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.     

The Geography of Population and the Geography of Services

In discussing a methodology for a geography of services, a new branch of Soviet geographic research, the authors propose geographically meaningful classifications of services, the use of value and labor-input indicators, the problem of a typology of service regions, and other aspects of research in this new discipline. The geography of services is found to be closely related to population geography because of the correlation between the distribution of services and the distribution of population.     

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 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.     

Let's Not!

Armand finds that Anuchin painted an overly dark picture of the future of geography in the Soviet Union. The issue of a unified geography versus two or more geographies is regarded by Armand as a fruitless terminological argument. He holds that geographers can make their research count increasingly in national planning by making more use of mathematical apparatus, familiarizing themselves with related technical disciplines, and by being bolder in making practical recommendations to policy makers.     

Some Results of the Second National Interagency Conference on Population Geography

Population geography in the Soviet Union is found to be developing mainly in breadth without adequate theoretical gounding. Because of the growing interest in mathematical methods, which have yet to demonstrate their real research value, long-tested traditional methods (statistical, comparative, cartographic) are being neglected. The usefulness of large conferences as compared with small meetings on a specific topic is questioned. The present active interest in population geography is resulting in neglect of other branches of economic geography in the Soviet Union.     

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.     

THE GEOGRAPHY OF OCEANS AND ITS BASIC PROBLEMS

The study of oceans as a subfield of geography has gained acceptance in the Soviet Union. Some universities have introduced courses in marine geography, and geographers have participated in oceanographic research voyages. An effort is made here to define the place of a marine geography within the geographic discipline as a whole, to set the spatial limits for geographical investigations of the oceans and to suggest problem areas suitable for geographical analysis. In keeping with the Soviet dichotomy, physical and economic geographic problems are distinguished. Physical-geographic problem areas would include study of oceanic water masses; large-scale interaction between oceans and atmosphere; study of island environments, and the biogeography of oceans. Economic geographic problems would focus both on theoretical aspects, such as spatial regularities in human activities related to oceans, and on applied aspects, providing a sound basis for economic development of ocean areas.     

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.     

The today and tomorrow of Geography

The author proposes a fundamental shift of the center of gravity of Soviet geography from Its present emphasis on physical geography toward greater stress on economic geography. He feels that most major geographic problems should be solved by inter-disciplinary teams of geographers from various specialized fields in which economic geographers would act as conductors of the geography orchestra.     

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.     

Letter of Protest Regarding Yu. G. Saushkin's Article in Economic Geography, 1962, No. 1

An article published in Economic Geography, 1962, No. 1, by Prof. Yu. G. Saushkin of Moscow University in criticized by nine other Soviet economic geographers for alleged failure to give an objective appraisal of the current state of economic geography in the Soviet Union.     

SOCIO-ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY IN THE WEST AT A TURNING POINT

The decade of the 1970s is viewed as a turning point in the development of socio-economic geography in the West. An increasingly sociological focus has been accompanied by strong criticism of the traditional foundations of human geography and economic geography. A radicalization of socio-economic geography has involved several contradictory trends and periods. A symptomatic and important aspect, from the Soviet point of view, has been increasing interest on the part of some Western scholars in Marxist theory and in the work done by Soviet geographers in socio-economic geography.     

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.     

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).     

On new Directions in the Development of Soviet Economic Geography

A review of new research areas in Soviet economic geography distinguishes three categories of topics in terms of the level of advance and the volume of research being done. The most viable new areas, with a large number of studies, include the resource-oriented approach to economic geography and the systems approach to settlement geography. In other research areas, such as the geography of services and the geography of land use, only the first steps are being made. The lag in land-use studies behind the West is explained in terms of the large territory of the USSR, which is said to have made this type of research unnecessary until recently. The potentialities of some research areas are only just beginning to be perceived, notably in the case of studies on spatial value relationships, involving regional accounts and balance of payments.     

Straddling the Boundaries Between Sciences

The author reverts to the theme that, in addition to the particular disciplines in physical geography and in economic geography, there is a genuine need for a general geographic approach to study of the geographical environment and of the man-nature relationship. As a result of the growing social impact on the environment, the operation of natural laws and social laws becomes so closely intertwined that no single discipline operating with one particular set of laws is capable of understanding the complex processes and phenomena in the interplay between nature and society. The growing specialized differentiation of geography as a science does not eliminate it as a distinct field of human knowledge with a common object of study. However there is a danger that the process of differentiation may be going too far, with an increasing number of scholars from adjacent disciplines coming into geography. The trend is said to be evident in the advanced training of geographers in universities, where geography facilities are turning into collections of departments turning out, say, meteorologists with little general geographic background. And yet there is a growing need for broadly trained geographers, particularly in the entire field of long-range planning and pre-planning research, in which the author is engaged.     

A Geography of Consumption and a Geography of Services

Professor Kovalev, a specialist in rural settlement, proposes the development of two new branches of economic geography in the Soviet Union that would be concerned with the study of regional differences in consumption and services. The proposal reflects the increasing concern of the Soviet party and government for raising the living standards of the population. Kovalev discusses a number of methodological problems, such as the availability of data.     

Problems of Improving the Territorial Organization of the National Economy and Economic Regionalization

The authors briefly review the role of regional planning in Soviet economic planning and describe the role of the newly formed regional coordinating and planning councils of the major economic regions. The new network of 17 economic regions is also discussed. Tokarev is a department head of the State Economic Council USSR and Alampiyev is a department chief in the Council for the Study of Productive Forces, an agency under the jurisdiction of the State Economic Council.