ica research agenda on cartography and gi sciencepublished by maney publishing (c) the british...

Pub

lishe

d by

Man

ey P

ublis

hing

(c)

The

Brit

ish

Car

togr

aphi

c S

ocie

ty

V I E W P O I N T P A P E R

ICA Research Agenda on Cartography and GI Science

Kirsi Virrantaus1, David Fairbairn2 and Menno-Jan Kraak3

1Helsinki University of Technology, Finland. 2University of Newcastle upon Tyne, England. 3ITC, the Netherlands

Email: [email protected]

The paper presents the ICA research agenda on Cartography and GIScience. The first part discuses the research topics

and the second part deals with the ‘implementation’ of the agenda by the ICA Commissions and Working Groups.

Keywords: Research Agenda

BACKGROUND TO THE ICA RESEARCH AGENDA

Maps and geographic information (GI) have special powerthrough their ability to connect and integrate data sets bythe inherent geographical location, and present theinformation contents in a user-friendly and understandablevisual and tactual way. Such ability has long beenrecognized as an intrinsic property of the map artefact, aswell as contemporary geodatabases. The power of maps andgeographic data handling has been recently recognized inmany real world applications and strategic decision makingsituations related to current topics like crisis management,early warning systems, efforts for supporting sustainabilityand decreasing global poverty.

The international cartographic association (ICA), as aglobally well represented and internationally visible organi-zation, has a special position and role as a promoter of thedevelopment of cartography and GI science. Research anddevelopment in ICA aim in general to create theory andmethods for cartography and GI handling. By applyingtheories and methods in various fields, new tools can becreated for cartographic and GI practice. Such topics areaddressed at the main work-forums of ICA, itsCommissions. These organizations are formally establishedby vote at the quadrennial ICA General Assemblies,although interim Working Groups can also be establishedbetween General Assemblies by the ICA ExecutiveCommittee (EC) to address specific short-term issues.

The idea of the ICA Research Agenda on Cartographyand GI Science was initially considered at ICA ExecutiveCommittee meetings during the 1990s but the specificdecision to work on a structured Research Agenda wastaken at the London EC meeting in 2001, with a plan toorganize a session on the issue at the InternationalCartographic Conference in Beijing in 2001. This sessionincluded several valuable presentations (including thosefrom Professors Gruenreich, Meng, Mullen and Ormeling).The work plan for the Research Agenda development was

made during the Mexico City EC meeting in 2005. It wasrealized that several ICA Commissions had overlappingresearch concerns while some new challenging topics wereoutside of any Commission’s field. A formal ResearchAgenda would have a significant role in informingCommission members, General Assembly Delegates andICC attendees, of the integrated nature of research activityin Cartography and GI Science, the expanding scope ofresearch and the role of ICA in promoting such activity. Itshould be realized that the content of the agenda representsa snapshot in time. Agenda like these should anyhow beconsidered to be living documents adapting to newtechnological and methodological developments over time.This paper consists of two major parts, the content of theresearch agenda and the current ‘implementation’ by theICA’s Commissions and Working groups.

THE GOAL OF THE RESEARCH AGENDA

The goal of this agenda is primarily to give some guidelinesfor the Commissions’ work as well as to lead to tightercooperation between Commissions. The agenda can alsosupport the development of the flexible Commissionstructure of ICA. From a practical point of view the agendamay outline the future contents of the proposedInternational Yearbook for cartography and GI science.

More widely, the agenda is written in order to showICA’s actual and potential contribution to scientificresearch within our global society, and to serve as amoderator for discussions in that forum. In order toimplement its own strategic mission, ‘to ensure thatgeospatial information is employed to maximum effect forthe benefit of science and society’ (ICA Strategic Plan,2003), ICA must have a clear agenda for research coveringall fields and topics under the title Cartography and GIScience. This agenda, therefore, documents currentresearch activity in these fields, suggests areas where more

The Cartographic Journal Vol. 46 No. 2 pp. 63–75 May 2009# The British Cartographic Society 2009

DOI: 10.1179/000870409X459824

Pub

lishe

d by

Man

ey P

ublis

hing

(c)

The

Brit

ish

Car

togr

aphi

c S

ocie

ty

intensive or renewed effort is required, and also discussesthe methods by which some of this research can beundertaken – within ICA Commissions, through interna-tional collaboration with sister societies, and undersuggested programmes of integrated research stimulated,we hope, by the presentation of this summary. It alsoreveals the gaps, e.g. items important for the agenda butnot intensively covered by the research activities of theCommission and Working Groups.

PROCESS OF DEVELOPING THE RESEARCH AGENDA

The first preliminary study on research topics within theremit of ICA was made in the 2003 Budapest meeting of theEC and Commission chairs, who tried to outline the topicsof interest to each Commission. The work was continued in2005 in the Mexico City EC meeting as well as in A Corunain 2005 in two brainstorming sessions for Commission andWorking Group chairs and co-chairs, and the first draftdocuments outlining the research interests of Commissionswere created. In the meetings the Mind Map technique wasused and, based on that work, the first draft document waswritten, presented to the 2006 Moscow EC meeting,discussed and subsequently sent to the Commissions forcomments. Commissions have been asked to provideadditional text with relevant literature references on thetopics that they feel important. The second draft wasdiscussed in the EC meeting in Brno in 2007 and the planfor finalizing the agenda as well as publishing it in theMoscow ICC Proceedings was made. Before presentation,another round of comments among the Commission chairshas been organized. After the Moscow conference the newTerms of Reference of the Commissions and Workinggroups were analyzed based on their ‘relevance for research’.Via an online survey among the chairs of the Commissionsand Working Groups these were matched with the content ofthe research agenda, revealing gaps and overlap amongCommission and Working Group research activities.

