Some of the most exciting progress to address central limitations in GIS is currently originating from the margins of cartographic traditions. This article explores the potential of a proactive engagement with mapping technologies from peripheral positions, such as humanist, feminist, decolonial, queer, and black perspectives, to overcome what we identify as five intrinsic challenges of GIS: the representation of place; emotions; scales; time and change; and relational approaches. The proposals deal with specific concerns that do not fit in existing GISystems and suggest how a creative engagement with mapping technologies further expands our understanding of what GIS could be.
AgnewJA (1987) Place and Politics: The Geographical Mediation of State and Society. Boston, MA: Allen & Unwin.
2.
AlavezJCaquardS (2023) Mapping-Ofrenda: mapping as mourning in the context of migration. Journal of Cultural Geography40(1): 21–46.
3.
AldermanDHInwoodJ (2023) On the living Black atlas: learning geospatial ethics from the African American freedom struggle. The Cartographic Journal1–9.
4.
AldermanDHInwoodJBottoneE (2021) The mapping behind the movement: on recovering the critical cartographies of the African American freedom struggle. Geoforum120: 67–78.
5.
AllenDLawhonMPierceJ (2019) Placing race: on the resonance of place with black geographies. Progress in Human Geography43(6): 1001–1019.
6.
Anti-Eviction Mapping Project (AEMP) (2018) Handbook by the Anti-Eviction Mapping Project (AEMP). Capous-DesyllasMMorgaineK (eds) Creating Social Change Through Creativity: Anti-Oppressive Arts-Based Research Methodologies. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 289–308.
7.
BagheriN (2014) Mapping women in Tehran’s public spaces: a geo-visualization perspective. Gender, Place & Culture21(10): 1285–1301.
8.
BagnoliA (2009) Beyond the standard interview: the use of graphic elicitation and arts-based methods. Qualitative Research9(5): 547–570.
9.
BallatoreADe SabbataS (2020) Los Angeles as a digital place: the geographies of user-generated content. Transactions in GIS24(4): 880–902.
10.
BartonKC (2015) Elicitation techniques: getting people to talk about ideas they don’t usually talk about. Theory & Research in Social Education43(2): 179–205.
11.
BaumannPSSöderströmOAbrahamyan EmpsonL, et al. (2022) Mapping personal geographies in psychosis: from space to place. Schizophrenia Bulletin Open3(1): sgab051.
12.
BergmannLLallyN (2021) For geographical imagination systems. Annals of the Association of American Geographers111(1): 26–35.
13.
BergmannLO’SullivanD (2018) Reimagining GIScience for relational spaces. The Canadian geographer. Geographe canadien62(1): 7–14.
14.
BlaschkeTMerschdorfHCabrera-BaronaP, et al. (2018) Place versus space: from points, lines and polygons in GIS to place-based representations reflecting language and culture. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information7(11): 452.
15.
BluntAVarleyA (2004) Geographies of home. Cultural Geographies11(1): 3–6.
16.
BodenhamerDJCorriganJHarrisTM (2010) The Spatial Humanities: GIS and the Future of Humanities Scholarship. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
17.
BodenhamerDJCorriganJHarrisTM (eds) (2015) Deep Maps and Spatial Narratives. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
18.
BondiL (1998) Gender, class, and urban space: public and private space in contemporary urban landscapes. Urban Geography19(2): 160–185.
19.
BondiL (2005) Making connections and thinking through emotions: between geography and psychotherapy. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers30: 433–448.
20.
BrickellK (2012) «Mapping» and «doing» critical geographies of home. Progress in Human Geography36(2): 225–244.
21.
BrownMKnoppL (2006) Places or polygons? Governmentality, scale, and the census in the gay and lesbian atlas. Population, Space and Place12(4): 223–242.
22.
BrownMKnoppL (2008) Queering the map: the productive tensions of colliding epistemologies. Annals of the Association of American Geographers98(1): 40–58.
23.
CabnalL (2010) Acercamiento a la construcción de la propuesta de pensamiento epistémico de las mujeres indígenas feministas comunitarias de Abya Yala. Momento de paro Tiempo de Rebelión116(3): 14–17.
CalafioreAPalmerGComberS, et al. (2021) A geographic data science framework for the functional and contextual analysis of human dynamics within global cities. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems85: 101539.
Carpio-PinedoJDe Gregorio HurtadoSSánchez De MadariagaI (2019) Gender mainstreaming in urban planning: the potential of geographic information systems and open data sources. Planning Theory & Practice20(2): 221–240.
31.
ChishtieFBulbulRBabukovaP, et al. (2023) Platial mobility: expanding place and mobility in GIS via platio-temporal representations and the mobilities paradigm. Journal of Geographical Systems25(1): 77–101.
32.
ChomintraM (2022) Reflecting on critical DEI practices in spatial collection development, metadata, and instruction. Journal of Map & Geography Libraries18(1–2): 68–86.
33.
CochraneLZeidYSharifR (2019) Mapping anti-sexual harassment and changing social norms in Egypt. ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies18(2): 394–420.
34.
Colectivo de Geografía Crítica (2018) Geografiando para la Resistencia. Los Feminismos como Práctica Especial Cartilla 3. Quito, Ecuador: Colectivo de Geografía Crítica de Ecuador.
35.
Costanza-ChockS (2020) Design Justice: Community-Led Practices to Build the Worlds We Need. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
36.
CouclelisH (2003) The certainty of uncertainty: GIS and the limits of geographic knowledge. Transactions in GIS7(2): 165–175.
37.
CramptonJW (2010) Mapping: A Critical Introduction to Cartography and GIS. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Vol. 5.
38.
CresswellT (2005) Place: A Short Introduction. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
39.
CruzDVázquezERualesG, et al. (2017) Mapeando el Cuerpo-Territorio. Guía metodológica para mujeres que defienden sus territorios. Quito, Ecuador: Colectivo Miradas Críticas del Territorio desde el Feminismo.
40.
DerbyshireJ (2020) Answers to questions on uncertainty in geography: old lessons and new scenario tools. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space52(4): 710–727.
41.
DesboroughK (2018) The global anti-street harassment movement: digitally-enabled feminist activism. In: VickeryTEverbachJR (ed) Mediating Misogyny: Gender, Technology, and Harassment. New York City, NY: Springer International Publishing, 333–351.
42.
DmowskaAStepinskiTFNowosadJ (2020) Racial landscapes – a pattern-based, zoneless method for analysis and visualization of racial topography. Applied Geography122: 102239.
DruckerJ (2009) Temporal modeling. In: DruckerJ (ed) SpecLab: Digital Aesthetics and Projects in Speculative Computing. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
45.
DruckerJ (2011) Humanities approaches to graphical display. Digital Humanities Quarterly5(1): 1–23.
46.
DunnS (2017) Praxes of “the human” and “the digital”: spatial humanities and the digitization of place. GeoHumanities3(1): 88–107.
47.
D’ignazioCKleinLF (2020) Data Feminism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
48.
ElwoodS (2022) Toward a fourth generation critical GIS: extraordinary politics. ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies21(4): 436–447.
49.
ElwoodSLeszczynskiA (2018) Feminist digital geographies. Gender, Place & Culture25(5): 629–644.
50.
ElwoodSLawsonVSheppardE (2016) Geographical relational poverty studies. Progress in Human Geography41(6): 745–765.
51.
FalcoEZambrano-VerrattiJKleinhansR (2019) Web-based participatory mapping in informal settlements: the slums of Caracas, Venezuela. Habitat International94: 102038.
52.
FerreiraESalvadorR (2015) Lesbian collaborative web mapping: disrupting heteronormativity in Portugal. Gender, Place & Culture22(7): 954–970.
53.
FiedlerRSchuurmanNHyndmanJ (2006) Improving census-based socioeconomic GIS for public policy: recent immigrants, spatially concentrated poverty and housing need in Vancouver. ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies4(1): 145–171.
54.
FilebornB (2021) Digital mapping as feminist method: critical reflections. Qualitative Research23(3): 14687941211028797.
55.
FishC (2020) Storytelling for making cartographic design decisions for climate change communication in the United States. Cartographica: The International Journal for Geographic Information and Geovisualization55(2): 69–84.
56.
FishC (2021) Elements of vivid cartography. The Cartographic Journal58(2): 150–166.
57.
FoleyR (2022) Affective landscapes: capturing emotions in place. In: LovellSACoenSERosenbergMW (eds) The Routledge Handbook of Methodologies in Human Geography. London, UK: Routledge, 109–122.
58.
FotheringhamASWongDWS (1991) The modifiable areal unit problem in multivariate statistical analysis. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space23(7): 1025–1044.
59.
FrankeTWintersMMcKayH, et al. (2017) A grounded visualization approach to explore sociospatial and temporal complexities of older adults’ mobility. Social Science & Medicine193: 59–69.
