Whither Geography? A Response to Finlayson's Concerns. (13th October 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Holmes, John
• Is Part Of: Geographical research. Volume 54:Number 1(2016)
• Page Start: 103
• Page End: 106
• Publication Date: 2015-10-13
• Subjects: Australian Geography -- interdisciplinarity -- disciplinary flux -- National Committee for Geography; Geography -- Research -- Periodicals; Geography -- Australasia -- Periodicals; Human geography -- Periodicals; Physical geography -- Periodicals; 304.2072
• DOI: 10.1111/1745-5871.12154
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1745-5863

Abstract

Abstract: Prompted by Brian Finlayson's editorial, titled 'Whither (or Wither?) Geography', I am reminded that a review of the discipline's status and directions would be timely, using the 2002 Australia‐wide reviews in this journal as benchmarks. I welcome the thoughtful proposal for a disciplinary report to the Academy of Science recently prepared by Alaric Maude on behalf of the National Committee for Geography. I take the view that the three central issues are: firstly, flux in the discipline's 'external relations' in an era of interdisciplinarity, cross‐disciplinary mergers, instrumentalism, and budgetary constraints; secondly, flux in 'internal relations' involving subdisciplines and subcultures: and thirdly, flux in 'vertical relations' involving the links between secondary and tertiary Geography. It is instructive to note that the earliest disciplinary reviews, up to the 1980s, were solely directed towards bibliographic celebrations of research directions whereas recent reviews, of necessity, have been focussed on pressing issues concerning 'Whither Geography?'. Alaric's proposal will also be issue focussed, with its emphasis on relevance and on contributions of national significance.