Mapping Contested Wilderness: Conservation, Development, and the Politics of Land-Use

Maps actively produce places by highlighting certain features, prioritizing specific values, and downplaying others. Different mapping approaches are thus not only analytical but also carry profound political implications. Wilderness mapping, in particular, is inherently political, defining how wilderness is conceptualized, which areas are considered worthy of protection, and which are prioritized for development. This paper focuses on how different wilderness maps create distinct spatial realities and how they can be employed in political debates. Through a critical narrative review and comparative analysis, it examines how different mapping approaches and spatial representations of wilderness shape land-use planning and political perceptions, using a proposed hydropower plant in the Icelandic Central Highlands as a case study. The findings show that the estimated wilderness loss associated with the proposed plant varies substantially depending on the methodological approach, particularly concerning how disturbance, accessibility, and visibility are conceptualized. These differences are not merely technical but reflect contrasting interpretations regarding what constitutes wilderness and how it should be measured. Although the physical changes caused by development are measurable, the spatial extent classified as wilderness loss is not fixed because it depends on the mapping framework used to define and represent wilderness. Wilderness mapping therefore does not simply inform environmental assessment but actively shapes how impacts are interpreted, communicated, and debated. These findings elucidate the persistent tensions in wilderness governance worldwide, where competing spatial representations enable different policy positions to coexist.