{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.018543768748295608, 'fraction_numerical': 0.000545404963185165, 'mean_word_length': 5.390243902439025, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Handbook of Evolutionary Economic Geography

In laying out this objective, the editors follow social constructivist theories of scientific knowledge (building on work by Bruno Latour and others) and seek to interrogate how the research of economic geographers has been shaped by the times and places in which they work. The opening chapters of Part 1 provide an excellent account of this by analysing the situatedness of location models and quantitative economic geography in specific periods of time and space. In the remaining chapters, this theme is however less consistently addressed. This is somewhat ironic given that all the chapters are written exclusively by scholars affiliated to universities in the United Kingdom, United States, Canada and Australia. It is not made explicit whether or not this has been a conscious decision. It is nonetheless difficult not to note the endemic bias towards the Anglo-Saxon world that this selectivity has left on the book. The book’s preoccupation with political economies and neo-liberalism in particular follows a wellknown intellectual lineage in Anglo-Saxon economic geography. Similarly, most of the empirical examples and illustrations are situated in this part of the world. It could therefore be argued that the editors and authors of the book have really missed an opportunity to address and reflect upon this spatial bias. Instead, the selective spatial context of most of its contributions is largely left undiscussed. Even though the editors are careful in stressing that the book is not setting out to identify an economic geography canon (in spite of the book’s back cover making a claim that the SAGE Handbook of Economic Geography is a complete overview of the discipline), this bias perhaps also has played a role in why certain influential developments in economic geography have been left unaddressed. Especially for scholars in regional studies, the lack of attention for theoretical approaches related to evolutionary economic geography is probably disappointing and unfortunate (though Chapter 3 by Ron Martin briefly touches upon this). Moreover, only one chapter (by Nick Henry and Stuart Dawley) takes stock with regional development, clusters and technology. Apart from this otherwise instructive contribution, wider discussions on the emergence of the knowledge economy and the role of innovation, agglomeration, global networks and localization advantages in relation to this remain largely absent. At least in the Nordic countries and Continental Europe (but evidently also in Anglo-Saxon parts of the world), this has been for many decades a key topic for economic geography research with fruitful intersections to other disciplines. Numerous papers on these topics in Regional Studies (among other journals) offer evidence for that. More generally, it could perhaps even be argued that the scholarship found in Regional Studies demonstrates a more diverse and encompassing geographical coverage of spatial processes and transformations in economies, and entails greater attention for economic geographies found in (regions of) Asia, Latin America, Europe and Africa, than acknowledged in this handbook. All in all, this handbook provides a highly engaging, cohesive and thought-provoking state-of-the-art overview of Anglo-Saxon economic geography that very comprehensively captures its breadth, critical imagination and stimulating intellectual eclecticism. For students and scholars who want to enter, review and refresh their knowledge in the field of economic geography, it would however be recommendable to complement this handbook by other existing economic geography handbooks.