Oedzge Atzema, Ton van Rietbergen, Jan Lambooy and Sjef van Hoof - Dynamics in economic geography

1.1 Rediscovery of economic geography

cient general theory, and geographers claim economists do not devote enough attention to empirical evidence as a source of knowledge. Often the debate centres on the extent to which the physical environment determines the eco nomic achievements of businesses and regions. Over time, various answers to this question have been put forward. Initially, the focus was on the influence of the physical environment on regions’ economic achievements. In his sem inal work Civilization and Climate (1915), Ellsworth Huntington (1876-1947) classified civilizations hierarchically. The most stimulating climate, he argued, was in New Haven, Connecticut, which happened to be where he taught at Yale University. Then came other regions, with tropical countries inhabited by dark-skinned people bringing up the rear. Huntington considered climatic differences relevant to environmental factors influencing businesses, and thus overall economic achievements. Geographer Ellen Churchill Semple went fur ther, witness the first sentence of her 1911 book Influences of Geographic Envi ronment : ‘Man is a product of the earth’s surface.’ Huntington and especially Semple were clear representatives of physical determinism in geography based on the premise that nature limits variations in human behaviour. Economists thought this was too dogmatic and did not leave enough room for human agency, leading to a rejection of geography’s ability to explain world poverty. The solution to poverty would have to come from humans and technology, for example by stimulating the economy, as was argued by Keynes and applied by Roosevelt in his New Deal to cope with the Depression. Initially, the post-war emergence of the welfare state did not do the disci pline of economic geography much good either. Society was heavily influenced at the time by the rise of new technology. There was a strong feeling among politicians, entrepreneurs and consumers that nature and the limitations it imposed could be controlled. Society was something that could be shaped into whatever people wanted it to be. This led to large-scale interventions in the physical environment, such as massive deforestation, the widespread use of pesticides and the diverting of great rivers − not only in totalitarian countries such as the Soviet Union and China but also in democratic ones. The ecolog ical results of these interventions were often disastrous. The late 1960s witnessed renewed interest in economic geography. This was not so much because the natural environment was considered important but because the realization was dawning that imbalances between regions may well be permanent − not only globally but also within countries. Some regions had a much higher unemployment rate than others, and the imbalances per severed. In the agricultural and industrial regions of the Netherlands for example, unemployment was particularly high at the time, prompting many people to leave for Canada, Australia and New Zealand. The tide could be turned by strengthening the local economy. In those days, regional planning policies aimed to ‘bring work to the people’ and the government offered grants

13