial processes include spatial arrangements, organization and spatial interaction of
the phenomena. The distribution of geographical attributes interrelationships and
interdependence among them and the resultant expression in the space thereof forms a region.
The spatial synthesis of space requires comprehending distinct individual geographical
regions (which have intra-regional homogeneity and inter-regional heterogeneity) in one
whole, the idea or the concept of spatial organization emphasizes the distribution and
arrangements of phenomena in the space.
So, the areal differentiation focuses on division of the surface of the earth in
the form of regions on the basis of sameness or homogeneity in terms of distribution of
phenomena the concept of spatial organization connects and observes differences of different
places in holistic and comprehensive perspective.
Regional Geography vs. Systematic Geography Idiographic vs. Nomothetic Deductive vs.
Inductive argument:
Geography as areal differentiation seeks to describe and interpret the variable

character of the distinct and unique regions sprinkled on the face of the earth. Phenomena
occur in association on the surface of the earth and exhibit a complex ensemble of the
interplay of causal relationships among them, making each location/ region or a specific area
on the surface of the earth unique simultaneously enjoying a great deal of sameness or
homogeneity within the boundary of the region.
A regional approach is interested in the creation of the division of earth

surface into unique areas /regions on the basis of the description of the areal distribution of
the phenomena with an ensemble of the complex interplay of the causal relationship among
the phenomena, spatially located within a boundary of a region. Regionalization or
demarcation of the region is dynamic in nature. Any number of regional divisions can be
made owing to the need and requirement of the academic inquiry, based upon the parameters
of Uniqueness, Homogeneity, and bounds and limits (boundary – to demarcate one region
from another.).
A regional approach in lieu of scientific laws seeks to:
1. Describe assemblage of phenomena with precision based on empirical and objective

observation.
2. Categories the phenomena into generic concepts
3. Interpretation of phenomena and their spatial pattern in a region on the basis of
analysis and spatial synthesis.
4. Arrange these findings in an orderly manner.
In other words, regional geography attempts to study ‘All about one’ and is
diagrammatically opposite to systematic approach which is for ‘One about all’.
26
Systematic geography, on the other hand, is organized in terms of particular

phenomena of general geographic significance, each of which is studied in terms of the
relations of its areal differentiation with the other. Systematic geography is similar to
systematic sciences, for it also explains description and generalization.
Systematic geography endeavoured to formulate laws on the basis of empirical

observation. Such generalization or laws formulated are sought to have universal applicability
in terms of significance to areal differentiation. In systematic geography, each particular
element or element complex that is geographically significant is studied in terms of its
relation to the total differentiation of areas, as it varies from place to place over the world or
any part of it. Systematic geography is concerned with the study of one or few aspects of
human or physical environment and analyses their varying performance over space, cutting
across the regions. Systematic geography, therefore, is concerned with ‘one about all’.
Systematic approach as spatial analysis grew in stature a fierce opponent of

areal differentiation or regional geography. The basic conceptual difference regarding the
way the geography as a subject needs to be studied. Regional approach riding high on the
waves of chorology and areal differentiation focused on the study earth’s variation at
different places in terms of regions. Whereas, the systematic approach advocated for more
holistic all-encompassing spatial organization approach, which subsumed in itself not only
the spatial interaction and integration but also the areal differentiation in its fold.
Laws and universal applicable generalization provide credibility and if

geography needs to come out of subjective and empiricism folds it has to frame laws to make
the discipline more objective and scientific. According to Schaefer ‘it is the spatial
arrangements of phenomena or features, and not the phenomena themselves, about
which geographer should make a law like statements.
Systematic geography staunchly believed in nomothetic approach whereas

Regional geography argued in favour of idiographic approach. The nomothetic is concerned
with the universal and general. Nomothetic approach states that geography should focus itself
on the formulation of scientific laws and should not confined only to the mere application of
such laws. On the other hand to the contrary to the nomothetic, idiographic approach is
concerned with the unique and the particular. Both the approach came into prominence after
the Hartshorne – Schaefer debate over exceptionalism, when traditional regional geography
was represented as essentially idiographic and incapable of contributing towards effective
generalization.
Richard Hartshorne and Prof. Schaeffer Debate
An economist turned geographer at Iowa University, Prof. Schaefer wrote a

paper entitled ‘Exceptionalism in Geography’ which was published posthumously in 1953.
The paper was largely seen as a strong opposition of regional approach doing rounds in the
contemporary geography. It soon became a rallying point for a young lot of geographers who
were feeling caged in the stagnant, myopic and sterile academic atmosphere of regional /
chorological paradigm. The publication of the paper was a breeze of fresh air.
Schaefer strongly criticized the ‘exceptionalist’ claim for regional geography,

which debilitated geography against making scientific laws. He advocated for the adoption of
philosophy and methodology of scientific positivism. He completely rejected the contention
that geography is incapable of formulating laws and generalized statements owing to its
27
intrinsic nature of uniqueness of the regions. The chorological paradigm championed by

