Posts

Regional geography vs systematic geography

  Regional geography, to Hartshorne, is the study of all the features of a given region, any two-dimensional area of interest. The first objective is to learn and record the facts of the world within the region, to describe the region’s “contents”, and therefore describe the region itself. The second objective is to understand the region as an independent entity, as well as a reality within a broader context. Systematic geography deals, generally thematically (for example, morphological, economic, political, climatic), with processes that operate through space, in an attempt to understand and explain them. It needn’t be done on a global scale; to the contrary, most systematic geography is done through “case studies”, which in geography are generally regional. But the point is to be studying a phenomenon that is presumed to be universal, to operate identically elsewhere (subject to conditions, of course); any results are meant to be generalizable.