In this commentary, I reflect on geographical analysis as it enters middle age, focusing on what I perceive to be central elements—for both field and journal—of past growth and development, as well as future robustness and potential. My particular interest lies in evaluating “geographical analysis” as it stands today, taking the journal as one proxy for the larger field, and placing this within a wider context of quantitative human geography. As with any set of perspectives, mine are idiosyncratic and the product of a particular experience at a particular time. To make my case, I draw on manuscript citation histories from Geographical Analysis, my interpretation of recent developments in the discipline, and of course the insights of others who have plowed these pastures before me. I close by offering some thoughts about the future directions of our field and our journal.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 5 citations exist upstream.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.