Maps: are they instruments of power

Maps: Are They Instruments of Power?
Richards, N. 1999

Abstract:

Maps are powerful instruments that influence our interpretation of the space around us and the phenomena that occur within it. In historical and contemporary contexts maps have been, and are used, to create and perpetuate power, and to legitimate property and political claims. Maps, as with other forms of human communication, inevitably represent the interests, prejudices and goals of the people that create them and therefore need to be interpreted with care.

Key words: Maps, Power, Politics, History, Contemporary.

The Oxford dictionary defines the word ‘map’ as a ‘Flat representation of the Earth’s surface or part of it’. This gives little clue to the historical and contemporary importance of maps in the affairs of humanity. Of course many things other than the earth’s surface may be mapped, for example mapping of the human genome is presently the focus of much attention. This essay will be limited to the discussion of maps, as two dimensional, visual, and scaled down representations of space on the earth’s surface and of humanity’s activities in that space. Maps can help facilitate one group of peoples capacity to exercise control, or influence, over another group of people, that is exert power. This is due to the wide acceptance of maps as factual representations. Maps are a powerful media that most people accept as fact (Phillips, 1997, p. 15) and for this reason they have long been used to reflect, legitimate and give access to power as asserted by Massey (1995, p. 21).

Maps are, of necessity, selective representations of the environments their authors seek to portray. Physically, it is not possible to accurately represent life size three-dimensional space using two-dimensional cartography at convenient, publishable scales, so the mapmaker has to decide how to represent the area to be mapped, for example by making scale and projection selections. The nature of a map’s message, and its potential to facilitate power, is particularly sensitive to the means of representation chosen by the cartographer when he or she seeks to communicate the political, ethnic, religious, cultural, or other aspects of social geography that may exist in a given space.

Harley (1989 in Barnes & Gregory 1997, p. 163), in discussing the role of maps and power, makes a distinction between the external and internal power of cartography. Harley sees the external power in maps as the reflection of the power that is exerted on cartography. Maps reflect the interests of their authors and or those who commission their production. Precisely because maps cannot include all the physical, environmental, social or cultural detail of the space they seek to represent, decisions on what to include or exclude are made on the basis of the interests of those who are making the map. The map is therefore intrinsically a reflection of the power of the interests that created them (Wood 1992, p. 71). My school experiences (circa 1960s) were of world maps that showed the extent of the British Empire in red spread over a third of the globe. This was an example of mapmakers reflecting a view of the extent of British dominion, notwithstanding that by the 1960s many countries were sovereign states. Whilst my educators rejoiced in Australia’s inclusion in the spread of red, I now wonder if that sentiment was, at the time, shared by the peoples of India, the then Rhodesia, South Africa and other former British colonies. The maps of course, could not accommodate a diversity of views and could only reflect the interests of their makers, who wished to perpetuate the ‘power’ of British Commonwealth, and of my educators who were of like mind.

Harley’s concept of the external power of maps includes the view that power is exerted with cartography (1989 in Barnes & Gregory 1997, p. 163). Maps are used to legitimate claims to power in a variety of contexts. For example cadastral maps define the legal boundaries of land ownership and in this way are the graphic manifestation of a given jurisdiction’s prevailing legislation applicable to the ownership of land. The power to use land is thus legitimised and made robust against contested ownership by cadastral maps. The earth’s surface, both terrestrial and marine, has been the subject of contested claims for occupation, access and enjoyment of resources, for probably all of humanity’s history. Maps play an important role in groups seeking to legitimate their claims to space, and what it contains, over the claims of others. Massey (1995) develops the case of the Honduran indigenous peoples, the Mosquitia, Garifunas, Tawahka-Sumu and the Pesch who in the early 1990s together sought to legitimate their rights to land by the creation of a map. The key issue presented by Massey was that the occupation and use of the land by the indigenous peoples had never been recognised in ‘official’ maps of the region. Other users, such as coffee farmers, commercial loggers, and peasant farmers, therefore regarded the area as unoccupied and available for exploitation.

A comparison between the ‘official’ map of the region (Figure 1) and the map of the ‘Indigenous Lands of the Honduran Mosquitia’ (Figure 2) is revealing. Figure 1 indicates little human activity in the area of indigenous land use whist the western and northern sectors of the map are rich in the detail of modern settlement, showing roads, towns and airfields. Figure 2 on the other hand, reveals the area, from the point of view of the indigenous people, as a complex network of 175 zones of subsistence activity and occupation. By investing in the creation of a map (Figure 2) which represented the indigenous peoples occupation and traditional uses of the land, a platform was created that used the same language as established authority, that is mapping, and upon which the indigenous peoples could seek to legitimate their claims. At the ‘First Congress on Indigenous Lands’ indigenous peoples used the social land use map (Figure 2) to further their claims to protect the area and a resolution was agreed by the congress, which included government officials, to respect a number of indigenous peoples requests. However this does not necessarily mean that the indigenous peoples goals will be achieved (Massey 1995, p.10). Massey makes the point that this example shows that whilst placing things on a map can be empowering, omitting things from a map can be disempowering (1995, p. 20).

