By James Cheshire, University College London
I’m always amused to hear fellow academics tie themselves in knots as they try to explain to those outside the discipline what it is they actually do for a living. The pre-conceptions around ‘geography’ are so entrenched, they’re very hard to overcome. I’ve long given up trying to convince anyone kind enough to ask that geography isn’t just about listing capital cities! I used to tell them: “I’m interested in the geospatial analysis and visualisation of spatially referenced population datasets”, but soon came to recognise their blank stare and sudden pivot to discussing the weather that day. I’ve since learnt to lean into another stereotype and give a much simpler answer: "I make maps."
This response never extinguishes a conversation, it ignites it with further questions: “What kind of maps?”, “I thought we had mapped everything already?”, “Did you see that map of…?” and so on. People connect with maps and, unlike a geographer’s love of tweed jackets, they are one of the few useful stereotypes we can capitalise on as a discipline. So it’s my firm view that academic geographers can further embrace maps as a medium integral to the communication of geographical ideas and research findings.
For example, maps can give you both the local and the global perspective. In the context of the climate crisis they can show that global heating is not uniform, with temperatures increasing in some areas more than others not just across the earth but also within cities as concrete-laden neighbourhoods (typically more deprived) suffer the worst aspects of the urban heat island. They can be used to leverage change by highlighting illogical positions held by those in power, something suffragists did to great effect with their map-based Votes for Women a Success campaign in the first half of the 20th century.
There is no expectation to be a cartographic genius, geographers can engage with maps already in the public sphere. All major media outlets have teams of data journalists, some of whom have geography degrees, generating maps to illustrate their stories and all looking to improve their outputs and also challenge their audiences. If you spot a mistake or have concerns about (mis)representations leading to misconceptions then share your concerns. When Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022 the visual language adopted to portray the flows of refugees was that of large arrows, akin to those used to depict the invading army. I challenged this and as a result the BBC, Financial Times and The Economist all changed their symbols away from arrowheads.
Government too is keen to learn from geographers how to better use maps and visualisations. For example, there was a chorus of critiques about the use of visualisations in the COVID-19 briefing slides during the first year of the pandemic that triggered improvements. Any critique needs to extend beyond the ‘all maps are wrong’ tropes and offer constructive suggestions. When done well there are lasting positive impacts on the ways that complex issues are portrayed to the public.
For those looking to make maps and share them widely, I’d offer the following advice: firstly, you need to convey a clear narrative to achieve impact. Think about the most important thing you want your readers to take away when they have seen the map. Is there a way you can amplify that message (whilst remaining true to the data)? A map that needs lots of caveats in its explanation and a raft of side notes should stay in academic publications. Assume all nuance is lost when it is posted online, so you should be comfortable with the impression the map gives at face value. With that in mind, be sure of your data; check it and check again. The first thing a reader does when they look at a map is locate somewhere familiar, such as where they live, and then compare that to the other parts of the map. They’ll soon spot a mistake if something is amiss.
And finally, find some critical friends to offer feedback before sharing more widely. I’ve never once had a bad suggestion for an improvement. If readers don’t understand the map, it’s your problem not theirs!
My last thought comes from John K. Wright, who’s 1942 paper entitled ‘Map Makers are Human’ is often on my mind when I’m creating a map. In the midst of World War II he said:
“Maps help to form public opinion and build public morale. When the war is over, they will contribute to shaping the thought and action of those responsible for the reconstruction of a shattered world.”
Maps are powerful things so we’d be foolish to overlook them when encouraging others to think geographically.
Key points
-
Maps are an immensely powerful tool to communicate geographical research outputs and ideas.
-
Geographers don’t have to make maps to engage with them in public.
-
Narrative, confidence in the content and feedback are essential if maps are to be successful.
Banner image: James Cheshire and Oliver Uberti
How to cite
Cheshire, J. (2023) I make maps. Communicating research beyond the academy. Royal Geographical Society (with IBG) Guide. Available at: https://doi.org/10.55203/MASJ5124
About this guide
There’s a long tradition of geographers communicating research ‘beyond the academy’ - to policy, to publics, to young people, to school teachers - whether to recruit students, for career development, critical praxis and activism, or requirements of funders to document ‘impact’. Ten years ago we published the Communicating Geographical Research Beyond the Academy guide. It sought to bring together and share collective experience and learning, from within and beyond the academy. Today, there’s ever more opportunities and modes and media with which to do this. While many of the points made – about audience, about access, about brevity and the use of plain English – still stand, this collection covers these already familiar issues as well as bringing new perspectives to encourage readers to reflect on motives, means and methods and to illuminate examples of good practice.
