Comparative Analysis of Sino-Western Critical Toponymy Research Trajectories and the Construction of a Chinese Localization Research Framework

As the spatial mnemonics of human civilization, place names transcend their basic function as geographical identifiers to embody historical narratives, cultural genes, and societal values. Within the contemporary context of globalization and urbanization, place names participate dynamically in socio-spatial construction, reflecting power dynamics and shaping the formation of identity. Since the 1980s, the emergence of critical toponymy influenced by neo-Marxist geography has challenged the traditional perception of place names as neutral signifiers, reconceptualizing them as spatial representations of power struggles. Despite the long tradition of toponymic study in China, modern critical inquiry gained momentum only in the early 21st century, primarily in response to urban toponymic chaos. However, this development is embedded in China’s unique institutional and cultural contexts, navigating between market-driven cultural development and state-led principles of historical preservation. In this study, the author systematically compared the research trajectories of Sino-Western critical toponymy and analyzed their divergent theoretical frameworks, research priorities, and practical pathways rooted in distinct historical experiences and sociocultural backgrounds. With its origins in post-colonial and liberal urban contexts, Western critical toponymy has evolved from a macro-level political critique to incorporating cultural memory and spatial justice, focusing on deconstructing power and amplifying marginalized voices. By contrast, Chinese scholarship has progressed from initial institutional reflection toward analyzing power–culture relationships and, more recently, to addressing cultural heritage preservation and cross-cultural dialogue, demonstrating a problem-solving orientation aimed at balancing development with tradition under state guidance. Building on this comparative analysis, a systematic and prospective localized research framework for China was constructed in this study. This framework integrates the spatial critique of neo-Marxist geography with traditional Chinese toponymic ethics, focusing on four core practical contradictions inherent to Chinese toponymic governance: development versus preservation, market forces versus cultural integrity, diversity versus standardization, and digital technology versus traditional continuity. It proposes methodological innovation through interdisciplinary approaches and context-adapted technologies and advocates for a practical governance model characterized by multi-stakeholder collaboration and digital empowerment. The primary contribution of this study lies in its systematic delineation of Sino-Western differences, moving beyond isolated theoretical discussions. The proposed framework not only facilitates theoretical innovation and practical application within China but also challenges Western theoretical hegemony by offering a non-Western perspective. It provides valuable insights for other developing countries seeking compatible paths for cultural continuity and modernization, thereby enriching the global discourse on critical toponymy.