In this commentary, I first discuss my sympathies with Robert Lake's On resisting the seduction of theory, namely the dangers of overemphasizing theory and his plea to extend knowledge production beyond the academy. I then critique his omission of substantial work in and beyond geography already practicing his proposed move from knowing to doing, his dismissal of the possibility of progress in theoretical debates, his inattention to theoretical work that has attempted to take complexity seriously and the dualism separating theory from practice that is a leitmotif of his argument.
BarnesTJSheppardE (2010) ‘Nothing includes everything’: Towards engaged pluralism in anglophone economic geography. Progress in Human Geography34(2): 193–214.
2.
CraigWJHarrisTMWernerD (2002) Community Participation and Geographic Information Systems. London: Taylor and Francis.
3.
DavidsonMWardK (2024) Conjunctural urban geographies: Modes, methods, and meso-level concepts. Progress in Human Geography48(5): 1–22.
4.
ElwoodS (2008) Volunteered geographic information: Future research directions motivated by critical, participatory, and feminist GIS. GeoJournal72(3 & 4): 173–183.
5.
ElwoodS (2009) Integrating action research and GIS education: Negotiating methodologies, politics, and technologies. The Journal of Geography in Higher Education33(1): 51–65.
6.
Gibson-GrahamJK (1994) ‘Stuffed if I know’: Reflections on post-modern feminist social research. Gender, Place and Culture: A Journal of Feminist Geography1(2): 205–224.
7.
Gibson-GrahamJKCameronJHealyS (2013) Take Back the Economy: An Ethical Guide for Transforming Our Communities. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
8.
HallSCritcherCJeffersonT, et al. (1980) Policing the Crisis: Mugging, the State and Law and Order. London: Macmillan.
9.
KurtzHLeitnerHSheppardE, et al. (2001) Neighborhood environmental inventories on the internet: Creating a new kind of community resource for Phillips neighborhood. The CURA Reporter31: 20–25.
10.
LeesL (2023) What constitutes engaged dialogue in urban research? Thoughts from a long time “outside-insider”. Dialogues in Urban Research2(1): 7–21.
11.
LeitnerH (1983) Gastarbeiter in der städtischen Gesellschaft – Zum Problem der Segregation, Integration und Assimilation von Arbeitsmigranten am Beispiel der jugoslawischen Gastarbeiter in Wien. Frankfurt/New York: Verlag Campus.
12.
LeitnerH (2012) Spaces of encounters: Immigration, race, class and the politics of belonging in small-town America. Annals of the American Association of Geographers102(4): 828–846.
13.
LeitnerHElwoodSSheppardE, et al. (2000) Modes of GIS provision and their appropriateness for neighborhood organizations: Examples from Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minnesota. The URISA Journal12(4): 43–56.
14.
LeitnerHSheppardE (2003) Unbounding critical geographic research on cities: The 1990s and beyond. Urban Geography24(6): 510–528.
15.
LeitnerHSheppardE (2020) Towards an epistemology for conjunctural inter-urban comparison. Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society13(3): 491–508.
16.
LeitnerHSheppardE (2022) Speculating on land, property and peri-urban futures: A conjunctural approach to intra-metropolitan comparison. Urban Studies59(8): 1655–1675.
NagarR (2019) Hungry Translations: Relearning the World through Radical Vulnerability. Champagne, IL: University of Illinois Press.
19.
PeckJ (2017) Transatlantic city, part 1: Conjunctural urbanism. Urban Studies54(1): 4–30.
20.
PicklesJ (2018) From the “The” North” to “The” South: Spatializing the conjuncture in British Cultural Studies. In: WernerMPeckJLaveR, Christophers, B. (eds) Doreen Massey Critical Dialogues. New Castle upon Tyne: Agenda Publishing, 137–149.
21.
SandercockL (1997) Towards Cosmopolis: Planning for Multicultural Cities. Academy Press.
22.
SheppardEPeckJLeitnerH. (2024) Conjunctural Analysis. In: RichardsonD (ed) The International Encyclopedia of Geography: People, the Earth, Environment and Technology. London: Wiley, https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118786352.wbieg2203.
23.
StrunkC (2015) Practicing citizenship: Bolivian migrant identities and spaces of belonging in Washington D.C. Journal of Intercultural Studies36(5): 620–639.
