2

Space, time, geography

H COUCLELIS

Specific notions of space and often also time underlie every GIS application. This chapter
reviews the conceptual roots of space and time representations in the four traditional
disciplines of geography, mathematics, philosophy, and physics, recently augmented by
cognitive and sociocultural perspectives. It then assesses the place of GIS as information
technology at the intersection of several different views of space and time, and addresses
the tension between that plurality and GIS’s strong basis in a single view (the ‘map’ view).
Finally, it outlines four challenges for GIS research in the domain of spatio-temporal
representation: the seamless integration of space and time, the representation of relative
and non-metric spaces, the representation of inexact geographical entities and phenomena,
and the accommodation of multiple spatio-temporal perspectives to meet a variety of user
purposes and needs.

1 INTRODUCTION: WHY ‘GEOGRAPHICAL’ they are not just about the things listed in
INFORMATION SYSTEMS? geographical atlases, nor are they just ‘spatial’
information systems.
Of the many millions of users of GIS, only a small The first class of widely shared geographical
fraction have any formal ties with the discipline of concepts are thus the entities and phenomena of the
geography. Planners, foresters, natural and social world at geographical scales, and their changes over
scientists, utilities managers, marketing consultants, time. These entities can be as small as a village
transportation engineers, and many others now use square or as large as the planet itself: this is the
these systems on a daily basis without giving too range that the notion of geographical scale covers.
much thought to what the ‘G’ in GIS might stand Typical geographical entities are mountains, rivers,
for. Obviously ‘geographical’ refers to something of valleys, and coastlines, but artificial features such as
very broad import that far transcends the bounds of cities and roads are also among them. Phenomena
a particular discipline. The ‘geo’ in ‘geography’ is in are the things that happen, rather than those which
fact a great common denominator for all of us living are on the landscape: brush fires, weather systems,
on the surface of the Earth, as we are all more or floods, droughts, erosion, land reapportionment,
less familiar with the same basic things that populate urban growth. Often the most useful applications of
our planet. There are, in particular, two large GIS have to do with the complex interactions
categories of geographical concepts with which most between relatively static geographical entities and the
people are acquainted either through their dynamic phenomena through which these entities
professional activities or simply as part of everyday themselves evolve.
life: geographical entities and phenomena, and the The second category of universally shared
spatial and temporal properties and relations geographical concepts concerns the notions of space
characterising these. Geographical information and time applicable at geographical scales, and in
systems derive their name from the fact that they are particular the spatial and temporal relations among
designed around both these categories of concepts: geographical entities and phenomena. Where

29
H Couclelis

something is in geographical space is still the 2 DISCIPLINARY ROOTS OF SPATIO-

quintessential geographical question, though both the TEMPORAL PERSPECTIVES
question and its possible answers are usually less
simple than might appear at first sight. ‘Where’ may 2.1 A brief history of space and time
mean on which continent as well as at what precise
Though invisible and nonsensible, space and time
coordinates or address, or in what direction, how far,
have preoccupied people since antiquity
next to what, where else, in which part of a region. A
(Jammer 1964). Systematic thinking about space in
useful answer to the ‘where’ question may be given in
particular has its roots in four traditional disciplines:
latitude/longitude terms, or be something like ‘near
mathematics, physics, philosophy, and geography.
the lake but not too close to the forest’. Similarly,
These represent, respectively, the formal, theoretical,
questions regarding the temporal dimensions of
conceptual, and empirical perspectives on the
geographical entities and phenomena go well beyond
subject. Each of these comprises a large number of
simple ‘when’ inquiries about clock time and date:
different fields or views. For example, mathematics
what changes since, how fast, what could have caused
includes geometry, topology, and trigonometry;
this, what else happened at about the same time, what
philosophy comprises epistemology and the
came first. As an example of this latter kind of
philosophy of science; theoretical physics includes
question, GIS is already being used to help arbitrate
classical and relativistic mechanics and quantum
in debates arising from charges of ‘environmental
theory; and geography is subdivided into human and
racism’, where a critical question is often whether the
physical. All these fields, and several others, have
noxious land-use or the affected minority population
developed their own perspectives on space and time
was there first. But at what point in time is a land-use
(indeed, each of them may encompass a number of
or a population ‘there’? Even disregarding the
substantially different such perspectives). The
difficulty of pinning down the spatial component in
multiple overlaps among these four major
this question, we are clearly dealing with two possibly
disciplines, and the particular fields and subfields
interconnected spatio-temporal processes neither of
within them, have given rise to additional insights
which can be neatly time-stamped.
and ways of thinking. This is illustrated in Figure 1.
Geography and a number of related disciplines
Time has often, though not always, been considered
have developed an array of methods and tools to
along with space, either as an extension of space or
help answer these kinds of questions through the
in analogy with it.
spatial and temporal analysis of data about
Surely the oldest of the four, the geographical way
geographical entities and phenomena. Many of
of looking at the world represents the empirical
these have been incorporated in GIS, and their
perspective on the subject of space and time at
underlying assumptions about space and time are
geographical scales. Throughout their history as a
reflected in the systems’ data models, functions and
graphic user interfaces. Thus, while few users of GIS
may be concerned with space and time per se, they
all have to live with the consequences of how a philosophy of physics Philosophy
particular GIS implicitly treats these notions, and mathematical
deal with the problems of spatio-temporal philosophy, logic
representations that may be mutually conflicting or
inappropriate for the task at hand. Mathematics
The purpose of this chapter is threefold: first, it
will review the conceptual roots of space and time
representations generally, and particularly in the
Physics
case of GIS. Second, it will assess the place of GIS analytical
as information technology at the intersection of geography
several different perspectives on space and time.
Third, it will examine the challenges GIS faces in Geography
physical geography,
striving to embody appropriate conceptualisations of
social physics
space and time to meet increasingly complex and
sophisticated user needs. Fig 1. Historical roots of spatio-temporal perspectives.

