Putting the case for a pluralistic economic geography

Over the past decade or so, concern has grown in economic geography over whether the discipline has become too pluralised, characterised by the proliferation of conceptual schemas, theoretical approaches and local narratives, between which there is often little communication or coherence, thereby militating against the identification of a clear and generally agreed disciplinary identity and ‘core’ research agenda. In response, some economic geographers have argued that what is now needed is an ‘integrative turn’, in order to arrest and reverse this process of pluralisation. This article explores the complex issue of pluralism and argues there are convincing arguments in support of pluralism, on pragmatic grounds, as a purposive–strategic endeavour, and on normative–melioristic grounds. At the same time, the article explores in some detail the ideas of ‘integrative pluralism’ and ‘boundary objects’ as ways of achieving communication between different perspectives while preserving the advantages of pluralism.