THE STRUCTURE OF THE RESEARCH AGENDA

The scope of the agenda is wide including bothCartographic and GI Science issues. Depending on thebackground of the interested researcher, the entire field canbe approached by several ways. It is impossible to make ageneric structure of the topics that fits all opinions. It is alsoimpossible to create a non-overlapping hierarchy of researchtopics. What has been done on the basis of commondiscussions has now been organized under subtitles orkeywords. The definitions as presented by ICA (2003), havealso influenced the scope of this agenda – a primaryintention is to ensure that the topics discussed here fallwithin the accepted extent of Cartography and GI Science,and that we can also see synergies with closely related fields,notably in spatial data collection and handling.

KEYWORDS

The keywords have been extracted from the mind mapsproduced in the brainstorming sessions referred above.

Short discussion on the keywords has been added in orderto explain the role and/or meaning of each keyword. In thefollowing text the important research topics are in bold.References to supporting fields of science or technologiesare written in italic. It must be kept in mind that the topicscannot be organized totally hierarchically under the mainkeywords, but there are several topics that could be linkedto more than one keyword.

The keywords are:

1. Geographic information: we have decided to mainlyuse ‘geographic information’ in this document.Geospatial Information is considered as a synonym,and Geospatial is used in contexts where it iscommonly used.

2. Metadata and SDIs: in the text spatial data infra-structures (SDIs) have a synonym of ‘geospatial datainfrastructure’; by adding the geoprefix we canemphasize the real contents of the data in question.

3. Geospatial analysis and modelling: the emphasis is onthe extraction of added value from the processing ofspatial data on maps and the use of analysis andmodelling techniques to initiate, support and supple-ment the mapping process.

4. Usability: this keyword covers a range of issues whichconnect the human user of spatial data with itsrepresentation, its processing, its modelling and itsanalysis.

5. Geovisualization, visual analytics: here the visualrepresentation of spatial data, in map and in otherforms, is discussed, along with methods of using suchrepresentations.

6. Map production: this keyword stands for the numer-ous stages in mapping and map production as technicalprocesses, but also production of various map typesfrom atlases to Internet maps.

7. Cartographic theory: the fundamental concepts whichform the basis of all our spatial data handling areincorporated under this keyword.

8. History of cartography and GI science: the importanceof the development of methods and practices through-out history was recognized in the brainstormingsession: all current-day activity is informed by detailedaccounts of such development.

9. Education: to ensure a valid and viable future for ourcurrent activity, we need to research and implementmethods to educate and train future generations:methods of doing this fall under this research heading.

10. Society: a dominant research topic throughout hasbeen the examination of how such spatial datahandling is grounded in societal structures and howit is undertaken by different groups of people.

These keywords, with their related research topics aresummarized in Figure 1.

Geographic information

Geographic information is the core of both cartography/mapping and GI science/GI systems applications.Geographic information can be studied from various pointsof view: modelling, storing, processing and semantics.

64 The Cartographic Journal

Pub

lishe

d by

Man

ey P

ublis

hing

(c)

The

Brit

ish

Car

togr

aphi

c S

ocie

ty

Fig

ure

1.

The

mai

nit

ems

of

the

ICA

rese

arch

agen

da

and

thei

rsu

b-t

opic

s

ICA Research Agenda on Cartography and GI Science 65

Pub

lishe

d by

Man

ey P

ublis

hing

(c)

The

Brit

ish

Car

togr

aphi

c S

ocie

ty

Geographic information represents the natural and man-made, tangible and intangible world. Two main establishedmodels are used to represent various phenomena: discreteobjects and field models. In addition to precise, crisp data,GI can also be imprecise and imprecise information needsspecial modelling approaches. Thus, it is important toconsider research into imprecise geospatial data models,such as fuzzy models and rough sets.

Geographic information needs to be stored and handledas data in databases. The main methods of storage involveraster and vector organization. Spatial databases tend to behuge and spatial queries need to be supported by adequatespatial indexing. Some solutions already exist – like quad-trees and R-trees – but the topic is still relevant for furtherstudy in the context of GI. The dimensionality of spatialdata – two-, three- and sometime four-dimensional innature – adds to the complexity of handling such data.Advanced indexing methods exist but they need to beapplied to the context of GI (see also the section on‘Geospatial analysis and modelling’).

Databases need to be continuously updated and thetechniques for updating are problematic. Basically two mainapproaches exist:

1. Continuous updating, usually used when maps arederived from larger scale maps (e.g. detailed municipallarge scale maps), and supplemented by other updatingmethods such as field-based methods.

2. Updating based on digital images by using changedetection methods or replacing maps entirely by newlyinterpreted ones. Thus research is needed to addressincremental updating and versioning of vector formatgeographic databases and updating of map databases byusing digital images and change detection methods onimages.

Geographical databases themselves are huge, and via theInternet one can reach even more information in integrateddatabases than is possible to manage. Using new methodsof spatial data mining and visual data mining users cancreate new information and knowledge from the storeddata. Satellite images as well as other gridded data productscan also be mined and novel information and knowledgecan be extracted from them by image mining andautomated knowledge extraction.

