Integrative geography—Current issues in theory and practice (on the example of the Georgian geographical school)
Vol 7, Issue 1, 2024
VIEWS - 139 (Abstract) 109 (PDF)
Abstract
The article discusses the essence of integrative geography and its importance for the theory and practice of geographical science. Such areas of integrative geography are characterized, the development of which will further increase the importance of applied geographical science. They include teaching about cultural landscape and historical landscape (part of landscape studies), geoecological expertise and environmental impact assessment (part of geographic ecology), geographic archeology and ecological culture (part of historical geography), landscape management and landscape services (part of landscape planning), and tourism—Assessment and planning of recreational resources (part of recreational geography).
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
1. Christensen DE. Geography and Planning: Some Perspectives. The Professional Geographer. 1977; 29(2): 148-152. doi: 10.1111/j.0033-0124.1977.00148.x
2. Claeson CF. Integrated Development and Integrative Geography, Some Reflections and Impulses. Geografiska Annaler Series B, Human Geography. 1982; 64(2): 97. doi: 10.2307/490663
3. Hartshorne R. The Character of Systematic Geography. Annals of the Association of American Geographers. 29: 413-436. doi: 10.1080/00045603909357332
4. Sapkota K. Academic Discourse on the Dualism between Regional Geography and Systematic Geography. Journal of Geography Education. 2019; 18: 119. doi: 10.3126/ttp.v18i0.28012
5. Steel RW. Regional Geography in Practice. Taylor & Francis, Ltd., 1982; 67(1): 2-8.
6. Hartshorne R, Robert S. Annals of the Association of American Geographers. 1964; 54(4): 630-637. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8306.1964.tb01791.x
7. David EC. Geography and Planning: Some Perspectives. 1977; 29(2): 148-152. doi: 10.1111/j.0033-0124.1977.00148.x
8. Elizbarashvili N. Basics of applied geography. Handbook for students of higher education institutions. 2016; 502.
9. Piloting Landscape Planning in the Countries of the Southern Caucasus. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/ (accessed on 10 February 2024).
10. Elizbarashvili N, Meladze G, Grigolia L, et al. Landscapes—Structure, Functions, and Development Trends (On the Example of Landscapes of Georgia). Open Journal of Ecology. 2022; 12(01): 81-93. doi: 10.4236/oje.2022.121005
11. Elizbarashvili N, Gogoladze S, Sandodze G, et al. Cultural Landscapes: Essence and application perspectives in Georgia. In: Placemaking and Cultural Landscapes, chapter 7, Advances in Geographical & Environmental Sciences Series. Springer Nature Pte Ltd., Singapore; 2023. pp. 95-110.
12. Beruchashvili N. Landscape map of Georgia. Publish House TSU; 1995.
13. Elizbarashvili N, Meessen H, Kohler T, et al. Sustainable development of mountain regions. Committee on the Environment, Agriculture and Local and Regional Affairs; 2018. p. 291.
14. Beruchashvili N, Zhuchkova V. Methods for complex physical-geographical investigations: The manual. Moscow University Press. 1997; 320.
15. Universitat Hamburg. Available online: https://www.geo.uni-hamburg.de/geographie/studium/studiengaenge/master.html/ (accessed on 10 February 2024).
16. Tutorialspoint. Available online: https://www.tutorialspoint.com/ (accessed on 10 February 2024).
17. Steel RW. Regional Geography in Practice. Geography. 1982; 67(1): 2-8.
18. Geography. Available online: https://guide.wisc.edu/undergraduate/letters-science/geography/ (accessed on 10 February 2024).
19. Integrative geography. Available online: https://monikaschaffner.biz/en/integrative-geography/ (accessed on 10 February 2024).
20. Szarzynski J, Alcántara-Ayala I, Nüsser M, Schneiderbauer S. Addressing Challenges of Hazards, Risks, and Disaster Management in Mountain Regions. Mountain Research and Development. 2022; 42(2): 1-3.
21. Geography as an Integrative Discipline of Physical and Human Dimensions. Available online: https://gradesfixer.com/free-essay-examples/geography-as-an-integrative-discipline-of-physical-and-human-dimensions (accessed on 10 February 2024).
22. Brainly.com. Available online: https://brainly.com/question/1673637 (accessed on 10 February 2024).
23. Zimmerer KS. Geography and the Study of Human–Environment Relations. Available online: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781118786352.wbieg1028 (accessed on 10 February 2024).
24. Zimmerer KS. Geography and the Study of Human–Environment Relations. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322406060_Geography_and_the_study_of_human-environment_relations (accessed on 10 February 2024).
25. Elizbarashvili N, Beruchashvili G, Elizbarashvili R. Main principles, key factors and results of landscape planning of Trans boundary protected area in Caucasus (Georgia—Armenia). Collection of articles: Transformation of Social and Economic Space of Europe and Asia in Post-Soviet Time. - Barnaul (Russia), Publisher of Altai State University. 2014; 2: 308–319.
26. Thom BG, Woolmington E. The Integrative Power of Interdisciplinary Geography. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews. 2013; 52-63.
27. Ghilardi M, Desruelles S, Gadal S. Geoarchaeology: where human, social and earth sciences meet with technology. Surveys and Perspectives Integrating Environment and Society. Available online: https://journals.openedition.org/sapiens/422#authors (accessed on 8 March 2024).
28. Elizbarashvili N. Fundamentals of Geography. Tbilisi Universal. 2017; p. 187.
29. Elizbarashvili N. Landscape planning—methodology and experience. Tbilisi, 2009; p. 188.
30. Partelow S, Fujitani M, Soundararajan V, Schlüter A. Transforming the social-ecological systems framework into a knowledge exchange and deliberation tool for ecomanagement. Ecology and Society. 2019; 24(1): 15. doi: 10.5751/ES-10724-240115
31. Colding J, Barthel S. Exploring the social-ecological systems discourse 20 years later. Ecology and Society. 2019; 24(1). doi: 10.5751/es-10598-240102
32. Nagel B, Partelow S. A methodological guide for applying the social-ecological system (SES) framework: a review of quantitative approaches. Ecology and Society. 2022; 27(4). doi: 10.5751/es-13493-270439
33. Elizbarashvili N, Pilauri T, Elizbarashvili R, et al. Socio-ecological system of the mountainous region: A case study from Georgia. Journal of Environmental Biology. 2024; 45(2): 145-151. doi: 10.22438/jeb/45/2/MRN-5201
34. Labosier CF. The Integrative Nature of Geography. International Journal of Applied Geospatial Research. 2019; 10(2): 39-46. doi: 10.4018/ijagr.2019040104
35. Richard H. The Character of Systematic Geography. Annals of the Association of American Geographers. 2009; 29: 413-436. doi: 10.1080/00045603909357332
36. Sapkota K. Academic Discourse on the Dualism between Regional Geography and Systematic Geography. The Third Pole: Journal of Geography Education. 2019; 111-122. doi: 10.3126/ttp.v18i0.28012
37. Elizbarashvili N. Current issues of landscape science and development trends of landscape geography in Georgia. Interdisciplinary scientific journal “Environment and Society”. 2019; 1: 3-14.
38. Thom BG, Woolmington E. The Integrative Power of Interdisciplinary Geography. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews. 1988; 13(1): 52–63. doi: 10.1179/isr.1988.13.1.52
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24294/jgc.v7i1.5253
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2024 Nodar Elizbarashvili, Luka Davitashvili, Rusudan Elizbarashvili, Luiza Bubashvili, Tinatin Nanobashvili
License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
This site is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.