30
 Space, time, geography

species humans have always had to deal with rivers, where d is the distance between two points i and j
mountains, lakes, oceans, bogs, forests, weather with coordinates (xi, yi) and (xj, yj). There exist other
systems, and eventually also roads, cities, and dams. metrics defining other geometries. The ‘Manhattan’
Over the millennia people have evolved a very or ‘taxicab’ metric works well in gridded spaces
sophisticated practical knowledge of the spatial and where distance measurement must follow the grid
other properties of these entities, the spatial lines (e.g. the gridiron road network in Manhattan).
relations possible among them, the range of their Taxicab distance is defined as follows:
variations from place to place, and the changes these
dij = |xi – xj | + |yi – yj|
may undergo at different timescales (daily, seasonal,
or longer term). That knowledge has been recorded It behaves differently from Euclidean distance but
by geographers since ancient times, has been codified shares with it the properties of all metrics: it is
in maps and nautical charts, has been made symmetric (the distance from i to j is the same as
increasingly more precise through advancing that from j to i), and it obeys the ‘triangle
surveying and positioning technology, and has inequality’, meaning that for any three points, the
become to a large extent quantitative and analytical distance between any two of them is never greater
in more recent years. than the sum of the distances from these points to
In their attempts to describe accurately, explain the third one. These conditions are easily violated in
and solve problems relating to the geographical real environments: distances are usually not
environment, people from early on have turned to symmetric in areas with one way streets, and, if
mathematics. By some accounts geometry, ‘the measured in terms of travel time rather than miles,
language of space’ (Harvey 1969), originated in the shortest route between two points is often not
ancient Egypt where land surveyors needed to the direct route. Variable-metric spaces in which the
re-establish property boundaries annually following variation is not systematic are very difficult to
the seasonal flooding of the Nile. The Greek represent mathematically.
mathematicians, Euclid and the Pythagoreans in Genuine non-metric spaces are more general and
particular, brought the science of geometry to a level very powerful. Topological spaces are those dealing
of perfection that remained unsurpassed for two with the properties of figures that remain invariant
millennia, while the seventeenth-century work of under continuous transformations (e.g. stretching,
Newton on the calculus also provided a language for twisting, squeezing, folding, but not cutting or
time. Mathematics represents the formal perspective puncturing). More formally, topological spaces are
on space and time, bringing its formidable deductive sets of arbitrary elements (called ‘points’ of the
power to the representation, manipulation, and space) in which a concept of continuity, based on the
analysis of these elusive concepts. existence of local (neighbourhood) relations, is
Of the many kinds of space represented in defined: it is precisely these relations which are
mathematics, only a few appear to be naturally preserved in a continuous mapping from one figure
applicable to geographical-scale entities and onto another (Alexandroff 1961). Familiar concepts
phenomena and are thus of direct interest to GIS such as inside and out, right and left, touching and
(Worboys 1995). Euclidean space, the space overlapping, being connected with, and so on, also
described by Euclid’s five axioms, is an abstraction express topological relations because they do not
of people’s experience with the spatial properties of depend on metric properties such as shape, size, and
the local to medium-scale environment. The basic distance. Connectivity in particular is a central
elements it deals with – points, lines, areas, and topological property and is at the basis of the
volumes – have intuitive interpretations in the definition of relative spaces, briefly discussed below.
geographical world. Euclidean space is also an What is known as topology in vector GIS is thus a
instance of a metric space, that is, a space in which very restricted view of a much broader and more
the notion of distance between two points and its fundamental notion. Topology is a popular area of
properties are axiomatically defined and inquiry among a number of GIS researchers who
quantifiable. The Euclidean distance metric is rightly see it as a rich source of formal insights
defined as: about how geographical entities may relate to each
other in space (Egenhofer and Franzosa 1995;
dij = √ [(xi – xj) 2 + (yi – yj)2]
Egenhofer and Mark 1995; Worboys 1995).

