Introducing the “Climate Action Task Force”
In response to the current climate crisis, last spring we circulated a petition among various geography listservs requesting that the AAG Council take significant action “to reduce CO2 emissions related to the Annual Meeting.” The petition asked that the “Council do so in a manner commensurate with what the recent (October 2018) Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) special report asserts is needed to limit global warming to 1.5°C: about a 45 percent cut (from 2010 levels) by 2030, and ‘net zero’ emissions by 2050.” In light of the strong support that the petition received, the AAG Council responded in April with the creation of a task force charged with redesigning the Annual Meeting so that it is a low-CO2-emitting endeavor. The task force is mandated to transform the Annual Meetings in a manner that is effective in meeting the needs of AAG members and that is also socio-spatially and environmentally just.
Since that time, the Annual Meeting Climate Action Task Force, under the leadership of Wendy Jepson, professor of geography at Texas A&M University and member of the AAG Council, has recruited a diverse group of geographers from across the United States and Canada to serve as members. Through various working groups, task force members are currently focused on three areas: 1) conducting research into qualitative and quantitative dimensions of the carbon regime that underpins the AAG’s conference model; 2) exploring how information and communication technologies can be best mobilized to offer rewarding virtual experiences for conference participants; and 3) organizing a first round of special initiatives at the AAG annual meeting in Denver in 2020.
| Climate Action Task Force Members | |
| Kafui Attoh, City University of New York | Elizabeth Olson, UNC Chapel Hill |
| Daniel Bedford, Weber State University | Aparna Parikh, Dartmouth College |
| Tianna Bruno, University of Oregon | Paul Robbins, University of Wisconsin–Madison |
| John Hayes, Salem State University | Sue Ruddick, University of Toronto |
| Wendy Jepson, Texas A&M, task force chair | Sarah Stindard-Kiel, Temple University |
| Oscar Larson, AAG | Elin Thorlund, AAG |
| Patricia Martin, Université de Montréal | Jayme Walenta, University of Texas at Austin |
| Joseph Nevins, Vassar College | |
Smaller academic associations have already experimented with low carbon conferencing (e.g. the Society of Cultural Anthropology’s 2018 Conference, Displacements, a hybrid of a virtual conference and in-person gatherings at sites across the world linked via the internet). However, no large learned society has directly engaged with an attempt to transition to a low-carbon conference model. Thus, this initiative has the potential to place the AAG at the cutting edge in the struggle against climate change.
To ensure the wellbeing of the AAG, while seeking to provide a stimulating and inclusive environment for the diverse community of geographers, we envision proposing and experimenting with a series of initiatives aimed at implementing change in an incremental way over the next five years. Accordingly, we are working on a series of special initiatives for Denver 2020 that will also serve as a means for charting future pathways. While the plans are still preliminary, these initiatives include a virtual plenary session with Kevin Anderson, professor of energy and climate change at the University of Manchester and the former Director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research. We also are organizing a series of “blended” sessions related to the taskforce’s major themes, in which there will be a combination of virtual and on-site participation. These panels and paper sessions will explore a range of issues, including emerging models for academic conferences, the promises and pitfalls of carbon offsetting, and the dilemmas of knowledge production in an era of climate disruption. We hope as well to have a room dedicated to a variety of virtual experiments that will bridge research, activism and performance to highlight the importance of this initiative. Another innovative initiative will seek to match senior geographers with emerging scholars in a virtual “conversation over coffee.” Finally, we will organize a special poster session with the purpose of helping us to reimagine the AAG annual conference in 2025. Through these diverse initiatives, we seek to understand the impact virtual conferencing might have on participants’ experiences, while testing the limits and possibilities of different technological infrastructures that could be mobilized to support low-CO2 conferencing.
We understand that changing our professional behaviors is difficult. Our discipline and our careers are often based in large part on in-person connections with physically distant places and people throughout the world. In our professional and personal lives we are immersed in social practices in which air travel is profoundly normalized, and viewed as both a necessity and an unquestioned right. Yet we also know that climate disruption is already here and that air travel is a significant source of CO2 emissions. If we take seriously the gravity of a situation so clearly spelled out by climate science, then we must collectively create new ways of being in the world, which means weaving new kinds of relationships between individuals and communities, both near and far. In this sense, rethinking the dominant modes of academic conferencing presents the possibility of creating new forms of academic relationships and exchange that remain fully engaged in the world. We may “lose” some things; but we will gain as well. In this sense, the goal of the Annual Meeting Climate Action Task Force is in no way to undo the AAG or question its relevance, but rather position both our discipline and our association at the forefront of progressive change.
If you are interested in learning more about the initiative or engaging with the Task Force, please contact Wendy Jepson at: wjepson [at] tamu [dot] edu.
DOI: 10.14433/2017.0064
On the topic of the ecological footprint of academic travel, there is a rapidly growing body of literature. Here are two recent articles that we recommend:
Julien Arsenault, Julie Talbot, Lama Boustani, Rodolphe Gonzalès and Kevin Manaugh, “The environmental footprint of academic and student mobility in a large research-oriented university,” Environmental Research Letters, Vol. 14, No. 9, 2019
Seth Wynes, Simon D. Donner, Steuart Tannason, Noni Nabors, “Academic air travel has a limited influence on professional success,” Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 226, No. 20, 2019: 959-967
Other resources are listed at: www.flyingless.org
Geography was not taught in my high school and I expect that was true in much of the United States… The foresight of a few geographers and the extraordinary assistance of the AAG enabled us to develop an exam for AP Human Geography in the 1990s. Today AP Human Geography is the fastest growing AP course, increasing five-fold over the past 10 years. It is one of the 10 highest enrolled of all AP subjects. No longer folded into “social studies” or “earth science,” geography—at least human geography—finally has a place of its own in the secondary school curriculum.
