We offer a review and research agenda for critical remote sensing, defined as inquiries and scientific practices cognizant of the embedding of power within the production, analysis, and instrumentalization of satellite imagery. First, we consider critiques of the satellite gaze. Second, we chronicle remote sensing’s evolving political economy, examining the technology’s use by governments, scientists, and commercial and non-governmental actors. Then, we review practices of critical remote sensing, categorized as research (1) exposing injustices; (2) engaging situated knowledges; and (3) empowering marginalized actors. Lastly, we suggest five areas for intertwining critiques and practices and consider possibilities for counter–remote sensing.
AdamsWM (2017) Geographies of conservation II: technology, surveillance and conservation by algorithm. Progress in Human Geography43(2): 337–350.
2.
AdaySLivingstonS (2009) NGOs as intelligence agencies: the empowerment of transnational advocacy networks and the media by commercial remote sensing in the case of the Iranian nuclear program. Geoforum40(4): 514–522.
3.
AgnewJGillespieTWGonzalezJ, et al. (2008) Baghdad nights: evaluating the US military ‘surge’ using nighttime light signatures. Environment and Planning A40(10): 2285–2295.
4.
AhmedNIslamMNHasanMF, et al. (2019) Understanding the political ecology of forced migration and deforestation through a multi-algorithm classification approach: the case of Rohingya displacement in the southeastern border region of Bangladesh. Geology, Ecology, and Landscapes3(4): 282–294.
5.
Alvarez LeónLFGleasonCJ (2017) Production, property, and the construction of remotely sensed data. Annals of the American Association of Geographers107(5): 1075–1089.
6.
AmadP (2012) From God’s-eye to camera-eye: aerial photography’s post-humanist and neo-humanist visions of the world. History of Photography, 36(1), 66–86.
7.
AmooreL (2018) Cloud geographies: computing, data, sovereignty. Progress in Human Geography42(1): 4–24.
8.
AmooreL (2020) Cloud Ethics. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
9.
AndersonJSarkarDPalenL (2019) Corporate editors in the evolving landscape of OpenStreetMap. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information8(5): 232.
10.
ArnoldHJP (2000) Views: not quite the first.Astronomy and Geophysics: The Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society41(6): 6–8.
11.
AshJKitchinRLeszczynskiA (2018) Digital turn, digital geographies?Progress in Human Geography42(1): 25–43.
12.
AtkinsonPMFoodyGM (2002) Uncertainty in Remote Sensing and GIS: Fundamentals.Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
13.
BakerJCWilliamsonRA (2006). Satellite imagery activism: sharpening the focus on tropical deforestation. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography27(1): 4–14.
14.
BaldwinKOxenfordHA (2014) A participatory approach to marine habitat mapping in the Grenadine Islands. Coastal Management42(1): 36–58.
15.
BallyPBéquignonJArinoO, et al. (2005) Remote sensing and humanitarian aid. ESA Bulletin122: 36–41.
16.
BarnesTJ (2001) Retheorizing economic geography: from the quantitative revolution to the “cultural turn”. Annals of the Association of American Geographers91(3): 546–565.
17.
BastinJ-FFinegoldYGarciaC, et al. (2019) The global tree restoration potential. Science365: 76–79.
18.
BegleyC (2016) The lost White City of Honduras: discovered again (and again). In: CardJJAndersonDS (eds). Lost City, Found Pyramid: Alternative Archaeologies and Pseudoscientific Practices. Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama Press, 35–45.
19.
BeitlCMRahimzadeh-BajgiranPBravoM, et al. (2019) New valuation for defying degradation: visualizing mangrove forest dynamics and local stewardship with remote sensing in coastal Ecuador. Geoforum98: 123–132.
20.
BennettMM (2020) Is a pixel worth 1000 words? Critical remote sensing and China’s Belt and Road Initiative. Political Geography78: 102127.
21.
BennettMMFaxonHO (2021) Uneven frontiers: exposing the geopolitics of Myanmar's borderlands with critical remote sensing. Remote Sensing13(6): 1158.
22.
BergmannLLallyN (2021) For geographical imagination systems. Annals of the American Association of Geographers111(1): 26–35.
23.
BergstromCTWestJD (2021) Calling Bullshit: The Art of Skepticism in A Data-Driven World. New York: Random House.
24.
BlaschkeT (2010) Object based image analysis for remote sensing. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing65(1): 2–16.
25.
BlaschkeTStroblJ (2001) What’s wrong with pixels? Some recent developments interfacing remote sensing and GIS. GIS – Zeitschrift für Geoinformationssysteme14: 12–17.
26.
BlueBBrierleyG (2016) ‘But what do you measure?’ Prospects for a constructive critical physical geography. Area48(2): 190–197.
27.
BosABDe SyVDuchelleAE, et al. (2019) Global data and tools for local forest cover loss and REDD+ performance assessment: accuracy, uncertainty, complementarity and impact. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation80: 295–311.
28.
boydDCrawfordK (2012) Critical questions for big data: provocations for a cultural, technological, and scholarly phenomenon. Information Communication and Society15(5): 662–679.
29.
BoyleSAKennedyCMTorresJ, et al. (2014) High-resolution satellite imagery is an important yet underutilized resource in conservation biology. PLOS One9(1): 1–11.
30.
BrannonMM (2013) Standardized spaces: satellite imagery in the age of big data. Configurations21(3): 271–299.
31.
BraunAC (2021) More accurate less meaningful? A critical physical geographer’s reflection on interpreting remote sensing land-use analyses. Progress in Physical Geography45(5): 706–735.
32.
BrewingtonL (2018) Stakeholder perceptions of invasive species and participatory remote sensing in the Galapagos Islands. In: MenaCFde Lourdes TorresM (eds) Understanding Invasive Species in the Galapagos Islands. Germany: Springer International Publishing, 175–192.
33.
Briant CarantJ (2017) Unheard voices: a critical discourse analysis of the Millennium Development Goals’ evolution into the Sustainable Development Goals. Third World Quarterly38(1): 16–41.
34.
BrighentiAMPavoniA (2020) Vertical vision and atmocultural navigation. Notes on emerging urban scopic regimes. Visual Studies, 35(5), 429–441.
35.
BriggsRC (2018) Poor targeting: a gridded spatial analysis of the degree to which aid reaches the poor in Africa. World Development103: 133–148.
36.
BrownMKnoppL (2011) Queering the map: the productive tensions of colliding epistemologies. Annals of the American Association of Geographers98(1): 40–58.
37.
BugliarelloG (1996) Telecommunications, politics, economics, and national sovereignty: a new game. Technology in Society, 18(4): 403–418.
38.
BurnsRDaltonCMThatcherJE (2018) Critical data, critical technology in theory and practice. Professional Geographer70(1): 126–128.
ChapinMLambZThrelkeldB (2005) Mapping indigenous lands. Annual Review of Anthropology34: 619–638.
41.
CloudJ (2001) Imaging the world in a barrel: CORONA and the clandestine convergence of the Earth sciences. Social Studies of Science31(2): 231–251.
42.
ComberAWulderM (2019) Considering spatiotemporal processes in big data analysis: insights from remote sensing of land cover and land use. Transactions in GIS23(5): 879–891.
43.
CohenAKlassenSEvansD (2020) Ethics in archaeological lidar. Journal of Computer Applications in Archaeology3(1): 76–91.
44.
ComberAFisherPWadsworthR (2005) You know what land cover is but does anyone else? An investigation into semantic and ontological confusion. International Journal of Remote Sensing26(1): 223–228.
CornejoRHKoedamNLunaAR, et al. (2005) Remote sensing and ethnobotanical assessment of the mangrove forest changes in the Navachiste-San Ignacio-Macapule lagoon complex, Sinaloa, Mexico. Ecology and Society10(1): 16.
47.
CosciemeLSuttonPCAndersonS, et al. (2017) Dark times: nighttime satellite imagery as a detector of regional disparity and the geography of conflict. GIScience and Remote Sensing54(1): 118–139.
48.
CosgroveD (2001) Apollo’s Eye: A Cartographic Genealogy of the Earth in the Western Imagination. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
49.
