How Come Geographic Information Systems are Peripheral in Information Systems Research?

Abstract

Traditionally, geospatial information systems (GIS) and information systems (IS) tend to refer to different academic disciplines: geography, geology, environmental sciences, food and agriculture the former; organization studies, business, accountancy and social sciences more generally the latter. Probably for historical reasons, the distance between GIS and IS is also remarked by the former being often focused on the public sector, the latter on the private sector. Indeed, geospatial information has always been traditional domain of state and military organizations whereas information processing has been one of the first applications of information science to businesses of all sorts.In this talk I refer to research works of mine in GIS and IS to argue that not only this separation has lost its fundaments but also that it can be detrimental to research, therefore to practice and education. I cluster my illustrations according to three main themes: a) prod-usage, b) information asymmetry, c) governance. While user-generated content is not a new phenomenon any longer, the geo-spatial domain keeps referring to voluntary geographic information, which exceeds consolidated business models. Secondly, large scale lay-people data production may not be rationalizing decision making, but it keeps eroding information asymmetry across all levels, challenging expert knowledge embedded in organizations. Finally, geospatial information has the peculiar characteristic of bridging the finitude of space and indefinitely replicable realm of digital data. Thus it challenges the spatial jurisdictions in which regulators operate.Those three themes apply to two current researches we are working on in Ireland: a spatial analysis of indigenous IT industry and “Coding Space” about the introduction of the new postcode.