Quantitative Revolution

Introduction: Quantitative Revolution

• Emergence and Nature of the Revolution
  • 🔄 In the 1950s and 1960s, geography underwent a paradigm shift known as the Quantitative Revolution.
  • 🧭 This shift replaced the idiographic approach (which emphasized descriptive, region-specific study based on areal differentiation) with a nomothetic approach, focused on:
    • Generalization,
    • Model building, and
    • Discovery of spatial structures and universal patterns.
  • 🌍 Geography was redefined as a spatial science, focusing on the analysis of the spatial arrangement of phenomena on the Earth’s surface.
  • 📊 This transformation marked the entry of statistical and mathematical methods into geographical research, enhancing scientific rigor and analytical clarity.
• Scientific Vision and Methodological Shift
  • 🔬 Geography moved from pure description to a scientific vision, through:
    • Application of quantitative techniques,
    • Use of formulas, models, and graph theory,
    • Development of spatial logic and analytical frameworks.
  • 📈 As Burton (1963) highlighted, this school of thought aimed to:
    • Discover universals in geographical phenomena,
    • Build scientific models for spatial analysis,
    • Establish theoretical and methodological foundations to better interpret geographical reality.
• Transformation of Geography’s Nature and Definition
  • 🗺️ Traditionally, geography was understood as a descriptive discipline that studied the surface features of the Earth.
  • 🧠 With the advent of the quantitative revolution, geography’s definition and scope evolved, focusing more on:
    • Systematic, accurate, and logical explanation of spatial variations,
    • Scientific analysis over simple narrative.
  • 📍 It brought about a methodological overhaul, as geography now sought:
    • Explanatory depth,
    • Predictive capacity, and
    • General principles based on observable spatial data.
• Wider Scientific and Disciplinary Context
  • 🧪 The movement towards quantification in geography was initiated by natural scientists, especially:
    • Physicists and mathematicians, who emphasized precision, logic, and model-based thinking.
  • 🌱 The trend first spread across physical and biological sciences, and then into social sciences by the late 1960s, influencing:
    • Economics,
    • Psychology,
    • Sociology.
  • 🧬 While it had limited influence in anthropology or political science, it had virtually no impact on historical studies due to their narrative and qualitative nature.

Objectives and Implications of the Quantitative Revolution

• Primary Objectives of the Quantitative Paradigm
  • 📖 Shift from Narrative to Scientific Discipline
    • The foremost aim was to transform geography from a narrative, descriptive subject (from its root geo + graphics) into a scientific discipline.
    • It sought to move away from storytelling or mere description of regions and toward analytical interpretation.
  • 🌍 Scientific Explanation of Spatial Patterns
    • A key goal was to explain and interpret spatial patterns of geographical phenomena in a logical, objective, and systematic manner.
    • This marked a significant departure from subjective or intuitive methods of studying space.
  • 📊 Use of Mathematical and Statistical Techniques
    • The paradigm emphasized applying mathematical models, quantitative measurements, and statistical tools to study geographical phenomena.
    • This approach brought precision and replicability into geographic analysis.
  • 📍 Establishing Accurate Generalizations
    • Another major objective was to make accurate and verifiable generalizations about the order and arrangement of locations on the Earth’s surface.
    • It aimed to formulate rules or patterns about spatial distribution.
  • 🧪 Developing Laws and Predictive Models
    • The revolution sought to create principles, laws, and hypotheses that could be tested, estimated, and used for forecasting.
    • This aligned geography with other natural and social sciences in terms of predictive capability.
  • 🧠 Providing Theoretical and Philosophical Foundation
    • Finally, it aimed to give geography a sound philosophical and theoretical base, enhancing its scientific legitimacy and academic rigor.
• Dichotomies Emerged Due to Quantification
  • The shift towards scientific analysis introduced a number of new methodological and philosophical dualisms in geography:
    • 🧪 Instrument-Based Measurement vs. Sense-Based Observation
      • Debate between using instruments for data collection vs. relying on human senses and direct experience.
    • 🧠 Rational Analysis vs. Intuitive Perception
      • The revolution encouraged analytical reasoning, pushing back against intuition-driven interpretation.
    • 🧫 Laboratory Constructs vs. Real-World Experience
      • Preference for models built in academic environments over rich, lived experiences from the field.
    • 🔁 Changing Phenomena vs. Discrete Cases
      • Conflict between understanding the dynamic and continuous nature of spatial change and treating phenomena as isolated, case-based events.
    • 🧾 Nomothetic vs. Idiographic Approach
      • Tension between:
        • Nomothetic (law-seeking, generalizing, quantitative)
        • Idiographic (place-specific, descriptive, qualitative) methods.
• Navigating the Dichotomies
  • 📉 Attempting to resolve these dichotomies individually often leads to intellectual entrapment and confusion.
  • 🎯 Instead of resolving all contradictions, geographers embraced the broader quantification movement, focusing on how it evolved within geography and gradually expanded to redefine the discipline.
  • 🔬 This revolution ushered in the scientific method, allowing geography to grow beyond description and into an analytical and predictive spatial science.

Quantitative Revolution in Geography

• Traditional Position of Geography
  • 📚 Traditionally, Geography was a “following discipline”—its core ideas were influenced by other disciplines like environmental science, biology, physics, and economics.
  • 🌍 The doctrine of environmental determinism, represented by thinkers such as Ellen Semple, Ellsworth Huntington, Griffith Taylor, and Friedrich Ratzel, focused on establishing causal relationships in geography and searching for laws.
  • ⚙️ Their work had a mechanistic flavor, much like the work of later quantifiers, who also sought causality and generalization through models and laws.
• From Idiographic to Quantification
  • 📉 Before the quantitative revolution, geography was heavily influenced by the idiographic approach, which focused on description, uniqueness, and regional character.
  • 🔄 The quantitative revolution marked a return to scientific rigor, echoing themes of environmental determinism and aligning with the rise of neo-determinism in the same era.
  • 🔁 This renewed scientific orientation attempted to bridge the earlier descriptive nature of geography with a more analytical and predictive framework.
• Initial Resistance and Paradigm Shift
  • ❌ The revolution was strongly opposed, especially in the United States, where environmental determinism had faced criticism for its reductionist worldview.
  • 🧪 Nonetheless, new tools and statistical techniques started gaining acceptance under the influence of contemporary probabilistic science.
  • 🧮 As noted by Bronowski (1959), statistics began replacing the notion of deterministic cause-effect with the idea of probable trends.
  • 🔄 Over time, the revolution shifted from determinism to a more indeterministic and probabilistic approach within spatial analysis.
• Timeline of the Revolution
  • 📆 The movement began in the late 1940s and gained momentum between 1957–1960, finally stabilizing by 1963, when Burton wrote his influential paper “Qualitative Revolution & Theoretical Geography”.
  • 📈 In this period, there was growing momentum toward making geography theoretical, systematic, and model-based.
• Role of Key Thinkers and Endorsements
  • 📜 Ackerman and Schaefer strongly supported this shift, advocating for a geography that embraced scientific theory and systematic methodology.
  • 🧠 Ackerman noted that while simplified statistical tools had always been part of geography, the field was now moving towards more advanced quantitative methods, which he considered a logical development.
  • 📝 Burton stated that even traditionalists like Hartshorne and Spate accepted the inclusion of quantitative techniques in geography.
• Views of Hartshorne and Spate
  • 📏 Hartshorne (1959) emphasized that:
    • To elevate geographical thinking to a more scientific level, it was essential to establish generic concepts.
    • These concepts should be implemented with objectivity and accuracy using quantitative measurements and mathematical logic.
  • 🧪 Spate (1960), however, expressed skepticism about the quantification process in his work “Quantity and Quality in Geography”, suggesting a need for balance between numerical rigor and human insight.
• Institutional Recognition
  • 📚 A 1965 report by the National Academy of Sciences – National Research Council acknowledged the growing importance of quantitative methods in geography.
  • 📊 The report argued that:
    • Understanding the correlation of spatial distributions—both statistically and dynamically—was key to explaining:
      • Living systems,
      • Social structures, and
      • Environmental changes on the earth’s surface.
  • 🔍 The report also acknowledged historical challenges:
    • Few researchers, many problems, and rigorous multivariate methods made early progress slow.
  • 🛠️ Only recently had systematic approaches become common to analyze these complex geographical phenomena effectively.

The Path of the Quantitative Revolution in the Discipline of Geography

• Foundational Publications and Intellectual Roots
  • 📚 The roots of the quantitative revolution in geography can be traced to a series of influential works from other disciplines, especially from economics, cybernetics, and behavioral sciences.
    • Neuman and Morgenstern’s Theory of Games and Economic Behavior (1944):
      • ➤ Introduced strategic decision-making and mathematical modeling in economics, which later influenced spatial modeling in geography.
    • Weiner’s Cybernetics (1948):
      • ➤ Laid the foundation for systems theory, feedback mechanisms, and control processes—concepts that became relevant in understanding spatial systems.
    • Zipf’s Human Behaviour and the Principle of Least Effort (1949):
      • ➤ Proposed mathematical principles to explain human spatial behavior and resource optimization, which resonated with geographers seeking universal models.
    • Stewart’s Empirical Mathematical Rules Concerning Distribution and Equilibrium of Population (1947):
      • ➤ Proposed innovative ways to address classical geographic questions using empirical mathematical rules.
      • ➤ This work deserves special mention as it introduced a new lens through which old geographic questions could be reevaluated quantitatively.
• Immediate Impact and Swift Uptake in Geography
  • 🚀 The impact of quantification in geography was immediate and profound, described as “startling in its suddenness”.
  • ✅ While geography had traditionally been descriptive and idiographic, quantification was accepted for its valuable role in enhancing precision and scientific rigor.
• John Ker Rose’s Early Advocacy (1936)
  • 📝 In a 1936 paper on corn cultivation and climatic conditions, John Ker Rose made an early call for the use of relational analysis: ➤ “The methods of relational analysis would be particularly promising tools for geographical investigation.”
  • ❗ However, this proposal was largely ignored by the geographical community at the time.
• Strahler’s Petition for Scientific Geomorphology
  • 🌍 Strahler launched a compelling critique of traditional methods in geomorphology, specifically challenging W.M. Davis’s descriptive approach.
  • 🔬 He advocated for G.K. Gilbert’s dynamic-quantitative systems as a more scientific alternative.

(a) Quantitative Revolution in the Branches of Geomorphology and Climatology

• 📌 Geomorphology: Early Reactions and Resistance
  • Arthur Strahler argued that G.K. Gilbert’s scientific and quantitative work was more suitable for future geomorphological studies than the descriptive approach of W.M. Davis.
  • ❗ However, Gilbert’s paper was neglected for nearly thirty years, and it did not become a landmark in the field of geomorphology.
  • ✅ Strahler himself acknowledged that physical geographers, at that time, did not adopt Gilbert’s ideas.
  • Instead, they continued to follow W.M. Davis, whose model was widely accepted and popular.
    • 👉 Notable followers of Davis included:
      • Douglas Johnson
      • C.A. Cotton
      • N.M. Fenneman
      • A.K. Lobeck
  • ✅ Strahler conceded that these scholars made:
    • “Excellent contributions to descriptive and regional geomorphology.”
    • They laid a solid foundation for human geography but failed to provide a scientific foundation for geomorphology.
• ❗ Criticisms of Quantification in Geomorphology
  • Some geographers were critical of Strahler’s quantitative advocacy.
  • ✍️ Quam (1950):
    • Argued that the use of mathematical formulae and statistical analysis might present an unrealistic image of reality.
    • Such results might lack objectivity and accuracy.
  • ✍️ Woolridge (1959):
    • Also criticized Strahler.
    • Acknowledged the emergence of ‘quasi-mathematical geomorphology’, but warned:
      • High-level mathematics may not be suitable for explaining complex geomorphological phenomena.
    • Maintained that W.M. Davis would continue to be their intellectual guide.
    • Opposed those who rejected Davis’s methods and interpretations.
• ✅ Supporters of Quantitative Geomorphology
  • Despite opposition, Strahler found support from other geomorphologists.
  • 🧑‍🏫 L. King (1962):
    • Emphasized that statistical methods are highly useful for studying large-scale and complex processes.
    • Advocated for their careful and precise application to avoid producing superficial outcomes.
  • 🔍 Other geomorphologists who supported quantitative methods:
    • Chorley
    • Dury
    • Mackay
    • Wolfman
  • 📈 Their collective efforts indicated that the use of quantitative techniques would likely grow and spread within the discipline.
• 🌦️ Climatology: Acceptance of Quantification
  • Unlike geomorphology, the branch of climatology openly embraced quantification.
  • 🌡️ Climatologists widely accepted statistical methods to explain climatic patterns and phenomena.
  • ✅ Prominent examples of successful implementation of quantitative techniques:
    • Thornthwaite
    • Mather and Green
    • Bryson
  • 📊 Their work demonstrated the effectiveness of these methods and silenced many critics.
  • 🔍 Climatology became one of the leading subfields within geography where quantitative revolution was fully realized.

(b) Quantitative Revolution in the Branches of Human and Economic Geography

• ❗ Initial Resistance and Challenges
  • Human and Economic Geography faced the greatest resistance to the use of quantitative methods.
  • This opposition was primarily due to the possibilist tradition, which emphasized:
    • Human agency,
    • Freedom of choice,
    • The unpredictable and diverse nature of human behavior.
  • In this context, applying statistical and mathematical tools—which seek patterns, models, and predictions—was seen as difficult or inappropriate.
• 🔬 Parallel with Physical Sciences
  • Interestingly, the problems faced by human geographers in quantifying human behavior were compared to the challenges faced by physicists at the microscopic level (e.g., dealing with quantum particles).
  • Just as quantum mechanics acknowledges uncertainty and probabilities, social sciences can adopt statistical approaches that accommodate variability and randomness in human behavior.
  • A modern social science, therefore, aims to predict patterns without enforcing control, respecting individual freedom while still observing broader trends.
• 📚 Important Scholarly Debates and Contributions
  • The early years of quantitative revolution saw lively academic debates, many of which are worth noting:
    • 📌 Garrison–Nelson Debate on classification of urban services.
    • 📌 Reynolds–Garrison Discussion on the “modest use” of quantification in human geography.
    • 📌 Spate–Berry Argument in economic geography:
      • Concluded that statistics are like a half-filled glass—while statistics provide one part, interpretation and understanding complete it.
    • 📌 Zobler–Mackay Debate on the use of chi-square tests in regional geography.
    • 📌 Lukermann–Berry Dispute on defining “geographic” economic geography.
  • These debates were published in professional journals, which:
    • Drew academic attention,
    • Generated scholarly interest,
    • Gave legitimacy to quantitative methods in geography.
• 🏛️ Institutional Recognition and Support
  • A significant outcome was the formation of the Regional Science Association (1956):
    • It became a platform for promoting quantification in geography.
    • It helped institutionalize quantitative methods in geographical research.
    • It gave formal recognition and validation to the work of quantifiers.
• 📈 Continued Legacy and Current Influence
  • Though some literature suggests the revolution is over, in reality, quantitative methods remain active and evolving, especially in subfields like:
    • Transport Geography
    • Economic Geography
    • Urban Geography
  • Journals that consistently publish research using quantitative techniques include:
    • Annals of the Association of American Geographers
    • Geographical Analysis
    • Environment and Planning A
    • The Professional Geographer
    • Journal of Geographical Systems
    • Urban Geography
• 🔁 Evolution in Recent Times
  • Quantification in geography is no longer just about global generalizations.
  • The focus has shifted toward:
    • Local level studies,
    • Understanding localized spatial relationships,
    • Studying how gender, race, ethnicity, sexuality, and age influence spatial behavior.
  • Scholars like Kwan and Weber (2003), Poon (2003), and Fotheringham (2006) have been at the forefront of this transformation.
• ✊ Quantification as a Tool for Social Change
  • Quantitative methods are now being used not just to describe patterns, but also to challenge social and political inequalities.
  • Scholars like Kwan and Schwanen (2009) argue that:
    • A solid grasp of statistical methods is crucial to counter regressive policies that misuse data.
    • When blended with a critical, humanistic sensibility, quantitative geography can:
      • Empower progressive thought,
      • Promote social justice and inclusion,
      • Act as a tool for policy advocacy and change.

Quantitative Revolution – Definition and Related information

• The term ‘Quantitative Revolution’ was coined by Burton in 1963
• Definition – “The application of Statistical and Mathematical techniques, theorems, proofs in the understanding geographical system is called as Quantitative Revolution in Geography”
• Quantitative Revolution was developed in Geography by B.J.L Berry, Richard Chorley
• Statistical Methods first introduced in Geography in the 1950s
• Quantitative Revolution calls for a change in methodology, thereby imparting a scientific character to discipline
• The methodology included Mathematical tools, Statistical Analysis, Laws of Physics, etc which provided objectivity and Scientific touch, as was desired by some Geographers
• Quantitative Revolution provided Geography with a sound Philosophical and theoretical base
• It aims at making the geographical study more useful by making precise generalization identifying the ideal location for economic activities
• It aims at explaining & interpreting spatial patterns of Geographical phenomenon in a rational and objective manner using physics laws, mathematical tools, statistical analysis, etc
• Quantitative Revolution was inspired by the positivistic school of thought.
• Profound supporters of the Quantitative Revolution were Neil Harvey, Schaeffer, Ackerman, Haggett, Chorley, etc.

Base of Quantitative Revolution

• Quantitative Revolution was based on various methods-
  1. Statistical Methods – Mean (e.g. HDI), Median, Mode, Coefficient of Variability (e.g. Rainfall), Standard Deviation (e.g. Rainfall), Probability, Least Square Method (e.g. Agriculture)
  2. Mathematical Methods – Algebra (e.g. Locational Triangle), Geometry theorems, Triangular Methods, etc – All these led to Spatial Analysis in Geography
  3. Laws of Physics – such as
     • Gravity Laws – Gravity model such as Breakpoint theory
     • Thermodynamic Laws – in the study of Ecosystem
  4. Cybernetics – Branch of Physics which includes a study of regulating or self-regulating systems
  5. Neoclassical Economics – Ricardo, Adam Smith, Weber, Keynes, etc.

Approaches in Quantitative Revolution

• Quantitative Revolution was based on 3 Approaches –
  1. Locational Analysis – It includes spatial analysis but seeks to find out the optimum location (where profit is maximum and cost is minimum) by applying statistical and mathematical techniques, physics laws, etc
     • e.g. Weber Locational Model, Von Thunen Agricultural Model
     • It was suggested by P. Haggett and Bunge
  2. Spatial Analysis – It is the Study of Earth as a Space Geometry
     • It includes measurements & Divisions of space and man became a point on Surface
     • It means Geometrical analysis, the study of distance, the geometrical shape of CPT
  3. System Analysis – Study of various functional components of a system and their interrelationships
     • e.g. in Central Place Theory, the relationship between various settlements at various hierarchical levels.

