Results of the Third Congress of the Geographical Society of the USSR

A review of the IGU symposium on the history of geographical thought, held in July 1976 in Leningrad, discusses common themes in papers presented by Soviet geographers and foreign participants. In the view of the Soviet organizers, the foreign presentations were more concerned with the past than with the current impact of geography on socio-economic activities, which is said to distinguish the Soviet school of geography. The work of the symposium demonstrated that the ideas of geographical determinism had been largely abandoned. The presentations of foreign geographers suggested that they were still inadequately informed about the work of Soviet geographers despite ongoing translation programs.     

SOVIET ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY: SIX DECADES OF DEVELOPMENT AND CONTEMPORARY PROBLEMS

A senior Russian economic geographer reviews the peripatetic evolution of the discipline during the Soviet period. After an early phase in the 1920s and 1930s, when it made some practical contributions to economic planning, particularly in regionalization, economic geography was long relegated to the status of a teaching discipline separating it from the more goal-oriented economic sciences. In recent years, economic geography has again acquired greater practical relevance, largely because of the development, and official endorsement, of the theory and application of territorial-production complex theory as an approach to spatial organization of the Soviet economy. Its thematic content has been broadened by the inclusion of the increasingly active field of population geography and urban geography. The growing “social” content of the discipline has given rise to suggestions that it be renamed “social geography,” or at least “social-economic geography,” reflecting a similar change of designations of the Soviet economic plans to social-economic plans.     

Resolution of the Fifth Congress of the Geographical Society USSR

A 1978 collection of articles devoted to geocybernetics, a subfield of geography concerned with spatial aspects of management, focuses on the problem of administration of the Soviet economy through a system of socio-economic regions at three levels–macro, meso and micro levels. The reviewer examines critically some of the basic ideas of regionalization underlying the proposed new discipline. He questions, in particular, what he considers an exaggerated research emphasis on problems of middle–level and lower–level regionalization without adequate attention to the issue of the Soviet Union's macroregions.     

GEOGRAPHICAL SYSTEMS AND ECONOMIC-GEOGRAPHICAL SYSTEMS

A group of physical geographers of the Institute of Geography in Moscow, the principal academic research institution in geography, published an article in 1974 seeking to define and categorize terms and concepts now being used in Soviet geography. The article said the term geosystem (geographical system) applied equally to physical-geographical and socio-economic entities, and the term “geographical environment”, in actual research practice, referred not only to the physical setting of human activities, but also to engineering elements and social conditions. The present writer contends that such a definition of the geographical environment, incorporating both natural and social elements, smacks of a unified geography, and that geosystems, as originally defined, refer only to natural terrestrial systems, excluding man.     

Fifty Years of Development of Soviet Geographic Thought

A review of trends in Soviet geography covers the increasing specialization of physical-geographic disciplines and attempts to integrate physical geography through landscape-study techniques and the theory of a physical-geographic envelope of the earth. Economic geography has focused on regionalization problems and the formation of territorial-production complexes. The controversy over the content of geography is reviewed, and cartography and regional geography are viewed as frameworks for the generalization of geographic information. The new constructive school of Soviet geography is described.     

A Letter from David Hooson to a Soviet Journal

David Hooson, now at the University of California, Berkeley, has been, together with Ian M. Matley of Michigan State University, among the principal North American interpreters of Soviet methodological discussions in geography, including the controversy surrounding V. A. Anuchin. The present letter, in which Hooson corrects a quotation cited out of context and an error of translation in a Soviet journal, represents one of the few, modest attempts to achieve a dialogue between Soviet and American geographers.     

Geographical Aspects of Public Health

A review of Soviet research in medical geography stresses that in addition to study of the geography of disease and its causes of propagation, Soviet medical geographers are also concerned with identifying the natural factors that have a beneficial effect on the health of man. Five current research trends are outlined. For previous material on medical geography, see Soviet Geography, October 1962.     