60.
FreemanE (2010) Time Binds: Queer Temporalities, Queer Histories. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
61.
GaheganM (2018) Our GIS is too small. Canadian Geographies/Géographies Canadiennes62(1): 15–26.
62.
GargiuloIGarciaXBenages-AlbertM, et al. (2020) Women’s safety perception assessment in an urban stream corridor: developing a safety map based on qualitative GIS. Landscape and Urban Planning198: 103779.
63.
GermesMKlausL (2021) When marginalized subjects map their city: counter-mapping experiments with drug users in some German and French neighborhoods. Bulletin of Sociological Methodology/Bulletin de Méthodologie Sociologique152(1): 96–124.
64.
GiesekingJJ (2018) Size matters to lesbians, too: queer feminist interventions into the scale of big data. The Professional Geographer70(1): 150–156.
65.
GiesekingJJ (2020) A Queer New York: Geographies of Lesbians, Dykes, and Queers. New York, NY: NYU Press.
66.
GilmoreRW (2007) Golden Gulag: Prisons, Surplus, Crisis, and Opposition in Globalizing California. Oakland, CA: University of California Press, Vol. 21.
67.
GoodchildMF (2013) Prospects for a space–time GIS. Annals of the Association of American Geographers103(5): 1072–1077.
68.
GriffinALWhiteTFishC, et al. (2017) Designing across map use contexts: a research agenda. International Journal of Cartography3(sup1): 90–114.
69.
GuhlincozziAR (2022) Making visible the Chicagoland suburban healthcare landscape of latina women: a qualitative GIS approach. Social & Cultural Geography25(2): 275–294.
70.
HacιgüzellerP (2012) GIS, critique, representation and beyond. Journal of Social Archaeology12(2): 245–263.
71.
HarawayD (1988) Situated knowledges: the science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies14(3): 575.
72.
HawthorneC (2019) Black matters are spatial matters: black geographies for the twenty-first century. Geography Compass13(11): e12468.
73.
HeckETsaiM (2022) Sharing therapeutic experiences of place: Co-creative digital storytelling as a way to explore connection to place. Emotion, Space and Society43: 100879.
74.
HermannMPearceM (2010) «They would not take me there» people, places, and stories from champlain’s travels in Canada 1603–1616. Cartographic Perspectives66: 41–46.
75.
HooksB (1984) Feminist Theory. From Margin to Center. Boston, MA: South End Press.
76.
HunterMA (2015) W.E.B. Du Bois and black heterogeneity: how the Philadelphia negro shaped American sociology. The American Sociologist46(2): 219–233.
77.
IraluE (2021) Putting Indian country on the map: indigenous practices of spatial justice. Antipode53(5): 1485–1502.
78.
IversonAA (2019) (C)art Therapy: Sketch Mapping Workshops for Early Teens as a Case Study in Post-representational Cartography [Thesis]. Available at:https://minds.wisconsin.edu/handle/1793/79646
79.
JagerATewsonALudlowBBoydellK (2016) Embodied ways of storying the self: a systematic review of body-Mapping. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 17(2), Article 2.
80.
JohnsonLC (2006) Browsing the modern kitchen—a feast of gender, place and culture (part 1). Gender, Place & Culture13(2): 123–132.
81.
Jokela-PansiniM (2021) Body mapping as a feminist visual method. In: KoglerR.WintzerJ. (eds). Raum und Bild—Strategien visueller raumbezogener Forschung. Berlin: Springer, 69–82.
82.
KatzC (2001) On the grounds of globalization: a topography for feminist political engagement. Signs26(4): 1213–1234.
KellyMBosseA (2022) Pressing pause, “doing” feminist mapping. ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies21(4): 399–415.
85.
KellyMLallyNNicholsonPJ (2023) On art and experimentation as geographical practice. GeoHumanities9(2): 380–410.
86.
KiddD (2019) Extra-activism: counter-mapping and data justice. Information, Communication & Society22(7): 954–970.
87.
KirbyEWatsonAChurchillB, et al. (2021) Queering the map: stories of love, loss and (be)longing within a digital cartographic archive. Media, Culture & Society43(6): 1043–1060.
88.
KitchinRDodgeM (2007) Rethinking maps. Progress in Human Geography31(3): 331–344.
89.
KnowlesA (2014) Why we must make maps: historical geography as a visual craft. Historical Geography42: 3–26.
90.
KnowlesAWesterveldLStromL (2015) Inductive visualization: a humanistic alternative to GIS. GeoHumanities1(2): 233–265.