Dahdouh-GuebasFKoedamN (2008) Long-term retrospection on mangrove development using transdisciplinary approaches: a review. Aquatic Botany89(2): 80–92.
50.
DaltonCMTaylorLThatcherJ (2016) Critical data studies: a dialog on data and space. Big Data and Society3(1): 1–9.
51.
DevineJACurritNReygadasY, et al. (2020a) Drug trafficking, cattle ranching and land use and land cover change in Guatemala’s Maya Biosphere Reserve. Land Use Policy95: 104578.
52.
DevineJAWrathallDCurritN, et al. (2020b) Narco-cattle ranching in political forests. Antipode52(4): 1018–1038.
53.
D’IgnazioCKleinLF (2020) Data Feminism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
DunnCE (2007) Participatory GIS—A people’s GIS?Progress in Human Geography31(5): 616–637.
56.
ElvidgeCDZhizhinMHsuFC, et al. (2013) VIIRS nightfire: satellite pyrometry at night. Remote Sensing5(9): 4423–4449.
57.
ElwoodS (2006) Critical issues in participatory GIS: deconstructions, reconstructions, and new research directions. Transactions in GIS10(5): 693–708.
58.
ElwoodS (2007) Making space for integrative research and teaching. Environment and Planning A, 39(10), 2291–2296.
59.
ElwoodSLeszczynskiA (2018) Feminist digital geographies. Gender, Place & Culture, 25(5), 629–644.
60.
ElwoodSWilsonM (2017) Critical GIS pedagogies beyond ‘Week 10: ethics’. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 31(10): 2098–2116.
61.
ErdbrinkTAndersonC (2021) In Sweden’s Far North, a Space Complex Takes Shape. The New York Times, 23 May.
62.
EricksonAS (2012) Microsatellites: a bellwether of Chinese aerospace progress? In: ParksLSchwochJ (eds). Down to Earth: Satellite Technologies, Industries, and Cultures. New Brunswick and London: Rutgers University Press, 254–279.
63.
Fernandez-DiazJCCohenASGonzálezAM, et al. (2018) Shifting perspectives and ethical concerns in the era of remote sensing technologies. SAA Archaeological Record18(2): 8–15.
64.
FishAR (2020) Drones: visual anthropology from the air. In: VanniniP (ed). Handbook of Ethnographic Film and Video. Abingdon & Oxon: Routledge, 247–255.
65.
FreyKESmithLC (2007) How well do we know northern land cover? Comparison of four global vegetation and wetland products with a new ground-truth database for West Siberia. Global Biogeochemical Cycles21(1).
66.
GabrysJ (2016) Program Earth: Environmental Sensing Technology and the Making of a Computational Planet. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
67.
GartnerGBennettDAMoritaT (2007) Towards ubiquitous cartography. Cartography and Geographic Information Science34(4): 247–257.
68.
GeYHuSRenZ, et al. (2019) Mapping annual land use changes in China’s poverty-stricken areas from 2013 to 2018. Remote Sensing of Environment232: 111285.
69.
GeogheganJPritchardLJrOgneva-HimmelbergerY, et al. (1998) ‘Socializing the pixel’ and ‘pixelizing the social’ in land-use and land-cover change. In: Liverman D, Moran EF, Rindfuss RR, et al. (eds). People and Pixels: Linking Remote Sensing and Social Science. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 51–69.
70.
GhoseR (2003) Community participation, spatial knowledge production, and GIS use in inner-city revitalization. Urban Technology10(1): 39–60.
71.
GillespieTWFrankenbergEFung ChumK, et al. (2014) Night-time lights time series of tsunami damage, recovery, and economic metrics in Sumatra, Indonesia. Remote Sensing Letters5(3): 286–294.
72.
GleasonCJ (2016) On Rivers. PhD Thesis, University of California, Los Angeles, USA.
73.
GleasonCJHamdanAN (2017) Crossing the (watershed) divide: satellite data and the changing politics of international river basins. Geographical Journal183(1): 2–15.
74.
GoldsteinJE (2020) The volumetric political forest: territory, satellite fire mapping, and Indonesia’s burning peatland. Antipode52(4): 1060–1082.
75.
GoldsteinJEFaxonHO (2022) New data infrastructures for environmental monitoring in Myanmar: Is digital transparency good for governance?Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space5(1): 39–59.
76.
GrahamMSheltonT (2013) Geography and the future of big data, big data and the future of geography. Dialogues in Human Geography3(3): 255–261.
77.
GregoryD (2011) From a view to a kill: drones and late modern war. Theory, Culture & Society28(7–8): 188–215.
78.
GrossmanDCurridenCMaL, et al. (2020) Chinese Views of Big Data Analytics. Santa Monica, USA: RAND Corporation.
GuptaVPabianF (1998) Commercial satellite imagery and the CTBT verification process. Nonproliferation Review5(3): 89–97.
81.
HallARCoyneCJ (2013) The political economy of drones. Defence and Peace Economics25(5): 445–460.
82.
Hall (Kindervater)K (2016) The emergence of lethal surveillance: watching and killing in the history of drone technology. Security Dialogue47(3): 223–238.
83.
HarawayD (1988) Situated knowledges: the science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies14(3): 575–599.
84.
HarleyJB (1988) Maps, knowledge and power. In: CosgroveDDanielsS (eds) The Iconography of Landscape. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 277–312.
85.
HarleyJB (1989) Historical geography and the cartographic illusion. Journal of Historical Geography15(1): 80–91.
86.
HarrisLMHazenHD (2006) Power of maps: (Counter) mapping for conservation. Acme4(1): 99–130.
87.
HarrisTWeinerD (1998) Empowerment, marginalization, and ‘community-integrated’ GIS. Cartography and Geographic Information Science25(2): 67–76.
88.
HassanMSmithAWalkerK, et al. (2018) Rohingya refugee crisis and forest cover change in Teknaf, Bangladesh. Remote Sensing10(5): 689.
89.
HayGJCastillaG (2008) Geographic object-based image analysis (GEOBIA): a new name for a new discipline. In: BlaschkeTLangS,HayGJ (eds) Object-Based Image Analysis. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 75–89.
90.
HeeksRShekharS (2019) Datafication, development and marginalised urban communities: an applied data justice framework. Information Communication and Society22(7): 992–1011.
91.
HerscherA (2014) Surveillant witnessing: satellite imagery and the visual politics of human rights. Public Culture26(3): 469–500.
92.
HodgsonDLSchroederRA (2002) Dilemmas of counter-mapping community resources in Tanzania. Development and Change33(1): 79–100.
93.
HodlerRRaschkyPA (2014) Regional favoritism. The Quarterly Journal of Economics129(2): 995–1033.
94.
HollowayJMengersenK (2018) Statistical machine learning methods and remote sensing for sustainable development goals: a review. Remote Sensing10(9): 1365.
95.
HooverJDLeiszSJLaituriME (2017) Comparing and combining Landsat satellite imagery and participatory data to assess land-use and land-cover changes in a coastal village in Papua New Guinea. Human Ecology45(2): 251–264.
96.
HsuFCElvidgeCDBaughK, et al. (2019) Cross-matching VIIRS boat detections with vessel monitoring system tracks in Indonesia. Remote Sensing11(9): 1–26.
97.
Human Rights Watch (2017) Massacre by the River: Burmese Army Crimes against Humanity in Tula Toli. United States: Human Rights Watch.
98.
HunterHNelsonE (2021) Out of place in outer space?: exploring orbital debris through geographical imaginations. Environment and Society12(1): 227–245.
99.
IrwinA (2019) Asking the Earth. New Scientist244(3254): 18–19.
100.
IvanKHolobâcăIHBenedekJ, et al. (2020) Potential of night-time lights to measure regional inequality. Remote Sensing12(1): 33.
101.
JanssenMKukG (2016) The challenges and limits of big data algorithms in technocratic governance. Government Information Quarterly33(3): 371–377.
102.
JiangH (2003) Stories remote sensing images can tell: integrating remote sensing analysis with ethnographic research in the study of cultural landscapes. Human Ecology31(2): 215–232.
103.
JungJ K (2020) Teaching creative geovisualization: imagining the creative in/of GIS. The Canadian Geographer/Le Géographe Canadien64(4): 512–528.
