Blackwell Reference Online

Extract

As an opening to this volume, we believe that it would be useful for readers to be aware both of the rationale that underpins it and, perhaps a little more unusually, of the process that led to its production; especially the critical role played by the academic reviewers of the original proposal. The former is important because the idea for the volume materialized out of the recognition that debates regarding the constitution of the sub-discipline had re-opened (for an extensive review see Andrews & Evans 2008 ). In reality this debate has been ongoing since Kearns’ (1993 : 144) decisive intervention in the early 1990s, which saw the sub-discipline rupture (albeit productively) along the now familiar lines of “health” and “medical” geography. However, although most commentators agree that the scope and scale of research conducted by scholars on both sides of this divide has expanded considerably and areas of intersection have increased, few agree upon the nomenclature under which this endeavor takes place. Are we health geographers, medical geographers, post-medical geographers, or something else entirely? This volume was initially conceived as a prime opportunity to reflect upon this expansion, to highlight the variety of research that is conducted by scholars associated with the sub-discipline, and also as an opportunity to reflect further on the key debates that had been ... log in or subscribe to read full text