on the Relationship between GIS and Maps
A geographic information system (GIS) is often summarized as a sum of its parts: five components—Hardware, Software, Data, Methods, and People (analysts and audiences, users and consumers). Notably, maps are included as one of the components of a GIS. So…
What is the relationship between “GIS” and “the map”?
This is a shockingly complex question. While industry has done a fairly decent job distilling the core components of a GIS into a list of five components, conceptualizing and defining that thing we call “a map” is not so straightforward.
For the purposes of addressing the question, let’s set aside all non-GIS-based and non-data-derived mapping. Let’s also agree that—for thinking about this question—definitions of cartography, as a practice and a discipline, are outside of this discussion.
Then, I think we are left with three primary (large and not mutually exclusive) ways of thinking about maps in relation to a GIS:
The map is a communicative and descriptive output of a GIS.
The map is an information-rich input of a GIS, often translated into data.
The map is a space for testing, analyzing, and evaluating relationships measured within a GIS.
a simplified summary of the relationship between a GIS, its components, and the thing we conceptualize as “the map” (LM, 2026)
These are simplified and summarized, along with their relationship to the five components of a GIS, in the diagram above. Further, these three relationships can be associated with our tripartite curriculum of learning GIS, broken down by “GIS activity”: mapping data, making data, and analyzing data.