Why Not in My Back Yard? Field-Based Physical Geography Research in the Southeast

• Published in: Southeastern geographer Vol. 44; no. 1; pp. 15 - 26
• Main Authors: PEASE, PATRICK P., GENTRY, GLENN W.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Chapel Hill Journal of the Southeastern Division, Association of American Geographers 01.05.2004; University of North Carolina Press; The University of North Carolina Press
• Subjects: Biogeography; Climatology; Datasets; Field research; Geodetic position; Geographic regions; Geography; Geomorphology; Landscapes; Physical geography; Trends; United States > US
• ISSN: 0038-366X; 1549-6929

Observations that submissions of physical geography research to theSoutheastern Geographerhave been low prompted us to question if the Southeast is understudied by physical geographers relative to other regions. We reviewed over 7,000 articles in eleven journals to estimate the frequency and types of field-based research being done. We also reviewed the online publication lists of physical geographers living in the Southeast to determine where they conduct their research. Based on the journal articles reviewed, 72% of the field sites were in international locations. Of the 28% that used U.S. field sites, only 8.4% (2.3% of the total) were in the Southeast. Given that the Southeast makes up over 12% of the land area and is home to 37% of the geography programs in the U.S., the concentration of research in the area is low. Aside from being understudied, field-based research in the Southeast is also unevenly distributed. North Carolina and Georgia were the most studied states. North Carolina was the most frequently used location for geomorphology studies and Tennessee was cited most often for biogeography. Kentucky and South Carolina were the least studied states. Few researchers from states outside the SEDAAG region come into the Southeast to conduct research. At the same time, a significant portion of the research efforts of geographers living in the Southeast have been put toward field sites in other states and countries. The resulting lack of focus on the unique environments of the Southeast is limiting our knowledge of the region.