31
H Couclelis

The most recent of the four traditions as a whether these new conceptions (some of which are
distinct discipline, physics has its roots in downright bizarre), developed for the immensely
mathematics and philosophy. Indeed, well into the large and the vanishingly small, have any relevance
nineteenth century physics was synonymous with for space and time at geographical scales and for
either natural philosophy or applied mathematics. GIS in particular.
Through physics people were gradually able to Finally, philosophy is another ancient tradition
organise their formal and conceptual understanding representing the conceptual perspective on the issues
of the world (consisting in large part of the of space and time. From Pythagoras to Russell,
geographical world) into a systematic framework Poincaré and Heisenberg, the best philosophers of
connecting the different pieces of knowledge space and time have often been the great physicists
together. Prominent in that edifice, though not and mathematicians striving to clarify the
always explicitly so, were the notions of space and implications of their own discoveries for our
time, upon which physics lent its distinct theoretical conceptual understanding of the world. Of the
perspective. Newton’s work on classical mechanics debates that took place for over two millennia, a few
could not have been developed in the absence of an are directly relevant to GIS. Prominent among these
underlying model of space and time. Much of the is the question of whether things or properties are
modern understanding of these concepts is the world’s primary ingredients (Hooker 1973). This
attributed to the work of Newton in the seventeenth is the fundamental controversy between the ‘atomic’
century, even though the essence of the Newtonian and ‘plenum’ ontologies, allowing two conflicting
space–time concept was already contained in hypotheses to be formulated (for a discussion of the
Aristotle’s Physics. implications of these hypotheses for GIS, see
Newton’s mechanics presupposes a space Couclelis 1992):
conceptualised as a neutral container of things and ● There exist things in time and space which have
events. Newton himself called this absolute space, in (known and unknown) attributes;
contradistinction to relative space which came to be ● The spatio-temporal clusters of known attributes
associated with Newton’s contemporary and rival, are the things.
Leibnitz. Relative space emerges out of the relations
The first hypothesis leads to an ontology of objects,
among things and events: contrary to absolute space,
the second one to an ontology of fields. Both are in
there can be no such thing as empty relative space.
principle compatible with either a relative or an
Absolute space is endowed with a 3-dimensional
absolute view of space-time, though an advanced
Cartesian frame of reference, to which time may be
exploration of the plenum ontology is likely to lead
added as a fourth orthogonal axis. Relative space by
to a relative view whereby the properties of the space
contrast does not depend on any frame of reference
itself come to depend on the properties of the field.
extrinsic to the spatio-temporal relations
According to Einstein (1920: 155):
represented, and its dimensionality and general
properties can vary widely with the geometry ‘There is no such thing as empty space, i.e. space
entailed by these relations. The triumph of classical without field. Space-time does not claim existence on
mechanics ensured that the notion of absolute space its own, but only as a structural quality of the field.’
became orthodoxy for three full centuries. It is only Another old philosophical debate recently found to
in recent decades, following the formulation of be of great relevance to GIS is that regarding the
alternative notions of space-time in both general ontological status of space and time: are these
relativity and quantum mechanics, that interest in objective properties of the world, or are they
relative space has been revived. Thus for Gatrell constructs of human understanding? The latter, less
(1991) ‘space is taken to mean “a relation defined on popular position was taken by Kant in his Critique
a set of objects”’. Gatrell goes on to argue for the of Pure Reason (see Friedrich 1977), who argued
relevance of that view of space for GIS, which thus that space is a ‘synthetic a priori’: something that
far has been based almost exclusively on the appears to be the way it is because human minds are
absolute-space model. However, the contributions of such as they are. In recent years a neo-Kantian view
general relativity and quantum mechanics to our of space has been adopted by many geographers and
understanding of space and time go well beyond the GIS researchers exploring the cognitive dimensions
absolute–relative controversy. It is an open question of our understanding of space.

