Geographies of Environmental Data 1

Abstract

Massive changes to the physical environment over the last decade have been understood by geographers in relation to new social, economic, and institutional imperatives to collect and circulate data. This review, the first of three on “environmental data,” diverts from common approaches to the concept to consider the distinctive ‘environments’ that result from data's geographical, material, and spatial entailments. Examples are drawn from economic geography – which began to engage data-driven spatial transformation in the 1990s – and political geography, political ecology, which has highlighted the ecological costs of data-driven AI and Bitcoin economies and data center projects beginning since the early 2010s. The review also considers parallel engagements over the same period by scholars working in media studies, concluding that investigations into data's geographies recommend new forms of correspondence between these disciplines.

Keywords

Progress report environmental data geography materiality ecology

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

3Pillar. 2023. “The Evolution of Big Data Analytics Market.” Accessed 30 September 2025. https://www.3pillarglobal.com/insights/blog/the-evolution-of-big-data-analytics-market/.

Amoore

2018. “Cloud Geographies: Computing, Data, Sovereignty.” Progress in Human Geography 42 (1): 4–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132516662147.

Amoore

2020. Cloud Ethics: Algorithms and the Attributes of Ourselves and Others. Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press.

Apple - Environmental responsibility report. 2015. “Progress Report, Covering FY 2014.” https://www.apple.com/environment/pdf/Apple_Environmental_Responsibility_Report_2015.pdf.

Ash

Kitchin

Leszczynski

. 2018. “Digital Turn, Digital Geographies?” Progress in Human Geography 42 (1): 25–43. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132516664800.

Atkins

2020. “Tracing the ‘Cloud’: Emergent Political Geographies of Global Data Centres.” Political Geography 86: 102306. doi:10.1016/j.polgeo.2020.102306

2024. “Data Centres on the Moon and Other Tales: A Volumetric and Elemental Analysis of the Coloniality of Digital Infrastructures.” Territory, Politics, Governance 12 (1): 12–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/21622671.2022.2153160.

Bakker

, 2009. Neoliberal nature, ecological fixes, and the pitfalls of comparative research. Environment and Planning A 41(8): 1781–1787. https://doi.org/10.1068/a4277

Bakker

Ritts

. 2018. “Smart Earth: A Meta-Review and Implications for Environmental Governance.” Global Environmental Change 52: 201–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2018.07.011.

10.

Bernhard

2023. “How Undersea Cables May Affect Marine Life.” BBC News 02.03.23. Accessed 30 September 2025. https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20230201-how-undersea-cables-may-affect-marine-life.

11.

Bhageshpur

2019. “Council Post: Data Is The New Oil–And That's A Good Thing. Forbes.” Accessed 26 May 2025. https://www.forbes.com/councils/forbestechcouncil/2019/11/15/data-is-the-new-oil-and-thats-a-good-thing/.

12.

Blaikie

Brookfield

. 2015 (1987). Land Degradation and Society. London: Routledge.

13.

Blum

2012. Tubes: Behind the Scenes at the Internet. London: Penguin Books.

14.

Brodie

2020. “Stuck in mud in the Fields of Athenry: Apple, Territory, and Popular Politics.” Culture Machine 19: 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443720904601.

15.

Brodie

2023. “Data Infrastructure Studies on an Unequal Planet.” Big Data & Society 10 (1): 1–14. doi:10.1177/20539517231182402

16.

Burrell

2020. “On Half-Built Assemblages: Waiting for a Data Center in Prineville, Oregon.” Engaging Science, Technology, and Society 6: 283–305. https://doi.org/10.17351/ests2020.447.

17.

Burrington

2015. “The Environmental Toll of a Netflix Binge.” The Atlantic. Accessed 26 May 2025. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/12/there-are-no-clean-clouds/420744/.

18.

Carr

Bast

Madron

Syrus

A. M.

. 2022. “Mapping the Clouds: The Matter of Data Centers.” Journal of Maps 18 (1): 106–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/17445647.2022.2088304.

19.

Castells

1997. An introduction to the information age. City (7): 6–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/13604819708900050

20.

Couldry

Mejias

U. A.

. 2019. “Data Colonialism: Rethinking big Data’s Relation to the Contemporary Subject.” Television & new media 20 (4): 336–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527476418796632.

21.

Crampton

J. W.

2014. “Collect it all: National Security, big Data and Governance.” GeoJournal 80: 519–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/00045608.2013.843436.

22.

Crang

Graham

. 2007. “Sentient Cities Ambient Intelligence and the Politics of Urban Space.” Information, Communication & Society 10 (6): 789–817. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691180701750991.

23.

Crawford

2021. The Atlas of AI: Power, Politics, and the Planetary Costs of Artificial Intelligence. New Haven: Yale University Press.

24.

