Annals of the AAG Workflow Router (aaag-workflow)
The orchestrator for an Annals submission. Figure out the stage and the area, then send the user
to the matching skill. The Annals is the broad four-area flagship of the discipline — the router's
first job is to make the paper legible as geography, not just as a domain study that happens to use
maps or coordinates.
When to trigger
- Starting a new Annals paper and unsure where to begin
- Mid-project and unsure which skill applies next
- Deciding which of the four areas (or the cross-disciplinary/General Geography track) the paper targets
- Choosing the article type (Article, Forum, Commentary) — they have different caps
- Returning with a decision letter (route to
aaag-rebuttal)
First question: which area?
The Annals routes manuscripts to a subject editor by area; the area you declare shapes the
reviewers and the bar. Pick the closest, or General Geography if the contribution is discipline-wide.
| Your work |
Area |
Watch for |
| Spatial analysis, GIScience, modeling, geocomputation |
Geographic Methods |
method must advance geographic inference, not just apply a tool |
| Social/cultural/economic/political/urban geography, often qualitative |
Human Geography |
engage geographic theory; not a sociology paper with a map |
| Coupled human-environment systems, political ecology, hazards, land change |
Nature and Society |
both sides (nature and society) must be theorized |
| Geomorphology, biogeography, climatology, remote sensing of the environment |
Physical Geography, Earth & Environmental Sciences |
rigor of an earth-science venue + geographic framing |
| Contribution spans areas / is discipline-wide |
General Geography (cross-disciplinary) |
say why all geographers should care |
Article type (caps differ — see aaag-submission)
| Format |
Scope |
Cap (verify; 检索于 2026-06) |
| Article |
full original study |
≤ 11,000 words incl. abstract, refs, notes, tables, figure captions |
| Forum |
curated multi-author debate |
intro 2,500 + papers 5,000 each, ≤ 25,000 total |
| Commentary |
response/short intervention |
< 2,000 words incl. references |
Routing map (stage → skill)
Area fit & framing? → aaag-topic-selection
Where does it sit in geography? → aaag-literature-positioning
What's the geographic argument? → aaag-theory-building
Is the design defensible? → aaag-research-design
Are the analyses sound? → aaag-data-analysis
Are the maps/exhibits clear? → aaag-tables-figures
Does it read as geography? → aaag-writing-style
Spatial-data provenance/ethics? → aaag-transparency-and-data
How will it be judged? → aaag-review-process
Ready to submit? → aaag-submission
Got an R&R / decision? → aaag-rebuttal
Default order
topic-selection → literature-positioning → theory-building → research-design → data-analysis → tables-figures → writing-style → transparency-and-data → review-process → submission → rebuttal
Iterate: most papers loop theory ↔ design ↔ analysis several times before writing-style.
Geography fit check (run before routing onward)
| Check |
Pass condition |
Route if weak |
| Geographic-ness |
The space/place/scale/spatial-process is constitutive of the argument, not decorative. |
aaag-topic-selection |
| Area |
The paper clearly targets one of the four areas (or General Geography). |
area table above |
| Method on own terms |
Quantitative/spatial, GIScience, remote-sensing, or qualitative work is defended in its own tradition. |
aaag-research-design |
| Spatial-data integrity |
Projections, sources, and geoprivacy/human-subjects ethics have a plan. |
aaag-transparency-and-data |
If "geographic-ness" fails — the paper would be unchanged if you deleted the geography — do not route
to writing-style; it needs a theory/fit repair (aaag-topic-selection).
