See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328826697

Chapter 08 CULTURAL DIMENSIONS IN HUMAN Godwin O. Ikwuyatum

Chapter · October 2018

CITATIONS READS 0 798

1 author:

Godwin O. Ikwuyatum University of Ibadan

23 PUBLICATIONS 33 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Environmental Disasters, Conflict and Forced Migration View project

Migration and Return Migration as Drivers of Rural Cosmopolitanism in Benue State, Nigeria View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Godwin O. Ikwuyatum on 09 November 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. Chapter 08

CULTURAL DIMENSIONS IN

Godwin O. Ikwuyatum

Introduction

Human Geography’s focus on location provides a basis to appreciate , communication and cognitive plan. Combing information about groups, culturally prominent individuals, ethnicity, religion, language, social relationships, and political allegiance at a granular family-group level allows analysts and operators to visualize a network of dynamic relationships situated in geographic locations (Sutherlin, 2017). This exposition by Sutherlin reflects the significance of Cultural Geography as a sub- discipline of Human Geography, which has been defined and conceptualized in a variety of ways. Cosgrove (1994) defined it as a subfield of Human Geography which focuses “upon the patterns and interactions of human culture, both material and non-material, in relation to the and the human organization of space”. Another school of thought is of the opinion that cultural geography is that branch of geography, that views the world as inherently social, spatial, and political that examines issues relating to the spatiality of identities, inequalities, and power across multiple scales, by asking such questions as: How does pattern differences between the global North and South and within both? What difference does it make to society that women tend to have been associated more with ‘home’ than men? Why has the education system largely failed to reduce class inequalities in societies? Notorn (2016) on his part opined that “cultural geography is concerned with making sense of people and the places they occupy through analyses and understandings of cultural processes, cultural landscapes, and cultural identities”. The effect of culture in human geography is so prominent, that at times it becomes unclear and difficult to differentiate between cultural and as the lines between them are on the whole unclear. For example, research on migration, livelihood, and sexuality, household and human health among others has social component as well as cultural ones. The uncertainty and the enlarged sphere of cultural influence in analysis and explanation in Human Geography have made cultural geography a modern-day sub-discipline of interest. This chapter takes into consideration the following main beliefs: First, it is historically sensitive; that is, the works introduced begin with traditional cultural geography and moved on to new cultural geography. Second, it is philosophically situated within a structure of the idea of changes in human geography. Third, it is focused on expressions that are apparently cultural (e.g. literature, art, music) rather than social or social-cultural (e.g. disability, sexuality, diaspora). The genesis and development of Cultural Geography is worth tracing for better understanding of its epistemology and dynamic nature. This branch of human geography emerged as an American tradition of scholarship linked closely to the mid-twentieth century work of Carl Sauer, who defined the landscape as “the defining unit of geographic study; that and societies are creations of the landscape which they also shame; and the interaction between the ‘natural’ landscape and human communities creating the ‘”. The Carl Sauer school of thought of Cultural focused essentially on studying the range of human interventions in transforming the ‘natural’ landscape, and were thus most interested in quantifying , for example, buildings/architectures, agricultural technologies and other industries (Merle, 2010). During the peak of the ‘quantitative revolution’ in the 1960s and 1970s, interest in cultural geography declined as human geographers turned their attention to the development of human geography as a ‘spatial science’. However, the critique of in geography throughout the 1980’s, brought about the transformation of cultural geography in North America particularly in the United Kingdom, into what is now known as the ‘new’ cultural geography. The discipline had a

1 different theoretical assumptions, methods and subjects from those of the Berkeley School (traditional cultural geography) in the 1980s and 1990s. Three aspects of cultural geography can be clearly identified: First, the ‘traditional’ cultural geography, sometimes referred to as the ‘Berkeley School,’ second, is the ‘new’ cultural geography while the third, is ‘more-than-representational’ (Lorimer, 2005). The ‘new’ cultural geographers analyzed culture in contemporary and urban societies, and focused primarily on investigating non-material culture, for example, identity, ideology, power, meaning, values among others, rather than focusing on material culture, mainly of non-modern and rural societies; they integrated new themes, such as, colonialism and post-colonialism; ; and consumption; gender and sexuality; ‘race’, anti- racism and ethnicity; ideology; language; and media; and incorporating different theoretical traditions, including Marxist political-economic models, , post-colonial theory, post- and , among others (Merle, 2010). In addition, politics of identity and the construction of identity are some of the issues of interest interrogated by the new cultural geographers. The critiques within the new cultural geographers camp, saw some of its ideas on identity and space as static; hence, the development of the ‘non-representational theory’ by Nigel Thrift, who himself was one of the prominent critiques of the ‘new cultural geography. While some of the themes of ‘new’ cultural geography are still of interest, , through his development of ‘non-representational theory’, is a post-structuralist theory that challenged those using social theory and conducting geographical research to move beyond an interest in and other static representations of culture. The non-representational theory focuses upon practices, that is, how human and nonhuman formations are enacted or performed and not simply on what is produced; on hybrid formations which is similar to ‘hybrid geographies’ developed by Sarah Whatmore, where she prompted cultural geographers to attend to the ‘more-than-human’ geographies in which we live, ‘things taking place’, (Harrison, 2000; Dewsbury 2000, 2003; McCormack 2002, 2005; Merle, 2010). Some commentators on the non-representative idea seek to include an empirical on embodied practices and dynamic processes, because ‘abstract accounts of body-practices’ and the return to phenomenological accounts of ‘being-in-the-world’ constitutes a retreat from exploring the intersections between representations, discourses, material things, spaces and practices (Nash, 2000). This has led to the suggestion that ‘more-than-representational’ is a preferable term for this branch of geography, as it seeks to better understand “our self-evidently more-than-human, more-than-textual, multisensual worlds” (Lorimer, 2005, p.83). Cultural Geography is thus a vital branch of Human Geography.

The Meaning and Concept of Culture ‘Culture’ is the controlling factor, in this sub-discipline of human geography, and it requires a comprehensive and definite conceptualization. The question then is what is ‘Culture’? Culture has been known to be associated with and religious devotion from history, the central word ‘cult’ in the subject. Culture from the 16th century up to the 19th century was employed to facilitate the development of human mind and individual manners through learning (Sewell Jr., 2018) and has subsequently been used to reflect the development of society as a whole. Tylor (2010 ) in his book ‘’ described culture as “that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom, and other capabilities and habits acquired by a person as a member of a society”. The import of Tylor’s description is that culture is a complex term, a fact further alluded to by Williams (1983) who opined that, culture is one of the two or three most complicated words in the English language and the whole way of life. emerged as a discipline in the last quarter of the 19th century. Culture is a person’s creation and beyond that it is a social reality, which cannot be created by individuals in isolation, but a synergy of people’s experiences. In addition, the fundamentals which make up culture are inherited from the past, tied to the experience of present-day associations and to dreams and plans that have to do with the future. Culture and cultures are shaped by network of intercommunication between and among people with commonalities and/or similarities, i.e. people who speak the same language, similar family structures and attend the same school, among many others.

2

Culture carries the mark of identical and shared experiences of life lived, joys, sorrows and challenges generally at different periods in history; hence society’s culture is developed by the summation of group experiences and sustained by the hope for a better life in the future for the entire community. Individuals’ practices, attitudes, knowledge and values together form the attributes of the culture of a community and/or society. In essence, a society’s culture is defined by the way people link up the past with the present and the future together. Critical to the conceptualizing of culture is Sewell Jr. (2005) viewpoints that: culture is a category of social life; culture is a system and practice; and culture has distinct worlds of meaning.

