Abstract
In the geographical and planning literature there is a rather limited view of what is relevant. On the whole, the study of our own country is deemed to be highly relevant, that of other developed countries is sometimes relevant, whereas the study of poorer societies is seen generally to be irrelevant. Recent shifts towards a world-economy perspective have helped to reorientate our sights beyond the Straits of Dover, but have tended to concentrate on the more obviously relevant countries such as the United States of America, the European Economic Community, and Japan. Meanwhile, the amount of work on other, poorer, parts of the world seems to be decreasing. This is unfortunate partly because there are important issues concerned with development and poverty which need to be studied and about which we can perhaps contribute solutions. But, still more vital is the perspective that historical and international comparisons provide; perspective that is often lacking in work that is currently relevant. Sometimes the experiences of very different societies offer warnings about how to tackle a current problem at home. We need more, theoretically informed, work on the great overseas. Such work is vital for both the intellectual and the material well-being of this country.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.