104.
KavvadaAMetternichtGKerblatF, et al. (2020) Towards delivering on the Sustainable Development Goals using Earth observations. Remote Sensing of Environment247(15): 111930.
105.
KelleyLC (2018) The politics of uneven smallholder cacao expansion: a critical physical geography of agricultural transformation in southeast Sulawesi, Indonesia. Geoforum97: 22–34.
106.
KitchinR (2014) Big data, new epistemologies and paradigm shifts. Big Data and Society1(1): 1–12.
KrasmannS (2020) The logic of the surface: on the epistemology of algorithms in times of big data. Information Communication and Society23(14): 2096–2109.
109.
KukutaiTCormackD (2019) Mana motuhake ā-raraunga: datafication and social science research in Aotearoa. Kotuitui14(2): 201–208.
110.
KwanMP (2016) Algorithmic geographies: Big data, algorithmic uncertainty, and the production of geographic knowledge. Annals of the American Association of Geographers106(2): 274–282.
111.
KybaCCMGiulianiGFranziskakisF, et al. (2019) Artisanal and small-scale mining sites in the Democratic Republic of the Congo are not associated with nighttime light emissions. Multi-Science Journal2(2): 152–161.
112.
LangSFürederPRiedlerB, et al. (2020) Earth observation tools and services to increase the effectiveness of humanitarian assistance. European Journal of Remote Sensing53: 67–85.
113.
LangSHayGJBaraldiA, et al. (2019) GEOBIA achievements and spatial opportunities in the era of big Earth observation data. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information8(11): 474.
114.
LauerMAswaniS (2008) Integrating indigenous ecological knowledge and multi-spectral image classification for marine habitat mapping in Oceania. Ocean and Coastal Management51(6): 495–504.
115.
LaveRWilsonMWBarronES, et al. (2014) Intervention: critical physical geography. The Canadian Geographer/Le Géographe Canadien58(1):1–10.
116.
LawlerSMBoleyAC, and ReinH (2021) Visibility predictions for near-future satellite megaconstellations: latitudes near 50 degrees will experience the worst light pollution. arXiv:2109.04328.
117.
LitfinKT (1997) The Gendered eye in the sky: a feminist perspective on earth observation satellites. Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies18(2): 26–47.
118.
LivermanDMoranEFRindfussRR, et al. (1998) People and Pixels. Washington, DC.: The National Academies Press.
119.
LocksleyG (1983). The political economy of satellite business. Telecommunications Policy7(3), 195–203.
120.
Lumban-GaolJSyahAFArhatinRE, et al. (2020) Distribution of fishing vessels derived visible infrared imaging radiometer suite (VIIRS) sensor and vessel monitoring system (VMS) in the Java Sea. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 4 September 2019429: 012051.
121.
MackP (1991) Viewing the Earth: The Social Construction of the Landsat Satellite System. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
MarxAGowardS (2013) Remote sensing in human rights and international humanitarian law monitoring: concepts and methods. Geographical Review103(1): 100–111.
124.
MarxAWindischRKimJS (2019) Detecting village burnings with high-cadence smallsats: a case-study in the Rakhine State of Myanmar. Remote Sensing Applications: Society and Environment14: 119–125.
125.
MaxwellAEWarnerTAFangF (2018) Implementation of machine-learning classification in remote sensing: an applied review. International Journal of Remote Sensing39(9): 2784–2817.
126.
McDonaldGGCostelloCBoneJ, et al. (2021) Satellites can reveal global extent of forced labor in the world’s fishing fleet. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences118(3): 1–9.
127.
McGurkTJCaquardS (2020) To what extent can online mapping be decolonial? A journey throughout Indigenous cartography in Canada. The Canadian Geographer/ Le Géographe Canadien64(1): 49–64.
128.
McLeodDM (2009) Derelict of duty: the American news media, terrorism, and the War in Iraq. Marquette Law Review93(1): 113–137.
129.
MercerD (1983) Unmasking technocratic geography. In BillingeMGregoryD,MartinR (eds) Recollections of a Revolution. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 153–199.
130.
