This reply to Hassink, Gong and Marques’ ‘Moving beyond Anglo-American economic geography’ raises several issues relevant to formulating a unified paradigm that escapes Anglo-American bias. First, the reply identifies different meanings of Anglo-American dominance that do not necessarily align. Remedying concerns that engage with the problems of anglophone hegemony do not necessarily solve institutional issues of Anglo-American dominance, exclusions of contributors, places and viewpoints, or postcolonial critiques. Second, the essay investigates the origins of anglophone dominance, how the skewed transnationalization of geographical practice came about, to excavate solutions from geography’s past. Based on these assessments, several epistemological issues are brought up that might hamper development of a unified paradigm. The reply concludes with encouragement to engage in the Sisyphean labour associated with the quest toward a unified paradigm for economic geography.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 25 citations exist upstream.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.