Synthetic Geography and Algorithmic Governance: New Tension Areas in Digital Heritage Management
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20788319Abstract
The rapid development of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is fundamentally transforming the ways in which spatial knowledge is produced, represented, and circulated. This transformation extends beyond a mere technical innovation, carrying structural implications for social power relations, institutional responsibility, and democratic governance. This article examines this transformation through the concept of synthetic geography, discussing the implications of GenAI for spatial documentation and digital heritage management from a critical social science perspective. The study proceeds along four axes: first, it addresses the shift from space as a measured object to space as an algorithmically produced form of knowledge, and the consequences of this shift for the politics of knowledge production. Second, it examines the effects of algorithmic reconstruction practices in digital heritage on locality, collective memory, and social identity. Third, it discusses the ethical tensions generated by this process along the dimensions of authenticity, misleading representation, data ownership, and digital inequality. Finally, it evaluates the institutional dimensions of algorithmic governance in relation to accountability gaps, data sovereignty risks, and participation deficits, and develops concrete implications for public institutions, local governments, and policymakers. The article argues that synthetic geography should be understood not merely as a new research object for social sciences and public administration, but as a critical threshold that demands a fundamental reconsideration of how space is known, by whom it is represented, and within which institutional frameworks it is governed.References
Altaweel, M., ve Khelifi, A. (2024). Using generative AI for reconstructing cultural artifacts: Examples using roman coins. Journal of Computer Applications in Archaeology.
Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Institute of planners, 35(4), 216-224.
Bakaev, M., Maxim/Bolgov Bakaev (Radomi), ve Chugunov, A. V. (2024). Digital Geography. Springer.
Benjamin, R. (2019). Assessing risk, automating racism. Science, 366(6464), 421-422.
Benjamin, W. (2008). The Work of Art in the Age of Its Technological Reproducibility, and Other Writings on Media. The Belknap Press Of Harvard University Press.
Bovens, M. (2007). Analysing and assessing accountability: A conceptual framework 1. European law journal, 13(4), 447-468.
Bradley, J. (2017). Weapons of Math Destruction: How Big Data Increases Inequality and Threatens Democracy. Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith, 69(1), 54-56.
Casali, Y., Aydin, N. Y., ve Comes, T. (2022). Machine learning for spatial analyses in urban areas: A scoping review. Sustainable cities and society, 85, 104050.
Cina, E., Elbasi, E., Elmazi, G., ve AlArnaout, Z. (2025). The role of AI in predictive modelling for sustainable urban development: Challenges and opportunities. Sustainability, 17(11), 5148.
Couldry, N., ve Mejias, U. A. (2019). Data colonialism: Rethinking big data’s relation to the contemporary subject. Television ve new media, 20(4), 336-349. https://doi.org/10.1177/1527476418796632
Crawford, K. (2021). The atlas of AI: Power, politics, and the planetary costs of artificial intelligence. Yale University Press.
Cugurullo, F., Caprotti, F., Cook, M., Karvonen, A., McGuirk, P., ve Marvin, S. (2023). Artificial intelligence and the city: Urbanistic perspectives on AI. Taylor ve Francis.
Danaher, J., Hogan, M. J., Noone, C., Kennedy, R., Behan, A., De Paor, A., Felzmann, H., Haklay, M., Khoo, S.-M., ve Morison, J. (2017). Algorithmic governance: Developing a research agenda through the power of collective intelligence. Big data ve society, 4(2), 2053951717726554.
Davidson, L. R. (2023). Cultural representation and digital reproduction: A critical analysis of post conflict reproductions of heritage.
Dodge, M., Kitchin, R., ve Perkins, C. (2009). Rethinking maps (C. 31). Routledge.
Elwood, S., ve Leszczynski, A. (2018). Feminist digital geographies. Gender, Place ve Culture, 25(5), 629-644.
Erll, A. (2011). Memory in Culture. Palgrave.
Fisher, E. (2022). Do algorithms have a right to the city? Waze and algorithmic spatiality. Cultural studies, 36(1), 74-95.
Foucault, M. (2020). Power/knowledge. İçinde The new social theory reader (ss. 73-79). Routledge.
Gao, S. (2023). Artificial intelligence and human geography. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.08827.
Goodman, E. P., ve Powles, J. (2019). Urbanism under google: Lessons from sidewalk Toronto. Fordham L. Rev., 88, 457.
Halbwachs, M. (2020). On collective memory. University of Chicago press.
Haraway, D. (1988). The science question in feminism. Feminist studies, 14(3), 575-599.
Hollands, R. G. (2008). Will the real smart city please stand up? City: Analysis of Urban Trend, Culture, Theory. Policy, Action, 12(3), 303-320.
ICCROM. (1994). The Nara document on authenticity (1994). International Council on Monuments and Sites. https://landscapes.icomos.org/wp-content/uploads/1994-NARA-document-on-authenticity-International-Council-on-Monuments-and-Sites-1.pdf
Janowicz, K., Sieber, R., ve Crampton, J. (2022). GeoAI, counter-AI, and human geography: A conversation. Dialogues in Human Geography, 12(3), 446-458.
Jokilehto, J. (2016). Considerations on Authenticity and Integrity. Conservation of Cultural Heritage in the Arab Region, 43.
K Ansell, C. (2011). Pragmatist democracy: Evolutionary learning as public philosophy. Oxford University Press.
Kitchin, R. (2014). Big Data, new epistemologies and paradigm shifts. Big data ve society, 1(1), 2053951714528481.
Kwan, M.-P. (2018). Algorithmic Geographies: Big Data, Algorithmic Uncertainty, and the Production of Geographic. Geographies of Mobility: Recent Advances in Theory and Method, 32.
Lee, J. (2024). How can AI change geography teaching and learning?-Focusing on geographical inquiry. The journal of the Korean association of geographic and environmental education, 32(1), 95-112.
Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space.
Leszczynski, A. (2015). Spatial media/tion. Progress in Human Geography, 39(6), 729-751.
Lin, Y., ve Zhao, B. (2025). Posthuman cartography? Rethinking artificial intelligence, cartographic practices, and reflexivity. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 115(3), 499-512.
Long, H. (2022). Theorizing land use transitions: A human geography perspective. Habitat international, 128, 102669.
Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of oppression: How search engines reinforce racism. İçinde Algorithms of oppression. New York university press.
Nora, P. (1989). Between memory and history: Les lieux de mémoire. representations, 7-24.
Oeldorf-Hirsch, A., ve Neubaum, G. (2025). What do we know about algorithmic literacy? The status quo and a research agenda for a growing field. New Media ve Society, 27(2), 681-701.
Pasquale, F. (2015). The black box society: The secret algorithms that control money and information. İçinde The black box society. Harvard University Press.
Ricker, B. (2025). Computing Geographically: Bridging Giscience and Geography. Geographical Research.
Romano, A. (2025). Synthetic geospatial data and fake geography: A case study on the implications of AI-derived data in a data-intensive society. Digital Geography and Society, 8, 100108.
Saleh, H. J. H., Arrang, J. R. T., ve de Barros Cardoso, L. M. O. (2025). Applications of Geospatial AI in Human Geography and Spatial Networks: A Literature Review. EDRAAK, 2025, 76-84.
Schillemans, T. (2011). Does horizontal accountability work? Evaluating potential remedies for the accountability deficit of agencies. Administration ve society, 43(4), 387-416.
Sengar, S. S., Hasan, A. B., Kumar, S., ve Carroll, F. (2025). Generative artificial intelligence: A systematic review and applications. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 84(21), 23661-23700.
Smith, L. (2006). Uses of heritage. Routledge.
Ulnicane, I., Knight, W., Leach, T., Stahl, B. C., ve Wanjiku, W.-G. (2021). Framing governance for a contested emerging technology: İnsights from AI policy. Policy and Society, 40(2), 158-177.
Walker, M., ve Winders, J. L. (2024). Geographies of artificial intelligence: Labor, surveillance, and activism. Human geography, 17(2), 227-235.
Wang, S., Hu, T., Xiao, H., Li, Y., Zhang, C., Ning, H., Zhu, R., Li, Z., ve Ye, X. (2024). GPT, large language models (LLMs) and generative artificial intelligence (GAI) models in geospatial science: A systematic review. International Journal of Digital Earth, 17(1), 2353122.
Waterton, E., ve Watson, S. (Ed.). (2015). The Palgrave Handbook of Contemporary Heritage Research. Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137293565
Witte, J., Lee, E., Brausem, L., Shillabeer, V., ve Bonacchi, C. (2025). Generative AI in Heritage Practice: Improving the Accessibility of Heritage Guidance. Heritage, 8(12), 513.
Wu, A. N., ve Biljecki, F. (2021). GANmapper: Geographical content filling. arXiv preprint arXiv:2108.04232.
Yigitcanlar, T., Desouza, K. C., Mossberger, K., Cheong, P. H., Li, R. Y. M., Mehmood, R., ve Corchado, J. M. (2025). Artificial intelligence and the city: An editorial perspective. Journal of Urban Technology, 1-7.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 The Journal of World Women Studies
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