Satellite data and orthophotos are often used withoutinterpretation as additional information in image maps.When combining interpreted, usually vector, and non-interpreted, usually raster, information together, problemsof scales and granularities appear.

The distribution of geospatial data across the Internet isbecoming widespread, but there are many barriers to simpleand effective access to geospatial data. Open geospatialconsortium standards for serving data (www.opengeos-patial.org) are designed to assist, but they are notuniversally applied: there are implications of the contem-porary geobrowser (e.g. Google Earth) model for carto-graphers to address, in handling, compiling and presentinggeospatial data.

The semantics of GI links research to various applicationfields with related taxonomies of concepts. Ontology is anapproach that aims to produce a common framework for

different terminologies. Toponymy is related to GI in thesense of semantics as well. These topics affect attributetagging, name (including geographical name) determina-tion and processing flow lines in geodatabases.

Metadata and SDIs

Complete geospatial data infrastructures (SDIs) consist ofcontemporary, comparable and integrated GI at global,regional or national levels along with services that enable anefficient use of the information. There are numerousresearch issues associated with the design, implementationand use of SDIs. Spatial data infrastructures policyincluding the political and administrative proceduresrequired to initiate and maintain SDIs can be studied inorder to enhance their utility. In practical terms there areproblems such as copyright and pricing policies.Harmonization of databases can be based on appropriatelyapplied ontology schemas and developed similaritymeasures. The fact that detailed geographic data arecollected at different levels (municipal, regional, national)means that SDIs are likely to contain multiple representa-tions in order to obtain the vertical integration. Effectivegeneralization of maps as well as organization of multiplerepresentations in databases could rationalize the produc-tion of topographic maps and assist in updating ofdatabases. Such generalization requires significant consid-eration of conceptual schema, geometrical and spatialproperties and visual appearance. It can be undertaken inreal time (on-the-fly generalization) and it has links withGeovisualization and with the modelling described in thenext section.

Metadata is the key for geospatial data infrastructures atboth national and global levels, and the derivation, storage,scope and use of metadata have been addressed throughmature national and ISO standards on metadata of GI(ISO 19115:2003) as well as its extension to gridded andimagery data (ISO 19115-2:2007). A special part ofmetadata describes quality information. There is also anISO standard on geographic data quality (ISO19113:2002) with definitions of quality elements andmeasures to be used. However, the uncertainty issues arenot solved only by publishing standards and by forcing thedata producers to document metadata of the produceddatasets. The users need to be able to evaluate also theuncertainty of the results of the analyses in which theycombine several datasets of different quality. Thus evalua-tion of the uncertainty of the GI analysis results andestimating the risks of subsequent decision-making arefurther research issues of importance.

Metadata is inherently multivariate and metadata repre-sentation by multivariate visualization methods, alongwith the usability of such visualizations needs to beexamined. The linkages among metadata, data quality andvisualization are potentially valuable. The metadata stan-dard for gridded and imagery data, for example, introducesthe ‘two-dimensional quality coverage concept’ and the‘spatially varying quality concept’. These could be used forother data set types as well.

The visualization of data quality in general, and suchspatially varying quality in particular, are examples of how


Pub

lishe

d by

Man

ey P

ublis

hing

(c)

The

Brit

ish

Car

togr

aphi

c S

ocie

ty

map quality – including generalization quality – can beaddressed.

Geospatial analysis and modelling

Using geospatial analysis we try to describe, explain andpredict geographical phenomena. Theories and methodsadopted from mathematics, statistics, computer graphicsand information theory have been integrated with GIScience approaches to yield a mature and useful toolbox forsuch analysis.

Spatial statistics represents one of the most importantand core methodologies. Although not a new area in GIscience, there is a scope to expand its applicationsconsiderably. In spatial data mining it is one of the coretechniques and specific topics such as geostatistics, spatialautoregressive processes and point processes delivertechniques of considerable interest. When applied tomultivariate analysis, further specialist methods such astraditional principal components analysis and factor analy-sis, or more recent self-organizing maps and k-meansclustering analysis can be used.

The development of realistic geospatial process modelsand those which incorporate time (spatio-temporal mod-els) in a realistic manner will lead to improved representa-tions of the real world. The models themselves must beunderstandable, applicable to a range of data sets andsituations and must be capable of integration with others inprocessing workflows: geospatial process ontology needsdevelopment to ensure compatibility and interoperability.

Several computational methods can be used in imple-menting these geospatial modelling and analysis methods.Intelligent agents, cellular automata, neural networks andfuzzy logic are examples of geocomputational methods,which have not yet been adopted as standard computationalsolutions in GI applications. Algorithm development isoften undertaken on an ad hoc basis for specific tasks, but itmay well use particular spatial data structures, such asVoronoi and TIN (Triangular Irregular Network) models,or use particular approaches, such as data compression(e.g. wavelets) or network analysis based on graph theory.The latter, in particular its extensions (e.g. labelling andweighting of graphs), has not been researched and appliedenough in spatial problem solving.

All these techniques to get spatial information and createspatial knowledge, related to data quality and risk issues,can be implemented to support spatial decision-making.

Usability of maps and GI

The starting point in the study of usability is the usersthemselves. These may be professional users such asadministrative personnel and planners; some importantgroups of dedicated map users including children, thevisually impaired, tourists, military, mass media, Internetusers, ubiquitous/mobile users; along with occasional andamateur users.

