Map is the basic language of geography and an indispensable tool for spatial analysis. But for a long time, maps have been regarded as an objective and neutral scientific achievement. Inspired by critical geography, critical cartography/GIS came into being with the goal of clarifying the discourse embedded in cartographic practice. Power relationship challenges the untested assumption in map representation that is taken for granted. After more than 40 years of debate and running in, this research field has initially shown an outline, and critical cartography/GIS has roughly formed two research directions: the deconstruction path mainly starts from the identity of cartography subject and the process of map knowledge production, and analyzes the inseparable relationship between cartography and national governance and its internal power mechanism respectively; the construction path mainly relies on cooperative mapping and anti-mapping to realize the reproduction of map data. Domestic critical cartography/GIS research has just started, and it is necessary to continue to absorb the achievements of critical geography and carry out research in different historical periods. The deconstruction research of different types of maps also needs to strengthen the in-depth bridging between the construction path and the deconstruction path, and to be more open to the public. Impartial map application research, and actively apply the research results to social practice.

Regional cooperation stands as a key strategy to address intense economic competition and formidable local governance challenges. Successful regional collaborations are typically founded on the basis of institutional similarity, which also serves as the starting point for a multitude of related theoretical studies. Consequently, the regional cooperation within the context of institutional conflicts has been overlooked. This paper aims to explore the process of regional cooperation against the backdrop of conflicts, using the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area (GBA) as a case study and analyzing it from the perspective of the sociology of knowledge. The article posits that conflicts can stimulate interactions among various actors, foster the generation of local knowledge, and propel specific cooperative practices. Moreover, local and central governments, grounded in local knowledge and universal managerial insights, continuously authenticate and propagate local innovations, establishing guiding policies and, consequently, producing rational knowledge. The accumulation of such knowledge has not only strengthened civilian cooperation but also facilitated broader collaborative efforts. The study reveals that despite the GBA’s remarkable achievements in cooperation, challenges persist: on the one hand, there are issues with the government’s process of rational knowledge production and the quality of knowledge itself; on the other hand, excessive governmental dominance may suppress the production and application of local knowledge. Therefore, refining the knowledge production mechanism is especially critical. The findings of this paper uncover the mechanisms of regional cooperation amidst institutional conflicts and deepen our understanding of regional collaboration and cross-border governance.