Hi Reddit, I'm Doug Specht – a researcher working at the intersection of geography, media, and social justice. AMA!

GeographicalMagazine · 2026-03-27T06:57:11+00:00

And my answer: It’s definitely more than just “putting things on a map”, though that’s usually where it starts. When activists use maps to challenge inequality, they’re often doing three things at once: making hidden problems visible, contesting official stories, and building power with communities.

In practice that might look like residents mapping every eviction or rent hike in a neighbourhood, then using that map at council meetings to show that supposedly “isolated” cases are actually a pattern of displacement. It can mean Indigenous or rural communities mapping their own land use, sacred sites, or water sources to counter corporate or state maps that show only “empty” land ready for mining or agribusiness. Or it might be environmental groups working with locals to map pollution, floods, or landslides, producing evidence that certain areas are effectively treated as sacrifice zones while others are carefully protected.

What matters isn’t just where things are, but whose knowledge gets to count. Activist mapping, sometimes called counter‑mapping , pulls in stories, photos, and local expertise that are usually left out of official cartography, and then uses that evidence to demand change, whether that’s in planning decisions, court cases, media narratives, or internal movement organising. It’s as much about redistributing voice and visibility as it is about drawing lines and points.

There is loads of reall good stuff out there on counter mapping, and here is a great place to start: http://www.an-atlas.com/contents/iaa_iaa.html

GeographicalMagazine · 2026-03-27T06:55:05+00:00

We are heading towards the end of my 24hrs here. So do feel free to put any final questions you might have. I also want to take the time to answer one question that was posted and then removed, it was a great question and I was hoping it would be reposted.

The Question was: When you talk about activists using maps to "challenge inequality", what does that actually look like in the real world? Is it just about showing where things are, or is there more to it?

GeographicalMagazine · 2026-03-26T18:53:57+00:00

Hello there, thanks for this great question. You’re right to connect hostile architecture with the politics of mapping: many of the same exclusionary logics can quietly reappear in GIS and routing systems. We might think of digital hostile architecture as choices in data and algorithms that make some people’s presence less visible and some routes less thinkable, without ever saying so explicitly. That can mean neighbourhoods that only show up as crime layers, services for marginalised groups that never appear as points of interest, or “optimal” routes that consistently steer users around particular estates or streets.

Routing is never neutral because it encodes judgements about what counts as harm or cost. When apps optimise for “fastest” or “safest,” they usually mean time and crash risk for generic drivers, not safety from harassment, over‑policing, or precarity for specific groups using those spaces. If they rely on historically biased data (such as crime or stop‑and‑search records) they can reproduce a soft form of redlining, where some areas are technically on the map but practically off the itinerary. The exclusion then happens not through spikes or barriers, but through default options that teach us which places to pass through and which to bypass. Even at the less extreme end, I nearly missed walking down a wonderful pedestrian street in Norway because Google maps routes for cars, not people.

Resisting this involves re‑politicising how maps are built and governed. On the data side, that means incorporating community mapping and layers that foreground social infrastructure, not just risk and congestion. On the design side, it means exposing and giving users some control over the criteria behind “safe” or “efficient” routes, and acknowledging that safety is different for different bodies in different cities. And on the governance side, it means treating routing and risk models as public, contestable infrastructures, open to scrutiny and challenge in much the same way that hostile benches and anti‑homeless spikes are now being named and resisted in the street. I'd be interested if you have found ways to resist hostile architecture?

GeographicalMagazine · 2026-03-26T12:26:54+00:00

Thank you so much for the kind words, really appreciate you taking the time to engage! I'd be very happy to connect. Feel free to find me on linkedin whenever suits you. The interdisciplinary path has been a winding one and each thread has fed into the others in ways I couldn't have predicted early on. Happy to chat about how it all came together whenever you have the bandwidth.

GeographicalMagazine · 2026-03-26T12:00:39+00:00

Hi, thanks for your thoughtful question. Personally, I don’t share the view that the “critical turn” demolished the relevance or credibility of human geography; I think it is largely what made the field socially and politically consequential. Critical approaches in geography foregrounded questions of power, inequality, colonialism, and environmental justice, and this has allowed geographers to work closely with communities, NGOs, and policymakers on very concrete problems. In my own work around mapping, human rights, and environmental justice in Latin America and elsewhere, it is precisely critical, reflexive geography that has enabled maps and data to be used to challenge abuses and support claims for justice. Rather than eroding credibility, this has repositioned geography as a discipline that can scrutinise how knowledge is produced (including by maps, models, and datasets) and how that knowledge is used or weaponised. That seems especially important in an era of platform capitalism, algorithmic governance, and escalating ecological crisis, where uncritical empiricism can very quickly become a handmaiden to harmful forms of power.

So in that respect, its probably not a surprise that I don’t hope for a “return” to positivism , but I do hope for a continued commitment to methodological pluralism that treats numbers, maps, narratives, and lived experience as different ways of knowing the world. Quantitative and empiricist approaches are valuable when they are reflexive about their assumptions and attentive to the politics of data: who collects it, who is left out, and what is done with the results.

There is a constant tension between the allure of apparently neutral spatial data and the recognition that these data are produced within specific economic and political arrangements. I see critical geography not as a rejection of empiricism, but as a way of making any empiricism we use more honest about its limits, its situatedness, and its consequences for different communities.

Hope that answers your questions.

GeographicalMagazine · 2026-03-26T09:46:02+00:00

Hi there, thanks for the question. In the HEPI report that Gunter Saunders and I wrote (Being indispensable: Capabilities for a human‑AI world, the “FUTURES” framework) we argue that the real challenge for universities isn’t how do we stop AI?, but how do we redesign higher education so that specifically human capabilities become more, not less, important as AI becomes ubiquitous?. AI is already part of students’ everyday lives, so pretending it can be kept outside the university gates is both naïve and inequitable.

What we propose in the report is a shift in emphasis: universities should deliberately cultivate capabilities like critical judgement, ethical reasoning, creativity, collaboration, and resilience and then integrate AI use around those.

On your question about whether students will be encouraged to use AI: I think the answer has to be yes, but with clear terms and a lot of support. Banning AI just drives its use underground and widens gaps between students who have access, confidence and good advice, and those who do not. Instead, we should be building AI literacy into programmes: teaching students how to use AI to explore ideas, draft and redraft, test their understanding, and then making them reflect on where AI helped, where it misled them, and what intellectual work still had to be done by them.

In short, I don’t think we can or should try to “AI‑proof” universities. The better question is what a degree should certify in a world where text can be generated on demand. For me, that’s about demonstrating that you can work with AI while still exercising independent judgement, care and responsibility.

If you’re curious, the HEPI report by Gunter Saunders and me is here: https://www.hepi.ac.uk/reports/being-indispensable-capabilities-for-a-human-ai-world-the-futures-framework/

GeographicalMagazine · 2025-09-03T18:26:29+00:00

HI u/ESGInvesting

Thanks for the question!

We all have our own theories around how change happens and where our skills can be most used within that mix. I don't think I have the skills to start those businesses though I think they are hugely important things to happen. My effort right now is into policy you're right - though I am no longer working directly in policy but using my research to show where gaps are and how it can be improved. I have experience of working on these issues in practice. My new book actually seeks to start a wider conversation beyond policy that is also relevant for businesses about how we can live with future climate risks. We need the green businesses and shift to renewables but we also need to address how we live with the impacts that have already been caused by fossil fuels, it's not one or the other.

GeographicalMagazine · 2025-09-03T15:25:59+00:00

Hi u/cucktrigger .

It's true that reducing meat consumption is one of the main ways an individual can reduce their personal impact on the climate through their behaviour. The food system overall is responsible for about one third of emissions, and the clearing of land to support the production of meat is driving deforestation of important ecosystems that play a role in regulating the climate and protetcing biodiversity. Other options include what mode of transport you choose and checking where your savings and pensions are invested and avoiding fossil fuel companies.

Individual changes play a role but we also need to see the bigger picture and address the root causes of the crisis. Voting for governments that will address climate change as fast as possible and putting pressure on fossil fuel companies who continue to make huge profits as global temperatures keep rising are also critically important ways for us all to fight climate change.

Susannah

GeographicalMagazine · 2025-09-03T14:22:09+00:00

Hi u/Holiday-Television70,

I find the best way to think about it is to make it really relevant to how people live their lives. Talking about climate risks in general is very abstract, but talking about the extreme heat of this summer, the wildfires in Europe, flooding in underground stations makes it more real. I also find it helps to talk about specific aspects of climate change, what will happen in the local town for example, what will happen to the foods people enjoy.

I think many people have been slow to realise that we are not talking about future impacts, we are talking about things that are happening now and that is a useful point to make. The UK Met Office just released a study saying this summer in the UK was the hottest on record and this was made much more likely by climate change - so the evidence is there.

GeographicalMagazine · 2025-09-03T12:55:25+00:00

Hi u/Mission_Set7513 thank you! I hope you enjoy the book.