“Methodological Clashes in Moscow” as Misinterpreted by an American Geographer

David Hooson of the University of British Columbia is accused of prejudiced interpretation of the Soviet discussion of V. A. Anuchin's book Teoreticheskiye problemy geografii and of open hostility toward the Marxist basis of Soviet geography. The authors reject Hooson's suggestion that there may be a growing rapprochement between Soviet and American geography, and they reassert the fundamental political orientation of Soviet geography. In the authors' view, the only useful contact between the two sides must be sought in what they call a complete and objective exchange of information and opinion.     

Soviet Geographers at the 19th International Geographical Congress

Reviewing the contribution of Soviet geographers at the Stockholm congress, the author makes a plea for more papers on economic geography and on integrated problems in geography. He denies that a trend toward greater emphasis on specialized disciplines is characteristic of Soviet geography. He criticizes some Soviet geographers for preparing what Saushkin considers misleading summaries of papers presented by foreign geographers.     

THE 1929 MEETING OF SOVIET GEOGRAPHY TEACHERS: A KEY EVENT IN THE HISTORY OF SOVIET ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY

A Soviet economic geographer who participated in a 1929 conference of geography teachers describes the antecedents, the atmosphere and the proceedings of this crucial meeting in a stormy period of the discipline. It was a landmark in the history of Soviet economic geography in marking the beginning of the end of the old sectoral-statistical approach and inaugurating the new regional school led by N. N. Baranskiy.     

On the Study of the History of Geographical Ideas

The author rebuts the criticism by Yu. G. Saushkin that the book Razvitiye geograficheskikh idey [The Evolution of Geographical Ideas] is in effect a history of physical geography rather than a history of geography as a whole. Isachenko contends that concepts of natural science have been at the root of geography throughout its history and it is therefore natural for a history of geographical ideas to deal predominantly with the ideas of physical geography. Far from having ignored human geography, Isachenko contends, his book traces the anthropocentric school through its various stages of development. Only the survey of Soviet geography was restricted to physical geography, the author says, because Soviet geography consists of two virtually independent disciplines and the author happens to be a physical geographer viewing his discipline as the foundation of all geography.     

About S. V. Kalesnik's Article on “Monism” and “Dualism” in Soviet Geography

The author defends V. A. Anuchin's efforts to develop the theory of unity of geography based on Marxist-Leninist philosophy. Konovalenko finds that Americans are closely following the theoretical discussion in Soviet geography because they, too, are supposedly searching for a methodological foundation of a unified geography. He holds that Soviet geography, by developing such a theory on a Marxist basis, can win followers within the ranks of foreign geographers, including Americans. S. V. Kalesnik's article appeared in Izvestiya Vsesoyuznogo Geograficheskogo Obshchestva, 1962, No. 1, pp. 15–25, and was translated in Soviet Geography, September 1962 pp. 3–16).     

Geographic Education and Research at Canadian Universities

A Soviet visiting geographer assesses the state of geography at Canadian universities in the light of Soviet experience. The system of higher education in geography is found to have expanded considerably in recent years, partly through the formation of new universities and the creation of new geography departments. Despite relatively weak links among universities and a wide diversity in research topics, each major department appears to have specialized in certain areas. This is partly a result of efforts by the Canadian Association of Geographers. The status of various geographic disciplines is briefly reviewed.     

Study of the History of Geographical Ideas

Two recent books on the history of geographical ideas, by A. G. Isachenko of Leningrad University, and by Preston James of Syracuse University, are reviewed in the general context of the need for a textbook for courses now being taught at Soviet universities. The Isachenko book is criticized on the ground that it reduces the history of geographical ideas to a history of physical geography, ignoring the impact of human activity. James, who deals with the history of geographical ideas as a whole, is praised for having included a chapter on the new geography in the Soviet Union and on the innovative aspects of theoretical geography, such as systems theory, spatial systems, diffusion on studies, etc. In the reviewer's opinion, the two books need to be examined critically in connection with preparation of a text for a Soviet university course on the history and methodology of geography.     

