Sustainable Geography E-Book

Roger Brunet

• Herausgeber: John Wiley & Sons
• Kategorie: Wissenschaft und neue Technologien
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 719

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2013

Beschreibung

Sustainable Geography recalls the system and laws of geographical space production, tackles the hardcore of geography and presents models and organizations through a regional analysis and the dynamics of territorial structures and methods. The book also describes the general idea of discontinuities, trenches, the anti-dialectical and redivision-uniformity in the globalization and addresses the Transnational Urban Systems and Urban Network in Europe.

Leseprobe

Table of Contents

Preface

Author Biography

PART 1. GEOGRAPHICAL SPACE PRODUCTION: SYSTEMSAND LAWS

Part 1. Introduction

Chapter 1. Geography: the Hard Core of a Social Science

1.1. The geographical question

1.2. Geographical space is produced

1.3. The reasons for the production of space

1.4. The organization of space

1.5. The logical field and the idea of a system in the production of space

1.6. The environment and the memories of the system

1.7. Geographical figures

1.8. Scientific practice

1.9. Conclusion

Chapter 2. The Geon and Energy of the System

2.1. Populations and working forces

2.2. Resources to actualize

2.3. Information as a source of negentropy

2.4. Production means and organization of space

2.5. The place of the capital and its distribution

2.6. The cybernetics of the system

2.7. Back to A

Chapter 3. Geographical Fields as the Environment of Places

3.1. Cardinal fields

3.2. Planetary fields

3.3. Cultural fields

3.4. The effects of exposure and attraction

3.5. Fields and geographical distributions

Chapter 4. Laws of Geographical Space Production

4.1. Geographic logic and the law of profit

4.2. Propositions of laws

4.3. Environment in systems

Chapter 5. Sense of Distance

5.1. Revelation of the distance

5.2. Distance measure

5.3. Ruptures of the distance

5.4. The represented distance: isolation and entrenchment

5.5. The distance and difference

5.6. End of distance?

PART 2. BROKEN SPACE

Part 2. Introduction

Chapter 6. Discontinuities and Thresholds

6.1. Discontinuity theory (1965)

6.2. Discontinuities and catastrophism

6.3. The region and discontinuity

6.4. Back to the discontinuity (1997)

6.5. Three examples of discontinuities in the geomorphological processes

Chapter 7. Territory Retrenchments

7.1. The pure and the wall

7.2. Retrenchments at the center

7.3. Separated peripheries

7.4. Folds and double folds

7.5. From retrenchment to res publica

Chapter 8. Antiworld and Alienation

8.1. Alienation

8.2. Antiworld

Chapter 9. Free Zones in the International Division of Labor

9.1. The territories of the antiworld

9.2. The complexity of the concept of international division of labor

9.3. The free zones: simplicity of speech, complexity of the roles

9.4. The golden belt

9.5. Territories without frankness, buccaneering territories

Chapter 10. Geography of the Gulag Archipelago

10.1. The sources of this survey

10.2. Geographical history

10.3. The organization of the archipelago

10.4. The modes of production

10.5. Conclusion

Chapter 11. Geography of Migrations or the Antiworld in Spate

11.1. Waves and currents of emigration

11.2. Wanderings of insecurity, fracture of Mediterraneans

11.3. Migrations systems: nomadism or wandering

11.4. Conclusion

PART 3. MODELSAND CHOREMATICS

Part 3. Introduction

Chapter 12. Building Models for Spatial Analysis

12.1. From spatial organization to models

12.2. Choremes

12.3. The syntax of choremes or the linguistics of geography

Chapter 13. Model Maps and Choremes

13.1. Models and choremes

13.2. The rules of art

13.3. The procedure

13.4. “In Poland, i.e. nowhere” (A. Jarry)

13.5. The language of maps

13.6. Bibliography and References

Chapter 14. Models in Geography? A Sense to Research

14.1. What is a model?

14.2. Refutations

14.3. From theoretical practice to necessary hypotheses

14.4. Requirements of modeling

14.5. Conclusion

Chapter 15. Mediterranean Models

15.1. The lake

15.2. The focus

15.3. The straight

15.4. The isthmus

15.5. The crescents

15.6. The barrier

15.7. The chott

Chapter 16. The Aquitaine Region as a Corner

16.1. The southwest corner of France

16.2. Openings to seize

16.3. Dissymmetries of nature

16.4. Two urban systems

16.5. Regions and resources

Chapter 17. Structural Dynamic of the City of Tours (France)

17.1. Administrative center of a province on a Paris radius

17.2. The Val effect

17.3. The metropolization and the network star

17.4. Tours: social inequalities

Chapter 18. Analysis and Representation of Spatial Organizations: A Few Models

18.1. Openings

18.2. Color images

18.3. Other illustrations

PART 4. SCALESOF GLOBALIZATIONAND MOVING EUROPE

Part 4. Introduction

Chapter 19. Ways, Forms, and Figures of Globalization

19.1. Economic globalization

19.2. The global village

19.3. Global ecology

19.4. How globalization changes the world

19.5. Re-differentiations and polycentrism

19.6. Contradictions and permanencies

19.7. Representations

Chapter 20. Aspects of Globalization: the Diamond Revolution

20.1. The De Beers empire: a heritage of British imperialism

20.2. After globalization by monopoly, polycentric globalization

20.3. Rupture and uncertainties at the turn of the millennium

Chapter 21. European Fields and Mainlines

21.1. The peninsula of the old continent

21.2. The European backbone

21.3. The Ring

21.4. The European trellis

21.5. Centralities, barriers and new found solidarities

21.6. Conclusions

21.7. Appendix: Blue Banana

Chapter 22. Transnational Urban Systems in Europe: Towards a New Modernity

22.1. Europe as a milieu

22.2. Can transnational city systems help Europe?

22.3. Conclusions

Chapter 23. Russia in Revolutions

PART 5. GEOGRAPHYINTOTHE CITY PROSPECTS

Part. 5. Introduction

Chapter 24. Regaining Reason

24.1. El sueño de la razón

24.2. Unsustainable city

24.3. Territories in competition

24.4. Si les signes vous faschent

24.5. The marshland of Entelechies

24.6. Serio ludere

Chapter 25. What is Geography?

