Rethinking (New) Economic Geography Models: Taking Geography and History More Seriously

Harry Garretsen*, Ron Martin

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

87 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Two aspects of New Economic Geography models are often singled out for criticism, especially by geographers: the treatment of geography, typically as a pre-given, fixed and highly idealized abstract geometric space; and the treatment of history, typically as 'logical' time (the movement to equilibrium in a model's solution space) rather than real history. In this paper we examine the basis for these criticisms, and explore how far and in what ways NEG models might be made more credible with respect to their representation of geography and history, and particularly whether and to what extent the work of geographers themselves provides some insights in this regard. We argue that the conceptualization of space and time is in fact a challenge for both NEG theorists and economic geographers, and that, notwithstanding their ontological and epistemological differences, both groups would benefit from an interchange of ideas on this front.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)127-160
Number of pages34
JournalSpatial Economic Analysis
Volume5
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun-2010

Keywords

  • New economic geography
  • proper economic geography
  • history
  • geography
  • INCREASING RETURNS
  • TRANSPORT COSTS
  • PATH DEPENDENCE
  • GREAT-BRITAIN
  • REGIONAL WAGE
  • CITY GROWTH
  • SPACE-TIME
  • TRADE
  • AGGLOMERATION
  • EQUILIBRIUM

Cite this