32
 Space, time, geography

2.2 Spatio-temporal conceptions in the age of GIS For historical reasons the current generation of
GIS embodies the spatial views of a small number of
Newton and his contemporaries and followers set
applied disciplines: cartography, computer aided
the tone for the modern intellectual tradition which
design, landscape architecture, remote sensing. From
was marked by the search for objective knowledge
these it has inherited a strong basis in Euclidean,
independent of any observer. With the decline of
analytical and computational geometry and a dual
that tradition in the second half of the twentieth
spatial ontology of fields (the remote-sensing legacy)
century and the advent of postmodernity, two new
and objects (the landscape-architecture legacy),
perspectives on space and time were added to the
while the temporal aspect, which was mostly
traditional four: the cognitive and the sociocultural.
absent in the parent disciplines, has been largely
Both are based on the premise that there is no single
neglected until recently and is still often treated
objective reality that is the same for all, but that
almost as an afterthought.
different realities exist for different minds or for
Of the several contributing disciplines
different sociocultural identities. This implies that
cartography has surely had the strongest and most
the world as described by mathematics and physics is
lasting impact on GIS. In fact, GIS may be
not the only world there is, and that in fact the world
described (or criticised) as presenting the ‘map’ view
so described may be of little relevance to people’s
of the world, tied to the notion of an absolute space
thinking and activities. On the cognitive side of the
equipped with a Cartesian or other system of
argument, the experiential perspective in particular,
2-dimensional coordinates. The representation and
propounded primarily by Lakoff and Johnson
manipulation of geographical coordinate systems
(1980) and Lakoff (1987), has attracted a lot of
under different geometric projections, and the
attention among a number of GIS researchers
association of attribute information with specific
(Mark, Chapter 7; Mark and Frank 1996), while the
(x,y) coordinates (geocoding), is as central to GIS as
multiple realities viewed from the standpoint of
it is to cartography. Much of the power of GIS
different sociocultural perspectives have been the
derives from its strong roots in that ancient
subject of investigation by a growing number of
discipline which over the centuries has evolved a
critical theorists and cultural geographers (see
formidable arsenal of methods for recording,
Pickles, Chapter 4). Thus we may view the four
measuring, and representing the surface of the
historical ‘objective’ approaches to space and time as
Earth. However, that strength is also the source of
being embedded in the intersubjectivity of the
several of GIS’s weaknesses, as the map view of the
cognitive individual on the one hand and the
world can have serious limitations if stretched
sociocultural group on the other. This is illustrated
beyond its intended purposes: maps are static, flat,
in Figure 2. This means that, far from being
2-dimensional, precise, and not well suited for
resolved, the question of space and time has become
conveying the fact that the level of knowledge or
more complex over the centuries. It is this growing
certainty over their range is often far from uniform
conceptual quagmire that GIS is being called to
(Goodchild 1996). Section 4 below includes a brief
address in practical terms.
discussion on how these limitations are currently
being addressed, and what research challenges
remain for the future.

Philosophy 3 AN INFORMATION SCIENCE FOR

Mathematics SPATIO-TEMPORAL PHENOMENA
Socio-
Cognitive
cultural As an information technology the purpose of GIS
Physics is not to add another perspective or view on space
Geography and time to the many already available, but rather to
help convey to the users spatio-temporal
information in a form suitable for the task at hand.
This simple-sounding requirement is in fact very
Fig 2. Spatio-temporal perspectives in the age of GIS. complex because of the multiple spatio-temporal