25.1. The field of geography

25.2. Geography as a science

25.3. Geographies

25.4. Geography as an established fact

25.5. Applied geography

Chapter 26. Geography in the Public Place

26.1. As an increased desire for geography

26.2. Five equations for fractions of society

26.3. Geography as Janus: two sides of the profession

26.4. Currents and patterns, or navigating without sinking

26.5. For socially useful works

26.6. Conclusion

Chapter 27. Geography and Human Rights

27.1. The difference

27.2. Resorting to nature

27.3. The revealing space

27.4. Conclusion

Chapter 28. Dimensions of Sustainable Development

28.1. The scale of sustainable development is global

28.2. Worldwide contradictions of sustainable development

28.3. Local scale: untenable “sustainable city”

28.4. The intermediate scales

28.5. Conclusions

Conclusion. Along the Way

Index

First published 2011 in Great Britain and the United States by ISTE Ltd and John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Apart from any fair dealing for the purposes of research or private study, or criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, this publication may only be reproduced, stored or transmitted, in any form or by any means, with the prior permission in writing of the publishers, or in the case of reprographic reproduction in accordance with the terms and licenses issued by the CLA. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside these terms should be sent to the publishers at the undermentioned address:

ISTE Ltd

John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

27-37 St George’s Road

111 River Street

London SW19 4EU

Hoboken, NJ 07030

UK

USA

www.iste.co.uk

www.wiley.com

© ISTE Ltd 2011

The rights of Roger Brunet to be identified as the author of this work have been asserted by him in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Brunet, Roger, 1931-

  Sustainable geography / Roger Brunet.

    p. cm.

  Includes bibliographical references and index.

  ISBN 978-1-84821-192-6

  1. Geography--Philosophy. 2. Geographical perception. 3. Human geography. I. Title.

  G70B825 2010

  910--dc22

2010038378

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A CIP record for this book is available from the British Library

ISBN 978-1-84821-192-6

Preface

Like any living science, geography has changed considerably. Fortunate enough to be both a witness and to participate in these transformations, I have observed that it has not been a linear evolution but rather has advanced in stages. Certain people believe that the evolution was advanced by a succession of negations: it is easier for them to forget a moment rather than integrate its most reliable assets. Even if science is not shielded from trends, it progresses more by successive assimilations, by accretion, rather than by negative events and omissions that would only set it back; this is its strength over time and its sustainability, contrary to popular opinion.

From nature to man

A key moment was the period between the 1960s and 1970s, when geography, while evolving towards the social sciences, took on a more scientific aspect. This could seem like a paradox, but is not. For a long time, geography was dominated by the practice of natural sciences. It studied the Earth as a planet, primarily in its physical aspects, limiting itself to the Earth’s epidermis, as said then, the ground over which humanity spread, its natural habitat, rather than humanity itself was the focus of attention. It was said to study “the relationships of man and of nature”, which was partly true of previous eras.

Towards 1950, this was no longer even very accurate: geography was focused on nature, and even on a single aspect of nature, the landforms. It had learnt to be somewhat thorough, but without sufficient scientific grounds. The training of geographers remained literary, in the old tradition of tales of journeys and exploration. Its forays into human societies were characterized by this: even though it was interested in certain groups, it was especially interested in the “natives”, the exotic peoples that were called “primitive” at the time. In this respect, contemporary geography in the media, as found in Geo or National Geographic has not significantly changed: preferring the picturesque, it always favors “nature” and the latent curiosity towards the most marginal groups of humans in our globalized world.

In the mean time, nonetheless, physical geography had thankfully developed, and better concerned itself with the living aspects of nature, especially plants and soils, as well as with the atmospheric and oceanic circulations. It has needed to get closer to natural science and even physics specialists and their methods. It has discovered that by concerning itself with accidents it could integrate the notion of risk, which at the same time was to adopt the point of view of human societies. More thorough than human geography before the 1960s, physical geography has kept on its scientific course, all the while becoming more and more interested in human societies and integrating the environmental dimension precisely: it became an ecology.

Until the 1960s, approximately, human and regional geography was primarily descriptive and monographic. It could use numbers in abundance, but forgot to draw conclusions from these. When it tried to generalize, at best, it was by describing certain well-defined ideal types, based on appearances. The worst case scenario was that it would lose itself in dangerous political doctrines, which attempted to justify imperialist and aggressive attitudes. It was on the name of “nature” that it depended totally and to which it submitted all its ideas: the doctrines of vital space (Lebensraum), of natural borders (Naturgrenze), justifications for the colonization of “primitive” countries, the Geopolitik of the German generals as well as Pinochet, and “the land that does not lie”, which embodied the “true” peasant values – Blut und Boden in German.

Is there a new geography?

The end of Nazism meant that these wanderings were more or less forgotten. New generations of geographers were looking for something else, and to better understand the world, its divisions and its potential. Several openings arose: the thoughts of cybernetics (N. Wiener and L. von Bertalanffy) and system theories resulting from “hard” science; the work of philosophers and sociologists or anthropologists, such as C. Levi-Strauss, the active discussions of Marxist hypotheses; the development of models and means of calculation by economists. The research environment had changed, while at the same time provoking a true variety of approaches and attitudes.

Then we began to discuss models and theory in human geography, particularly in urban studies. The trend has been more swift and more technical with English-speaking geographers: the publications of T. Hägerstrand, B. Berry and P. Haggett have had an impact, as well as the theoretical ideas of G. Olsson, W. Bunge and P. Gould. The trend has been slower in France and in the more “literary” countries that have Latin origins, as well as in Russia where the “dominance of nature” has mobilized geographers, and where the social sciences were repressed. At least people could start thinking of systems, models, theories and practice at the same time. It seemed like a “new geography” ; it was, at least, a real change.

The trend became more generalized, and inevitably there were contradictions. It had its own tangents, just like in economy, towards the dehumanization of human actions in favor of supposedly acting abstractions, of quasi-entelechies forgetting the real players of the geographic space. A “radical” geography appeared with the aim to make the dominated players and the oppressed minorities the center of the debate. This was renamed “social geography” in France, and it put forward a “spatialism” that was truly exaggerated or sometimes imaginary. The report that I wrote for the French government in 19821 acknowledged this evolution of the practice of geography towards a science of man and society, the broadening of its interests, the way it looked at and discussed things.

