Skip to main content

Publishing maps for reports, plans, and submissions

Maps in reports, plans and submissions can have a very long life. They are copied into council files, hearing evidence, future plan changes and other documents. A map prepared for one kaupapa can later be treated as if it were a permanent statement of boundary, status or Māori position.

That makes context, mandate and provenance as important as layout quality.

Start with the kaupapa, not the document template​

Before building the figure, ask:

  • What does the map need to help people understand or decide?
  • Whose position or knowledge does it represent?
  • What mandate exists for that representation?
  • Is the map evidence, analysis, context or advocacy?
  • What should a future reader not infer from it?

A council submission template or technical-report convention should not determine what Māori knowledge is disclosed.

A map can play different roles​

A map may be:

  • an orientation aid
  • an illustration supporting kōrero
  • a summary of source data
  • a formal representation adopted for a particular plan or submission
  • an analytical output
  • an argument showing relationships or effects

Say which role it is playing. Do not make a contextual map look like a definitive legal or cultural determination.

Useful wording can include:

  • Indicative map prepared for this kaupapa.
  • One source among several.
  • Generalised for public release.
  • Modelled output, not a site observation.
  • This geometry does not define mana whenua.

Evidence is not limited to state data​

A formal report may combine:

  • Māori-held kōrero and locally mandated information
  • iwi or hapū plans
  • historical records
  • Māori Land Court or Treaty evidence
  • Crown and council datasets
  • scientific measurements and models
  • imagery
  • derived GIS analysis

Keep those sources distinct. Do not allow the government layer to become the objective evidence while Māori knowledge is described only as cultural context.

The strength and appropriate use of each source should be explained on its own terms.

Place names and representation​

Use ingoa wāhi carefully.

  • use locally appropriate names where the kaupapa calls for them
  • retain macrons and spelling
  • distinguish official, historical and local names where needed
  • do not copy a basemap label without checking it
  • keep provenance where a name carries particular authority or history

Rohe and boundaries​

Rohe, takiwā and mana whenua relationships are not automatically cadastral-style boundaries.

Where a line or area is required:

  • state the purpose for which it was created
  • say whether it is indicative, statutory, administrative, customary or another representation
  • show overlap or uncertainty where that matters
  • avoid creating an exclusive hard line merely because the report template wants one map

See Working with mana whenua and rohe without hard boundaries.

Scale and precision​

Match the visual precision to the knowledge and purpose.

Avoid:

  • exact-looking points where the location is approximate
  • sharp polygon edges around relational or uncertain areas
  • model outputs styled as observed facts
  • precise sensitive sites in a public appendix

A map should not become more certain when it is exported to PDF.

Sensitive information​

Reports and submissions are high-risk because they are widely circulated and often become public records.

Possible approaches include:

  • generalised areas rather than exact sites
  • restricted appendices
  • a verbal or in-camera briefing where available and appropriate
  • stating that a relevant value exists without publishing its location
  • providing an approved alert or buffer layer rather than the source knowledge

If the report enters a public process, make that consequence clear before Māori-held information is included.

Attribution and provenance​

Record enough to show:

  • institutional dataset sources
  • Māori-held source or provenance where it can be stated safely
  • map author or organisation
  • date and version
  • analytical transformations
  • generalisation or masking
  • limitations
  • the purpose for which the representation was authorised

See Attribution, whakapapa and sources.

Layout that survives copying​

Maps in reports often end up reduced, printed in greyscale or separated from the surrounding text.

Use:

  • a clear purpose-led title
  • readable labels
  • a short legend
  • strong enough contrast
  • date and version on the map face
  • source and limitation notes that remain with the image

Design quality matters because poor layout can distort meaning.

Submission maps and advocacy​

A submission may deliberately argue for a position. That is not a defect.

Be transparent about:

  • the position being advanced
  • what evidence supports it
  • what analysis was performed
  • what remains uncertain

Neutral-looking cartography is not the same thing as neutrality. Every choice of extent, layer, classification and label shapes the reader's view.

The ethical requirement is not to pretend the map has no position. It is to avoid misleading people about the evidence or authority behind it.

Technical appendices​

Use appendices for material that supports the map without overwhelming the main kōrero:

  • data dictionaries
  • full metadata
  • detailed methods
  • sensitivity-safe supporting maps
  • technical assumptions

Do not place exact sensitive material in an appendix simply because appendices feel less visible.

Before publication​

Check:

Kaupapa and mandate​

  • the map serves the report's actual kaupapa
  • the authority for this representation and use is clear
  • further hapū, iwi or whānau mandate is not being assumed from a project sign-off

Evidence​

  • source types are distinguished
  • public/Crown data is not treated as culturally authoritative by default
  • Māori-held information retains appropriate provenance
  • analysis is identified as analysis

Representation​

  • boundaries and sites do not imply false certainty
  • ingoa wāhi are appropriate
  • sensitive detail is protected
  • the map says what it should not be used to conclude

Production​

  • readable at final size
  • date and version visible
  • final submitted version archived
  • superseded versions separated

After submission​

Keep a record of exactly what was published or lodged and the decision that authorised that version.

If the map later changes, do not silently replace it in the archive. Record what changed and why, especially where the earlier representation has already entered a public or statutory process.

Last updated on