Hartshorne maintained that geography is a unique field science having a complex interplay of
many variables which cannot be controlled (as necessary for performing experiments in
laboratory science) and therefore, controlled experiments to study the outcome cannot be
undertaken in geography rendering the discipline incompatible with formulating generalized
and universal laws, as required in the systematic sciences.
Demolishing this mental construct, Schaefer argued that most sciences,

including physics and economics deal with unique phenomena and geography, could claim
no special status on that account. All sciences study unique events which they seek to explain
in terms of general laws, and geography should be no exception. He strongly pleaded in his
paper in favour of formulating laws pertaining to the spatial distribution of phenomena
(arrangements and pattern of distribution) on the surface of the earth and not the phenomena
themselves. The spatial arrangements of the phenomena he reminded are the special concern
of geography as a science, not the phenomena themselves.
According to Schaefer Geography is a science of spatial distribution and

elaborated on the difference between nature of laws developed in geography in comparison to
the laws of the other social sciences. He claimed that the geographical laws are pattern or
form laws whereas the laws of the other social science are process laws.
Hartshorne provided a point by point rebuttal of the Schaefer’s observations.

Hartshorne in his own words ‘geography is basically a regional study dealing with the unique
combination (interrelations) of characteristics in specific areas of the earth’s surface; it is
largely descriptive: ‘No universals need to be evolved, other than the general law of
geography that all areas are unique’. He stuck to his original concept of geography as a
science of the study of areal differentiation and reasserted that ‘Geography is a discipline that
seeks to describe and interpret the variable character of the earth’s surface as the world of
man’. He firmly believed that even though ‘time’ was important in the study of geography,
the main thrust or concern was to describe the variable character of areas as formed by
existing features in interrelationship that is a functional/causal relationship between
phenomena of diverse origin existing together in particular places at the present time. He, was
stern in maintaining that those who believe that formulating scientific laws is the only
objective of science are actually thoroughly confusing the means with the ends.
The outcome of the Hartshorne – Schaefer debate was a clear shift of

academic enquiry towards systematic geography from the regional geography in America,
post-1950. There were an increasing realization and awareness that geography too should
develop and laws and models and accomplish this purpose it needs to adopt nomothetic
perspective in order to seek general in the particular (inductive argument). This also
precipitated the shift from areal differentiation to spatial integration (spatial organization),
creating a spatial pattern in the movement and circulation in the form of spatial interaction.
Exceptionalism in Geography
Exceptionalism refers to the belief that geography and history are
methodologically distinct from other systematic sciences because they are peculiarly
concerned with the study of the unique and the particular. This idea is closely associated with
Kantianism. Immanuel Kant, a German philosopher-geographer of eighteenth-century is
recognized as the founder of exceptionalism. According to Kant, history and geography find
themselves in an exceptional position and are different from that of other systematic sciences.
28
He considered history as temporal science and geography as a regional science. According to

Kant, history differs from geography only in the consideration of time and space. History is a
report of phenomena that follow one another and has reference to time while geography is a
report of phenomena besides each other in space. History is narrative and geography is
descriptive. Both fill up the entire circumference of our perceptions: geography that of space
and history that of time.
The idea of exceptionalism is closely associated with Kantianism, but in

geography, this term is usually identified with F.K. Schaefer. He made a critical analysis of
the Hartshorne’s book ‘Nature of Geography’ published in 1939. Schaefer made vigorous
attempt to criticise the exceptionalism claims made for geography as a regional science.
Schaefer in his paper which was published in 1953 he criticised the works of
Hartshorne, Hettner, Kant, and others. He strongly criticised Hartshorne’s exceptionalism
claims for regional geography and presented an alternative case for geography adopting the
philosophy and methodology of positivist approach. First of all, he elaborated the nature of
science and then defined the peculiar characteristics of geography as a social science. He
argued that a science is characterized by its expansions and explanations require laws. In
geography, the major regularities which are described refer to spatial patterns and hence
geography has to be conceived as the science concerned with the formulation of the
laws governing the spatial distribution of certain features on the surface of the earth. These
spatial arrangements of phenomena, and not the phenomena themselves, should be the subject
of geographers search for law-like statements. Geographical procedures would then not differ
from those employed in the other systematic sciences, both natural and social. Observation
would lead to a hypothesis about the interrelationship between two spatial patterns, and the
hypothesis would be tested against a large number of cases, to provide the material for a law
if it was thereby verified
The argument against the definition of geography as the science of spatial

arrangements was termed as ‘exceptionalism’. It claims that geography does not share the
methodology of other sciences because of peculiar nature of its field of study—the study of
unique places, or regions (and compares geography with history, which studies unique
periods of time).
Schaefer found exceptionalism in Hartshorne’s regional geography which

according to him claims that geography does not share the methodology of systematic
sciences because of the peculiar nature of its subject matter, the study of places or regions
which are unique by their nature. Using analogies from systematic sciences like physics and
economics, Schaefer argued that geography is not peculiar in its focus on unique phenomena;
all sciences deal with unique events which can only be accounted for by an integration of
laws from various systematic sciences, but this does not prevent the development of those
laws. Thus, however, there is nothing extraordinary about geography in that respect.
Thus, Schaefer claimed that there is nothing exceptional about the nature and
methodology of geography as advocated by Hartshorne. As stated above, he placed human
geography in the category of social sciences rather than in humanities or natural sciences.
Geography must be considered as the subject like other social sciences and not ‘exceptional’.
29
The concept of Positivism

The origin of positivism as a well-established philosophy can be accredited to
French philosopher August Comte in the 1830s. Positivism as a philosophy was mainly
initiated as a polemical instrument against the romantic and speculative tradition that
prevailed prior to the French Revolution. Its main purpose was to distinguish science from
metaphysics and religion. Thus, positivism may be precisely described as a philosophical
movement that emphasized on science and scientific method as the only source of knowledge
and, which stood in sharp contrast to religion and metaphysics. All scientific knowledge was
to be based on direct and empirically verifiable experience of reality (phenomenology).
Positivism was also described as empiricism (derived from the Greek word
‘empeire’ meaning experience) since it promoted science and scientific methods as a source
of knowledge. It averred that science only dealt with ‘empirical questions’ that were based
on experiences of real conditions as they existed and that which could be tested through
experiments or some other measures.
Positivism in Geography
There was a great deal of efforts in the latter half of the 19th century to
develop the discipline of geography as a nomothetic science. This was largely the impact of
the Darwinian tradition that invigorated the scientists to search for the governing laws of
nature and in the same tune, the social scientists to explore the laws determining social
arrangements. The hypothetic-deductive approach of study that was especially characteristic
of the natural sciences, replaced the inductive methods in the social sciences. Thus there was
an effort to accommodate social sciences within the framework of positivism. It must be
pointed out here that the geographical developments that took place in the 1950s and 1960s
were mainly committed to logical positivism. The researchers sought to develop a priori
models about reality for which they devised a set of hypotheses that were to be authenticated,
validated or discarded through testing of empirical data. Once verified, they were validated as
laws until their eventual refutation through further research. The logical positivists conceived
that some order persisted in the objective world that needed to be explored and discovered
through scientific investigation---- spatial patterns of variation in geography----that could not
be manipulated by the observer. Geography soon became ‘positivist-led.’ The hypothetic-
deductive approach led the discipline particularly human geography to develop as a model
building and theoretical science since it dealt with phenomena that were familiar with reality
both spatially and temporally.
Schaefer with his critique of Kant’s exceptionalist views that placed history
and geography as exceptional and different from the other systematic sciences, put forward
his ‘spatial organization paradigm’ and conceived geography as a spatial and social science
primarily concerned with the formulation of laws that governed the spatial distribution of any
phenomenon as they were found on the earth’s surface. Hence, Schaefer set off a sort of
‘revolution’ in geography that was basically ‘theoretical and quantitative’ in nature. This
revolution in geography sought to provide the discipline a scientific approach with the
application of mathematical and statistical methodologies.
The quantitative revolution that geography underwent by adopting the

viewpoints of positivism was set off mainly by the mathematicians. It was mainly the
outcome of the impact of the non-geographers on geography.
30
The most important theoretical development that fundamentally incorporated

the philosophy of positivism was the locational analysis of Peter Haggett.
Another concept that was intrinsically associated with positivism was the
concept of systems. A system was defined as an array of entities that had specific
relationship among them as well as with their environment. Richard J. Chorley was the first
geographer to introduce general systems theory in geography. His paper ‘Geomorphology
and General Systems Theory’ (1962) was developed within the framework of the systems
approach in which he tried to apply the concept of open and closed systems to
geomorphology.
The positivist philosophy by rejecting metaphysics provided a sound

philosophical, methodological and scientific base to the discipline of geography. Knowledge
based on the observations of real situations that could be easily verified empirically was
highly objective, unbiased and unprejudiced and could be readily utilized for the formulation
of universal laws and theories. Positivism encouraged the use of statistical and mathematical
techniques that provided precision to research and enabled to analyse a geographical system
in a much more simplified form. It provided a kind of framework within which theoretical
statements could be formally presented. However, the critique of positivism was highly
intense and convincing.
The critique of positivism in geography mainly emanated from two sources:
 Its acceptance of statistical techniques for making inferences about reality; and,
 Its acceptance of the assumption of the methodological unification of the sciences.
Positivism created a false sense of objectivity. The models constructed using

statistical techniques that were considered as an effective tool of theory building actually
deviated the observer from the observed by giving more prominence to some elements and
undermining others. This paved the way for controlling and manipulating society. They were
regarded as grossly inadequate for geographical enquiry as well due to non-repeatability of
experiments and data.
By employing quantitative techniques positivism largely eliminated the social

and humanistic concerns and reduced humankind as decision-makers or workers to mere
passive agents. Such models mostly turned out to be the result of economic determinism.
Since it excluded the normative questions thus it deprived human society of

the norms and values based on which it should have been organized. Positivism attempted to
construct theories with universal acceptability by moving from particular to the general which
had reduced validity in real world owing to the spatial character of geographical data. Hence,
this resulted into overgeneralization.
The critique of positivism revived the social foundations and responsibilities

of social sciences due to which geography went through an anti-positivism and critical
revolution in the 1970s. A lot of humanistic approach was proposed to counter and replace
the concept of an objective world highlighted upon by the positivist paradigm.
31
Structuralism in Geography
The structuralists advocated that the explanation of the observed phenomena
should be claimed from the general structures that underpin the human culture and the
behavioural pattern of the human agency in shaping the society in a particular manner. The
general structures are not supposed to be identifiable within the surface properties of such
phenomena and thus, require a more in-depth analysis to reveal that out. Structuralism is,
therefore, itself a theory as well as the methodology which is guided by the research interest
of the investigator in exploring the underlying structure with proper logic and justifications.
The structure is something which is strongly dependent on the relations. There

have been some typical forms of structuralism by means of the scholars’ contribution at
different contexts in revealing the structural underpinning of various phenomena. Such
contexts include the language, signs and linguistics; culture and structural anthropology;
literary theory, literature and mythologies; and psychoanalysis.
The most prominent entry of structuralist approach in the geographical

researches could be evident through the works of Marxist geographers during 1970s when
they strongly challenged the spatial science, sometimes represented in the form of
cartography. According to Peet (1977), the growing interest in the geographers to adopt
Marxist perspectives was because of the then western society’s dissatisfaction to the existing
structure and increasing frustration with the positivist approach that repeatedly failed to
achieve the acceptable solution and changes related to the social problems.
In this context, David Harvey’s work ‘Social justice and the city’ (2010) acted
as the stimuli for geographers to adopt the Marxist approach for the geographical research,
because this approach is holistic and stressing more on the interdependence of the both
economic and social issues in terms of production, consumption, and distribution. However,
such borrowing of Marxist perspectives in geography was also debated in several grounds –
from the adoption of the philosophy to the way it got applied in geography.
The actual form of structuralist geography indeed acknowledges the

importance of the production system and its organization that significantly influence the
creation and the structuring of social processes at all levels of the society. So, naturally, it
deals with all the dialectic relationships that exist between the social processes on one hand
and the natural environmental and spatial relationships on the other hand.
Structuralist geographers mainly criticize the approaches believing that

individual decision-making cannot reveal the real structural process that underpins the
creation and recreation of geography. The impact of structuralist geography is more dominant
in some areas of human geography.
The contribution of structuralist approach is also prominent in social

geography, especially the social urban geography that influenced a lot in transforming the
orientation of geographical research. In pre-structuralist perspective, geographers used to
focus on the issues like who lives where in urban areas and also used to assume that there was
a given set of social relations not changing over time, a mutual consensus about the rightness
of such relations on the basis of which people would be allocated with a specific housing
location and would be allowed to change their positions, and a free competition among the
people to choose housing locations wherever they want. The structuralist perspective strongly
challenged such assumptions by arguing that society is ever-changing and the relations are
32
supposed to change accordingly. Such relations are altered rather by dissensus and sometimes
even by conflict. So, there remain several complex mechanisms that limit the free choice to
select housing locations in the urban area.
Quantitative Revolution in Geography

The application of statistical and mathematical techniques, theorems' and
proofs in understanding geographical systems is known as the ‘quantitative revolution’ in
geography.
It was now related to providing accurate, systematic, rational descriptions and

explanations of the variations in the geographical phenomenon that occurred over the Earth's
surface. The most obvious change has occurred due to the quantitative revolution that
brought changes in the methods and techniques used to explain the geographical phenomenon
in a spatial framework.
The statistical methods are employed in geography for generating and testing
hypotheses using empirical data, whereas the mathematical techniques and theorems are used
for deriving models from a set of initial abstract assumptions. In other words, statistical
methods are used to estimate, and test the significance of, various parameters associated with
a given mathematical model such as the distance decay and gravity models.
The main objectives of the quantitative revolution in geography were as under:
1. To change the descriptive character of the subject (geo+graphy) and to make it a

scientific discipline;
2. To explain and interpret the spatial patterns of geographical phenomena in a rational,
objective and cogent manner
3. To use mathematical language instead of the language of literature, like ‘Af’ in the
Koppen’s classification of climate which stands for the ‘tropical rainforests’;
4. To make precise statements (generalizations) about locational order;
5. To test hypotheses and formulate models, theories and laws for estimations
and predictions;
6. To identify the ideal locations for the various economic activities so that the profit
may be maximized by the resource users; and
7. To provide geography a sound philosophical and theoretical base, and to make its
methodology objective and scientific.
In order to achieve these objectives, the preachers of quantitative techniques

stressed on field surveys for the collection of data and empirical observations. In the
formulation of models and theories they assumed:
 Mantis a rational (economic) person who always tries to optimize his profits.
 Man has infinite knowledge of his space (environment and resources).
 They assumed ‘space’ as an isotropic surface.
 There is no place for the normative questions (questions about social values) in
scientific research and objective interpretation of the geographical reality.
 They assumed that normative questions, like cultural values, beliefs, attitudes,
customs, traditions, likes and dislikes, prejudice, and aesthetic values have no place in
geographical research and scientific explanation of geographical patterns.
33
Historical Perspective of Quantitative Revolution
In the 1950s and 1960s, a revolutionary change described as "quantitative

revolution" occurred in the discipline of geography. It replaced the ‘idiographic’ approach
based on areal differentiation by ‘nomothetic’ one, which had its roots in the search for
models of spatial structure and phenomenon. The quantitative revolution led the basis of
geography as a spatial science that dealt with the spatial analysis of phenomena that existed
on the earth surface. In simpler words, it gave geography a scientific vision through the
application of methodology rooted in statistical methods. Some of the elements of positivism,
which had previously been not accepted at some point in time, were now accepted open-
handedly. In the words of Burton (1963) this school had set out to discover universals, to
build models and to establish methods and theoretical bases on which geographical realities
could be erected. Traditionally, geography was a discipline that studied and described the
surface of the Earth, but in due course of time, its definition and nature have changed.
The inspiration for mathematical modelling came from at least two

sources: first Social Physics, which focused initially on the Gravity Model’ and
later ‘Entropy Maximization’ and, second Neoclassical Economics which influenced
geography principally through the regional science movement and ‘Location Theory’.
Although geographers borrowed several models from economics and

sociology, e.g. the ‘Crop Intensity Model’ of J.H. Von Thunen (1826), Alfred Weber’s model
of Industrial Location’ (1909), Christaller (1893-1969) was the first geographer who made a
major contribution to location theory in his study of Central Places in Southern Germany.
Subsequently, American urban geographers developed theoretical models of urban places. It
was during the post-Second World War period that A. Ackerman (1958) encouraged his
pupils to concentrate on quantification cultural processes and systematic geography
Weaver, another American geographer, delineated crop combination regions in
Middle West (1954) by applying the standard deviation technique which brought
Quantitative Revolution in Agricultural Geography. Haggerstrand became interested in the
possibilities of investigating the process of innovation with the help of mathematical and
statistical methods; He was able to construct a general ‘Stochastic Model’ of the process of
diffusion. Stochastic literally means at random.
Empirical studies indicated that the movement of persons between two

urban centres was proportional to the product of their populations and inversely proportional
to the square of the distance between them. Stewart pointed out the isomorphic equal form
or structure relationship between this empirical generalization and Newton’s law of
gravitation. Thereafter, this concept became known as the ‘Gravity Model’. In other
branches of the discipline, e.g. population, regional, economic, cultural and political
geography a number of statistical techniques were gradually diffused. Thus, the diffusion
of quantitative techniques, steadily took place in the 1960s.
Merits of Quantitative Methods
The advantages of the application of quantitative techniques in geographical

studies are many. The quantitative techniques are firmly based on empirical observations and
are readily verifiable. The statistical techniques help in reducing a multitude of observations,
data and facts to a manageable number of factors. These techniques help in the estimation,
interpolation, and simulation of data which are necessary for forecasting. They also help in
describing, analysing and simplifying a geographical system. Locational theories of
34
industries, agricultural land use intensity, and stages of development of landforms can be
easily understood and predicted with the help of quantitative techniques. Moreover, these
techniques provide framework within which theoretical statements can be formally presented.
The models formulated with the help of Quantitative techniques are generally free from
biasness and they are of immense use in the building of theories, general and special laws.
Demerits of Quantitative Methods
The applications of quantitative techniques in geographical studies have been criticized on

several counts. Some of the weaknesses and limitations of quantitative techniques have
been given as under:
1. The quantitative revolution was based on the philosophy of positivism (originally

proposed by August Comte in 1820) which distinguishes science from religion and
metaphysics. It followed the methodology of spatial science and thus reduced the
subject to space geometry. The man and environment relationship cannot be properly
established by the mechanistic models designed with the help of quantitative
techniques.
2. The advocates of quantitative revolution pleaded for the language of geometry.
Geometry is not an acceptable language to explain the man and environment
relationship—the main theme of human geography.
3. The models and theories developed on the basis of empirical data exclude the
normative questions like beliefs, taboos, emotions, attitudes, desires, hopes, fears,
likes and dislikes, prejudices and aesthetic values. This is mainly being done to make
the study objective and scientific. In the real world, in the interrelationships of man
and environment, and decision making processes, the normative questions and social,
moral, religious and ethical values have a close bearing. In fact, in any economic
activity and in the decision making process about the utilization of resources, people
are largely governed by their religious, moral, cultural and social values. It is because
of these values that dairying is not developing among the Khasias (Meghalaya) and
Lushais (Mizoram) of the north-east India. In fact, taking milk is a taboo in these
tribes. The Muslims, all over the world hate piggery, and the Sikhs dislike the
cultivation of tobacco. By excluding the normative questions the study may be
objective, but it gives only a parochial picture of the man and environment
relationship.
4. The advocates of quantitative techniques in geography focused on ‘locational
analysis’. The main weakness of the locational analysis is that it promotes capitalism.
In a capitalistic society, there is exploitation of human and environmental resources
(land, water, forest and minerals) which makes the rich richer and the poor poorer.
5. With the development of sophisticated machinery and automation, there is less scope
of employment. Thus, it leads to unemployment and it is a system of wasteful
production. The assumption that man is a ‘rational person’ who always tries to
optimize his profit has also been criticized.
6. In the real world location decisions are seldom if ever optimal in the sense of
maximizing profits or minimizing resources used. In the opinion of Simon, man, in a
limited number of alternatives, chooses one that is broadly satisfactory rather than
optimal. In most of the cases the satisfying model applies and man takes decisions
about the utilization of his resources to satisfy his aspirations and desires.
7. The assumption that man has ‘infinite knowledge’ of his space or environment
(resources) has also been criticized. The knowledge about a resource changes as the
35
new technology develops. Hence, say that he has a full knowledge about his
environment.
8. Models developed with the help of quantitative techniques reduced people (decision-
makers, workers) to passive agents. To a large extent such models may be seen as one
of determinism.
9. Application of quantitative techniques demands not only considerable mathematical
power; they also demand reliable data which is rarely available in the developing
countries like ours. In fact, the data collected in the developing countries has many
pitfalls and shortcomings. The models or theories developed on the basis of unreliable
data are bound to give only a distorted and faulty picture of the geographical reality.
10. The overenthusiastic preachers of quantitative techniques have sacrificed many good
qualitative statements which were quite useful in the interpretation of regional
personalities.
11. The estimations and predictions made with the help of sophisticated quantitative
techniques proved erroneous many a time and there remains a danger of
overgeneralization.
12. The models developed with the help of statistical techniques give more prominence to
some features and distort some others.
13. Making reliable models and universal laws in human geography like other social
sciences with the help of quantitative techniques is, however, not possible. According
to one school of thought of physics, the probabilities can be calculated but definite
predictions are not possible even in pure sciences like physics. In the opinion of
Stephen Hawking, “the laws of science cannot completely determine the future of the
universe”. God (God as a metaphor for the laws of nature) plays dice and God may
turn out to be “an inveterate gambler”.
Despite all these merits and demerits of quantitative revolution, it may be

summarized that ‘spatial science’ was inaugurated in North America. By the end of 1960s it
was dominating many of the journals published throughout the English speaking world. Most
research was positivist in its tone. Most of the researchers used quantitative methods, and
thus contributed to the development of theories and models. But these theories and models
presented only a partial picture of the man-environment relationship. This methodology was
criticized and as a reaction to this behavioural and humanistic approaches were introduced in
human geography. In some cases, even in social science, a purely quantitative approach is
necessary and in others requires a purely qualitative approach, and often a combination of the
two is more satisfactory for making estimations and predictions in geography.
Whatever the merits and demerits of the quantitative revolution from

American centres in Washington, Wisconsin and Iowa, it spread to Europe, especially in
Britain and Sweden. In Sweden, the department of geography at Lund University soon
became renowned as a centre of theoretical geography, attracting scholars from many
countries. The major advances towards a unifying methodological and philosophical basis for
the quantitative schools were made in the 1960s by British geographers, notably Peter
Haggett, Richard Chorley and David Harvey.
These scholars suggested that geography should adopt quantitative methods

and the use of computer to handle data to develop geographical paradigms and models. A
model was defined as an idealized or simplified representation of reality which seeks to
illumine particular characteristics. According to Chorley and Haggett, a model was either a
theory or a low or a hypothesis of structured idea.
36
The over enthusiasm of the preachers of quantitative revolution has, however,

