Critical GIS

Abstract

Critical Geographic Information Systems (GIS) is an academic term in use for at least twenty-five years. In that quarter of a century, academics have used it in multiple ways, which are not always consistent with a particular meaning of ‘critical.’ The uses can even contradict each other. “Critical GIS” has designated positions at that time in opposition to perceived mainstream GIS developments. Early in this period, critical GIS referred to a constructivist epistemological approach. Maps do not depict reality, not even partially. Instead, maps help produce (construct) reality. This constructivist concept still lies at the core of critical GIS, but associations are less clear as the term has become disciplinarily aligned with academic geography. Critical GIS, especially the ‘critical part’ of the term, also has become ambiguous and loaded with many associated meanings and disciplinary tensions that come from a multitude of ways people evoke it and relate it to their concepts, research, politics, and work. In a very general sense, ‘critical’ often means scientific work that is mindful to avoid assumptions, avoids ideological positions, and reflects on conclusions and procedures. This breadth of meaning leads to the myriad pragmatically motivated uses of the term that have led it to become hackneyed and prone to rhetorical overuse that intensifies critical GIS ambivalence and even leads to mistrust. However, ‘Critical GIS’ also remains an evocation of scientific strength arising from an evocation of reflexivity and diversity in scientific activities. For any intellect shaped or guided by tenets of modernism, these crucial aspects of ‘critical’ require stepping outside the constraints of academic disciplines to evoke alternate perspectives and reconsider assumptions and assertions. In this sense of the word ‘critical,’ the multiple and even conflicting interpretations of the term point to a continued intellectual vibrancy regarding geographic information. In this light, the organization of this bibliography follows disciplinary and scientific characteristics and organizes them around temporal periods, epistemological issues, and pragmatic impulses from outside the academic discipline. This article aims to provide a first overview of critical GIS in geography and related fields. Critical GIS shares important developments with critical cartography, which continues. The article traces critical GIS from its origins, its relationship to GIS and society work, its disciplinary integration, and its role in framing aspects of neogeography, which refers data-oriented approaches to geographical research.