How international are geography journals? Not international enough

Imhof, Nadja; Müller, Martín

doi:10.1177/0308518x20907608

Cited by 11 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 8 publications

(8 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While journal publications represent the most recent scholarship, often in scattered form, handbooks and progress reports have a somewhat different function: their primary mission is to consolidate the state-of-the-art in particular Table 2. Shares of editors, board members and authors from non-Anglophone countries, 2017, and change since 1999 (see also Imhof and Müller, 2020). Note: Cells shaded in light grey mark the three highest values, cells shaded in dark grey mark the three lowest values of each column.…”

Section: Forming the Canon: Handbooks And Progress Reportsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Worlding geography: From linguistic privilege to decolonial anywheres

Müller

2021

Progress in Human Geography

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Geography studies the world. Our knowledge of the world, however, comes mostly from Anglophone sources. This makes Geography in urgent need of worlding – of including multiple voices and languages from around the world. Introducing the notion of linguistic privilege, the article establishes language as an important dimension of epistemic struggle, alongside gender, race, class and others. Its analysis finds the greatest linguistic privilege in the most influential positions in knowledge production – editors of handbooks and journals and authors of progress reports. Three strategies of worlding should challenge this: making gatekeepers multilingual, promoting multiple Englishes and valorising ex-centric knowledge.

show abstract

Section: Forming the Canon: Handbooks And Progress Reportsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The gender of geography's gatekeepers' (Schurr et al, 2020), 'How international are geography journals? Not international enough' (Imhof and Müller, 2020) and 'A part of the world or apart from the world? The postsocialist global East in the geopolitics of knowledge' (Trubina et al, 2020).…”

Section: Acknowledgementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Worlding geography: From linguistic privilege to decolonial anywheres

Müller

2021

Progress in Human Geography

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The paper clearly demonstrates his profound knowledge of the development of geography in Argentina. Fochler-Hauke's writings in Spanish were also well received, as evidenced by the very positive reviews of his book Introduction to the History of Geography (Inchauspe, 1956), as well as "Corología geográfica" (M.Z., 1956) in the renowned Argentine journal Boletín de Estudios Geográficos. This very positive reception is without a doubt also grounded in the high international recognition of German geography before and during the German geographers' time in Argentina.…”

Section: Tucumán's German Geographers and Their Influence On Argentin...mentioning

confidence: 93%

“…While there is a broad consensus across academic geography that our discipline is currently marked by Anglophone hegemony (e.g., Aalbers and Rossi, 2009;Jazeel, 2016;Halvorsen, 2018;Imhof and Müller, 2020;Müller, 2021), the first half of the 20th century marked a transition in this respect (Jöns and Freytag, 2016). Until the end of World War I, German-speaking geography was the hegemonic geographical school, with many Anglo-American geographers studying at German universities and a steady flow of theoretical ideas from Germany to the Anglophone world (Jöns and Freytag, 2016:4).…”

Section: Geographical Theory In Germany Before 1945mentioning

confidence: 99%

Globalizing geography before Anglophone hegemony: (buried) theories, (non-)traveling concepts, and “cosmopolitan geographers” in San Miguel de Tucumán (Argentina)

Rainer

Dudek

2022

Geogr. Helv.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. The relationship between “national” geographical schools and an increasingly globalized geographical theory-building under the logics of Anglophone hegemony has generated critical debate within geography. This paper aims to contribute to current discussions on the development of differential, language-based “schools of thought” in geography and how these are mobilized and de- and recontextualized when they travel beyond their origins. However, it does not focus on the period of Anglophone hegemony but intends to shed a new, historically informed light on the politics of geographical knowledge production. Against this backdrop, we study why, how and with what consequences German geographical knowledge traveled to Argentina in the 1940s – the end of the “German hegemony” – following the employment by the National University of Tucumán (UNT) of the four German geography professors Wilhelm Rohmeder, Gustav Fochler-Hauke, Fritz Machatschek and Willi Czajka, all of whom had been institutionally and ideologically entwined with National Socialism. Firstly, we show that the epistemic differences between “national” schools of geographical thought – skillfully juggled by the geographers we analyze here – can provide an opportunity for the successful de- and recontextualization of theory. Secondly, we argue that boundary spanning and the traveling of theory beyond their geographical origins – largely (implicitly) viewed as progressive – should always be put in context(s) and assessed more cautiously from a normative point of view.

show abstract

“…In discussion about the hegemony of Anglo-American geographers in international geography the composition of the editorial team and editorial board is often seen as an indicator of genuine internationalization (for a recent example Imhof and Müller 2020). The presence of academics affiliated to non-Anglo universities is a signal that such authorship is welcome.…”

Section: Internationalizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Geopolitics at 25: An Editorial Journey through the Journal’s History

Agnew¹,

Dalby

Flint

et al. 2020

Geopolitics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Geopolitics is 25 years old. In this Forum former editors reflect on the journey the journal has taken in those 25 years and the wider discipline (or disciplines) in which the journal sits. Alongside a recounting of how the journal came into existence and its name change to just 'Geopolitics', the editors reflect on the resurgence and increasingly interdisciplinary nature of geopolitics as a field of study which the journal played a role in and all meticulously chronicled in its pages (or bytes); the meanings and importance of the "geo" in geopolitics; the dynamics and politics of international publishing, the academic publishing industry, metrics, citation and the move online; as well as the continued Anglophone nature of political geography within a supposedly internationalising academy. This is coupled with suggestions for future avenues of research, including a plea to consider physical geography more concretely.

show abstract

How international are geography journals? Not international enough

Cited by 11 publications

References 8 publications

Worlding geography: From linguistic privilege to decolonial anywheres

Worlding geography: From linguistic privilege to decolonial anywheres

Globalizing geography before Anglophone hegemony: (buried) theories, (non-)traveling concepts, and “cosmopolitan geographers” in San Miguel de Tucumán (Argentina)

Geopolitics at 25: An Editorial Journey through the Journal’s History

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About