The problem of the urban–rural binary in geography and political ecology

Abstract

Geographers have been challenging problematic spatial concepts for decades. Gillen et al. usefully add to this work by disrupting the urban–rural binary in human geography, suggesting that we take people in the Global South more seriously, especially those ‘whose perspectives on urbanization are entangled with ongoing rural dynamics’. They advocate for advancing the concept of relational ruralization. In this commentary, I express my general support for Gillen et al.'s efforts to expose the limitations associated with the urban–rural divide. However, I go somewhat beyond their work to suggest that human geographers should consciously reduce the primacy of the urban–rural binary when conceptualizing space, especially when looking at activities that transcend the urban–rural. There are more productive ways to consider connections.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 19 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.