Anti-patterns
- Treating the Annals like a domain journal that "also takes maps" — the geography must be load-bearing
- Forcing a quantitative-spatial template onto qualitative human geography (each area is judged on its own terms)
- Picking the wrong area editor (a Nature-Society paper sent as pure Physical, or vice versa)
- Sending a 14,000-word draft to a journal that caps everything (incl. captions/notes) at 11,000
Output format
【Stage】idea / positioning / theory / design / analysis / exhibits / writing / transparency / review / submit / rebut
【Area】Methods / Human / Nature-Society / Physical / General
【Type】Article / Forum / Commentary
【Route to】aaag-<skill>
【Why】one line
【Then】the next skill after that
Supplementary resources
1---2name: aaag-workflow3description: Use when starting or navigating any Annals of the American Association of Geographers (Annals of the AAG) manuscript and you need the entry point. Routes to the right sub-skill based on lifecycle stage and which of the journal's four areas (plus the cross-disciplinary track) the paper targets. It dispatches; it does not draft content.4---56# Annals of the AAG Workflow Router (aaag-workflow)78The orchestrator for an Annals submission. Figure out the stage and the **area**, then send the user9to the matching skill. The Annals is the **broad four-area flagship of the discipline** — the router's10first job is to make the paper legible as *geography*, not just as a domain study that happens to use11maps or coordinates.1213## When to trigger1415- Starting a new Annals paper and unsure where to begin16- Mid-project and unsure which skill applies next17- Deciding which of the **four areas** (or the cross-disciplinary/General Geography track) the paper targets18- Choosing the **article type** (Article, Forum, Commentary) — they have different caps19- Returning with a decision letter (route to `aaag-rebuttal`)2021## First question: which area?2223The Annals routes manuscripts to a **subject editor by area**; the area you declare shapes the24reviewers and the bar. Pick the closest, or General Geography if the contribution is discipline-wide.2526| Your work | Area | Watch for |27|-----------|------|-----------|28| Spatial analysis, GIScience, modeling, geocomputation | **Geographic Methods** | method must advance geographic inference, not just apply a tool |29| Social/cultural/economic/political/urban geography, often qualitative | **Human Geography** | engage geographic theory; not a sociology paper with a map |30| Coupled human-environment systems, political ecology, hazards, land change | **Nature and Society** | both sides (nature *and* society) must be theorized |31| Geomorphology, biogeography, climatology, remote sensing of the environment | **Physical Geography, Earth & Environmental Sciences** | rigor of an earth-science venue + geographic framing |32| Contribution spans areas / is discipline-wide | **General Geography (cross-disciplinary)** | say why all geographers should care |3334## Article type (caps differ — see `aaag-submission`)3536| Format | Scope | Cap (verify; 检索于 2026-06) |37|--------|-------|------------------------------|38| **Article** | full original study | **≤ 11,000 words** incl. abstract, refs, notes, tables, figure captions |39| **Forum** | curated multi-author debate | intro 2,500 + papers 5,000 each, **≤ 25,000 total** |40| **Commentary** | response/short intervention | **< 2,000 words** incl. references |4142## Routing map (stage → skill)4344```text45Area fit & framing? → aaag-topic-selection46Where does it sit in geography? → aaag-literature-positioning47What's the geographic argument? → aaag-theory-building48Is the design defensible? → aaag-research-design49Are the analyses sound? → aaag-data-analysis50Are the maps/exhibits clear? → aaag-tables-figures51Does it read as geography? → aaag-writing-style52Spatial-data provenance/ethics? → aaag-transparency-and-data53How will it be judged? → aaag-review-process54Ready to submit? → aaag-submission55Got an R&R / decision? → aaag-rebuttal56```5758## Default order5960`topic-selection → literature-positioning → theory-building → research-design → data-analysis →61tables-figures → writing-style → transparency-and-data → review-process → submission → rebuttal`6263Iterate: most papers loop theory ↔ design ↔ analysis several times before writing-style.6465## Geography fit check (run before routing onward)6667| Check | Pass condition | Route if weak |68|-------|----------------|---------------|69| Geographic-ness | The space/place/scale/spatial-process is *constitutive* of the argument, not decorative. | `aaag-topic-selection` |70| Area | The paper clearly targets one of the four areas (or General Geography). | area table above |71| Method on own terms | Quantitative/spatial, GIScience, remote-sensing, or qualitative work is defended in its own tradition. | `aaag-research-design` |72| Spatial-data integrity | Projections, sources, and geoprivacy/human-subjects ethics have a plan. | `aaag-transparency-and-data` |7374If "geographic-ness" fails — the paper would be unchanged if you deleted the geography — do not route75to writing-style; it needs a theory/fit repair (`aaag-topic-selection`).7677## Anti-patterns7879- Treating the Annals like a domain journal that "also takes maps" — the geography must be load-bearing80- Forcing a quantitative-spatial template onto qualitative human geography (each area is judged on its own terms)81- Picking the wrong area editor (a Nature-Society paper sent as pure Physical, or vice versa)82- Sending a 14,000-word draft to a journal that caps everything (incl. captions/notes) at 11,0008384## Output format8586```87【Stage】idea / positioning / theory / design / analysis / exhibits / writing / transparency / review / submit / rebut88【Area】Methods / Human / Nature-Society / Physical / General89【Type】Article / Forum / Commentary90【Route to】aaag-<skill>91【Why】one line92【Then】the next skill after that93```9495## Supplementary resources9697- [`../../resources/external_tools.md`](../../resources/external_tools.md) — geographic data + GIS/remote-sensing/spatial software by area98- [`../../resources/official-source-map.md`](../../resources/official-source-map.md) — official Annals/AAG/Taylor & Francis URLs behind every fact in this pack
brycewang-stanford