Assumptions

• Models and Theories formulated in this era were based on some common assumptions as these models follow ideal conditions such as –
  • Man is economic and rational
  • Man has infinite knowledge of his environment and resources
  • Space (Environment and Resources) is isotropic surface
  • There is no place for normative questions like cultural values, social values, emotions, etc in Geographical Research
  • Assumed prices to be the same everywhere.

Philosophy behind the Quantitative Revolution

• Positivism – It means reality is what is cognizable. It guides Quantitative Revolution
  • It means the formation of universal laws on the basis of the unification of sciences
  • It is against the normative questions of a man like values, morals, ethics, emotions, etc
  • It considers man as economic and rational
  • It considers reality as what can be defined through laws
• Functionalism – It leads to system analysis
  • It studies the various component elements of a phenomenon & its interrelationship
• Empiricism– It believes in direct observation.

Phases of Quantitative Revolution

• Phase 1 – Genesis Phase
  • 1818-1915
    • Von Thunen Model for Agriculture
    • Weber Industrial Model
    • Migration laws of Ravenstein etc
  • 1915-1950
    • Settlement Geography
    • Rank Size Rule
    • Primate City Concept
    • Some economic models etc
• Phase 2 – Zenith Phase
  • 1950-1970
    • Geographers dropped all other methods to adopt Quantitative Techniques
    • Dominance of the Quantitative Revolution
    • Quantitative Revolution term coined by Burton in 1963
    • Several models were created such as the Gravity Model, Distance Decay law, Losch Model, the sphere of Urban Influence, etc
• Phase 3 – Declining Phase
  • Post-1970s
    • After 1976, the Quantitative Revolution was suddenly abandoned as its supporters stopped supporting it due to its lost relevance
    • Limitations of Quantitative Revolution came to the front
    • As a reaction, Critical Revolution started to grow which was more guided by humanism and took into consideration normative questions.

Advantages of Quantitative Revolution

• The emergence of scientific approach and quantitative tools undisputedly improved the functional relevance of geography
• It gave a new lease of Life to Geography
• Geography became well structured & geographical ideas became precise and accurate
• It developed objectivity from being overly descriptive
• It helped in describing, analyzing, and simplifying Geographical Systems
• Geographers are now being able to make use of primary information and are no more dependent on secondary and tertiary sources (such as other sciences)
• Modern Geography is capable of developing scientific theories and models. Before the Quantitative Revolution, most of the theories and models were empirical and not scientifically tested
• Quantitative Revolution provided the sound scientific and methodological base
• Quantitative tools have been very helpful in the explanation of man-environment relation with the help of correlation and regression methods
• The use of Central values and deviation methods has improved the quality of Geographical mapping. Presently, scattered diagrams, choropleth maps, and isopleth maps are drawn with scientific intervals and have been very helpful to developmental agencies.
• The use of nearest neighbor statistics have been able to help in the understanding of spatial patterns of settlement of distribution
• Now, it is possible to define areas of compact, dispersed, and randomly distributed patterns of settlements. This kind of information is helpful to planners for the development of infrastructure and socio-economic variables
• Before the arrival of Quantitative tools, Geographical Regionalization was based on observation and assessment. Hence, there were problems with overlapping and non-inclusions. By making use of Gravitational models, it is now possible to bring a scientifically defined regionalization process
  • e.g. Crop combination Regionalization was developed by Weaver and is now popular throughout the world. It is based on the deviation method
• There have been several investigations of socio-economic problems in geography. There have been problems in the management of multivariate information. With the help of Quantitative techniques, a multitude of information can be reduced to a manageable number of factors i.e. Generalisation of information
• It served as an important tool to measure Reality & Deviation.

