The rapid evolution of geospatial technology has created unprecedented opportunities for innovation, but it has also raised critical ethical challenges that demand urgent attention. As a society, how can we balance the benefits with the risks? How can we ensure that locational data serves the public interest rather than allowing financial interests to dominate? What are the responsibilities of those who use locational data?
To explore such questions, the American Association of Geographers (AAG) partnered with Esri and the University of California, Santa Barbara, in 2022 to convene experts to consider the ethical issues of locational data. The group was tasked with generating examples to illustrate the inherent risks of using locational data and to provide context for educators and ethicists. One outcome was an open-source publication called “Locational Data and the Public Interest,” which was recently re-released by the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)—a professional organization that seeks to advance technology for the benefit of humanity—in IEEE Transactions on Technology and Society.
As one of the coauthors of “Locational Data and the Public Interest,” I emphasize the need to center ethical considerations in both academic training and professional practice. While the report covers an array of needs—from a research agenda and educational goals to regulatory recommendations and how to engage the public—Section VI offers critical insight. It examines the real-world impacts of locational technologies on marginalized communities, offering invaluable case studies for fostering ethical awareness and accountability in the geospatial ecosystem. These examples underscore the importance of integrating GeoEthics—a framework that prioritizes privacy, equity, and inclusivity—into every stage of geospatial technology development and application.
The Power and the Peril
Locational data has the dual capacity to empower and harm, as vividly illustrated by examples in the report. From workplace surveillance to unintended biases in algorithmic systems, these cases reveal how technologies designed for efficiency or convenience can exacerbate existing power imbalances.
For instance, companies using location analytics to closely monitor worker productivity highlight the tension between operational efficiency and worker rights. The potential for data from period tracking apps to be weaponized in the United States—amid tightening restrictions on reproductive health—demonstrates how locational information can be repurposed for surveillance, violating personal autonomy. And when users of a free fitness app inadvertently exposed sensitive military outposts by tracking their workouts, it illustrated the risks of open data sharing without rigorous ethical review.
These cases are not anomalies but are rather emblematic of systemic issues in the geospatial ecosystem. Studying them provides concrete material for educators and trainers to explore the societal implications of locational data, moving beyond abstract principles to grounded, actionable discussions.
Teaching GeoEthics by Example
The examples noted in “Locational Data and the Public Interest” serve as powerful tools for academic instruction and professional training. By embedding concrete case studies into curricula, educators can:
- Foster critical thinking: Students can analyze the worker productivity case to debate the ethical limits of employee monitoring. Questions might include: “How does location tracking intersect with labor rights?” and “What safeguards could prevent misuse?”
- Emphasize intersectionality: One case study highlights how a delivery service provider allegedly excluded predominantly Black neighborhoods from fast delivery, which illustrates how algorithmic bias perpetuates systemic racism. This case invites discussions on data equity and inclusive design.
- Explore dual-use dilemmas: A GPS-powered app that sought to guide migrants to water while displaying poetry to support their emotional well-being sparked legal and ethical controversy before its release. This example challenges students to weigh humanitarian intent against potential legal repercussions.
Such exercises cultivate mindsets that prioritize ethical foresight, encouraging future professionals to anticipate unintended consequences and engage affected communities in technology design.
Recommendations for Ethical Practice
Section VI of “Locational Data and the Public Interest” outlines 20 recommendations for addressing the ethical challenges posed by location technologies. Key strategies with direct relevance to education and training include the following:
- Collaborate with affected communities: Engage marginalized groups in all stages of geospatial projects, from design to implementation. For example, involving Indigenous communities in land-use mapping ensures respect for traditional knowledge and sovereignty.
- Work to mitigate biases: Tools such as GeoAI can perpetuate spatial inequities if trained on biased datasets. Courses should teach methods for auditing and correcting biases, such as participatory GIS techniques.
- Encourage ethical peer review: Journals and conferences should require authors to address the societal implications of their work, including data privacy and equity considerations.
These recommendations align with emerging best practices in responsible innovation, such as the European Union’s Artificial Intelligence Act and IEEE’s Ethically Aligned Design framework.
Building a Culture of Accountability
The geospatial community must move bey-ond self-regulation. Section VI advocates for enforceable standards, including the following:
- Informed consent protocols: Require clear, accessible user agreements for location data collection.
- Algorithmic transparency: Mandate public disclosure of how locational algorithms impact marginalized groups.
- Third-party audits: Conduct independent reviews of corporate and governmental geospatial practices to ensure compliance with ethical guidelines.
Academic programs can prepare students for this shift by integrating regulatory frameworks such as the General Data Protection Regulation and the California Consumer Privacy Act into coursework, emphasizing the legal dimensions of GeoEthics.
Ethics as a Foundation, Not an Afterthought
The examples and recommendations summarized here are not merely cautionary tales—they are also blueprints for transformative change. By embedding these lessons into academic curricula and professional training, a new generation of geospatial practitioners will view ethics not as an afterthought but as a foundational pillar of their work.
As location technologies continue to reshape the world, the geospatial community has both the responsibility and the opportunity to ensure that these tools serve the public interest—protecting privacy, advancing equity, and empowering communities.