Culture as a Category of Social Life Sewell Jr. (2005) contended that in one meaning, culture is a theoretically defined aspect of social life that is abstracted out from the complex reality of human existence. Culture in this sense is always compared to other categories of social life, such as, economics, politics and biology it takes the singular. When it is expressed as ‘cultures’ it means a concrete and bounded world of beliefs and practices which is identifiable with a social group; and between one culture another culture. Culture as a category of social life can be further perceived in the following ways: 1) culture as learned behaviour-This is when culture is seen as a whole body of practices, beliefs, institutions, customs, habits, myths, and built up by people who pass same from one generation to another. In this instance it is compared to nature. 2) Culture as all institutional spheres devoted to the making of meaning- Culture under this group is perceived of being based on the belief that social groups are made of clusters of institutions devoted to specialized activities of production, circulation and use of meanings. This cultural sphere include art, music, theatre, fashion, literature, religion, media and education and culture under this sphere is defined as activities which take place in institutionally defined spheres which produce meaning out of them. This conception is significant in sociological and cultural studies. 3) Culture as a system of Symbols- this is a major concept in where is perceived as a social system, a system of symbols and meanings created of them in the study of structuralism, and postmodernism. 4) Culture as a practice- this is the idea of culture as a tool kit, which is the sphere where culture is expressed though conscious action, power relation, struggle, conflict and change.

Culture as System and Practice The second point of view of culture is seen as a System and Practice, that is, culture being perceived under dualistic eyes as a system and a practice, a situation in which cultural practices are employed to use existing cultural symbols. Innate cognitive capacities are orchestrated by cultural practices to produce high-level cognitive processes. In human activities, examples of this phenomenon range from everyday inferences about space and time to the most sophisticated reasoning in scientific laboratories (Hutchins, 2008). In his book `Religion as a Cultural System', Geertz (1966) characterised religion as a system of symbols which acts to establish powerful, pervasive, and long lasting moods and motivations in men by formulating conceptions of a general order of existence and clothing these conceptions with such an aura of factuality that the moods and motivations seem uniquely realistic . At the core of this definition is the idea that religion consists of a set of interrelated symbols (elsewhere referred to as `sacred' symbols) that fuse an ethos, that is, a set of `powerful, pervasive, and long-lasting moods and motivations', with a world view, i .e . a set of `conceptions of a general order of existence' . Elsewhere in `Religion as a Cultural System', Geertz speaks of a people's ethos (Henry Munson, Jr., 2008). These are all views that are brought to bear in Human Geography, with the entry of cultural dimensions in the examination and explanation of human activities in space.

Culture as Distinct Worlds of Meaning Culture can also be conceptualized via its various meanings it connotes under different circumstances and situations, culture’s worlds and meanings vary under its nature of being often faced with internal conflict; loosely integrated due to its variety of activities; contested as conflicts of race, class, gender, etc; complex and dynamic in nature; weakly bounded and organized. The cultural

3 dimension of the practice of human geography therefore is independent first from the premise of structure in terms of structure-political, economics and geographical principles. Secondly, the autonomous nature of culture creates the space for its definition and shaping of its meaning being influenced, shaped and reshaped by a host of other factors.

Types of Cultural Approaches in Human Geography Explanations and analysis of geographical relationships, interactions and scales in space can be done based on ways of life or the culture of the people which is often developed overtime and as a result of peoples interaction with their immediate environment and amongst peoples. Here lies the cultural dimension in Human Geography which employs several cultural approaches to understand how land use, human settlements, land ownership and how a variety of social organizations are organized into coherent systems. Cultural approaches employed in Human Geography include and but not limited to following four cultural approaches in contemporary cultural geography:

1. The ‘Neo-Positive Approach’ was the first approach that emerged at the beginning of the twentieth century and it perceives the technical aspects of culture as key-factors of socio- spatial systems. Proponents of this approach, include Robert Dodgshon in the U.K., and Jean- René Trochet in France. They are of the view that socio-spatial systems developed by human interaction in space are not only studied in their materials form but also in their mental and behavioural dimensions.

2. The second approach is the ‘Landscape-based Cultural Approach’, though aligned with the ideas developed in the early twentieth century human Geographers, as manifested in Italian Geography at the time, showed transformations in the discipline. General problems of the discipline were conceptualized by asking the questions, why humanity faces nature that has been created just to be exploited? Though this position was not accepted, and it led to the building of a new conceptual basis of landscape analysis. This approach was practiced mainly in Germany and France. In Britain, scholars such as Denis Cosgrove discussed this approach extensively. Since 1990, the interest for landscapes has increased globally in particular in Anglophone countries.

