Counter-narratives to dominant development discourses are made possible using research methods designed to elicit marginalized voices. In this article, we propose a new analytical framework called the interpretive schema for drawings for analyzing visual narratives. The interpretive schema for drawings consists of five themes or interpretive lenses (scale, centrality, inclusion, connections, and relationality) that were generated from maps of fuelwood collection in rural India. We suggest that the interpretive schema reflects and animates a range of spatialities that are central to geographic studies of human–environment dynamics. Using the interpretive schema for drawings in this way enables us to emphasize emic socio-spatial perspectives, and offers a critical research avenue through which everyday realities can be represented, understood, and validated. While other image-based research approaches, critical cartographies and participatory mapping exercises may encourage the expression of alternative knowledges, our proposed interpretive schema for drawing presents a specific set of guidelines for interpreting and making sense of visual narratives through explicit socio-spatial analysis.
AbramsD (1997) The Spell of the Sensuous: Perception and Language in a More-than-human World.
New York:
Vintage Books.
2.
AlerbyE (2000)
A way of visualizing children’s and young people’s thoughts about the environment: A study of drawings. Environmental Education Research6(3): 205–222.
3.
BanksM (2007) Using Visual Data in Qualitative Research.
London:
Sage.
4.
BarrazaL (1999)
Children’s Drawings About the Environment. Environmental Education Research5(1): 49–66.
5.
BarthesR (1981) Camera Lucida: Reflections on Photography.
New York:
Noonday Press.
6.
BellSLPhoenixCLovellR, et al. (2015)
Using GPS and geo-narratives. Area47: 88–96.
7.
BirkenholtzT (2008)
Contesting expertise: The politics of environmental knowledge in northern Indian groundwater practices. Geoforum39(1): 466–482
8.
BoschmannECubbonE (2014)
Sketch maps and qualitative GIS: Using cartographies of individual spatial narratives in geographic research. The Professional Geographer66(2): 236–248.
9.
CaquardSCartwrightW (2014)
Narrative cartography: From mapping stories to the narrative of maps and mapping. The Cartographic Journal51(2): 101–106.
10.
ChambersR (1994)
The origins and practice of participatory rural appraisal. World Development22(7): 953–969.
11.
ChattiDArcherMLennonM, et al. (2017)
Exploring the mundane: Towards an ethnographic approach to bioenergy. Energy Research & Social Science30: 28–34.
12.
ChattiD (2019) Changing hearths and minds: Household energy transitions in rural India. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Yale University, USA.
13.
CookeBKothariU (2001) Participation: The New Tyranny?
London:
Zed books.
14.
DaltonCMStallmannT (2017)
Counter-mapping data science. The Canadian Geographer/Le Géographe Canadien62: 93–101.
15.
DavisDK (2005)
Indigenous knowledge and the desertification debate: Problematising expert knowledge in North Africa. Geoforum36(4): 509–524.
16.
DerrT (2006) “Sometimes birds sound like fish”: Perspectives on children’s place experiences. In: Spencer C and Blades M (eds) Children and their Environments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.108–123.
17.
DickinsonJLZuckerbergBBonterDN (2010)
Citizen science as an ecological research tool: Challenges and benefits. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics41: 149–172.
18.
EdmundsDThomas-SlayterBRocheleauD (1995)
Gendered resource mapping: Focusing on women’s spaces in the landscape. Cultural Survival Quarterly18(4): 62–70.
19.
ElwoodS (2010)
Thinking outside the box: Engaging critical geographic information systems theory, practice and politics in human geography. Geography Compass4: 45–60.
20.
ForsythT (2003) Critical Political Ecology: The Politics of Environmental Science. London: Routledge.
21.
GagnéK (2019) Caring for Glaciers: Land, Animals, and Humanity in the Himalayas.
Seattle, WA:
University of Washington Press, 2019.
22.
Goldman MJ, Paul Nadasdy P and Turner MD (2011) Knowing Nature: Conversations at the Intersection of Political Ecology and Science Studies.
Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
23.
HarawayD (1988)
Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies14(3): 575–599.
24.
HarrisLMHazenHD (2006)
Power of maps: (Counter) mapping for conservation. ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies4(1): 99–130.
25.
HussEAlhaiga-TazS (2013)
Bedouin children’s experience of growing up in illegal villages, versus in townships in Israel: Implications of social context for understanding stress, and resilience in children’s drawings. International Journal of Art Therapy18(1): 10–19.
26.
JasanoffS (2004) States of Knowledge: The Co-production of Science and the Social Order.
London:
Routledge, 2004.
27.
KatzC (1986)
Children and the environment: Work, play and learning in rural Sudan. Children’s Environment Quarterly3(4): 43–51.
28.
KhandelwalMHillMEGreenoughP, et al. (2017)
Why have improved cook-stove initiatives in India failed?World Development92: 13–27.
29.
KellerCFleuryJPerezA, et al. (2008)
Using visual methods to uncover context.Qualitative Health Research18(3): 428–436.
30.
KitchinRDodgeM (2007)
Rethinking maps. Progress in Human Geography31(3): 333–344.
31.
KnowlesKAWesterveldLStromL (2015)
Inductive visualization: A humanistic alternative to GIS. GeoHumanities1(2): 233–265.
32.
Kwan MP and Ding G (2008) Geo-narrative: Extending geographic information systems for narrative analysis in qualitative and mixed-method research. The Professional Geographer 60(4): 443–465.
33.
