Painter, J. (2010) 'Rethinking territory.', Antipode., 42 (5). pp. 1090-1118.
Territory is the quintessential state space and appears to be of growing political importance. It is also a key concept in geography, but it has not been subject to as much critical attention as related geographical terms and remains under-theorised. Taking my cue from Timothy Mitchell's suggestion that the state should be understood as the effect of social practices, I argue that the phenomenon that we call territory is not an irreducible foundation of state power, let alone the expression of a biological imperative. Instead, territory too must be interpreted principally as an effect. This “territory-effect” can best be understood as the outcome of networked socio-technical practices. Thus, far from refuting or falsifying network theories of spatiality, the current resurgence of territory can be seen as itself a product of relational networks. Drawing on an empirical case study of the monitoring of regional economic performance through the measurement of gross value added (GVA), I show that “territory” and “network” are not, as is often assumed, incommensurable and rival principles of spatial organisation, but are intimately connected.
|Keywords:||State spatiality, Territory, Territory-effect, Network, region, Value added.|
|Full text:||PDF - Accepted Version (736Kb)|
|Publisher Web site:||http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8330.2010.00795.x|
|Record Created:||01 Nov 2010 09:50|
|Last Modified:||21 Nov 2012 11:16|
|Social bookmarking:||Export: EndNote, Zotero | BibTex|
|Usage statistics||Look up in GoogleScholar | Find in a UK Library|