The 1980s established the background trend, by spreading the precious methods of calculation and cartography made possible by personal computers, and then the Internet and the diffusion of methods and techniques of scientific analysis. They slowed down the protests: geography did not escape the so-called postmodernist attitudes, the relativist, and “constructivist” critics and many other “ists”, which proves that it was in good health. Nonetheless, these were and remain watered down versions, somewhat behind the times, and rather vague: the learning of social sciences is still an unfinished task.

At least, the expression of geography as a social science has become even more accentuated. There has been a paradigm shift: we have gone from the “relation between man and nature” to the production and organization of the spaces of humanity. Progress is sensitive, however, even when geography deals with environmental questions, as it takes on more firmly and rigorously the comprehension of human processes and actions on land. It is regrettable that it is so little mentioned in contemporary debates on global ecology and global warming. Its sense of scale, what happens in the field, as well as climatic oscillations, would enable many geographers to make an impact in terms of measure and common sense: how the territories are managed is a good indicator of what needs to be done and how big the problem really is.

Towards a sustainable geography

For a long time, these trends did not really coincide with regional geography, which was what interested me. What appeared to me as key in our research as geographers was to understand the existence, creation, and evolution of different regions: why it is so here, and different over there? Why do these differences in landscapes, populations, activities, of development exist? Why were there even different names, and did they correspond to different content, under different appearances? What lies behind the countless facets of the world? Just as in painting, it was necessary to “give a shape to the shapeless”, or better still to understand the different forms that the “face of the Earth” took on. Little by little I felt the need to look for the logic behind the organization and the differentiation of these spaces, and finally the production of these spaces.

Geographical spaces are the result of the work of human societies, in spaces that are already present, which have been transformed by previous societies. It is, therefore, necessary to know and understand the players and their thought process, the rules of production, and the organization of different territories; and the networks that link them together. The forms that we study all have a social logic, that go together with inherited forms, which are, in part, of natural origin. This is true on all levels: the world as a whole, the continents, the big regions, the countries and their districts.

The various aspects of the work presented in this book were constructed over a long period of time, with publications dating from 1952 to the present date. The environment has been modified by the transition to mass teaching, the revolution of communication and information, the reconfiguration of the world and of its centers, and the rise of new fears. The intellectual environment has also changed, going from empirical to Marxist debates, followed by quantitative and structuralist movements, and then deconstructive-constructive and postmodern, and a few neo-religions of market, profit, geopolitics and ecologism. These shifts and breaks affect everyone. However, a general idea remains, or maybe, just a way of seeing things.

My work aims to build a reasoned and rational geography, keen to understand the logic behind the production of geographic spaces in all their aspects, the rules of their organization, and all the diversity of their forms. It has shared common ground with the geography of English-speaking countries, but is different in its cultural background and its expression. Among others, and in its own way, it has sought to be worthwhile in the field of social sciences and maybe also useful in the management and development of territories. Therefore, contributing to establish the basis of a sustainable geography:

A sustainable geography is a geography that I can support, maintain, and justify, because of its place among the other sciences and by its scientific practice. It is a geography that, in its processes, can realistically survive the changes of the world and the places within it, all the while constantly incorporating new assets. A geography that does not idealize nature as eternal and invariable data, and even less so in its “pre-industrial” situation, as was stated in the conclusion of the summit of the UN in Copenhagen (December 2009), but which takes into account the ability that humanity has to adapt and evolve to a nature that is changing and different depending on the regions, nowhere or ever “ideal”. A geography that has a solid theory based on verifiable facts. A geography that is capable of adapting to the new tools of knowledge and research, as well as world changes and the representations of the world, while keeping a necessary distance from the object. A geography that is fundamentally critical and that is never satisfied with the state of science or of the world.

This book is an illustration as well as an explanation of the process that aims to achieve sustainable geography. It brings together old texts (either refashioned or summarized) which have been published in a variety of journals and books, as well as new unpublished texts. The first part is about the fundamentals of the theory behind the production of geographic spaces. The others deal with certain aspects that have particularly interested me: the ruptures and discontinuities in space; the analysis of structures and spatial dynamics; the scales of this analysis; the uses and content of geography.

Acknowledgements

Let me take this opportunity to thank all those to whom I owe something: friends that accompanied me on the adventures of L’Espace Géographique and Mappemonde, and the RECLUS group, who have enriched my work with their discussions and support; all those whose philosophical and scientific writings inspired further thought, obviously too numerous to be cited – with nonetheless a special mention among the geographers for Peter Haggett and Peter Gould, for Jean-Bernard Racine, Jean Tricart, Henri Reymond, François Durand-Dastès, Olivier Dollfus, Giuseppe Dematteis and Horacio Capel.

1 Brunet Roger, “Rapport sur la géographie française” , L’Espace Géographique, vol. 3, pp. 196-214, 1982.

Author Biography

Born in Toulouse in 1931, I studied at the University of Toulouse. My first research projects (1951-1953) were geomorphological, on the one hand on the forms and erosion of the Terrefort hills of Toulouse, on the other hand on the high Pyrenean mountains and the small glaciers that are found there: a pleasant time, a time of field work and exploration of mysteries. I also wrote several reports and articles between 1951 and 19571. Then, after a brief spell as a high-school teacher, I returned to university to dedicate myself to human and regional geography, which were, at the time, in my opinion, extremely archaic and only loosely based on science. Changing this was the motivation for my PhD thesis.

The main thesis took me 8 years (1957-1965), as required by the French doctorate system at the time; it was based on the analysis of the delay and transformations of the countryside around Toulouse2. I attempted to argue a traditional and careless explanation for this situation from the “whims of the climate”. I could demonstrate that they were mainly due to the history of rural property: the bourgeoisie of the landowners, via sharecropping, had sucked the plus-values of wheat production, without investing in productive activities; this had stopped any serious attempt at agricultural investment, fixing impoverished workers in a polyculture of self-consummation.

The recent progress came about with new capital, especially from North Africa, and attempts at cooperation and training, as well the progressive disappearance of sharecropping; this showed that these fields were perfectly able to support modern production. This research was based on 1,300 villages, obviously before the dawn of computers. It required a large amount of fieldwork, of historical research, statistical research, and numerous interviews that enabled me to meet fascinating people, rich personalities, gleaming subtleties, and kept me from all illusion of “peasant wisdom”, mostly made of routine and ruse.

A “complementary thesis” was needed in another domain: I decided to work (in 1965) on discontinuity phenomena3, in opposition to an idea that was widely spread among the best geomorphologists. For them, a break in an evolution or on a slope could only be exogenous, an external accident. My idea, based on numerous readings of Marxian and systemic literature, was to demonstrate that breaks, and even reversals and changes in quality, could come from simple progressive changes in quantity in a continuous evolution. I found a number of examples of this, whether in physical geography (water, climate, vegetation forms and landforms), or in human geography (densities, distance to the town, etc.) and I came to see that the “region”, sensu lato, was an expression of the discontinuity of the spatial systems.

I kept on this path, guiding student's dissertations towards “rural suburbs”. In parallel, my teaching had led me to reflect on regional cartography: in 1962, I published a manual on the state of art, and was faced with the limitations of “synthesis” maps. Research done on rural suburbs, readings of the then new cybernetics (N. Wiener and L. von Bertalanffy) and the contemporary reading of model-rich books in English (P. Haggett, R. Abler, J. Adams & P. Gould, K. Chapman, etc.) that were starting to appear, which made me think about the concepts of system, structure, model, and about the methods of research and representation that could be deduced from this in regional geography

It was in Reims in the Champagne region (1967-1974) that I continued this research in more depth and the teaching that I associated with this in theoretical and quantitative geography, all the while publishing a collection of essays on rural districts4. I had decided to leave Toulouse to head a new geography department in a university that was being formed, which gave me total freedom to work as I saw fit, even if the material means were limited and teaching took up a lot of time. The students, extremely motivated and happy to be able to benefit from a new university, were a great help. Along with Etienne Juillard of Strasbourg University, we were able to acquire from the National Center of Scientific Research a “cooperative research program” dedicated to spatial systems. My first publications on the systems and geography models are from this time5.

Those years were also a time of great demand in urban development. The support of the DATAR (governmental organism for the development of the territory) enabled several universities, led by Jacqueline Beaujeu-Garnier of Paris, to create a cooperation to study the Paris Basin; I had to manage it and to work on the “crown cities” surrounding Paris. In Reims we created a whole series of analyses of towns in the Champagne region, in strong liaison with the public services and professional organizations. I then created a periodical (TIGR, Travaux de l 'Institut de Géographie de Reims, 1969) that is still going today, and managed a large Atlas of the Champagne-Ardenne region (1973). Together with the Law Department, in 1971, I created an Institute of Development and Environment of Reims University (IATEUR), which also still exists and trains specialists for public organizations and local authorities. The word environment was then in its infancy: we were showing an early interest in ecological questions that were not yet at the forefront of research, but which were of interest to us.

The publishers were getting their act together as well: I took the opportunity to create the scientific journal L'Espace Géographique at Doin's in 1972, with the help of a few friends, with the aim of establishing it as the high-level and modern-spirited French journal that to me was lacking among the international journals. At the same time, I had accepted a proposal from Larousse who had asked me to write a new edition of Géographie de la France in two large volumes, for which I assembled a team. Very quickly, it became a widely circulated weekly color booklet, named Découvrir la France (112 issues of 20 pages, 1972-1974) which was able to reach a wide audience: a difficult challenge, over more than 2 years, but nonetheless fascinating and encouraged by success, and followed by the books which were published according to region. I gained valuable lessons in editing, critique, writing, and graphic expression. A series of the same type on the Beautés de la France came next, but the scripts for this came from journalists and my work as editor was less busy.

In 1974 I changed position and line of work: the CNRS (National Centre of Scientific Research) asked me to be at the head of its center for documentation and information in social sciences, situated in Paris, where more than 100 people analyzed international journals in all social and human sciences, using the large computers of the time, which was groundbreaking; and to manage, at the same time, the geography information and documentation laboratory, which employed around 20 people. This was a challenge I was interested in taking on, as I felt the need at that time to better inform myself on other human sciences, convinced that the future of geography lay within these sciences, as a specialist of the spaces of humanity on Earth. During my time there, I united the different publications in a computer database named FRANCIS associated with the physical sciences PASCAL database, undertook the computerization of the venerable Bibliographie Géographique Internationale that joined FRANCIS, and created an Intergéo newscast. I almost entirely left behind geographical research to dedicate myself to this, as well as a number of international meetings, as well as to read and meditate on the other human sciences. However, I was able to write a book on the Champagne region and formalize a few ideas on the modeling of structures and spatial dynamics6.

A new circumstance could only accentuate this evolution, all the while slowing down this research, and look to new horizons: following the long-awaited victory of the left in 1981, I was asked to become a counsellor at the Ministry of Research, in charge of social sciences, and then to become head of department of social sciences within the same ministry. From 1981 to 1984, I tried to contribute to the development and financing of different human and social sciences, and necessary reforms, and be able to observe as a relative outsider, sometimes with amusement, sometimes with pain, the behaviors and conflicts of the tribe of thinkers and workers of the social sciences. I did not wish to remain too long with administrative duties, where the art of diplomacy and moderation were preferred over that of impulse, and it was not possible to convince the different and numerous libraries of human sciences that we had prepared – the new French “great library” (Bibliothèque François Mitterrand) already had all the plaudits and the media.

Being in charge of archeology, history, sociology or philosophy, I suggested to the geographers to build a new kind of research team, adequately funded, for which I received a positive response. This was the adventure of the public interest group RECLUS (Study network of the changes in the localizations and spatial units), for which, in agreement with my friends, I chose an acronym that paid tribute to élisée Reclus, the great French geographer of the 19th century. Seen as an anarchist, he had mainly worked abroad and official academic circles had ignored him on purpose: moreover, from my perspective, his work was of much superior quality and more depth than that of Vidal de la Blache, curator and sovereign, too long considered as “the” French geographer. It was necessary to decentralize: Montpellier was chosen, as an attractive and up and coming town, and I left the ministry to take direction of this group from 1984 to 1990.

Financed by more than 20 ministries and public organizations, RECLUS brought together with the Maison de la Géographie of Montpellier as many as 50 collaborators, and worked in a network with around 30 teams scattered around France, to which it entrusted part of their research and financing. RECLUS committed itself to three agendas: the publication of a new Géographie Universelle, the making of an Atlas de France, the study of feasibility of an Observatoire de la Dynamique des Localisations having as a goal to follow what was changing world geography, in particular the opening and closing of factories, mines and of facilities worth mentioning. The gamble on information technology was fundamental and, thanks to Patrick Brossier, an excellent specialist who had wished to accompany us, we were rapidly able to implement a pioneering system of automatic cartography production by integration of statistical data, as early as 1985.