33
H Couclelis

views simultaneously present in a GIS. There are developed out of the maturing GIS technology to
indeed four critical aspects or players here (see also address just these kinds of questions that cannot be
Goodchild and Longley, Chapter 40): resolved merely through smarter software and better
system design (Goodchild 1992). Elsewhere I have
1 the builder of the database, who is driven by an
proposed a framework for geographical information
empirical understanding of the geographical
entities and phenomena being measured; science anchored on four vertices representing the
2 the data model on which the database is mapped, above four perspectives: the empirical, the formal,
which has to conform to the spatio-temporal the experiential, and the social (Couclelis 1997).
‘understanding’ of the digital computer; The edges and faces of the resulting tetrahedron
3 the user of the database, who needs to extract the represent particular research perspectives in
information necessary for a given task from the geographical information science, while the core
primarily graphical representations presented by questions, partaking of all four perspectives, are
the system; represented by the tetrahedron’s interior (Figure 3).
4 the sociocultural (including disciplinary) context Prominent in that scheme is the base triangle defined
of the task, which determines, among other by the empirical–formal–experiential triad of
things, what kinds of questions are to be asked, vertices, which represents the map view of the world,
and what forms of answers are acceptable. critically augmented by the temporal consciousness
and intersubjectivity inherent in the experiential
There are thus four qualitatively different perspective. The ‘social’ vertex is a more recent
spatio-temporal perspectives involved in this process: addition, marking the growth of the GIS field from
an empirical one, attempting to capture the spatio- a computer-aided technology to a discipline capable
temporal and other properties of cities, lakes, forests, of reflecting on the multiple two-way connections
rivers, and so on as accurately as possible; a formal between that technology and its social, political,
one, based on the properties of points, lines, areas, cultural, and philosophical context.
or pixels, and on the constraints of digital
representations; an experiential one, using spatial
metaphors and other cognitive devices to convert
graphics and other computer-generated signs back
4 CHALLENGES FOR GIS
into expert geographical understanding; and a social Geographical information science is a ‘meta’ science:
one, focusing inquiry and determining what the it is not about the geographical world, it is about
ontologies of interest should be. These views are information about the geographical world. Contrary
partially conflicting. For example, the to some common misconceptions, information is
point–line–area data model view of vector GIS is ill not a thing – i.e. a bunch of bits – but a relation
adapted to the need to represent fuzziness and between a sign and an intentionality: the sign(s)
uncertainty in geographical entities and phenomena being, in this case, the various graphic and other
as apprehended from either the empirical or the
experiential or the social perspectives (Burrough and
Frank 1996); on the other hand, the discrete field alternative
geographical
view represented in raster data models contradicts Social perspectives
concepts
two basic intuitive notions prominent in the
experiential perspective: that geographical space is
sociospatial Experiential
continuous, and that it is populated with individual constructs
things (Couclelis 1992). As another example of such
internal conflicts, the temporal aspect is implicitly
Empirical geometry
present in the experiential perspective, explicitly topology
absent or superficially added on in the formal view Formal
represented by most current data models, and either geographical
absent or present, as the case may be, in the measurements
empirical and social views.
Clearly there are issues here that far transcend the Fig 3. A framework for geographic information science:
technical. Geographical information science has dimensions of time and space representations for GIS.

34
 Space, time, geography

forms of GIS output, and the intentionality, the ● Integration of space and time
purposeful human intelligence giving meaning to ● Representation of relative and non-metric spaces
these signs (Couclelis 1997). This implies that the (and times)
right way to represent geographical information is a ● Representation of inexact spaces (and times)
function of who is looking at it, and for what ● Representation of commonsense views of space
purpose: there can be no single right way. What is true and time.
of all information is complicated fourfold by the fact
that in GIS there are always the four concurrent
perspectives (empirical, formal, experiential, and 4.1 Integration of space and time
social), each of them with its own preferred views of The static quality of the map has been the primary
time and space. In the domain of spatio-temporal reason why the integration of the temporal
representation, the greatest challenge for GIS is thus
perspective in GIS (and the representation of
to move beyond its traditional quasi-exclusive
dynamic phenomena and changing features)
identification with a single view – the map view –
continues to be so difficult. Efforts to do justice to
useful though this may be for so many purposes, and
the temporal essence of geographical phenomena are
to permit the simultaneous accommodation of the
multiple views required in each case. relatively recent (Peuquet, Chapter 8; Langran 1992;
Looking back at the variety of approaches to Langran and Chrisman 1988; Peuquet 1994;
space and time outlined in section 2, it is clear that Worboys 1995). Standard approaches to representing
the map view of the geographical world is only one change within the map view are mostly variations of
of many possible. Whether in the ‘fields’ or ‘objects’ the ‘timeslice’ model, consisting of producing a
version, the map view is rooted in absolute sequence of time-stamped maps corresponding to
Newtonian space and Euclidean geometry. The different time points within a given time interval. The
former is ill matched with the explicit representation resulting sequence may be represented in GIS either
and treatment of relations (witness the intractable as an ordered set of independent maps, or as a
problem posed in Newtonian physics by the space–time composite layer, or as a 3-dimensional
‘three-body problem’); the latter deals with discrete spatio-temporal structure. While sufficient for many
figures, volumes and surfaces defined through purposes, this kinematic (as opposed to dynamic)
infinitely small points and infinitely thin and crisp representation breaks up the continuity of
lines and surfaces. Both presuppose a homogeneous, phenomena, may miss temporal orderings indicating
isotropic space that is a neutral container, and causal connections between events, and leaves open
neither is integrated with time (indeed, time cannot the question of what may have happened in the
even be defined within Euclidean geometry). These intervals between timeslices.
properties contradict many aspects of real-world Advances in temporal GIS involve various
geographical entities and phenomena, which are departures from the notion of time as a single
strongly time dependent, not precisely bounded in
extra axis added to a Cartesian spatial frame.
either space or time, inhomogeneous and anisotropic
Two-dimensional time defined on both a real-world
as to their attributes and dynamic properties, not
time dimension and a database time dimension, and
properly representable either as geometric figures or
nonlinear time (in the form of forward or backward
as fields, and have complex relations in both space
and time with other entities and phenomena. branching time) have been successfully implemented
Researchers have long recognised the limitations by several researchers (Snodgrass 1992). Even more
of the map view and have proposed several useful advanced notions of time as defined through events,
extensions of standard GIS that try to address one change, motion, and process have also been
or the other of these problems, as many of the proposed, though most of these remain at the
chapters in this Section demonstrate. Some of these conceptual level (Clifford and Tuzhilin 1995;
limitations, such as the difficulty of representing Kelmelis 1991). Thus, while great progress has been
more than two dimensions in GIS, are primarily made in developing data models for GIS that go
technical. Other efforts focus on more fundamental beyond the timeslice approach, the creation of a
problems. These may be discussed under the truly spatio-temporal GIS remains an unmet
following four headings: challenge (see also Peuquet, Chapter 8).

35
H Couclelis

4.2 Representation of relative and non-metric of which they are part. Elements of this idea are also
spaces (and times) contained in Tomlin’s (1992) map algebra.
A further problem is that for the most part relative
Many geographical phenomena are defined in whole spaces are n-dimensional, where n can be any arbitrary
or in part through relations holding among relevant integer. Such spaces defy not only map-based GIS but
entities. These relations may be material exchanges any analogue (visual or material) representation
such as fluid flows or human or animal migration medium. However, formal and digital representations
flows between places, functional connections of of n-dimensional spaces abound, along with several
influence, communication, accessibility, potential very useful analysis techniques (e.g. multidimensional
interaction, and so on, or cognitive properties of scaling, cluster analysis, Q-analysis). There is no reason
ordering, classification, association, or why these could not be part of GIS data models
differentiation. In all but the simplest cases these through which users could derive appropriate partial
relations are best seen as defining a relative space, views linking relative and absolute spaces. An
i.e. a space whose properties depend on the illustration of this possibility is given by Portugali and
configuration of the relevant relations. Handling Sonis (1991), where a 7-dimensional space of labour
relative space well will become increasingly relations is sequentially projected on an ordinary map
important for GIS as cyberspace, the space of of Israel. A more general approach to this problem is
electronic connections, continues to expand its hold known as spatialisation, whereby arbitrary n-
on every aspect of society. dimensional spaces (not necessarily derived from
There are two problems here for GIS. First, geographical phenomena) are transformed into and
rooted as it is in absolute space, GIS does not analysed as familiar (often geographical) spatio-
represent relations well. This is because in absolute temporal representations.
space geocoded locations are bound to a priori
existing relations of geometry and topology among
the corresponding points in the space, whereas in 4.3 Representation of inexact spaces (and times)
relative space the definition of a set of arbitrary In contrast to the more general challenges of space-
relations comes first and the geometry and topology time and relative-space representation, this one is of
follow. Thus even relations that can be represented GIS’s own making. Euclidean geometry,
on the plane, such as those defined by georeferencing and the map view together conspire
communication or movement over physical in forcing GIS into one or the other end of a
networks, are confounded by the underlying representational spectrum ranging from crisply
Euclidean metric. For example, a relation of delineated, internally homogeneous objects to
proximity among a set of places cannot be properly continuously varying attribute fields. Most
represented by the transportation network geographical entities and phenomena or their most
connecting these places if proximity is defined in useful representations do not fall neatly into either
terms of travel time rather than distance. While it is category (Burrough and Frank 1996). In the
often possible to represent well-behaved time distances literature this problem has usually been treated in
by subjecting the original map to an appropriate terms of fuzziness and uncertainty. The distinction
geometric transformation, in other cases the resulting made is that between the geometrical properties of
space is non-metric or non-planar and cannot be so the entities and phenomena themselves, which may
represented. More generally, the conflicting properties or may not be crisply delineated (fuzziness), and the
of absolute and relative space prevent the satisfactory state of our knowledge about these properties, which
representation of relations in GIS. This is also largely may or may not be accurate (uncertainty). The latter
the reason why the proper integration of GIS with aspect is being attacked with the tools of probability
geographical models, especially those describing social theory (Goodchild and Gopal 1989), while a
phenomena, continues to be so difficult. Takeyama and growing number of researchers are applying fuzzy
Couclelis (1997) present a partial solution to this set theory to address the many cases where the lack
problem by formalising the notion of a relational space of clear boundaries is an intrinsic property of the
combining properties from both absolute and relative. entities studied (Burrough 1996). The graphic
Points in relational space behave as in absolute space representation of fuzziness and uncertainty,
but are also linked to information on their functional especially where both aspects coexist, is currently an
neighbourhoods, i.e. their place in the relative space(s) active area of investigation.