3. The ‘Cultural Processes’ constitute the third approach. This approach emerged from the development of the epistemological field of geography that had to do with post-modern criticism in reinterpretation of practices, know-hows, attitudes and knowledge. This approach is centred on: a- the role of communication; b- the building of identities; c- the role of the Beyond which men use in order to build the normative view needed for action and the creation of a social order. a) Different cultures depend significantly on the mode used for the transmission of information. Distance between people and places are significant in analytical communication, as it loses its effectiveness with increasing distance. Hence, the distinction between low cultures based on orality, high cultures which rely partly on the written word, mass cultures linked with the new media, and technical cultures which take advantage of internet. Symbolic communication, permit people of like minds to synergise their views into the same conviction as demonstrated in 1952 by Jean Gottmann. b) The issue of identities is a global challenge, problem and an issue in crisis. It is critical in order to understand this aspect of reality, to explore the way the sense of self, us and the others is built. c) This is the analysis the conception of the Beyond normative that humans developed, which Geographers distanced themselves from its explanation but restricting themselves to their traditional role of explaining the regional differentiation of the World, but not the disposition humans and their spiritual problems. The approach is developed to understand the distinction between sacred and profane spaces, thereby permitting vital views on the ideologies which have often been substituted to

4

religious Beyond, but have kept the main characteristics. It underscores how myths and tales are perceived as alternative to logical evidence.

4. The fourth approach is the ‘Critical Approach’ in cultural geography. This is a critical and radical approach seemingly linked with James Duncan's critique, in 1980, of the super organic conception of culture. Radical approach stresses micro-analyses and case studies. It revived the curiosity for place, so strong at the beginning of the twentieth century but had gradually declined. The Anglophone dominated the critical approach, which was conceived in varying ideological forms by scholars. For example, Denis Cosgrove focused on ideological strategy, while James Duncan hinged his explanation on the role of bearers of messages. Others like Peter Jackson lay emphasis on the construction of race, sex and marginality (Peter Jackson, 2010). These positions or views by scholars have aroused a critical debate on the cultural approach to geographical analysis and explanation.

The Need for Cultural Approach in Contemporary Human Geography The need to seek spatial explanations using cultural perceptions is not in doubt and indeed significant in contemporary human geography, because variation in location and the varying nature of cultural interaction with the immediate environment tend to influence explanations in human geography. The examination of cultural processes in human geographical explanation need to be further intensified for a number of reasons. First, traditional cultural studies, hitherto, perceived culture as static. The focus on such things as artefacts used by humans, on gestures, practices, know-hows, beliefs and values; however, with the entry of the cultural school into human geography, cultural processes, such as, the way people acquire, transform and use the material, intellectual or ethical tools which are the basic elements of their culture when studied presents a better understating of human variations experienced in our geographical space. In essence it deepens the analysis of cultural processes Second, culture is the totality of human life and environment and not just a portion of life. Likewise its use and explanation in human geography is holistic and pervades human geography, as social, economic, political, urban or rural geographies are reconstructed based on the significance of these sectors in the explanation. In the social geographical space we observe people and societies. How they relate with issues of rights, family systems, the use of legitimate power, political process and the use of communication technological processes to develop humanity and modernization. These human processes of interaction and socialization are culture driven. In economic terms, the goods and services people tend to buy are culturally identified and they are natural entities in themselves. For example, travelling has economic , be it for religious purposes, such as pilgrimage to sacred places, as tourist for relaxation in attractive climatic locations to visiting historical places. The motivation and/or determinants for this human process vary among cultures, peoples and countries of the world. From the political angle to which belong, political geographers are essentially focused on studying governance, on issues such as political tolerance, democratic systems, public administration, the judicial system and the police. The functionality and effectiveness of these systems and institutions do not only vary but are determined by the peoples culture and the way governance is built. In this aspect the cultural dimension to geographical explanation creates a better understanding of interrelationships. Third, culture in itself cannot explain geographical realities; however, it influences and facilitates the understanding of choices and behaviours which form the varying social, economic or political processes and/or geographies that constitute our space hence, culture is a common denominator for the different parts of geography. Scholars interested in cultures did not try primarily to explain the realities they observe but their aim is to understand them. For example, in a society or civilization where economy plays a significant part, normally producers reduce their offer as prices decline. It is important to note that many traditional peasant farmers do not react this way because often than not they develop their production and raise their supply when markets are depressed. To the economic man this behaviour might look irrational, however, the main aim of the peasant traditional

