Bridging the divide between human and physical geography: Potential avenues for collaborative research on climate modeling

Abstract

Despite repeated calls for greater collaboration between physical and human geographers, the unique interdisciplinary potential of geography remains largely underutilized. Yet geographers are well positioned to take a leading role in the interdisciplinary turn in climate‐related research. This paper explores the possibilities for physical and human geographers to collaborate within and beyond the discipline, specifically on the topic of climate modeling. We first examine geographical research critically examining the production and circulation of climate knowledge. Drawing on insights from a recent literature called “Critical Physical Geography,” we then outline how geographers might engage in collaborative and interdisciplinary work in order to promote more democratic practices of producing climate knowledge, enrich understandings of climate change, and more effectively serve goals of social and environmental justice. We argue that both the discipline of geography and the field of climate research stand to gain enormously from geographers' efforts to talk across the divide between social and natural science within and beyond the boundaries of geography.

Infrastructuring “data-driven” environmental governance in Louisiana’s coastal restoration plan

“…At every step of the Master Plan modeling process, experts confront status quo funding levels, dataset availability, and so on. These are moments where activists could create the conditions by which modelers encounter different data frictions or even directly engage modelers about different questions to ask of the data (Colven and Thomson, 2018). For example, the GRN has delved into the Master Plan model appendices to understand how communities are ranked for adaptation funding.…”

Geographies of science and technology II: In the critical zone

“…By combining field and lab toxicology (Liboiron et al, 2019) with contributions to STS and human geography debates on toxic politics (Liboiron et al, 2018), CLEAR’s work offers a radically different vision of what critical zone science could look like. Relatedly, Colven and Thomson (2018) offer climate modelling as another site where collaboration between human and physical geographers could transform and democratise knowledge-making. They suggest that a CPG approach could help address the well-documented problems of spatial abstraction in climate change science (e.g.…”

A political ecology of data

“…Indeed, calls to bring together political ecology and data analytics are not necessarily new and, in many ways, extend ongoing engagements between political ecology and sustainability science (Goldstein et al., 2020; Kelley, 2018), not to mention critical GIS and cartography (Foo, 2019; Weiner et al., 1995). But such partnerships ought to be renewed in the context of, for instance, modeling climate futures and taken in new directions (Colven and Thomson, 2018).…”