LaveR (2012)
Neoliberalism and the production of environmental knowledge. Environment and Society: Advances in Research3:19–38.
34.
LeechNOnwuegbuzieA (2007)
An array of qualitative data analysis tools: A call for data analysis triangulation. School Psychology Quarterly22(4): 557–584.
35.
LeeuwSDParkesMWMorganVS, et al. (2017)
Going unscripted: A call to critically engage story-telling methods and methodologies in geography and the medical-health sciences. The Canadian Geographer61(2): 152–164.
36.
MartzCMPowellRWeeB (2020)
Engaging children to voice their sense of place through location-based story making with photo-story maps. Children’s Geographies18: 141–168.
37.
MatthewsMH (1984)
Cognitive maps: A comparison of graphic and iconic techniques. Area16(1): 33–40.
38.
MilesMBHubermanAM (1994) Qualitative Data Analysis.
Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
39.
MitchellC (2011) Doing Visual Research.
Los Angeles, CA:
Sage.
40.
MitchellCMSommerM (2016)
Participatory visual methodologies in global public health.Global Public Health11(5–6): 521–527.
41.
MollettSFariaC (2013)
Messing with gender in feminist political ecology. Geoforum45: 116–125.
42.
MosseD (2001) ‘People’s knowledge’, participation and patronage: Operations and representations in rural development. In: CookBKothariU (eds) Participation – The New Tyranny?
London:
Zed Press, pp.16–35.
43.
NightingaleAJ (2011)
Bounding difference: Intersectionality and the material production of gender, caste, class and environment in Nepal. Geoforum42(2): 153–162.
44.
NirmalPRocheleauD (2019)
Decolonizing degrowth in the post-development convergence: Questions, experiences, and proposals from two Indigenous territories. Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space2(3): 465–492.
45.
OldrupHHCarstensenTA (2012)
Producing geographical knowledge through visual methods. Geografiska Annaler, Human Geography94(3): 223–237.
46.
ParkerB (2006)
Constructing community through maps? Power and praxis in community mapping. The Professional Geographer58(4): 470–484.
47.
PeetRWattsM (2002) Liberation Ecologies: Environment, Development and Social Movements.
London:
Taylor and Francis.
48.
ProsserJ (1996)
What constitutes an image-based qualitative methodology?Visual Sociology11(2): 25–34.
49.
RibotJC (1998)
Theorizing access: Forest profits along Senegal’s charcoal commodity chain. Development and Change29(2): 307–341.
50.
RisottoAGiulianiMV (2006) Learning neighborhood environments: The loss of experience in a modern world. In Spencer C and Blades M (eds) Children and their Environments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.75–90.
51.
RoseG (2007) Visual Methodologies: An Introduction to the Interpretation of Visual Materials.
Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
52.
SimonGLBailisRBaumgartnerJ, et al. (2014)
Current debates and future research needs in the clean cookstove sector.Energy for Sustainable Development20(3): 49–57.
53.
SimonGL (2014)
If you can’t stand the heat, get into the kitchen: Obligatory passage points and mutually supported impediments at the climate–development interface.Area46(3): 268–277.
54.
SimonGLPetersonC (2019)
Disingenuous forests: A historical political ecology of fuelwood collection in South India. Journal of Historical Geography63: 34–47.
55.
SimonGLPetersonCAndersonE, et al. (2020)
Multiple temporalities of household labour: The challenge of assessing women’s empowerment. Development and Change. DOI. https://doi.org/10.1111/dech.12616
56.
SiumARitskesE (2013)
Speaking truth to power: Indigenous storytelling as an act of living resistance. Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society2(1): 1–10.
57.
SlettoBWagnerABryanJ, et al. (2020) Radical Cartographies: Participatory Mapmaking from Latin America.
Austin, TX:
University of Texas Press.
58.
SmithLT (2013) Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples.
London:
Zed Books Ltd.,
59.
SojaE (1980)
The socio-spatial dialectic. Annals of the American Association of Geographers70(2): 207–225.
60.
SontagS (1977) On Photography.
New York:
Picador.
61.
SultanaF (2009)
Fluid lives: Subjectivities, gender and water in rural Bangladesh. Gender, Place & Culture16(4): 427–444.
62.
TrellE-MVan HovenB (2010)
Making sense of place: Exploring creative and (inter)active research methods with young people. Fennia188(1): 91–104.
63.
TremblayCHarrisL (2018)
Critical video engagements: Empathy, subjectivity and changing narratives of water resources through participatory video. Geoforum90: 174–182.
64.
TuanY-F (1977) Space and Place: The Perspective of Experience.
Minneapolis, MN:
University of Minnesota Press.
65.
WeeB (2012)
A cross-cultural exploration of children’s everyday ideas: Implications for science teaching and learning. International Journal of Science Education,
34: 609–627.
66.
WeeB andAnthamattenP (2014)
Using photography to visualize children’s culture of play: A socio-spatial perspective. Geographical Review 2014; 104: 87–100.
67.
WeeBMasonH (2016) Children’s language about the environment. In: Kopnina H and Shoreman-Ouimet E (eds) Handbook of Environmental Anthropology. New York: Routledge, pp.401–411.
68.
WeberS (2008) Visual images in research. In Knowles J and Cole A (eds) Handbook of the Arts in Qualitative Research. London: Sage, pp.41–54.
69.
YoungLBarrattH (2001)
Adapting visual methods: Action research with Kampala street children. Area33(2): 141–152.
