Finding the Way: A Tribute to Geography

By James Chan

James Chan posed in front of a wall shelf full of booksOne June 1, my lifelong companion and I bought a condo at The Philadelphian, right next to the Philadelphia Museum of Art. When I opened the mailbox of our unit guess what I found? A copy of the latest Annals of the AAG (American Association of Geographers) with the previous owner’s name on the label. The presence of that journal struck me like a message from Providence. It reminded me of my geography training and—now at age 76 and after nearly 55 years of work both within and outside of the field—made me wonder: could a discipline which I once thought had led me astray have actually been my lucky star? Here is my geography story.

No sooner had puberty awakened me to the need for an education in this chaotic world than I realized I excelled at geography in high school. I became a geography major at the University of Hong Kong and graduated in 1970. In 1971, the University of Chicago accepted me as a foreign student in their geography department. I studied under Marvin Mikesell (cultural geography) and Paul Wheatley (historical geography of East and Southeast Asia), graduating in 1973. I then went to the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor to work with Rhoads Murphey (China, India, and regional geography), earning my Ph.D. in 1977. Peter Gosling (Southeast Asia) and George Kish (Soviet Union) were my other geography advisors. Professor Chang Chun-shu (History of China) was the only non-geography member of my doctoral committee.

In the late 1970s, as now, tenure-track jobs in geography were scarce. I had a one-year stint at Boston University and a brief stay at SUNY Cortland, teaching cultural and world regional geography, along with a course I created on China. Personal issues at the time compounded the shortage of good jobs in geography, so I left academic teaching and worked at Academic Press, Inc., a scientific publisher in New York, where I served as China Area Manager and then International Promotion Manager for two years. Corporate politics made me want to leave an otherwise good position. In May 1983, I set up my own consulting practice, helping American manufacturers, database companies, and professional associations do business in China and Asia. I’m still an independent consultant, doing what I love—something I literally cooked up on my own.

For several years in the late 1970s and early 1980s, I was lucky to befriend Woody (Forrest) Pitts, whose work at the University of Hawai‘i specialized in Japan, Korea, and quantitative methods. I used to complain to him about the lack of career opportunities in geography and how I felt “let down” for having chosen it as my specialty. Woody, kind and supportive, told me I was wrong to feel that way. Intellectually, I agreed with him. But emotionally, I couldn’t stop blaming geography for a career I thought I would never find.

In truth, I was disingenuous with myself. It is true that I never became an academic or research geographer, and business consulting has never been seen as a natural path for geography majors. Yet my knowledge of geography contributed to the epiphany I had about working in international consulting.

One day in church, I made a vow: I wanted to help pull China and America closer through trade. A deep calm and sense of peace came over me the moment that idea struck. Now, as an independent business consultant with a Ph.D. in China geography and cultural geography, I’m reminded by the serendipitous Annals of the AAG in my mailbox that what I’ve been doing is still deeply, intimately geographical.

Imagine me at the nadir of a troubled life when I was in my late 20s and early 30s, seeing myself as Hercules standing in the middle of the Pacific Ocean, pulling China and America closer—moving the tectonic plates themselves. Isn’t that a quintessentially geographical idea?

In April 1979, while I was a young geography professor at SUNY Cortland, Clifton Pannell (University of Georgia, urban, economic and cultural geography of China and East Asia) invited me to give a paper on China. I traveled to Philadelphia from Cortland, New York to attend the 75th Anniversary of the AAG annual meeting, which was held at the Benjamin Franklin Hotel. In the evening of April 22, 1979, I met my lifelong companion by chance in the city. Our meeting has turned Philadelphia into my home and the United States of America into my adopted country.

Now you know why that latest issue of The Annals turned out to be such a revelation. Geography as a subject works mysteriously for me.


Perspectives is a column intended to give AAG members an opportunity to share ideas relevant to the practice of geography. If you have an idea for a Perspective, see our guidelines for more information.

    Share

Building Healthier Cities: A Call for Geographers and Building Professionals to Collaborate through Geospatial Data

By Oluwaseun Ipede

As our cities grow more complex and environmental crises mount, urban sustainability is no longer a theoretical discussion; it’s an existential necessity. Among the greatest challenges facing 21st-century cities is balancing rapid urbanization with public health and environmental sustainability. At the heart of this challenge lies an indispensable asset: Geospatial data.

Geospatial data is the connective tissue that binds physical infrastructure, human behavior, and environmental systems. But data alone is not enough. Its responsible use requires geographers, academic and professional, human and physical, cartographic and computational, to engage collaboratively with built environment professionals such as architects, engineers, and construction (AEC) specialists. In doing so, we can transform urban spaces into sustainable, healthy cities that serve both people and the planet.

This perspective calls for a more intentional convergence between academic geography and the built environment professions. We must create stronger alliances between geographers and AEC practitioners to unlock the full potential of geospatial technologies, not only for smarter infrastructure but for a higher Public Health Index (PHI), a metric that integrates the determinants of health within the spatial context of urban development.

Why Geospatial Thinking Matters in the AEC World

The AEC sector is in the midst of a digital revolution driven by tools such as Building Information Modeling (BIM), GIS, IoT, and AI. Yet, what’s often missing from this techno-centric evolution is geographical thinking, the ability to analyze the spatial dimensions of urban life, social equity, and environmental justice.

AEC professionals typically design and construct the built environment based on functional needs, client specifications, and engineering requirements. But without geographers’ input, they may overlook socio-spatial disparities, ecological sensitivity, or historical injustices embedded in urban landscapes.

By leveraging geospatial data, geographers can help architects and engineers ask better questions:

  • Are green spaces equitably distributed?
  • What neighborhoods face the highest air pollution burden?
  • Where are vulnerabilities to urban heat islands concentrated?
  • How does access to healthcare, clean water, and public transport vary across districts?

These are not only public health questions, but also inherently geographic questions. The answers lie in maps, models, and location-based data.

Public Health and Urban Sustainability: A Spatial Convergence

There is growing recognition that the health of urban populations is shaped more by where people live than by individual behavior. The WHO’s urban health framework emphasizes that air quality, noise pollution, walkability, access to nature, and housing conditions are all place-based determinants of health.

In a 2021 article in Nature Sustainability, Nieuwenhuijsen et al. demonstrated how integrated urban and transport planning using spatial models could significantly reduce premature deaths in cities by designing healthier environments. Similarly, the Lancet Global Health commission on urban design highlighted the health dividends of data-informed land use, mobility, and environmental planning (Giles-Corti et al., 2016).

The missing piece? Systematic and sustained collaboration between academic geographers and built environment professionals, rooted in shared access to data and mutually informed practices.

Large number of houses built on a hill with greenspace saved within.
Junnar, Maharashti, India. Building and planning professionals should work more closely with geographers to capture the full range of geoinformation about places, such as the distribution of green space, health outcomes for residents, history and context, and more. Credit: Zoshua Colah, Unsplash

 

Bridging Academic Research and Real-World Impact

Academic geography often generates invaluable insights into urban systems, population health, environmental exposure, and spatial justice. Yet, these insights are frequently siloed, buried in journals, datasets, or local case studies without pipelines into professional practice.

By contrast, AEC professionals often possess the authority and tools to shape real environments but may lack the time or training to engage with cutting-edge geographic research. The result is a fragmentation that wastes both insight and opportunity.