The Géographie Universelle was a true collective work, requiring numerous and fruitful meetings for work and the critique of the projects. It was published from 1990 to 1996 in 10 double volumes illustrated in color; other than the direction of the collection, I was in charge of the general presentation of geography in the first volume, and of the ex-USSR, which had become in the meantime La Russie et les pays proches, in the last volume. The Atlas de France was published in 14 volumes from 1995 to 2001. The development of these publications was due to a background work, of method and form. Thousands of files were drawn up in the observatory observation, that for while published a Lettre d 'Odile ; but, regrettably, we had to conclude that the French government would not give itself the necessary means to the maintenance and success of such an observatory.

Numerous research contracts were executed during this time, for French and European public organizations and even for a few private companies, especially in terms of evaluation and prospecting of the territories. I personally invested my research time, for example, in the study of free zones and tax havens (1985-1986)7, of employment 8, of the industrial dynamics of France9, the comparison of European cities10, transport systems11, and numerous works on the Languedoc and the Mediterranean. The writing of the general volume of the Géographie Universelle (published in 1990) required a large amount of theoretical thinking, based on numerous critical discussions, whereas the use of choremes and chorematics was developing, concepts that I led to formalize, discuss and enrich. A whole series of articles on geography, its methods and its evolution, came out of this12. Large contributions to the issue of territorial development in France and in Europe were produced, causing many interventions, lessons, and conferences in the professional and associative environments.

In parallel, I continued my research on the soviet system and followed its collapse closely. I worked from 1980 on the concept of alienation of territories, and especially by the soviet system, which I was looking to understand. My trips to the USSR and Eastern Europe due to my duties in the information of social sciences had opened me up to the fundamental issues on the nature of the existing system. I published a summary of the accessible information on the geography of the Gulag 13, and a systemic sketch on the “Eastern system”14, as well as analysis of the world of geographers of the USSR15. After 1990, preparing the part of the Géographie Universelle dedicated to Russia (published in 1996), I carried out new trips in the country, with the help of a friendly professor, V. Kolosov.

Other than more or less confidential reports, RECLUS published a little over 120 books and brochures from the results of research or aiming to give the means for geographers to work, such as textbooks, developments, and free ideas in a collection called Géographie, where I published a book16. The totality of the editing work, cartography by computer and layouts, was done on site, as well as the L 'Espace Géographique, which continued its fruitful reunions of writing and debate committees, also publishing a selection of articles in English17. La Carte, mode d'emploi et Les Mots de la géographie, dictionnaire critique18 were bookshop successes and were re-edited. A new journal, Mappemonde, was created in 1986 and dedicated to geographical images (now in free access at http://mappemonde.mgm.fr). RECLUS was a place of active diffusion of graphic models and chorematic analyses, which were very rapidly diffused into education in middle schools, high schools, and even primary schools.

In 1990, I chose to transfer the leadership of RECLUS to Hervé Théry, who was prepared for it; I kept the editorial responsibilities, chiefly the direction of the two journals and the Géographie Universelle, and I organized, at the request of the Minister of Research one of the international conferences of the ministry, dedicated to “Geography: situate, evaluate, model” (Paris, December 1990). I was called to take a seat at the National Committee of Development of the Territory (1994-1995), as well as several scientific committees, and dedicated time to relationships with the media and numerous private and public organizations.

From 1996, I started explorations from the new and wonderful tool that was the Internet, extracting geographical information on a few chosen topics. In the extension of the last volume of Géographie Universelle, I published La Russie, Dictionnaire Géographique, which required a large amount of research and cartography19, as well as two volumes subtitled Raisons de Géographe20; then, in the same series, I reused my introductory text of Géographie Universelle under the title Le Déchiffrement du Monde.

The vast possibilities of the Internet and the research on nuclear energy in the world21 and on Kazakhstan22 led me to become interested in the world of the diamond, which seemed to me to be the subject of big changes; I compiled and crossed an abundant amount of documentation and published an analysis and a synthesis of the transformations of this closed world of the diamond23, accentuating a method that I think to be useful: the distinction between a constructed and reasoned tale, easy to read and the detailed “proof”, united in the form of a double dictionary of the actors and the places.

This taste for dictionaries, which I have had since I was a child, and the need to fulfil one of the functions of the geographer, which is to inform others about places, aiming for a wide public, then led me to a heavy task. Under the title France: le Trésor des Régions24, it consisted of publishing files and illustrations on the places of France: situations and landscapes, heritage, facilities and activities. The work represents the equivalent of a 250 to 500 page book for each of these 27 regions (or groups of overseas territories) and is presently completed and available for free on the Internet (http://tresordesregions.mgm.fr), but requires regular updates. At the same time, I extended several works on Europe25, models26, methods, and the place of geography27. In parallel, I continued analyses of the geography of social inequalities and on the organization of urban and regional spaces, and a reflexion on certain aspects of globalization28.

1 See Part 2, Chapter 6 in this book.

2Les Campagnes toulousaines, Publications de la Faculté des Lettres et Sciences humaines, Toulouse, 1965.

3Les phénomènes de discontinuité en géographie, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Mémoires et Documents, Paris, 1967.

4 “Quartiers ruraux du Midi toulousain”, Toulouse: Revue géographique des Pyrénées et du Sud-Ouest, 1969. “Sozialstruktur und Region im Agrargeographie”, Muenchen Studien zur Sozialgeographie und Wirtschaftsgeographie, 1968, Zum Standort der Sozialgeographie (f. W. Hartke). “La notion de quartier rural”. Bulletin de l'Association de Géographes français, 1968.

5 “Organisation de l'espace et cartographie de modèles, l'exemple du Massif Central”. L'Espace géographique, 1972. “Pour une théorie de la géographie régionale” in La Pensée géographique française (Mélanges A. Meynier), 1972. “Structure et dynamisme de l'espace français”. L'Espace Géographique, 1973. “Spatial systems and structures. A model and a case study”. Geoforum, vol. 6, 1975. “La ‘New Geography' en France”. In Human geography in France and Britain (R. Clarke & P. Pinchemel eds.), SSRC-IBG, London 1975. “Systèmes et approche systémique en géographie”. Bulletin de l'Association de Géographes Français, 1979.

6Atlas et géographie de Champagne, Pays de Meuse, Basse-Bourgogne, Flammarion, Paris, 1981. “La composition des modèles dans l'analyse spatiale”. L 'Espace géographique, vol. 4, 1980 (in this book Part 3, Chapter 14).

