Other critiques include the observation that
many of the local–global narratives that
scholars employ have focused on the moment
of impact between global and local processes,
and as a result have underplayed the ongoing
power dynamics between local–local forces
(Ortner, 1995). By the same token, the actual
workings and trajectories of perceived global
forces such ascapitalismare often assumed
rather than investigated empirically, leading
to a blind spot with respect to global–global
dynamics. This latter critique has been taken
to the extent of questioning the very nature
of capitalism itself (Gibson-Graham, 2006b
[1996]). A final, more implicit critique has
emerged with the literature ontransnation-
alism, wherein scholars have preferred to priv-
ilege the ongoing movements between scales
and acrossbordersrather than the perceived
static conceptualization of both scales and
borders that is suggested by the local–global
terminology. km
locality Aplaceorregionof sub-national
spatialscale. Locality studies were a promin-
ent feature of British urban and regional re-
search in the 1980s and 1990s. They
developed from attempts to understand the
process of socio-economic restructuring
and the role of place and spatial variation
within it. Locality was a key organizing concept
for three research programmes funded by the
UK’s Economic and Social Research Council
in the 1980s: the ‘Changing Urban and
Regional System’ initiative (CURS), the
‘Social Change and Economic Life’ initiative
(SCELI) and the ‘Economic Restructuring,
Social Change and the Locality’ programme.
At the centre of each was a series of studies
of the impact of restructuring on particular
places or regions. A key concern of these
‘locality studies’ was to collect detailed empir-
ical evidence to assist the identification of
the nature, causes and consequences of spatial
differentiation in processes of change (Cooke,
1989).
The research raised a series of metho-
dological and theoretical issues that became
bound up with wider and sometimes acrimo-
nious debates. These included: the delimita-
tion of localities for research; the relationship
between locality studies and criticalrealism;
the extent to which localities should be seen as
‘pro-active’ agents of their own transform-
ation; the politics of the ‘empirical turn’; the
question of whether a concern with local dif-
ference risked limiting the scope for general-
ization and theoretical development (Smith,
1987); and the gendered implications (see
gender) of most locality studies’ focus on the
sphere of waged labour and their limited treat-
ment of cultural relations.
Since the end of the formal research pro-
grammes, the concept of locality has been
much less prominent in the geographical lit-
erature, but two more recent developments
during the 1990s may be noted. First, there
has been a much stronger emphasis on rela-
tional and networked concepts of locality and
on the links between localities and other
spatial scales. Murdoch and Marsden (1995)
draw onactor-network theoryto suggest
that ‘localities should be seen as constituted
by various networks operating a different
scales’ (p. 368), while Amin (2004b) has
proposed a wholly non-territorial view of
places as ‘unbound’.
Second, many of the issues highlighted by
the localities debate have been translated into
new conceptual frameworks. For example, the
upsurge of interest inglobalizationduring
the 1990s has involved a recasting of the
issue of local specificity in terms of global–
local relations, while the further development
ofcultural geographyhas seen increasingly
sophisticated treatments of the relationships
between politics, place andidentity. jpaSuggested reading
Duncan (1989);Environment and Planning A
(1991).localization A term often contrasted with
globalization and meant to capture the
importance of place-based activities.
Localization refers to the necessary embedd-
edness of economic processes, which always
reflect their social, political and geographical
context. All activities require some degree of
spatial fixity and many obtain significant
advantages from being geographically local-
ized. These advantages include economies of
agglomerationas well as more sociocultural
advantages pertaining to face-to-face contact,
the formation of personalnetworks, and the
creation of centres of innovation and know-
ledge (Amin and Thrift, 1994a). kmSuggested reading
Amin and Thrift (1994a); Cox (1997).location quotient A quantitative measure
used to describe the concentration of a group
or an activity in a locality or region relative to
that of a larger area such as the countrywide or
national norm. The quotient is the ratio of theGregory / The Dictionary of Human Geography 9781405132879_4_L Final Proof page 425 31.3.2009 2:44pmLOCATION QUOTIENT