The document discusses the quantitative revolution in geography that began in the late 1940s, shifting the focus from qualitative to quantitative methods, significantly altering geographical approaches and methodologies. While emphasizing the importance of quantification for theory building and precise understanding, it also acknowledges its limitations and the opposition it faces within the discipline. Ultimately, it argues that despite its challenges, quantitative techniques remain essential for the scientific development of geography and its theories.

1. Scope of Quantification in
Geography

2. Introduction
• Quantitative Revolution in geography began in the late 1940’s or early
1950’s, it reached its culmination in the period from 1957 to 1960 and
is now over. In the third quarter (1950’s) of the 20th
century the raw
material with which the geographers deal became primarily more of
the quantitative nature and less merely qualitative.
• This gradual but steady change in emphasis engendered a
modification of the intellectual approach to the subject.
• This was quantitative revolution which brought abrupt changes in
geographical methods and concepts.

3. • Advancements made by coming generations in different fields may at
times be in terms of factual knowledge.
• At other times however, they reflect a changing approach to the
subject at large, such as this present conscious and deliberate attempt
to provide a more quantitative approach to the geographer’s
problems.
• The traditional geography was qualitative now it became
quantitative.
• Earlier it was descriptive now it included explanation also. In all
branches of the subject this tendency has to develop. Climatological
investigations have traditionally and necessarily been concerned with
numerical data.

4. 1. Economic geography, too, has for long utilized quantitative
data as prime source of information, although explanatory
studies have tended to rest more on subjective judgments
than would in many cases seem desirable.
2. Geomorphology, population studies and various other
aspects of human geography, amongst many branches of the
subject, have also increasingly turned to more precise
numerical data, over the recent past.
• All in the attempt to render a more accurate and objective
assessment of the geography of particular areas or problems.

5. 3. Moreover, as geographers increasingly co-operate with
scientists from other disciplines or engage in the practical
fields of planning, the need to present both data and
conclusions in sound quantitative terms becomes even more
pressing.

6. Limitations
• Quantifications is just a means towards a goal. In human geography,
we cannot quantify many aspects of human behaviour, therefore the
application of quantification can only be in those fields in which we
have reliable data.
• Quantification can be brought in geography only with strong
mathematical background.
• Traditionally geography has been descriptive. The primary goal of
geography is description. But quantification is a means-not everything
in geography e.g. in landforms – description is of utmost importance.
But all description is subjective.

7. • The question was:
The phenomena with which geography deals, quantification is
very difficult to be applied-Inadequacy of quantification partial
quantification- e.g. Fertility pattern of Chandigarh/Attitude of
married females and males/ Green revolution in Punjab
irrigation as a means to be evaluated but there will be
hundreds of other things which cannot be identified e.g.
changing behaviour of the farmers.
• Therefore, quantification has a very limited scope in
geography it should not be given undue importance.

8. Answer: Not to total geography. Applicable to
• Systematic geography
• Not to understand the complex phenomena
• We are trying to build up the total reality, the object is to apply
quantification in different branches for building generalizations.
• It is not a ‘new’ geography in the sense that is alters the nature of the
discipline itself; but only in that it offers new techniques for the
solution of old problems as well as new ones- techniques which has
brought a new rigour into geographical thinking and have made
possible the exploration of new fields.

9. Four Dimensions of any Discipline
1. Conceptualization
2. Methodology
3. Information
4. Application

10. Four Methodologies in Geography
1. Field work
2. Cartography
3. Photogrammetric, photo interpretation and remote sensing
4. Quantitative analysis

11. Role of quantification
1. Precise (gives precision)
2. Objective & comprehensive
Quantitatively, the theories built are hypotheses only. Testing are done
quantitatively-as a result of which we get theory building/model
building.

12. How does quantification help in theory building?
• Hypothesis is a logical statement of relationships between two,
phenomena or a set of phenomena.
• For theory- Testing is needed. Testing is possible only through
quantification.
• Quantification is therefore indispensable to theory building. We study
relationships quantitatively.
• Sometimes we discover patterns-relationships.
• Relationships between development and a number of factors we can
correlate them-we cannot correlate them. Not all of them are
correlated-some are related the results are wonderful.