7Atlas des zones franches et des paradis fiscaux, Fayard-RECLUS, Paris, 1986. “Les zones franches dans la division internationale du travail”. Enna, Colloquio Il Processo Regionale, 1985 (hereafter Part 2, Chapter 9, “Sustainable Geography”). “Paradis fiscaux et lieux francs”, International Assoc. of Young Lawyers, Madeira, 1992.

8La vérité sur l'emploi en France, Larousse, Paris, 1987.

9Le redéploiement industriel, Ministère de l'Industrie et RECLUS, Paris, 1986.

10Les villes “Européennes”, DATAR-RECLUS-La Documentation française, Paris, 1989. Republished in English, Catalan, Spanish, and French by Ajuntament de Barcelona in 1991.

11 Several reports and papers, i.e. “L'Enjeu du transport”, L'Espace Géographique, vol. 3, 1993.

12 For example “Redéploiements de la géographie”, Cahiers Géographiques de Québec, 1988. “L'Aveuglante unité de la géographie”, L'Espace Géographique, 1989. “La géographie, science des territoires et des réseaux”, Cahiers de Géographie de Québec, 1996.

13 “Géographie du Goulag”. L'Espace Géographique, 1981.

14 “Le système oriental et son espace, schéma d'analyse de système”, Géopoint, Avignon, 1984.

15 “Soviet Geographers”, Soviet Geography, 1990.

16Le Territoire dans les turbulences, RECLUS, Montpellier, 1990.

17Two Decades of L'Espace Géographique, an anthology. RECLUS, Montpellier, 1993.

18La Carte, mode d'emploi, Fayard-RECLUS, Paris, 1987. Les Mots de la Géographie, dictionnaire critique, La Documentation française-RECLUS, Paris, 1992 (with R. Ferras and H. Thery).

19La Russie, Dictionnaire Géographique, La Documentation française-RECLUS, Paris, 2001.

20Champs et contrechamps, Belin, Paris, 1997. Territoires de France et d'Europe, Belin, Paris, 1997. Le Déchiffrement du Monde, Belin, Paris, 2001.

21 “Centrales nucléaires dans le Monde”, Mappemonde, vol. 60, 2000.

22 “Hauts lieux et mauvais lieux du Kazakhstan”, L 'Espace Géographique, vol. 1, 2001.

23Le Diamant, un monde en revolution, Belin, Paris, 2003.

24 Free access online at http://tresordesregions.mgm.fr.

25 “Les lignes de force de l'Europe”, Mappemonde, vol. 65, 2002. “Transnational urban systems in Europe: towards a new modernity. In I. Bekemans & E. Mira, Civitas Europa. Cities, Urban Systems and Cultural Regions Between Diversity and Convergence, P. Lang, Brussels, 2000. “Des villes comme Lleida. Place et perspectives des villes moyennes en Europe”, in C. Bellet and J. Llop Ciudades intermedias. Urbanización y Sistemilidad, El Milenio, Lleida, 2000. “La Corse, région d'Europe”, Mappemonde, vol. 76, 2004.

26 “Des modèles en géographie? Sens d'une recherche”, Bulletin de la Société de Géographie de Liège, vol. 39, 2000.

27 “La géographie sur la place: emplois et modes d'emploi”, Revue Belge de Géographie, vol. 2, 2003. “Raisons et saisons de géographe”, Geo-Carrefour, vol. 1 2003, Le Développement des territoires: lois, formes, aménagement, Région Nord-Pas-de-Calais, coll. les Rencontres du nouveau siècle, and La Tour d'Aigues, Ed. de l'Aube, Lille, 2004. “Produzione di territorio: attori e leggi nel mondo reale”. In G. Dematteis Le Frontere delle Geografia, UTET, Torino, 2009.

28 See hereafter Part 3, Chapter 17 (Tours) and Part 4, Chapter 19 (Globalization).

PART 1

Geographical Space Production: Systems and Laws

Part 1

Introduction

The production of geographic space: systems and laws

My research has led to the development of a theory on the production and organization of geographic space. It encompasses those involved in the production and their strategies, the forms produced and the use of these forms in spatial systems. This process was described in detail in 1990 in the first volume of Géographie Universelle, and revised in Le Déchiffrement du Monde (Paris: Belin 2001). The first chapter of this section (Geography: the Hard Core of a Social Science) summarizes and introduces the theory, which has been presented at several conferences but has remained unpublished.

The region is, or was, key to the work of geographers. In 1965, I put forward a proposal concerning its relationship with the idea of discontinuity in geographical space, and in 1972, I proposed a renovation of the practices of regional geography1. The differences between “polarized region” and “homogeneous region” were starting to be distinguished. The latter denotation did not seem accurate: I preferred the idea of “isoscheme region”, i.e. having the same structure2. This led me to put forward the concept of a geon as an open spatial system, fashioning a structured space. As a result the participating factors and energy systems needed to be specified. The second chapter attempts to deal with these factors (The Geon and Energy of the System).

Another notion, used in certain physical sciences, and in sociology, by P. Bourdieu, seemed appropriate to me in geography: that of the field, on which I started work in the 1970s3, when the term was not used in geography. The hypothesis is that any place, any geon, interacts with several fields, which have a distinct origin and nature and maintain a relationship with this place, or this geon: these fields are at same time the environment, are part of a system, and are modified by its existence. They condition or determine the local or regional system, except those that react to them. The field concept has contributed to the rethinking of the concept of determinism, which is what the third chapter attempts to deal with (Geographical Fields as the Environment of Places), which is also derived in part, from Le Déchiffrement du Monde.

The research on these regional and local systems, which are very different from their neighbors, even “unique”, showed me numerous regularities and constants, abundant communities of forms and structures. Excellent books on geographic models had already been published in the English language – and geomorphology had an elaborate arsenal of forms and structures at its disposal. They still had a formal side to it. These morphologies were lacking convincing arguments concerning the origin and the meaning of these regularities and its convergences in human and regional geography. For a long time I contemplated and then adopted the idea that we could talk of laws, and researched which laws regulate the production of geographical spaces. The work is ongoing. The fourth chapter (Laws of Geographical Space Production) summarizes the current state of my proposals. It is taken from the contribution of the volume dedicated to Giuseppe Dematteis in 20094.