36
 Space, time, geography

The fuzziness/uncertainty perspective on the issue of 5 CONCLUSION

inexact spaces decomposes the problem into an
objective and a subjective component, whereby a clear GIS has come a long way since it was little more than
distinction is drawn between how things really are out the latest in computer mapping software. With the
there in the empirical world, and how they are known rapidly increasing technical and conceptual
to be by imperfect human observers. The simplicity of sophistication of the technology came increasingly
that perspective has fostered much robust research, but complex demands and expectations from an ever
it seems likely that alternative views will soon be expanding and diverse user community. Directly or
required in order to deal with more sophisticated indirectly, the representation of space and time has
demands on future GIS. Thus Couclelis (1996) been central to the pressures for better GIS.
distinguishes 480 different potential cases of Advanced applications require better integration of
geographical entities with ill-defined boundaries, based space and time and ways to represent the entities of
on different possible combinations of empirical interest that go beyond the objects/fields dichotomy;
characteristics, observation mode, and user purpose. the introduction of the social perspective demands
While that number in itself is not significant, there are more attention to the issues of subjective perceptions
two points worth noting: first, only a few of these cases and multiple views of spatio-temporal entities and
are fully accounted for through the phenomena; and the establishment of the information
fuzziness/uncertainty perspective; and second, the age challenges absolute physical space as the sole,
variety of cases calls for a corresponding variety of undisputed framework for representing geographical
different models of space and time, not all of which reality. We are learning that the geographical is not
can be supported by GIS based on the map perspective. just the mappable, the spatial is not just the visible,
the temporal is not an independent domain, and not
all users see the world through the same eyes. The
4.4 Representation of commonsense views of
purpose of this chapter has been to review the field of
space and time
spatio-temporal representation and highlight the
Introducing purpose and the user perspective into unresolved issues, which are many. Research in GIS is
the picture calls for some radically different moving so rapidly that the next edition of this book is
approaches to the treatment of space and time in bound to report on some spectacular progress – as
GIS. First, this requires the ability to present well as on the next set of challenges.
multiple views of the same information so as to meet
different individual interests, skill levels, and needs.
Second, the construction of these alternative views
References
must be thoroughly informed by the active ongoing Alexandroff P 1961 Elementary concepts of topology. New
research on the cognitive and social dimensions of York, Dover
space and time. Third, the presentation of the Burrough P A 1996 Natural objects with indeterminate
information must be flexible enough to conform to boundaries. In Burrough P A, Frank A U (eds) Geographic
how people use graphic representations of objects with indeterminate boundaries. London, Taylor and
Francis: 3–28
spatio-temporal configurations and phenomena
(from sketch maps and flow diagrams to Burrough P A, Frank A U (eds) 1996 Geographic objects with
photographs and animations) in reasoning, indeterminate boundaries. London, Taylor and Francis
problem-solving, collaborative work, public debate, Clifford J, Tuzhilin A 1995 Recent advances in temporal
teaching, and communication. Work on space and databases. Proceedings, International Workshop on Temporal
Databases, Zurich, Switzerland. Berlin, Springer
time in GIS is thus expanding well beyond the
traditional domain of geometry and topology, Couclelis 1992 People manipulate objects (but cultivate fields):
beyond the raster-vector debate in GIS. In Frank A U,
investigating issues of language, culture, semantics,
Campari I, Formentini U (eds) Theories and methods of
metaphor, cognitive configurations, and social spatio-temporal reasoning in geographic space. Berlin,
constructions (Kuhn 1995; Mark and Frank 1991, Springer: 65–77
1996; Pickles 1995). Translating these multiple and Couclelis H 1996 Towards an operational typology of
sometimes conflicting insights into data models that geographic entities with ill-defined boundaries. In Burrough
work is no mean task. One of the major research P A, Frank A U (eds) Geographic objects with indeterminate
frontiers in GIS lies in this area. boundaries. London, Taylor and Francis: 45–55