91.
KurganL (2013) Close up at a Distance: Mapping, Technology, and Politics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
92.
KwanMP (1999) Gender and individual access to urban opportunities: a study using space–time measures. The Professional Geographer51(2): 211–227.
93.
KwanMP (2002) Feminist visualization: re-envisioning GIS as a method in feminist geographic research. Annals of the Association of American Geographers92(4): 645–661.
94.
KwanMP (2008) From oral histories to visual narratives: re-presenting the post-september 11 experiences of the muslim women in the USA. Social & Cultural Geography9(6): 653–669.
95.
KwanMP (2012a) How GIS can help address the uncertain geographic context problem in social science research. Annals of GIS18(4): 245–255.
96.
KwanMP (2012b) The uncertain geographic context problem. Annals of the Association of American Geographers102(5): 958–968.
97.
KwanMPKniggeL (2006) Doing qualitative research using GIS: an oxymoronic endeavor?Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space38(11): 1999–2002.
98.
LallyN (2022) What can GIS do?ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies21(4): 337–345.
99.
LeszczynskiA (2009) Quantitative limits to qualitative engagements: GIS, its critics, and the philosophical divide. The Professional Geographer61(3): 350–365.
100.
LeszczynskiA (2020) Glitchy vignettes of platform urbanism. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space38(2): 189–208.
101.
LévyJMaitreORomanyT (2016) Rebattre les cartes. Topographie et topologie dans la cartographie contemporaine. Réseaux34(195): 17–52.
102.
LiteratI (2013) Participatory mapping with urban youth: the visual elicitation of socio-spatial research data. Learning, Media and Technology38(2): 198–216.
103.
Lopes HeimerRV (2021) Travelling cuerpo-territorios: a decolonial feminist geographical methodology to conduct research with migrant women. Third World Thematics: A TWQ Journal6(4–6): 290–319.
104.
Lopes HeimerRV (2023) Bodies as territories of exception: the coloniality and gendered necropolitics of state and intimate border violence against migrant women in England. Ethnic and Racial Studies46(7): 1378–1406.
105.
LucchesiAH (2018) “Indians don’t make maps”: indigenous cartographic traditions and innovations. American Indian Culture & Research Journal42(3): 11–26.
106.
LucchesiAH (2019) Mapping geographies of Canadian colonial occupation: pathway analysis of murdered indigenous women and girls. Gender, Place & Culture26(6): 868–887.
107.
LunenfeldPDruckerJSchnappJ, et al. (2012) Digital Humanities. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
108.
MacEachrenAM (2017) Leveraging big (geo) data with (geo) visual analytics: place as the next frontier. In: Spatial data handling in big data era: select papers from the 17th IGU spatial data handling symposium 2016, Beijing, China, 18–20 August 2016, 139–155. Springer.
109.
MaharawalMMMcElroyE (2018) The anti-eviction mapping project: counter mapping and oral history toward bay area housing justice. Annals of the Association of American Geographers108(2): 380–389.
110.
MahtaniM (2014) Toxic geographies: absences in critical race thought and practice in social and cultural geography. Social & Cultural Geography15(4): 359–367.
111.
MarstonSA (2004) A long way from home: domesticating the social production of scale. In: SheppardRBMcMasterE (ed) Scale and Geographic Inquiry: Nature, Society and Method. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing.
112.
MasseyD (2005) For Space. London, UK: Sage Publications Limited.
113.
MayraK (2022) Birth mapping: a visual arts-based participatory research method embedded in feminist epistemology. International Journal of Qualitative Methods21.
114.
McKittrickK (2011) On plantations, prisons, and a black sense of place. Social & Cultural Geography12(8): 947–963.
115.
McKittrickK (2021) Dear Science and Other Stories. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
116.
McLeanJMaalsenSPrebbleS (2019) A feminist perspective on digital geographies: activism, affect and emotion, and gendered human-technology relations in Australia. Gender, Place & Culture26(5): 740–761.
117.
MillerHJ (2020) Geographic information science III: GIScience, fast and slow – why faster geographic information is not always smarter. Progress in Human Geography44(1): 129–138.
118.
MocnikFB (2022) Putting geographical information science in place – towards theories of platial information and platial information systems. Progress in Human Geography46(3): 798–828.
119.
Moore-CherryNCrossaVO’DonnellG (2015) Investigating urban transformations: GIS, map-elicitation and the role of the state in regeneration. Urban Studies52(12): 2134–2150.
120.
MountzAHyndmanJ (2006) Feminist approaches to the global intimate. Women’s Studies Quarterly34(1/2): 446–463.
121.
NelsonTAGoodchildMFWrightDJ (2022) Accelerating ethics, empathy, and equity in geographic information science. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 119(19), Article 19.
122.
OlmedoE (2017) L’expérimentretien comme méthode d’enquête. Cartographie sensible et terrains de recherche collaboratifs entre art et géographie. Mappemonde, Revue trimestrielle sur l’image géographique et les formes du territoire, 121.
123.
OpenshawSTaylorP (1979) A million or so correlation coefficients: three experiments on the modifiable area unit problem. In: WrigleyN (ed) Statistical Applications in the Spatial Sciences. London, UK: Pion, 127–144.
124.
O’SullivanD (2005) Geographical information science: time changes everything. Progress in Human Geography29(6): 749–756.
125.
O’SullivanD (2006) Geographical information science: critical GIS. Progress in Human Geography30(6): 783–791.
126.
O’SullivanDBergmannLThatcherJE (2018) Spatiality, maps, and mathematics in critical human geography: toward a repetition with difference. The Professional Geographer70(1): 129–139.
127.
OswinN (2019) An other geography. Dialogues in Human. Geography10(1).
PánekJPásztoVMarekL (2017) Mapping emotions: spatial distribution of safety perception in the city of Olomouc. In: IvanISingletonAHorákJ, et al. (eds) The Rise of Big Spatial Data. Berlin, Germany: Springer International Publishing, 211–224.
130.
ParkerB (2016) The feminist geographer as killjoy: excavating gendered urban power relations. The Professional Geographer69(2): 1–8.
131.
Pascual-BordasJ (2023) The domestic bathroom: a strongbox for gender performativity and transgression. Social & Cultural Geography1–19.
132.
PavlovskayaM (2002) Mapping urban change and changing GIS: other views of economic restructuring. Gender, Place & Culture9(3): 281–289.
133.
PavlovskayaM (2018) Critical GIS as a tool for social transformation. Canadian Geographies/Géographies Canadiennes62(1): 40–54.
134.
PeakeL (2016) On feminism and feminist allies in knowledge production in urban geography. Urban Geography37(6): 830–838.
135.
PearceMW (2008) Framing the days: place and narrative in cartography. Cartography and Geographic Information Science35(1): 17–32.
136.
PearceMWLouisRP (2008) Mapping indigenous depth of place. American Indian Culture & Research Journal32(3): 107–126.
137.
PetrovićAManleyDvan HamM (2020) Freedom from the tyranny of neighbourhood: rethinking sociospatial context effects. Progress in Human Geography44(6): 1103–1123.
138.
PeuquetDJ (1994) It’s about time: a conceptual framework for the representation of temporal dynamics in geographic information systems. Annals of the Association of American Geographers84(3): 441–461.
139.
PicklesJ (1995) Ground Truth: The Social Implications of Geographic Information Systems. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
140.
PiraniNRickerBAKraakMJ (2020) Feminist cartography and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal on gender equality: emotional responses to three thematic maps. Canadian Geographies/Géographies Canadiennes64(2): 184–198.
141.
RankinB (2020) Mapping time in the twentieth (and twenty-first) century. In: Time in Maps: From the Age of Discovery to Our Digital Era. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press, 15–34.
142.
RocheS (2016) Geographic information science II: less space, more places in smart cities. Progress in Human Geography40(4): 565–573.
143.
Rodó-ZárateM (2014) Developing geographies of intersectionality with relief maps: reflections from youth research in Manresa. Catalonia, Gender, Place & Culture21(8): 925–944.
144.
Rodó-ZárateM (2023) Intersectionality and the spatiality of emotions in feminist research. The Professional Geographer75(4): 676–681.
145.
Rodriguez CastroL (2021) ‘We are not poor things’: territorio cuerpo-tierra and Colombian women’s organised struggles. Feminist Theory22(3): 339–359.
146.
RoseG (1993) Feminism & Geography: The Limits of Geographical Knowledge. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
147.
Rose-RedwoodRBlu BarndNLucchesiAH, et al. (2020) Decolonizing the map: recentering indigenous mappings. Cartographica: The International Journal for Geographic Information and Geovisualization55(3): 151–162.
148.
RothRE (2021) Cartographic design as visual storytelling: synthesis and review of map-based narratives, genres, and tropes. The Cartographic Journal58(1): 83–114.
149.
RussellL (2020) Glitch Feminism: A Manifesto. London, UK: Verso.
150.
SchuurmanN (2000) Trouble in the heartland: GIS and its critics in the 1990s. Progress in Human Geography24(4): 569–590.
151.
ScottD (2021) Normalized alterity: visualizing black spatial humanities. GeoHumanities7(2): 475–493.
152.
SheltonT (2018) Rethinking the RECAP: mapping the relational geographies of concentrated poverty and affluence in Lexington, Kentucky. Urban Geography39(7): 1070–1091.
153.
SheltonT (2022) Situated mapping: visualizing urban inequality between the god trick and strategic positivism. ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies21(4): 346–356.
154.
ShieldsR (2018) Bergson’s GIS: experience, time and memory in geographical information systems. Media Theory2(1): 316–332.
155.
SlettoB (2015) Inclusions, erasures and emergences in an indigenous landscape: participatory cartographies and the makings of affective place in the Sierra de Perija, Venezuela. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space33(5): 925–944.
156.
SlettoBBarrera de la TorreGLamina LuguanaAM, et al. (2021) Walking, knowing, and the limits of the map: performing participatory cartographies in Indigenous landscapes. Cultural Geographies28(4): 611–627.
157.
StegerAEvansEWeeB (2021) Emotional cartography as a window into children’s well-being: visualizing the felt geographies of place. Emotion, Space and Society39: 100772.
158.
SweetELOrtiz EscalanteS (2015) Bringing bodies into planning: visceral methods, fear and gender violence. Urban Studies52(10): 1826–1845.
159.
TemperLDemariaFScheidelA, et al. (2018) The global environmental justice atlas (EJAtlas): ecological distribution conflicts as forces for sustainability. Sustainability Science13(3): 573–584.
160.
ThatcherJBergmannLRickerB, et al. (2015) Revisiting critical GIS. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space48(5): 815–824.
161.
ThatcherJBergmannLO’SullivanD (2018) Speculative and constructively critical GIS. Canadian Geographies/Géographies Canadiennes62(1): 4–6.
162.
TownsendA (2013) Smart Cities: Big Data, Civic Hackers, and the Quest for a New Utopia. New York, NY: WW Norton & Company.
163.
TratnjekBRekacewiczP (2016) Cartographier les émotions. Carnets de Géographes9: 1–22.
164.
TuanYF (1975) Images and mental maps. Annals of the Association of American Geographers65(2): 205–212.
165.
TwiggJ (2004) The body, gender, and age: feminist insights in social gerontology. Journal of Aging Studies18(1): 59–73.
166.
VasudevanPRamírezMMMendozaYG, et al. (2022) Storytelling earth and body. Annals of the Association of American Geographers113(7): 1728–1744.
167.
WesterholtRMocnikFBComberA (2020) A place for place: modelling and analysing platial representations. Transactions in GIS24(4): 811–818.
168.
WesterveldLKnowlesA (2021) Loosening the grid: topology as the basis for a more inclusive GIS. International Journal of Geographical Information Science35(10): 2108–2127.
169.
WhitesellDKFariaCV (2020) Gowns, globalization, and “global intimate mapping”: geovisualizing Uganda’s wedding industry. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space38(7–8): 1275–1290.
170.
WigenKWintererC (eds) (2020) Time in Maps: From the Age of Discovery to Our Digital Era. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
171.
WikstrømRD (2023) The potential of combining qualitative GIS and map elicitation in daily mobility studies. Journal of Transport Geography108: 103573.
172.
WilsonMW (2015) New lines? Enacting a social history of GIS. Canadian Geographies/Géographies Canadiennes59(1): 29–34.
173.
WilsonMW (2021) GIScience I: social histories and disciplinary crucibles. Progress in Human Geography45(1): 166–177.
174.
WilsonMW (2022) GIScience III: questions of time. Progress in Human Geography46(6): 1431–1438.
175.
WoodD (1978) Introducing the cartography of reality. In: LeyDSamuelsMS (eds) Humanistic Geography: Prospects and Problems. Chicago, IL: Maaroufa Press, 206–219.
176.
ZaragocinSCarettaMA (2021) Cuerpo-territorio: a decolonial feminist geographical method for the study of embodiment. Annals of the Association of American Geographers111(5): 1503–1518.
177.
ZhaoB (2022) Humanistic GIS: toward a research agenda. Annals of the Association of American Geographers112(6): 1576–1592.
