Abstract In this brief afterword, I reflect on the contributions to the Area special section on the “Geographies of Labour in a Changing Climate.” I argue that there is an urgent need to develop a research agenda under this theme and that, with its focus on multi‐scalar dynamics and the constrained agency of workers, labour geography already has a toolkit that is well attuned to the task. In conclusion, the case is made for developing an approach that might be characterised as a “political ecology of labour.”

In this special section we ask the question: “How can visual ethnographies that focus on sensory inhabitations of place make us attentive to diverse worlds?”

AreaVolume 53, Issue 2 p. 402-403 AREA PRIZE Area Prize: The Wiley Publisher's Area Prize for New Research in Geography First published: 08 June 2021 https://doi.org/10.1111/area.12722Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article. Volume53, Issue2June 2021Pages 402-403 RelatedInformation

Urban refugee women are a challenging research population to contact as they typically prefer to remain discreet and anonymous in their host cities due to concerns over their status and security. Building trust and rapport can be challenging and researchers need to balance issues such as negotiating gatekeepers and time scales alongside ethical demands to do no harm and avoid extractive and exploitative research. As a result, refugee women’s individual and quotidian experiences are rarely examined and foregrounded and their emotional responses to their host cities and host communities are overlooked. In light of this, considered methods, such as solicited diaries, which allow refugees the space and time to reflect on their emotional experiences and these associations with space and place, could be beneficial. However, there has been little written on the use of this method with refugee participants in deeply marginalised circumstances. Alongside some practical and ethical considerations of using solicited diary methods with urban refugee women, this paper considers two main issues. First, the practical role that instructions play in guiding participant responses and engagement in the diary process, and second the ways in which diaries can illuminate the relationship between emotion and spatiality. Diaries were found to have much to offer in advocating refugees as knowledge holders, whereby written excerpts act as “evidence” of their experiences. Analysed alongside other qualitative methods, and if used appropriately and considerately with refugee participants, diaries have the potential to be insightful, empowering, and cathartic.

Stickers are a frequent sight on city streets, adorning street furniture and walls around the world. They serve a range of purposes, including advertising, graffiti, and street art. Many stickers, however, are dedicated to resistance; they promote protest marches or rallies, radical or subversive opinions, and protest groups and social movements. Small, self‐adhesive pieces of paper, vinyl, or plastic, protest stickers range from the hand drawn to the professionally printed. Cheap to produce and easy to distribute, they are a common tactic in the repertoires of activists across the Global North. Despite their ubiquity, protest stickers have been overlooked by academics from across the social sciences and humanities. Using methodologies connected to both material and visual cultures, this paper utilises analysis of an archive of more than 5,000 photographs of protest stickers taken over six years in 53 locations to argue that protest stickers should be significant tools in attempts to understand the geographies of resistance, public space, and the right to the city. This paper explores what protest stickers are, the purposes they serve, how they communicate their messages, where they are located, and how they circulate. Finally, I propose a future research agenda including four key areas that should be pursued in order to better understand the relationships between protest stickers, public space, and the geographies of resistance.

This paper calls for a research agenda that attends to the geographies of everyday intergenerational encounter that occur informally in communities. Using the theoretical framing of social infrastructure and encounter, it argues that we need to better understand the potential of the everyday, mundane, and often fleeting social interactions we have in the everyday shared spaces of our neighbourhoods, and that it is these interactions that can have the biggest impact on intergenerational relations. This argument is made in response to a lack of research on “naturally occurring” intergenerational encounters when compared to a more well‐established body of research on intentional intergenerational practice and design. To demonstrate the value of attending to encounters of the everyday, the paper draws on a body of research within social and cultural geography on intercultural encounters that points to the value of “everyday civics” in contributing to community cohesion in the context of cultural diversity.

