Dose scale matter?: scale and research traditions


  • กษมา พลกิจ คณะสถาปัตยกรรมศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยเชียงใหม่
  • ปวร มณีสถิตย์ คณะสถาปัตยกรรมศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยเชียงใหม่
  • ยุพเรศ สิทธิพงษ์ คณะสถาปัตยกรรมศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยเชียงใหม่
  • สถาปนา กิตติกุล คณะสถาปัตยกรรมศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยเชียงใหม่
  • รณวีร์ สุวรรณทะมาลี คณะสถาปัตยกรรมศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยเชียงใหม่


Scale, Multiscalar Research, Human-Environment Systems, Landscape Architecture, Environmental Planning


Scale is a central tenet of spatial–related research; however, the “scale issues” in landscape architecture and environmental planning have often been taken for granted and rarely been questioned. This paper explores the issues of scale through reviewing literature from two disciplines tied to spatial research, which are geography and landscape ecology. These two disciplines put the scale issues at the forefront of their studies, and they are deemed appropriate since both provide fundamental knowledge for many fields, including landscape architecture and environmental planning, that examine human–environment systems.  By situating scale in research traditions, this paper explains what scale is and explores “scale” from two schools of thought–the science of scale and the social construction of scale.  The paper urges to discuss the issues of scale explicitly at the beginning of the research to avoid confusion among researchers.  The paper also argues that, fundamentally, by understanding scale issues and problems from various perspectives would not only help ways in which the complex spatial phenomena can be conceptualized, investigated and managed through multi–scalar frameworks, but also encourage teamwork in multi–disciplinary research.


Agnew, J. (1993). Representing space: space, scale and culture in social science. In Duncan, J. & Ley, D. (Eds.). Place/culture/representations. (pp.251–271). London: Routledge.

Ahl, V. & Allen, T. F. H. (1996). Hierarchy theory: a vision, vocabulary, and epistemology. New York: Columbia University Press.

Amin, A. (2002). Spatialities of globalization. Environment and Planning a: Economy and Space, 34 (3), 385–399.

Boonchoo, S. & Singha, S. (2007). Khuen kwam samphan chumchon Lanna kab sabphayakon nam koranee fai phaya kham amphur Saraphi changwat Chiang Mai. (In Thai) [The reconcilement of relationship between Lanna community and resource project in case of Phaya kham weir in Sarapi district Chiang Mai]. Bangkok: Thailand Research Fund.

Brenner, N. (1998). Between fixity and motion: accumulation, territorial organization and the historical geography of spatial scales. Environment and Planning d: Society and Space, 16 (4), 459–481. DOI: 10.1068/d160459

Brenner, N. (2000). The urban question as a scale question: Reflections on Henri Lefebvre, urban theory and the politics of scale. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 24 (2), 361–378.

Brenner, N. (2001). The limits to scale? Methodological reflections on scalar structuration. Progress in Human Geography, 25 (4), 591–614.

Cao, C.–Y. & Lam, N.S.–N. (1997). Understanding the scale and resolution effects in Remote Sensing and GIS. In Quattrochi, D. A. & Goodchild, M. F. (Eds.). Scale in Remote Sensing and GIS. (pp. 57–72). New York: Lewis Publishers.

Castells, M. (1996). The rise of the network society. Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell.

Clark, A. N. (1998). The Penguin dictionary of geography. London: Penguin Books.

Cox, K. R. (1998). Representation and power in the politics of scale. Political Geography, 17 (1), 41–44.

Dark, S. J. & Bram, D. (2007). The modifiable areal unit problem (MAUP) in physical geography. Progress in Physical Geography, 31 (5), 471–497.

Delaney, D. & Leitner, H. (1997). The political construction of scale. Political Geography, 16 (2), 93–97.

Deleuze, G. (2002). The Actual and the Virtual. In Deleuze, G. & Parnet, C. (Eds.). Dialogues II (pp.148–159). New York: Columbia University Press.

