The Dictionary of Human Geography (94 page)

Read The Dictionary of Human Geography Online

Authors: Michael Watts

BOOK: The Dictionary of Human Geography
12.79Mb size Format: txt, pdf, ePub
homophobia and heterosexism
Though interrelated, these terms refer precisely to dif ferent exercises of oppression. Homophobia refers to the fear of lesbians and gays, the existence of ?homosexuality?, and sometimes other dissident or non normative sexualities, bodily performances or political struggles. The term is used diffusely around quEER theory, however, to describe sentiments ranging from the disciplining, distancing, unease, disgust or hatred towards a queer other (who may be an embodied other or a dimension of the self: see ABjECTiON; psychoanalytic theory). By contrast, heterosexism (also called hetero normativity) refers to structures or agencies in society that privilege and normalize male female sexual relations over same sex (or queered) ones, as well as the gendered per fORMANCES that accompany them (see PERfORMATlviTY). The terms may refer to structural barriers, or to human agency, con sciousness or subjectivity. Most if not all re cent work across queer geography and sexuality and space studies explore, docu ment or critique the panoply of forms that either homophobia or heterosexism can take. (NEW PARAGRAPH) There are at least two ways that geography is implicated in these terms. The first is that the topical interests of geographers, especially spa tiality and nature culture relations, are di mensions through which critical geographers are exposing and critiquing homophobia and heterosexism. For example, the popular spatial metaphor of ?the closet? to describe the con cealment, denial, or erasure of gays and les bians has been spatialized to show how homophobia and heterosexism work through spatial arrangements and practices (Brown, 2000). Scales of analyses have ranged from the body (how sexuality functions as a performative, and its spatial situatedness af fects performance), to the global (as in ques tions of international tourism, migration and REfUGEES, and post colonial legacies; e.g. Puar, 2002). Both place and movement can be as sessed as heteronormative or homophobic. (NEW PARAGRAPH) The second way of conceiving the links be tween geography and homophobia involves the discipline?s long and under exposed his tory of internal homophobia and heterosex ism, which has certainly been associated with its masculinism. Yet the discipline has long been populated by lesbians, gays, bi and omni sexuals, even transgendered and trans sexual people, some in quite prominent posi tions, with stellar reputations. These geographers have often experienced damaging and painful repercussions because of their sex ual identities or practices (e.g. homophobia was implicated in the closure of the Harvard geography department; see also Valentine, 2000). The widest array of charges of homo phobia and heterosexism have been brought by Binnie (1997), who has detected strains, not simply in conventional positivist branches of the discipline, but also in allied critical areas such as Marxist geography and fEMiNiST geography. mb (NEW PARAGRAPH) Suggested reading (NEW PARAGRAPH) Bell and Valentine (1995); Browne, Brown and Lim (2006). (NEW PARAGRAPH)
hot money
Portfolio capital iNvestMeNt that is both short term and volatile in nature (Froot, O?Connell and Seasholes, 2001). Hot money accumulates rapidly in periods of eco nomic boom, but dissipates quickly in times of crisis, which tends to exacerbate and intensify such crises. Portfolio capital investment is risk averse, and is directed mainly towards property and financial coMModities, for which there are well developed secondary Mar kets. These secondary markets expedite both the rapid entry and exit of money from an economy. The inflow and outflow of hot money has been associated with numerous fi nancial crises since the beginning of the twen tieth century, and recently with financial crises in South East Asia, Russia and Argentina. aL (NEW PARAGRAPH) Suggested reading (NEW PARAGRAPH) Froot, O?Connell and Seasholes (2001); Naylor and Hudson (2004). (NEW PARAGRAPH)
Hotelling model
A classic model of the loca tion strategy deployed by firms seeking to maxi mize their Market share through the size of their hiNterLaNds. The original model pro duced by Harold Hotelling (1895 1973: see Hotelling, 1929) identified the strategies of two firms competing in a linear market, where customers were evenly distributed, and was generalized with the example of ice cream sellers competing on a beach (Alonso, 1964b). As formulated, the model showed that, what ever their starting locations (e.g. figure 1), the two firms would converge at the centre of the beach (figure 2), from where each would serve the half of the customers closer to them than to their competitor: those furthest from the centre would pay more for the product because of the greater transport costs/time involved in mak ing a purchase. The most efficient equilibrium distribution for two firms sharing the market equally would be that shown in figure 3, with each serving half of the beach and the total transport costs less than in figure 2. Each firm would realize, however, that if it moved closer to the centre it could capture customers from its competitor, hence the two providers congregate there. (NEW PARAGRAPH) Hotelling?s model has been used to account for patterns of aggLoMeratioN under certain circumstances, and has also been applied to other competitive situations, exemplified by the large literature on the ?spatial theory of (NEW PARAGRAPH) voting? developed from Downs? (1957) classic work (cf. public choice theory). rj (NEW PARAGRAPH)
