IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jecgeo/v7y2007i3p285-309.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic theories and spatial transformations clarifying the space-time premises and outcomes of economic theories

Author

Listed:
  • José Corpataux
  • Olivier Crevoisier

Abstract

This article examines the approaches adopted by various schools of economic thought towards dealing with space and time. Each school has its own approach, though their treatment of time and space has generally been implicit. These spatial and temporal factors determine, right from the start, the way both reality and the explanatory frameworks which are supposed to take account of that very reality are looked at. The purpose of examining these various economic approaches is to clarify the view of space and time that is reflected in their premises. These ultimately determine the sometimes radical differences that emerge when looking at various theoretical traditions. In the first section, a number of contributors to equilibrium theory (from Walras to Krugman) are brought together. The approaches they use are characterised by their historical relationships with physics and mathematics. In short, their view is that space is exogenous, unchangeable, objective and abstract. The second section concentrates on schools of thought rather than specific contributors. Institutional and territorial economics have developed different conceptions of space and time, drawing their inspiration from social science and complexity theory. Space and time are always concrete. Space is marked by contrasts: it is both specific and generic, given and constructed, endogenous and exogenous. Finally, in the context of territorial economics and complexity theory, the part played by those engaged in research and modelling is addressed in terms of the way space is constructed.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)

