Human geography without scale

TLDR

Scale in human geography has evolved over two decades, yet no consensus exists on its definition or operationalization. The authors critique the hierarchical conception of scale and propose eliminating it, offering a flattened ontology that renders the concept unnecessary. They critique the hierarchical conception of scale and develop a flattened ontology that removes the need for the concept. The paper concludes by discussing the political implications of a human geography without scale.

Abstract

The concept of scale in human geography has been profoundly transformed over the past 20 years. And yet, despite the insights that both empirical and theoretical research on scale have generated, there is today no consensus on what is meant by the term or how it should be operationalized. In this paper we critique the dominant – hierarchical – conception of scale, arguing it presents a number of problems that cannot be overcome simply by adding on to or integrating with network theorizing. We thereby propose to eliminate scale as a concept in human geography. In its place we offer a different ontology, one that so flattens scale as to render the concept unnecessary. We conclude by addressing some of the political implications of a human geography without scale.