household
A socio economic formation comprised of one or more individuals who share living quarters, often framed as those who ?eat from the same bowl and live under one roof?. While this notion provides some latitude against the common assumption that the household is coterminous with family, whether nuclear or extended, it lacks the spa tial robustness to encompass more expansive notions, including the increasingly common formation of transnational households. Wright and Ellis (2006) frame the household ?simultaneously as a spatial scaLe and a set of practices; not situated in one place, but involv ing heterogeneous lives interacting with others all over town?, or further afield, as recent MigratioN research suggests. (NEW PARAGRAPH) Considering the household as a spatial scaLe can illuminate its structural relations with other scales, and bring to the fore the interconnections between production and social reproduc tion at its heart. This understanding provides a corrective for the common assumption that the household is a ?natural? unit; a perspective that allows it to be disregarded in economic analyses, its substantial contributions to local and national economies ignored or taken for granted. But without the domestic labour pro vided in and through the household, ?there would be no labour force and no society? (Townsend and Momsen 1987). Not only is the household at the nexus of social reproduc tion, which encompasses biological reproduc tion if not generational, then that associated with daily sustenance cultural reproduction, and consumption, but it is also the site of economic production, including both paid and unremunerated work. The balance between these activities as much as who carries them out and for whom is a social question. While household members manage, maintain, per petuate, contest and sometimes change these arrangements and the social relations that hold them in place, they do so in a particular histor ical and geographical context. (NEW PARAGRAPH) Prior to the interventions of feminist theor ists beginning in the late 1970s (see fEMlNlSM), the household was assumed to include affect ively related individuals with largely homogen ous interests, and altruistic and co operative intentions towards each other (e.g. Folbre, 1986), but as Townsend and Momsen (1987) long ago cautioned, the household can be an ?arena of subordination?. It is a realm of differ entiated and unequal social relations, struc tured by age, class, ethnicity, gender, life course, nationality, race and sexuality (e.g. Brydon and Chant, 1989). These internal divi sions, which are associated with particular and shifting divisions of labour and allocations of resources, are constituted by as they are constitutive of broader social relations ofpro duction and reproduction. Household com position; location (whether matrilocal, patrilocal or neither); power dynamics, such as who heads the household and under what terms implicit or explicit; and the allocation of work and consumption practices among mem bers are effects of this interrelationship. These differences are historically and geographically contingent. If capitalist industrialization has been associated with the separation of home and work, and households of individuals or nuclear families tend to predominate in the global north, while extended family house holds are more common in the global south, it is important to remember that these differ ences themselves vary according to class, race, (NEW PARAGRAPH) ethnicity, sexuality and location, among other things. ck (NEW PARAGRAPH) Suggested reading (NEW PARAGRAPH) Marston (2000); Walton Roberts and Pratt (NEW PARAGRAPH) (2005). (NEW PARAGRAPH)
housing class
A social group defined by its housing tenure (Rex and Moore, 1967). It suggests that tenure status shapes the material conditions of life. Rex developed a categoriza tion of housing classes including owners, tenants in publicly or privately owned hous ing, and lodgers in another household?s dwell ing, among others which permitted analysis of the experiences of immigrant groups in the UK and emphasized the role of urban man agers and gatekeepers in constraining hous ing market choice (see housing studies). Those interested in urban politics have also debated the concept, since it suggests that housing class interests might be the basis for collective political action (Purcell, 2001). EM (NEW PARAGRAPH) Suggested reading (NEW PARAGRAPH) Rex and Moore (1967). (NEW PARAGRAPH)