Crawford

and T. Paglen. 2021. Excavating AI: The politics of images in machine learning training sets. AI & Society 36(4): 1105–1116. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-021-01162-8

25.

Crawford

Joler

. 2018. Anatomy of an AI System: The Amazon Echo as an Anatomical map of Human Labor, Data and Planetary Resources. New York: Share Lab and AI Now Institute/.

26.

Cubitt

2005. Eco media. London: Rodopi Books.

27.

Cubitt

Hassan

Volkmer

. 2011. “Does Cloud Computing Have a Silver Lining?.” Media, Culture & Society 33 (1): 149–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443710382974.

28.

Datta

2023. “The Digitalising State: Governing Digitalisation-as-Urbanisation in the Global South.” Progress in Human Geography 47 (1): 141–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/03091325221141798.

29.

Davenport

2013. “The Rise in Analytics 3.0.” Iianalytics. Last Accessed 30 September 2025. https://iianalytics.com/community/blog/the-rise-of-analytics-3-0.

30.

DeLyser

Sui

. 2013. “Crossing the Qualitative-Quantitative Divide II: Inventive Approaches to big Data, mobile Methods, and Rhythmanalysis.” Progress in Human Geography 37 (2): 293–305. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132512444063.

31.

Duarte

2017. Data disruption. Quality Progress 50(9): 20–24. https://asq.org/quality-progress/

32.

Edwards

, Z. G. T. Cooper and M. Hogan. 2025. The making of critical data center studies. Convergence 31(2): 429–446. https://doi.org/10.1177/13548565231224157

33.

Edwards

P. N.

Mayernik

M. S.

Batcheller

A. L.

Bowker

G. C.

Borgman

C. L.

. 2011. “Science Friction: Data, Metadata, and Collaboration.” Social Studies of Science 41 (5): 667–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312711413314.

34.

Faxon

H. O.

Goldstein

. 2022. “Monitoring and Surveilling Environmental Crime in Southeast Asia.” The Nature of Data: Infrastructures, Environments, Politics. Jenny Goldstein and Eric Nost. Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press.

35.

Frew

J. E.

Dozier

. 2012. “Environmental Informatics.” Annual Review of Environment and Resources 37 (1): 449–72. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-042711-121244.

36.

Fuller

2005. Media Ecologies. Cambridge: MIT Press.

37.

Furlong

2021. “Geographies of Infrastructure II: Concrete, Cloud and Layered (in) Visibilities.” Progress in Human Geography 45 (1): 190–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132520923098.

38.

Furuhata

2022. Climatic media: Transpacific Experiments in Atmospheric Control. Durham: Duke University Press.

39.

Gabrys

2011. Digital Rubbish. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.

40.

Gabrys

2016. “Practicing, Materialising and Contesting Environmental Data.” Big Data & Society 3 (2): 2053951716673391. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951716673391.

41.

Gillespie

2010. “The Politics of ‘Platforms’.” New media & Society 12 (3): 347–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444809342738.

42.

Goldstein

J. E.

2020. “The Volumetric Political Forest: Territory, Satellite Fire Mapping, and Indonesia’s Burning Peatland.” Antipode 52 (4): 1060–82. https://doi.org/10.1111/anti.125.76

43.

Goodchild

M. F.

1997. “Towards a Geography of Geographic Information in a Digital World.” Computers, Environment and Urban Systems 21 (6): 377–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0198-9715(98)00009-X.

44.

Graham

Marvin

. 2002. Splintering Urbanism: Networked Infrastructures, Technological Mobilities and the Urban Condition. London: Routledge.

45.

Greenpeace International. 2011. How Dirty is Your Data? Accessed 26 May 2025. https://www.greenpeace.org/international/publication/7196/how-dirty-is-your-data/.

46.

Hogan

2015. “Data Flows and Water Woes: The Utah Data Center.” Big Data & Society 2 (2): 2053951715592429. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951715592429.

47.

Hogan

2018. “Big Data Ecologies.” Ephemera 18 (3): 631. https://doi.org/10.1145/3447772.

48.

Hogan

2022. “Data center.” In Encyclopedia of Big Data, 272–275. Cham: Springer International Publishing.

49.

Johnson

2019. “Data Centers as Infrastructural in-Betweens: Expanding Connections and Enduring Marginalities in Iceland.” American Ethnologist 46 (1): 75–88. https://doi.org/10.1111/amet.12735.

50.

Jones

Hillier

Comfort

Clarke-Hill

. 2013. “Towards Sustainable Data Centre Operations in the UK.” Journal of Property Investment & Finance 31 (1): 89–100. doi:10.1108/14635781311292999

51.

Kellogg

Starosielski

Wiessner

. 2024. “Through the Haze: Data Centres’ Elemental Aesthetics.” Journal of Environmental Media 5 (1): 141–50. https://doi.org/10.1386/jem_00126_1.

