en rtogrnpli i c perspectives bulletin o f the North American Cartographic Information Society Ldil<>r Dav id DiBi11se J 1.,•,1'.'-y (;la< ,(;r.1 pltil'~ I .1\bt ircih 1ry Dl'p.1rtnw111 ol Ct«>gr.1phv :l02 W,1lkl'r Building l\•1m St.ill' Univl'rs ity Univt•rsity l'.irk, l'A lh8ll2 l'ln,1il : dibi,l~l{f~.'\.~sl:. p~u.l•du Coeditor 1\.11 rl f'roc/1 I C:202 l'.1llt't' libr,1ry l\ 1 nn Stale Unl\'t'r~itv t:tfilori11/ 1\ssisl1111/ Su :11111H' Pel erso11 l),•.i~y Cl'0Cr.1phk' L1borntory :\umber 7,

more »

... 11 l'J'lll cartogmpltic perspectives 3 featured article The problem of defining and actualizing standards of ethical conduct troubles many professions, including cartography. In an attempt to formal ize the ethical discourse in cartography the editors of Carto-grapl1ic Perspectives invited five contributors to discuss what they perceive as important ethical problems in the discipline. The contributors were selected from the three major sectors of the cartographic enterprise: commercial mapping organizations, government mapping agencies, and university geography departments offering cartography programs. The contributors identify personal and institutional vigilan ce in product quality assurance, map plagiarism through violation of copyright law, and conflicts of interest as important ethical issues. The commentary concludes by questioning the nature and validity of cartography's claim to truth ("accuracy"), and asserts that cartographic ethics cannot be extricated from the values of the larger society which commissions the production of cartographic information. C artography, as a discipline, has begun to pay an increasing amount of attention to ethical issues. Panel discussions devoted to ethics held at the annual meetings of the Association of American Geographers (AAG) and the North American Cartographic Information Society (NACIS) attest to this trend. Published discussions of ethical issues arising as a result of the adoption of GIS and computer assisted cartography include Dangermond and Smith (1988), Visvalingam (1989) and Dutton (1978) . These examples point to an emerging discourse on ethics in cartography. We hope that this paper will further the discourse by providing a diverse collection of perspectives on ethical problems in the field and a tentative synthesis of their implications. As a working definition for the purposes of this discussion, we define ethics as "principles of conduct guiding the practices of an individual or professional group." Cartographers may be required to interact professionally in a number of institutional/organizational milieus. The body of this article is comprised of three sections dealing with ethical problems within the commercial, government, and academic sectors of cartography. Our purpose will be to discuss a range of ethical problems which may develop from the normal practice of cartographers/information specialists in these three domains. A discussion of ethical problems in commercial cartography is contributed by Dobson. Two anonymous cartographers employed by a federal mapping agency address ethical problems in government cartography. Andrews considers ethical problems in academic cartography. Contributing authors were invited to present specific or hypothetical examples to illustrate the conditions which may lead to ethical dilemmas and to suggest strategies for their resolution. Impending ethical problems which may arise as a result of technological or broader societal changes are also discussed. The commentary concludes with McHaffie's summary and synthesis of the fundamental ethical problems faced by cartographers in these three sectors. ' These contributors were required by the terms of their employment contracts to seek the permission of agency superiors before publishing this paper. Permission was not granted (i.e., the paper was censored in its entirety). The authors have therefore consented to publishing their contribution anonymously. Their statements, therefore, should not be construed as representing the opinions of a major federal mapping agency, but rather those of two concerned private citizens.