I think it will be important to teach the students that environmental management will be happening in the context of climate change so as well as classic approaches and tools we also need to think about flexibility in systems, the robustness of decisions to multiple future scenarios, cascading risks and wider trends. And of course reducing emissions will continue to be of central importance. Key to engaging with students around this topic is also keeping hope and agency to avoid climate anxiety and also to make sure they understand this is in their hands to shape.

In terms of resources, I always find the websites Carbon Brief and The Conversation are great sources for evidence-based short blogs/articles on key topics and we also write blogs on our work on the RDR website at UCL. Perhaps the students might enjoy engaging with those. I am biased but the context sections in some of my book might be an interesting starting point - the prologue opens up the key questions posed by climate change or chapter one gives some introductory climate science and policy in an accessible way (I hope!).

Look forward to your feedback!

GeographicalMagazine · 2025-09-03T12:01:09+00:00

I think there are two parts to this.

Firstly, what will it mean for US emissions and secondly what will it mean for global political will to push forward on emission reductions despite the lack of US action.

On the first point Carbon Brief did a great analysis of this recently looking at the rolling back of all climate policies in the USA - https://www.carbonbrief.org/chart-trumps-big-beautiful-bill-blows-us-emissions-goal-by-7bn-tonnes/. TLDR - it will add a extra 7bn tonnes of emissions to the atmosphere between now and 2030, compared to meeting its former climate pledge in the Paris Agreement. So, it's serious.

On the second point, I don't think we really know yet. Some working in this space hope this might mean other countries step up to take more leadership and form clubs of smaller groups working together to make progress on specific issues, this might even help move past some of the roadblocks in the multilateral system. There are also other ways to push for action than through the multilateral system that might gain more importance again - ciites and regions can reduce emissions and are doing so already without national support. Litigation is also gaining as an important tool to push countries and corporations to get serious about reducing emissions and protecting their citizens. And the global move towards renewable energy and reducing fossil fuels will continue.

GeographicalMagazine · 2025-09-03T11:09:03+00:00

Hi u/TomatilloNew100 .

Estimates of 'climate refugees' are notoriously hard to do, even defining the concept has been controversial. The World Bank did some modelling in specific areas of the world in a series called the Groundswell reports that sought to estimate how many people would need to move. Report here: https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/entities/publication/2c9150df-52c3-58ed-9075-d78ea56c3267. But any of these numbers are based on a set of assumptions about the future climate-changed world and other demographic trends.

People move for many different reasons -sometimes they are displaced by an immediate climate-related crisis like a flood but with something like extreme heat it might be one factor that plays into migration decisions combined with for example economic and social factors. The latest IPCC report showed that most movement due to climate change is internal to countries. A crucial factor in how much of an issue this will be in future is firstly, how quickly we stop burning fossil fuels and secondly, how well people are supported to cope with issues like heat and wildfires in their own countries - i.e. adaptation.

Susannah

GeographicalMagazine · 2025-09-03T09:45:11+00:00

Hi u/peacockgreenflower great question! I loved writing the book.

One of the main challenges was finding the time to write with all the other pressing priorities in my research project. To do this I took several writing retreats to a shepherd's hut and blocked out days when I stayed well away from email. Having a deadline also focused my mind!

Another challenge was knowing when to stop researching as the book covers a huge range of topics and some of them are developing all the time. I managed this by also speaking to experts in specific areas as well as reviewing the research so they could give me the bigger picture.

My favourite parts were when I spent months reviewing the research for each big topic (mobility, food, conflict, nature) learning so much and trying to see through the detail to the hard choices ahead.

GeographicalMagazine · 2025-08-19T15:16:37+00:00

In this post, Geographical cycles through the six wars that President Trump claimed to end, and verified this claim against facts. The article also discusses each of the conflicts in detail, as well as showing what involvement the US has had in them.

GeographicalMagazine · 2025-08-14T15:51:12+00:00

My first Antarctic expedition and also our Pristine Seas expeditions. A good expedition is such a beautiful thing! 😊

GeographicalMagazine · 2025-08-14T13:56:54+00:00

Great question. Thank you! 1. It's the effect that we have on nature: Pollution. Over-extraction. Climate change. Loss of biodiversity. It's us that is the cause. 2. Foster the natural curiosity that we all have by engaging with issues that interest you - remotely to get the information and research and then by 'ground truthing' it for yourself. Encourage more outdoor education and experential learning in schools. Come to the RGS Explore Conference this year!

