The Scale Problem in Human Geography

Abstract

Macro and micro scale studies are supposed to complement each other to produce comprehensive theories. They do not because problems are artefacts whose structure depends upon various philosophical and methodological positions. These create opposing sets of assumptions and inferences about human behavior. All this is well illustrated by comparing spatial analysis with behavioral geography. Spatial analysts have claimed that micro analysis is impossible, unnecessary, misleading, and unsuccessful. Opposing arguments claim that macro analysis is unsuccessful, and that micro analysis is necessary. Some evidence suggests that behavior varies with group size. If this is so, studies conducted solely at one scale will never verify those at another scale. If we wish to develop adequate theory, we need to combine macro and micro analyses in single pieces of research. This will provide the missing complementarity, increase the information content contained in our models, and reduce the number of arbitrary decisions which must be made to facilitate research.