5 farmer is not to make money from agricultural production, but to provide enough food for the family in the present, and in the future under different challenging environmental conditions. In order to achieve such a result, they buy some products or services they cannot provide as a family, they consequently maintain a permanent minimum income due to their behaviour. This implies that whenever fundamental values of people are known, appreciating their behaviour became quite understandable. It is however important to note that culture is not always a sufficient explanatory factor, hence when they are used unprofessionally, they could be appropriately criticized by professionals in anthropology, or economics. Fourth, the role of time only came to the fore of geographical explanation essentially during the , as geography was hitherto interested in present circumstances and in limitations created by the natural environment. This new perspective raised new interest in the relationship between geography and ethics. Fifth, the cultural process and perception encouraged the examination of varying periods in current social life. The appreciation of history and the way time is valued and incorporated into the plans of individual’s changes from place to place. Cultural differences between ages influence and indeed important to note that human perception and beliefs of life after this earthly life also influence cultural explanations of the past and present in human geography. The Cultural view therefore presents a favourable new relationship of geography to time, as geographers explanations can now deal on time specific dimensions. Since the beginning of the twentieth century many interesting narratives have been written on geography but with the entry of cultural geography, the role of time and by extension has been further integrated into the main stream of human geography. Sixth, the reintegration of planning, which is a form of normative thinking, into human geography with the cultural perspectives, has extended the sphere of geographical thought and explanation. Geographers try to restore the relation which existed at the time of Enlightenment between geography and planning. They wish to give more coherence to a field which developed as a kind of condominium of economics, geography, history, sociology, art history, architecture, urbanism, urban planning, landscape gardening, etc, and as a result loosely structured. Seven, It has become pertinent to change scales of investigation and explanation from micro to macro scales because they are based and examined under a multicultural situations and context, which implies and allude to the fact that that daily life is partly structured by conversions on the nature, and the enduring significance of cultures. The macro-scale study of cultures may be developed along three points of view namely: (i) the mapping of the areas or places, as there are often variations in luggage of know-hows, attitudes or values, the significance of which can be established statistically, which is the hallmark of geographical analysis; (ii) the way people conceive themselves in terms of images and identities of at macro level; and (iii) that explanations are based on acceptable set of norms. Eight, the study of ethnogeographies became a standard with the entry of cultural geography to main stream human geography. These ethnographies focused on, among many other things on the geographical practices, know-hows and knowledge culture often develop; they are captivating because what is often enduring in the social demand for geographical knowledge, and what is specific to some level of cultural development. In the process of cultural development: systems of orientations; place-names, based on etymological, historical, and geographical information science (GIS) are developed in order to communicate and socialize geographical knowledge; have a full understanding of nature and a practical knowledge of the opportunities presented by the social environments people live in; and build networks of social relations in order to facilitate social interaction and organize space. The ethnogeographic approach is as useful when studying modern-day societies as against when applied in the primitive or traditional contexts. For example, questions such as: What is the geography of the internet age? This would facilitate the study of the geography of a modern-day society, in this case the internet, by investigating different techniques, practices, attitudes, preferences and knowledge social groups have developed in their varied perception of the internet. Nine, Cybergeographies have also emerged as a new approach and technology that is now deployed to search and develop human knowledge of its space. This has been made possible with the

