Advertisement

Scale and Where the Three Prongs Can Meet

  • Debnath MookherjeeEmail author
Chapter
  • 40 Downloads
Part of the The Urban Book Series book series (UBS)

Abstract

The importance of scale in research and planning for the MCR in the developing world is no longer debatable. This is especially true in the current era of globalization and technological advances transforming traditional scalar hierarchies and creating multiple spatialities. The aspatial, network-based, representational, and discursive roles of scale are also becoming increasingly more consequential. I see scale as the third prong in a coherent tri-pronged approach to sustainable development in the Asian MCR that should be used in conjunction with the other two prongs, as discussed in the previous chapter. I recognize that scale remains a confounding concept, although a paradigmatic shift toward conceptual inclusivity by reconciling its many facets, seems to be taking place in the literature. In this chapter I offer an overview of this shift, followed by a brief look at the framework of the MCR from a bi-scalar perspective, and, given the need to recognize the diversities among (and within) the spaces in the MCR, conclude with one example of how elements of the three prongs can converge into a coherent approach for sustainable planning.

Keywords

Scale concepts Observational scale Tri-pronged approach MCR Sustainability 

References

  1. Allen A (2001) Urban sustainability under threat: the restructuring of the fishing industry in Mar del Plata, Argentina, Development in Practice, 11(2–3):152–173  Google Scholar
  2. Allen A (2003) Environmental planning and management of the peri-urban interface (PUI): perspectives on an emerging field. Environ Urban 15:135–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Allen A (2006) Understanding environmental change in the context of rural-urban interactions. In: McGregor D, Simon D, Thompson D (eds) The peri-urban interface: approaches to sustainable natural and human resource use. Earthscan, London, pp 30–43Google Scholar
  4. Allen, A, da Silva, NLA, Corubolo, E (1999) Environmental problems and opportunities of the peri-urban interface and their impact upon the poor. Draft for Discussion. Development Planning Unit. UCL, London, UK. Available from www.ucl.ac.uk/dpu/pui
  5. Allen A, You N (2002) Sustainable urbanisation: bridging the green and brown agendas. Development Planning Unit (dpu). University College, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. Amin A (2004) Regions unbound: towards a new politics of place. Geogr Ann 86:33–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brenner N (2000) The urban question: reflections on Henri Lefebvre, urban theory and the politics of scale. Int J Urban Reg Res 24:361–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brenner N (2001) The limits to scale? Methodological reflections on scalar structuration. Prog Hum Geogr 25:591–614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cao C, Lam NS-N (1997) Understanding the scale and resolution effects in remote sensing and GIS. In: Quattrochi DA, Goodchild MF (eds) Scale in remote sensing and GIS. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp 57–72Google Scholar
  10. Castree N, Demeritt D, Liverman D, Rhoads B (eds) (2009) A companion to environmental geography. Wiley-Blackwell, Malden, MAGoogle Scholar
  11. Coombes M (2014) From city-region concept to boundaries for governance: the English case. Urban Stud 51:2426–2443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Davoudi S (2008) Conceptions of the city regions: a critical review. Proc Inst Civ Engineers: Urban Des Plan 161:51–60Google Scholar
  13. Delaney D, Leitner H (1997) The political construction of scale. Political Geogr 16:93–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dickinson R (1964) The city region in Western Europe. Routledge & Kegan Paul, LondonGoogle Scholar
  15. Douglass M (1998) A regional network strategy for reciprocal rural-urban linkages: an agenda for policy research with reference to Indonesia. In: Tacoli C (ed) Rural-urban linkages. Earthscan, London, pp 124–154Google Scholar
  16. Friedmann J, Douglass M (1975) Agropolitan development: towards a new strategy for regional development in Asia. In: Proceedings of a seminar, UN Centre for Regional Development, NagoyaGoogle Scholar
  17. Gregory D (1993) Geographical imaginations. Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  18. Gregson N (1986) On duality and dualism: the case of structuration and time geography. Prog Hum Geogr 10:184–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Harrison, J (2015) In retrospect, in snapshot, in prospect. In Jones KE, Lord A, Shields R (eds) City-regions in prospect? Exploring points between place and practice. McGill Queen’s University Press, Montreal & Kingston, London, Chicago, pp 20–52Google Scholar
  20. Harrison J, Heley J (2015) Governing beyond the metropolis: placing the rural in city-region development. Urban Stud 52:1113–1133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Harrison J, Hoyler M (2015a) Megaregions: foundations, frailties, futures. In: Harrison J, Hoyler M (eds) Megaregions: globalization’s new urban form? Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, pp 1–28Google Scholar
  22. Harrison J, Hoyler M (eds) (2015b) Megaregions: globalization’s New Urban Form? Cheltenham, UK: Edward ElgarGoogle Scholar
  23. Hesse M (2015) Megaurban regions: epistemology, discourse patterns, big urban business. In: Harrison J, Hoyler M (eds) Megaregions: globalization’s new urban form? Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, pp 29–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hilling, D (1989) Alan B. Mountjoy: an appreciation. In Potter RB, Unwin T (eds) The geography of urban-rural interaction in developing countries: essays for Alan B. Mountjoy. Routledge, London and New York, pp 1–10Google Scholar
  25. Howitt R (1993) A world in a grain of sand: towards a reconceptualisation of geographical scale. Aust Geogr 24:33–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Howitt R (1998) Scale as relation: musical metaphors of geographical scale. Area 30:49–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Howitt R (2002) Scale and the other: Levinas and geography. Geoforum 33:299–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Howitt R (2003) Scale. In: Agnew J, Mitchell K, Toal G (eds) A companion to political geography. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 138–157Google Scholar
  29. Jonas AEG (2006) Pro scale: further reflections on the ‘scale debate’ in human geography. Trans Inst Br Geogr 31:399–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jonas AG (1994) Editorial. Environ Plan D: Soc Space 12:257–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Jones JP, Leitner H, Marston SA, Sheppard E (2017) Neil Smith’s scale. Antipode 49:138–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jones M, MacLeod G (2004) Regional spaces, spaces of regionalism: territory, insurgent politics and the English question. Trans Inst Br Geogr 29:433–452Google Scholar
  33. Jones KT (1998) Scale as epistemology. Political Geogr 17:25–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kellerman A (1987) Structuration theory and attempts at integration in human geography. Prof Geogr 39:267–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kelly PF (1999) The geographies and politics of globalization. Prog Hum Geogr 23:379–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kurtz H (2003) Scale frames and counter-scale frames: constructing the problem of environmental injustice. Political Geogr 22:887–916CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lam NS-N (2004) Fractals and scale in environmental assessment and monitoring. In: Sheppard E, McMaster R (eds) Scale & geographic inquiry. Blackwell, Malden, MA, pp 23–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lam NS-N, Quattrochi DA (1992) On the issues of scale, resolution, and fractal analysis in the mapping sciences. Prof Geogr 44:89–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Lefebvre H (1991) The production of space (trans: Nicholson-Smith D). Oxford and Cambridge, MA, BlackwellGoogle Scholar
  40. Leitner H, Miller B (2007) Scale and the limitations of ontological debate: a commentary on Marston, Jones and Woodward. Trans Inst Br Geogr 32:116–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Manson SM (2008) Does scale exist? An epistemological scale continuum for complex human-environment systems. Geoforum 39:776–788CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Marston S (2000) The social construction of scale. Prog Hum Geogr 24:219–242CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Marston S, Jones JP, Woodward K (2005) Human geography without scale. Trans Inst Br Geogr 30:416–432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. McKinnon D (2010) Reconstructing scale: towards a new scalar politics. Prog Hum Geogr 35:21–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. McMaster RB, Sheppard E (2004) Introduction: scale and geographic inquiry. In: Sheppard E, McMaster R (eds) Scale & geographic inquiry. Blackwell, Malden, MA, pp 1–22Google Scholar
  46. Moore A (2008) Rethinking scale as a geographical category: from analysis to practice. Prog Hum Geogr 32:203–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Neumann RP (2009) Political ecology: theorizing scale. Prog Hum Geogr 33:398–406CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Paasi A (2004) Place and region: looking through the prism of scale. Prog Hum Geogr 28:536–546CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Parr J (2005) Perspectives on the city-region. Reg Stud 39:555–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Pieterse E (2011) Recasting urban sustainability in the South. Development 54:309–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Purcell M (2003) Islands of practice and the Marston-Brenner debate: toward a more synthetic critical human geography. Prog Hum Geogr 27:317–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Ruddell D, Wentz EA (2009) Multi-tasking: scale in geography. Geogr Compass 3(2):681–697CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Sayre NF (2005) Ecological and geographical scale: parallels and potential for integration. Prog Hum Geogr 29:276–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sayre NF (2009) Scale. In: Castree N, Demeritt D, Liverman D, Rhoads B (eds) A companion to environmental geography. Malden, MA, Wiley-Blackwell, pp 95–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Schafran A (2014) Rethinking mega-regions: sub-regional politics in a fragmented metropolis. Reg Stud 48:587–602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Schafran A (2015) Beyond globalization: a historical urban development approach to understanding megaregions. In: Harrison J, Hoyler M (eds) Megaregions: globalization’s new urban form? Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, pp 75–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Sheppard E, McMaster RB (2004a) Scale and geographic inquiry: contrasts, intersections, and boundaries. In: Sheppard E, McMaster R (eds) Scale & geographic inquiry. Blackwell, Malden, MA, pp 256–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Sheppard E, McMaster RB (eds) (2004b) Scale & geographic inquiry. Blackwell, Malden, MAGoogle Scholar
  59. Shields R (2015) Re-spatializing the city as the city-region? In Jones KE, Lord A, Shields R (eds) City-regions in prospect? Exploring points between place and practice. McGill Queen’s University Press, Montreal & Kingston, London, Chicago, pp 53–72Google Scholar
  60. Simon D, McGregor D, Thompson D (2006) Contemporary perspectives on the peri-urban zones of cities in developing areas. In: McGregor D, Simon D, Thompson D (eds) The peri-urban interface: approaches to sustainable natural and human resource use. Earthscan, London, pp 4–43Google Scholar
  61. Smith N (2000) Scale. In: Johnston RJ, Gregory D, Pratt G, Watts M (eds) The dictionary of human geography. Blackwell, Malden, MA, pp 724–727Google Scholar
  62. Tacoli C (2003) The links between urban and rural development. Environ Urban 15:3–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Tobler WR (1988) Resolution, resampling, and all that. In: Mounsey T (ed) Building database for global science. Taylor and Francis, London, pp 129–137Google Scholar
  64. Turner MG, Dale VH, Gardner RH (1989) Predicting across scales: theory development and testing. Landscape Ecol 3:245–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Xu J (2016) Contentious space and scale politics: planning for intercity railway in China’s mega-city regions. Asia Pacific Viewpoint, 2016. Victoria University, Wellington and Wiley, Australia Ltd., pp 1–17Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Environmental Studies, Huxley College of the EnvironmentWestern Washington UniversityBellinghamUSA

Personalised recommendations