Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
locations, the outcomes of which would be greater similarity,
greater homogeneity, more equality, and more individual-based
democracy.
Source:
Friedman 2005, 2006, 2007.
overcoming space, as a result of technological and institutional epoch-
making phenomena.
Yet, Friedman's argument is not entirely new. The idea that technologi-
cal improvements mean that geography and distance have become of little
or no importance goes back to the early 1980s (Warf 1995; Gaspar and
Glaeser 1998), where commentators assumed that the overriding likely
impacts of the emergent information technologies would be to promote
dispersal away from areas of population concentration. During the 1980s
these arguments were increasingly bolstered by widespread contempora-
neous observations of a process of urban-rural shift, whereby increasing
numbers of people and firms appeared to be moving away from major
cities and into smaller cities (Fothergill et al. 1985). In 1992 O'Brien (1992)
announced the 'end of geography' and by 1997 Frances Cairncross (1997)
had also proclaimed the 'death of distance' (Cairncross 1997); they were
followed, among others, by the 'weightless world' (Coyle 1997) and the
'vanishing of distance' (Reich 2001). As we have already noted, although
to most readers of Friedman's topic these assumptions and arguments
immediately strike a chord and therefore seems completely reasonable,
from the perspective of economic geography many of Friedman's assump-
tions and arguments about globalization are entirely wrong. In particular
he makes one critical error in his thesis. For Friedman it is unambiguous
and obvious that technology has reduced the costs of engaging in activities
across space, thereby flattening the world. For urban economists and eco-
nomic geographers, however, things are far from being so straightforward.
Spatial transactions costs have not fallen over recent years, but instead
they have changed, and in many cases they have actually increased. These
changes are transforming the relationships between firms and geography.
In particular, the relationships between multinational firms, cities, regions
and countries are changing both dramatically and rapidly, and from the
perspective of economics these transformations are far more profound
than any changes brought by YouTube or Facebook (Christopherson
et al. 2008; Stiglitz 2002; Storper and Venables 2004, Steingart 2008).
Moreover, as we will see over the following sections, the available empiri-
cal evidence suggests that many of these changes are actually diametrically