MinBGabaK (2014) Tracking electrification in Vietnam using nighttime lights. Remote Sensing6(10): 9511–9529.
131.
MinBGabaKMSarrOF, et al. (2013) Detection of rural electrification in Africa using DMSP-OLS night lights imagery. International Journal of Remote Sensing34(22): 8118–8141.
132.
MirzoeffN (2011) The Right to Look. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
133.
MonmonierM (1991) How to Lie with Maps. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
134.
MunroJ (2020) Global HIV interventions and technocratic racism in a West Papuan NGO. Medical Anthropology: Cross Cultural Studies in Health and Illness39(8): 704–719.
135.
MyersA (2010) Camp Delta, Google Earth and the ethics of remote sensing in archaeology. World Archaeology42(3): 455–467.
136.
NASA Harvest (2021) NASA Harvest Mission. Available at:https://nasaharvest.org/ (accessed 17 December 2021).
137.
NæssP (2004) Prediction, regressions and critical realism. Journal of Critical Realism3(1): 133–164.
138.
NaidooRHillK (2006) Emergence of indigenous vegetation classifications through integration of traditional ecological knowledge and remote sensing analyses. Environmental Management38(3): 377–387.
139.
NalepaRABauerDM (2012) Marginal lands: the role of remote sensing in constructing landscapes for agrofuel development. Journal of Peasant Studies39(2): 403–422.
140.
NalepaRAGianottiAGSBauerDM (2017) Marginal land and the global land rush: a spatial exploration of contested lands and state-directed development in contemporary Ethiopia. Geoforum82: 237–251.
141.
NardonL (2007) Cold war space policy and observation satellites. Astropolitics5(1): 29–62.
142.
NightingaleA (2003a) A Feminist in the forest: situated knowledges and mixing methods in natural resource management. ACME2(1): 77–90
143.
NightingaleA (2003b) Nature–society and development: social, cultural and ecological change in Nepal. Geoforum34(4): 525–540.
144.
Ó TuathailG (1997) At the end of geopolitics? Reflections on a plural problematic at the century’s end. Alternatives22(1): 35–55.
145.
OberhausD (2019) Trump tweeted a sensitive photo. Internet sleuths decoded it. Wired, 3September.
146.
Paneque-GálvezJVargas-RamírezNNapoletanoBM, et al. (2017) Grassroots innovation using drones for indigenous mapping and monitoring. Land6(4): 86.
147.
ParksL (2001) Satellite views of Srebrenica: tele-visuality and the politics of witnessing. Social Identities7(4): 585–611.
148.
ParksL (2005) Cultures in Orbit. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
149.
ParksLSchwochJ (2012) Down to Earth: Satellite Technologies, Industries, and Cultures. New Brunswick and London: Rutgers University Press.
150.
PavlovskayaM (2018) Critical GIS as a tool for social transformation. The Canadian Geographer/ Le Géographe Canadien62(1): 40–54.
151.
PelusoNL (1995) Whose woods are these? Counter-mapping forest territories in Kalimantan, Indonesia. Antipode27(4): 383–406.
152.
PepperMDoughtyPHutchinsonMN, et al. (2011) Ancient drainages divide cryptic species in Australia’s arid zone: morphological and multi-gene evidence for four new species of Beaked Geckos (Rhynchoedura). Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution61(3): 810–822.
153.
PerkinsCDodgeM (2009) Satellite imagery and the spectacle of secret spaces. Geoforum40(4): 546–560.
154.
PicklesJ (1995) Ground Truth: The Social Implications of Geographic Information System. New York: Guilford Press.
155.
RączkowskiW (2020) Power and/or penury of visualizations: Some thoughts on remote sensing data and products in archaeology. Remote Sensing12(18): 2996.
156.
RadcliffeSA (2009) National maps, digitalisation and neoliberal cartographies: transforming nation‐state practices and symbols in postcolonial Ecuador. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers34(4): 426–444.
RadilSMAndersonMB (2019) Rethinking PGIS: participatory or (post)political GIS?Progress in Human Geography43(2): 195–213.
159.
RangaswamyNAroraP (2016) The mobile internet in the wild and every day: digital leisure in the slums of urban India. International Journal of Cultural Studies19(6): 611–626.