A more effective model would:

  • Create applied research partnerships where academic institutions support municipal projects with geospatial modeling, health risk mapping, or sustainability planning.
  • Co-develop open data platforms that bring together public health data, environmental monitoring, land use, and infrastructure systems.
  • Embed geographers in interdisciplinary planning teams within urban design firms, public agencies, and NGOs.
  • Incentivize knowledge translation, encouraging academics to publish not only in peer-reviewed outlets but also in formats digestible by policymakers, planners, and engineers.

Through these approaches, we transform geographic knowledge into actionable intelligence for healthier cities.

The Role of Data Collaboration: Optimism over Obstacles

It’s true that data limitations exist, especially in the Global South, where political sensitivities or institutional gaps can impede access. But rather than accepting these barriers, we should see them as challenges to overcome through professional solidarity and innovative collaboration. Emerging models such as data cooperatives, public-private academic partnerships, and community mapping projects (e.g., Humanitarian OpenStreetMap) demonstrate how diverse stakeholders can pool geospatial data to fill critical gaps.

Data availability and collaboration challenges are not exclusive to the Global South, they also exist in the Global North, though in different forms. In wealthier contexts, issues often revolve around data fragmentation, siloed institutional access, and proprietary restrictions by private firms. Despite robust infrastructure, academic research, and AEC professionals in the Global North still face hurdles in sharing and integrating geospatial data for public benefit. Collaborative initiatives, but the need for stronger academic-practitioner synergy remains. The opportunity to blend research with practice to improve public health through spatial insights is global. AEC professionals can enhance this effort by sharing non-sensitive spatial data collected during design or construction phases, site assessments, building footprints, and environmental impact data back into public or academic domains. Meanwhile, universities and research institutes can act as neutral custodians of data, improving transparency and trust.

Everyone Has a Geographic Role

No matter their specialization–transport geographers, medical geographers, climate modelers, or remote sensing analysts–every geographer works with “place” as a foundational concept. And every AEC professional works in a place, whether designing a water pipeline, planning a hospital, or modeling a transportation network.

This shared concern with space and place is the starting point for collaboration.

We must redefine geography not only as a field of academic inquiry but as an action-oriented discipline embedded in urban development processes. Geography, through its emphasis on scale, systems, and connections, offers a language to unify the fragmented efforts of planners, builders, public health experts, and citizens.

By foregrounding geospatial data and geographical expertise, we can help cities evolve not just in form, but in function, as ecosystems of wellbeing.

Conclusion: Toward a Healthy Urban Future

As a multidisciplinary expert, I stand at the intersection where physical space meets digital insight. I’ve witnessed firsthand how each role contributes a vital piece to the urban puzzle, from capturing accurate terrain models with GPS/drones to analyzing social disparities with spatial data. What’s clear is that no single discipline holds the key to building sustainable, healthy cities. It is only through intentional collaboration between academic researchers and built environment professionals that we can truly unlock the power of location-based data.

Geospatial data is not just about maps, it’s about meaning. When survey data informs urban models, when drone imagery validates land cover changes, and when GIS connects these insights to public health indicators, we move beyond design toward decision-making for human well-being. Geography isn’t just a field; it’s a framework. It equips us to see connections, understand patterns, and act across scales.

The future of our cities depends on breaking down silos, sharing data openly, and applying geographic thinking across professions. It’s time we all, academics and practitioners alike, step up as co-creators of healthier, more equitable urban spaces. After all, everything happens somewhere. And where it happens matters. “Everything is related to everything else, but near things are more related than distant things.”

This article is based on the author’s presentation on urban oases during AAG 2025 in Detroit.  


Perspectives is a column intended to give AAG members an opportunity to share ideas relevant to the practice of geography. If you have an idea for a Perspective, see our guidelines for more information.

 

    Share

Navigating Human Dynamics—Reflections on Chairing the AAG Symposium on Environmental Exposure, Mobility, and Health

By Michaelmary Chukwu

Michaelmary ChukwuAt the 2025 AAG Annual Meeting in Detroit, I had the incredible opportunity of serving as both a session chair and presenter for the 11th Symposium on Human Dynamics Research. This year’s symposium, themed “Human Dynamics and GeoAI,” marked a major evolution of geographic thought—building on a decade of intellectual contributions that have redefined how we understand human-environment interactions in increasingly multifaceted physical and virtual worlds. Thanks to Dr Xinyue Ye, Department of Landscape Architecture and Urban Planning, Texas A&M University and Dr Xiao Huang, Department of Environmental Sciences, Emory University, for allowing me to take up such a monumental adventure—one that has shaped my experience of AAG for the better.

The symposium’s foundation was engrained in a timely recognition: that contemporary human experiences of space and place are no longer limited to traditional geographies with which we already are familiar. Rather, spatial experiences now unravel across hybrid realms shaped by technologies such as the metaverse and fediverse, generative AI, and quantum computing—although these are relatively novel to me. As spatial researchers, we are often challenged—and empowered—to adapt our conceptual and analytical designs to this convergence. The sessions I chaired brought together a diverse group of scholars exploring how dynamic environmental exposures, shifting mobility patterns, and evolving health outcomes intersect in this digitally augmented landscape. Collectively, these sessions illuminated the role of GeoAI as both a lens and a tool for addressing these multifaceted challenges. My aim in this article is to reflect on my experience facilitating and participating in these sessions, highlighting key themes, emerging insights, and the broader significance of human-centered, technologically informed geography in an era of rapid transformation.

A Broad Shift in the Discipline

The field of human dynamics has always been centered on the spatial understanding of how people interact with their environments—how they move, where they are exposed to risks, and how these patterns shape health, opportunity, and resilience. Nevertheless, in today’s ever-changing world, these interactions have become more fluid, complex, and pushed by emerging technologies. I like how Dr Ye articulated this perspective:

The foundation of human dynamics research lies in understanding human needs, wants, and constraints… GeoAI, with its ability to analyze spatial data through artificial intelligence, will play a critical role in bridging human dynamics with geographic insights, offering new ways to understand and respond to complex urban challenges.

The 2025 Human Dynamics Symposium embraced this evolution, emphasizing a human-centered and convergence-driven approach to research. As we step even deeper into a hybrid era where physical places and virtual spaces blend, our analytical frameworks must be equally adaptable and dynamic.

The sessions I chaired revealed just how far human dynamics researchers have moved beyond merely mapping mobility flows or modeling progressive exposure. They are also now interrogating how AI-generated environments, real-time data streams, and machine learning (ML) algorithms shape human behavior and social vulnerability. A clear example is that the integration of data with environmental risk models can enable a sharper understanding of who is exposed to what hazards—and why. Similarly, GeoAI (the intersection of GIScience and AI) allows us to uncover disparities in exposure, which traditional lone geospatial techniques could not dictate. As Dr Huang has written, “As AI technology keeps evolving, we want to keep pace using it for socially beneficial purposes.”

This burgeoning intersection between technological innovation and geographic inquiry reflects a broader shift in the discipline. No longer are we just observers of mobility—we are now very much inclined to predicting, intervening, and (re)co-constructing human-environment futures. As many of the scholars presented their studies on everything from post-pandemic mobility changes to ethical concerns in AI-based exposure assessments, a clear theme emerged: human dynamics research must not only respond to technological disruption but also lead the way in shaping its implications for equity, access, and sustainability.

Michaelmary Chukwu poses next to a session board outside of a session room.
The author presenting at the AAG symposium he also chaired. Credit: Daniel Kissi-Somuah

The first session focused on urban mobility and exposure disparities, setting a strong foundation for critical thinking and reflection on spatial inequities. Papers examined e-scooter adoption in Charlotte, flow detection techniques for board-scale mobility data, and state policy implications for climate and worker health in Canada. Particularly notable was a paper proposing the use of Points of Interest (POIs) as sentinel nodes for infectious disease surveillance, offering a compelling intersection of geospatial methods and public health. All presenters made important submissions that sparked deep philosophical thoughts in geography.

The second session featured methodological innovations among geographically diverse studies, such as shared-bike mobility dynamics in Seoul, modeled carbon efficiency using urban scaling laws, and the linkages of urban sprawl with subjective well-being in the U.S. One presentation stood out for its novel use of geolocation data to examine tobacco exposure risks using a neuroscience framework. Another presented COVID-19 risk mapping in Kwara State, Nigeria, broadening the discussion to global health geographies and data-sparse regions. This session embodied the kind of interdisciplinary and cross-regional inquiry that the symposium aims to foster.

The final session turned attention to post-pandemic urban restructuring and digital-physical convergence. Presenters addressed the “donut effect” in U.S. cities due to remote work, correction methods for pedestrian mobility biases in Strava data, and the use of graph neural networks to estimate population flows from multimodal transport data. Two of the last presentations caught my attention: an analysis of mobility equity in four Atlanta neighborhoods in the context of the 15-minute city framework, and a forward-looking piece on GIS-based hybrid space-place approaches, emphasizing the need to rethink individual behavior across physical-virtual boundaries.

Throughout the day, the diversity of topics—ranging from graph theory and machine learning to behavioral geography and environmental justice—underscored the multidimensional nature of human dynamics research today. As an early-career geographer, I was honored to chair such a wide range of talks, with the opportunity not just to moderate, but to facilitate bridges between these ideas: connecting themes, fostering open discussion, and encouraging reflection on both technological promise and ethical responsibility.

AAG is not just a venue for presenting research, it is a dynamic community of thinkers, mentors, and co-creators of knowledge.

 

Presentation Insights: Sharing My Research

Among the highlights of the symposium was the opportunity to present my own research. I presented my study of how park visitation behavior varies across space, creating patterns that uncover inequities rooted in race, income, and location geography. Making use of longitudinal human mobility data from SafeGraph, the research revealed widening disparities in both access and usage of urban parks. More specifically, we showed that the borough of Manhattan enjoyed more access and use of parks—a predominately white area, compared with The Bronx, Queens, and Brooklyn, which are predominantly areas with people of color.

Michaelmary Chukwu's bar chart illustrates Aggregate Visits to Urban Park by Census Blocks in New York City in 2022
The author found that Manhattan enjoys far more access and use of its parks than other boroughs. Credit: Michaelmary Chukwu

 

My presentation illustrated persistent gaps in visitation trends, spatially and statistically, at the census block group level.  Low-income and racially marginalized neighborhoods in New York City consistently lagged in park usage, despite proximity. Some parks in those block groups were not well-maintained and lacked or had uneven distribution of park amenities. This points to a deeper narrative: access is not solely about distance but shaped by systemic barriers—ranging from safety concerns to cultural disconnection.

As a first-time participant at the AAG Annual Meeting—and at the time, a master’s student at the University of Arkansas—chairing not one, but three sessions within the Human Dynamics Symposium was an experience that exceeded my every expectation. Entering such an intellectually charged and collaborative space, I initially wondered how I would measure up. But from the very first session, it became clear that AAG is not just a venue for presenting research, it is a dynamic community of thinkers, mentors, and co-creators of knowledge.

The privilege to engage with and learn directly from leading scholars in the field of human dynamics profoundly shaped my understanding of the many aspects of geographical thoughts and the future. I paid close attention to how leading researchers grounded their advanced methodologies in real-world challenges such as health disparities, urban inequity, and the need for technological foresight. I appreciated how questions were asked not simply to critique, but to expand, refine, and deepen shared understanding of science of geography. This experience will remain a defining moment in my academic journey, affirming that even as an emerging scholar, there is space to lead, learn, and belong in the evolving story of human dynamics.

Michaelmary Chukwu is a Ph.D. student in Geographical Sciences and Cartography at the University of Maryland. He completed a master’s degree in Geography from the University of Arkansas in 2025 and a bachelor’s degree in Urban and Regional Planning from the University of Ilorin, Nigeria in 2021. He is a student member of the American Association of Geographers (AAG), American Planning Association (APA), and Cartography and Geographic Information Society (CaGIS) while also being a distinguished full member of Sigma Xi and Phi Kappa Phi Honor Societies. Michaelmary’s research interests are in GIScience, urban mobility, spatial statistics, GeoAI, computational social science, urban studies, active transportation, and remote sensing. He has received recognition for his outstanding works including a national scholar award from the University of Arkansas and Third Place student poster at the Southwest Regional Division of AAG.  


Perspectives is a column intended to give AAG members an opportunity to share ideas relevant to the practice of geography. If you have an idea for a Perspective, see our guidelines for more information.

    Share

Leadership of Color: A Call for JEDI-Based Discussions, Analysis, & Recommendations

Person holding their hands in the shape of a heart with sunlight in background

By Rasul A. Mowatt

This month we welcome Dr. Rasul A. Mowatt, who has served on the AAG JEDI Committee for three years and steps down this month. We appreciate Dr. Mowatt’s perspective on the uphill battle of being a university leader of color, a perspective that is critically important at all times, and especially now.

Rasul Mowatt holds his book "The Geographies of Threat and the Production of Violence."There is a strange thing that happens once you are hired or appointed to a leadership post within higher education. You, the racialized you, sit in the chair, hopefully a functional one, and the onslaught begins. The type of onslaught that no orientation program or notes from the previous seat holder can prepare you for, because they are often unprepared to actually provide any assistance to you on such matters. What matters? The matters of Race, the matters of gender, and the matters of difference. At least on matters of Race, becoming and being an administrator of color leaves you with very little insight from literature in higher education (most studies and discussions are pre-2000s: Poussaint, 1974; Wilson, 1989). More contemporary discussions have been focused on the (needed) diversification of leadership in the university (Jackson, 2003; McCurtis, Jackson, & O’Callaghan, 2009) or have been focused on pathways that were undertaken to become leadership of color in the university (Liang, Sottile, & Peters, 2016; McGee, Jett, & White, 2022; Valverde, 2003).

But there is an acknowledged issue with the experiences of those administrators of color, and an acknowledged issue with the scant amount of attention given to studying and understanding the experiences of those administrators (Breeden, 2021; Chun & Evans, 2012; Razzante, 2018; Rolle, Davies, & Banning, 2000; West, 2020 — Breeden and West are the foremost scholars on the subject). While there is a multitude of research on this subject in ProQuest searches for theses and dissertations, the published academic book and article barely reflects 10% of that output. So, this results in so many administrators to sit in those chairs, in those offices, within those units of the university that are already unforgiving to the graduate student of color, the adjuncts of color, the early career scholar of color, and staff of color (within operations, student affairs, and academic affairs), with little to no insight on how to navigate the job and one’s life while doing the job.