Because of the large number and variation of users, mapdesign should always be user oriented (user-centreddesign) and be based on good knowledge about theelements of usability. Today, maps are most often digitaland interactive and thus users are able to dynamically

retrieve data for display and analysis from data bases. Therepresentation of information needs to be different fordifferent user groups. The previous situation where mapswere graphical presentations with limited data contents thatneeded interpretation no longer applies. The limitation ofthe map now is more often the small size of the screen inthe display equipment. The design of map interfaces forInternet, mobile devices etc. creates a most demandingdesign problem. The special users of maps like visuallyimpaired people would enjoy also various forms ofinteraction using tactual and audio interfaces to maps.For navigation and way finding applications evenmore exciting interfaces have been developed like augmen-ted realities in helmets and intelligent clothes. Thecreation of usability tests – both qualitative and quantita-tive – for new maps and other visualizations, for examplemultivariate visualization techniques, is a challengingfield.

Understanding cartographic communication is the start-ing point for both map design and usability analysis.Cognition and visual perception have been analysed inorder to get theoretical basis for map design rules.Perception of maps leads to information acquisition andlearning about the topic. Research in psychology andphysiology, which cartographers should be aware of,continuously reveals new knowledge about the humanperception processes: it would seem valuable to follow thisand ensure that visual perception, as well as audio andtactual perception is taken into account. Learning theoriesbased on contemporary approaches to perceptual studiesalso support map design and map use research.

The users themselves are finding, querying, reading andapplying maps in different ways than before. Research intomethods of data assimilation and use of maps andgeospatial data in particular situations (e.g. personalnavigation) is necessary to assess the impact of contempor-ary displays in, for example, satellite navigation systems,public map displays and through unconventional mediasuch as mobile devices. The role and meaning of mentalmaps, cartoids and cartograms are emphasized amongresearchers of cartographic communication. The skill ofspatial thinking and spatial understanding of problemsmust be kept as the basis of map design.

It is clear that an increasingly large number of map usersare accessing cartographic products through mobile andposition-enabled devices. It is absolutely essential that suchforms of map use, here related to the broad field of locationbased services, are effectively undertaken, and both thetechnology and the use of location based services are areasof prime concern to cartographic researchers. Adaptivemaps modify themselves according to their location as wellas the preferences and situation of the user. Contemporaryresearch on navigation systems, satellite systems like theglobal navigation satellite system and other positioningmethods should be carefully examined by cartographers todetect synergies.

Geovisualization and visual analytics

Because there will always be a demand for paper mapping,studies of the effectiveness of static two-dimensionalproducts, as well as (for example) three-dimensional scale


Pub

lishe

d by

Man

ey P

ublis

hing

(c)

The

Brit

ish

Car

togr

aphi

c S

ocie

ty

models products are always needed. But Geovisualizationtechniques have extended the map medium to embracedynamic, three- and four-dimensional data representa-tion using methods which are interactive, capable of beingsupplemented by augmented and virtual realities, integratedwith geodatabases, and flexible in application, platform,scale and content. In many cases these involve multi-dimensional and multivariate representations such asparallel coordinates plots and star diagrams, along withinteractive techniques such as brushing.

A research agenda for Geovisualization was published bythe ICA Commission on Visualization in 2001, andprogress since then has addressed research areas such asrepresentation methods (including virtual environments),database linkages for visualization and cognitive issuesin Geovisualization and knowledge acquisition throughvisualization.

The more recent subject of ‘visual analytics’ extends thegeovisualization metaphor further to embrace integrateddata mining and the development of decision makingtechniques through spatial thinking, visualization, ana-lytical reasoning and knowledge engineering. Furthernew visualization developments in the field of games andsimulators can be profitably examined in order to adoptnovel and effective tools and methods for geovisualization.Visualization is tightly linked to analysis by the means ofexplorative analysis.

The importance of collaborative decision makingsupported by spatial representations and data sets isgrowing in many areas of human activity. For example,instead of one planner and decision-maker there is a groupof people at the same time around the same planning/decision-making task or accessing the same representation.Collaborative methods try to support these kinds ofsituations. In collaborative visualization instead of oneperson, there is a group of persons who are able to see thevisualizations at the same time. This can happen in onespace (for example, on a large or multi-screen or in a virtualreality cave automatic virtual environment) or in manyplaces. Using the Internet it is possible to transfer both thevisualization and the interactions of several users to allowfor remote collaboration. There are technical issues such asupdates, synchronization of the data transfers and manage-ment of conflicts, which need to be solved. Collaborativetools as well as single user tools enjoy the existence ofmulti-media.

It is important to realize that the focus of researchin Geovisualization is not on the technical execution ofthe representation (although this is fundamental to theprocess), but is more directed to the data managementto enable this, to possible tasks and application areas,and most notably to the role of the user in the visualiza-tion process. Thus, the impact of the visualization onknowledge acquisition (does the map presentunknown information, or is it used to display and confirmpreviously known information?), its role as an investigativetool (is the map for private study, or is it part of a morepublic decision making process?), and its didactic capabil-ities (is the map being used interactively or is beingread passively?) can be researched through models ofvisualization.

