Theorizing Sociospatial Relations
Abstract
This essay seeks to reframe recent debates on sociospatial theory through the introduction of an approach that can grasp the inherently polymorphic, multidimensional character of sociospatial relations. As previous advocates of a scalar turn, we now question the privileging, in any form, of a single dimension of sociospatial processes, scalar or otherwise. We consider several recent sophisticated ‘turns’ within critical social science; explore their methodological limitations; and highlight several important strands of sociospatial theory that seek to transcend the latter. On this basis, we argue for a more systematic recognition of polymorphy—the organization of sociospatial relations in multiple forms—within sociospatial theory. Specifically, we suggest that territories (T), places (P), scales (S), and networks (N) must be viewed as mutually constitutive and relationally intertwined dimensions of sociospatial relations. We present this proposition as an extension of recent contributions to the spatialization of the strategic-relational approach (SRA), and we explore some of its methodological implications. We conclude by briefly illustrating the applicability of the ‘TPSN framework’ to several realms of inquiry into sociospatial processes under contemporary capitalism.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Geopolitical rivalry in CWII is geared towards control over the integration of non-linear, not-necessarily-hierarchical nodes in topological networks that are not overtly territorial.
“In conceptual terms, key principles of network structure include interconnectivity and interdependence (Jessop, Brenner, and Jones 2008), so geopolitical rivalry in CWII is geared towards control over the integration of non-linear, not-necessarilyhierarchical nodes in topological networks that are not overtly territorial (i.e., these networks have material components, but they transcend discrete”
From The Second Cold War: US-China Competition for Centrality in Infrastructure, Digital, Production, and Finance Networks (2024) · cites this paper as Jessop, Brenner, and Jones 2008
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Mannay, D. (2010) · Qualitative Research · doi:10.1177/1468794109348684 · Cited by 386 · see citing works
Mapping the data shadows of Hurricane Sandy: Uncovering the sociospatial dimensions of ‘big data’
Shelton, T., Poorthuis, A., Graham, M., & Zook, M. (2014) · Geoforum · doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2014.01.006 · Cited by 256 · see citing works
Schindler, S., Alami, I., DiCarlo, J., Jepson, N., Rolf, S., Bayırbağ, M. K., Cyuzuzo, L., DeBoom, M., Farahani, A. F., Liu, I. T., et al. (2024) · Geopolitics · doi:10.1080/14650045.2023.2253432 · Cited by 252 · see citing works
“…logic of geopolitical rivalry during the Cold War encouraged bordering, bounding, and enclosing space to constitute a ‘territorial outside’ (see Jessop, Brenner, and Jones 2008, 393), which reflected profound ‘ideological antagonism, not just as foreign orientation but pervading all structures…”
BackgroundInfluentialZuniga-Teran, A. A., Gerlak, A. K., Elder, A. D., & Tam, A. (2021) · Environmental Science & Policy · doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2021.10.001 · Cited by 82 · see citing works
Blockchain financial geographies: Disrupting space, agency and scale
Zook, M., & Grote, M. H. (2024) · Geoforum · doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2022.08.001 · Cited by 36 · see citing works
- Authors
- Jessop, B., Brenner, N., & Jones, M.
- Affiliations
- Lancaster University (GB)
- New York University (US)
- Aberystwyth University (GB)
- Venue
- Environment and Planning D: Society and Space
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2008-01-01
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 389-401
- ISSN
- 0263-7758 (ISSN-L)
- 1472-3433
- OpenAlex
- W136386487
- Cited by
- 1,252
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 53 · 2025: 50 · 2024: 75 · 2023: 102 · 2022: 75 · 2021: 93 · 2020: 85 · 2019: 83 · 2018: 80 · 2017: 73 · 2016: 82 · 2015: 66 · 2014: 72 · 2013: 60 · 2012: 65
- FWCI
- 306.22
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Environment and Planning D Society and Space (publishedVersion)
- Lancaster EPrints (Lancaster University) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Geography, Planning and Development › Spatial and Cultural Studies
- Social Sciences › Geography, Planning and Development › Historical Geography and Geographical Thought
- Social Sciences › Urban Studies › Urban Planning and Governance
- Keywords
- territoriality, place, scale, networks, strategic-relational approach, spatialization, contemporary capitalism, critical social science
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review