Thinking about
Geography and Community
- Where do the ten most important people in your life
reside? List the people and places.
- Does community require that members live near each
other? (distance decay)
- -- is sustained physical, face-to-face interaction
required for community?
- Are there communities without propinquity? (nearness)
- --depends on the definition of community e.g.
Does community comprise the most significant people in my life? If
so, where are they?
- Geography--what do we mean when we say the "geography"
of a place is important?
- --usually we refer to location and physical characteristics
i.e. where is it (spatial)? and what is it like there? (ecological
or environmental) What other aspects of "geography" are significant?
- Is there one "geography" of a place or area--or
are there many?(perspective)
- --there can be many e.g. varying perceptions of
individuals and groups or perspective differences--political, economic,
cultural, historical
- How large should a community be? (scale)
- --economies of scale and threshold population
e.g. How many people are needed to make an economic activity viable?
How far are people willing to travel for a certain good or service
at a specific price in money, time and effort? (friction of distance
and range of a good)
- --consolidation of the national economy along
with transportation and communication innovations--consolidation of
other institutions to conform to the changing economies of scale e.g.
number of school districts and increasing school size and rise of
new organizations such as labor unions and" common cause" groups
- --local economies subsumed into larger and larger
spatial economic systems seeking optimal economic returns on investment--constant
search for least cost locations for production and distribution
- --changes in transportation lead to changes in
accessibility which leads to changes in land values --from an economic
standpoint the most accessible locations are the most valuable(land
as commodity)
- Community--is it spatial or ecological or both?
Does community need to be ecological?
- Economic community or civic community? Citizen or
consumer? Balance between participation and efficiency? Rooted or mobile?
- Do physical geographical characteristics "determine"
the cultural and individual responses to local environments?
- -- consider the implications of environmental
determinism, possibilism, probablism
Wendell Berry in Decolonizing Rural America Audubon
March/April 1993 Excerpts and reflections.
The true source and analogue of our economic
life is the economy of plants, which never exceeds natural limits, never
grows beyond the power of its place to support it, produces no waste,
and enriches and preserves itself by death and decay. We must learn to
grow like a tree and not like a fire. We must repudiate what Edward Abbey
called the ideology of the cancer cell---the idiotic ideology of unlimited
economic growth that pushes blindly toward the limitation of massive catastrophe.
- Berry offers an economic-ecological model--quite spatially constrained.
Is not Earth a set of interacting ecosystems? Are there overlaps among
localized ecosystems and unforeseen natural changes? What are the implications
of Berry’s perspective?
But if we speak of a healthy community, we cannot
be speaking of a community that is merely human. We are talking about a
neighborhood of humans in a place plus the place itself: its soil, its water,
its air , and all the families and tribes of the nonhuman creatures that
belong to it. If the place is well preserved; if its entire membership,
natural and human. is present in it; and if the human economy is in practical
harmony with the nature of the place, then the community is healthy. A diseased
community will suffer natural losses that become, in turn , human losses.
A good community is sustainable , it is within reasonable limits self sufficient,
and it is within reasonable limits self-determining-- that is free of tyranny.
- He offers a place bound, inclusive, nature based definition of
community. Assuming that there will have to be many of these communities?
How will they coordinate their behavior towards each other?
- Since Earth is a set of interacting systems that are commons (
e.g. air, oceans, soils, river systems, etc.)how will decisions be made?
What level of political authority will coordinate the activities of
local communities and enforce compliance?
It is even conceivable that our people in Washington
D.C. might make decisions turning towards sustainability and self-sufficiency
in local economies. The federal government could do much to help, if it
would. Its mere acknowledgment that problems exist would be a promising
start.
- Is this a realization that scale and power from a center are major
factors in establishing and maintaining communities?
Barry Lopez in Losing Our Sense Of Place
Teacher Magazine February 1990 Excerpts
and reflections. Americans
are fast becoming strangers in a strange land, where one roiling river,
one patch of desert is as good as another. America the beautiful exists---a
select few still know it intimately---but many of us are settling for
a homogenized national geography.
To truly understand geography requires not
only time but a kind of local expertise, an intimacy that few of us ever
develop.
A specific geographical understanding, however,
can be sought out and borrowed. It resides with men and women more or
less sworn to a place, who abide there, who have a feel for the soil and
history, for the turn of leaves and night sounds. Often they will take
an outlander in tow.
Their knowledge is intimate rather than encyclopedic,
human but not necessarily scholarly. It rings with the concrete details
of experience.
America, I believe teems with such people.
The paradox here between a faulty grasp of geographical knowledge for
which Americans are indicted and the intimate, apparently contradictory
familiarity of a group of largely anonymous people, is not solely a matter
of confused scale.(The local landscape is easier to know than a national
geography.)And it is not simply ironic. The paradox is dark. To be succinct.
The politics and advertising that seek a national audience must project
a national geography; to be broadly useful that geography, must inevitably,
be generalized and it is often romantic. It is therefore frequently misleading
and imprecise. The same holds true with the entertainment industry, but
here the problem might be clearer. The same films, magazines and television
features that honor an imaginary American landscape also tout the worth
of the anonymous men and women who interpret it . Their affinity for the
land is lauded, their local allegiance admired. But the rigor of their
local geographies, taken as a whole, contradicts a patriotic, national
vision of unspoiled, untroubled land. These men and women are ultimately
forgotten along with the details of the landscapes they speak for, in
the face of more pressing national matters. It is the chilling nature
of modern society to find an ignorance of geography, local or national,
as excusable as an ignorance of hand tools; and to find the commitment
of people to their home places only momentarily entertaining. And finally
naive.
In 40,0000 years of human history, it has
only been in the last few hundred years or so that a people could afford
to ignore their local geographies as completely as we do and survive.
Technological innovations from refrigerated
trucks to artificial fertilizers, from sophisticated cost accounting to
mass air transportation, have utterly changed concepts of season, distance,
soil productivity, and the real cost of drawing sustenance from the land.
- Are you a local geographer with intimate knowledge of your place?
- Have you experienced the homogenization of national geography?
When and how?
- Does mobility add to our breadth of geographic knowledge but at
the same time dilute rootedness and depth of knowledge about the character
of specific places?
|