By Logan Wiley

Last month, my labmate Annie and I presented our research on the Athens eviction landscape at UGA’s annual Center for Undergraduate Research (CURO) Symposium. We had spent many of our research hours in two places: at the Athens Magistrate Court Office digitizing eviction files or in the Community Mapping Lab entering data into our online dashboard. So, discussing our work with professors, community partners, and other student researchers offered a refreshing and rewarding culmination of our effort during the semester. Our poster focused on the relationship between eviction filing and non-local property ownership, visualized by our map of eviction hotspots in the county and filings identified by non-local and local ownership. Through my work on the project this year, I developed my understanding of mapping’s role in analyzing housing inequities but also realized that our maps lack many of the causes and contexts necessary for addressing these issues.

Our updated map of eviction filing hotspots and rental property ownership showed four eviction hotspots dispersed in west, east, and north Athens. Most of these hotspots concentrate around apartment complexes including Lexington Heights, Arbor Ridge Apartments, and Hidden Pines Apartments. Based on my readings of the files, tenants often receive an eviction affidavit after being late or partially behind on rent due to job loss or temporary illness. From my perspective, eviction filings exacerbate housing insecurity in impoverished areas of Athens and perpetuate income inequality. Along with updating our visualization of the eviction hotspots, we wanted to analyze how nonlocal property speculation affects housing insecurity in Athens by investigating the business locations of evicting property owners. This analysis was overdue after the purchase of duplexes by non-local investment company Prosperity Capital Partners led to rent increases and displacement for low-income Athens tenants in June 2022.

I would like to expand analysis of nonlocal property ownership to include some statistical analysis, but for this poster we conducted preliminary examination and visualization of nonlocal speculation. Out of the twelve property owners with more than fifty evictions filed within their properties, nine of them are based outside of Georgia (75%). Prosperity Capital Partners dominates the list with more than 350 filings across their many Athens properties, equating to more than 10% of all eviction filings recorded within our period of analysis. The next highest evicting owner, Filmore Capital Partners, has about 175 filings recorded, half the amount of Prosperity Capital Partners. Even from these first analytical steps, it’s clear that non-local property speculation plays a role in displacement and must be considered for future policies and housing activism. The updated hotspot and nonlocal property ownership analysis produced engaging discussion before and during the conference, but I believe the next phase of the project must find a new community partner or expand our local network to properly use our data and inform organizations addressing the housing crisis. Mapping where evictions occur has been an important foundation for the project; now, we must expand analysis on why evictions occur and how we can address displacement in our community.

So far, we have worked well with the local government and the activist group Athens Housing Advocacy Team (AHAT), but I feel that the project lacks the experiences of tenants experiencing the housing crisis. Although still vague, I hope to help include more community perspectives in further analysis, possibly through alternative mapping methods or explorations of the roles of gender, race, and language in the experience of housing insecurities. After developing a strong research network in the Community Mapping Lab and learning practical skills through geospatial analysis and visualization, I feel confident to identify and fill in the blind spots of our current eviction analysis.

Logan Wiley is an undergraduate at UGA majoring in Geography and Psychology. He has been working in the CML for the last two years.

By Daniel Klein, Community GIS student in Spring 2024

This spring in Community GIS, we are working on a report that explores ongoing changes to the historically Black neighborhood of Inner East Athens (IEA), and the difficulties and disparities that its residents face. As we began work on this project, our 19-strong class of student geographers split into more focused subgroups, with each person being assigned a specific role in their respective group. My group, Demographics, is using data from the U.S. Census Bureau to look at the current demographic characteristics of IEA, compare the neighborhood to the rest of Athens, and assess how the area has changed over the last five to ten years. My role is the Cartography and Visualization lead, which means I am in charge of taking data and creating the final visuals that will complement our written report.

When I found out that I was assigned this position, I was admittedly relieved. I wouldn’t have to deal with the headaches inevitably engendered by finding data sources, wrestling those data files into something we could use, or dealing with finicky functions in GIS software. I would get to do the fun stuff, the thing that most people assume you do all day when you say you study geography—make maps. However, once I started mapping, I was met with a series of difficult choices surrounding how exactly I would visualize my group’s findings, stemming from one cartographic truism: there are umptillion possible ways to visualize the same data, and unfortunately for all of us, there’s no “correct” method.
 
Take some of the dilemmas I faced as I tried to complete this task, which I thought would be simple. First, I wondered whether I should even use a map to represent some of our findings. Might a graph or a table be better? And if I make a map, should I show data at the census block group level, or the less granular census tract level? On one hand, displaying block groups could pinpoint hotspots of rapid demographic change, but with such a fine analysis, a viewer might miss the forest for the trees and not see the broader trends in IEA. 
 
Another area of confusion was the best way to demonstrate change over time. For instance, one question my group wanted to answer is how the number of IEA residents who are enrolled in college has changed over time, as increasing numbers of college-enrolled individuals might be a sign that an influx of student housing and students is forcing out long-time residents. But when comparing the percent of college-enrolled residents in 2022 and 2012, should I visualize the change in percent or the percent change for each block group? The former is easier to understand, but it wouldn’t highlight areas of exponential change. A block group that increases by a factor of six from 4% to 24% would look the same as one that increases from 75% to 95%, but the first is far more interesting for my group’s purposes than the second. Meanwhile, showing the percent change would call attention to rapid increases or decreases, but is less intuitive for the viewer—“percent change in percents” is almost as hard to understand as it is to say out loud.

These visualization choices, despite how trivial they probably seem, became more serious when I considered the way our work may be used in the future. For once, my cartographic choices would not be contained to the shelter of a university course; instead, they would be showcased to the broader public. Not to overstate my own importance, but whether or not my maps effectively communicated our findings could play some small role in our community partners’ ability to secure grants, or whether policymakers view the ongoing changes in IEA as important.
 
The solution to these issues at which I arrived: make the visualization choices that convey the points you want to emphasize. It’s vague, it’s disappointingly ad hoc, but it’s the only remedy that will work in all cases. Every research question is different, and there’s no singular best practice for all projects.
 
In one’s maps, you must balance a kind of internal and external validity: Does your visualization faithfully depict the results of your analysis? And does it authentically  depict what is occurring in the “real world”? Sometimes, you have to sacrifice one of these qualities for the other, like the earlier discussion of change in percent vs. percent change. In the end, I opted to show changes in percent because I prioritized digestibility, even though areas of rapid change might appear muted. But another researcher, working on a different project, trying to make a different point might choose otherwise. That’s okay—just be aware of the implications on what the reader will take home from your conclusions.
 
All maps tell a story. But some stories are more useful than others.

Keywords: Cartography, visualization, research
 
Bio: Daniel Klein is a fourth-year studying International Affairs, with minors in Sociology and Political Science and a certificate in Geographic Information Sciences. After graduating in spring 2024, he plans to explore employment in the field of public opinion research before ultimately pursuing a PhD in political science.

By Sana Ullah, Spring 2024 Community GIS Student

As someone deeply rooted in community projects and passionate about leveraging technology for positive social change, the intersection of community GIS (Geographic Information Systems) and addressing complex issues like food security holds immense significance to me. With a background in agricultural development and rural communities, I understand the transformative power of collaborative efforts in tackling pressing challenges. In this blog post, I aim to explore the importance of community GIS, drawing upon my experiences and highlighting the role of the Community GIS course offered at the Geography department of the University of Georgia (UGA) in addressing food security, particularly in the context of Inner East Athens, Georgia. My journey in community projects began in the fertile fields of rural landscapes in Pakistan, where I witnessed firsthand the resilience and ingenuity of local communities in overcoming agricultural challenges. Working alongside rural farmers and community leaders, I learned the importance of participatory approaches in sustainable development initiatives. From implementing local food systems to promoting improved farming practices, I witnessed the transformative impact of empowering communities with the tools and knowledge to shape their own destinies.


Community GIS emerged as a powerful tool in my PhD career at UGA, offering a spatial lens through which to understand and address complex socio-environmental issues. By harnessing geospatial data and community input, GIS enables stakeholders to visualize patterns, identify disparities, and co-create solutions tailored to local contexts. From mapping land use patterns to analyzing socio-economic indicators, GIS empowers communities to make informed decisions and advocate for change. GIS empowers communities because analyzing data such as demographic data of an aera through GIS techniques can provide us with some significant information that could be used by local government, NGOs, and other stakeholders to shape policies and implement project for the development of the area. The Community GIS course offered at the Geography department of UGA stands at the nexus of theory and practice, equipping students with the skills and knowledge to leverage GIS for community-driven initiatives. Through hands-on projects and engagement with local partners, students explore the potential of GIS as a tool for social justice and environmental stewardship. By bridging the gap between academia and community action, the course cultivates a new generation of change-makers poised to tackle real-world challenges.


Inner East Athens, like many urban areas globally, grapples with the complex interplay of gentrification and the accessibility of nutritious food. As someone deeply rooted in agricultural practices and rural development, I recognize the critical importance of sustaining local food systems while navigating the challenges posed by rapid urbanization and climate change. This class blog is trying to highlight the importance of food security Inner East Athens because there are some reasons that cause it such as gentrification and studentification. Food security goes beyond mere access to food; it encompasses availability, access, utilization, and stability of food sources. Inner East Athens, historically vibrant with diverse communities, now faces the repercussions of gentrification, altering the socio-economic fabric and influencing food accessibility. Gentrification often leads to rising living costs, displacing low-income residents and disrupting their access to affordable and nutritious food. Gentrification reshapes neighborhoods and alters the challenges and opportunities for businesses for the local communities. This transition often marginalizes existing communities, exacerbating food insecurity among vulnerable populations. As property values soar, traditional residents are priced out of their neighborhoods, disrupting social networks and community cohesion vital for collective food security initiatives.


The challenges faced in inner East Athens echo across urban landscapes worldwide. Cities serve as epicenters of economic activity, attracting diverse populations seeking livelihood opportunities. However, rapid urbanization often outpaces infrastructure development, leading to food deserts and unequal distribution of resources. From New York to Nairobi, urban areas grapple with the dual challenge of food security and gentrification, underscoring the need for holistic interventions. Due to various socio-economic transformations in IEA, local initiatives and ideas can help tackle the community problems such as community gardens, urban farming cooperatives, and farmers' markets reclaim vacant lots and public spaces, fostering local food production and strengthening community resilience. One of the examples is Rashe who is very passionate about the development and prosperity of her community people.  These initiatives not only promote food sovereignty but also foster social inclusion and environmental sustainability. Effective policy frameworks are essential for addressing the root causes of food insecurity and gentrification. Governments must prioritize inclusive urban planning, ensuring equitable access to land and resources for small-scale farmers and marginalized communities. Zoning regulations should encourage mixed-income neighborhoods and protect cultural heritage, preserving traditional food systems and culinary diversity.


Creating resilient food systems requires collaboration across sectors, including government agencies, civil society organizations, and private enterprises. Partnerships that leverage local knowledge and global expertise can catalyze impactful interventions, fostering holistic approaches to food security and urban development. Empowering communities to lead their own initiatives promotes ownership and sustainability, fostering a sense of collective responsibility towards nourishing communities. As I embark on this journey at the intersection of community projects and GIS, I am excited by the possibilities that lie ahead. Through collaborations with local stakeholders, including community organizations, government agencies, and academic institutions like UGA, I am confident that we can leverage the power of GIS to create positive change in Inner East Athens and beyond. By harnessing technology as a force for social good, we can build more resilient, inclusive, and sustainable communities where everyone has access to nutritious food and opportunities for a better future. I had the opportunity to work with a dedicated group of people in my class project on gentrification. We found that due to gentrification the prices go high, and people become more vulnerable due to low socio-economic situations. I also listened to other group projects, and it was interesting to know how businesses, properties along with gentrification impact local people influencing their daily life and accessibility to food.

Bio: Sana Ullah is a third year PhD student of interdisciplinary agricultural education. He is focusing on small farmers’ access to information and resources about adaptation strategies to climate change. Mr. Sana is passionate about community empowerment through participatory research and agricultural development.