Denver, a multicultural city home to more than 600,000 people, is the 19th largest city in the United States and the site of the 2020 AAG Annual Meeting. Situated at the base of the Rocky Mountains, Denver has also served as a bridge between the east and the west coasts historically, culturally, and economically. Between sessions at the AAG Annual Meeting, there is a variety of things to do to explore the Mile High City. The AAG has compiled some suggestions of places of interest on our Annual Meeting website to help plan your trip.
Read the latest titles in geography and related disciplines as found on the New Books in Geography list. Some of these books will be reviewed in The AAG Review of Books. The editors of The AAG Review of Books are happy to receive suggestions for potential reviews and potential reviewers. Reviews are commissioned by the editors, based on the appropriateness and qualifications of the reviewer, observing the usual avoidances of conflict of interest. Persons wishing to volunteer their reviewing services should have the requisite qualifications and demonstrable prior knowledge and engagement with the subject area, preferably through publications. Please contact the editors at 
In addition to the most recently published journal, read the latest issue of the other AAG journals online:
Angeline Johnson was recently selected as a 2019-2020 FUSE Fellow assigned to a project entitled “Forging Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration for Community Economic Development.” After finding geography as a college freshman, Angeline believes core principles like scale and Tobler’s First Law have given her an invaluable perspective throughout her career. For geographers looking towards a future career path she recommends students “recognize the strength [they] bring as both a geographer and a broad thinker.”
Dr. Soe Myint, a professor of geography in the School of Geographical Sciences and Urban Planning at Arizona State University, has been appointed as a Fulbright Canada Research Chair in Environmental Studies. As the only geographer to receive a Fulbright Canada Research Chair position for 2019-2020, Myint will spend the fall semester at the University of Regina researching water use policy on the plains. 
Please consider submitting applications or nominations to four AAG grants and awards with approaching deadlines, three for students and one for career geographers. The 
For the 2020 AAG Annual Meeting in Denver, CO, the National Center for Research in Geography Education (NCRGE) is welcoming abstracts and organized session proposals for a track of research-oriented sessions in geography education. This track aims to raise the visibility of research in geography education, grow the NCRGE research coordination network, and provide productive spaces for discussion about geography education research and the notion of what makes research in the field potentially transformative.
The AAG is saddened to hear of the passing of Michael Bradford, a geographer and Professor at Manchester University. Central to Bradford’s career was his dedication to geography education, having served as President of the Geographical Association in the UK from 1999-2000 as well as having received numerous teaching awards and fellowships. He is survived by his wife of 50 years, Sheila Kaplan, who is organizing a celebration of life for Bradford on October 19, 2019.
One of the most anticipated items when I began attending AAG meetings was the annual edited book that came in our packet. This would be a special volume dedicated to the city and region where the meeting was held. Within it would be chapters detailing all kinds of interesting aspects of the region, written by geographers with expertise and wisdom. I still have a large collection of these regional geographies on my book shelf. The AAG was poorer when we stopped producing this regional compendium and we need to bring it back.
Savvy spatial thinkers recognized that the Euclidean distance calculation offered no insight into the actual distance one might travel along a road network to get to a destination, and they chose instead to employ the Manhattan distance calculation as a simulation. The method offered N–S or E–W movements in a stair-step pattern. While the resultant distance was likely more appropriate in most cases, there was no question that it was a substandard approach to calculating distance along a road network. Until recently, understanding access to care from the patient perspective has been a daunting technological challenge.
Healthcare administrators have also been interested in the issue of access. The concept has broad implications for planning services, managing populations, and preventing hospital readmissions. Initial GIS methods for access calculations from this perspective included the use of buffers or pre-defined service regions. It’s a very simple prospect to drop a point representing a hospital and create a 10-mile circular buffer to represent an area of general accessibility to the facility. From the hospital perspective, this method is roughly equivalent to the Euclidean distance calculation.
In 2000, Radke and Mu inspired the development of a method offering improved realism for accessibility called the two-step floating catchment area. The technique, derived from gravity models, attempts to capture several spatial variables and their interactions. The model requires the assessment of physician availability (supply) at locations (i.e., hospitals) as a ratio to their surrounding population (within a travel time threshold) and then sums those ratios around each residential (demand) location. Since its development, several enhancements have been made to the method that improve accuracy across different environments (like rural and urban). In 2011, a three-step floating catchment area technique was published that helped to minimize the overdemand estimation caused by the two-step method. The advance further refined the results, offering potential for better resource planning and identification of health professional shortage areas due to limited access.
But what about going back to the patient perspective on the question of access to healthcare? There are now regulations in place that attempt to improve access to care by first understanding it from the patient’s perspective. I’m talking about network adequacy requirements, which refer to a health plan’s (including provider/plans) ability to deliver the benefits promised by providing reasonable access to a sufficient number of in-network primary care and specialty physicians, as well as all healthcare services included under the terms of the contract. Given the vast differences in topologies and road networks from one place to another, it makes sense that the regulation is based on driving times and driving distances together to formulate the most accurate picture possible. Depending on the regulatory agency, the standard for what is deemed an “adequate” size for a provider network will differ, but one important aspect remains the same. It is impossible to calculate the geographic network adequacy of a plan without the help of a GIS. Still, this is not a trivial matter when one considers the math involved. The number of calculations for this, from the individual perspective, is daunting, on the order of 34 billion for a medium-sized health plan.