52.

Kinsley

2014. “The Matter of ‘Virtual’geographies.” Progress in Human Geography 38 (3): 364–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132513506270.

53.

Kitchin

Dodge

. 2008. Code/Space: Software and Everyday Life. Cambridge: MIT Press.

54.

Kitchin

R. M.

1998. “Towards Geographies of Cyberspace.” Progress in Human Geography 22 (3): 385–406.

55.

Lai

K.P.

, and M. Samers. 2021. Towards an economic geography of FinTech. Progress in Human Geography 45(4):720–739. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132520938

56.

Lally

Burns

. 2017. “Special Section Editorial: Toward a Geographical Software Studies.” Computational Culture 6. Accessed 28 November 2017. http://computationalculture.net/special-section-editorial-geographies-of-software/.

57.

Lally

Kay

Thatcher

. 2022. “Computational Parasites and Hydropower: A Political Ecology of Bitcoin Mining on the Columbia River.” Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space 5 (1): 18–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2021.1949142.

58.

Lepawsky

2015. “The Changing Geography of Global Trade in Electronic Discards: Time to Rethink the e-Waste Problem.” The Geographical Journal 181 (2): 147–59. https://doi.org/10.1111/geoj.12077.

59.

Levenda

Grabowski

. 2022. “Data, Colonialism, and the Transformation of Nature in the Pacific Northwest.” In The Nature of Data: Infrastructures, Environments, Politics, edited by Goldstein

Nost

, 83–102. Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press.

60.

Levenda

A. M.

Mahmoudi

. 2019. “Silicon Forest and Server Farms: The (Urban) Nature of Digital Capitalism in the Pacific Northwest.” Culture Machine 18: 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diggeo.2024.100106.

61.

Mahmoudi

Levenda

A. M.

Stehlin

J. G.

. 2020. “Political Ecologies of Platform Urbanism: Digital Labor and Data Infrastructures.” In Urban Platforms and the Future City: Transformations in Infrastructure, Governance, Knowledge and Everyday Life, edited by Hodson

Kasmire

McMeekin

Stehlin

J. G.

Ward

, 40–52. New York: Routledge.

62.

Malecki

E. J.

2002. “The Economic Geography of the Internet’s Infrastructure.” Economic Geography 78 (4): 399–424. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-8287.2002.tb00193.x.

63.

Mattern

2017. Code and Clay, Data and Dirt: Five Thousand Years of Urban media. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

64.

Maxwell

2014. “Media Industries and the Ecological Crisis.” Media Industries Journal 1 (2): 36–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444395433.

65.

Maxwell

, and T. Miller. 2012. Greening the media. London: Oxford University Press.

66.

McCormack

D. P.

2015. “Envelopment, Exposure, and the Allure of Becoming Elemental.” Dialogues in Human Geography 5 (1): 85–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/2043820614565875

67.

McCormack

D. P.

2018. Atmospheric Things: On the Allure of Elemental Envelopment. Durham: Duke University Press.

68.

McLean

2020. “Changing Digital Geographies.” Changing Digital Geographies, 1–21.

69.

Michener

W. K.

Jones

M. B.

. 2012. “Ecoinformatics: Supporting Ecology as a Data-Intensive Science.” Trends in Ecology & Evolution 27 (2): 85–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2011.11.016.

70.

Migozzi

Urban

Wojcik

. 2004. ““You Should do What India Does”: FinTech Ecosystems in India Reshaping the Geography of Finance.” Geoforum; Journal of Physical, Human, and Regional Geosciences 151: 103720. doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2023.103720

71.

Mumford

2021. The transformations of man. New York: Routledge.

72.

Mytton

2021. “Data Centre Water Consumption.” npj Clean Water 4 (1): 11. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41545-021-00101-w.

73.

Nathan

2019. “Spatial Imaginaries and Tech Cities: Place-Branding East London’s Digital Economy.” Journal of Economic Geography 19 (2): 409–32. https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lby018.

74.

Nost

Goldstein

J. E.

. 2022. “A Political Ecology of Data.” Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space 5 (1): 3–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/25148486211043503.

75.

NRDC America’s Data Centers Are Wasting Huge Amounts of Energy Unpaginated. 2014. Accessed 24 May 2025. https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/data-center-efficiency-assessment-IB.pdf.

76.

O’Neill

2025. “NC Town Could See a New 123-Acre Data Center. Here’s Why Some Residents Hope Not.” Charlotte Observer. Accessed 23 October 2025). www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/article312216706.html#storylink=cpy.

77.

