Geographic Information Systems (GIS)-Undefined & Dangerous.

“it is a technology…closely tied to the concrete material and ideological needs and interests of certain groups”. p.639

Perkins (1995) article “Representations in an Electronic Age: Geography, GIS and Democracy”, explores the impacts of GIS as a tool, technology and social relation. His discussion of GIS, begins with the claim that GIS is not straightforward, it is fraught with different interpretations, as the technology infiltrates many different professions and ideological movements. While Geography as an academic discipline has explored and questioned the assumptions of knowledge-making since the late 1970’s; emerging from the modernist paradigm to approaches that question the objectivity of knowledge created for the people to devour rather than query. GIS has largely missed these paradigm shifts.
To brighten the discussion, Perkins draws on the many progressive possibilities of GIS. He points to the re-emergence of a civic culture that draws on the electronic airways to create a “community of dialogue” and the potential for marginalized groups to harness the power of cartographic representation. Therefore on the one hand, GIS can enable communities to better make decisions, providing access to more and better information. On the other hand, it can be used as a power tool for groups to communicate on equal playing fields of those traditional map-makers. This can occur in the face of the development and research of GIS and electronic tools primarily being funded through business, government and military elites.
Nevertheless, Perkins illustrates that the discussions around GIS largely maintain its 1960’s roots, with scientific claims to objectivity. Drawing from contemporary writings on GIS, he points out the problematic nature of inquiry. He concludes that GIS practitioners and academics are focused on the technological ability of GIS to represent reality, rather than considering how the information presents reality. In other words, the weight is on how the spatial data can be manipulated, not the end use of the map, whether this is a market analysis for business interests or mapping out military targets.
It is suggested, from Perkins article that the use and development of GIS reflects the contemporary power structures within society. So yes, it can be used to empower marginalized people, but most often it is used by elites that are acting in their own self-interests and this is mirrored within the literature of GIS. Often this results in a discussion limited to the usefulness of the tool presented within interests that diverge or compete with the proponents of progressive social change. As a result GIS practitioners, can hide behind the technology, as it is muddled between its ability to cross many areas of geographic inquiry, but it is reliant on the justice of the data that feeds it and as Perkins seems to criticize, the values and assumptions behind the data.