Contested Places and the Politics of Space (original) (raw)
Related papers
Socio-spatial relations: an attempt to move space near society
There is a great effort to include relational attributes within a space perspective. This concerns two current interpretative tendencies: the first is related to the idea of de-territorialisation due to the high mobility of people and goods; the second is centred on the idea that social relations are increasingly loose and fragmented, giving rise to the ‘liquid society’. Approaches emphasising the importance of space and the strength of relations may counter such ideas by showing that many empirical cases are still interpretable by a robust combined socio-spatial perspective. The paper will take the polymorphic and structural approach of authors like Jessop, Brenner and Jones, paying special attention to the ‘quality’ of social relations according to a tradition that began with Simmel and Mauss, passed through Polanyi, and concluded with Godbout and Caillé. The paper illustrates the debate on the conjunction between space and relations, in particular through the view of Schatzki, elaborates on new or renewed patterns, and gives some examples of where such theoretical elaborations can be applied. The product is a typology of ‘socio-spatial relations’, while examples will be provided in regard to the issues of globalization, sustainability and governance.
After Critical Geopolitics: Why Spatial IR Theorizing Needs More Social Theory
In this paper, we argue that most attempts to rethink the politics of space in IR still struggle to move out of the conceptual shadow of traditional geopolitics. Most accounts conceptualise space in opposition to the geopolitical container model, yet, they usually modify certain components of this model rather than seeking to transgress it. In response to this critical diagnosis, we suggest IR theory needs a reengagement with the fundamentals of social theory on how spatial terms can be described in relation to human society before investigating more historically specific "claims about the transcendence of the Westphalian System, the emergence of a post-international world, and hence the supersession of the traditional intellectual problematic of the internation itself", in the words of Justin Rosenberg. In order to do that we introduce the writings of two contemporary sociological theorists on the role of space for the theorization of politics: the Actor Network Theory of Bruno Latour and the systemic theory of world society proposed by the late Niklas Luhmann. In social geography, these two bodies of work have been described as offering substantial alternative possibilities to both the "spatial fetishism" of material container space conceptualisations and the "spatial exorcism" that insists that space be seen exclusively as discourse, as most contemporary perspectives in IR theory do. We conclude the paper by exploring the possibilities of advanced social theoretical conceptualisations of space for IR theory by expounding and comparing the consequences of applying actor-network and systemic perspectives to the concept of national territory and the notion of failed states in IR theory.
Social Geography State , power and space
2005
Space" may take many different significations of which, however, two are paramount for human geography: Space as a part of the world with specific characteristics and with activities located in or on it (object-space), and space as a frame of reference, used to locate and thereby order the relations among persons, things, activities and immaterial items (space as locational scheme). This paper argues that, from the viewpoint of an observer, every objectspace presupposes a locational scheme, but not vice versa. Spaces as locational schemes are discussed as instruments, which individuals and organizations use to coordinate their activities. Therefore, space is a constitutive element of the reproduction of the social and is not something external to the social, as most geographies and social theories would have it. Under modern conditions, it is, above all, the metainstitution of the state that has the power to define interpretative schemes, thereby constituting entities and controlling their interactions. The discussion of the mutual constitution of spaces and institutions reveals that, from a methodological point of view, in the end the analysis of space, society and power coalesce. By disclosing the constitutive conditions of institutions and power structures, the analysis of spaces as locational schemes turns out to also be a deconstructive practice.
The Dynamic Concept of Territory in a Globalized World
2001
Space has long been studied in relationships with Geography, Economy, and Management. These sectors pay attention to the influence of space in their own analysis and some effort has already made to define space. This lack of definition is becoming crucial in a world where spatial actions are more and more global and not only local. This shift complicates human environment where relationship with space is no longer just reducing distances but trying to propose the right conditions for the emergence of proximities. To present a structured view of space taking into account this new scale of spatial action, we propose to adopt a new methodology based on ethology studies. The territory and its dynamic management are at the centre of this new way of thinking what space is.
Space and Territoriality: Graduate Level
Space, the final frontier" J.T. Kirk Space and the political, economic and social relationships that we construct around notions of territory, nation, frontiers, home and away, all sets the limits for the possibility of community, justice, and order. The course will pay specific attention to the interstices of domestic and inter/national spacessuch as borders, airports, camps, colonies, other lost spaces. Using critical theory from Foucault, Bourdieu, Virilio and others, the readings represent an interdisciplinary interrogation of space.
The Spatial Turn: Interdisciplinary Perspectives
Across the disciplines, the study of space has undergone a profound and sustained resurgence. Space, place, mapping, and geographical imaginations have become commonplace topics in a variety of analytical fields in part because globalization has accentuated the significance of location. While this transformation has led to a renaissance in human geography, it also has manifested itself in the humanities and other social sciences. The purpose of this book is not to announce that space is significant, which by now is well known, but to explore how space is analyzed by a variety of disciplines, to compare and contrast these approaches, identify commonalities, and understand how and why differences appear.
© Copernicus GmbH 2005 Social Geography State, power and space
2014
Abstract. “Space ” may take many different significations of which, however, two are paramount for human geogra-phy: Space as a part of the world with specific character-istics and with activities located in or on it (object-space), and space as a frame of reference, used to locate and thereby order the relations among persons, things, activities and im-material items (space as locational scheme). This paper ar-gues that, from the viewpoint of an observer, every object-space presupposes a locational scheme, but not vice versa. Spaces as locational schemes are discussed as instruments, which individuals and organizations use to co-ordinate their activities. Therefore, space is a constitutive element of the reproduction of the social and is not something external to the social, as most geographies and social theories would have it. Under modern conditions, it is, above all, the meta-institution of the state that has the power to define interpre-tative schemes, thereby constituting ent...
On Geopolitics: Spaces and Places 1
The study of international relations sits at the convergence of human inquiry that crosses both time and space. The aim here is to elaborate on the spatial context of international relations, to contrast it to the temporal context, and to indicate broadly the continuing importance of the geopolitical spatial context to the study of international relations. I briefly demonstrate how this relationship is based not on an earlier approach based on geographic determinism, but rather possibilism-the possibilities presented by the spatial, geographic, and geopolitical context. In elaborating on space and place, I return to the central research focus of my career: the dynamism and importance of the spatial context for understanding international relations, along with the need to take both time and space into account, the need to appreciate both a locational view and the perceptual/symbolic/constructed view of space and place, and to do so within an increasingly globalized, interdependent, and transnational world system.
A well-established scholarly paradigm capable of explaining the interaction between spatial and social constellations doesn't really exist. Several attempts have been formulated from different disciplinary perspectives, such as anthropology, sociology, social and cultural geography, architectural history and theory, but no consensus has been reached. The only chance to develop a convincing theoretical apparatus nevertheless lies in an interdisciplinary approach that would build upon the insights and methods developed within these different disciplines. In order to do that, it might be helpful to point towards divergent models of thought that underlie the existing attempts to make sense of the relation between spatial configurations on the one hand and social/cultural patterns on the other. This paper presents a model which identifies three important ways to conceptualise this interaction: space seen as receptor, as instrument or as stage. The paper reviews the relevant literature from architectural history and theory, positioning it within a broader framework that also addresses material from anthropology, sociology and cultural geography. It points to similarities and parallels, but also to divergent sensibilities and contrasting understandings, which together make up a rich matrix of theoretical positions.