Dear ana, 

If your research objective is to test some research hypothesis and thereby make some inference about the population then, quantitative methods will be the most appropriate one. On the other the main interest of the research work is exploratory in nature; and deep understanding of how the units are interacting among each other then qualitative is preferred to quantitative one. 

Dear Kidanemariam Gebregziabher, for your suggestion if I want to study renewable energy and its implications on economy I should use quantitative methods. Although, opinions from expertise should be qualitative. what about if I mix methods, one confirms another?

it need more quantitative work 

which methods should be applied?

it depends on your problem and data which you have collected because in economic geography there are number of branches in which you can study you can use correlation, regression even time series techniques and even factor analysis 

any examples of those in economic geography? I am studying IO matrix and its applicability to offshore wind cluster

In general, quantitative methods are most useful when there is an experimental or analysis of financial information.  So to study a wind cluster you would use quantitative measures do determine the costs vs value of the production of energy, for example.  If you wanted to find out how the local community would support or oppose the development, then qualitative approaches are useful.

Both of them are excellent tools to explain the reality.  The methods (quantitative and qualitative) are necessary in order to justify your information. Sometimes you can not find information (quantitative or qualitative) sometimes you have to build them, but if you have enough information, you will be able to demonstrate your dissertation. The objetive information will be supported by numbers, but also its necessary to be justified by subjective information.  The subjective information qualify the objetive information. Try to use both of them.  

There are different economic geographies. From geographer's perspective, it is impossible to study economic geography without maps. So GIS representation is quite relevant. Economists who study economic geography often do not know how to work with maps and use classical methods like regression. Good if this is spatial regression, although to my mind maps have more information. The so called new economic geography uses space to very limited extent contrary to the models of 1930s: I mean Hotelling, Losch, Christaller and others.

My personal opinion about spatial economic models is reflected in this chapter (although I have more papers on RG related to spatial and regional economics):

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283908757_Role_of_Density_and_Field_in_Spatial_Economics

Chapter Role of Density and Field in Spatial Economics

Yuri, very interesting article, although i have to ask, can we present those models in any economy? whats the limitations for investment variable?

Dear Ana, spatial structure of economy always exists, but it plays much higher role when transport cost is a substantial fraction of total costs. That means for countries with low population density, spatially distributed natural resources, etc. If you are interested, I have another paper on the role of population density:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271497718_Socio-economic_influences_of_population_density

As for investment - remember that it is location specific in most of the cases. If one builds a plant or a road, the cost of relocation in future almost equals to the investment. Well, there exist small businesses with small relocation cost, like the seller of ice cream on a beach in famous model of Hotelling (1929). Counting just for financial capital does not capture this effect of location specific investment.

Article Socio-economic influences of population density

Dear Yuri, the analysis on portuguese offshore wind cluster do not shows direct influences on transport costs and relocation. The cluster is not regional but national. The number of organisations which beleong to cluster are in different regions. Maybe in long run, the regional development in certain regions will promote that relationship. I am really interested in cleantech cluster. Any help about this subject will be great.

Ana, there is a difference between theory and empirics.If you mean that no regression has captured the importance of transport costs for wind infrastructures in Portugal, there might be several reasons for that. First, the sample may be small. Second, there might be improper cost accounting. I am not sure if you had information about cost difference for potential infrastructures of wind power stations including the physical loss of energy in the wires. But it also may happen that all is so closely located that for Portugal this effect is not pronounced. I expect it to be pronounced for Brazil for any infrastructure covering its vast territory.

Ann,

I think the best answer to your question is "It all depends." It all depends on what you plan to do. If your plan is to explore the topic, meaning if you want to create a theory of ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY, then your best method would be qualitative. But if you want to analyze an existing theory of ECONOMIC GEOGRAPHY, then your best method is quantitative. You could do both in mixed methods approach. I'm hopping that I understood your question well.

Dear Ana,

Economic geography has different geographic aspects, as well economic. The latter have social impact, which can be studied by both approaches. Of course a combination of qualitative and quantitative methods is more comprehensive. Scientists though usually chose the approach based on their own background and qualifications.

Have a nice day,

Helen   

Yuri, cant see the last answer from you

Ana,  do you see answer #11 and do not see #13? I copy it, although it is RG problem not to show some posts.

There is a difference between theory and empirics. If you mean that no regression has captured the importance of transport costs for wind infrastructures in Portugal, there might be several reasons for that. First, the sample may be small. Second, there might be improper cost accounting. I am not sure if you had information about cost difference for potential infrastructures of wind power stations including the physical loss of energy in the wires. But it also may happen that all is so closely located that for Portugal this effect is not pronounced. I expect it to be pronounced for Brazil for any infrastructure covering its vast territory.

thars part of my study :)

I like the aphorism bt C. Wright Mills in The Sociological Imagination,

“IBM Plus Reality Plus Humanism=Sociology”

We could now read it as "=Geography" except now we would probably say 

“Clark Labs Plus Reality Plus Humanism=Economic Geography”

Clark Labs produces Idrisi, the integrated geographic information system (GIS) and remote sensing software package. 

I tend in practice to apply the following approach:

“Clark Labs Plus Reality Plus Demography=Economic Geography”

Which is why I followed an MA in economic geography / population geography with several years developing socioeconomic computer models and then an MS in Earth science / geospatial analysis.

Forty years experience has led me to believe that simple models. narrowly defined. are more helpful than complex models.

The Quantitative methods are more useful