Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
the spatial structure of the EU territory and as the perspective of a single member
state from the highly urbanised part of north-west Europe, which would regard all
other countries as 'rural' and 'green deserts' in comparison. The discussions
surrounding the maps for the draft ESDP thus exemplify the difficulty of finding the
right level of abstraction at a scale higher than the nation-state, and the need for
careful consideration of the specificities of intergovernmental working in order to
avoid a nationally biased perspective on spatial development issues. The question
of who is involved in the process of producing maps and who makes decisions on
what to represent is a crucial one in planning processes in general, but particularly
so in intergovernmental ones. While all member states were invited to send a dele-
gate to participate in the cartographic group set up under the Dutch presidency, in
practice this was limited to those countries that had the staff and financial
resources to do so, and also the appropriate expertise and interest in the task.
Countries not represented on the cartographic group, therefore, had the possibility
to comment on the suggestions made by the cartographic group, but had little
opportunity to initiate proposals for cartographic illustrations.
Most of the cartographic illustrations that were prepared under the Dutch
presidency were discarded, and instead four geo-referenced maps in A3 format
were included in the appendix of the first draft ESDP (CSD, 1997) (see Figure
5.2). Much of the information for these illustrations originated from the work on the
French trend scenarios and the maps prepared under the Italian presidency.
However, this is a problematic approach, as it attempts to give scientific credibility
to what are effectively highly subjective assessments. Reflecting the controversies
about 'maps' in the ESDP process, these four illustrations carried a note saying
that:
This representation is only an illustration of certain spatial elements referred to
in the text of the 'First Official Draft' of the ESDP.... They in no way reflect
actual policy proposals and there is no guarantee that the elements displayed
are exhaustive or entirely accurate. (CSD, 1997, annexe)
Many notes can be found in the VROM
3
archives on the discussions surrounding
the development of maps for the ESDP, and the increasing confusion at this stage
about the information base for, and purpose of, the illustrations. For instance,
Finland, Germany and Spain expressed their view that 'maps should be objective
(descriptive or statistical) - not political' (Archives of VROM, 15 December 1997).
Besides the persistent understanding by several delegates that statistical maps
can be objective and unbiased (although clearly every map is an interpretation and
therefore distorts reality), the comments also express the unease with a political
message that might be misunderstood, and a certain confusion about the function
