Advertisement

18 Social Demography, Space and Place

  • David L. BrownEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Handbooks of Sociology and Social Research book series (HSSR)

Abstract

Social demographers are pushing back from the totalizing norms of a-spatial theory. Population dynamics affect, and are affected by the attributes of geographic places at multiple spatial scales. Spatial analysis in demography has benefitted from methodological advances, and from new theoretical perspectives in which space as a simple container of social behavior has been replaced by relational thinking in which spatial units play a causal role in social and demographic processes. In this perspective, space is a relatively abstract term that lacks substantive meaning. In contrast, place and community are created when people organize space, give it meaning, and identify with it. As Jones and Woods (Reg Stud 47:29–42, 2014) have observed, places and communities have both material and imagined coherence. Their material coherence is comprised of social, economic and political structures while their imagined coherence is characterized by a sense of place, and emotional and behavioral attachments to place. Demographic behavior contributes to the production and reproduction of a place’s institutional structure, while demographic relationships spanning place boundaries contribute to economic, social and political interdependencies. Like other social boundaries in contemporary society, spatial boundaries have become increasingly permeable, and spaces of intense social, economic and political interpenetration. Accordingly, the utility of spatial binaries such as urban vs rural is called into question.

Keywords

Spatial demography Space Place Community Relational theory Social boundary Material coherence Imagined coherence Permeable boundary 

