https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9898-8330
![Sample our Urban Studies journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110826/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Urban-Studies.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
‘Left behind places’ has become the leitmotif of geographical inequalities since the 2008 crisis. Yet, the term’s origins, definition and implications are poorly specified and risk obscuring the differentiated problems and pathways of different kinds of areas. This paper explicates the geographical etymology and spatial imaginary of ‘left behind places’. It argues that the appellation and its spatial expression have modified how geographical inequalities are understood and addressed by recovering a more relational understanding of multiple ‘left behind’ conditions, widening the analytical frame beyond only economic concerns, and opening up interpretations of the ‘development’ of ‘left behind places’ and their predicaments and prospects. While renewing interest in fundamental urban and regional concerns, what needs to endure from the ascendance of the ‘left behind places’ label is the terminology and spatial imaginary of reducing geographical inequalities and enhancing social and spatial justice.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors are grateful to the editor and four reviewers for their constructive comments made on earlier versions of this paper. Thanks also to the participants at the Regional Studies Association ‘Regions in Recovery’ Special Session on ‘Rethinking Economic and Social Development in “Left Behind Places”’, June 2021, and the seminar at the School of Geography, UCD, April 2022. The usual disclaimers apply.
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.