Padilla Calderon

Vasquez Ruiz

. 2019. “Mapa Oaxaca Platform Puts the Power of Data Into the Hands of Mexican Communities.” Accessed 24 May 2025. https://blog.globalforestwatch.org/people/mapa-oaxaca-platform-puts-the-power-of-data-into-the-hands-of-mexican-communities.

78.

Parikka

2015. A Geology of media. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

79.

Pasek

Vaughan

Starosielski

. 2023. “The World Wide web of Carbon: Toward a Relational Footprinting of Information and Communications Technology's Climate Impacts.” Big Data & Society 10 (1): 20539517231158994. https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517231158994.

80.

Peters

John Durham

. 2015. The Marvelous Clouds: Toward a Philosophy of Elemental Media. University of Chicago Press,

81.

Pickren

2017. “‘The Global Assemblage of Digital Flow’: Critical Data Studies and the Infrastructures of Computing.” Progress in Human Geography 42 (2): 225–43. doi:10.1177/0309132516673241

82.

Postman

1970. “The Reformed English Curriculum.” In High School 1980: The Shape of the Future in American Secondary Education, edited by Eurich

A. C.

, 160–8. New York: Pitman.

83.

Purandare

2024. “Digital Infrastructure: Public Good or Private Commodity?—Rethinking the Right to Internet Access in the Context of Urban Digitisation.” Science, Technology and Society 29 (4): 555–72. https://doi.org/10.1177/09717218241281824.

84.

Rella

, 2024. Close to the metal: Towards a material political economy of the epistemology of computation. Social Studies of Science 54(1): 3–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/03063127231185095

85.

Rosen

Alvarez León

L. F.

. 2024. “Signaling Hinterlands and the Spatial Networks of Digital Capitalism.” Annals of the American Association of Geographers 114 (8): 1841–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/24694452.2023.2249974.

86.

Sadowski

2019. “When Data is Capital: Datafication, Accumulation, and Extraction.” Big Data & Society 6 (1): 2053951718820549. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951718820549.

87.

Shehabi

Smith

S. J.

Hubbard

Newkirk

Lei

Siddik

M. A. B.

Holecek

Koomey

Masanet

Sartor

. 2024. 2024 United States Data Center Energy Usage Report. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California. LBNL-200163.

88.

Starosielski

2016. “Thermocultures of Geological media.” Cultural Politics 12 (3): 293–309.

89.

Starosielski

, and J. Walker. 2016. Sustainable media. New York: Routledge.

90.

Sterne

2012. Mp3: The Meaning of a Format. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

91.

Taffel

2021. “Data and oil: Metaphor, Materiality and Metabolic Rifts.” New media & Society 25 (5): 980–98. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443720939449.

92.

Thatcher

2014. “Big Data, big Questions, Living on Fumes: Digital Footprints, Data Fumes, and the Limitations of Spatial big Data.” International Journal of Communication 8: 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951716648346.

93.

Thatcher

O’Sullivan

Mahmoudi

. 2016. “Data Colonialism Through Accumulation by Dispossession: New Metaphors for Daily Data.” Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 34 (6): 990–1006. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263775816633195.

94.

Thompson

, et al. 2009. Experimental Geography: Radical Approaches to Cartography, Landscape, and Urbanism. New York: Melville House.

95.

Velkova

2016. “Data That Warms: Waste Heat, Infrastructural Convergence and the Computation Traffic Commodity.” Big Data & Society 3 (2): 2053951716684144. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951716684144.

96.

Velkova

2023. Retrofitting and ruining: Bunkered data centers in and out of time. New Media & Society 25(2): 431–448. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448221149946

97.

Velkova

Plantin

J.-C.

. 2023. “Data Centers and the Infrastructural Temporalities of Digital media: An introduction.” New media & Society 25 (2): 273–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448221149945.

98.

Vertesi

2021. Reflections on postphenomenological crossings in postphenomenology and imaging. In: How to Read Technology, edited by Samantha J. Fried, Robert Rosenberge, Boulder, CO, 277–283. Lexington Books.

99.

Wyeth

Rella

Atkins

. 2024. “The Material Geographies of Bitfury in Georgia: Integrating Cryptoasset Firms into Global Financial Networks.” Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space 56 (3): 816–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518X231211789.

100.

Zook

McCanless

. 2022. “Mapping the Uneven Geographies of Digital Phenomena: The Case of Blockchain.” The Canadian Geographer/Le Géographe Canadien 66 (1): 23–36.

101.

Zook

M. A.

2000. “The web of Production: The Economic Geography of Commercial Internet Content Production in the United States.” Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space 32 (3): 411–26. https://doi.org/10.1068/a32124.

102.

Zook

M. A.

Blankenship

. 2018. “New Spaces of Disruption? The Failures of Bitcoin and the Rhetorical Power of Algorithmic Governance.” Geoforum; Journal of Physical, Human, and Regional Geosciences 96: 248–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2018.08.023.