ABSTRACT
The pluralistic nature of population geography, with its strong links to demography and population studies, is acknowledged in Chapter 1 in which Bob Woods reviews recent developments in the theory and methodology of the subject. The fundamental question of the definition of population geography is considered and a distinction is drawn between broad definitions (such as that employed by Trewartha) and narrower statements which seek to concentrate attention on demographic geography (ie. the study of variations in population dynamics via analysis of mortality, fertility and migration components at various scales.) Contemporary population geography accommodates researchers espousing both demographic as well as traditional geographic perspectives. While such plurality may promote progress in the subject it can also be argued that the failure to define a precise area of interest and expertise has contributed to the limited influence of population geography in the general field of population research. Attention then turns to theoretical considerations. The purpose of theory and the related question of how a theory can be validated are subject to detailed examination. The discussion then examines the different levels at which theories may be constructed. Three distinct scales are recognised. Micro theory, which seeks to understand individual behaviour, is illustrated with reference to the study of marriage practices within an environment of constrained choice. Middle-range theory which is concerned with the characteristics of groups of people is the most commonly employed level of conceptualisation. Work at this scale is exemplified by Easterlin’s attempts to combine economic and sociological theories of fertility. Grand theory is directed at long term social, economic and demographic change and is best illustrated by demographic transition theory. The basis of a flexible theory of demographic behaviour based on the interaction of a variety of causal factors is suggested. Five principal methodologies for population geography are then considered. Empiricism has been the dominant approach to pattern identification and modelling with significant contributions being made in fields such as multiregional demo-graphic accounting, and automated cartography. When attempting to establish causal relationships some form of positivism has normally been invoked. Though of continued relevance in population geography, the limitations of positivism have led to the consideration of alternative approaches, with for example, a behavioural perspective being of particular utility in migration studies. Despite several problems (such as the non-replicability of survey results) the behavioural and humanistic approaches can improve understanding of the forces operating to produce observed population patterns. The structural perspective views human behaviour as conditioned by the dominant mode of production, with each mode having its own laws of population. The potential and problems of each of these methodologies are assessed. Two fundamental issues for population geography refer to the definition of the subject area, and how to increase the influence of the geographical component within population studies. It is suggested that the answer to both questions lies in greater specificity with concentration on key topics, greater use of demographic techniques, and the development of an applied or problem-oriented population geography. Finally, three particular areas in which geographers can make a significant contribution are identified. First, the development of a comprehensive theory of migration. Second, study of spatial variations in demographic structure between cultural regions and their historical development, third, further development of geographical data bases and application of forecasting methods to contemporary issues.