In many ways we are still stuck in late-1960 questions of how do we get more students of color and faculty of color to come to our respective institutions, so much so that we have fallen far behind the questions we needed to ask in the 1970s (on curriculum), in the 1980s (on degree programs), in the 1990s (on policies of protection), in the 2000s (on strengthening budgets), and in the 2010s (on legislative safeguards). In the 2020s, we are still calling and fighting for representation, when there were greater collective needs for ideas about expansion and fortification. As we have not been prepared to address those collective needs, we have been ill-equipped to address the individual needs of administrators of color. And not the type of individual need to fortify one’s self against a microaggression that may affect one’s emotional state. No: The individual need to fortify one’s self against joblessness, career-ending incidents, and field-wide ostracization. The type of needs experienced by people who serve as chancellors, provosts, vice-chancellors, vice-provosts, associate vice-chancellors, associate vice-provosts, deans, associate deans, department heads, department chairs, associate department chairs, program directors, head librarians, managers, officers, full professors, associate professors, and faculty serving as chairs of a particularly important committees or task forces.

How do you (the racialized you) handle issues that arise from standard operating problems, hiccups in processes, miscommunication, and errors in tasks that become a bigger issue when the subject [or target] is you?

How do you (the racialized you) handle issues that arise from the sabotaging of paperwork processing (i.e., not submitting faculty reimbursements, missing dates for tenure and promotion letters, never sending letters or other correspondence onward on your behalf)?

How do you (the racialized you) handle issues that arise from the number and frequency of complaints against you, rather than the substance or credibility of any one complaint?

How do you (the racialized you) handle issues that arise from every accusation levied against you requiring regular visits to the office of the next level in the protocol system of a university (even when there is no substance or credibility)?

How do you (the racialized you) handle issues that arise from donors not wishing to give to your unit because you are the person that they must be work with (and so, your very being is a detriment to your unit)?

How do you (the racialized you) handle issues that arise when every unfavorable review, report, and decision that may affect someone employed in your unit invokes a particular set of actions and words against you?

How do you (the racialized you) handle issues that arise from anonymous emails that are directed at you but meant for others to see, messages that question your humanity and being (and yet, information and technology units cannot identify the source or put a stop to them)?

How do you (the racialized you) handle issues that arise from people wanting to hire the idea of you instead of hiring  you — all of you, your scholarship, your ways of thinking?

How do you (the racialized you) handle (potential) issues that arise from the need to be extra aware of how a disaffected student, staff, or faculty may react to your decision that may affect them unfavorably (failing grade, removal from a program, termination of a job, or denial of tenure — not knowing the level of concern you may need to have for your own safety)?

And so many more questions and scenarios that seem to not have answers, much less discussion in any known book, article, workshop, training, tutorial, and the like. You begin to question your sanity when you raise these issues and the particular ways that they occur for you because of the racialized you and not because of the administrating you. It can be argued that some progress has been made on the diversification of the faculty (in certain fields and disciplines, or departments of geography). It can also be argued that there have been some gains, in some places, for some faculty of color in moving through the ranks of the professoriate. But it cannot be argued that we have quite found a way to think of how we can best serve, protect, support, and grow leadership of color.

In the meantime, sitting in such chairs and offices comes with a decreasing quality of health that brings on its own set of issues from long late-night emergency room visits due to dizzy spells, lack of pain relief from constant stomach churning, or the mounting stress that comes with the knowledge of a potential diagnoses of social death.

Such a social death is not inevitable, even at times of much publicized oppressions and increased levels of scrutiny in campus operations. In fact, now is the key time to close the gaps in our literature and discussions, to document and address the plight and experiences of leaders of color in academia. What we do not have today as intellectual resources are a product of what was not explored yesterday, thus, it is our obligation to gift tomorrow with insight. The readings below are an important start in this discussion, yet only a few are recent enough to reflect the pressures and aggressions — micro and macro — that leaders of color confront on campuses right now, in an anti-JEDI, anti-immigrant, anti-difference era. Only by documenting our experiences, and acting on what we know, can we break through and begin to make campuses sites of true learning and liberation.

 

References

Breeden, R. L (2021). Our presence is resistance: Stories of Black women in senior-level student affairs positions at predominantly White institutions. Journal of Women and Gender in Higher Education14(2), 166–186. https://doi.org/10.1080/26379112.2021.1948860

Chun, E., & Evans, A. (2012). Diverse administrators in peril: The new indentured class in higher education. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers.

Jackson, J. F. L. (2003). Toward administrative diversity: An analysis of the African-American male educational pipeline. The Journal of Men’s Studies12(1), 43-60. https://doi.org/10.3149/jms.1201.43

Liang, J. G., Sottile, J., & Peters, A. L. (2016). Understanding Asian American women’s pathways to school leadership. Gender and Education30(5), 623–641. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2016.1265645

McCurtis, B. R., Jackson, J. F. L., & O’Callaghan, E. M. (2009). Developing leaders of color in higher education: Can contemporary programs address historical employment trends? A. J. Kezar, ed., Rethinking Leadership in a Complex, Multicultural, and Global Environment: New Concepts and Models for Higher Education (pp. 65-91). Routledge.  

McGee, E. O., Jett, C. C., & White, D. T. (2022). Factors contributing to Black engineering and computing faculty’s pathways toward university administration and leadership. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 15(5), 643–656. https://doi.org/10.1037/dhe0000407

Poussaint, A. (1974). The Black administrator in the White university. The Black Scholar6(1), 8-14. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41065748

Razzante, R. J. (2018). Intersectional agencies: Navigating predominantly White institutions as an administrator of color. Journal of International and Intercultural Communication11(4), 339–357. https://doi.org/10.1080/17513057.2018.1501082

Rolle, K. A., Davies, T. G., & Banning, J. H. (2000). African American administrators’ experiences in predominantly White colleges and universities. Community College Journal of Research and Practice24(2), 79–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/106689200264222

Valverde, L. A. (2003). Leaders of color in higher education: Unrecognized triumphs in harsh institutions. Rowman Altamira.

West, N. M. (2020). A contemporary portrait of Black women student affairs administrators in the United States. Journal of Women and Gender in Higher Education13(1), 72–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/26379112.2020.1728699

Wilson, R. (1989). Women of color in academic administration: Trends, progress, and barriers. Sex Roles, 21, 85–97. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00289729

Rasul A. Mowatt, Ph.D., is Department Head and Professor in the Department of Parks, Recreation and Tourism Management, College of Natural Resources, at North Carolina State University (NCSU); and Affiliate Professor in Sociology + Anthropology at NCSU. He earned his Ph.D. from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He was formerly Professor in the Departments of American Studies and Geography in the College of Arts + Science at Indiana University. His primary areas of research are Geographies of Race, Geographies of Violence/Threat, The Animation of Public Space, and Critical Leisure Studies. His most recent publication is The City of Hip-Hop: New York City, The Bronx, and a Peace Meetin (Routledge, 2025).


The AAG Culture of Care column is an outreach initiative by the AAG JEDI Committee. Don’t forget to sign up for JEDI Office Hours. The current theme of Office Hours is An Ethos of Care in the Research Enterprise.

    Share

Where are GIScience Faculty Hired From?

Portion of word cloud graphic showing Wuhan University as the largest entity.

Analyzing Faculty Mobility and Research Themes Through Hiring Networks

The following Perspective is drawn from a paper currently under review at Cartography and Geographic Information Science journal. This research was supported by the CaGIS Rising Award and the GISphere project, which summarizes more than 400 GIS programs and faculty information globally.

By Yanbing Chen, University of Wisconsin, Madison and Yuhao Kang, University of Texas, Austin

Academia is profoundly shaped by the dynamics of faculty hiring networks, acting as a pathway for knowledge dissemination and collaborative research formation in higher education. With rapid technological advances and a surging demand for spatial analysis, GIScience is transforming research and industry alike, underscoring the need to examine how hiring practices influence academic networks and research trajectories. This study addresses the gap by analyzing data provided via the GISphere project (GISphere Institution Guide, 2023) on 946 GIScience faculty members from 384 universities across 27 countries. We employ network and word cloud analyses to demonstrate the connections between PhD-granting institutions and faculty affiliations, revealing global placement patterns, diversity in hiring trends, and the thematic evolution in GIScience research interests between year 1990 and 2024. These findings contribute to the broader discourse on faculty hiring (in)equities and provide insight into the formation of research clusters within the GIScience community.

The network analysis of GIScience faculty placements reveals that hiring is predominantly concentrated within the Global North. North America, Asia, and Europe collectively account for 92% of GIS faculty positions, with the United States (28.54%), China (26.74%), and the United Kingdom (8.35%) leading in faculty placements. The analysis shows that certain institutions play a dominant role in the GIS hiring network. For example, Wuhan University, Chinese Academy of Sciences, University of California Santa Barbara, The Ohio State University, and Peking University are responsible for 15.43% of all global GIS faculty placements (Figure 1). While faculty hiring in other fields, such as computer science and economics, follows a clear prestige-driven hierarchy (Clauset et al., 2015; Wapman et al., 2022), the GIS hiring network appears more decentralized, with a wider distribution of contributing institutions. However, this relative decentralization does not eliminate regional inequalities. The network structure reveals localized recruitment patterns within continents. For instance, North American GIS faculty often originate from U.S. or Canadian PhD programs, while European institutions tend to hire graduates from within Europe. This regional clustering reflects the limited cross-continental mobility of GIS faculty, likely influenced by geographic proximity, immigration policies, and reduced recruitment costs for regional candidates.

Word cloud graphic showing Wuhan University as the largest entity.
Figure 1. Network graph of global GIS faculty placement (n=946). Nodes represent universities, color-coded by country. Node size reflects the number of faculty produced, while edge thickness indicates the number of faculty movement between universities.

 

The diversity index refers to the proportion of faculty originating from a particular region relative to the total affiliated faculty within that same region. It examines regional disparities in hiring patterns at the continental, country, and institutional levels. At the continental level, North America has the lowest diversity index, with only 11.01% of GIS faculty holding PhDs from outside the continent (Figure 2). Asia (24.37%) and Oceania (64.00%) show higher cross-continental hiring, though often from neighboring regions or countries with historical ties. Europe reports 11.15% diversity overall, with nine countries having 0% diversity, as all GIS faculty obtained PhDs within Europe. The country-level diversity index highlights varying patterns of domestic retention. For example, in the United States, 87.70% of faculty obtained their PhD domestically, while China exhibits a similar pattern, with 79.45% of GIS faculty holding domestic PhDs. Conversely, Singapore and Thailand have the highest country-level diversity indices (100%), indicating reliance on external academic talent. At the institutional level, external recruitment is common. On average, 60.66% of GIS faculty at global universities were externally recruited. These trends suggest that while universities value external perspectives to promote intellectual diversity, internal recruitment practices persist in countries with smaller academic systems (Figure 3).

Faculty Hiring Networks are predominantly in the United States.
Figure 2. Faculty Hiring Networks in North America. The figure shows all GIS faculty currently employed in North American institutions and indicates whether their doctoral training was obtained in North American countries or other countries.

 

This chart shows that a total of 345 GIS faculty members are currently affiliated with institutions in North America. Of these, 88.99% obtained their PhDs in North America, 7.83% in Europe, 2.03% in Asia, 0.87% in Oceania, and 0.29% in Africa.
Figure 3: Marimekko chart visualizing the distribution of GIS faculty placements across four continents (North America, Asia, Europe, and Oceania) and their PhD origins. The X-axis represents the total number of current GIS faculty in each continent, while the Y-axis shows the percentage of faculty based on where they obtained their Ph.Ds. The width of each segment on the X-axis corresponds to the number of GIS faculty in that continent. Colored segments represent the proportion of faculty whose PhD origins are from different continents. For example, a total of 345 GIS faculty members are currently affiliated with institutions in North America. Of these, 88.99% obtained their PhDs in North America, 7.83% in Europe, 2.03% in Asia, 0.87% in Oceania, and 0.29% in Africa.

 

The findings of this study have important implications for GIScience education and hiring policies. The preference for internal recruitment at continental and country levels highlights the need to promote international mobility. Institutions should encourage greater international recruitment, particularly from underrepresented regions like Africa and South America, to diversify the pool of GIS scholars. The role of influential institutions in global GIS hiring also raises concerns about academic equity. While GIS faculty placement appears less hierarchical than in other fields, the concentration of placements within a small subset of universities highlights a potential inequity in access to faculty positions. Universities seeking to foster a more inclusive academic environment should consider promoting mobility pathways for PhD graduates from less influential institutions. In conclusion, hiring patterns and thematic shifts in GIScience highlight the importance of fostering a more inclusive, globalized GIS community, ensuring that ideas from across the world are equitably represented in GIS education and research.

 

References

Clauset, A., Samuel Arbesman, Daniel Larremore. (2015) Systematic inequality and hierarchy in faculty hiring networks. AAAS Science Advances, 12 Feb 2015, Vol 1, Issue 1. DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.1400005

Wapman, K.H., Sam Zhang, Aaron Clauset, Daniel B. Larremore. 2022. Quantifying hierarchy and dynamics in US faculty hiring and retention. Nature 610, pp. 120–127. Access https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-05222-x

Perspectives is a column intended to give AAG members an opportunity to share ideas relevant to the practice of geography. If you have an idea for a Perspective, see our guidelines for more information.

    Share

Care as Leadership: Sustaining and Strengthening Our Programs in a Time of Stress and Change

Person holding their hands in the shape of a heart with sunlight in background

By Ken Foote

Portrait of Ken FooteFor almost a quarter century, the AAG’s Geography Faculty Development Alliance (GFDA) and Healthy Departments Initiative (HDI) have provided support for our members, from those just getting started in their careers to those leading departments and programs. Summer workshops, symposia at national and regional meetings, webinars, and publications like Thriving in an Academic Career and Practicing Geography are all part of these efforts.

Fundamental to all these activities is the belief that caring for our community strengthens our community. Indeed, hundreds of our members have already benefited from the community-building activities the AAG supports, including those that focus on building mutual respect, empathy, trust, and shared responsibility for the health and progress of our field and all its members.

