Cover not available

Article published In: Information Design Journal
Vol. 29:1 (2024) ► pp.3–24

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required

Visualizing biodiversity on maps

Conflicting goals and limits of conventional presentation methods

ORCiD logo with link | University of Bern
Published online: 27 May 2024
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/idj.23007.sch
Abstract
Maps play a central role in the transfer of knowledge for biodiversity conservation. However, their production and reception contexts have not been sufficiently investigated so far. While critical cartography has demonstrated that maps are not objective representations of nature but are influenced by social conventions, these insights have not been fully reflected in ecological mapping practice. This paper draws on critical map theory and expands it with a critical evaluation of map visualization. By analyzing the design of biodiversity maps, our study demonstrates that the way biodiversity is visualized in maps does not adequately reflect the dynamics and interdependencies of natural systems, nor does it adequately reflect the species-specific needs. It is argued that design-led research provides relevant knowledge about evaluating maps in terms of their functionality as communication tools. This is of central importance if we wish to further develop ecological cartography and make it practicable and effective in its field of application.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The role of maps in the transfer of ecological knowledge
  • 3.Critical takes on nature conservation mapping
  • 4.Evaluation of biodiversity maps from the perspective of design research
    • 4.1Theoretical foundation
    • 4.2Synthesis and formal comparison
  • 5.The design analysis of biodiversity maps
    • 5.1Urban Tree Mapping
    • 5.2Monitoring and inventory of species occurrences
    • 5.3Spatial guidelines for future action
    • 5.4Mapping ecosystem services
    • 5.5Summing up
  • 6.Towards new design approaches
  • 7.Conclusion and further research
  • Note
  • References
  • Image credits
References (42)
References
Bertin, J. (1983). Semiology of graphics. University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blaser, J., Gardi, O., Kern, M., Mack, S., Wiedemar, M., & Remund, J. (2016). Schlussbericht Urban Green & Climate Bern: Die Rolle und Bewirtschaftung von Bäumen in einer klimaangepassten Stadtentwicklung. Hochschule für Agrar-, Forst- und Lebensmittelwissenschaften HAFL, Bern.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Crampton, J. W., & Krygier, J. (2006). An Introduction to Critical Cartography. ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies, 4(1), 11–33.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Crampton, J. W. (2010). Mapping: a critical introduction to cartography and GIS. Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Davies, H., Doick, K., Handley, P., O’Brien, L., & Wilson, J. (2017). Delivery of ecosystem services by urban forests. Forestry Commission Research Report. Forestry Commission.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Denil, M. (2003). Cartographic Design: Rhetoric and Persuasion. Cartographic perspectives, 451, 8–67. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Drucker, J. (2011). Humanities Approaches to Graphical Display. Digital Humanities Quarterly, 5(1).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Findeli, A. (2004). Die projektgeleitete Forschung: Eine Methode der Designforschung. In Swiss Design Network (Ed.), Erstes Design Forschungskolloquium (pp. 40–50). Swiss Design Network.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Flusser, V. (2000). Towards a philosophy of photography. Reaktion Books.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Frayling, C. (1993). Research in Art and Design. Royal College of Art Research Papers 1(1), 1–5.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gloor, S., & Göldi Hofbauer, M. (2018). Der ökologische Wert von Stadtbäumen bezüglich der Biodiversität. In D. Dujesiefken (Ed.), Jahrbuch der Baumpflege 2018 (1st ed.) (pp. 33–48). Haymarket Media.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Harley, J. B. (1989). Deconstructing the Map. Cartographica, 26(2), 1–20. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Harris, L. M., & Hazen, H. D. (2006). Power of Maps: (Counter) Mapping for Conservation. ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies, 4(1), 99–130.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kim, A. M. (2015). Sidewalk City: Remapping Public Space in Ho Chi Minh City. University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koordinationsstelle BDM (2014). Biodiversitätsmonitoring Schweiz BDM. Beschreibung der Methoden und Indikatoren. Umwelt-Wissen Nr. 1410. Bundesamt für Umwelt.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kowarik, I., Bartz, R., Brenck, M., & Naturkapital Deutschland – TEEB DE (Eds.) (2016). Ökosystemleistungen in der Stadt: Gesundheit schützen und Lebensqualität erhöhen. Technische Universität Berlin, Helmholtz-Zentrum für Umweltforschung – UFZ.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Maes, J., Zulian, G., Thijssen, M., Castell, C., Baró, F., Ferreira, A. M., Melo, J., Garrett, C. P., David, N., Alzetta, C.; Geneletti, D., Cortinovis, C., Zwierzchowska, I., Louro Alves, F., Souto Cruz, C., Blasi, C., Alós Ortí, M. M., Attorre, F., Azzella, M. M., Capotorti, G., Copiz, R., Fusaro, L., Manes, F., Marando, F., Marchetti, M., Mollo, B., Salvatori, E., Zavattero, L., Zingari, P. C., Giarratano, M. C., Bianchi, E., Duprè, E., Barton, D., Stange, E., Perez-Soba, M., van Eupen, M., Verweij, P., de Vries, A., Kruse, H., Polce, C., Cugny-Seguin, M., Erhard, M., Nicolau, R.; Fonseca, A., Fritz, M., & Teller, A. (2016). Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services. Urban Ecosystems. Publications Office of the European Union.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Malavasi, M. (2020). The map of biodiversity mapping. Biological Conservation, 2521, 108843. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mose, J., & Strüver, A. (2009). Diskursivität von Karten – Karten im Diskurs. In G. Glasze & A. Mattissek (Eds.), Handbuch Diskurs und Raum: Theorien und Methoden für die Humangeographie sowie die sozial- und kulturwissenschaftliche Raumforschung (pp. 315–325). Transcript.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Peluso, N. L. (1995). Whose Woods are these? Counter-Mapping Forest Territories in Kalamantan, Indonesia. Antipode, 27(4), 383–406.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rekacewicz, P. (26.03.2021). The Inspired Discipline: On Geography’s Search for New Mediums and Artistic Methods. Online symposium, mLAB, Geographisches Institut, Universität Bern. [author’s transcript]
Scheuermann, A. (2017). Die rhetorische Designanalyse und Buchanans ›Design-Argument‹ – am Beispiel des Lego Star Wars At-At Walker 4483. In W. Neuber, P. L. Oesterreich, G. Ueding, & F. Vidal (Eds.), Rhetorik. Ein internationales Jahrbuch. Band 36: Rhetorik im digitalen Zeitalter (pp. 109–127). De Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Schneller, A. (2015). Design Rhetoric: Studying the Effects of Designed Objects. Nature and Culture, 10(3), 333–356. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Seager, J. (2018). The women’s atlas. Penguin Books.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wood, D., & Fels, J. (1998). The power of maps. Guilford Press. (Original work published 1992)Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wood, D., Fels, J., & Krygier, J. (2010). Rethinking the power of maps. Guilford Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Image credits
Fig. 1, 2, 8
Source: Author
Fig. 3a
Naturnetz Pfannenstil (2022). Gemeinde Meilen, Vernetzungsplan [map]. In: [URL]
Fig. 3b
Knaus, F. (2015). Anzahl Arten mit hoher Schutzpriorität in der UBE [map]. In: Die räumliche Verteilung ökologischer, landschaftlicher und gesellschaftlicher Werte und Gefahren für diese Werte in der UNESCO Biosphäre Entlebuch. Interner Bericht, Biosphärenmanagement und ETH Zürich. p. 7. © ETH Zürich und UNESCO Biosphäre Entlebuch, © data: swisstopo and Kanton LuzernGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fig. 3c
Department of Economic, Social and Environmental Affairs of the Canton of Basel-Stadt, Office for the Environment and Energy, Coordination Office for Environmental Protection/Agriculture (Eds.) (2014). Zonenplan Perimeter Wiesental [map]. In: Vernetzungskonzept DZV Kanton Basel-Stadt. p. 12. © Geodata Basel-City. [URL]
Fig. 3d
Swiss Confederation (Ed.) (2021). Amphibians stationary objects [map]. In: [URL] © swisstopo, BAFU
Fig. 4a
Meyer, A., Zumbach, S., Schmidt, B., & Monney, J.-C. (Eds.) (2009). Rückgang des Europäischen Laubfrosches in der Schweiz seit 1960 [map]. In: Auf Schlangenspuren und Krötenpfaden: Amphibien und Reptilien der Schweiz. Haupt. © karch/swissTopoGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Published in: Schweizer Vogelschutz SVS / BirdLife Schweiz (Ed.) (2011). Biodiversitätsverlust und Konsequenzen für die Schweiz. p. 28Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fig. 4b
Grooten, M. & Almond, R. E. A. (Eds) (2018). Locations of Living Planet Index species populations [map]. In: WWF (2018). Living Planet Report – 2018: Aiming Higher. WWF, Gland, Switzerland. p. 94 ©2018 WWFGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fig. 4c
Jonas Oesch (2022). Schutzgebiete und Zonen mit hoher Artenvielfalt im Kanton Zürich [map]. In: Titz, S. (2022, December 13). Biodiversität Schweiz: Der aktuelle Stand enttäuscht. Neue Zürcher Zeitung. [URL] © Info Flora und NZZ
Fig. 5
Geodata Basel-City (2023). Tree cadastre [map]. In: [URL]
Fig. 6
Geodata City of Bern, Amt für Geoinformation des Kantons Bern (2023). Baumkataster [map]. In: [URL]
Fig. 7
City of Zurich (2023). Tree cadastre [map]. In: [URL]
Fig. 9a
Geodata Basel-City (2021). Grasshoppers [map]. In: Cantonal inventory of nature conservation sites [URL]
Fig. 9b
Geodata Basel-City (2021). Butterflies [map]. In: Cantonal inventory of nature conservation sites [URL]
Fig. 10
Fernández, N., Torres, A., Wolf, F., Quintero, L. and Pereira, H. M. (2020). Boosting ecological restoration for a wilder Europe. ” German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) and Rewilding Europe.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fig. 11
Maes, J. et al. (2016). Map of green infrastructure for the municipality of Pobla de Claramunt [map]. In: Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services. Urban Ecosystems. 4th Report. Publications Office of the European Union. p. 23Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fig. 12
Maes, J. et al. (2016). Maps used for mapping urban ecosystem in Cascais [map]. In: Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services. Urban Ecosystems. 4th Report. Publications Office of the European Union. p. 26Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue