Economic Geography

Conclusion
The shared project of economic geography offers the potential of a rich and
complex analysis of the spatial dynamics of capitalism, its implications for unequal
livelihood possibilities and ways to ameliorate negative implications and exceed
capitalism itself. This potential cannot be found within any single approach, but
in trading zones between them. A ‘round table’ culture can foster equal voice for
the full variety of situated views on economic geography (including those from
The economic geography project
21

---

outside the Anglo-American realm, whose remarkable hegemony over the proj-
ect constitutes its greatest weakness); and catalyse a culture of mutual critique
and reflexive thinking, where passionate disagreement is the source of robust
collective knowledge production rather than mutual alienation. Such exchanges
will be simultaneously intellectual and political and will not require consensus in
these domains in order to move forward (indeed consensus may be a hindrance).
A pluralist non-relativist economic geography will be extraordinarily difficult to
achieve and maintain, but is essential if we wish to maintain our critical edge and
make a durable contribution to ‘economic’ analysis.
Notes
1. ‘Economic geography’, for the purpose of this chapter, is defined to include all researchers
who identify themselves as practitioners of economic geography, irrespective of disci-
pline. Subsequently, I will distinguish those who see this project as essentially a branch
of mainstream economics (‘geographical economists’), from those who see it as rooted
in the social theoretic traditions that have come to dominate contemporary Anglophone
human geography (‘economic geographers’, cf. Sheppard and Barnes [2000]).
2. Economic geographers, at the time of writing, have not attempted to engage with the
lively heterodox debates in the Post-autistic Economic Review (http://www.paecon.org).
3. Too often, as was the case in the GIS and Society debates, highly simplified misrepre-
sentations of the other side have been presented. For example, Krugman, Stiglitz and
even Sachs are far from the skills for market rationality that geographers generally
attribute to mainstream economists. On the other side, quantitative, non-neoclassical
and post-positivist economic geography is possible.