The need to reaffirm these values this year has been made imperative by rapid-fire policy changes at the national and state levels. These are already having profound impacts on geographical research and education at all levels. This impact has been especially hard on our undergraduate and graduate programs, where changing policies are affecting students, faculty, research, and teaching. This year’s workshop “Maintaining what matters: Strengthening your department in a time of rapid change” has been organized to help our community respond to these challenges by providing a forum for sharing concerns and strategies in a supportive setting. Sessions will touch on:

From crisis to courage: Creating a sustainable future for your department

Planning for improving our departments

Supporting international students

Academic freedom in the face of new, restrictive legislation,

Mentoring, promotion, and tenure in the current climate

Envisioning transformative GenEd curricula in challenging times

Scheduled online for June 23-24, starting at 11:00 a.m. ET, with panels, discussions, and interactive activities throughout each day. The program is free to all AAG members. Non-members pay $250.

Learn more and register

 

The GFDA and HD Organizing Committee

This year’s Department Leadership workshop has been developed by a capable and experienced organizing committee of leaders within their own institutions, in GFDA and HDI, and at AAG:

  • Patricia Ehrkamp, Arts & Sciences Distinguished Professor, Professor of Geography, University of Kentucky, and 2024-2025 AAG President
  • Ken Foote, Deputy Head and Director of Urban and Community Studies, Department of Geography, Sustainability, Community, and Urban Studies, University of Connecticut, 2010-2011 AAG President
  • David Kaplan, Professor, Department of Geography, Kent State University, 2018-2019 AAG President
  • Rebecca Lave, Associate Dean for Social and Historical Sciences, Professor, Geography, Indiana University-Bloomington, 2024-2025 AAG President
  • Shannon O’Lear, Joint appointment with Environmental Studies Program, Professor, KU Chancellors Club Teaching Professor 2024-2029, University of Kansas
  • Risha RaQuelle, Chief Strategy Officer, AAG

For questions or further guidance about any of these opportunities, please email meeting@aag.org.

Ken Foote is a member of the Department of Geography, Sustainability, Community, and Urban Studies at University of Connecticut. A past president, longtime member, and Fellow of AAG, he founded the Geography Faculty Development Alliance in 2003.


The AAG Culture of Care column is an outreach initiative by the AAG JEDI Committee. Don’t forget to sign up for JEDI Office Hours. The current theme of Office Hours is An Ethos of Care in the Research Enterprise.

    Share

JEDI Is More than an Acronym

Person holding their hands in the shape of a heart with sunlight in background

By Jenna Loyd, JEDI Committee Chair

Jenna Loyd

Justice. Equity. Diversity. Inclusion. These words animate the work of the AAG committee going under the acronym JEDI. These words represent values that are enshrined in AAG’s Statement of Professional Ethics, whose second paragraph reads:

Our discipline of geography is stronger when we uphold equity, human rights, and educational freedom across the breadth of geographic inquiry. We appreciate the diversity of our members’ experiences and backgrounds, as well as the broad variety of ideas and approaches to geographic knowledge production.

When I joined the JEDI Committee in 2023, DEI already had assumed a prominent place in the campus culture wars along with the distortion of critical race theory (CRT). Since then, these acronyms have been unmoored from the meanings found in the scholarly history of critical race theory and social movement histories of the struggles against racial, gender, and disability discrimination. DEI and CRT came to mean reverse discrimination and indoctrination, arguments that situated its proponents on the right side of history and validated their efforts to dismantle it. Since 2023, 19 anti-DEI bills have become law across seven states, according to the Chronicle of Higher Education; another 75 have failed or been tabled. Related pieces of legislation have passed restricting what can be taught in classrooms.

These efforts became an opening salvo in the even broader attacks on higher education and research we are living through right now. Some universities, academic associations, and research nonprofits have scrubbed their websites of DEI. The AAG has not, nor does it intend to do so. In February, the JEDI Committee reiterated its commitments to its principles and reaffirmed the AAG’s 2023 statements of support of educational freedom, critical geography and the well-being of LGBT2QIA+ people, and Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC).

We are not backing down because JEDI is more than an acronym. When I was first learning this committee’s history, Meghan Cope explained to me that justice was an important principle informing its initiatives. Justice has more than one meaning for our discipline, a concept that often provides a way of linking issues together, from racial justice to economic justice, environmental justice, disability justice, climate justice, and more. To me, it informs why equity would be a value and suggests that inclusion itself should be just. In the introduction to their new edited collection, How to Foster Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Justice in Geography, Guo Chen and LaToya Eaves recount how decades of collective efforts to broaden the scope and societal relevance of geographic inquiry have gone hand in hand with criticisms of the discipline’s systematic forms of exclusion. For Chen and Eaves, our embrace of justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion as interconnected values serves to “enrich the theories and practices that help more and more geographers feel at home and foster passion and inquiry in creating a vibrant world discipline for current and future generations of geographers” (2024, 3-4).

More than an acronym, [TLC-GRAM is] a mnemonic reminding us that care and relationships should guide transformative work in the AAG, departments, and specialty groups.

For just inclusion of groups of people who’ve been neglected or excluded from the discipline, we need to actively change the structure of our collective work as geographers. And this takes cultivating a culture of care. Over the first two years of the JEDI Committee’s existence, the committee worked with over 50 members in seven working groups to synthesize 32 points of its strategic plan into a useable framework for change shorthanded as TLC-GRAM. Like the idea that justice is indivisible, each of the elements of Training, Listening, Communications, Governance, Reports, Advocacy, and Membership are interconnected. More than an acronym, it’s a mnemonic reminding us that care and relationships should guide transformative work in the AAG, departments, and specialty groups. AAG’s Chief Strategy Officer, Risha RaQuelle, has provided invaluable leadership for this work. She launched the beta version of the toolkit at the 2024 GFDA meeting; you can read her overview of the TLC-GRAM here and discussion of how care can inform research here. At a session last month in Detroit, leadership of the Energy and Environment Specialty Group walked through how they had put the toolkit to work in their specialty group and the Committee will be finalizing materials for its use this academic year.

I think part of why JEDI work continues undiminished in the AAG is because of the decades of cultivating principles of justice as interconnected. Another reason is the longstanding engagement with care ethics, articulated by AAG President Victoria Lawson in 2005. Geography as a discipline and AAG as an association are filled with members, staff, and leadership who want our profession and field of inquiry to hold true to justice and care, even as we debate and expand what these terms mean. We know that we are responsible for making this space as a collective effort. What we do will continue to be debated and will continue to evolve. And we do this because we think the space we make to do critical work with each other is worth defending.


The AAG Culture of Care column is an outreach initiative by the AAG JEDI Committee. Don’t forget to sign up for JEDI Office Hours. The current theme of Office Hours is An Ethos of Care in the Research Enterprise.

    Share

Places of Possibility: Resources for Challenging Times

Person holding their hands in the shape of a heart with sunlight in background

By Risha RaQuelle, Chief Strategy Officer

Photo of Risha Berry

In times of such profound transformation, it’s crucial to lean on the work and relationships we’ve built over years of collaboration. The strength of our professional networks, resources, and shared commitment is what helps sustain us through challenging periods.

The constraints and threats we face are real—anti-DEI legislation, funding elimination, and systemic shifts challenge the very fabric of our work. But despite these obstacles, we continue to press forward. AAG, like each of our members, is navigating the path forward Yet, we persist—in supporting your career, your well-being, and the values that unite us as a community.

We encourage you to take a moment to reflect on the resources that sustain you. We’d also like to highlight some of the support AAG offers to contribute to your success and thriving.