Keywords: Communities, GIS, Gentrification, Food security, Inner East Athens

By Nicholas Lounsbury, Spring 2024 Community GIS Student

Much of my learning in my undergraduate path came from the Community Geographic Information Science course led by Dr. Jerry Shannon. This course spends a lot of time collaborating to assist local community members. In past semesters most Geography courses for me were following directions from an assignment sheet to create maps in Geographic Information Systems (GIS) software but this course was different. This course is much more about the research and development part of GIS that I’ve never had to deal with before; in the past professors would just give us cleaned-up data and tell us how to visualize it. But this course spent the most of its time allowing us the opportunity to see what goes into the background of community-based GIS work including interactions with community members as well as processing and visualizing data to fit our research purposes. I spent the majority of this semester working with my classmates and with feedback from community partners to research the neighborhood of Inner East Athens, a neighborhood that has long been ignored by Athens government officials and is undergoing gentrification as residents get driven out by rich renters seeking affordable housing. A big part of the community research process in my project was communicating with a resident of the Inner East Athens (IEA) community, Rashe Malcolm, a local restaurant owner and county commissioner candidate. Malcolm voiced her concerns with her neighborhood as well as project goals she wants to achieve for the community. By sharing information between our two groups we can gain a more comprehensive understanding of the community to more easily address the plans Malcolm has in mind. This process is known as the co-production of knowledge, where information is shared between groups to achieve a more relevant and beneficial outcome from research for both parties involved. We had multiple meetings with Rashe Malcom to get an understanding of what she wants from us, using our technical experience with GIS, as well as to get feedback so the work we do is relevant and useful to her. This kind of back and forth community interaction is something I never got from another GIS or geography course and provides a clear insight into what community-focused GIS work could really be like, which is a lot of planning and brainstorming meetings. Throughout much of Community GIS’s course we spent time split up into separate groups tackling issues we pointed out with the community including matters like food access, property ownership, and gentrification, the last of which I spent my time working on. As I stated before, past geography courses I took revolved around being given data and being told what to do with it, but here we don’t have that luxury as we must learn to gather and apply the data ourselves in a way we think would best assist the community. We had many meetings just going over ways we can display the risks of gentrification to the East Athens neighborhood which involved finding articles of past efforts to visualize gentrification to modify to best fit our purposes. We discovered a few variables such as economic vulnerability, demographic change, and housing sales price changes to be the best way we can achieve this goal of greater understanding of gentrification risk. To get most of this data we downloaded census information and spent time in Excel cleaning up the data to prepare it for GIS software visualization. It took a surprising amount of time just processing a few datasets to prepare for GIS work. This data processing work is something most of us never did before even if we had past GIS classes because the datasets usually come prepared for GIS software already, so learning how to format data on our own was a valuable and eye-opening learning experience. I believe this course was a valuable insight into behind-the-scenes work that goes into geographic research beyond the obvious map-making endeavor that is only the tip of the iceberg and final touches to a community project that spanned multiple months of collaborative and independent work.

Bio: Nicholas Lounsbury is a fifth-year undergraduate Geography student passionate about urban planning and transportation issues. Having spent time in his undergraduate path learning about GIS techniques and cooperative research, Nicholas plans to use those skills outside of college after he graduates later this year

Keywords: Communities, GIS, Inner East Athens, Gentrification, Research, Co-Production, Data

References:

Norström, Albert V., et al. “Principles for Knowledge Co-production in Sustainability Research.” Nature Sustainability, vol. 3, no. 3, Jan. 2020, pp. 182–90. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0448-2.

By Shaifali Prajapati, Spring 2024 Community GIS Student

I’m currently a student in the Community GIS class, pursuing my first year as a PhD Geography major at the University of Georgia. Even before attending UGA, learning about the ongoing work Dr. Jerry Shannon’s Community GIS class has been doing with the Linnentown Project made the course stand out to me. Students across different iterations of classes each year were able to utilize GIS as part of efforts to bring the stories of the people of and connected to Linnentown to the surface. I was intrigued to hear about a course that strives to integrate service-learning and GIS together, guided by community mapping and critical GIS. While I took several GIS courses as a Geography major in undergrad, all of them focused on learning to use various associated software through projects meant to emulate topics students would use for layered spatial analyses geared towards industry job prospects. Beyond completing deliverables for the labs, there was a lack of instruction in understanding why and how these processes were carried out. Considering all of these factors, I had set my sights to take this class if I ever attended.
 
For this semester’s Community GIS class we’re working with community partner Rashe Malcolm, the local business owner of Rashe’s Cuisine located right in the Triangle Plaza area of Inner East Athens. We’re developing a project to aid in her proposal to revitalize Inner East Athens with consideration to the already-established culture and demographics in the neighborhood. As part of this project, we are working to provide a profile of Inner East Athens through mapping current demographic and business dynamics, processes of studentification (similar to gentrification in which the needs of student populations of higher education institutions drive social, cultural, and economic displacement of local residents), property ownership and food access affecting the area (Pickren 2012).
 
While I’ve had prior experience working on community-based mapping, it is through this class that I’ve been able to take part in the praxis of community geography by applying critical theories of mapping with a critical lens on GIS through attention to conducting inclusive research. This blog itself is one aspect of this ongoing process to critically reflect on the implications of our work. So far, we’ve discussed and reflected on being conscious of using GIS through a critical lens. One of the core ideas we’ve been paying attention to is avoiding extractive (extraction of knowledge and resources) research and instead striving to carry out inclusive (mutually beneficial) research that examines implications of the research we’re doing for the people and places that are being studied. Some of the ways we’ve been conscious of these implications are through conducting interviews with prominent local figures also advocating for Inner East Athens to gain their perspectives on the prospects of revitalization as well as key concerns affecting the area. We also took a trip to learn about the Inner East Athens community and the historical legacy of Triangle Plaza from Rashe. As Rashe was guiding us through locations where she was planning for revitalization by building a community garden, grocery store, and affordable housing, I was able to situate myself in the actual locations we’ll be collecting data for and have a more nuanced understanding of local business owners and residents from Rashe’s perspective.
What stuck with me most during this visit is Rashe pointing out murals dedicated to women in the neighborhood that were commemorated for their strong community leadership, and her dedication to continue those efforts as a community leader herself.
 
With these informed perspectives in mind as well as our own perspectives of being students and residents of Athens, we are using our skill sets as a class by researching, compiling, and presenting spatial dynamics that Rashe has requested for her plans of continuing development in this community. Throughout this process, I really appreciate having discussions with Rashe as a class because it gives us the opportunity to hear her thoughts directly and time for us to ask questions. Additionally, getting feedback from her and the interviewed local figures on our project deliverables has been an integral part of approaching work with a critical perspective centered on community partners through working with informed perspectives and having strong communication. My hope is that our project is helpful to Rashe and that future classes can continue working with her in her goals to revitalize Inner East Athens, and I’m curious to see how the project develops and changes over time as well as how Inner East Athens is viewed and the people residing there view their neighborhood themselves.
 
Presently, as we’re nearing the end of class, I’m glad to be able to take part in this unique blend of learning and practicing GIS. While it can help with job prospects through the project management skills we’ve gained as a class along with learning how to use GIS software and carrying out spatial analyses, the goal throughout the semester to me has been to guide students to critically consider the impacts of what it means to be “doing community geography ” (Fischer 2022).
 
 
Keywords: community mapping, Critical GIS praxis and pedagogy, inclusive research

References:
​
Fischer, H., Block, D., Bosse, A., Hawthorne, T. L., Jung, J. K., Pearsall, H., ... & Shannon, J. (2022). Doing community geography. GeoJournal, 87(Suppl 2), 293-306.
 
Pickren, G. (2012). “Where Can I Build My Student Housing?”: The Politics of Studentification in Athens-Clarke County, Georgia. Southeastern Geographer, 52(2), 113–130. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26229005

By Andrew Mote, Spring 2024 Community GIS Student
​
As a fifth year Geography major at the University of Georgia, I have learned a lot about how the world changes and why it does so. All of these classes, such as Commodification of Food and Urban Geography, have taught me valuable concepts like how urban spaces sprawl and how that’s changed over time, or how food is commodified and globalized. I have acquired plenty of valuable skills and foundational knowledge to help me understand the world but Community GIS is the first class that really has taken what I’ve learned and applied it to the real world. I’ve always strived to do good in the world as I move forward and learning about these concepts was my answer to doing so. I want to learn about the people around me so I can help them if they ask for it. So far, my coursework has really solidified my understanding of power structures and the systems we live in, but I haven’t had many chances to learn how I can help in a more direct manner or how I can move forward and help the others around me do so as well. Community GIS along with a few other experiential learning classes have become my foundation for the so-called “art of research.”
 
