Intervention: Critical physical geography

Abstract

A recent opinion piece rekindled debate as to whether geography's current interdisciplinary make-up is a historical relic or an actual and potential source of intellectual vitality. Taking the latter position, we argue here for the benefits of sustained integration of physical and critical human geography. For reasons both political and pragmatic, we term this area of intermingled research and practice critical physical geography (CPG). CPG combines critical attention to power relations with deep knowledge of biophysical science or technology in the service of social and environmental transformation. We argue that whether practiced by individuals or teams, CPG research can improve the intellectual quality and expand the political relevance of both physical and critical human geography because it is increasingly impractical to separate analysis of natural and social systems: socio-biophysical landscapes are as much the product of unequal power relations, histories of colonialism, and racial and gender disparities as they are of hydrology, ecology, and climate change. Here, we review existing CPG work; discuss the primary benefits of critically engaged integrative research, teaching, and practice; and offer our collective thoughts on how to make CPG work.Keywords: physical geography, critical human geography, transdisciplinarity, anthropoceneIntervention en géographie physique critique Un article d'opinion paru récemment est à l'origine de la relance d'un débat qui pose la question à savoir si le fondement interdisciplinaire actuel de la géographie serait une relique historique ou une source réelle et potentielle de vitalité intellectuelle. En prenant la défense de la seconde position, nous militons en faveur des bénéfices découlant de l'intégration soutenue de la géographie physique et de la géographie humaine critique. Pour des raisons à la fois politiques et pragmatiques, nous avons nommé ce domaine de recherche et de pratique enchevêtré la géographie physique critique (GPC). C'est au service de la transformation sociale et environnementale que la GPC intègre un regard critique sur les relations de pouvoir à la connaissance profonde de la science ou de la technologie biophysique. Que se soient des individus ou des équipes qui la pratiquent, les travaux de recherche en GPC peuvent contribuer à l'amélioration de la qualité intellectuelle et à l'élargissement de la pertinence politique de la géographie humaine critique et géographie physique, compte tenu que la séparation de l'analyse des systèmes naturels et des systèmes sociaux pose des difficultés d'ordre pratique. À l'origine des paysages sociobiophysiques se trouvent autant les relations inégales de pouvoir, les histoires de colonialisme et les disparités raciales et entre les sexes que l'hydrologie, l'écologie et les changements climatiques. Dans cette partie de l'article, nous passons en revue les travaux actuels en GPC, nous engageons une discussion sur les principaux avantages des approches intégratives et véritablement critiques en recherche, dans l'ense...

Urban Geomorphological Heritage. An Overview

“…Currently, urban geomorphology addresses new questions such as ecosystem services provided by geomorphological processes and landforms (Picket et al 2001, Gordon et al 2012, Gray et al 2013, interconnections between geomorphological and anthropogenic systems, studied through holistic approaches, and the need to merge physical geography and human and social sciences approaches, giving rise to new hybrid approaches such as socio-hydrology (Sivaplan et al 2012) or critical physical geography (Lave et al 2014). Also the emergence of the Anthropocene as a new interval of geological time in which human influence on Earth dominates over natural processes (Steffen et al 2011) has induced new researches in geomorphology specifically addressed to the analysis of Man/Earth interaction challenges (Price et al 2011, Goudie and Viles 2016, Brown et al 2017.…”

The Role of Geographical Landscape Studies for Sustainable Territorial Planning

“…Our approach to the integration of human and physical geography is therefore consistent with positions that mandate the integration of the natural and social sciences, particularly with regards to social and ecological sustainability [14,19,20]. In terms of more pragmatic concerns with territorial management and planning studies for sustainability, this position is considered to be essential [21][22][23].…”

“…For this reason, the integrative approach of geography requires human geographers to engage with the science of physical geography due to the relevance of physical features of the land in shaping social relations. In the same way, physical geographers need to understand the social power relations and human practices that shape biophysical systems [14]. Its main precept is not to rely on explanations based exclusively on human geography or PG, as landscapes are as much the product of unequal power relations, histories of colonialism, and racial and gender disparities as they are of land forms, hydrology, ecology, and climate change [14].…”

“…The emphasis on the integration of biophysical and social factors is based on the definition of landscape in the ELC, which defines it as stated in the introduction [65]. This emphasis by the ELC on the integration of human and non-human factors in the landscape is consistent with various other calls for stronger integration of physical and human geography, particularly in the pursuit of sustainability (e.g., Lave et al, 2014) [14].…”

“…The characterization of geography as an integrative approach in contemporary scientific literature should be understood as an important counterpoint to other schools of thought that advocate furthering the dualistic split between science and philosophy, and humanity and nature [14]. This integrated approach in geography also provides an important counterweight to, on the one hand, deterministic ideological positions that purport to reduce complex social systems to a handful of essential environmental factors (e.g., Diamond, 1999) [15] or biological determinants of human "nature" (e.g., Wilson, 2002) [16], and on the other hand, various forms of radical constructionism-as-philosophical-critique that deny the existence of an objective reality and therefore any form of non-human nature apart from a social concept of it [17], and social monism that describe non-human nature as produced by society [18].…”