Regional science has enjoyed mixed fortunes since the 1980s. While it has gained a larger following among economists and public policy practitioners, the discipline has fallen out of favor among more radical and
post-modernist geographers. In an apparent effort to secure a larger share of research funds, geographers had the
National Science Foundation's Geography and Regional Science Program renamed "Geography and Spatial Sciences".
New economic geography In 1991,
Paul Krugman, a highly regarded international trade theorist, issued a call for economists to pay more attention to economic geography in a book titled
Geography and Trade, focusing largely on the core regional science concept of agglomeration economies. Krugman's call renewed economists' interest in regional science and, perhaps more importantly, founded what some term the "new economic geography", which shares much common ground with regional science. Broadly trained "new economic geographers" combine quantitative work with other research techniques, for example at the
London School of Economics. The unification of Europe and the increased internationalization of the world's economic, social, and political realms have further heightened interest in the study of regional, rather than national, phenomena. The new economic geography appears to have garnered more interest in Europe than in America where amenities, notably climate, have been found to better predict human location and re-location patterns, as emphasized in recent work by Mark Partridge. In 2008 Krugman won the
Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences and his Prize Lecture has references both to work in regional science's location theory as well as economic's trade theory.
Criticisms Today, there are fewer regional scientists from academic
planning programs and mainstream
geography departments. Attacks on regional science's practitioners by radical critics began as early as the 1970s, notably
David Harvey, who believed it lacked social and political commitment. Regional science's founder, Walter Isard, never envisioned that regional scientists would be political or planning activists. In fact, he suggested that they will seek to be sitting in front of a computer and surrounded by research assistants.
Trevor J. Barnes suggests the decline of regional science practice among planners and geographers in North America could have been avoided. He says, "It is unreflective, and consequently inured to change, because of a commitment to a God's eye view. It is so convinced of its own rightness, of its Archimedean position, that it remained aloof and invariant, rather than being sensitive to its changing local context." However, such critics have failed to provide empirical evidence for their claims and ended up criticizing for the sake of criticizing. == See also==