Topographic relations: developing a heuristic device for conceptualising networked relations

Abstract

This paper considers whether the deployment of a topographical metaphor may add value to the recent discussion of networked relations. The paper discusses how viewing relations as part of a relational landscape may add a third dimension to the discussion by allowing an appreciation of the strength, or entrenchment, of relations, and how these entrenchments impact on the development of new relations and the resistance to watershed events. The heuristic device is explored through the case of air survey in the 1920s and 1930s. This illustrative case demonstrates how relations are held together, resisted and reformed to different degrees depending on the varying topography of the relational landscape.

Rescaling low‐carbon transformations: Towards a relational ontology

“…There are lessons here about how geographers understand the transferability of knowledge and policy instruments within the context of low‐carbon interventions (Bulkeley, Castán Broto & Edwards, ). An interactionist view of the mobility of LCUIs within wider social contexts could mean that “as actors become more connected within networks, their position in the landscape becomes entrenched” (Inkpen et al., , p. 547), subsequently allowing the “entrenched actors” to forge of new networks and connections across multiple scales. Ergo, a key challenge is developing “complex interrelationships and hybrid responses” (Hodson & Marvin, , p. 17) against the background of a “precarious fragility of alternatives” (2016, p. 17) to the dominant social order.…”

Emerging Adulthood in Time and Space: The Geographic Context of Homelessness

“…Multiple interrelated scales refer to how different ways of constructing home may (dis)associate together at the scale of a house, neighborhood, region, or beyond. Significantly, a "larger" scale does not necessarily mean a more important level in creating "home"; rather, different scales interrelate in complex networks in daily paths and over time, where some relations are more entrenched than others (Inkpen, Collier, & Riley, 2007;Sheehan & Vadjunec, 2012). However, all constructions of "home" share a sense of place as well as being "in place," even in those constructions of home for which mobility is a key component of home construction, because mobility is between places (Johnsen, May, & Cloke, 2008;Kuusisto-Arponen 2009;May, 2000;Robertson, 2007;Robinson, 2002;Sheehan, 2010).…”

Following the Actors: mobilising an actor-network theory methodology in geography

“…Thus, research represents a translation, where the network relations extend far beyond the spatial confines of the research location. For example, while the research on which this paper is based focused on residential development in a fringe Sydney suburb, I was required to trace associations and connections well beyond this location and operating on multiple scales (see Legg 2009;Inkpen et al 2007). It is important, therefore, to position research as the selective and partial representation of network connectivity, which is mediated by our position as researchers and as ultimate network translators.…”

“…Thus, Smith (2003) suggests that ANT allows for a richer poststructuralist interpretation of networks, facilitated through a variety of qualitative methods, allowing a greater understanding of the actual organisation of cities. ANT has been mobilised within human geography as an epistemological framework for almost two decades (Murdoch 1995(Murdoch , 1997aWhatmore 1997;Haraway 1991); however, until recently, few studies have recognised its specific methodological backbone (see Cowan et al 2009;Bear & Eden 2008;Gabriel & Jacobs 2008;Doak & Karadimitriou 2007;Inkpen et al 2007;Jons 2006). Indeed, it has been argued by many authors that the key to ANT's development is that it is more a method for studying the world rather than a theory that yields some level of inference and hypothesis development (Latour 1994(Latour , 2005Dicken et al 2001;Murdoch 1997a).…”

“…The objective in such a reading of space and place is not to play down their significance and the phenomena that are expressed therein but rather to see localities as part of a larger network environment, one that is not separate from global, transnational, national or local influences (Amin & Thrift 1994). Methodology is therefore required to trace these connections and flows as relations shift between scales and into and out of the research field (Inkpen et al 2007).…”