Map production

Map production has long been a core practice of carto-graphy. Based on geodetic, photogrammetric, remote sensingor laser scanning based methods, topographic map produc-tion is a part of the surveying process. In each country,topographic mapping has its own traditions, includingselection of the map projections and datum. Nowadays inmany countries the geocentric WGS84 based systems areapplied, but it is still an important part of cartography toknow the properties and applications of various projectionsand manage their application and the conversions betweenthem. In practice many GIS software tools offer transfor-mations from projections and coordinate systems to others,while mobile and ubiquitous applications might sometimesrequire transformations on the fly. Map projections andtransformations, along with associated mathematical studiesof distortion, are valid areas of cartographic research. It isnoteworthy that it is not only topographic mapping whichmust address these issues: the importance of referenceframes to mobile applications, and the study of transfor-mations of raster imagery (from satellite, aerial platformsand ground-based) are also essential, as is the referencesystem adopted within GI layers.

Map production technology is a rapidly developing field.The new mapping technologies of satellite remote sensing,laser-scanning technologies and advanced global navigationsatellite system technologies offer both fast and accurateacquisition of topographic data. However they also givenew challenges for research and development as well asinnovations for several application areas. A continuouslydeveloping range of field and remote data collectiontechniques ensures that map production flow lines mustbe able to handle spatial data varying in source, format,scale, quality, reliability and area of coverage.

The role of cartographic knowledge as applied to mapproduction is still important. Map design, already men-tioned in connection with usability, covers issues such assymbolization, text and label placement, generalization,colour selection and layout design. Such tasks alwaysrequire understanding of the data compilation, the infor-mation compatibility and skills for aesthetic design. In casesof multi-lingual countries and production of printed maps,label placement is a challenging subtask in map design.Collection and standardization of place names as such is animportant part of map production and has important linksto ontology and information management issues.

The applications of map production processes and theirdevelopment are core topics for public and private mappingorganizations. There is a continuous interest in rationalizingand modernizing the production of maps and geospatial datasets. Such processes can differ depending on the map type:topographic or thematic, large or small scale, printed or digital.In topographic map production processes, the actual problemscan come from quality management and harmonizationneeds, which may themselves be guided by the requirements ofgeospatial data infrastructures. In many countries there areattempts to rationalize and synchronize municipal and nationalmapping by trying to harmonize the data contents and takecare about the quality management of production. Qualitymodels, up-to date metadata descriptions and associatedprocess documentation are central issues.


Pub

lishe

d by

Man

ey P

ublis

hing

(c)

The

Brit

ish

Car

togr

aphi

c S

ocie

ty

An enormous number of different categories of maps canbe, and are, produced by a variety of methods. Thematicmaps address particular concerns and portray specific data.Each category may have research issues associated with it.Some examples from specific ICA Commissions include:mountain maps, which must efficiently portray three-dimensional representations; marine charts, which mustincorporate ongoing developments in electronic nauticalcharting; environmental maps, which are valuable con-tributors to risk mapping for early warning applications;military mapping, which can also assist in civil crisismanagement, but is also responsible for planning andexecution of complex, technologically advanced militarymanoeuvres and campaigns, both in real-time and insimulators. Examples of other thematic map categorieswhich could benefit from applied research work includetourist maps, orienteering maps, advertising maps, artisticmaps, fantasy maps, geological and geophysical maps,cadastral maps, personalized maps, aeronautical maps,poverty maps, maps in text books, and mass mediamaps. Some thematic maps have global relevance becauseof the application: maps supporting scientific investigationsinto immediate problems, such as climate change and sea-level rise, are among the most important of these.

Other mapping functions for which production (perhapsas well as compilation and design) is a major issue includeatlases and atlas information systems. The future ofatlases has been debated for a long time, since the firstversions of digital and interactive atlases were introduced.Multimedia atlases came soon after and now the concepts ofAtlas Information Systems and web-atlases have beenintroduced and supplemented, supported by geobrowserssuch as Google Earth and Wikipedia. Technologies tosupport the cartographic and GI data handling require-ments of such products have to develop. Tactile and audiomaps need special design and production technology; theycannot be side products of regular maps and are often noteasily derived from the data.

The established tasks of map production, in addition tobeing subject to variability in data handled, method ofrepresentation and application area, are subject to over-riding practical issues such as economic, legal and securitymatters (including confidentiality). Legal issues includecopyright, privacy, liability and illegal use detection(using cartographic traps). Economic issues which can beresearched include production models and map marketing.Finally, once the maps have been produced or the databaseshave been implemented, there is a need to manage thearchive which they represent. This covers areas such asarchiving, updating, metadata extraction and recordingand further librarianship issues. As unique documentswhich need specialist curators and library resources foracquisition, storage and consultation, the role of maps inthe contemporary library is changing. And as spatial databecomes increasingly available in non-standard media, therole of the curator must expand to incorporate new skills.

Cartographic theory

Fundamental cartographic theory has been addressed by theICA Commission on theoretical cartography over manyyears, recognising that from a methodological point of

view, conceptual analysis in Cartography is very important.Various structural models of cartography (or its parts) haveattempted to describe the process of mapping as a science,an academic discipline, a technology, or an inherent humanimpulse. Furthermore, the tasks of cartographic design canbe deconstructed, and the map artefact itself (e.g. is it amodel, a language, a communication channel, a decorationor an archive?) can be examined.

