Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
The spread of geographic information systems triggered
many criticisms. While the assumptions of objectivity and
neutrality associated with maps were being deconstructed
through the work of the critical cartography authors
[HAR 89], GIS was presented by others at that time as a
“perfect” reproduction of space which could only have been
achieved through computer processing. Conversely from this
objectivist approach, several authors stressed the fact that
the digital description of the territory is never neutral, but is
associated with assumptions concerning the choice of spatial
representation and the possible actions on it. Henri Desbois
conceptualizes the “ideology” embedded in GIS; thus:
We can easily fall under the illusion that digital
simulation is the exact equivalent of the world.
However, the coding of surface spatial data, lines
and points impose a particular interpretation of
space. The way in which databases in general are
made implies a worldview that excludes other
worldviews. For instance, what is quantifiable,
measurable is bound to be favored over what is
not. So digital simulation is inevitably a reduction
which cannot be ideologically neutral.
6
[DES 08]
The GIS archi-text [JEA 99] is filled with a metrological
ideology of space which favors quantifiable spatial phenomena
over non-quantifiable ones. It is what Pickles describes as the
6 “Il est facile d'avoir l'illusion que la simulation numérique est
l'équivalent exact du monde, mais le codage des données spatiales en
surfaces, lignes et points impose une conception de l'espace particulière.
La façon dont les bases de données en général sont constituées implique
déjà une vision du monde qui en exclut d'autres. Par exemple, ce qui est
chiffrable, mesurable, est forcément privilégié par rapport à ce qui ne l'est
pas. La simulation numérique est donc fatalement une réduction qui peut
n'être pas neutre idéologiquement.”
Search WWH ::
Custom Search