Research, just like any other worldly endeavor, has its own artform that guides its creation. Just as with a canvas, the person behind the brush has control over how it forms but not entirely. The art is in the process. You can plan out your artwork as much as you want, cover the canvas in sketch lines, but it’s not until you’re halfway through and asking questions that the art begins to take shape. Similarly in research, you can plan it out as much as you want, but only when you step out and start talking to people and looking at patterns that the artwork starts to form. This idea is reinforced by a concept I learned in Community GIS, called co-production of knowledge. The kind of research that focuses on incorporating community voices that the data is based on, the kind that avoids extractive tendencies that often go with studies of society. Before this class, I didn’t think I was the type of person to promise to help a community with my research and leave without completing my end of the deal, but to see this concept had a name and a study of its own was quite intriguing.
 
            “Co-production of knowledge” focuses on doing research in a manner that supports all the parties involved. It not only does this, but it also recognizes the varying positionalities involved in the project and how those multiple types of expertise can be best utilized. It’s not just about academic experience but also the lived experience of the community partners which helps produce knowledge collaboratively. The goal of it is to step away from extractive forms of research, the ones where a professor at a university goes into a community, makes a bunch of promises, and then as soon as they have their data, they leave. The knowledge created by these practices is more pure because it incorporates many perspectives. Producing research with this in mind, grounds the knowledge in place and establishes context which makes it more true to itself. It is artistic in nature because it accounts for the process in and of itself. It recognizes that the process taken to acquire data shapes the data itself but it’s also important to understand how it emphasizes that this process is impossible to empirically show and can only be truly understood by the people involved.
 
Not only is it about how the research is used after the fact, but I think it also helps guide the research process as a whole. One of the biggest things I learned is how important it is to understand everything you can about your study area before you even look at the relevant factors to one's research. I got a better understanding of this outside of Community GIS as I was interviewing a UGA Geography graduate student. Pablo Arias-Benavides is a PhD student who  focuses his research on Costa Rica and how sustainability policies affect locals going through their day to day life. A lot of his research hinges on interviewing locals and the way he talks about the interviewing process really shifted my view on how to conduct research in general. While you’re interviewing or in the middle of researching, you have to let the process itself guide you. Particularly in interviews, often it takes its own direction and you have to let that happen to a certain extent as that will show more truth than any question you can ask. Though, if you don’t understand what you’re researching beforehand, you are bound to get caught up in the tiny details when it’s time to figure out the big story.
 
There is so much value in understanding the basic demographics of an area before diving into the more specific research related questions. It goes so much further than this though, I learned that if you only study the quantitative data of an area, it is impossible to truly understand how a place functions. I think that’s a common thing Geographers get stuck on, they focus on telling the story through a map but forget that it’s only a single paint brush on a massive canvas. This is why it is crucial to allow time for verbal knowledge to be exchanged. While a zoom call with the client may never create a useful data point that can be used in the final document, one single discussion can make a huge difference in the quality of the data down the line.

By Zane Frentress, Spring 2024 Community GIS Student

This winter, our Community GIS class began work with Rashe Malcolm, a local activist and proprietor of Rashe’s Cuisine, to compile a neighborhood profile of Inner East Athens. Rashe is working on a redevelopment plan for Triangle Plaza and the surrounding area that would increase food access and affordable housing options for neighbors. Triangle Plaza is located at the point where Vine St. and Nellie B. Ave intersect, across the street from Bert’s Grocery and just down the road from the Nellie B. Community, in the heart of Inner East Athens. This historically Black neighborhood, roughly bounded by the Oconee River to the west, the Loop to the south and east, and North Avenue, has experienced dramatic socioeconomic changes in the past few decades. Many long term residents find themselves vulnerable to displacement as developers and real estate agents steer homebuyers “across the river” to the East side. As a geographer-- and a renter-- in Athens, I’m more than aware of the predatory housing market and how skeezy developers are driving up the cost of living, pushing out anyone who can’t keep up with the astronomical rise in rent and property taxes. I knew this was happening in East Athens, but I had personally never spent time in the area. What I knew about the neighborhood was filtered through my connections at the University and secondhand sources. Now, I found myself in a Community GIS class collaborating on a project with Rashe Malcolm and other community members trying to find ways to connect our ways of knowing Inner East Athens, as geographers and community members, that can support Rashe in her food access and economic justice initiatives. The project we are working on with Rashe is an act of translation-- we are building a  bridge “across the river.”
 
We first met Rashe at Triangle Plaza this January. For the first time in my personal experience, I came to Inner East Athens by crossing the river, not by zooming in on Google Maps. Many of my classmates had the same experience. Instead of reading through computer screens, we squinted through the winter sun to see Rashe’s vision for the neighborhood. We met Rashe in the community hall in Triangle Plaza, where she pointed out the empty rows of electrical outlets left over from previous salon and laundry businesses, and talked about what bringing back businesses could mean for the community. We stood with her in the parking lot, where she saw potential for garden beds and an industrial kitchen. We followed her to the (mostly) empty lot behind Triangle Plaza, where she saw a full service grocery store to serve the surrounding community. As we spent time with Rashe, her vision for the neighborhood embedded itself in the way I saw the landscape. The maps and census groups we used to define Inner East Athens in our early GIS labs materialized as roads and homes and businesses and we were able to think through the ways that Rashe’s material vision and our virtual one connected, and how these perspectives could build on one another. These connections informed the way we designed our research questions for the rest of the project. We are currently working to finalize a document that focuses on five geographic aspects of Inner East Athens: demographics, property ownership, businesses, gentrification, and food access.
 
Our meeting with Rashe was informative, not only because of what we learned but from the ways it highlighted how much we still had to learn on our own. Back in the classroom after our visit, we learned more about business turnover through data on business and property transfer over time. We read more about the complexities of defining food access and how location alone cannot predict which residents might experience challenges in having access to nutritious and culturally appropriate food. During our visit to Triangle Plaza, we noticed that the residents passing by-- most of whom were Black-- were eyeing us with reasonable suspicion. We learned about “studentification,” and the ways that the University we represent has wrecked the housing market in Athens by accepting more and more students from wealthier backgrounds without building new on-campus housing for them. This has forced many Black residents out of their neighborhoods as developers rush to cash in on the student boom by buying up housing with a low market value and flipping it back to students with a high price tag. As students ourselves, we spent a good deal of time talking about “positionality,” and what kinds of knowledge we do and do not possess as outsiders from the University, and how we can be both learners and contributors in the translation project we were working on with Rashe.
 
Collaborative knowledge production has a nice ring to it. I was particularly excited to learn more about the various ways to approach research in community geography. Over the next couple of months, our class went back and forth not only with Rashe, but with other people affiliated with the neighborhood such as artists, business owners, city commissioners, and journalists. Then, we went back and forth with ourselves over how to process the abundance of information we just got. Then, we revisited our own cartography and data processing skills, and learned some new ones along the way. By cycling through these stages of asking, learning, doing, reflecting, and reworking, we are engaging in my favorite word from this class: praxis. Praxis is the process of applying the things we learn to the things we do, learning from that process, and doing it all over again. After a few weeks of this, though, we found that we needed to break the ice and address how deeply uncomfortable it can be to learn and unlearn this way.  Working with large groups and partners requires maintaining a delicate balance between listening and realizing what you can or can’t offer in discussion. We’re trying to render visible something we’re only just starting to see, and pass it on to someone who has a clear vision, who doesn’t need the color gradients and zipped .csv files to verify her lived experience.
However, throughout this class we have also seen over and over how powerful geospatial data can be as a tool to communicate. We learned how to sort through census data to isolate specific information that could help us back up our collaborators’ experiences in Inner East Athens. We found we could track things like studentification over time by looking at fields like “percent of residents between 18-24 years of age,” “percent of residents renting vs. residents who own a home,” and “percent of residents with secondary education or higher,” over several decades. We learned how to use tools like Business Analyst to show how Inner East Athens stacked up against the rest of the city in terms of amenities, and who was using them. We learned how to track down whether property owners and business owners lived in the neighborhood to see just how much of the money spent in the neighborhood actually stayed in it to support the community. We learned how to run programs on GIS software that could calculate walking and driving times from a given point so that we could see how far away residents had to travel to get food. Even though many of us in the Community GIS class had only crossed the river for the first time this winter, and still consider ourselves outsiders, we still found that we were able to contribute to this larger project through praxis: We work with Rashe to bridge the world that we have come to know with the world that she wants to build in a way that accommodates multiple ways of knowing Inner East Athens. It’s been messy, but the work we do will continue to live and change through Rashe’s long term investment in redeveloping the neighborhood.
​