Publishing Māori GIS maps
Last reviewed: 26 August 2026
Publishing changes the audience and the life of a map. A working layer used within a hapū, whānau or project may become a PDF, StoryMap, web map or data extract that can be copied, separated from its original kōrero and combined with other information.
The useful starting point is the kaupapa: what does this version need to communicate, who is it for, what relationships sit around the information, and what context needs to travel with it?
Use this when
This section covers:
- maps for hui or wānanga
- governance or trustee papers
- reports, plans and submissions
- private or public web maps
- StoryMaps and other narrative sites
- dashboards
- data extracts for another organisation
Start with the purpose of the output
Useful questions include:
- What is this map or publication for?
- Who is connected to the places or kōrero shown?
- Who is the intended audience for this version?
- What detail actually helps that audience?
- What meaning could be lost if the map travels without its presenter or report?
- What could be inferred when it is combined with other public information?
- What is likely to happen if it is forwarded, downloaded or screenshotted?
A platform's share button answers a technical question. It does not decide what the publication should contain.
See What belongs in GIS?, Who decides what? and Ethics, tikanga and consent.
Different audiences can need different maps
The same underlying information may legitimately produce several representations.
| Representation | Useful for | Main consideration |
|---|---|---|
| in-room map | hui or wānanga kōrero | what needs to be visible in that setting |
| internal PDF | operational or governance use | copies and old versions can circulate |
| partner map | council, researcher or consultant work | purpose, useful detail and onward use |
| public static map | public information | context can be separated from the image |
| private web map | project exploration | sharing settings, export and identity |
| public web map | open access | assume copying and reuse |
| StoryMap | narrative and place-based explanation | maps, text, images and embeds all form part of the publication |
| data extract | analysis by another party | purpose and source context need to travel with the data |
The aim is not maximum restriction. It is to make each version fit the kaupapa and audience.
Static maps
A PDF or image can be useful because the visible content is fixed and there is no live feature service behind it.
A useful map normally includes:
- a purpose-led title
- date and version
- source and provenance note
- readable labels and legend
- scale where relevant
- the level of detail useful for the kaupapa
- a short note about uncertainty or intended use where that helps the reader
Screenshots, forwarding and cropping still matter because a static map can easily travel beyond the original hui or report.
See Attribution, sources and metadata and Draft and final maps.
Web maps
A web map does not need to expose the main working layer.
A practical pattern is:
- keep the main working layer with its source and context
- create a separate view or shared version where useful
- build the map, app or dashboard from that version
Useful things to check include:
- fields and features
- popups
- attachments
- search and export settings
- metadata and thumbnails
- map extent
- sharing groups
- dependent apps and services
See Sensitive places, Spatial masking and Publishing maps with sensitive locations.
Hui and wānanga
A map for hui is part of the kōrero, not merely an engagement product.
It can help people compare places, question assumptions, add memory and see relationships that are difficult to hold in a spreadsheet or report. It can also dominate the discussion if the map is presented as though it has already settled what the place means.
Use Maps for hui and wānanga for practical ways to make room for kōrero, annotation and different views.
StoryMaps
A StoryMap can keep maps close to narrative, photographs and context. That is often useful where whenua, whakapapa and history cannot be explained by geometry alone.
It also publishes several kinds of material at once. A useful review therefore looks at the whole story rather than just the map layer.
Use StoryMaps and Place names and ingoa wāhi where naming and local context are important.
Sensitive places
Some outputs do not need the best available coordinate.
Other representations can include:
- broad locality
- generalised area
- buffer or alert zone
- counts or categories
- no geometry
- detailed working version plus a broader shared version
See Publishing maps with sensitive locations and Pā and archaeological landscapes.
Provenance is part of the map
Attribution helps preserve the whakapapa of information. Without it, a published map can look as though every line, name and point came from the map author or from a government basemap.
Useful source context can include:
- where the data and kōrero came from
- what source or relationship gave it meaning
- date or version
- transformations or generalisation
- whether geometry is exact, indicative or interpreted
- what the map cannot support as a conclusion
See Whakapapa of data, Provenance and source checking and Attribution, sources and metadata.
Ingoa wāhi
Place names can carry whakapapa, memory and different histories of the same whenua.
Useful practice can include:
- locally used names where they fit the kaupapa
- correct macrons and spelling
- official, historical and local names kept as separate fields where needed
- source notes for locally held or historical names
- avoiding the assumption that a basemap label is the only valid name
See Place names and ingoa wāhi, Who gets to name a place? and Historical Māori maps.
Accessibility and readability
A map that cannot be read is not serving its audience well.
Useful checks include:
- readable labels
- colour is not the only carrier of meaning
- adequate contrast
- clear legends
- plain descriptions of uncertainty
- mobile behaviour for web publications
- alt text for meaningful images where the platform supports it
Before release
A final review can ask:
- Does this serve the kaupapa or mainly showcase the GIS?
- Is this the right representation for this audience?
- Could less spatial detail communicate the same point more clearly?
- Are source, date and uncertainty visible where they matter?
- Could the map be misunderstood if separated from its report or presenter?
- Is the shared version distinguishable from the main working record?
- Will somebody understand later why this version was created?
Common traps
- treating public publication as the natural end-state of every GIS project
- using one map for every audience
- designing the map first and discussing the kaupapa afterwards
- publishing a working layer simply because it already exists
- treating an official basemap as neutral cultural context
- exposing precise locations when the message is landscape-level
- assuming a private link cannot travel
- losing whakapapa and source context during export
- leaving online content unchanged long after the kaupapa or evidence has moved on