Atlas of the Federal Republic of Germany - Concept and implementation status

This article outlines the conceptual foundations, institutional history, and implementation strategy of a modern National Atlas of the Federal Republic of Germany. National atlases are understood as comprehensive, systematically organized representations of a state’s physical, economic, social, and political geography. Traditionally characterized by territorial completeness, standardized scales, encyclopedic scope, and public sponsorship, they serve planning and decision-making, education, research, and national representation. Recent international examples demonstrate a shift toward user-oriented thematic structures, flexible scales, explanatory texts, graphics, photographs, geographic information systems, and complementary digital formats. A contemporary German atlas should therefore combine carefully designed, individually produced maps with standardized, regularly updated electronic presentations rather than simply reproduce the same content in print and digital media. Despite earlier cartographic works for West Germany, spatial planning, and the former German Democratic Republic, no genuine national atlas existed for prewar, divided, or reunified Germany. Following reunification, geographical and cartographic associations developed an ambitious six-volume concept comprising approximately 300 principal maps and an equal number of explanatory pages. Germany was generally to be represented at 1:2 million, supplemented by European-context maps and regional case studies. The plan envisaged computer-assisted print production, electronic editions, a central editorial and cartographic unit, decentralized working groups, an eight-year schedule, and expenditure of about DM 29.3 million. Federal support was not secured, however, and the original model was judged financially impracticable. The revised approach places the Institute for Regional Geography (IfL) at the center of a phased, research-based implementation. Initial work would be financed through coordinated individual research proposals, test thematic and technical procedures, and produce exemplary atlas sheets from different subject areas. These would be assembled as a pilot or “volume zero” to establish quality standards, attract subscriptions, and mobilize additional funding. Organizational priorities include integrating participating scholars and institutions, holding workshops, appointing prospective volume editors, establishing an effective editorial team, and later creating a board of trustees and a scientific advisory council. Uniform specifications are to govern content, texts, cartographic design, sheet length, and volume size. A central technical objective is the construction of scalable geometric databases for administrative boundaries and topography, linked to thematic geometries and ongoing spatial-monitoring data. A modular pool of base layers, object classes, symbols, and cartographic software would enable authors to prepare much of their material digitally, leaving the IfL primarily responsible for editorial and cartographic completion. Alternative electronic editions, potentially including continuously revised online publication, are also to be explored. The project’s fate depends not only on scholarly competence but on funding, institutional autonomy, technological change, rapidly aging data, market demand, and evolving media use. The authors conclude that a periodically updated subscription atlas with simultaneous Internet publication may ultimately be more appropriate than a fixed, once-only edition, and that the IfL must use the project to advance innovative, application-oriented research methods rather than preserve inherited atlas traditions unchanged.