The circumstances that the Honduran indigenes found themselves in would no doubt find resonance with Australian Aborigines. Following Cook’s declaration of possession of the East coast of the then New Holland on 22nd August 1770, the British applied the doctrine of ‘terra nullius’ (empty land) to their new acquisition (Frost, 1981 p. 521). This meant that they regarded themselves as having a moral right to occupy what they regarded as the unused lands of Australia (Flannery, 1994 p. 280). The consequent omission of Aboriginal interests from maps helped to legitimate the process of European expansion into Australia.

The potential for maps to provide access to power has been well understood by those in, or seeking power throughout human history. It is in respect to this aspect of maps and mapping that Harley’s concept of the internal power of cartography emerges. Harley asserts that the internal power of maps is the potential for cartographers to manufacture power, Harley argues that,

· "Maps are a technology of power, and the key to internal power is cartographic process." (1989 in Barnes & Gregory 1997, p. 164)

I interpret Harley’s argument to be that the capacity to create maps allows for the selection of what is included in, and excluded from maps, which in turn enables the message contained in the map to be manipulated by its creator or creators to suit particular interests. Thus providing the potential to acquire or perpetuate power. Maps enjoy a high level of credibility, especially when produced by authorities such as governments, universities or large companies, and it is this quality that enhances the potential of maps to provide access to power. In the Honduran example the primary reason for the indigenous peoples creating a map was to gain access to power and influence the decision making of the Honduran government (Massey 1995, p. 21).

Maps are not necessarily unique in their capacity to facilitate the process of gaining access to power. In this respect maps are similar to a newspaper article, a book, or a television programme. They are all means of communicating messages which are inevitably coloured by the interests, bias and prejudices of their authors, but which have the potential to reflect, legitimate and give access to power. The key difference in respect of maps is the more general acceptance of maps as factual representations of the world, compared to the other forms of communication mentioned, which are more likely to be regarded with skepticism. Supporting this view Monmonier argues that the map and cartography are powerful and believes that this is due to " our frequently unquestioning acceptance of cartographic messages" (1995, p.1).

A topical example of the role of maps in the exercise of power is provided by recent events in East Timor. On the 10^th of October 1999, Indonesian security forces fired upon Australian Interfet forces in East Timor. The Indonesian forces fired on the Interfet troops on the grounds that they had trespassed into West Timor. Subsequent discussions between the respective commanders confirmed that the map used by the Australians, of Indonesian manufacture (Figure 3), differed from that used by the Indonesian forces which was of Dutch origin (Figure 4) and which showed the border to be in a different location. An implication of this difference was the death of an Indonesian policeman in the ensuing exchange of fire (Garran & McPhedran 1999, p. 9). In this instance the maps used reflected the different understanding each side had as to the location of the border between East and West Timor. The map shown in Figure 4 was used by the Indonesian forces to legitimate their actions in attacking the Interfet forces on the grounds that they were on, or too close to the border. Similarly the Interfet forces, to justify their claim that they were well inside the border, used the map shown in Figure 3. It is important to realise that the maps alone were not responsible for this incident or the trouble in East Timor generally, these are the products of complex and disturbing human actions. The incident does however underscore the importance placed on maps as arbitrators of what is ‘real’ on the ground, especially when abstract human constructs such as political borders are involved.

It is clear that maps are instruments that are often associated with the reflection, justification and acquisition of power. Maps are "… an excellent mirror on culture and civilisation" (Thrower, 1972 p. 1) and much of culture and civilisation is about the pursuit and perpetuation of power. Nonetheless maps are essential tools that enable us to navigate through the world and understand spatial phenomena (ibid). As with all messages that humanity creates, maps inevitably embody the prejudices and biases of their authors (Wood 1992, p. 24). The interpretation of maps therefore requires appropriate care and consideration of the intent of the map and its message.

References:

Black, J. 1997, Maps and Politics, Reaktion Books Ltd., London.

Flannery, T. 1994, The Future Eaters, Reed New Holland, Sydney.

Frost, A. 1981, New South Wales as Terra Nullius: The British Denial of Aboriginal

Land Rights, Historical Studies, vol. 19, pp. 513-523.

Garran, R. & McPhedran, I. 1999, "General sends Jakarta a ‘please explain’", The

Australian, 12^th Oct., p. 9.

Harley, J.B. 1996, ‘Maps Knowledge and Power’, in Exploring Human Geography,

S. Daniels & R. Lee, eds, Arnold, London.

Harley, J.B. 1997, ‘Deconstructing the Map’, in Reading Human Geography: The

Poetics and Politics of Inquiry, eds T. Barnes & D. Gregory, Arnold, London.

Massey, D. 1995, ‘Imagining the world’, in D. Massey & J. Allen eds. Geographical

Worlds, Oxford University Press, The Open University, Oxford.

Monmonier, M. 1995, Drawing the Line: Tales of Maps and Cartocontoversy, Henry

Holt, New York.

Phillips, R. 1997, Mapping Men and Empire. A Geography of Adventure, Routledge,

London.

Smith, N.& Katz, C., 1993 ‘Grounding Metaphor: Towards a Spatialized Politics’, in M.

Keith & S. Pile, eds, Place and the Politics of Identity, Routledge, London.

Thrower, N.J.W. 1972, Maps and Man, Prentice-Hall, New Jersey.

Wood, D. 1992, The Power of Maps, The Guilford Press, New York.

School of Geography, Population and Environmental Management
Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia