ACKERMAN AND “SOCIAL ESTABLISHMENT” OF AMERICAN GEOGRAPHY: RETHINKING THE QUANTITATIVE REVOLUTION

Three different ways of looking at the history of geography as an academic discipline have been proposed (Johnston, 1983): 1) the linear progression approach adopting Kuhn's concept of paradigm, 2) the particularistic approach focussing on individual scholars and their work, and 3) the contextual approach with its focus on external environments embracing the discipline. Geographers-for example, Haggett and Chorley (1967) -were likely to con-sider as a paradigm shift the Quantitative Revolution that is similar to the term of scien-tific revolution. Instead, this paper aims at rethinking of the Quantitative Revolution, con centrating our discussion on Ackerman's points, who is the substantial editor of “Science of Geography” (1965) which had resulted in legitimating the Quantitative Revolution, and social environments embracing the postwar American geography.<br> Reflection on the wartime geography, which is succinctly represented by Ackerman (1945), paved the way that systematic geography had been gaining in importance after World War II. Under the influence of regional science, on the other hand, the inappropriateness of the regional concept accelerated to introduce an alternative organizing concept, space, into geography. This alternation is also contributed by Ullman's conceptualization of spatial interaction. In addition to these internal development, two other circumstances made ge-ography tend toward the quantification-oriented: geographers' desire to get higher evaluation, for example, discussions on renaming geography in the 1959-1960 Professional Geography the institutionalization of the research system supported by the government granting funds, for example, the start of NSF's Social Science Program. These deeply structuralize the Quantitative Revolution.<br> It was Ackerman that successfully led this quantification movement. Ackerman with special skill in providing advice and judgment was engaged himself in consulting activities in government agencies since the late 1940 s (White, 1974). Then he immediately returned his experiences to geography. Like other private foundations, the Carnegie Foundation was a main financial source for NAS-NRC, which is closely associated with the Carnegie Institution where Ackerman was served in his later years. Consequently he was able to intend to improve geography through this channel. It was by means of the proposal of “Science of Geography” that he attempted to realize his ideal geography, with graduates of Eastern universities such as Harvard and Yale, and of fellows of University of Chicago. In this report, it was concluded that in location theory studies including urban and trans-portation geography the dialogue between the empirical and the theoretical had gone farthest of any research field, and that others should follow these studies. Thus quantitative geography was legally recognized in American geography.<br> Ackerman's attempt to make geography more scientific was involed in the social establish-ment of the discipline as well. The social establishment of science is meant by the situation that the give-and-take relationships between state, industry and science are formed by research funds and collateral services, so that science coexists with the social structure inter-dependently (Hiroshige, 1973). The social establishment is evidently exemplified by the rela-tionships between geography and government institutions such as NSF and RNR, or private institutions and foundations such as the Carnegie Institution and the Ford Foundation.