Focusing on the recent transformation of urban food markets in the UK, this paper applies a practice theory perspective to analyse the social practices involved in the making and doing of urban food markets. Based on fieldwork in Barnsley and Sheffield, we identify three sets of interrelated practices that are involved in the transformation of urban markets: economic diversification, traditionalisation, and technological innovation. We describe these practices as socio‐material in the sense that they involve the practices of buying and selling, and other forms of social interaction, combined with the foodstuffs, infrastructure, and other material things that together constitute the contemporary marketplace. The evidence presented in this paper challenges prevalent dichotomised ways of thinking about market transformation in terms of inclusion and exclusion or modernity and tradition.

The last two decades have seen a “volumetric turn” within Anglophone social sciences and humanities scholarship. This turn is premised on the idea that space may be better understood in three‐dimensional terms – with complex heights and depths – rather than as a series of two‐dimensional areas or surfaces. While there is an increasingly diverse and rich set of scholarship accounting for voluminous complexities in the air, oceans, ice, mountains, and undergrounds, all too often this work foregrounds state and military‐led approaches to volume. This has resulted in a limited methodological toolkit through which to explore voluminous complexities as they emerge and extend beyond military and state contexts. Often reliant on elite interviews, archives, and cartographies, there has been little critical discussion of both methodological practice and the “flatness” of research outputs articulating three‐dimensional worlds. In this paper we address this by foregrounding the role of immersive and multisensory methodologies (sounding volumes, seeing‐sensing drone volumes, and object volumes). To conclude, we offer avenues for further inquiry, including attending to shifting everyday voluminous experiences in the Anthropocene, and the need to diversify the communication of “volume” research.

Abstract This paper reflects on some of the methodological challenges I was faced with during my recent fieldwork in refugee camps along the Balkan Route. In particular, I will discuss the difficulties related to the application of conventional research methods in a context largely determined by “irregular” mobilities and by changing relationships between formal and informal camps. In‐depth interviews, go‐along interviews, participant observation, and other methods were crucially affected by the camp context, including its visible and invisible structures of power. After briefly discussing the role played by the Serbian authorities in defining our work in “the field,” the article analyses how doing fieldwork in this specific context required endless methodological adjustments, especially when it concerned our encounters with refugees living in camps and the necessity to take into full account the precarious conditions in which interviews took place. The second part of the article, focused in particular on the methodological implications of working in refugee makeshift camps, interrogates the reliability of the information obtained under such peculiar conditions and the ethical concerns associated with our positioning when visiting informal refugee encampments along the Balkan Route. Questions related to the study of makeshift camps will also be analysed together with the need to adapt (often, “on site”) our methods to “camp circumstances” and to produce potential counter‐cartographies of refugee informal mobilities.

Abstract This paper proposes critical legal engineering (CLE) as a new methodology for legal‐geographic action research. While legal geography is on the rise, geographers rarely participate in legal or judicial process, and when they do – for example, as court expert witnesses – they merely respond to the pre‐established agendas of the legal system. I argue that legal geographers’ knowledge on the nature of law and its relations with society is a source of power that could allow them to set legal agendas and pluralise legal discussions. CLE assumes that legal geographers can put forward technical legal arguments, thus using law’s own tools to implement normative agendas implied in critical research. However, CLE demands a dialectical attitude that preserves the contradiction between political ends and legal technology – while pursuing both of them at the same time. As I show, CLE can realise critical agendas in three ways. First, it co‐opts the legitimacy provided by the legal system, lending it to the agendas that are otherwise perceived as “too radical.” Second, elevated by the law these radical agendas may gain greater power to influence political‐economic realities even before the legal outcomes are decided. Finally, CLE draws out of “technical” legal discussions into the heat of the public debate, thus politicising the law. Having developed this methodological proposition in the course of my research on urban movements, I illustrate it with the strategy of Berlin's campaign Deutsche Wohnen & Co. Enteignen (DWE), which has crafted a legal argumentation based on Article 15 of the German Constitution to pursue re‐municipalisation (or de‐privatisation) of housing.