160.
RenaultM (2021) It spied on Soviet atomic bombs. Now it’s solving ecological mysteries. The New York Times, 9July.
161.
RichelsonJT (2012) Intelligence secrets and unauthorized disclosures: confronting some fundamental issues. International Journal of Intelligence and CounterIntelligence25(4): 639–677.
162.
RobbinsP (2001) Fixed categories in a portable landscape: the causes and consequences of land-cover categorization. Environment and Planning A33(1): 161–179.
163.
RobbinsP (2003) Beyond ground truth: GIS and the environmental knowledge of herders, professional foresters, and other traditional communities. Human Ecology31(2): 233–253.
164.
RobbinsPMaddockT (2000) Interrogating land cover categories: metaphor and method in remote sensing. Cartography and Geographic Information Science27(4): 295–309.
165.
RocchiniDFoodyGMNagendraH, et al. (2013) Uncertainty in ecosystem mapping by remote sensing. Computers & Geosciences1(50): 128–135.
166.
Rose-RedwoodRBlu BarndNLucchesiAet al. (2020) Decolonizing the map: recentering Indigenous mappings. Cartographica: The International Journal for Geographic Information and Geovisualization55(3): 151–162.
167.
RothL (2009) Looking at Shirley, the ultimate norm: colour balance, image technologies, and cognitive equity. Canadian Journal of Communication34: 111–136.
168.
RotheDShimD (2018) Sensing the ground: on the global politics of satellite-based activism. Review of International Studies44(3): 414–437.
169.
RunkJVNegríaGOConquistaLP, et al. (2010) Landscapes, legibility, and conservation planning: multiple representations of forest use in Panama. Conservation Letters3(3): 167–176.
170.
RuserNLeiboldJMunroK, et al. (2020) Cultural Erasure. Canberra: Australian Strategic Policy Institute.
171.
SachedinaHIgoeJBrockingtonD (2017) The spectacular growth of the African wildlife foundation and the paradoxes of neoliberal conservation. Current Conservation3(3): 24–26.
172.
Sanchez-AzofeifaAGuzmanJACamposCA, et al. (2017) Twenty-first century remote sensing technologies are revolutionizing the study of tropical forests. Biotropica49(5): 604–619.
173.
SandströmP (2015) A Toolbox for Co-production of Knowledge and Improved Land Use Dialogues.PhD Thesis, Swedish University of Agriculture Sciences, Sweden.
174.
ShanksMTilleyC (1992) Re-Constructing Archaeology: Theory and Practice. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.
175.
SheppardE (1995) GIS and society: towards a research agenda. Cartography and Geographic Information Systems22(1): 5–16.
176.
ShiKChangZChenZ, et al. (2020) Identifying and evaluating poverty using multisource remote sensing and point of interest (POI) data: a case study of Chongqing, China. Journal of Cleaner Production255: 120245.
SommarivaA (2018) The Political Economy of the Space Age: How Science and Technology Shape the Evolution of Society. Wilmington, DE: Vernon Press.
181.
StahlR. (2010) Becoming bombs: 3D animated satellite imagery and the weaponization of the civic eye. MediaTropes, 2(2), 65–93.
182.
TaubmanP (2003) The exotic but fallible spy machines behind America’s case for war. The New York Times, 4 February.
183.
ThatcherJBergmannLRickerB, et al. (2015) Revisiting critical GIS. Environment and Planning A48(5): 815–824.
184.
ThomBColombiBJDegaiT (2016) Bringing Indigenous Kamchatka to Google Earth collaborative digital mapping with the Itelmen peoples. Sibirica15(3): 1–30.
185.
TomlinsonRToomeyMAG (1999) GIS and LIS in Canada. In: McGrathGSebertLM (eds). Mapping a Northern Land: The Survey of Canada, 1947-1994. Montreal, Quebec: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 462–490.
186.
TonneauJPMaurelP (2016) Satellite imagery: a tool for territorial development. In: BaghdadiNMehrezZ (eds) Land Surface Remote Sensing in Urban and Coastal Areas. London: ISTE-Elsevier, 101–139.
187.
