By Ivalu Petersen, fictional Still North staff member. Published .
Not peer reviewed. Fictional demonstration publication. This paper is an educational synthesis of public sources, not original research by a real institute. Illustrative examples are not measured findings. The cover is a generated illustration. SN-2026-083 is a local archive identifier, not a DOI.
Abstract
Public release changes what a community map can reveal, even when names are removed. This methods note compares NIST de-identification guidance with Indigenous data-governance and Canadian research ethics sources to examine identification, collective exposure, and inference from omissions. A wholly fictional seasonal-observation case contrasts exact points, displaced points, broad zones, and a non-spatial account. It shows why record counts, contributor counts, and complete release packages require separate scrutiny, and why suppressing one cell may not prevent reconstruction. The analysis favours a purpose-led, authorised derivative rather than automatic export of the source map. It provides neither an anonymisation guarantee nor a universal Indigenous checklist, and identifies changing linkage opportunities, review capacity, and irreversible distribution as important limits.
- Paper type
- Methods note
- Topic
- Communities and governance
- Keywords
- community mapping; disclosure risk; data governance; spatial aggregation
- Format
- PDF, 3 pages; 1457 words
Sources and context
The PDF discusses these public sources and its limitations. A citation is not an endorsement of this demonstration archive.