Geographical Approaches to the Study of Extractive Industries

The locational patterns of development of extractive industry in the USSR have been neglected as an object of study in Soviet economic geography. The geography of resource-based industry is determined by two groups of factors: natural and economic. Research is needed to establish the quantitative parameters of the effect of natural factors on location. The most significant economic factor of location is technical progress. A basic problem in the development of extractive industry in the Soviet Union has been the areal disparity between availability of resources and resource use. The disparity is most evident between the western and eastern zones of the country. Soviet economic regions can be grouped according to their share in the gross output of all extractive industry. Within groups, regions can be distinguished according to the extent to which available resources are being used. Resource-based industries tend to form the core of industrial complexes, particularly in pioneering regions where the economy is in its early stages of development. Five types of resource complexes are distinguished: energy-oriented complexes, ore-based complexes, fishery complexes, timber complexes, and nonmetallic mineral complexes.     

Yu. G. Saushkin's Reply to a Letter of Protest by Nine Soviet Geographers

The following is a reply to a letter that appeared in Soviet Geography, January 1963, pp. 60–62, accusing Saushkin of having given a misleading picture of Soviet economic geography in his article in the American journal Economic_Geography, 1962, No. 1. Saushkin rejects the charges that he gave a one-sided and impoverished picture of the Soviet discipline, that he minimized Lenin's contribution to Soviet economic geography, that he departed from an official definition of the discipline adopted in 1955, and that he supported three controversial Soviet geographers, R. M. Kabo, N. N. Kolosovskly, and V. A. Anuchin.     

Present Problems in Soviet Cartography and the Tasks of the Geographical Society

After having long existed as a technical discipline serving the needs of geographers, cartography in the Soviet Union has become increasingly a research discipline involving many common interests with geography. Collaboration between cartographers and geographers is becoming increasingly essential as more attention is being given to thematic cartography involving not only particular disciplines (geomorphology, economic geography, population geography) but what may be called an integrated “geographical” cartography. Much effort continues to be devoted in the Soviet Union to the compilation of regional atlases and to a wide range of thematic maps. Increasing attention is being given to the production of evaluative maps, assessing the potential use of the physical environment and natural resources. School maps represent a major part of Soviet map production. Tourist and hiking maps need to be seriously improved.     

Soviet Geographic Literature

A review of geography publishing in the Soviet Union analyzes the output of literature by categories of end-users: (1) publications designed for professional geographers, including works on theory and method, university textbooks, periodicals and serials, and bibliographic and information services; (2) geographic publications intended for the public at large, including regional studies of different levels of sophistication on the Soviet Union and foreign areas as well as popular geography books; (3) geography textbooks and study aids for elementary and secondary schools, which represents the largest portion of geography publishing in terms of volume, with an average of 4 million books printed each year. Recommendations for improvements in geography publishing include the creation of a Council on Literature, made up of professional geographers; the establishment of a centralized publishing house that would specialize in geography (except for textbooks, government publications and special-purpose literature), and the establishment of a translation journal that would disseminate some of the more significant foreign articles in Russian translation.     

Economic Geography in the USSR on the 50th Anniversary of Soviet Power

Economic geography has, since the inception of the Soviet state, played an important utilitarian role in the planning and development of the national economy. The basic research of economic geographers in the preplanning stage should, however, be distinguished from the actual selection of an industrial site or of a railroad alignment, which must be the province of government design and planning agencies. Two approaches can now be noted in Soviet economic geography. One, closely related to economics, deals with the economic factors of economic location; the other, closely related to physical geography, emphasizes the regional approach to the man-environment system.     

INTEGRATION AND DIFFERENTIATION IN MODERN GEOGRAPHY

A leading physical geographer reviews recent efforts in the Soviet Union to foster integration among the physical and socioeconomic disciplines of geography. He identifies a number of barriers that stand in the way of integration: the ever increasing multiplicity of conceptual approaches and models in geography, runaway terminological innovation and confusion, the increasing tendency of socioeconomic geographers to give their particular disciplines a greater economic and sociological orientation, the lack of cohesion in efforts to work out general geographic concepts and theories, the absence of physical-geographic background in work on social and economic geography, the increasing trend toward differentiation in geography, the fact that there is actually very little joint work among physical and socioeconomic geographers. In Isachenko's view, geography in the Soviet Union remains inevitably a dualistic discipline, in which progress toward genuine integration would require, for example, genuine collaboration among geographers in the various subfields.