中国社会文化地理学研究的发展与反思：基于2015—2020年中英文文献分析

作为一个在中国发轫较晚的人文地理学分支，社会文化地理学逐渐成为人文地理学的重要分支。随着研究话题的日新月异以及研究方法和理论的推陈出新，中国社会文化地理学的理论和应用研究在近年（2015—2020年）得到越来越多学者的关注和参与，同时涌现出一系列新的学科现象和值得反思的问题，如话题的多样性、研究方法的交叉性、研究科学性的反思和质疑等。因此，从延续学科自省的视角出发，有必要坚持从中、西对比的角度，不断度量中国社会文化地理学的发展趋势，定位学科的特点，以期为国内社会文化地理研究提供一定的方向和启示。借助文献分析工具对2015—2020年中、英文领域主要学术期刊的社会文化地理学文献进行采集和分析，辅以德尔菲法对学科专家进行咨询，尝试结合客观和主观数据，综合辨析当前中外社会文化地理学的研究特色，以及未来中国社会文化地理学研究可能的发展方向和潜力所在。从分析结果上看，国外社会文化地理研究话题涵盖：1）从移民研究到流动性研究；2）从文化景观研究到超越人类的地理学研究；3）弱势人群研究与关怀地理学等方面。中国社会文化地理研究话题包括：1）理论引介与反思；2）城镇化、流动性与多元移民；3）旅游与地方；4）乡村转型与乡愁等方面。综合国内外社会文化地理研究成果可知，西方国家（尤其是英国）作为社会文化地理学的重要发源地，在学科知识“生产—消费”循环中保持优势地位；西方社会文化地理学研究重点关注国际大政治和日常政治话题，而中国社会文化地理研究与旅游和乡村话题结合紧密，与西方形成明显区别，反映中国社会发展需要；中国社会文化地理学国际化趋势明显，但中、西方知识交换程度不高，知识边界依然明显。另外，专家咨询意见也凸显社会文化地理研究者的学科归属感有待加强、研究范式系统化不足与共识不充分等问题。未来中国社会文化地理学需要不断推进学科交叉和方法创新，探索其地理学本质，在国际化进程中讲好中国故事，总结中国经验，发展中国理论，服务国家，对话世界。

Reflections on and Progress in Social and Cultural Geography in China: Analysis of Chinese and English Literature during 2015-2020

As a newly developed branch, social and cultural geography has gradually become an important research field within human geography. With fast-changing research topics, methods, and theories, social and cultural geography has been attracting increasing attention in Chinese mainland over the past six years (2015-2020). New trends and criticisms deserve further analysis, such as the diversity of topics, the intersectionality of research methods, and the reflection and questioning of scientific research. Thus, from the perspective of disciplinary introspection, it is necessary to examine the trend of Chinese social and cultural geography from the perspective of comparing China and the West, so as to locate the characteristics of the discipline and to provide certain directions and enlightenment for domestic social and cultural geography research. Drawing on CiteSpace, this article collects, analyzes, and visualizes publications related to social and cultural geography in both English and Chinese (for English publication, we focus on Social & Cultural Geography (N=418), focusing on five selected leading Chinese journals: Acta Geographica Sinca, Scientia Geographica Sinica, Progress in Geography, Geographical Research, and Human Geography (N=400). Furthermore, the Delphi method was employed to see how Chinese social and cultural geographers (N=20) would comment on the recent development of social and cultural geography in Chinese mainland. With qualitative and quantitative analysis, the topics of Western social and cultural geography are reflected in: (1) migration studies and mobility research, (2) cultural landscape and more-than-human geography, and (3) research on disadvantaged groups and caring geography. In contrast to the West, Chinese social and cultural geography research themes include 1) subject theory introduction and reflection, 2) urbanization, mobility, diverse immigration, 3) tourism and place, and 4) rural transformation and homesickness. Given the comparison of research topics of social and cultural geography between China and the West, the findings of this article include 1) Western countries (the U.K. in particular) currently play key, if not dominant, roles in producing, shaping and consuming theories and knowledge of social and cultural geography; 2) "Politics" and "politics" are the main research focuses in the West, while "tourism" and "rurality" are the dominant topics among Chinese publications. It presents a critical difference between the two bodies of literature and reflects the trends of China's social development. 3) Social and cultural geography research in Chinese mainland is undergoing a significant process of internationalization. However, common knowledge (e.g., publications and theories being cited and discussed) shared by both sides remains insignificant. The boundary of knowledge becomes increasingly flexible but still relatively fixed. On the other hand, researchers' opinions also exposed the issue according to which social cultural geography researchers' sense of discipline belonging is yet to be strengthened, as well as the fact that systemization and consensus of research paradigm are insufficient. To further promote interdisciplinary dialogues and knowledge exchanges, explore the role of space in theorization, and show the contributions of Chinese stories, experience and theories to the current literature on research on social and cultural geography deserve further exploration.