Researching the outdoors: exploring the unsettled frontier between science and adventure

Abstract

Outdoor practitioners and academic geographers arguably share a common origin in the explorers of the seventeenth to nineteenth centuries. The two interests diverged during the twentieth century, as academic geography became less dependent on travel, and the pursuit of knowledge no longer provided the sole justification for exploration and adventure, but some synergies remain, at least in experiencing and making sense of the natural environment. This paper reflects on some pilot fieldwork for an on-going research project that combines fluvial geomorphology and outdoor education practice, in order to explore the parallels and differences between physical geography and outdoor education. A key area of divergence is identified in the degree of attention paid to the 'self' , and particularly the body, in our interactions with the environment. We highlight the role of embodied experience both in our approach to the field site and in the subsequent framing and re-framing of the research project, joining calls for greater attention to be paid to the corporeal practice of fieldwork. We conclude by arguing that Driver's notion of an 'unsettled frontier ' (2001, Geography militant: cultures of exploration and empire Blackwell, Oxford) between science and adventure is as relevant for contemporary discourse as he suggests it is for historical geography. Figure 1 Field sketches of the pilot research site by (a) Louise and (b) Pauline. The numbers identify common elements: 1 is the tributary inlet; 2 and 3 are sections of vertical bank face, bare of vegetation; 4 is a boulder weir

Interpretive field geomorphology as cognitive, social, embodied and affective epistemic practice

“…Methodologically, the research was exploratory, seeking to elucidate the complexities of field research rather than identify statistically dominant themes (Crouch & McKenzie, 2003). Aiming to elicit participants' accounts of their field experiences in their own terms, without imposing the theoretical framing on the data collection phase, the project invited geomorphologists to "tell their stories" of fieldwork in research and teaching (as relevant to each participant).…”

“…This account was then tested against the data, re-reading all questionnaire responses and interview transcripts in a search for counter-evidence, to ensure robustness. This is a small-scale study, as is common to qualitative research seeking in-depth understanding of the complexity of a phenomenon (Crouch & McKenzie, 2003). A total of 39 useable questionnaire responses were generated, with 14 interviewees.…”

“…Field observation is, though, a learned, specialized skill (Bauer, 1999; Brierley et al, 2021; Couper & Ansell, 2012; Vitek, 2013). Davis (1902, p. 239) was clear that observation is not just about “seeing,” but “must be followed by abundant thinking.” Not all would agree with the implied linearity.…”

Slow science, the geographical expedition, and Critical Physical Geography

“…Bunge, and co‐workers, conceived their physical repositioning as a geographical expedition, one as concerned with teaching as it was with research (Heyman ). At first glance, the term “expedition” is unfortunate because of its association with the utilitarian purpose of bringing the world under the sovereignty of science, notably in the 19 th century (Withers )—and the association of 19 th ‐ and early 20 th ‐century academic geography with the justification of sovereign expansion more generally (Couper and Ansell ). The kind of expedition that Bunge advocates and which I support here is not a colonizing one.…”

Confluences of human and physical geography research on the outdoors: an introduction to the special section on ‘Exploring the outdoors’

“…In our final paper, Pauline Couper and Louise Ansell (2012) draw attention to the role of embodied experience in the framing and execution of a field research project. Moving beyond traditional concerns with physical geography, they note how the materiality of the field site and their bodily engagements with it not only influence fieldwork practice but have a bearing on the knowledge that it produces.…”