given way to the present phase in which mathematical and statistical methods are just one of
the many tools for approaching geographical problems. In the 1970s, even Harvey—a
staunch supporter of the quantification philosophy—became an apostate, and declared that
quantitative revolution has run its course and diminishing marginal returns are setting in L.D.
Stamp vehemently opposed the quantitative revolution and preferred to term quantitative
revolution a ‘civil war’ and noted that quantification had many points in common with a
political ideology; it was more or less a religion to its followers, “its golden calf is the
computer”. Stamp pointed out that there are many fields of enquiry in which quantification
may stultify rather than aid progress, because there will be temptation to discard information
which cannot be punched on a card or fed onto a magnetic tape; there is also a danger that
ethical and aesthetic values will be ignored. Minshull observed that the landscape was
becoming a nuisance to some geographers, that many of the models will only apply to a flat,
featureless surface, and warned that there is a real danger that these ideal generalizations
about spatial relationships could be mistaken for statements about reality itself. Minshull also
sounded a note of warning that scholars would try to justify their models or hypotheses many
a time in a subjective way which could give a distorted picture of the geographical reality.
The quantitative revolution, as stated above, began in the developed nations of

the west where theories and models were constructed on the basis of data collected. There is
certainly a danger that the models developed in Europe and America may be elevated to
general truth and universal models. In reality we do not have universal urban geography and
universal agricultural geography. There are different urban and agrarian processes which are
working in different parts of the world and leading to different cultural landscapes. Owing to
this factor, generalization on the basis of quantitative techniques may be misleading and
negative instead of being positive. Apart from the above fact, the data used by the western
experts hardly refer to a period of about one hundred years. Further, it reflects the modes of
production and distribution of the developed capitalist societies. The processes which operate
in the rigidly planned economies of the socialist countries of Europe and in the East European
countries are altogether different. The processes of urbanization and development which
change in space and time are different in different economic and political systems. In brief,
quantitative revolution also could not enable the geographers to formulate universal laws and
paradigms.
Locational Analysis in Geography

Locational analysis is an approach to human geography which focuses on the
spatial arrangement of phenomena. Its usual methodology is that of spatial science. The main
objective of locational analysis was expressed as building accurate generalization, models
and theories with productive power (Berry and Marble, 1968). Locational analysis is based
on the philosophy of positivism. The philosophy of positivism underpins the approach, which
concentrates on the identification of theories of spatial arrangements and so is closely linked
to the discipline’s quantitative revolution.
A number of geographers in U.S.A. advocated the cause of locational analysis

in the 1950s, although it has much deeper roots in the work of pioneers who were later
adopted by geographers. Bunge (1966), for example, wrote a thesis on Theoretical
Geography based on the premises who stated that geography is the ‘science of locations’.
Others such as McCarty were strongly influenced by developments in the field of economics,
to which they introduced the spatial variable. These links led to the close interrelationship
37
between geographers and regional scientists in the 1960s and 1970, and illustrated by
attempts to build economic geography theories of spatial arrangements (Smith, 1981).
Locational analysis is based on empiricism. Empiricism is a philosophy which

accords special privilege to empirical observations over theoretical statements. Specifically, it
assumes that observational statements are the only ones which make direct reference to
phenomena in the real world, and that they can be declared true or false without reference to
the truth or falsity of the theoretical statements. In empirical inquiry, it is assumed that its
facts ‘speak for themselves’. They presented a strong case for using geometry as the language
for the study of spatial form.
Haggett, in his book Locational Analysis in Human Geography (1965),

appealed to adopt the geometrical tradition to explain order, location order and patterns in
human geography. Such a focus needed: (1) to adopt a system approach which concentrates
on the patterns and linkages within a whole assemblage; (2) to employ models as to
understand man and environment relationship; and (3) to use quantitative techniques to make
precise statements (generalizations) about locational order. For the spatial analysis they
suggested to adopt ‘linear model’, spatial autocorrelation and regression. Other geographers
who contributed substantially to the field of locational analysis are Morril, Col, Chorley, Cox,
Harvey, Johnston, Pooler, Sack and Smith.
Morril was strongly influenced by the geometrical traditions adopted by

Bunge and Haggett. In his book, The Spatial Organisation of Society, he argued that people
seek to maximize spatial interaction at minimum cost and so bring related activities into
proximity—the result is that human society is surprisingly alike from place to place…
[because of] the predictable, organized pattern of locations and interactions.
The locational approach in human geography has been criticized on philosophical and
methodological grounds by the behaviouralists and humanists.
Some of the main criticisms against locational analysis are as under:
1. The locational analysis based on positivism ignores the normative questions to