Demerits of Quantitative Revolution

• It rejected man and his normative questions like faith, belief, emotions, customs, desires, prejudices, aesthetic values, etc but in the real world, man-environment relations and decision-making processes are affected by normative questions and social, moral, ethical values, etc
  • In any decision-making process about the utilization of resources, people, etc are largely governed by religious, moral, cultural, and social values
  • It is because of these values that dairying is not developed in Khasis (Meghalaya) and Lushais (Mizoram) where taking milk is a taboo
  • Muslims all over the world hate piggery and Sikhs dislike the cultivation of tobacco
  • Thus, by excluding the normative questions, the study may become objective but gives only a parochial picture of the man-environment relationship
• Isotopic surface and other idealistic conditions are never found. Thus, models were mostly normative and lacked universal application
• The man became a point on the surface
• Geography became a space geometry where the measurement was the means of understanding a spatial dimension of Geographical phenomenon
• The advocates of Quantitative Revolution focussed on ‘Locational Analysis’ which promotes Capitalism
• Geography has the main task of studying the reciprocal relationship between man and nature. Thus, this task was itself offloaded during the Quantitative Revolution
• The man became mechanistic and models developed with the help of Quantitative techniques reduced people to Passive agents. Such models may be seen as one of economic determinism
• With the development of sophisticated machinery and automation, there is less scope of employment. Thus, it leads to unemployment
• The man and environment relationship cannot be properly established by the mechanistic models designed with the help of Quantitative techniques
• The advocates of the Quantitative Revolution pleaded for the language of Geometry, but Geometry is not an acceptable language to explain man and environment relation
• The assumption that man is a ‘rational person’ who always tries to optimize his profit has been criticized.
  • In real-world, location decisions are seldom optimal in the sense of maximizing profits or minimizing resources
  • According to Simon, “Man in a limited number of alternatives chooses one that is broadly satisfactory rather than optimal”
  • In most of cases, the satisfying model applies and the man takes decisions about the utilization of his resources to satisfy his aspirations and desires
• The assumption that man has ‘infinite knowledge’ of his space or environment has also been criticized as technology is a dynamic concept that keeps changing with resource
• Applications of Quantitative Revolution demand reliable data which is rarely available in developing country like India
• The estimates and predictions made with the help of sophisticated quantitative techniques proved erroneous many times and the danger of overgeneralization prevails
• The models developed with the help of statistical techniques gave more prominence to some features and distorted some others
• Making reliable models and universal laws in Human Geography with the help of Quantitative techniques is not possible
• Among the early protesters of the Quantitative Revolution, O.H.K Spate and Dudley Stamp were prominent
  • O.H.K Spate argued that the use of the methodology needs mathematical and scientific temperament of investigation, but Geographers come from social science temperament so they may concede some fatal errors in judgement
  • Hartshorne also held that the views of Spate cannot be ignored
  • Dudley Stamp was opposed to the blind use of quantitative tools in Geography and opined that geography need not borrow any techniques
• According to him, “Maps speak themselves” so there is no need to bring other scientific techniques
• However, Statistical techniques improved the quality of maps which was ignored by Stamp
• Quantitative tools provide precise and rigid conclusions, but geography is a social science where conclusions should have flexibility.

Conclusion

• Despite all the merits and demerits of the Quantitative Revolution, it may be summarized that ‘spatial science’ was inaugurated in North America
• By the end of the 1960s, it was dominating many of the journals published throughout the English speaking world and there was a growing consciousness among geographers about the usefulness of quantitative tools
• Most of the researchers used Quantitative models, and thus contributed to the development of theories and models. But, these theories and models presented only a partial picture of the man-environment relationship
• This methodology was criticized and as a reaction to this, behavioural and humanistic approaches were introduced in human geography
• It was realized that the use of Quantitative tools cannot provide relevant conclusions for all geographic problems. Hence, after the 1970s, there has been an emphasis on the selective use of such tools
• Often a combination of the quantitative and qualitative approach is more satisfactory for making estimations and predictions in geography
• Whatever the limitations, the fact cannot be denied that it was a Quantitative Revolution which could bring scientific understanding in Geography and the very base of the present status of Geography lies in Quantitative Revolution