housing studies
An interdisciplinary field with a wide array of research foci, dealing with aspects of housing from property mar ket dynamics, through the provision and man agement of special needs accommodation, to questions of design and sustainability, among others. Geographical approaches to housing have frequently addressed the uneven geographies of housing production, consump tion, meaning and policy. These uneven geog raphies reflect and produce differences in housing within cities, across countries, and between more and less developed countries. (NEW PARAGRAPH) One focus is the provision of housing via various mechanisms (Ball, Harloe and Martens, 1988). The production process leads to the spatial segregation of certain types of housing and therefore, certain people in specific neighbourhoods a process that is frequently inflected with racism. The nature of provision, tenure type, the cost of housing, and its quality and maintenance all vary in ways that impact its character not only as a shelter but also as a symbolic element of the landscape (e.g. Bunnell, 2002), as an invest ment and as a resource that shapes residents? life chances. (NEW PARAGRAPH) For those with high incomes who can buy into neighbourhoods where the housing stock is appreciating, home ownership pre sents opportunities for capital gain. These opportunities are, in many countries (e.g. the USA), supported by state policies that provide subsidies and tax benefits for homeowners or that, more generally, mitigate the negative impacts of other land uses on higher income residential neighbourhoods (cf. urbaN and regioNaL pLaNNiNg; zoNiNg). Low income owners, on the other hand, frequently face dis crimination based on income, race and other factors (cf. redLiNiNg; urbaN MaNagers aNd gatekeepers) and are often penalized finan cially as risky investments. Furthermore, they frequently face instability in their neighbour hoods as a result, for instance, of geNtrifica tioN and urbAN reNEwM. These conditions enforce and deepen existing patterns of social polarization. (NEW PARAGRAPH) Similarly, while housing no matter what the tenure type is a resource that aids in access to jobs and various types of services from shops to recreational facilities, it is a socially and spatially uneven resource. For example, high quality food at reasonable prices is often diffi cult to find near low income housing, as are high quality, safe recreational facilities for chiLdreN. These factors, among others, both reflect and reinforce inequalities relating to nu trition and health and are, in turn, directly re lated to housing (Smith and Mallinson, 1997). (NEW PARAGRAPH) The social, economic and geographical characteristics of housing production and coNsuMptioN are closely related to pubLic poLicy. In different countries and at different times, policy makers see housing as a tool for and/or an object of policy intervention. Hous ing construction has been used to kick start economies (cf. suburbaNizatioN) and to re shape iNNer cities (cf. urbaN reNewaL). It has also been central to attempts by states, charities and other organizations to improve social conditions such as health. The state?s decreasing role in public housing provision raises new challenges in this regard, but has been paralleled by growth in alternative forms of housing tenure associated with community development (DeFilippis, 2004) and in at tempts to reduce the impact of housing devel opment on the environment. eM (NEW PARAGRAPH) Suggested reading (NEW PARAGRAPH) Ball, Harloe and Martens (1988). (NEW PARAGRAPH)
human agency
The ability of people to act, usually regarded as emerging from consciously held intentions, and as resulting in observable effects in the human world. Questions about whether individuals have the freedom to act or whether their actions are constrained, or even determined, by structural forces have been at the heart of many debates in contemporary human geogrAphy. (NEW PARAGRAPH) At the turn of the twentieth century, indi viduals? actions were viewed by geographers as being the result of a higher logic or force, whether the imperatives of eNvironMentaL deterMinisM or the conditioning of Sauer?s (1925) ?superorganic? notion of culture. There were exceptions such as Vidal de la Blache?s (1926) possibiLism, which allowed a range of possible actions to emerge from any situation, but for most the role of the individ ual was secondary to process. (NEW PARAGRAPH) In the 1950s and 1960s, the introduction of spatiaL science allowed a decision Making agent, but only in as far as it followed the logic of neo cLAssicAL economic modelling. The adoption in geography of structural ver sions of mArxism also regarded individual mo tivations and interpretations