Bridging the Qualitative–Quantitative Divide in Transport Geography∗

Abstract

Recent viewpoints concerning the state of research in transport geography have touched on the issue of insularity and the need to bridge the divide between the largely spatial-analytical or quantitative research in transport geography and the critical or qualitative research prevalent in urban, economic, and most other subfields of human geography. Transport geography has been criticized by some for being a quiet corner of our discipline that has lost its centrality largely because it remains within the analytical framework of the 1960s. This article explores these sentiments by reexamining recent transport-oriented research in highly cited geography journals to assess the degree to which the qualitative-quantitative divide exists within transport geography and between transport and other subfield in human geography, as well as to explore issues of productivity and centrality of transport-oriented research in geography. Results indicate that geographical research involving transport topics is much more prevalent and reflects a wider range of epistemological and methodological approaches than is frequently assumed. Nevertheless, there is still a considerable divide between "mainstream" transport geography and other human geographical research that necessitates much more interaction between transport and other subfields and greater incorporation of alternative research approaches within the mainstream of transport geography. To that end, we propose a preliminary critical transport geography research agenda that is open to a variety of methodological approaches, including quantitative analysis.

Looking through Hägerstrand’s dual vistas: towards a unifying framework for time geography

“…How to conflate geospatial data with varying levels of accuracy, different levels of detail, and different generalizations is still an open question. The general trends seem to point to the direction of artfully combining both quantitative and qualitative analysis (Goetz et al, 2009;Cope and Elwood, 2009). More research is needed along this direction to link GIS with the emerging mobility research methodologies (Fincham et al, 2010;Lee and Kwan, 2011).…”

Stimulating or frustrating research ? Transport geography and (un)available data

“…While this should call for a comprehensive analysis including a look at both positive and negative deviations from the trend, works usually focus on a specific case, for example, Knowles and Matthiessen (2009) Concluding remarks 36 As a traditional transport geographer, I believe that data are crucial in transport geography. This is not only because this sub-discipline has usually been, at least in the Anglo-Saxon world, more quantitative than qualitative (Goetz et al, 2009). Surprisingly, recent viewpoints have not addressed this (Goetz, 2006 ;Rodrigue, 2006 ;Keeling, 2007 ;etc.).…”

Transport Geography: perspectives upon entering an accomplished research sub-discipline

“…Discussions identified a range of possibilities where both more traditional applied and novel theoretical approaches can develop geographical understanding without needing to be recognised as falling under the remit of specific disciplines. This relates to the suggestion by Preston and O'Connor (2008) that Transport Geography forms part of an interdisciplinary approach and Goetz et al's (2009) point that transport is the focus of a much broader range of geographical work than might initially be assumed, including, but not limited to migration, housing mobilities, environmental behaviours and health.…”

“…This leads to associations with positivism and critiques of Transport Geography as remaining in the past (Goetz et al, 2009, Røe, 2000Hall, 2004;Hanson, 2008) and not following the epistemological trends in human geography, as result becoming being marginalised (Vowles 2006). Such critiques have given rise to parallel streams of work within geography such as Social Justice (Farrington & Farrington 2005;Lucas 2006) and Mobilities (Shaw & Hesse 2010;Sheller & Urry 2006;Cass et al 2005) Despite researching within the remit of Transport Geography, those engaged in these parallel streams may not necessarily consider themselves Transport Geographers, perhaps because of its perceived associations with positivism and a desire to be different.…”

“…Examples were discussed, including discussion of the limited availability of programmes combining of BA (Human) Geography with BSc Mathematics. Although there is a much greater emphasis on quantitative skills within physical geography and many students will study both, it is their application in human geography which is often missing, when there is no reason why human geography cannot be both critical and quantitative (Goetz et al, 2009). Within this debate some participants suggested that the focus should be on quantitative skills as qualitative skills are easier to learn if required at postgraduate level, perhaps signifying that a quantitative bias remained amongst some Transport Geographers, and that there is a need to emphasise the importance of theoreticallygrounded qualitative research for the discipline.…”