Electoral Geography

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
In recent years there has been increased interest, especially from geographers, in the field of electoral geography. In this article three major approaches to the study of voting—the cartographic method, the "friends and neighbors" models, and the "nationalization" models—are discussed and evaluated. It is argued that the cartographic approach is very limited in its utility because of the static and imprecise character of the work as well as its low explanatory potential. The "friends and neighbors" models are most applicable in very restricted circumstances. Under other conditions they are likely to be of marginal value. The "nationalization" approach is of considerable importance, although some interpretative problems still exist. Despite some analytical and conceptual differences, these approaches to electoral geography are marked by an underlying similarity: a concern for the character and delineation of subnational political effects which are spatially demarcated. The "nationalizational" approach, it is argued, is likely to be the most useful for the description and explanation of such phenomena.

This publication has 21 references indexed in Scilit: