The proliferation and everywhereness of digital materialities, operations, and mediations require attention to the ways that colonial knowledge assumes access to Indigenous lands. In this commentary, I consider what an agenda for accountable digital geographies might look like. With the turn to (re)imagine the futures of geographical praxis, I invite a collective inquiry on how digital practices can work toward geographies of accountability and restitution on Indigenous lands with the aim of honoring the places, spaces, and communities in which geographical knowledge emerges. I suggest that decolonial and anticolonial methods redirect digital practices toward Land Back, re-orienting geographical knowledge to the affirmation of Indigenous life.
AshJKitchinR,LeszczynskiA (2018) Digital turn, digital geographies?Progress in Human Geography42(1): 25–43.
2.
BrunoTFaiver-SernaC (2022) More reflections on a white discipline. The Professional Geographer74(1): 156–161.
3.
CurleyASmithS (2020) Against colonial grounds: Geography on Indigenous lands. Dialogues in Human Geography10(1): 37–40.
4.
DaigleM (2019) The spectacle of reconciliation: On (the) unsettling responsibilities to Indigenous peoples in the academy. Environment Planning D37(4): 703–721.
5.
de LeeuwSHuntS (2018) Unsettling decolonizing geographies. Geography Compass12(7): e12376.
6.
DuarteM (2017) Network Sovereignty: Building the Internet across Indian Country. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
7.
DuarteMVigil-HayesMLittletreeS, et al. (2019) ‘Of course, data can never fully represent reality': Assessing the relationship between ‘Indigenous data' and ‘Indigenous knowledge', ‘traditional ecological knowledge', and ‘traditional knowledge'. Human Biology91: 163–178.
8.
ElwoodS (2022) Toward a fourth generation critical GIS: Extraordinary politics. ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies21(4): 436–447.
9.
ElwoodSLeszczynskiA (2018) Feminist digital geographies. Gender, Place, & Culture25(5): 629-644.
10.
ElwoodSWilsonM (2017) Critical GIS pedagogies beyond ‘Week 10: Ethics’. International Journal of Geographical Information Science: 1–19.
11.
FieldsD (2019) Automated landlord: Digital technologies and post-crisis financial accumulation. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space54(1): 160–181.
12.
FujikaneC (2021) Mapping Abundance for a Planetary Future. Durham: Duke University Press.
13.
GilmoreR (2017) Abolition geography and the problem of innocence. In: LubinA (eds) Futures of Black Radicalism. London: Verso, pp. 57–77.
JeffersonB (2020) Digitize and Punish: Racial Criminalization in the Digital Age. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
19.
KingT (2019) The Black Shoals: Offshore Formations of Black and Native Studies. Durham: Duke University Press.
20.
LawsonV (2007) Geographies of care and responsibility. Annals of the Association of American Geographers97(1): 1–11.
21.
LeszczynskiA (2018) Digital methods I: Wicked tensions. Progress in Human Geography42(3): 473–481.
22.
LiboironM (2021a) Decolonizing geoscience requires more than equity and inclusion. Nature Geoscience14: 876–877.
23.
LiboironM (2021b) Pollution is Colonialism. Durham: Duke University Press.
24.
LucchesiA (2022) Mapping violence against Indigenous women and girls: Identifying and moving beyond colonizing data and mapping practices. ACME: An International Journal for Critical Geographies21(4): 389–398.