as necessarily secondary to the determinants of the struc tures of historicAL mAteriALism. humanistic geogrAphy emerged in the 1970s with the stated goal of reanimating geography, to put people and their thoughts, emotions and be liefs at the heart of the discipline. It offered a challenge to structural Marxism, which humanistic geographers felt offered ?a passive model of man [sic] that is conservative and results in an obfuscation of the process by which human beings can and do change the world? (Duncan and Ley, 1982, p. 54). Focus ing on issues such as dwelling, LifeworLd and rhythms, humanistic geographers believed that social life was constructed through human actions. For them, structure appeared due to reification, and seemed ?autonomous only be cause it is anonymous? (Duncan, 1980). While there were attempts by some humanistic geog raphers to recognise the limitations of human agency such as Ley?s (1983) focus on inter subjectivity most tended towards epistemo logical ideALism. This led to the criticism that humanistic geography was na?ve about the limitations put on individual ability to act. (NEW PARAGRAPH) structurAtion theory and reALism sought to explain how social structures were both outcome and medium of the agency that con stitutes them. Giddens? (1984) structuration theory avoids the extremes of arguing that society is comprised of individual acts or is determined by social forces by holding these two extremes in tension with one another. It is through repetition that the acts of indivi dual agents reproduce social structures such as institutions, moral codes, norms and conventions. (NEW PARAGRAPH) Post structuralists (see post structuralism), following Foucault (1980a [1976]), argued that the coherent, independent subjectivity re quired for conscious agency is an epiphenom enon of discourse: there is no prior (NEW PARAGRAPH) ontological self but, rather, a sense of self hood is an effect of discourse. The ?self contained, authentic subject conceived by hu manism to be discoverable below a veneer of cultural and ideological overlay is in reality a construct of that very humanist discourse? (Alcoff, 1988, p. 415). Others have critiqued the intentionality of humanism and structura tion theory where agency is equated with ac tion, thus assuming intentionality and capacity to act. As a result, some have investigated psychoanalyic theory to expose the motiv ations behind actions, to reveal that suBjECTS are not entirely self aware and self fashioning agents. Feminists have reacted more power fully to postmodern and post structural pro nouncements of the ?death of the subject?, wondering whether this had occurred just when the male, white, subject might have had to share its status with those formerly excluded from agency (see Fox Genovese, 1986; Mas cia Lees, Sharp and Cohen, 1989: see also global warming). (NEW PARAGRAPH) The structure agency debate continued through the discipline?s cultural turn, with some fearful that the favoured discursive ap proach represented a new determinism that denied individual agency see the debate be tween Duncan and Duncan (1996) and Mitchell (1995). For others, the privileging of discourse was an over interpretation of agency, which regarded people as overly the oretical beings in their own decision making. As a result, some have turned to ethno methodology and non representational theory approaches in an attempt to record human agency without imposing the inten tionality of discourse (Thrift, 1997c). (NEW PARAGRAPH) Another dimension of the debate over agency concerns the extent to which humans are the only active or creative agents. Trad itional cultural geographers challenged the an drocentric accounts of early agriculture by suggesting that certain plants and animals may ?elect? to live near humans rather than human subjects knowledgeably selecting spe cies for domestication. Others have offered theoretically more sophisticated accounts of the effects of non human actors. Haraway (1992, p. 331) suggests broadening our under standing of the place of agency, arguing that non humans ?are not actants in the human sense, but they are part of the functional col (NEW PARAGRAPH) lective that makes up an actant?, and has developed this in terms of the ?cyborg? subject. Whatmore?s (2002a) ?more than human? geography similarly highlights the agency of a variety of objects (see actor network the ory), and has offered an image of a network of capable, but not necessarily conscious, agents. jsh (NEW PARAGRAPH) Suggested reading (NEW PARAGRAPH) Duncan and Ley (1982); Giddens (1984); Thrift (1997c); Vidal de la Blache (1926); Whatmore (2002a). (NEW PARAGRAPH)

Other books

Emily and Emerald by Kelly McKain
Rosehaven by Catherine Coulter
Belgarath the Sorcerer by David Eddings
The Buried Giant by Kazuo Ishiguro
Brightleaf by Rand, Raleigh
Knight's Mistress by C. C. Gibbs
Salvage for the Saint by Leslie Charteris
Hillstation by Robin Mukherjee
No mires atrás by Karin Fossum