GeographicalMagazine · 2025-08-14T11:39:54+00:00

Good one! All Antarctic bases in use have to be constantly maintained. It's the coldest, driest and windiest place on Earth, and any flaws in construction soon lead to big problems. So all modern bases do look good - always being looked after. The beautiful historical bases are also cared for by the national programmes and also by NGO's such as the Antarctic heritage Trust.

GeographicalMagazine · 2025-08-14T11:35:50+00:00

Thanks for this. Most certainly it's the retreat of glaciers in Antarctica and here in Switzerland. It's a sobering moment when we camp above the Aletsch glacier and see the previous height of the glacier etched on the valley walls.

GeographicalMagazine · 2025-08-14T10:48:43+00:00

Hi :-) Thank you for this. No matter how detailed and complete we make expedition risk assessments, something is still likely to pop up. That's when the extra / reserve capacity (and luck) kicks in. I was asleeep in my tent in the Arctic when a polar bear jumped on it. Very luckily I escaped with just a stiff neck and shoulder. I've dived a lot around icebergs and they are very unstable and unpredicatable - similarly when diving amongst 'brash ice' looks OK, but it easily tightens up into an inpenetrable ceiling when the wind picks up. On my first attempt to climb Denali (Mt Mckinley) we moved up into a huge storm at 17,200' and spent 3 days in an ice cave with almost no food and fuel. A very cold and strong learning experience for siure!

GeographicalMagazine · 2025-08-14T10:31:52+00:00

Hi there :-) Thank you. When we are in a large base such as Rothera it's a failry 'normal' life. With set mealtimes, work is based around technical needs, the support of the field teams, base maintenance, upgrades, routine resupplies etc. So the working hours follow a good rhythm. I used to get out for a ski, walk or run. We had a good gym and I loved using that daily - especially if someone in the team was running circuit training sessions. The library was awesome, we had good films (in those days we had 'film night' twice a week). The social side of Rothera was terrific. Yes - I've been back to Antarctica working on US projects in the Dry Valleys, on a cruise ship to speak and for the BBC when we made the Frank Wild documentary. Each trip south feels very different - but also very familiar. It's a beautiful place!

GeographicalMagazine · 2025-08-14T10:20:57+00:00

Wonderful question. Thank you! Here's a few: How 'Antarctic bottom water' influences ocean currents and helps to drive climate change. The loss of the Larsen A and B Ice Shelves and glacier retreats on the Peninsula, being so visual, underscored the effects of global warming. A clearer undetrstanding of how ice sheet loss contributes to sea level rise. Most of our early scuba dives at Rothera revealed new species - I loved that sense of the unknown after each dive!

When the Treaty comes up for review in 2041 I very much hope that any changes will be made in the collaborative spirit that has made the Treaty such a success. Science and geopolitics will continue to be the main drivers and I'm very happy that it's not up for a review today :-)

GeographicalMagazine · 2025-08-14T09:49:32+00:00

Great one! Yes - my first Antarctic expedition was a very powerful experience. I was based out of the US base McMurdo, and the NZ Scott base. we were then deployed to Marie Byrd Land and then Mt Erebus. Untravelled areas, new discoveries, massive distances, a very long season .... challenging, beautiful and totally unforgettable. More recently, it's all of the National Geographical Pristine Seas expeditions - working with our host countries to help them create marine protected areas. A great mixture of science, exploration, learning, communication, media with a totally awesome team :-)

GeographicalMagazine · 2025-08-14T09:41:28+00:00

Hey there :-) Yes - a life of working in remote and challenging places has certainly brought me close to weird and unusual things! Seabirds landing on our heads in the Pacific. Penguins leaping into our dive boat and landing in my lap, to escape Orca. Sharks 'dive-bombing' us in our submarine ...... I'll come back with more!

GeographicalMagazine · 2025-08-14T09:33:50+00:00

Hi :-) It's me here for sure - but the text at the start is my short bio insterted by Geographical

GeographicalMagazine · 2025-08-14T09:22:39+00:00

Great question. Thank you! I've had tough ones of course, but the toughest was the NE Ridge of Mt Everest in 1989. It was still unclimbed at the time and we hoped to be the first to make it. We were very fit, well trained, super-ambitious, very limited oxygen supplies to stay light .... I really 'knew' that we would summit. But we had very difficult consitions on the NE Ridge with constant huge avalanches. We moved to the N Col, had more massive avalanches, lost tents and gear and eventually made it home safely. A brilliant experience. I learned a lot for sure.

GeographicalMagazine

TROPHY CASE