For Individual AAG Members

Keep up your peer and mentoring network. Use the opportunities AAG offers for members to connect—through our Annual Meeting, career-focused sessions throughout the year, and local connections through the AAG Regional Divisions. As an AAG member, you are automatically part of your Regional Division, allowing you to engage with peers near you, strengthening community ties among geographers. The Regional Divisions also sponsor events focused on the next generation, from preliminaries for the World Geography Bowl to paper competitions and travel grants.

Your career matters, and we can help. From job search tools to liability insurance, AAG wants to help you navigate your career. The AAG Job Board lists opportunities in all sectors, at all levels of experience. AAG’s member-created Statement of Professional Ethics provides clarity and peer-sourced insight into the values and principles we seek to uphold in our discipline.

Communities of practice to support you.  AAG Specialty and Affinity Groups and Communities of Practice are designed to connect you with colleagues who share your expertise or interests. Your AAG membership makes you eligible for all of these communities of practice, which are renewed annually and carry their own modest dues, generally from $1 to $5 each year. These groups can serve as vital resources for advice, networking, and new opportunities.

Dedicated AAG staff can answer your questions. AAG’s Communities Team—Eddie McInerney and Mark Revell—can answer questions and support your participation in the Specialty/Affinity Group communities. You can also sign up for AAG’s regular JEDI Office hours.  JEDI Office Hours offer individuals and programmatic leaders the chance for one-on-one conversations about your ideas, experiences, and questions. Schedule a time to talk.

For Department Chairs and Program Leaders

AAG is strengthening tools to offer leaders of geography departments and programs new ways to protect and advance the discipline:

TLC-GRAM: This bridging inventory is designed to promote strategies for increasing belonging within the geography community, especially through strategic planning. We’ve curated a collection of resources, ideas, and initiatives, aimed at fostering inclusive and supportive environments that promote good governance and focus on making sure that all members of a community feel welcome and valued. If you have adapted this toolkit or have ideas for how to do so, we’d like to hear from you at communities@aag.org.

State of Geography Dashboard: AAG’s repository for data on geography higher education as a field of study. These data provide insight into the educational landscape for geography in the U.S., as well as insights into the field that might inform dialogues within your institution, especially strategic planning.

Each summer, over the past years the Geography Faculty Development Alliance workshops have offered early-career geographers and department chairs support in pursuing their work in teaching, mentoring, and leadership.

The Healthy Departments Initiative addresses the challenges faced by geography departments. The HD Committee assists department chairs and provides practice information that can improve program quality. To find out more, contact communities@aag.org

For Protecting and Advancing Our Discipline

AAG offers ways to monitor and participate in activities on behalf of the geography discipline. AAG’s Advocacy Hub provides Information on AAG’s policy stances and recent advocacy efforts. Learn about our policy principles here.

Positions and Task Forces at AAG have taken up critical disciplinary questions that can aid your direction and decision making within our discipline. One of the core such documents for this moment is AAG’s Statement of Professional Ethics.

Visit our governance page to view reports of past AAG task forces and find out about current task forces, such as the Mentoring Task Force, which is examining how to expand mentoring opportunities within geography. AAG’s Professional Conduct Policy is also a foundational document that keeps all of us accountable to one another and sets the standard for professional conduct within our discipline.

Navigating Hostile Environments

Reflecting on the hostile working conditions that critical geographers have faced—attacks on tenure, justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion, and challenges to academic unionization—I recognize the delicate balance between advocacy and pragmatic action. We, too, face shifting political landscapes. The AAG, like you, is navigating a world where decisions are made rapidly.

Here’s what I want you to know: The AAG is your member association. As a member, you are integral to how we adapt, educate, and advocate for the discipline of geography. We are a bridge, ensuring that geography remains a space where belonging is fostered, even when forces of othering try to dominate. Together, we can continue advocating for the values that matter most to our community, even as the political climate shifts.

Moving Forward Together

In closing, our commitment to promoting scholarly spaces, critical geographic research, and JEDI initiatives remains steadfast. We will continue to publicly affirm our dedication to advancing these principles through advocacy, awards, career-enabling functions, and providing access to training for students. By engaging in these efforts, we ensure that geography remains a space of possibility, even in increasingly inhospitable environments.

Through our annual meetings, regional gatherings, and resources, AAG offers opportunities to not only share research but also connect with others who understand the unique challenges we face. AAG will always be a space where ideas are shared freely, and all members are given the opportunity to contribute.

Let’s continue to work together—to build a future where geography and its practitioners can thrive, no matter the challenges we encounter.

The AAG Culture of Care column is an outreach initiative by the AAG JEDI Committee. Don’t forget to sign up for JEDI Office Hours. The current theme of Office Hours is An Ethos of Care in the Research Enterprise.

    Share

A Message of Hope and Action

Person holding their hands in the shape of a heart with sunlight in background

By Risha RaQuelle, Chief Strategy Officer

Photo of Risha Berry

In these times of rapid change, connection and community matter more than ever. AAG stands firm in our commitment to support and uplift our members, providing access to our member networks—networks necessary to navigate an evolving landscape. Through strategic planning, member-led initiatives, and resource development, we are building a future that reflects the resilience, creativity, and strength of geographers everywhere.

Together, we will sustain a thriving community where members can connect, contribute, and succeed—driven by the power of collective care and hope.

Charting a Bold New Course

AAG is actively preparing in collaboration with Council a new 10-year strategic plan and two staff-led 5-year operational plans to align organizational goals with the evolving needs of our members. These plans build on the strengths of our past while advancing a sustainable and forward-thinking agenda.

Members will play an essential role in shaping the 10-year plan. We invite all members to participate in upcoming listening sessions at the Annual Meeting. Your voice and perspectives will be key to ensuring that this plan reflects the collective needs and aspirations of our community

Our vision for growth

Forecasted last year, through our Request for Research Partnerships initiative, our vision for growth will continue to center member-driven grant partnerships to provide essential resources for meaningful work and programs. By investing in our members and fostering new networks of support, we are laying a foundation that sustains innovation and community engagement for years to come.

AAG’s renewed focus on connectivity is embodied in Communities@AAG, a newly aligned  organizational framework designed to enhance collaboration and resource-sharing across Specialty Groups, Affinity Groups, Communities of Practice, and Regional Divisions. This approach elevates community-driven programming and resource development through strategic grant seeking and member engagement.

Communities@AAG: Enhancing Connectivity and Collaboration

Communities@AAG represents a strategic organizational realignment that fosters networks of care, empowering geographers at every stage of their careers to connect, belong, and thrive. It is evolving into an all-hands approach by AAG staff, led by two key roles for AAG staff members dedicated to advancing this mission:

  • Community Impact Coordinator: (Eddie McInerney) Strengthens collaboration among member groups, including the 75 specialty and affinity groups, to foster equitable practices, share resources, and enhance member engagement. Eddie also monitors engagement opportunities around issues of importance to AAG members, in keeping with our Policy Principles.
  • Manager for Career Programs and Disciplinary Research (Mark Revell): Oversees professional development and research initiatives that align with AAG’s strategic goals, including expanding professional development offerings at the annual meeting, delivering comprehensive educational programming year-round, and enhancing AAG’s learning resources and disciplinary information to support students, professionals, and departments through essential services such as the Healthy Departments Initiative, Jobs Board and Guide to Geography Programs.

Building on Past Achievements

As we chart this new course, we are also reflecting on past efforts to ensure continuous improvement. In recent years, AAG has been developing leadership cohorts, improving our operations, piloting new programming formats, and refining community engagement strategies to be ready to support our members.