References

  1. Agnew, J. (2011). Space and place. In J. Agnew and D. Livingstone (eds.) Handbook of Geographical Knowledge (Pp. 316–331) London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alba, R., Logan, J., Zhang, Z., and Stults, B. (1999). Strangers next door: Immigrant groups and suburbs in Los Angeles and New York. In Moen, P. D. Dempster McClain and H. Walker. (eds.) 1999. A Nation Divided: Diversity, Inequality and Community in American Society (Pp. 108–132). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Allmendinger, P. and Haughton, G. (2009). Soft spaces, fuzzy boundaries, and metagovernance: The new spatial planning in the Thames Gateway. Environment and Planning-A., 41 (3), 617–633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Anselm, L. (2003). Spatial externalities, spatial multipliers, and spatial econometrics. International Regional Science Review, 26 (2), 153–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beale, C. (1977). The recent shift of U.S. population to nonmetropolitan areas. International Regional Science Review, 2, 113–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Berry, B. and Kasarda, J. (1977). Contemporary Human Ecology. New York, NY: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  7. Billsborrow, R. (1998). Migration, Urbanization and Development: New Directions and Issues. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bogue, D. (1950). The Structure of the Metropolitan Community: a Study of Dominance and Sub-dominance. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan.Google Scholar
  9. Brenner, N. (2001). The limits to scale? Methodological reflections on scalar structuration. Progress in Human Geography, 25 (4), 591–614.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brown, D.L. and Schafft, K. (2019). Rural People and Communities in the 21st Century: Resilience and Transformation (second edition). Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  11. Brown, D.L. and Shucksmith, M. (2017). Reconsidering territorial governance to account for enhanced rural-urban interdependence in America. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 672, 282–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brown, D.L. and Argent, N. (2016). The impacts of population change on rural society and economy. In M. Shucksmith and D.L. Brown (eds.) The Routledge International Handbook of Rural Studies (Pp. 85–95). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Brown, D. L. (2013). European rural population change matters, But demography is not destiny. Przeglad Socjologiczny, 30, 135–150.Google Scholar
  14. Brown, D. L., Bolender, B., Kulcsar, L.J., Glasgow, N., and Sanders, S. (2011). Intercounty variability of net migration at older ages as a path dependent process. Rural Sociology, 76 (1), 44–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Brown, D. L. (2002). Migration and community: Social networks in a multilevel world. Rural Sociology 67 (1), 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Brown, D.L. and Lee, M. (1999). Persisting inequality between metropolitan and nonmetropolitan America: Implications for theory and policy. In Moen, P. D. Dempster-McClain and H. Walker. (eds.), A Nation Divided: Diversity, Inequality and Community in American Society (Pp. 151–170 ). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Bryk, S. W. and Raudenbush, A. (2002). Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  18. Champion, A.G. (ed.) (1989). Counterurbanization: The Changing Pace and Nature of Population Deconcentration. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
  19. Cohen, A. (2004). The Symbolic Construction of Community. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Cox K. 2018. Globalization and the question of scale. In R C Kloosterman, V Mamadouh and P Terhorst (eds.), Research Handbook on the Geographies of Globalisation (Pp: 43–61). Cheltenham UK: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cox, K. (1996). The difference that scale makes. Political Geography, 15(8), 667–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Crowder, K. and Downey, L. (2010). Inter-neighborhood migration, race and environmental hazards: Modeling microlevel processes of environmental inequality. American Journal of Sociology, 115(4), 1110–1149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Delanty, G. (2010). Community. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. Dunford, M. and Smith, A. (2000). Catching Up or Falling Behind? Economic Performance and Regional Trajectories in the “New Europe.” Economic Geography, 76 (2), 169–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Duncan, O.D., Scott, W., Lieberson, L., Duncan, B. and Winsborough, H. (1960). Metropolis and Region. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Duncan, O.D., Cuzzort, R., and Duncan, B. (1961). Statistical Geography. New York, NY: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  27. Faist, T. (1997). From common questions to common concepts. In T. Hammar, G. Brochmann, K. Tamas, and T. Faist (eds.) International Migration, Immobility, and Development. Multidisciplinary Perspectives (Pp. 247–276). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Fowler, C., Rhubart, D. and Jensen, L. (2016). Reassessing and revising commuting zones for 2010: History, assessment, and updates for U.S. Labor Sheds, 1990–2010. Population Research and Policy Review, 35, 263–286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Frisbie, W.P. and Poston, D.L. (1978). Sustenance differentiation and population redistribution. Social Forces, 57, 42–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Fuguitt, G., Brown, D.L., and Beale, C. (1989). Rural and Small Town America. New York, NY: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  31. Gibbs, J.P. (1959). Demographic adjustment to a decrease in sustenance. Pacific Sociological Review, 2, 61–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Goldscheider, C. (ed.) (1992). Migration, Population Structure and Redistribution Policies. Boulder, CO: Westview.Google Scholar
  33. Goodchilde, M. and Janelle, D. (2004). Spatially Integrated Social Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Gottdiener, M. (1987). Space as a force of production. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 11(3), 405–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hawley, A.H. (1950). Human Ecology. New York, NY: Ronald Press.Google Scholar
  36. Hawley, A.H. (1971). Urban Society: An Ecological Approach. New York, NY: Ronald Press.Google Scholar
  37. Hirschman, C. and Tolnay, S. (2005). Sociological Demography. In D.L. Poston and M. Miklin (eds.) Handbook of Population (Pp. 419–449). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Hummon, D. (1992). Community attachment: Local sentiment and sense of place. In S. Low and I. Altman (eds.) Place Attachment (Pp. 253–278). New York, NY: Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Jones, M. and Woods, M. (2014). New localities. Regional Studies, 47(1), 29–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Johnson, K. and Winkler, R. (2015). Migration signatures: Net migration by age and race/ethnicity in U.S. counties, 1950–2010. Demographic Research, 32(38), 1065–1080.Google Scholar
  41. Johnson, K. and Cromartie, J. (2006). The rural rebound and its aftermath: Changing demographic dynamics and regional contrasts. In W. Kandell and D.L. Brown (eds.) Population Change and Rural Society (Pp. 25–50). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kirk, D. (1968). The field of demography. In D. Sills (ed.) International Encyclopedia of Social Science (Pp. 342–343). New York, NY: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  43. Lamont, M. and Molnar, V. (2002). The study of boundaries across the social sciences. Annual Review of Sociology, 28, 167–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Lefebvre, H. (1976). De l’Etat. Volume 2. Paris: Union Generale d’Editions.Google Scholar
  45. Lefebvre, H. (1991 [1974]). The Production of Space. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  46. Lewicka, M. (2010). Place attachment: How far have we come in the last 40 years? Journal of Environmental Social Psychology, 31, 207–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Low, S. and Altman, I. (eds.). (1992). Place Attachment. New York, NY: Plenum.Google Scholar
  48. Lobao, L. (1996). A sociology of the periphery versus peripheral sociology: Rural sociology and the dimensions of space. Rural Sociology, 61(1), 77–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Lichter, D.T. and Brown, D.L. (2011). Rural America in an urban society: Changing spatial and social boundaries. Annual Review of Sociology, 37, 562–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Lichter, D.T. and Ziliak, J. (2017). The rural-urban interface: New patterns of spatial interdependence and inequality in America. ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 672(1), 6–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Lyson, T. (1989). Two Sides to the Sunbelt. New York, NY: Praeger.Google Scholar
  52. Massey, D. and Denton, N. (1993). American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the American Underclass. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Marston, S. (2000). The social construction of scale. Progress in Human Geography, 24(2), 219–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Moen, P. Dempster-McClain, D., and Walker, H. (eds.) (1999). A Nation Divided: Diversity, Inequality and Community in American Society. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Montello, D. (2001). Scale in geography. In N. Smelser and P. Baltes (eds.) International Encyclopedia of Social and Behavioral Sciences (Pp. 13501–13504). Oxford: Pergamon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Molotch, H. and Logan, J. (1987). Urban Fortunes: The Political Economy of Place. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  57. National Research Council. (1989). A Common Destiny: Blacks and American Society. Washington DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  58. Paasi, A. (2013). Regional planning and the mobilization of regional identity: From bounded spaces to relational complexity. Regional Studies, 47(8), 1206–1219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Parsons, T. (1951). The Social System. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  60. Portes, A. (1999). Immigration theory for a new century: Some problems and opportunities. In C. Hirschman, P. Krasinitz, and J. DeWind (eds.) The Handbook of International Migration (Pp. 21–33). New York, NY: Russell Sage.Google Scholar
  61. Poston, D.L. and W.P. Frisbie. (2005). Ecological Demography. In D.L. Poston and M. Micklin (eds.) Handbook of Population (Pp. 601–623). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Poston, D.L. and M. Mao. (1996). An ecological investigation of interstate migration in the United States, 1985–1990. Advances in Human Ecology, 5, 303–342.Google Scholar
  63. Poston, D.L., Frisbie, W.P. and Micklin, M. (1984). Sociological human ecology: Theoretical and conceptual perspectives. In M. Micklin and H. Choldin (eds.) Sociological Human Ecology (Pp. 91–124). Boulder, CO: Westview.Google Scholar
  64. Poston, D.L. and White, R. (1978). Indigenous labor supply, sustenance organization, and population redistribution in nonmetropolitan America: An extension of the ecological theory of migration. Demography, 15 (4), 637–641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Rural Sociological Society. (1993). Persistent Poverty in Rural America. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  66. Sampson, R. (2004). Neighborhood and community: Collective efficacy and community safety. New Economy, 11, 106–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Sampson, R. (2012). Great American City: Chicago and the Enduring Neighborhood Effect. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Sampson, R. and Raudenbush, S. (1999). Systematic social observation of public spaces: A new look at disorder in urban neighborhoods.” American Journal of Sociology, 105, 603–651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Sampson, R., Raudenbush, S., and Earls, F. (1997). Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multi-level study of collective efficacy. Science, 277 (5328), 918–924.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Slack, T., Thiede, B. and Jensen, L. (2018). Race, residence and underemployment: 50 years in comparative perspective, 1964–2017. Presented at the Conference on Rural Poverty: Fifty Years After The People Left Behind. Washington, DC, March 21–22.Google Scholar
  71. Sayer, A. (1993). Method of Social Science: A Realist Approach. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  72. Selznick, P. (1992). In search of community. In P. Selznick (ed.). The Moral Commonwealth (Pp. 357–368). Berkley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  73. Smith, D. (1995). The new urban sociology meets the old: Re-reading some classical human ecology. Urban Affairs Review, 30, 432–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Stedman, R. (2002). Toward a social psychology of place: Predicting behavior from place-based cognitions, attitudes, and identity. Environment and Behavior, 34 (5), 561–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Taeuber, K and Taeuber, A. (1969). Negroes in Cities. New York, NY: Aldine.Google Scholar
  76. Thiede, B., Lichter, D.L. and Slack, T. (2018). Working, but poor: The good life in rural America? Journal of Rural Studies, 59, 183–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Thiede, B., Brown, D.L., Sanders, S., Glasgow, N., and Kulcsar, L.J. (2017). A demographic deficit? Local population aging and access to services in rural America, 1990–2010.” Rural Sociology, 83, 44–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Todaro, M. (1969). A model for labor migration and urban unemployment in less developed countries. American Economic Review, 59,138–148.Google Scholar
  79. Tuan, Y.F. (1977). Space and Place: The Perspective of Experience. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  80. Voss, P. K., White, C. and Hammar, R. (2006). Explorations in spatial demography. In W. Kandell and D.L. Brown (eds.) Population Change and Rural Society (Pp. 407–429). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Williamson, H. (1965). Regional inequality and the process of national development: A description of patterns. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 13, 3–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Wilson, W.J. (1999). Jobless poverty: A new form of social location in the inner-city ghetto.” In P. Moen, D. Dempster-McClain and H. Walker (eds.). A Nation Divided: Diversity, Inequality and Community in American Society (Pp. 133–150). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  83. Wirth, L. (1938). Urbanism as a way of life.” The American Journal of Sociology, 44, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Cornell UniversityIthacaUSA

Personalised recommendations