Gehlke, C. E. & Biehl, K. (1934). Certain effects of grouping upon the size of the correlation coefficient in census tract material. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 29 (185), 169–170.

Goodchild, M. F. & Quattrochi, D. A. (1997). Introduction: scale, multiscaling, remote sensing, and GIS. In Quattrochi, D. A. & Goodchild, M. F. (Eds.). Scale in Remote Sensing and GIS. (pp. 1–11). New York: Lewis Publishers.

Guba, G. E. & Lincoln, Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). Handbook of qualitative research. (pp.105–117). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Harris, T. M. (2006). Scale as artifact: GIS, ecological fallacy, and archaeological analysis. In Lock, G. & Molyneaux, B. L. (Eds.). Confronting scale in Archaeology: issues of theory and practice. (pp.39–53). Boston, MA: Springer.

Herod, A. & Wright, W. W. (Ed.). (2002). Geographies of power: placing scale. Oxford: Blackwell.

Howitt, R. (1998). Scale as relation: musical metaphors of geographical scale. Area, 30 (1), 49–58.

Jelinski, D. E. & Wu, J. (1996). The modifiable areal unit problem and implications for landscape ecology. Landscape Ecology, 11 (3), 129–140.

Johnston, R. J., Gregory, D. & Smith, D. M. (1994). The dictionary of human geography. Oxford, UK; Cambridge, Mass., USA: Blackwell.

Jonas, A. E. G. (2006). Pro scale: further reflections on the “scale debate” in human geography. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 31 (3), 399–406.

Jones, K. T. (1998). Scale as epistemology. Political Geography, 17 (1). Retrieved January 1, 2019, from

Knox, P. L. & Taylor, P. J. (Ed.). (1995). World cities in a world–system. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lam, N. S.–N. & Quattrochi, D. A. (1992). On the issues of scale, resolution, and fractal analysis in the mapping sciences. The Professional Geographers, 44 (1), 89–99.

Lam, N. S.–N. (2004). Fractals and Scale in Environmental Assessment and Monitoring. In Sheppard, E. & McMaster, R. B. (Eds.). Scale and geographic inquiry: Nature, society, and method. (pp.23–40). Oxford: Blackwell.

Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: an introduction to Actor–Network–Theory. New York: Oxford University Press.

Lebel, L., Garden, P. & Imamura, M. (2005). The politics of scale, position, and place in the governance of water resources in the mekong Region. Ecology and Society, 10 (2).

Leitner, H., & Miller, B. (2007). Scale and the limitations of ontological debate: A commentary on Marston, Jones and Woodward. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 32 (1), 116–125.

Lertvicha, P., Maethin, S. & Namthep, N. (2009). Mueang fai: chatkran nam chatkran khon bon phuenthan phumisat lae wattanatham. (In Thai) [Water management: irrigation system in Chiangmai–Lampoon]. Chiang Mai: Thailand Research Fund.

Levin, S. A. (1992). The problem of pattern and scale in ecology. Ecology, 73 (6), 1943–1967.

Manson, S. M. (2008). Does scale exist? An epistemological scale continuum for complex human–environment systems. Geoforum, 39 (2), 776–788.

Marceau, D. J. & Hay, G. J. (1999). Remote sensing contributions to the scale issue. Canadian Journal of Remote Sensing, 25 (4), 357–366. DOI: 10.1080/07038992.1999.10874735

Marceau, D. J. (1999). The scale issue in the social and natural sciences. Canadian journal of Remote Sensing, 25 (4), 347–356.

Marsh, W. M. (2005). Landscape planning: environmental applications (4th ed.). New York: Wiley.

Marston, S. A. (2000). The social construction of scale. Progress in Human Geography, 24 (2), 219–242. DOI: 10.1191/030913200674086272

Marston, S. A. (2004). A long way from home: domesticating the social production of scale. In Sheppard, E. & McMaster, R. B. (Eds.). Scale and Geographic inquiry: nature, society, and method. (pp.170–191). Oxford: Blackwell.