6 entry of cultural dimensions in geographical explanation in human geography. The modern-day use of the internet and/or the wide wide web (www) is a ‘global plague’ that humanity can no longer resist but embrace and adopt, no matter the platform on which it is accessed. Ten, political significance of geography in solving human governance and political issues should be further developed to align with modern-day contemporary perception of issues and demand. It is a truism that Geographers examine the contemporary world and evolutions; new ecological challenges: green house effects, ozone hole, global warming; cultural traditions and the traditional geopolitical perspectives which explained contemporary tensions and conflicts, and gave an idea of the scatter belts of tomorrow; however, geography as a discipline has remained unattractive for young learners who wish to seek explanation beyond positive approach and/or statistics which they perceive as mechanical. The introduction of cultural dimension to human geography significantly empowered political geographers to change the narrative by asking questions with political perspective. What are the choices open to the decision makers? What are their dreams, their programmes, and their conception of the future? What is the role of the citizen in these processes? Are they just waiting for the next election to show how much they disagree with the orientations of their governments? Are they struggling for a better democratic control of the political process? Hence, with the cultural approach, geographers are today able to develop fascinating perspectives on many of the hot problems of our World. Eleven, modern-day geography has risen to adding value to the development of human space and human endeavour and activities, thanks to the advent of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) which has revolutionised analysis and explanation via the point of view of the varied culture of people, locations and disciplines associated with the natural sciences and the social sciences be it sociology, economics or anthropology, as space, and/or spatial technology can no longer be ignored with the application and explanation within varied cultural realities.

The Cultural Approach and Other Social Sciences

Interdisciplinary collaboration is the modern-day approach and has apparently become a culture to contemporary research and explanation of human issues globally. Cultural geography has also imbibed this philosophy to extend its research frontiers for several reasons: a) as social scientists, Geographers also take note and employ concepts and theories used by rhetoricians, historians, ethnographers, anthropologists, sociologists, political scientists and the specialists of communication, urbanists and landscape architects, in order to avoid contemporary conflict of identity between disciplines; b) in order to avoid criticisms on spatial and territorial problems, which is within the domain of geographical theory and explanation but which is often not perceived the way of the , there is the need to inter-phase with other social sciences or humanities in order to critically to examine social issues for enhanced and more comprehensive explanation; c) as a drive for other social sciences disciplines, such as, sociology, economics, political science and psychology to learn to employ spatial cultural dimensions in their studies; and d) the relations between geography and history is very significant as Historical Geography has shown that the traditional union between both disciplines has to be nurtured and sustained for cultural approach to be relevant in historical geographical explanations.

Reflections on the Future of Cultural Geography The future of cultural geography is bright and sustainable. It apparently brings humanity and reality to human geographical investigation and explanation, which vary with different cultural experiences, values, institutions, social organizations and location. The place of this sub-discipline will be further entrenched in human geographical explanation, if among many other things Cultural Geographers maintain the tradition in terms of: (a) preserve the philosophy and maintain the energy manifested by the founders of cultural geography when it emerged as a significant sub-discipline of human geography in the 1970s and 1980s; (b) the need to deepen the critical orientations of the discipline, which involves the of colonial geographies, to explore geographical

7 imaginations of the past and present as well as to bring to the fore the construction of race, gender or age by narratives as well as the genesis of exclusion (Tylor, 1989); (c) by exploring and employing new types of geographic narratives different from those of centuries ago, using the cultural approach, in order to understand and appreciate the modern-day geographies of societies in other to shape the landscapes and spatial organisation; (d) to continue with the restructuration of the geographic sub disciplines like social, cultural geography as started by scholars such as (O'Tuathail, 1997) as the cultural turn highlights the need for social conditionning of people’s perception and explanation; (e) the need to revamp the regional approach is more than significant in present-day Human Geography in order to investigate the way space is divided, thought of and used at different scales by different social groups; (f) sustain the analysis of the landscape, which is shaped by peoples activities, the effectiveness of actions in space; and (g) reflecting on the focus of Human Geography at the beginning of the twentieth century, with a view to integrating the cultural dimension devoted on time and efforts to the analysis of man/milieu relationships. This involves a reflection on the philosophical links between humanity and its environment (Berque, 2000).