13. • We should be very careful about the implications and techniques-we
should be capable of interpreting it.
• Right kind of technique.
• Where to use standard deviation.
• Where to use median-mode.
• Should be capable of interpreting things explanations are very
important.

14. Definition
The application and adaption of statistical and mathematical
techniques to the study of geographical problem is known as
quantitative analysis in geography.

15. Significance
Quantitative analysis is of immense significance in several ways:
i. It enables a geographer to think precisely and rigorously and checks him
from making impression tic statements.
ii. It offers quantitative results that facilitate objective comparisons between
various geographical distributions.
iii. It draws attentions to relationship between geographical phenomena
unlikely to be noticed by intuitive inspection.
iv. It helps in formation of valid generalization and the theories. It may be
added that quantification in geography is merely a means towards the
understanding of geographic reality. It is not an end in itself as some
people tend to believe.

16. • Although its antecedents can be traced for back, the quantities
revolution in the late 1940’s or early 1950’s; it reached its culmination
in the period from 1957 to 1960, and is now over.
• Ackerman remarks that the use of explanatory models and regression,
correlation, variance and co-variance analysis may be expected to be
increasingly more prevent in the field. In the need for and value of
these methods geography does not differ from other social sciences.
• By far the greatest struggle for the acceptance of quantitative
methods has been in human and economic geography.

17. Opposition of Quantification
The opposition to the quantitative revolution can be grouped in to five broad
classes:
1. There were those who thought that the whole idea was a bad one and
that quantification would mislead geography in a wrong and fruitless
direction.
2. To argue that geographers should not use statistical methods comes close
to defining geography in terms of one research tool- namely the map.
3. Statistical techniques are suitable for some kinds of geography, but not all
geography, because there are certain things that cannot be measured.
This may be true for some variables.

18. 4. Although quantitative techniques are suitable and their application
to geography techniques problems is desirable, they are nevertheless
being incorrectly applied; ends are confused with means; quantitative
analysis has failed on occasion to distinguish the significant from the
trivial. The alleged discoveries of the quantifiers are not very novel and
so on.
5. Another criticism is in the ad hominem that quantification is all right
but quantifiers are not. They are perky suffer from overenthusiasm,
vaulting ambition or just plain arrogance.

19. Consequences of the Revolution
• Quantitative revolution was inspired by a genuine need to make
geography more scientific and by a concern to develop a body of
theory.
• Dissatisfaction with ideographic (concerned with unique and
particular) geography lies at the root of the quantitative revolution.
• Nomothetic is concerned with universal and general.

20. The development of theoretical, model-building geography is likely to
be the major consequence of the quantitative revolution.
Theory provides the sieve through which myriads (very great number
of) of facts are sorted, and without it the facts remain a meaningless
jumble.
Theory provides the measure against which exceptional and unusual
events can be recognized.
In a world without theory there are no exceptions; everything is
unique. This is why theory is so important.

21. It is not certain that the early quantifiers were consciously motivated
to develop theory, but it is now clear to geographers that
quantification is inextricably intertwined with theory.
The quantification of theory, the use of mathematics to express
relationship, can be supported on the man ground. First, it is more
rigorous. Second, and more important, it is a considerable aid in the
avoidance of self-deception.

22. Conclusion
Quantitative techniques are a most appropriate method for the
development of theory in geography.
• The quantitative era will last as long as its methods can be shown to
be aiding in the development of theory, and there can be no end to
the need for more and better theory.
• It follows that any branch of geography claiming to be scientific has
need for the development of theory, and any branch of geography
that need for theory has need for quantitative techniques.

23. Reference
• Berry, B.J.L. and Marble, D.F. eds, Spatial analysis: a reader in
statistical geography, Prentice-Hall, 1968.
• Burton, I. “The quantitative revolution”, Canadian Geographer, 7, 151,
1963.
• Zamir Alvi, Statistical Geography : Methods and Applications. Rawat
Publications, 2016.
• Hammond R. and P. McCullagh, Quantitative Techniques in
Geography: An Introduction. Oxford University Press, 1974.