The nascent spatial turn in peace and conflict studies is a promising development that expands conceptual resources and offers useful correctives to existing scholarship. However, the turn to space and place tends not to adequately emplace itself (including on its own European-derived terms) or sufficiently engage the socio-spatial difference of diverse peoples. Instead, a de-contextualised knower is invited to apply a new set of mobile scholarly tools in various settings without seriously considering diverse peoples’ conceptualisation and operationalisation of place in socio-political ordering. Long-standing Aboriginal Australian approaches to place, meanwhile, indicate the diversity and sophistication of approaches to space and place. They furthermore show that western political ontology – including the figures of the individual and the state embedded in much dominant scholarship – may not be relevant in many settings in which peace and conflict scholarship is undertaken. Realising the full potential of the spatial turn requires grappling with the relational emplacement of the knowing subject and the varied ways in which place configures socio-political order both for diverse peoples ‘in the field’ and in the centres of dominant forms of knowing in the Global North.

中文翻译：

---

空间关系挑战：在和平与冲突研究中纳入空间转向

和平与冲突研究中新生的空间转向是一个有前途的发展，它可以扩展概念资源并为现有奖学金提供有用的纠正方法。但是，转向空间和地方往往不足以使其自身地位得到充分体现（包括以欧洲为基础的术语），也不足以引起不同民族的社会空间差异。取而代之的是，邀请去上下文化的知识者在各种环境中应用一套新的移动学术工具，而无需认真考虑各种人在社会政治秩序中的概念化和场所的可操作性。同时，澳大利亚土著居民的长期定位方法表明了空间定位方法的多样性和复杂性。他们进一步表明，西方政治本体论-包括根植于占主导地位的学术研究中的个人和国家的人物-在进行和平与冲突研究的许多情况下可能并不相关。要充分发挥空间转向的潜力，就必须努力应对知识主体的关系定位，以及在各种不同的地方配置“政治”秩序的方式，以适应“田野”中各个民族以及知识主导形式的中心。全球北部。