Conclusion The introduction of cultural dimension and/or variables in human geographical investigation and explanation is very significant and can and has indeed helped to extend the sphere of human understanding of socio-economic issues beyond statistical explanations. The people’s culture, i.e. way of life, race, social institutions, social values, social processes, social meanings, social symbols, identity, religion, struggles and perception varies among cultures and locations, hence; constitute a critical component of the equation of human geographical explanation. The consequence of the cultural turn in Human Geography is the evolution of Cultural Geography, which has a unique tradition, philosophy, process of enquiry and explanation that should not only be sustained but developed to solving human challenges, from different cultural positions and locations in a globalizing world.

References

Barnett, C., (1998). The cultural turn: Fashion or progress in human geography? Antipode, 30, p. 379- 394. Bell, C. & Valentine, G., (1997). Consuming geographies: We are what we eat, London, Routledge. Berque, Augustin (2000). Ecoumène, Paris, Belin. Brunhes, Jean, (1910). La Géographie humaine, Paris, Alcan. Butzer, K.W., ed. (1978). Dimensions of human geography: Culture and theory in human geography. University of Chicago, Department of Geography. Research Paper no. 186. vii + 190 pp. Claval, Paul, (2001-a). The cultural approach in geography : the perspective of communication, Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift, 55(3), p. 122-127. Claval Paul, (2001-b). The geographical study of myths. Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift, 55(3), p. 138- 151. Cosgrove, D. E. (1984). Social Formation and Symbolic Landscape. University of Wisconsin Press. 332p. De Rosa, J., Ess, C., & Ehlschlaeger, C. (2017). White paper on The key role of human geography, culture and language in effective communication: A strategic multilayer assessment (SMA). Periodic Publication.

8

Dewsbury, John-David (2000). and the Event: Enacting a Philosophy of Difference. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space. Vol 18, Issue 4, 2000. P. 473-496

Dewsbury, John-David (2003). Witnessing Space: ‘Knowledge without Contemplation’ Environment and Planning D: Society and Space. Volume: 35.Iissue 11, P. 1907-1932

Duncan, James, (1980). The superorganic in American cultural geography. Annals of the Association of American Geographers,70, p. 181-192. Edward F. Bergman (1995). Human geography: Culture, connections and landscape. Prentice Hall. 532 . (2008). Culture . In: Timothy S. Oakes & Patricia L. Price. (eds). The cultural geography reader. Routledge New York. P. 482. Goetz, C. (1966).Think Description: Towards an Interpretation of Culture. Giddens, Anthony, (1984). The constitution of society. Oxford, Blackwell. Harrison, J. (2000). Terrestrial TV News in Britain: The Culture of Production. Manchester University Press, Performing Arts - 256 pp

Henry Munson Jr., (1986). Geertz on religion: The theory and the practice. Religion,16(1), 19-32. Hutchins, Edwin (2008). The role of cultural practices in the emergence of modern human intelligence. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B. The Royal Society Publishing Hutchins, B. (2011). The Acceleration of Media Sports Culture; Twitter, Telepresence and Online Messaging. Information and Communication and Society. Vol.14. No. 2. P. 237-257 Jackson, R.H., (1978). Religion and landscape in the Mormon cultural . In K.W. Butzer, (ed.), Dimensions of human geography: Essays on some familiar and neglected themes, Chicago: University of Chicago, Department of Geography. Kitchin, Rob, (2007). Mapping worlds: International perspectives on social and cultural geographies. London: Routledge, 2007. Kong, Lily. (2010). China and geography in the 21st century: A cultural (geographic) revolution. Eurasian Geography and Economics 51(5), 600–618. Laponce, Jean, (1984). Langue et territoire, Québec, Presses de l'Université Laval. Leonard, M.K., Brown, T.T., Travis, K.E., Gharapetian, L., Hagler, D.J., Dale, A.M., Elman, J.L., & Halgren, E. (2010). Spatiotemporal dynamics of bilingual word processing. NeuroImage, 49(4), 3286-3294. Retrieved from: http://www.cogsci.ucsd.edu/media/publications/sdarticle.pdf Liebes, T. & Katz, E. (1990). The export of meaning. Cross-cultural readings of Dallas. New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lorimer, H. (2005). Cultural geography: the busyness of being `more-than-representational' Progress in Human Geography 29. pp. 83-94

