Economic Geography

Conversations from within the field
The question being asked here or the situation for which I am seeking answers 
is not mine alone. Recent articles about the relevance of geography, the role of
On the intersection of policy and economic geography
215

---

geographers, the opportunities for a geographic point of view, abound in the flag-
ship journals (see Peck 1999). (It is easy to leap back in time and find similar arti-
cles lamenting the lack of relevance of the field in social policy circles. It is not that
we are just talking about being relevant; indeed, there is plenty of conversation
about this very issue and abundant examples of geography’s relevance. I seek to ask
and answer a different question: Why, when we speak up, are we not heard? I can
offer my own experience and the experience of others whom I have observed.)
Once again a caveat is in order. My colleagues in the United Kingdom, Europe,
and to some extent Asia and Africa seem well-placed to at least engage in policy
discourse. Perhaps this is because problems of underdevelopment, exploitation,
and unevenness are regularly part of the conversation. Perhaps it also reflects the
reward structure in places where an academic’s living wage is not assured
(Europe, and southern Europe in particular). It might also be that these national
governments take issues of inequality and uneven development more seriously
than we do in America. Further, perhaps other national governments do not see
such a rigid distinction between members of the academy and the policy commu-
nity. A deeper history might also serve to reveal intellectuals’ different cultural
predispositions to contribute to discussions about daily life. All of these possibil-
ities are not conventions in the United States where policy is done by people
specifically trained in that realm. The ordinary citizen is not in fact expected to
engage in the political process. That is what representative democracy is supposed
to be about – select your representatives and they will act on your behalf. This
model of engagement though seemingly representative reduces, if not outright
takes away, the need to contribute to public discourse. Perhaps this helps 
explain in part why American academics often find it difficult, if not distasteful,
to participate in public commentary.
All in all, geographers are not heard because they see the complexity in all
problems. This ability to see all sides of an issue is our strength and greatest liabil-
ity. It is strength because the world is complex and most other realms reduce life
to generalizable levels of abstraction. In doing so, however, we lose the pattern
and quality of differentiation that reflects the true reality of the world. Somehow,
in our recognition of difference, we are typecast as actors unable to generalize
and make sense of the patterns we see.
Summary
All that is discussed here can be quickly restated; academic engagement in the
political process best occurs when society is gravitating in that direction. It is a
simple idea predicated on the knowledge that actions occur most easily when met
with the least resistance. There are moments when many streams come together
in a confluence of ideas that result in an intellectual consensus about critical
problems to which are profitably aimed best efforts and significant energy. The
1980s was such a time. Underlying all of geography is the belief at some level
that each situation is somewhat or somehow unique and should not be smoothed
or glossed over – our regional roots confine our comfort level to the known and
216
Amy K. Glasmeier

---

the knowable even as the world increasingly demands that we speculate about
what is happening and why.
The events of Hurricane Katrina in August 2005 have awakened a sleeping
giant, the longstanding denial of human dignity to many Americans who, because
of their geography, are subject to circumstances that can only be described as
inhumane and deplorable. The last time this giant was awakened was 40 years ago;
geographers sat largely silent and on the sidelines. There is no need to now. We
should make our views known, let our voices be heard and use our intuitions and
analytical sensibilities, tools and knowledge of history to make a difference. This
is our second chance – we cannot let it pass unnoticed or unheeded.
We also have to stop following the next fantastic idea. ‘Creativity’ abounded in
New Orleans as the most indelible fact shaping the public image of the place.
‘Creativity’ coexists with inequality and has done so throughout history (see
Florida 2005 for a discussion of creativity). Let’s not get dragged into yet another
unsubstantiated discussion that can only serve to enliven regional competition
that pits one place against another. Instead, let’s speak about understanding and
cooperation. Let’s get in and get our hands dirty.
Notes
1. A debate was launched about the failure of economic geographers to engage policy by
Jamie Peck in 1999 in Transactions (Peck 1999, 2000; Pollard et al. 2000).
2. Jamie Peck and Adam Tickell’s research on Neoliberalism highlight this development.
3. Richard Gordon, Political Economist at the University of California Santa Cruz, was
an early critic of unbridled enthusiasm about the prospect of recreating Silicon Valley.
He and his wife, Linda Gordon, undertook some of the early survey-based research of
Silicon Valley supplier firms in which they demonstrated that even local firms were only
marginally attached to one another and to the complex itself. Gordon’s work showed
the early international quality of the Valley and its supplier system.
4. An electronic, full-text article retrieval service available in many public universities.