TörnbergPUitermarkJ (2021) For a heterodox computational social science. Big Data & Society. Online first. doi: 10.1177/20539517211047725.
188.
TurnerMD (2003) Methodological reflections on the use of remote sensing and geographic information science in human ecological research. Human Ecology31(2): 255–279.
189.
TurnerMDTaylorPJ (2003) Critical reflections on the use of remote sensing and GIS technologies in human ecological research. Human Ecology, 31(2): 177–182.
190.
TurnerWRondininiCPettorelliN, et al. (2015) Free and open-access satellite data are key to biodiversity conservation. Biological Conservation182: 173–176.
VadjunecJMSchminkMGomesCVA (2011) Rubber tapper citizens: emerging places, policies, and shifting rural-urban identities in Acre, Brazil. Journal of Cultural Geography28(1): 73–98.
194.
Van Den HoekJFriedrichHK (2021) Satellite-based human settlement datasets inadequately detect refugee settlements: a critical assessment at thirty refugee settlements in Uganda. Remote Sensing13(18): 3574.
195.
VirilioP (1989) War and Cinema: The Logistics of Perception. New York: Verso.
196.
WainwrightJBryanJ (2009) Cartography, territory, property: postcolonial reflections on indigenous counter-mapping in Nicaragua and Belize. Cultural Geographies16(2): 153–178.
197.
WakieTTLaituriMEvangelistaPH (2016) Assessing the distribution and impacts of Prosopis juliflora through participatory approaches. Applied Geography66: 132–143.
198.
WalkerJR (2021) Grounding the View from Nowhere: The Role of Remote Sensing Technology in International Human Rights Practice. PhD Thesis, University of California, Los Angeles, USA.
199.
WalkerRSHamiltonMJ (2019) Machine learning with remote sensing data to locate uncontacted indigenous villages in Amazonia. PeerJ Computer Science2019(1): 1–11.
200.
WalterMKukutaiTCarrollSRet al. (2021) Indigenous Data Sovereignty and Policy (eds). Abingdon: Routledge.
201.
WarfB (2007) Geopolitics of the satellite industry. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie98(3): 385–397.
202.
WarrenS (1995) Teaching GIS as a socially constructed technology. Cartography and Geographic Information Systems22(1): 70–77.
203.
WekerleTFilhoJBPda CostaLEVL, et al. (2017) Status and trends of smallsats and their launch vehicles—An up-to-date review. Journal of Aerospace Technology and Management9(3): 269–286.
204.
WilsonMW (2015) On the criticality of mapping practices: geodesign as critical GIS?Landscape and Urban Planning142: 226–234.
205.
WilsonMW (2017) New Lines: Critical GIS and the Trouble of the Map. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
206.
WinstonB (1996) Technologies of Seeing: Photography, Cinematography and Television. London: British Film Institute.
207.
WitjesNOlbrichP (2017) A fragile transparency: satellite imagery analysis, non-state actors, and visual representations of security. Science and Public Policy44(4): 524–534.
208.
WitmerFDWO’LoughlinJ (2011) Detecting the effects of wars in the Caucasus regions of Russia and Georgia using radiometrically normalized DMSP-OLS nighttime lights imagery. GIScience & Remote Sensing48(4): 478–500.
209.
WoodDWeigelA (2011) Building technological capability within satellite programs in developing countries. Acta Astronautica69(11–12): 1110–1122.
210.
WoodDWeigelA (2012) Charting the evolution of satellite programs in developing countries—The space technology ladder. Space Policy28(1): 15–24.
XuCZhaoB (2018) Satellite image spoofing: creating remote sensing dataset with generative adversarial networks. Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics114(67): 1–6.
213.
ZhaoBZhangSXuC, et al. (2021) Deep fake geography? When geospatial data encounter artificial intelligence. Cartography and Geographic Information Science48(4): 338–352.
214.
ZhouYMaTZhouC, et al. (2015) Nighttime light derived assessment of regional inequality of socioeconomic development in China. Remote Sensing7(2): 1242–1262.
215.
ZubrowA (2003) Mapping tension: remote sensing and the production of a statewide land cover map. Human Ecology31(2): 281–307.