Since the mid-1990s, cartosemiotics has undergonedevelopment. It has general (theoretical) and applied (user-oriented) subdivisions, the latter encountered in bothcartographic and non-cartographic traditions. Outside ofthe cartographic tradition, cartosemiotics may be applied inbiology, geography, ecology, geology, linguistics, etc. Themap semiotic approach to Cartography allows us toexamine map syntactics (which links the graphical repre-sentation with aesthetics and other parameters of design),map semantics with map sigmatics (indeed this can formthe basis of many studies of cartographic ontology) andmap pragmatics (which attempts to cover the entire area ofhuman experiences with maps, from perception andcognition, through use for navigation, to employment inartistic, cultural and literary works). Such an investigationcan improve the effectiveness of representations and datamodelling.

There are various communication and visualizationmodels as presentation forms in Cartography. Further-more, cartographic representation entails conceptual mod-elling of the world and can thus itself be studied as acognitive process. The new term ‘conception-analyticalapproach’ is a research area which has significant links todiverse conceptual models and spatial data handling in GIsystems. More properly allied to spatial analysis, analyticalcartography makes use of the spatial representations whichcartography produces in order to examine patterns, trendsand measures in the data. Analysis transforms geospatialdata into knowledge. The nature of such map/cartographic/geospatial knowledge must be recognized, along withmethods for describing and managing that knowledge.Cartographic theory may also assist in producing cartographicontologies, which can be fundamental to the exploitation ofcartographic databases and their applications. Terminologywithin cartographic fields themselves can be identified anddeveloped: for example, glossaries of definitions and termsused in specialist areas.

History

Cartography and the visualization of GI have a long andwell-documented history. Considerable research is ongoinginto a range of issues which can be regarded as dealing withthe history of cartography. These include the impact ofmap-making skills in societies throughout history, theway in which maps and GI have been used (both practicallyand for political and symbolic purposes), and the develop-ment of methods of production and the effect ofchanging technology.

In addition, historical studies have examined ‘progress’in mapping (e.g. increasing accuracies, scale, content,reliability throughout history – although not necessarilyunidirectional) and have also been concerned with thepreservation of the artefacts themselves. Within these


Pub

lishe

d by

Man

ey P

ublis

hing

(c)

The

Brit

ish

Car

togr

aphi

c S

ocie

ty

broad approaches, specific issues can be identified. Thehistory of printing technology is of considerable interest;the role of colonial cartography has been immense,especially in the 19th and 20th centuries; the dichotomybetween private and government mapmaking has beenfluid over many centuries. Such specific issues can be addedto by considering the way in which recent and contem-porary history of cartography is being addressed. It isimportant to document the rapidly changing and artefact-poor recent history of GI science and digital cartography.

In addition to the history of cartography as a discipline,the role of cartography in history has been researched bycartographers. Here the task of mapping, the role of maps,the propensity to map and the resultant impact of maps on awide range of other human activities have all been recorded.

Perhaps the most active research area currently which haslinks to this section is considering maps as culturalheritage, part of the patrimony and cultural inheritance ofa society. But such maps are more than artistic relics – theyare working documents which can be used for culturalinvestigation over a wide range of fields (including history,genealogy, archaeology, politics, architecture, sociology andgeography). There are significant applications in this field forthe application of contemporary digital techniques, andspecialist geospatial databases have been created based onhistorical data, but capable of being examined usingmodern scientific cartographic analysis.

Education

From a practical viewpoint, it is clear that many of thehighly skilled operations associated with cartography andGI handling require training and experience. This, itself, isan area of concern for ICA. In the research context,however, education can be divided into scientific educationin universities, education at schools and continuouseducation as a part of the profession (the latter also includestraining and practical ‘on-the-job’ knowledge acquisition).Research in these areas has examined curricula, practices indistance learning, e-learning and professional updating,access to maps and spatial data, use of maps to promoteattitudes and behaviours (e.g. spatial thinking), andestablishment of a profile for cartography which allows itto be applied and integrated with other subjects at schooland in society.

University curricula have been changed during the pastyears: it is clear that GI systems and GI science have takenover a place in the classroom from cartography. The impactof new technologies and political pressures, such as theintroduction of the Bologna pattern of study at Europeanuniversities, has lessened the appeal of cartography.However, cartography is a subject which can and shouldplay a larger role in curricula at many schools anduniversities. Curricula need continuous updating becauseof the rapidly developing technology and increasingmethodology and theoretical knowledge. Internationalcartographic association must follow the developments atuniversities and also try to influence the development ofeducational programs. Universities in less developedcountries could enjoy distance learning and virtualeducation, as long as the methods and content matchresearch findings in this general area.

Cartography and GI science as school subjects have takensome space in school teaching mainly in the geography andenvironmental programs. International cartographic asso-ciation should also try to influence to this change,particularly in developing countries. Schools should be ableto enjoy Internet datasets and free software. Especially inelementary school education, spatial thinking and learn-ing enhanced by using maps are interesting topics. Thesetopics are related with more general research into pedagogiclearning, but could be recognized more in cartographicresearch as well.

Society

Society is one of the five main ‘areas of operation’ of ICAand it also offers many interesting research topics from legalissues (including copyright and privacy questions) toethics, democracy and equity. However, accessibility tocartographic and geographic datasets and GI services is aglobal problem – not all members of society with an interestor need to access geospatial data are in front of a desktopcomputer. Access problems for many make it impossible toget information and participate in the developing digitalsociety. Gender problems together with other problems ofunder-represented groups and equity issues are acontinuous topic. Within ICA these topics have been longrecognized and from the research point of view it could beinteresting to analyse the effects of the development ofvirtual services in an e-government context on the equity ofindividuals. Virtual geographies might also developpeople’s ability in spatial thinking. Modelling the world,either in an individual or on a collective basis, is oneexample of social impacts that should be seriously studied.