In Chapter 5 (Sense of Distance), I discuss distance in geography and how and why, in spite of appearances, distance in geography always has a social aspect; it does not have great meaning, if not considered as a socialized measure5.

1 BRUNET R., Les phénomènes de discontinuité en géographie. Paris: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Mémoires et Documents, 1967, “Pour une théorie de la géographie régionale” in La Pensée géographique française (Mélanges A. Meynier), 1972.

2 BRUNET R., “Le quartier rural, structure régionale”, Revue géographique des Pyrénées et du Sud-Ouest, 1969.

3 BRUNET R., “La Champagne et les champs”, Travaux de l'Institut de Géographie de Reims, pp. 41-42, 1980.

4 BRUNET R.,“Produzione di territorio: attori e leggi nel mondo reale”, Le Frontere delle Geografia (for G. Dematteis), Turin, UTET, 2009.

5 BRUNET R.,“La Distance, objet géographique”, Revue Atala, no. 12, Rennes, 2009.

Chapter 1

Geography: the Hard Core of a Social Science

Geography is a field of knowledge; in this field a science has developed. Having for a long time leaned towards the natural sciences, it has ended up being categorized as a social science, while still maintaining the research practices and the specialists of the natural sciences. As such, it deals with human behavior, which implies a great deal of complexity and unpredictability; but we have learnt that any science deals with complex systems, and has its share of unpredictability.

Where does geography fit in among the sciences; what makes it specific? It is sometimes said “geography, it's what geographers do”. This evasion is unproductive as geographers do many things, some of which have nothing in common with one another, neither in the subject matter, the methodology, nor in the objectives. In the course of my work the “idea that I had in mind” (Horkheimer) has been elaborated and consolidated into a double hypothesis: that geography fulfills a function of clear, specific, and necessary knowledge; that it can be defined by a “hard core” of associated propositions.

1.1. The geographical question

Let us start with what is the most authentic, the most enduring: geographical curiosity, which is the “geographical feeling”, has been present in literature and in science since at least the time of the ancient Greeks, and felt by many writers and artists. The geographical feeling is what happens when you embrace a panorama with your eyes (etymologically, everything that you see, pan-orama), a landscape and human creations, from a physical point of elevation (the “view point”) or a simulated point of elevation (a map, an aerial photograph, or images of satellite data); and even from below, in the street. In “embrace” there is at the same time the notion of love and appropriation – as well as a desire to understand.

Geographical curiosity is what makes you want to know and understand a territory, localities: your country, small or big, near or far; the “others”, what are these “others” like, what “morals” do they have, as people used to say, and what will we be able to do with them – a question that is the foundation of commerce and exchange in every sense of these words, both decent and less so; strange places, unusual, the “higher places”, the very names of which set you dreaming; the whole world, as a place, house, and theatre of humanity, fashioned, altered and improved by it, like Ecumene according to the Greek word.

It is this curiosity that has historically inspired a whole series of sciences, techniques, and actions: geodesy and cartography; exploration and conquest; many accounts and some journalism; fields of knowledge, such as those of anthropology (or ethnology); even ecology or geology. Geography has also been claimed as a cause, when being used as a pretext, arguing inevitability, fatality: “it's because of the geography”; an excuse given by all bad politicians and strategists. It extends far beyond the field of geographers themselves, but is at the center of their work, and in this center can be found pure geographical subjects and concepts that are places, countries, territories, fields, and networks.

The geographical question, one that any geographer, as well as anyone who is a little curious, normally asks himself, is simply: what is here, and why is it here. The here is the key of geographical questioning. Very quickly, however, the question must be expanded: why here? Why is it so? For how long and how is it evolving? The question can be asked about objects, groups of people, and of geographical configurations. The answer can be quick, with the risk of being superficial or random. It can demand a lot of research and heated debates. To provide the answer, geography has not only an accumulation of information and experience, a praxis, but work instruments, and a set of hypotheses that constitute a theoretical corpus. Let us examine these hypotheses.

1.2. Geographical space is produced

Since humanity has been on Earth, it has acted as a society within an inherited environment. It acts primarily to endure over time, therefore, to reproduce, just like any other living thing, but humanity distinguishes itself by its ability to take initiatives, to invent things, and is conscious of doing so. By doing so, it produces: partly without meaning to through its daily, repetitive actions; partly on purpose, consciously. What does it produce?

It produces children and raises them; goods both consumable and durable; houses, buildings, roads; weapons and their contestation; bread, and games, techniques, methodologies; calculations and mathematics; ideas, myths, beliefs, religions: it has not stopped inventing gods; language and literature; works of art; rules, codes, law; types of society and of social and familial relations; training and information; exchange and movement of goods, information and even people; history; and it produces space…

Let us provisionally give this a very general and descriptive definition: habitats, paths, hunting, gathering, and fishing grounds and agricultural areas, workshops and factories, equipment and commerce, defined either formally or informally, this is connected, organized, and distributed on the face of the globe. This is valid for all human societies, ancient or modern, “primitive” or “advanced”.

The geographical space is at the same time the trace of humanity on Earth, and its habitat: imprint and matrix. One of the numerous products of its work, and the milieu in which it exists: the home of humans, their territory in the broadest sense of the term.

There are sciences and specialists to study each human product, whether social or individual, of goods or exchanges, arts, languages, history, social structure, law, etc; as well as for studying the matter surrounding and used by humanity, which is the realm of the so-called physical or natural sciences. I think that geography is simply the science of studying the space produced on Earth by and for humanity, for its reproduction, and what we usually call the world: not the Earth itself, but a humanized Earth, as humanity remodels it by using it and for its own use, my Earth becomes the world.

It is true that each person can say something about this space. We know spatial economists, sociologists, and anthropologists that speak of territory, urban specialists, specialized transport engineers, and a great deal of artists and writers have taken landscapes as their subject matter, but who has the obligation of precisely putting at the center of his work this great human activity if not the geographer? In contrast to what is sometimes said, any science (and geography is no exception) is first of all defined by a particular field of knowledge. Ours is the space produced by humanity on the entire globe. We need to recognize the forms, reasoning, effects, transformations, and therefore, the participants themselves, their mistakes as well as their successes.

