Darwinism and Geography

Although Charles Darwin was actively engaged in geographical exploration and his work would have been hardly possible if not for geographical differences in the distributions of species and characteristics, Darwin has received little direct attention in geography. Despite Darwin's lack of recognition as an influential figure for geography, much geographical research since the publication in 1859 of On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life has been either explicitly or implicitly inspired by Darwin. David Stoddard suggested that the Darwinian theme of evolution as change through time, with emphasis on the relationship between organic life and the environment, and his analysis of selection and struggle, exerted a strong influence on research in geomorphology, pedology, and ecology; led to the organicist interpretation of regions and states; and resulted in a deterministic application of the concepts of selection and struggle in human and political geography. Another major theme of Darwin's work, the random nature of original variations, was ignored by geographers until the late 20th century, which was largely the result of Darwin's inability to provide a good explanation for it.

The impact of Darwin's work constituted nothing short of a revolution in science, confronting the old mode of doing natural history head-on. Rather than attributing the diversity of natural forms to the will of a divine creator, Darwin's book provided a theoretical framework that explained the diversity of species in a purely naturalistic, causal fashion. Darwinism itself is best understood as an evolving entity as opposed to a homogeneous body of knowledge. If the interpretations and meanings of Darwinism change and evolve, can we still identify a set of conceptual pillars that make up Darwinian evolutionary theory? At a general level, we can identify a set of concepts and principles that characterize a Darwinian view of evolution:

• At any moment in time there is sustained variation of species produced through random mutation.
• The environment winnows on this variation through natural selection. Individuals and species that are relatively better adapted to their environment are more likely to leave more offspring and so expand at the expense of relatively poorly adapted individuals and species. The competition for scarce resources does not require “survival of the fittest.”
• There must be a mechanism that keeps variation stable long enough for selection to operate. If species were to adapt instantaneously to demands of their environments there would be no variety left to select from. Although Darwin realized that there must be a mechanism to pass on information between generations, he was never able to prove that, because genetics was developed only after the publication of The Origin of Species.
• There is no progression or development toward some ideal, perfect, or higher stage of development. Although humans are more complex than single-cell organisms, they are not necessarily better in terms of some preconceived ideal and optimal state of adaptation. They simply fill different niches in an environment.

Some writers have argued that Darwin's evolutionary principles can be generalized, although the mechanisms by which variation is produced, maintained, and destroyed are domain specific. While [Page 666]random mutation is the only source of variation in biological systems, a deliberate search for improvement and problem solving generates variety in social systems. While genes pass on information from one generation to the next in the biological domain, learning and knowledge acquisition are the primary means of passing on information in social systems. Collective knowledge is often embedded in institutions and organizations, constraining and enabling the creation, transmission, and destruction of new knowledge. Although natural selection produces gradual evolution through the elimination of relatively ill-adapted forms and differential growth of relatively well-adapted forms, there is no reason to assume that competition is always beneficial for the survival of species. In various biological and social contexts, altruistic and cooperative behavior may benefit some groups over others in the evolutionary process.

...