The preceding chapters have offered a number of observations about, challenges to, and strategies for realizing geography's potential to contribute to scientific understanding and societal problem solving in the United States. In this final chapter the committee summarizes its conclusions and recommendations on steps to improve geographic understanding, improve geographic literacy, strengthen geographic institutions, and take individual and collective responsibility for strengthening the discipline.
Clearly, geography has too few answers to the questions being posed to it by society, although its potential to answer those questions is considerable. At the same time, geography is being asked too few questions by the other sciences. On the one hand, the demands of society are too large for the current capabilities of the discipline; on the other hand, the demands from other scientific disciplines are too small. Because geography's ability to respond to society's needs depends considerably on its strength as a science, and its strength as a science depends considerably on its support from the family of sciences, this contradiction is a matter of serious concern to the committee.
Given society's enhanced interest in geography as a subject, it is essential to improve the knowledge base of geography as a discipline related to critical issues for science and society, to increase the appreciation and use of geographic perspectives in science and society at large, and to treat geographic learning as
a challenge to science as well as to practice. Based on the foundation laid in Chapters 1 through 7, the committee concludes that responses by the discipline and by its external constituencies are needed to:
Geographers must also improve the practice of relating the ''front end" of geographic analysis—conceptualization and data selection/sampling design—with "back-end" modeling and analysis. Without thoughtful and intellectually robust linkages between these two elements of the research enterprise, geographic analysis will be inherently incomplete. At least as important, the capacity of geographic analysis to address issues of complex systems and nonlinear dynamics needs to be improved in order to fulfill geography's potential to contribute to the body of science. The improvement of capabilities for data collection and analysis should therefore be high on the discipline's research agenda.
In addition, it is important to recognize the value of utilizing a variety of methodologies in seeking better understandings of the world, combining geography's characteristic appreciation of diversity with its recognition that there is no single "foolproof method" for producing knowledge.
A particular challenge is that of analyzing and modeling relationships among natural science and human science phenomena and processes, which are so often separated by boundaries of epistemology, professional specialization, data categories, and units of measurement. Besides the technical challenges, such as relating economic and ecological indicators, this is also a challenge to individual scientists to transcend conventional boundaries for understandings of other kinds of processes and linkages.
Geography as a discipline should devote more attention to the development of larger, integrative, interdisciplinary research projects, particularly projects that would benefit from the collaboration of physical and human geographers or those who develop methods of spatial representation and those who apply those methods, both within the discipline and beyond; and more of this research should be directed at high priority issues for society and science. An example of a research issue suited to both of these emphases is global change, broadly defined (see Chapter 7). In this and other cases, geography's ability to contribute on the basis of sound scientific research will often depend on the availability of valid longitudinal information covering the diverse topics incorporated in the discipline's perspectives.
Geography is being asked by the nation to help improve the geographic literacy of the U.S. population: knowledge of the world and flows within it, characteristics and dynamics of places, relations between local and global changes, relationships between people and their environment, and uses of geographic data and capabilities for data display and analysis. To respond effectively, the committee concludes that steps are needed to:
To meet its scientific and societal responsibilities, as outlined in this report, geography as a discipline needs to change, with the support and encouragement of its institutional patrons. The most fundamental problem is one of magnitude: geography's small size relative to demands for its services, broadly defined. But the discipline needs to address itself to problems of substance as well, related both to its traditions and to new directions in response to changing conditions. To these ends, the committee concludes that initiatives are needed to:
Progress in these regards is likely to depend as much on initiatives arising from within the discipline than on external initiatives. Simply stated, geography needs to do a better job of identifying users of its knowledge and techniques—and in estimating demand levels, demand trends, supply priorities, and supply strategies—in order to develop strategies to increase its external resource support. Considering the critical roles of external demands and resources in shaping such a prospect, however, this vision cannot be developed by geography in isolation. As indicated in Chapter 1, geography is a means to social ends, not an end in itself; and its plan for expanding its resource base must be consistent with those ends and the societal resources allocated to reach them.
An example of a specific issue is the growing dependence of effective geographic research and teaching on capital equipment. Except for physical geography and cartography, geography departments in colleges and universities have generally not needed significant equipment budgets in the past. At least partly as a result, the impacts of the technological revolution described in Chapters 4 and 7 have been virtually impossible to accommodate within current institutional concepts of departmental budgeting. In addition, the shorter effective lifetime of higher-technology equipment calls for budgets for regular replacement as well as for base-level capital stock.
Finally, geographers need to recognize that they also have responsibilities to their discipline, to other sciences, and to society. Geography's new relevance does not just pose challenges to external bodies and larger institutional settings; it calls for a response by individuals and groups of geographers on their own volition, both as professionals and citizens. In particular, the committee suggests that geographers, their organizations, and their departments should:
|
1 |
See Association of American Geographers. 1994. Reconsidering Faculty Roles and Rewards: Washington, D.C. |
To this end, faculty members need to make more of an effort to collaborate across subspecialties, especially between human and physical subspecialties, between these subspecialties and those emphasizing spatial representation, and across institutions. Faculty need to ensure that their undergraduate and graduate students are exposed to the range of geographic topics, research traditions, and methodologies that define the core of the discipline. At the undergraduate level, faculty members need to provide exposure to the various subspecialties in a way that reinforces the ideal of a liberal education and at the same time prepares students for advanced training. Such exposure might come, for example, through courses and seminars led by teams of physical and human geographers that emphasize the connectivity among subspecialties. At the same time, faculty members must provide opportunities for graduate students to obtain depth of learning in selected subdisciplines. Such opportunities might come through pre- and postdoctoral training opportunities, collaborations with faculty members in other departments, and extracurricular activities such as summer institutes.
Based on these conclusions, the committee offers a number of recommendations addressed to the external audience of this report. Each recommendation addresses the question of who needs to take action, and the final recommendation addresses the implementation process itself. Professional geographers should also examine the conclusions on "taking individual and collective responsibility for strengthening the discipline" of geography in order to identify additional actions that could strengthen the discipline from within.
To improve geographic understanding:
To improve geographic literacy:
To strengthen geographic institutions:
To encourage implementation of these recommendations:
If these recommendations are implemented, both science and society will benefit, as will geography itself. Underlying nearly all of the recommendations is the conclusion that the demand for contributions from geography and the supply capacity, given current resources, are far out of line. Unless significant actions are taken, and taken quickly, either geography's contributions will be severely supply constrained (leading, for instance, to restricted enrollments in university courses and programs) or may decline in quality, as limited professional resources are stretched too thinly.
This conclusion is unavoidable, and it raises questions about the allocation of financial resources. If geography's rediscovered relevance has greater value within science and to society than is currently being realized, the investment of resources should be commensurate with this higher potential. But the issue is not merely one of funding. More importantly, a wide range of institutions and leaders—in government, business, research support, science, education, issue advocacy, the communications media, and geography itself as a discipline—need to raise their levels of awareness of geography's value to science and society and find more effective ways to publicize and utilize geography's perspectives, skills, and knowledge base. Looking toward the next century, realizing geography's potentials will require innovative new partnerships between provider and user, supported and supporter, one science and another, data gatherer and data analyst, and basic research and applications of knowledge.
If geography can be a pathfinder in developing and fulfilling such partnerships, it can survive a difficult transition from scarcity to abundance, and science at large will benefit from many of geography's successes as models for other disciplines. Such a future for the discipline is far from certain, and some of the changing conditions in the 1990s may make it more difficult, but it is worth a concerted effort by all of the interested parties and most of all by geography itself.