The Changing Urban and Regional System in the UKAuthor(s): Hugh MatthewsSource: Area, Vol. 18, No. 1 (Mar., 1986), p. 81Published by: The Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers)Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20002294 .

Accessed: 12/06/2014 16:34

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

The Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers) is collaborating with JSTOR todigitize, preserve and extend access to Area.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 91.229.248.187 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 16:34:34 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Annual Conference 81

localities and that it is in these localities that accepted, traditional gender relations may be challenged most effectively.

Neil Smith (Columbia) concluded the formal presentations with an interpretation of the nature of political struggle in the USA. The pessimism associated with the decline of national political struggle was partially countered in his analysis by an observable increase in local struggles and by the recent emergence of a national campaign against US support for the South

African regime. There followed a lively discussion in which many of those attending presented a variety of

perspectives on both the nature of contemporary political struggle in general and on the nature and influence of radical analysis in geography. The enthusiasm of the 70 plus participating in the meeting has encouraged the editors of Antipode to consider, in conjunction with the Social

Geography and Women and Geography Study Groups, organising an annual event of this type to take place at future IBG conferences.

Joe Doherty University of St Andrews

Geographers and the graduate labour market

Who is geography for? For those, it seems, who can pay for its products of knowledge and labour power. Who should geography be for? For those who wish to make their own histories and geographies in conditions of their choosing. But such a transformation requires critical engagement with present conditions. The responsibility of the teacher is to provide the right kind of ammunition. Knowledge of the labour market should not seduce but forearm. Excellent papers from Jack Cross (The Guardian), two careers advisers (Ian McKellar, London University and Sam Danks, Sheffield City Poly) and an employer (David Batchelor, Coopers and Lybrand) served to substantiate, generalise and expand the experience of members of the (very tiny) audience. By researching the reactions of graduate employers to geographers

Tim Unwin (RHBNC, London) not only produced ammunition but asserted the value of critical academic enquiry in the arena of capital. It remains, however, for the makers of history and geography to judge their teachers.

Roger.Lee Queen Mary College, London

The changing urban and regional system in the UK

This well attended session, organised by the Social Geography Study Group, focused on the ESRC initiative on the Changing Urban and Regional System in the UK, providing an opportunity for some of the locality research teams to report on their projects four months after their inception. Outlining the main themes of locality adjustment Phil Cooke (Town Planning,

UWIST) stressed the importance of the local labour market and ethnographic study to the research agenda. Also, initial findings suggest that many of the trends recognised by Massey during the 1960s and 1970s within the UK space economy seem to have ceased or gone into reverse. Detailed empirical evidence for this was provided by reports from Jim Lewis (Durham) on Middlesbrough, Dan Shapiro and P Bagguley (Sociology, Lancaster) on

Lancaster and Harry Cowen (Environmental Studies, Gloscat) on Cheltenham. Neil Smith (Columbia) concluded the morning's events by providing an outsider's view on the whole programme. Whilst fully endorsing the valuable nature of the study Smith called for a stronger theoretical underpinning to the research and encouraged a tightening of definition of class and locality.

Hugh Matthews Coventry (Lanchester) Polytechnic

This content downloaded from 91.229.248.187 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 16:34:34 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions