Anticipating the Next Half‐Century of Geographical Analysis

Prompted by a series of panel sessions at a recent American Association of Geographers annual meeting entitled “A Globe‐Shaped Crystal Ball: The Next Fifty Years of Geographical Analysis,” participants were asked to speculate on the future of the journal, which of course has broader implications for spatial and geographic analytics. In what follows, I provide my thoughts on the journal as a reader, contributor, referee, and former editor of Geographical Analysis. The major points touched upon include the following. First, application to address substantive concerns will come to dominate the field. Second, the spatial data deluge will continue unabated, but will lead to important advances because of better detail and less abstraction of reality. Third, analytical methods will evolve specifically for big data. Fourth, the point‐and‐click revolution will result in ever more use of spatial analytics, but also will lend itself to greater and more widespread abuse of these methods. Fifth, addressing assumptions and theoretical foundations of long utilized approaches will revolutionize a new generation of spatial analytics. Sixth, geographic uncertainty and bias will be more than an afterthought, and methods will emerge to support meaningful analysis. Finally, spatial optimization will have increased prominence in fundamental analysis, particularly associated with establishing and evaluating significance.     

‘Piddington's Indiscretion’:1 Ralph Piddington,The Australian National Research Council and Academic Freedom

The primary aim of this paper is to investigate the question why, particularly in the first half of this century, Australian academics were so supine when it came to public criticism of the treatment, conditions and welfare of Australian Aborigines. Its focus is Ralph Piddington and how he was treated by the Australian academic establishment for his public criticism of the treatment of Aborigines at La Grange Bay, North-west Australia. It shows how the Executive Committee of the Australian National Research Council (ANRC), A.P. Elkin, Professor of Anthropology at Sydney University from 1933 to 1956 and chairman, from 1933 to 1955, of the Australian National Research Council's Committee for Anthropological Research, and A.O. Neville, Chief Protector of Aborigines in Western Australia, combined to silence and punish Piddington. The ANRC's criticisms of Piddington were fuelled, above all else, by their concern that his action would create a ‘very uncomfortable atmosphere regarding this Council and anthropological research generally.’ 5 2 Sir George Julius to Raymond Firth, 21 October 1932. 155/4/1/10.
In contrast the Rockefeller Foundation which provided the funding for the ANRC research grants and fellowships took a more lenient view of Piddington's action. It believed from the evidence presented by the ANRC that Piddington had made satisfactory progress toward carrying out the program for which he was given his fellowship and did not believe the charges made against him should impede his fellowship status.     

…?… evidence…?…

Questions of Evidence: Proof, Practice, and Persuasion across the Disciplines. Edited by James Chandler, Arnold I. Davidson, and Harry Harootunian (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994) 518pp. $45.00 cloth $19.95 paper.

The Creation of Scientific Effects: Heinrich Hertz and Electric Waves. By Jed Z. Buchwald (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994) 428pp. $32.95 paper $75.00 cloth.     

For Whom is the Rural Economy Resilient? Initial Effects of Drought in Western Sudan

This discussion piece addresses two recent debates: entitlement theory and the resilience of rural systems. The authors find that in western Sudan entitlement theory provides a specific and useful framework for understanding the nature of the crisis confronting the society. Arguments about the resilience of rural systems, however, need to be more closely examined and will depend on site-specific factors. The rural economy and society of western Sudan were not found to be resilient.     

Using television: Programme content and need gratification

It is shown that audience members actively select amongst available programmes on television. This selection is based upon the social role and situational characteristics of the viewer and it is also directly related to the reasons given by viewers for watching television.

Patterns of programme selection are related to three clusters of needs and reasons. The two most important of these are composed of needs relating to information and diversion. The least important cluster is concerned with the self and social contact.

Escape and diversion needs are satisfied by almost any programme; selection is minimal by those viewers expressing these needs. Information needs are best satisfied by news and other informational programmes, while social and self needs are best satisfied by quiz and variety programmes, popular drama and movies.