Merle Tambur, Maaja Vadi, (2012) "Workplace bullying and in a post‐transitional country", International Journal of Manpower, Vol. 33 Issue: 7, pp.754-768, https://doi.org/10.1108/01437721211268302

McCormack, W. J. (2002).The Blackwell Companion to Modern Irish Culture. Wiley, - Literary Criticism - 720 pp.

9

Michael, K., Harner, J. & Gober, P. (2002). Human geography in action. John Wiley & Sons Mitchell, Don (2000). Cultural geography: A critical introduction. Oxford, Blackwell Morozov, E. (2009). Iran: Downside to the Twitter Revolution. Dissent. Retrieved from: https://www.evgenymorozov.com/morozov_twitter_dissent.pdf Nash, C. (2000). Performativity in practice: some recent work in cultural geography. Progress in Human Geography. Vol. 24.No. 4 pp. 653-664

Norton, M.D. (2016). Building Blocks of a Knowledge Work Culture. https://www.slideshare.net/.../building-blocks-of-a-knowledge-work-culture-ndc-lond.

O'Tuathail, G. (1997). Critical geopolitics. London, Routledge. Pavlenko, A., (2003). Eyewitness memory in late bilinguals: Evidence for discursive relativity. International Journal of Bilingualism, 7 (3), 257–281. Pavlenko, A. (2014). The bilingual mind and what it tells us about language and thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Peter Jackson (2010) Rematerializing social and cultural geography Social & Cultural Geography.Vol.1, Issue 1. Pp. 9-14. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649369950133449

Polanyi, Karl, (1944). The great transformation. New York, Rinehart. Richardson, M. (1981). On the super organic in American cultural geography: Commentary on Duncan's paper. Annals of the Association of American Geographers,. 71, 284-287. Raymond Williams (2008). Culture. In Timothy S. Oakes & Patricia L. Price. The cultural geography reader. Routledge New York, p.15-19. Staszak, Jean-François (1999). Détruire Detroit. La matrice culturelle de la crise urbaine. Annales de Géographie, May-June, p. 277-299.

Sewell Jr. (2005). The Concept of Culture. https://is.muni.cz/el/1423/podzim2010/SOC978/SOC_470_Sewell.pdf Sutherlin, G. (2013). Crowd sourcing translation during crisis situations: Are ‘real voices’ being excluded from the decisions and policies it supports?” Oxford Internet Institute Blog. Retrieved from: https://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/blog/crowdsourcing-translation-during-crisis- situations-are-real-voicesbeing-excluded-from-the-decisions-and-policies-it-supports/ Sutherlin, G. (2014). Groupthink: ICT design with culture in mind. In M. Strano et al. (eds.). Proceedings Culture, Technology, Communication, University of Oslo, Norway, p.116-132. Sutherlin, G. (2014). The myth of the universal user-- Pursuing a cultural variable in ICT design for conflict management through quantitative analysis: Implications from a Ugandan Case Study. Ph.D Thesis. Sutherlin, G. (2017). Human geography analysis and how cultures think differently. White Paper on the key role of human geography, culture and language in effective communication. A Strategic Multilayer Assessment (SMA) Periodic Publication May 2017. Timothy S. Oakes & Patricia L. Price (2008). The cultural geography reader. Routledge New York, NY . p. 482.

10

Tylor, E.B. (2010). Primitive culture 2. Cambridge University Press. Taylor, M. (1989). The Structure, Culture, and Action in the Explanation of . Politics and Society. Sage. Vol. 17, No. 2

William Sewell, Jr. (2008). The concept(s) of culture. In: Timothy S. Oakes and Patricia L. Price. The cultural geography reader. Routledge New York. pp. 40-49. Williams, R. (1983) Culture and Society, 1780-1950 Columbia University press. 362 pp.

11

View publication stats