Fieldwork and the Geographical Review: Retrospect and Possible Prospects*

References

• Abbott, D. 2006. Disrupting the “Whiteness” of Fieldwork in Geography. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography 27 (3): 326–341.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butz, D. 2008. Sidelined by the Guidelines: Reflections on the Limitations of Standard Informed Consent Procedures for the Conduct of Ethical Research. Acme 7 (2): 239–259.
   Google Scholar
• Butz, D. 2010. Autoethnography as Sensibility. In The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Geography, edited by D. Delyser, S. Herbert, S. Aitken, M. Crang, and L. Mcdowell, 138–155. London : Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Butz, D., and K. Besio, 2009. Autoethnography. Geography Compass 3 (5): 1660–1674.
   Google Scholar
• Clifford, J., and G. E. Marcus, 1986. Writing Culture: The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography. Berkeley : University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Delyser, D. 2008. Teaching Qualitative Research. Journal of Geography in Higher Education 32 (2): 233–244.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delyser, D., and P. F. Starrs, 2001a. Doing Fieldwork: Editors' Introduction. Geographical Review 91 (1 & 2): iv–viii.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delyser, D., eds. 2001b. Special Issue on “Doing Fieldwork.” Geographical Review 91 (1 & 2): iv–viii, 1–508.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Denzin, N. K., Y. Lincoln, and L. T. Smith, eds. 2008. Handbook of Critical and Indigenous Methodologies. Los Angeles : Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Domosh, M. 1997. With “Stout Boots and a Stout Heart”: Historical Methodology and Feminist Geography. In Thresholds in Feminist Geography: Difference, Methodology, Representation, edited by J. P. Jones III, H. Nast, and S. M. Roberts, 225–237. Lanham , Md. : Rowman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Driver, F. 2000. Editorial: Fieldwork in Geography. Transactions, Institute of British Geographers, n.s. 25 (3): 267–268.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerber, R., and Goh K.C., eds. 2000. Fieldwork in Geography: Reflections, Perspectives and Actions. Boston : Kluwer Academic.
   Google Scholar
• Held, V. 2007. The Ethics of Care: Personal, Political, Global. New York : Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Herlihy, P. H., J. E. Dobson, M. Aguilar robledo, D. A. Smith, J. H. Kelly, and others. 2008a. The AGS Bowman Expeditions Prototype: Digital Geography of Indigenous Mexico. Final Report, Mexican Property Development Survey / Mexico Open Source Geographic Information Systems to [the U.S. Army] Foreign Military Studies Office (FMSO) NRCC [Northern Regional Contracting Center]–Fort Leavenworth. Short version at [http://web.ku.edu/~mexind/FMSO_Final_Report_2008_web_version.pdf].
   Google Scholar
• Herlihy, P. H., J. E. Dobson, M. Aguilar robledo, D. A. Smith, J. H. Kelly, and A. Ramos viera. 2008b. A Digital Geography of Indigenous Mexico: Prototype for the American Geographical Society's Bowman Expeditions. Geographical Review 98 (3): 395–415.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnston, R. J., and J. D. Sidaway, 2004. Geography and Geographers: Anglo‐American Human Geography since 1945. 6th ed. New York : Hodder Arnold.
   Google Scholar
• Katz, C. 1994. Playing the Field: Questions of Fieldwork in Geography. Professional Geographer 46 (1): 67–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lincoln, Y. S. 2005. Institutional Review Boards and Methodological Conservatism: The Challenge to and from Phenomenological Paradigms. In The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research, edited by N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln, 165–181. 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks , Calif. : Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Livingstone, D. 1993. The Geographical Tradition: Episodes in the History of a Contested Enterprise. New York : Wiley‐Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, G. J., and P. E. James, 1993. All Possible Worlds: A History of Geographical Ideas. 3rd ed. New York : Wiley & Sons.
   Google Scholar
• México Indígena. 2010. México Indígena: A Multi‐Scale Geographical Analysis of Indigenous Mexico. [http://web.ku.edu/~mexind/].
   Google Scholar
• Michalejko, C., and R. Ryan, 2009. U.S. Military Funded Mapping Project in Oaxaca. Z Magazine, April. [http://www.zcommunications.org/contents/33299].
   Google Scholar
• Nast, H. J. 1994. Opening Remarks on “Women in the Field.” Professional Geographer 46 (1): 54–66.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parsons, J. J. 1977. Geography as Exploration and Discovery. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 67 (1): 1–16.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peet, R. 1998. Modern Geographical Thought. New York : Wiley‐Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• PG [Professional Geographer]. 1994. Special Issue on “Women in the Field: Critical Feminist Methodologies and Theoretical Perspectives.” Professional Geographer 46 (1): 54–102.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Platt, R. S. 1959. Field Study in American Geography: The Development of Theory and Method Exemplified by Selections. University of Chicago, Department of Geography Research Paper No. 61. Chicago .
   Google Scholar
• Pratt, M. L. 1992. Imperial Eyes: Travel Writing and Transculturation. London : Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Robinson, W. D. 2007. Formative Work and Preliminary Results Using RDS: New Orleans after Katrina. Paper presented at the Annual Meetings of the American Public Health Association, Washington, D.C., 5 November. [http://apha.confex.com/apha/135am/techprogram/paper_167109.htm].
   Google Scholar
• Rundstrom, R. A., and M. S. Kenzer, 1989. The Decline of Fieldwork in Human Geography. Professional Geographer 41 (3): 294–303.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith, L. T. 1999. Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples. Dunedin , New Zealand : University of Otago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sundberg, J. 2003. Masculinist Epistemologies and the Politics of Fieldwork in Latin Americanist Geography. Professional Geographer 55 (2): 180–190.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar