Abstract
Recently, the question of how to conceptualize the region seems to have created a division in geographical scholarship between those propagating the primacy of a relational view, on the one hand, and those defending the relevance of a territorial view, on the other. This paper argues that two main factors have impeded a fruitful discussion, to the extent that even some points of convergence have been neglected. First, the two strands have drawn, sometimes implicitly, on incommensurable philosophical assumptions. Second, scholars in favour of a relational view have at times made statements that do not fit well (some of) their philosophical sources of inspiration. The paper suggests the task of conceptualization is readdressed by following consistently a discourse–theoretical relational ontology.