Suggested Citation

  • José Corpataux & Olivier Crevoisier, 2007. "Economic theories and spatial transformations clarifying the space-time premises and outcomes of economic theories," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(3), pages 285-309, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:jecgeo:v:7:y:2007:i:3:p:285-309
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jeg/lbm013
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Samuels, Warren J, 1995. "The Present State of Institutional Economics," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 19(4), pages 569-590, August.
    2. Geoffrey M. Hodgson, 1998. "The Approach of Institutional Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(1), pages 166-192, March.
    3. Martin, Ron, 1999. "The New 'Geographical Turn' in Economics: Some Critical Reflections," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 23(1), pages 65-91, January.
    4. Ron Martin & Peter Sunley, 1996. "Paul Krugman's Geographical Economics and Its Implications for Regional Development Theory: A Critical Assessment," Economic Geography, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 72(3), pages 259-292, July.
    5. Olivier Crevoisier, 2004. "The Innovative Milieus Approach: Toward a Territorialized Understanding of the Economy?," Economic Geography, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 80(4), pages 367-379, October.
    6. Ron A. Boschma & Koen Frenken, 2006. "Why is economic geography not an evolutionary science? Towards an evolutionary economic geography," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(3), pages 273-302, June.
    7. Chick, Victoria & Dow, Sheila C, 2001. "Formalism, Logic and Reality: A Keynesian Analysis," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 25(6), pages 705-721, November.
    8. Ann Markusen, 2003. "Fuzzy Concepts, Scanty Evidence, Policy Distance: The Case for Rigour and Policy Relevance in Critical Regional Studies," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(6-7), pages 701-717.
    9. Nicolas Grosjean & Olivier Crevoisier, 2003. "Autonomie différenciée des systèmes de production territoriaux," Revue d'économie régionale et urbaine, Armand Colin, vol. 0(2), pages 291-315.
    10. Paul Krugman, 1998. "Space: The Final Frontier," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(2), pages 161-174, Spring.
    11. O Crevoisier, 1996. "Proximity and Territory versus Space in Regional Science," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 28(9), pages 1683-1697, September.
    12. Olivier Crevoisier, 1999. "Two ways to look at learning regions in the context of globalization: The homogenizing and particularizing approaches," GRET Publications and Working Papers 12-99, GRET Group of Research in Territorial Economy, University of Neuchâtel.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Vadim Nikolaevich Ukrainsky, 2012. "Methodological Pluralism in the Study of the Economic Space," Spatial Economics=Prostranstvennaya Ekonomika, Economic Research Institute, Far Eastern Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences (Khabarovsk, Russia), issue 4, pages 87-109.
    2. Olivier Crevoisier, 2014. "Beyond Territorial Innovation Models: The Pertinence of the Territorial Approach," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(3), pages 551-561, March.
    3. Natalya Gennadievna Dzhurka, 2018. "Spatial Concentration of Industrial Production in Russia: Testing the Home Market Effectûíêà," Spatial Economics=Prostranstvennaya Ekonomika, Economic Research Institute, Far Eastern Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences (Khabarovsk, Russia), issue 3, pages 19-42.
    4. Partha Pratim DUBE, 2020. "Least Possible Time to Reach Targeted Profit Function under Unitary Transformation," Romanian Journal of Economics, Institute of National Economy, vol. 50(1(59)), pages 05-15, June.
    5. Evert J Meijers & Martijn J Burger, 2010. "Spatial Structure and Productivity in US Metropolitan Areas," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 42(6), pages 1383-1402, June.
    6. Martina Fuchs & André Scharmanski, 2009. "Counteracting Path Dependencies: ‘Rational’ Investment Decisions in the Globalising Commercial Property Market," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 41(11), pages 2724-2740, November.
    7. McLennan, Char-lee J. & Ritchie, Brent W. & Ruhanen, Lisa M. & Moyle, Brent D., 2014. "An institutional assessment of three local government-level tourism destinations at different stages of the transformation process," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 107-118.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. George Chorafakis, 2013. "The Knowledge Plexus," Vernon Press Titles in Economics, Vernon Art and Science Inc, edition 1, number 23, July.
    2. George Chorafakis, 2013. "The Knowledge Plexus [Paperback edition]," Vernon Press Titles in Economics, Vernon Art and Science Inc, edition 1, number 2.
    3. Ron A. Boschma & Koen Frenken, 2006. "Why is economic geography not an evolutionary science? Towards an evolutionary economic geography," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(3), pages 273-302, June.
    4. Ron Boschma & Ron Martin, 2010. "The Aims and Scope of Evolutionary Economic Geography," Chapters, in: Ron Boschma & Ron Martin (ed.), The Handbook of Evolutionary Economic Geography, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Dirk-Jan Koch & Ruerd Ruben, 2008. "Spatial Clustering Of NGOs: An Evolutionary Economic Geography Approach," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 0814, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Aug 2008.
    6. Nedko Mintchev, 2007. "Clusters – Characteristics and Structure," Economic Studies journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 4, pages 96-125.
    7. Bernhard Truffer, 2008. "Society, Technology, and Region: Contributions from the Social Study of Technology to Economic Geography," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 40(4), pages 966-985, April.
    8. José M. Gaspar, 2018. "A prospective review on New Economic Geography," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 61(2), pages 237-272, September.
    9. Martin Korpi, 2008. "Does size of local labour markets affect wage inequality? a rank-size rule of income distribution," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 8(2), pages 211-237, March.
    10. Anda David & Nathalie Guilbert & Nobuaki Hamaguchi & Yudai Higashi & Hiroyuki Hino & Murray Leibbrandt & Muna Shifa, 2018. "Spatial poverty and inequality in South Africa: A municipality level analysis," SALDRU Working Papers 221, Southern Africa Labour and Development Research Unit, University of Cape Town.
    11. Claudio Calero & Lindsay W Turner, 2020. "Regional economic development and tourism: A literature review to highlight future directions for regional tourism research," Tourism Economics, , vol. 26(1), pages 3-26, February.
    12. Gernot Grabher, 2009. "Yet Another Turn? The Evolutionary Project in Economic Geography," Economic Geography, Clark University, vol. 85(2), pages 119-127, April.
    13. Peter Schmidt, 2014. "EU regional policy and its theoretical foundations revisited," ERSA conference papers ersa14p1560, European Regional Science Association.
    14. Sara Cruz & Aurora Teixeira, 2010. "The Evolution of the Cluster Literature: Shedding Light on the Regional Studies-Regional Science Debate," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(9), pages 1263-1288.
    15. Christophe CARRINCAZEAUX, 2009. "Spatial dynamics of innovation (In French)," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2009-21, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    16. Michel S. Zouboulakis & John Kamarianos, 2002. "Racionalidad y cooperación entre firmas. Examen del comportamiento habitual de las industrias griegas," Revista de Economía Institucional, Universidad Externado de Colombia - Facultad de Economía, vol. 4(7), pages 98-113, July-Dece.
    17. Yang, Yong, 2012. "Agglomeration density and tourism development in China: An empirical research based on dynamic panel data model," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 1347-1359.
    18. Miguel Atienza & Guillermo Armando Ronda-Pupo & Nicholas Phelps, 2019. "Bridges over troubled water? Journals, geographers and economists in the field of economy and space 1980–2017," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 51(8), pages 1800-1823, November.
    19. Sylvain Barde, 2007. "Stable Partial Agglomeration in a New Economic Geography Model with Urban Frictions," Sciences Po publications 07/02, Sciences Po.
    20. Valentinov, Vladislav, 2023. "Stakeholder theory: Toward a classical institutional economics perspective," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 188(1), pages 75-88.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • B0 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - General
    • O0 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - General
    • R0 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:jecgeo:v:7:y:2007:i:3:p:285-309. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/joeg .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.