By partnering with members on efforts like Healthy Departments, the annual Geography Faculty Development Alliance workshops for both early career support and leadership development, and projects such as the Convening of Care and GAIA, we are creating sustainable pathways for innovative programming, professional development, and research. This approach ensures that our work is driven by and responsive to the needs of our membership.

We look forward to hearing from you. Join us at the listening sessions during the Annual Meeting and reach out to our Communities@AAG team to connect and get involved!

The AAG Culture of Care column is an outreach initiative by the AAG JEDI Committee. Don’t forget to sign up for JEDI Office Hours. The current theme of Office Hours is An Ethos of Care in the Research Enterprise.

    Share

Shifting the Research Enterprise: Embracing Care as a Strategy Forward

Participants from the Convening of Care conference gather for a group photo on Sept. 24, 2024, in Washington, DC.
Participants from the Convening of Care conference gather for a group photo on Sept. 24, 2024, in Washington, DC.

By Risha RaQuelle, AAG Chief Strategy Officer and
Emily Skop, Professor, University of Colorado, Colorado Springs

Photo of Risha Berry

Photo of Emily Skop

In the evolving landscape of academic research, initiatives for justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion (JEDI) have long been critical in advancing an inclusive, fair, and just research enterprise. These efforts, led by passionate advocates, have catalyzed significant progress in dismantling structural barriers and promoting diversity. However, as political and legislative challenges increasingly target JEDI initiatives, academic institutions need new strategies to continue this essential work.

The Convening of Care, held on September 19-20, 2024 and co-sponsored by the American Association of Geographers, the University of Colorado Colorado Springs, and the National Organization of Research Development Professionals with funding from the National Science Foundation, brought together research enterprise leaders, department heads, and early-career scholars to explore care as a way to navigate these challenges and advance inclusivity, even in the face of JEDI bans.

A key component of this convening was the formation of triads—collaborative groups made up of research enterprise professionals, academic department leaders, and early-career scholars. This triadic model allowed participants to exchange insights, reflect on their experiences, and collaboratively identify how care can be operationalized in their respective roles to foster a more inclusive and supportive research environment.

The Role of Triads in Reimagining Care

During the Convening of Care, triads were instrumental in guiding the discussions and exploring how care could complement the values promoted by JEDI. Bringing together individuals at different stages of their academic careers, with varied responsibilities and experiences, the triads created a unique space for cross-level collaboration. These groups examined how care, as a relational and ethical practice, could be infused into the day-to-day workings of research institutions.

The inclusion of research enterprise leaders, department heads, and early-career scholars ensured that a diverse range of perspectives was represented, offering insights into how care could be implemented at multiple levels of the academic and research enterprise. This triadic collaboration made it possible to address not only the policy and structural challenges but also the relational and cultural dynamics within academia.

The discussions within the triads focused on two central themes:

  1. The lived experiences of researchers and leaders navigating the research enterprise.
  2. Recommendations for how care can be embedded into research practices and leadership approaches.

 

Moving beyond traditional JEDI frameworks, which often focus on compliance and metrics, care encourages leaders to focus on the well-being of their researchers, emphasizing relational dynamics and mental health.”

 

Implications of Care for Research Enterprise Leaders

For research enterprise leaders, care introduces an instructive shift in how research environments are structured and supported. Moving beyond traditional JEDI frameworks, which often focus on compliance and metrics, care encourages leaders to focus on the well-being of their researchers, emphasizing relational dynamics and mental health. The triads identified that care could be embedded in leadership practices by:

  • Developing care-based mentorship programs that prioritize the emotional and personal growth of researchers.
  • Fostering transparent communication that acknowledges the challenges faced by underrepresented scholars and provides pathways to address these challenges without fear of retaliation.
  • Creating support networks that allow researchers to thrive in environments where they feel valued, rather than merely meeting diversity quotas.

Department Leaders: Shaping Departmental Culture through Care

Department leaders play a critical role in shaping the day-to-day culture of research environments. For these leaders, care offers a way to move beyond policy mandates to create a department culture that genuinely supports diversity and inclusion through personal connection and understanding. Triads involving department heads explored how care could be integrated into department leadership by:

  • Establishing listening sessions where faculty and students can voice their concerns and experiences in a supportive environment, ensuring that everyone’s voice is heard.
  • Promoting inclusive department meetings where care is demonstrated through equitable participation and recognition of contributions from all members, especially those from underrepresented groups.
  • Introducing well-being check-ins as part of regular departmental practices, helping to mitigate burnout and promote a healthier work-life balance for all scholars.

Early-Career Scholars: Building a Foundation of Care

For early-career scholars, many of whom face significant challenges navigating the complexities of the research enterprise, care provides a critical support system. The triads identified how care could serve as an essential tool in helping these scholars overcome barriers to inclusion, particularly in institutions where JEDI policies have been restricted. Key takeaways for early-career scholars include:

  • Building peer support networks that emphasize mutual care and provide a safe space for sharing experiences, advice, and strategies for success.
  • Advocating for mentorship models that not only focus on professional development but also on personal well-being, ensuring that early-career scholars are supported in all aspects of their academic journey.
  • Encouraging collaborative research practices that prioritize equitable partnerships, sharing both the workload and recognition, and fostering an environment where scholars can grow together.

TLC GRAM: A Framework to Operationalize Care Across Roles

The triadic collaboration also paved the way for a broader discussion on how care could be operationalized through the TLC GRAM framework as part of AAG’s JEDI implementation, the TLC GRAM framework was presented during the Convening of Care. The framework’s elements—Training, Listening, Communication, Governance, Reports, Advocacy, and Membership—provide a structured approach to embedding care in research organizations at every level.

The triads identified key areas where TLC GRAM could guide their efforts:

  • For research enterprise leaders, TLC GRAM offers a way to integrate care into leadership training and governance, ensuring that decisions prioritize well-being and relational dynamics.
  • For department heads, the framework provides tools for implementing listening practices and fostering transparent communication within departments, helping to create a supportive and inclusive culture.
  • For early-career scholars, TLC GRAM can be a guide for advocating for care-based mentorship and creating collaborative research environments that prioritize equity and shared success.

While TLC GRAM builds upon the values of JEDI, it also allows institutions to transcend the limitations of JEDI language, making care the central focus of their inclusivity efforts.

The Path Forward: Care as a Strategy for Inclusive Research

The triadic collaboration during the Convening of Care demonstrated that care is more than just a complementary approach to JEDI: it is a powerful strategy for moving forward in the face of JEDI bans. Through the insights and experiences shared in triads, it became clear that care provides a more flexible and relationally grounded approach to fostering inclusivity, one that can be applied at every level of the research enterprise.

By focusing on care, institutions can continue to promote equity and inclusion even in politically challenging contexts. Research enterprise leaders, department heads, and early-career scholars all have a role to play in operationalizing care through the TLC GRAM framework, ensuring that academic environments remain supportive, inclusive, and just—regardless of external political pressures.

Learn more about the outcomes of the Convening of Care and next steps for implementing care-based practices through the TLC GRAM framework.

The Convening of Care project is supported by the National Science Foundation under Award No. 2324401 and Award No. 2324402. Any opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

The AAG Culture of Care column is an outreach initiative by the AAG JEDI Committee. Don’t forget to sign up for JEDI Office Hours.

    Share