1.3. The reasons for the production of space

The production of geographical space meets a certain number of basic needs of societies, which correspond to as many uses of the space (Figure 1.1). Any human society must find shelter, and possibly even have to defend itself. The society takes advantage of the resources of part of the area, and appropriates it for itself. From that moment it becomes its territory, which the society attempts to preserve, and perhaps, even extend. It exchanges with its neighbors – this is the case even in the most archaic societies. It is seeking to invent means to maintain or improve the cohesion of this territory, by developing rules, and modes of management, that are generally expressed by hierarchies, specializations, and even symbolic places, separated from the others (the temple and the castle, the school and the stadium, memorable places).

Figure 1.1.Actions on the geographical space

It is in this manner that the society populates its space with a series of geographical objects, that change “the face of the Earth”: shelter (the habitat), workplace (agricultural and non agricultural), places of training and leisure, that imply specific construction of facilities of all sizes, up to the gigantic; places of administration, of power and communion; defense systems; external frontiers and internal divisions; transport networks. Furthermore, consciously or not, the society differentiates its space through its movements, its demographic dynamics, its revenue concentrations, the inequalities of all orders that develop within it. By modeling and remodeling the nature of the globe, its surface is modified, which we have also learnt to observe and to read as a landscape.

Therefore, this geographical space is a planned and developed space, both deliberately and accidentally. It helps to serve social reproduction. Any society is caught between two contradictory requirements: to keep it as it is, or improve it in order to improve the conditions for reproduction. Some societies are fundamentally conservative: especially those that conveniently invoke “country wisdom” and respect of the ancestors, hence “the earth never lies” and the established order. Others are dynamic, looking to increase production, if not well-being, initiative and freedom. It sometimes happens that they make mistakes, cause damage, degrade their space – even going as far as to cause their own extinction, as J. Diamond recalls in Collapse: by exhaustion of resources, excessive spending, excess of hubris, inability to look ahead, to plan for a moderate and sustainable use of resources.

Figure 1.2.Participants involved in geographical space

This society is made up of players, from the most impoverished to the most powerful: the individual (better, the family), groups or interest groups, companies, the state and its local divisions, the official international organizations, nongovernmental, and even the occult (Figure 1.2). They all have, although to a very unequal extent, interests, and the means with which to act, events that inspire them, strategies and tactics. The most impoverished leave traces and objects, even if they are negligible. The most powerful leave much bigger footprints, as big as the pyramids, on which civilizations exhaust themselves.

1.4. The organization of space

These populations, these traces, these multiple objects differentiate the geographical space. The geographer points out the differences and even the particularity of a given place; this is his role. He has been able to take pleasure in that and be satisfied with it, limiting himself to the description of places and their spatial distribution. Therefore, we will put forward the hypothesis that geographical space is not the chance disorder of random activity, but that it is organized; or at least, that it reveals forms of organization and that these forms themselves correspond to choices, perhaps even to necessities, of social reproduction, and that these forms of organization, therefore, have a social logic.

Experience enables us to distinguish six principle modes of general organization of the geographical space: the location, the network, the territory, the area, the field, and the geon.

1. The place is a point on the globe, with particular attributes, that can be described. It can be located, identified, and defined. It is itself, and not its neighbors. It is unique. Generally, it is named by those that frequent it. It is like the atom of the geographical space, but there are no two strictly identical places. Therefore, every place has at least four characteristics: a defined content (activity, population, landscape, etc.); a name; a position (its co-ordinates in latitude and longitude); and a situation (its environment, its milieu in the broad sense of the term). What it contains, what its real dimension is, is a matter of scale, analysis, perception, and interpretation. The place is not necessarily inhabited: Everest is a location, as is the minuscule Romanée vineyard, and Katyn or Bikini; New York, Singapore are locations, just points on a map of the world. The surface of the globe is made up of the juxtaposition of a multitude of places: in theory, there is an infinite number of places, if we cross all dimensions; in practice, there is a already a respectable number, if we add up all the recognized places, i.e. those that are named. Nevertheless, the scale of observation introduces a complication: on the global scale London is a single point, therefore, is only one location. On another level, Soho is a location. However, this area itself contains many distinct locations.

2. Places are linked by networks. Geographical networks include places and the routes that join them. Sometimes, it is the routes that we notice, especially if they have been constructed: the networks of sea routes, railways, and motorways. We almost forget that their only purpose is to link places for export and import. On the contrary, aerial networks can only be seen at airports, and we forget that they consist of very precise flight pathways. There are even invisible networks, such as those that associate the head office of a firm to its other offices. No place is really isolated: any point in the world is now known, found by satellite, accessible by helicopter – or by missile or drone. Nevertheless, a network is defined by a certain frequency of exchanges: in this sense a number of places are therefore outside networks, whereas many places belong to several networks, some to a multitude. A network is generally differentiated: the flows are unequal between locations, and are directed. New networks are constantly being created: the dialectic practice of distinction and of mimicry means that a selective network emerges (also called archipelago) of the global metropolises or the networks of “towns of art and history”, etc. A network normally extends over a defined area: it is deployed in a fragment of geographical space; but certain networks are on a world scale, their territory covers the entire Earth.

3. The territory is a fragment of the expanse that is distinguished by a specific appropriation, and a consciousness of this appropriation. Therefore, it is an ensemble of locations, and even a network of locations, a form of network. It has limitations, most often specific, sometimes uncertain or protected by buffer zones, such as historical marches. Generally, there is also a center, and therefore, peripheries. The states and their administrative subdivisions correspond to territories. The meshing is the overall design of the division of the area into territories. The result of a long history of conflicts and of allegiances, it is generally in irregular forms, except in the case of colonial settlements, where it can follow a regular course, such as the counties of part of the United States or Canada, or certain rectilinear boundaries of provinces in Australia or Siberia.

Meshing on this basis results in a number of forms of territories that are superimposed, both virtual and even imagined, sometimes real, which close to the concept of territory in the animal sense: an area that you deem to be yours, country of birth, or historical area, living space of a community, etc. This is the redoubtable meaning of the word, the source of many conflicts. This is why it is wise not to exaggerate, at least in geography, the meaning of the word territory. The weaker, banal meaning is ambiguous. The strong meaning is redoubtable: it implies a sense of possession that leads to hostility, as reflected in the animal world. This has been the inspiration for dangerous “sociobiologies”, to the point of describing what would be a “vital space” (and therefore “natural”), a Lebensraum for an ambitious people...

4.  Furthermore, geographical space is also divided into an infinite number of areas, that are not territories and are defined, not by an appropriation, but by the simple presence