Marston, S. A., Jones, J. P. & Woodward, K. (2005). Human geography without scale. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 30 (4), 416–432.

McCann, E. J. (2003). Framing space and time in the city: urban policy and the politics of spatial and temporal scale. Journal of Urban Affairs, 25 (2), 159–178.

McMaster, R. B. & Sheppard, E. (2004). Introduction: scale and Geographic inquiry. In Sheppard, E. & McMaster, R. B. (Eds.). Scale and geographic inquiry: nature, society, and method. (pp.1–22). Oxford: Blackwell.

Molle, F. (2007). Scales and power in river basin management: the Chao Phraya River in Thailand. The Geographical Journal, 173 (4), 358–373. DOI: 10.1111/j.1475–4959.2007.00255.x

Moore, A. (2008). Rethinking scale as a geographical category: from analysis to practice. Progress in Human Geography, 32 (2), 203–225. DOI: 10.1177/0309132507087647

Neumann, R. P. (2009). Political ecology: theorizing scale. Progress in Human Geography, 33 (3), 398–406.

Openshaw, S. (1984). The modifiable areal unit problem. CAT–MOG, 38, Norwich, UK: Geo Books.

Smith, N. (1992). Geography, difference and the politics of scale. In Doherty, J., Graham, E. & Malek, M. (Eds.). Postmodernism and the Social Sciences. (pp.57–79). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Smith, N. (2004). Scale bending and the fate of the national. In Sheppard, E. & McMaster, R. B. (Eds.). Scale and geographic inquiry: nature, society, and method. (pp.192–212). Oxford: Blackwell.

Sneddon, C. (2003). Reconfiguring scale and power: the Khong–Chi–Mun project in northeast Thailand. Environment and Planning a, 35 (12), 2229–2250. DOI: 10.1068/a35299

Surarerk, V. (1980). Panha Lae Karn kaekhai kho khatyaeng nai karn chatkran rueang nam lae karn chai nam phuea karn pho pluk nai rai na khong rabob chonlaprathan luang lae rabob chonlaprathan rat. (In Thai) [Problems and conflict solution of water management and the usage of water for agriculture in paddy fields of the Royal irrigation and the people irrigation systems] (research report). Chiang Mai: Social Science, Chiang Mai University.

Swyngedouw, E. (2004). Scaled geographies: nature, place, and the politics of scale. In Sheppard, E. & McMaster, R. B. (Eds.). Scale and geographic inquiry: nature, society, and method (pp. 129–153). Oxford: Blackwell.

Taylor, P. J. (1982). A Materialist framework for political geography. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 7 (1), 15–34.

Turner, M. G., Gardner, R. H. & O’Neill, R. V. (2001). Landscape ecology in theory and practice: pattern and process. New York: Springer.

Turner, M. G., O’Neill, R. V., Gardner, R. H. & Milne, B. T. (1989). Effects of changing spatial scale on the analysis of landscape pattern. Landscape Ecology, 3 (3–4), 153–162.

Wiens, J. A. (1989). Spatial scaling in ecology. Functional Ecology, 3 (4), 385–397.

Woodward, K. (2008). Downsizing Wal–mart: a reply to Prytherch. Urban Geography, 29 (1), 78–84.

Wu, H. & Li, Z. L. (2009). Scale issues in remote sensing: a review on analysis, processing and modeling. Sensors, 9 (3), 1768–1793.

Wu, J. & Li, H. (2006). Concepts of scale and scaling. In Wu, J., et al. (Eds.). Scaling and uncertainty analysis in ecology: methods and applications. (pp.3–15). Amsterdam: Springer.

Wu, J. (1999). Hierarchy and scaling: extrapolating information along a scaling ladder. Canadian Journal of Remote Sensing, 25 (4), 367–380.