The heading ‘Society’ covers the collection, handling andrepresentation of many highly varied socio-economic spatialdatasets which can be studied using cartography and GImethods. Particularly important areas which are subject tosignificant contemporary mapping and geospatial datahandling activity and research include health, unemploy-ment, literacy, public services, cultures, age and humanrights.

As a globally visible and well represented organization,ICA can support and enhance the use of such geospatialdatasets in the research of social questions at a globalscale. Such approaches need the support and cooperation ofnational and international institutions and organizations,including national mapping agencies, global non-govern-mental organizations and world development bodies,including United Nations bureaux.

With the help of the Internet, maps are now distributedto users in very different ways than they were only a decadeago. This has introduced a host of research questionsrelated to use of electronic networks for map distributionand the influence of the medium on the message ofmaps. In addition, the question arises as to which mediumshould properly be used in cartography to assure thedistribution of maps to the broadest possible audience.Likewise, questions must be asked about copyright andlicensing of maps that are distributed through the Internetand how sophisticated online map servers will be main-tained. This question has links to SDI as well.


Pub

lishe

d by

Man

ey P

ublis

hing

(c)

The

Brit

ish

Car

togr

aphi

c S

ocie

ty

From the audience point of view it is most important thatthe research results are delivered equally to the users,whoever they may be or wherever they are.

THE COMMISSIONS/WORKING GROUPS AND THE

RESEARCH AGENDA

The Terms of Reference of each Commission and WorkingGroup have been analyzed to see which of their Terms isrelated to research. It should also be realized that theCommission and Working Group chair had the opportunityto indicate which of their terms of reference is researchrelated. The interpretation of the meaning of research willno doubt vary among the chairs. Its outcome is alsoqualitative, it does not tell us about the amount of research.Publications of the Commission and Working Groupscould quantify the result a bit more.

The result of his exercise is depicted in the schemes inFigures 2 and 3. It will be obvious that the result dependson different factors. Most important is the overall objectiveof the Commission or Working Group. Not all of themhave been established to do research. Since the Terms ofReference are redefined every four years a Commission orWorking Group might have decided for a period thatconcentrates on more pragmatic topics. The background ofthe chairpersons and changing composition of theCommissions/ Working Group will also influence its focus.Just as the research topics defined in the previous sectionrepresent a snapshot in time so do the schemes in Figures 3and 4.

An on-line survey has been held among the chairs of theCommissions and Working Groups to see which of theirTerms of Reference are research related (Figures 2 and 3).In addition they were asked to indicate which of the topicsin the research agenda (Figure 1) had the interest of theirCommission or Working Group. This is depicted in thediagrams in Figure 4. It depicts a qualitative interest, anddoes not tell us anything about the amount of activitiesrelated to a particular topic. Also not all Commissions andWorking Groups have executed the online survey. Eighteenout 22 of the Commissions and one out of six WorkingGroups returned the questionnaire.

Figure 5 summarizes the relationship between theresearch topics and the Commissions and WorkingGroups in a slightly different way and allows us to seecommon interest between the Commissions and WorkingGroups that responded to the online survey. This could actas a guide for the chairs to see with whom to cooperatemore intensively.

CONCLUDING REMARKS: HOW TO IMPLEMENT THE

RESEARCH AGENDA?

The purpose of this research agenda has been to identifyand briefly elucidate some current and potential researchissues which fall under the terms of reference of ICA andindividuals and groups who work under its remit. Primarilythis includes the Commissions of ICA each of which ischarged with undertaking research work in their area. Thisagenda is intended to encourage the Commissions to

consider their research areas, and to examine possibleoverlaps and cooperation possibilities with otherCommissions. Furthermore, it will assist in identifyingthose areas of cartographic research which are not currentlycovered by any Commission and which need furtherencouragement. Finally, this document should disseminatethe agenda of ICA to other organizations, both those withwhich we can undertake research collaboratively and thosefor whom the results of ICA sponsored research will be ofvalue.

Clearly, therefore, we believe that this research agendashould be reflected upon by the constituent Commissionsof ICA. One of the major responsibilities of the electedchairs of the Commissions is to develop a ‘Terms ofReference’ document which should explicitly list thedeliverables expected over the four-year period of theCommission’s existence (the Commissions can be re-elected). Such deliverables should yield valid researchresults. A further duty of a Commission chair is to inviteand manage a group of experts and interested individuals toachieve the deliverables. The work programme can becompleted through focused research meetings and confer-ences (which can be during and around the time of biennialinternational cartographic conferences or at other times),through ongoing communications within the Commission,and through collaboration with Commissions in sistersocieties. Alternatively it is hoped that this agenda can beused in a positive way by those individuals who aresubmitting proposals for funding to regional, national andinternational organizations.

In all cases, ICA expects the results of research to bewidely disseminated for the benefit of itself, the widercartographic community and society in general. Thepresentation of a Commission report is required at eachquadrennial ICA General Assembly of Delegates and theopportunities to present research findings in the conferencearena exist. Publication of research work in academic andscientific journals would also be expected, along with moreinformal communication through Commission websites.

