Thinking Outside the Box: Engaging Critical Geographic Information Systems Theory, Practice and Politics in Human Geography

Abstract

Over the past decade or more, Geographic Information Systems (GIS) have been re‐imagined and reconfigured through critical GIS research and practice, as scholars and activist have sought new ways of engaging GIS beyond its characterization in the 1990s as a rationalist and rationalizing tool. Where many existing discussions of the contributions of critical GIS have focused on its position and impacts in GIScience, here I review recent work in critical GIS with an eye toward highlighting its contributions and possibilities in critical human geography. This study examines the theorizations, epistemological frameworks, and methodological innovations are enabling human geographers to engage with GIS, cartography, and geovisual methods in their work in creative ways. I begin by unpacking the ‘critical’ in critical GIS, illustrating how it has drawn upon theory and politics from critical theory to offer a series of key reconceptualizations of GIS and its knowledge‐making repertoire. Then, I illustrate the ever‐diversifying ways in which critical GIS theory and practice are being woven into geographers’ research and activism.

Creating ‘obesogenic realities’; do our methodological choices make a difference when measuring the food environment?

“…‘Researcher bias’ has been well discussed in qualitative literatures, where data is often seen as being ‘generated’ rather than ‘collected’ as a reflection of the investigator’s input into the research process [68,69]. Such issues of bias are less frequently discussed in quantitative discourse, particularly in relation to GIS, despite their apparent poignancy, although feminist critiques of GIS amongst others seek to increasingly understand the “exclusions, silences, and marginalizing [ sic ] power of our representations” [70-72]. Objective GIS studies are often based on the notion of ‘technological determinism’ [65,69], yet the extent to which this is possible is arguably limited.…”

Maps and contradictions: Urban political ecology and cartographic expertise in southern Appalachia

“…Scholars of critical cartography often investigate the intersection of power, the technology of the map, knowledge, and space, critically examining the map as a form of knowledge that creates known and unknown landscapes, valorizes and demeans particular knowledge, and affirms the social positions of those who are able to produce, circulate, and apply the maps. Recent numerous authors have elucidated a deconstruction of maps and cartography, detailing the power relations, problems of representation, and assumptions of truth that are part and parcel of cartography (e.g., Elwood, 2010;King, 1996;Pickles, 1995;Wood, 1992;Black, 1997). Other scholars working at the intersection of political ecology and critical cartography have created maps in conjunction with and using information from traditionally marginalized groups (Colchester, 2005;Poole, 2005;Rocheleau, 2005Rocheleau, , 1995Topatimasang, 2005).…”

Using partial participatory GIS in vulnerability and disaster risk reduction in Grenada

“…GIS practices are continuously changing to respond to the rising need for engaging stakeholders and ensuring ethical and democratic approaches to mapping (Elwood, 2010). The creation of sub-disciplines such as "critical GIS" and PGIS demonstrates advances towards more inclusive and simpler forms of GIS (Boschmann & Cubbon, 2013;Elwood, 2011).…”

“…PGIS is one of the several counter-mapping techniques developed to overcome the high levels of complexity that can marginalize poor communities in many geographic information system (GIS) approaches, and counters an over-reliance on top-down and quantitative sources of data (see Elwood, 2010). As a scientific tool seeking to increase the legitimacy of mapping processes through the incorporation of local actors, PGIS promotes the development of user-generated and demand-driven information (Elwood, Goodchild, & Sui, 2012).…”