37
H Couclelis

Couclelis H 1997 GIS without computers: building geographic Kuhn W 1995a Semantics of geographic information. GeoInfo,
information science from the ground up. In Kemp Z (ed.) Department of Geoinformation, Technical University
Innovations in GIS 4: selected papers from the Fourth of Vienna
National Conference on GIS Research UK. London, Taylor Lakoff G 1987 Women, fire, and dangerous things. Chicago,
and Francis: 219–26 University of Chicago Press
Egenhofer M J, Franzosa R D 1995 On the equivalence of Lakoff G, Johnson M E 1980 Metaphors we live by. Chicago,
topological relations. International Journal of Geographical University of Chicago Press
Information Systems 9: 133–52
Langran G 1992 Time in geographic information systems.
Egenhofer M J, Mark D M 1995 Modelling conceptual London, Taylor and Francis
neighbourhoods of topological line–region relations.
International Journal of Geographical Information Systems Langran G, Chrisman N R 1988 A framework for temporal
9: 555–65 geographic information. Cartographica 25: 1–14

Einstein A 1920 Relativity. London, Methuen Mark D M, Frank A U (eds) 1991 Cognitive and linguistic
aspects of geographic space. NATO ASI Series 63.
Friedrich C J 1977 The philosophy of Kant. New York, The
Dordrecht, Kluwer
Modern Library
Mark D M, Frank A U 1996 Experiential and formal models
Gatrell A C 1991 Concepts of space and geographical data. In
of geographic space. Environment and Planning B: Planning
Maguire D J, Goodchild M F, Rhind D W (eds) Geographical
and Design 23: 3–24
information systems: principles and applications. Harlow,
Longman/New York, John Wiley & Sons Inc. Vol. 1: 119–34 Peuquet D J 1994 It’s about time: a conceptual framework for
the representation of temporal dynamics in geographic
Goodchild M F 1992b Geographical information science.
information systems. Annals of the Association of American
International Journal of Geographical Information Systems
Geographers 84: 441–61
6: 31–46
Pickles J 1995 Ground truth: the social implications of
Goodchild M F 1996 Multiple roles for GIS in global change
geographic information systems. New York, Guilford Press
research. Paper presented at the second NSF/ESF Young
Scholars International Institute in Geographic Information, Portugali J, Sonis M 1991 Palestinian national identity and the
Berlin, July 1996 Israeli labor market: Q-analysis. The Professional Geographer
43: 265–79
Harvey D 1969 Explanation in geography. London,
Edward Arnold Snodgrass T R 1992 Temporal databases. In Frank A U,
Campari I, Formentini U (eds) Theories of spatio-temporal
Hooker C A 1973 Metaphysics and modern physics: a
reasoning in geographic space. Berlin, Springer: 22–64
prolegomenon to the understanding of quantum theory. In
Hooker C A (ed.) Contemporary research in the foundations Takeyama M, Couclelis H 1997 Map dynamics: integrating
and philosophy of quantum theory. Dordrecht, Reidel cellular automata and GIS through Geo-Algebra. International
Journal of Geographical Information Science 11: 73–91
Jammer M 1964 The concept of space in antiquity. In Smart J
J (ed.) Problems of space and time. New York, Macmillan Tomlin C D 1992 Geographic information systems and
Kelmelis J A 1991 ‘Time and space in geographic information: cartographic modeling (revised edition). Englewood Cliffs,
towards a 4-dimensional spatio-temporal data model.’ Prentice-Hall
Unpublished PhD dissertation, The Pennsylvania Worboys M F 1995 GIS: a computing perspective. London,
State University Taylor and Francis

38