REFLECTION

Is the agenda as presented here complete? Can it becomplete? The answer to both questions should be no forseveral reasons. First of all, creating the agenda has takenmany years due to the organizational workflow withorganizations like the ICA. Second, the technology pushis stronger than ever and new hypes pass by every fewmonths. However, some hypes prove to be of structuralimportance, so even when an hype some attention isrequired. An example is the Google Earth/Maps type ofdevelopments.

Another ‘hype’ not found in the agenda, but picked upby some Commission and Working Group activities is forinstance related to Web 2.0. With Mash-ups one can createcustomized and privatized maps. In combination with otherWeb 2.0 facilities such as wiki’s, blogs, photo sharing,podcasting, social software like facebook, folksonomy and(geo)tagging, as well as RSS feeds users contribute to thecollection of georeferenced materials available via the web.


Pub

lishe

d by

Man

ey P

ublis

hing

(c)

The

Brit

ish

Car

togr

aphi

c S

ocie

ty

Fig

ure

2.

The

ICA

Com

mis

sions

and

thei

rte

rms

of

refe

rence

.T

he

rese

arch

rela

ted

term

shav

ebee

nhig

hlighte

d.

See

htt

p:/

/w

ww

.ica

ci.o

rg/

for

det

ails

on

the

Com

mis

sio

ns.

Ther

eis

aq

ual

i-ta

tive

and

quan

tita

tive

diffe

rence

among

the

Com

mis

sions

and

thei

rT

erm

sof

Ref

eren

cean

dof

what

isco

nsi

der

edre

sear

ch


Pub

lishe

d by

Man

ey P

ublis

hing

(c)

The

Brit

ish

Car

togr

aphi

c S

ocie

ty

Fig

ure

3.

Th

eIC

AW

ork

ing

Gro

ups

and

thei

rte

rms

of

refe

ren

ce.

Th

ere

sear

chre

late

dte

rms

hav

eb

een

hig

hligh

ted

.See

htt

p:/

/w

ww

.ica

ci.o

rg/

for

det

ails

.T

her

eis

aq

ual

itat

ive

and

qu

anti

ta-

tive

dif

fere

nce

amo

ng

the

Wo

rkin

gG

rou

ps

and

thei

rT

erm

so

fR

efer

ence

and

of

wh

atis

con

sid

ered

rese

arch


Pub

lishe

d by

Man

ey P

ublis

hing

(c)

The

Brit

ish

Car

togr

aphi

c S

ocie

ty

Fig

ure

4.

Fo

cus

on

the

agen

da’

sin

div

idu

alre

sear

chto

pic

s.T

he

ho

rizo

nta

lb

ars

repre

sen

tth

eper

cen

tage

of

Co

mm

issi

on

san

dW

ork

ing

Gro

ups

‘in

tere

sted

’in

that

par

ticu

lar

topic

bas

edo

nth

ed

ata

rece

ived

fro

mth

eo

n-l

ine

surv

ey


Pub

lishe

d by

Man

ey P

ublis

hing

(c)

The

Brit

ish

Car

togr

aphi

c S

ocie

ty

This trend has been ‘classified’ as neo-geography or whenwe relate it to the maps ‘neo-cartography’. Would it bepossible to bring these often informal data collectionprocesses of Web 2.0 together with the formal world offor instance the National Atlas or Topographic Maps, suchthat both worlds could benefit and one might even think ofupdate via the people?

Map design in a neogeography environment will requireinnovations of the traditional approaches. The strength ofmaps is their ability to select from reality and abstract theselection via a well designed symbolization. This results inmaps that are characterized by their relative emptiness, byvisual hierarchy and have a particular appealing style. Bothselection and abstraction are challenged by the currentWeb2.0 products. This will require attention from many ofICA’s Commissions and Working Groups. And thesechallenges will keep the research agenda alive.

BIOGRAPHICAL NOTES

Menno-Jan Kraak is profes-sor in Geovisualization atITC and head of ITC’sGeo-Information Process-ing Department. He haswritten more than 200publications on cartogra-phy and GIS. His mostvisible publications arethree books on aspects ofcartography: Cartography,visualization of geospatialdata, (with Ormeling) pub-lished by Prentice Hall,(translated in 5 languages)

and Webcartography, developments and prospects (editedwith Brown) published by Taylor & Francis, and ExploringGeovisualization (edited with Dykes and MacEachren)published by Elseviers. Menno-Jan is a member of theeditorial board of several international journals in the fieldof cartography and GIS, and is active in the InternationalCartographic Association as Vice-President. He is chair ofthe Foundation Scientific Atlas of the Netherlands.

FURTHER READING

‘A Strategic Plan for the International Cartographic Association for2003–2011 as Adopted by the ICA General Assembly, 2003-08-16’ http://www.icaci.org/en/ICA_Strategic_Plan_2003-08-16.pdf).

Figure 5. The relationship between the ICA research agenda’sindividual research topics and the Commissions and WorkingGroups. It shows common interests and gaps in the execution ofthe agenda. The diagram could be a guideline for chairs to findpartners in tackling particular research problems. It shows that somehave a limited interest while others have a very broad researchscope. Commissions and Working Groups without links did notrespond to the on-line survey


ica research agenda on cartography and gi sciencepublished by maney publishing (c) the british...

Documents