explain the man and environment relationship. It was their mistaken belief that
“positive theory would lead to normative insight”. The cultural values are quite
important in any decision making process. The ideal location for any economic
activity may not be acceptable to individuals and the society (see quantitative
revolution).
2. The locational analysis did not reflect the reality of decision making processes and so
was of little value in predicting locational arrangement.
3. The models developed with the help of locational analysis conceal the complexities of
the real world.
4. At present, there is economic interdependence of societies at the global level, which
means that spatial interdependence has become much more important and “locally
experienced environmental dependencies lost their rationale”.
5. Locational analysis has also been criticized on the ground that it encourages the social
order of capitalism in which the owners of the means of production become rich and
the poor becomes poorer.
6. The locational analysis has given a chance to the capitalists to optimize their profits.
It gives an uncontrolled liberty and licence for plunder and miscalled profit.
38
7. Owing to locational analysis, there is over production and the economy enters the era
of over industrialization.
8. It is mainly because of the locational analysis and capitalism that there is a total
newness—new technology, new means of transportation, new education, new art, new
morals, new media, new amusement, new weapons, new violence, new terrorism, new
war and new mode of exploitation.
9. The followers of spatial science (positivists) treat people as dots on a map, statistics
(data) on a graph, or numbers in an equation. They consider humans as non-living and
other livings (plants and animals).
It is because of the inadequacies of the locational analysis that the

‘behaviouralism’ and ‘humanism’ achieved much significance in human geography.
Whatever the reason for its origin, there is little doubt that locational analysis
substantially changed the nature of human geography from the mid-1960s, although there is
some doubt that it ever dominated the discipline (Mikesell, 1984). It presented geography as a
positivist social science, concerned to develop precise, quantitatively stated generalization
about pattern of spatial organization, thereby enriching and being enriched by Location
Theory, and to offer models and procedures which could be used in physical planning.
39

Perspectives in Human Geography-1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Perspectives in Human Geography-1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Perspectives in Human Geography-1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Geography With Sandeep Sir

Perspectives in Human Geography

Evolution of geographical thought in India

The Earliest Known Indian Scholars and Their Field of Interest

Acharya Kapil (3000 BC) Cosmology

Acharya Bharadwaj (800 BC) Aviation technology

Baudhāyana, (800 BC) Mathematics

Acharya Charak (600 BC) Medicine

Acharya Kanad (600 BC) Physics (Atomic Theory)

Acharya Sushrut (600 BC) Medicine (Surgery)

Gautama Buddha (563 to 483 BC) Philosophy

Pānini (400BC) Grammar

Nagarjuna (100 AD) Chemistry

Âryabhatta I (476–550 AD) Mathematics & Astronomy

Varahamihir (499-587 AD) Astrology & Astronomy

Brahamgupta (598-668) Mathematics & Astronomy

Bhāskara I (600 - 680) Mathematics & Astronomy

AdiShankara (788 AD - 820 AD) Philosophy

Aryabhata II (about 920) Mathematics & Astronomy

Sridharacharya (AD 991) Mathematics

Brahmadeva (1060- 1130) Mathematics & Astronomy

Bhaskaracharya (1114-1183 AD) Algebra

The progress of geography as an independent discipline in India can be best

1. The Formative Stage: Pre-1950s;

3. The Confirmative Stage: The 1960s; and

The Formative Stage: Pre-1950s

The Informative Stage: The 1950s

The second phase immediately after Independence gave geography a national

The Confirmative Stage: The 1960s

The Reformative Stage: Since 1971

 Concern with regards to the problems of planning and development

To conclude it can be said in India lacks the tendency of developing

Determinism is one of the most important philosophies, which continued in

Determinists generally consider humans as a passive agent on whom physical

In the discipline of geography, the paradigm of environmentalism had stirred

In the eighteenth century, historian George Tatham, also explained the

Deterministic reasoning continued in the 19th century when geography itself

Friedrich Ratzel, the founder of 'new' determinism, supplemented the

Semple in her book Influences of Geographical Environment (1911) writes:

The doctrine was further established by Ellsworth Huntington and Griffith

Taylor (1880-1963) was more cautious in relating man and environment. He

Barrows (1923) initiated a meek criticism from within the environmentalist

In the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s geography drifted towards a regional

Ratzel (1844-1904) propagated new determinism where he emphasized that

Apart from determinism, scientific concepts like deductive approach,

Vidal de la Blache, Gallois, Brunhes, Demangeon, Emmanuel De Martonne,

The Rise of Possibilism

The doctrine of possibilism tries to explain the relationship of a human being

Febvre (1932) in ‘A Geographical Introduction to History’ stated ‘there are

In the nineteenth century, George Perkins Marsh and Kirchoff made an

Possibilism was further flourished by acclaimed historian Lucien Febvre

After this concept, probability theory is considered as an essential component

The probability theory was criticized on many grounds. For example, a

Cultural or Social Determinism in Geography

This philosophy made by American scholars can be explained in principle,

The philosophy of cultural determinism is quite broad among American

'cultural geographical differences'. Thus, social determinism is thus rigorous as the

Darwin’s Impact on Geography

1) the idea of change through time;