Population geography I: Surplus populations

The subject of ‘population’ is undergoing a renaissance in geography; this is seen, for example, in the voluminous studies addressing ‘marginalized’ populations, including but not limited to refugees, internally displaced persons, and children. In short, scholarship has focused on those lives render...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inProgress in human geography Vol. 37; no. 5; pp. 701 - 711
Main Author Tyner, James A.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published London, England SAGE Publications 01.10.2013
Sage Publications Ltd
Subjects
African Americans
At risk populations
Biopolitics
Children
Displaced persons
Fertility
Food stamps
Geodemographics
Geography
Households
Human geography
Marginality
Migration
Mortality
Mortality Rates
Nutrition
Politics
Population
Poverty
Progress reports
Refugees
Risk
Trends
Vulnerability
survivability
abandoned lives
surplus populations
disposable lives
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN0309-1325
1477-0288
DOI10.1177/0309132512473924

Cover

More Information
Summary:The subject of ‘population’ is undergoing a renaissance in geography; this is seen, for example, in the voluminous studies addressing ‘marginalized’ populations, including but not limited to refugees, internally displaced persons, and children. In short, scholarship has focused on those lives rendered ‘wasted’, ‘precarious’, or ‘superfluous’. Population geographers have made substantial contributions; however, more can be done. In this and the next two progress reports, I suggest that population geographers reflect more deeply on the spatiality and survivability of vulnerable populations. More specifically, population geographers should consider the politics of fertility, mortality, and mobility from the standpoint of a layered demographic question: within any given place, who lives, who dies, and who decides? In this first report, I resituate the concept ‘surplus population’ within the broader domain of population geography. In subsequent reports, I consider more closely population geography’s association with related subject areas (i.e. biopolitics and necropolitics). I maintain that, by addressing vulnerability and survivability, we join others in geography and allied fields who are writing about ‘populations’ not as biological, pre-given entities, but instead as political subjects at risk of premature death.
Bibliography:SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 14
ObjectType-Article-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ObjectType-Article-2
ISSN:0309-1325
1477-0288
DOI:10.1177/0309132512473924