The Enshitification of GIS

Part One: How Proprietary Ecosystems, Cloud Lock-In, and Feature Glut Threaten Geospatial Innovation

For decades, Geographic Information Systems (GIS) have helped people see the world differently. Planners, governments, corporations, researchers, and nonprofits use GIS to uncover geospatial relationships, manage resources and infrastructure, develop integrated plans, operationalize maps, and shape better futures. But as with many maturing technologies, GIS is entering a troubling phase—a process some call “enshitification.”

Coined by tech critic Cory Doctorow, “enshitification” describes how once-great platforms decay under the pressures of greed and control. They begin as open, user-centered systems but gradually morph into closed ecosystems optimized for corporate rent-seeking rather than public good. GIS, long built on ideals of openness and shared data, now shows many of these symptoms.

The Decline of Openness

Early GIS revolved around collaboration. Governments invested in public basemaps, universities shared tools, and the rise of open-source projects like QGIS fostered transparent exchange. But today’s landscape is dominated by proprietary software ecosystems that extract subscription fees while locking in data behind paywalls and restrictive licenses.

This shift undermines the collaborative fabric that made GIS thrive. Instead of solving spatial problems together, organizations are once again hoarding data. Data is becoming harder to get in open and accessible formats and price ranges. For example, access to foundational basemaps, infrastructure, elevation and terrain models, parcel and cadastral data, demographics and socioeconomics, and up‑to‑date POI and mobility layers is increasingly determined by who can afford them.

Feature Glut and Declining Usability

Modern GIS tools boast seemingly endless features—yet many users feel overwhelmed or ignored. Interfaces that once focused on clarity and cartographic quality now feel cluttered with AI widgets, integrations, ribbons and analytics dashboards few really need.

The logic is clear: every update promises “innovation,” but the underlying driver is monetization. Vendors prioritize features that create new subscription tiers or sell add-ons. The result is a growing disconnect between what professionals need and what corporations push.

Data Colonialism and Platform Control

Another worrying trend is the centralization of spatial data into a handful of corporate-owned cloud platforms. Once, local governments proudly hosted their own datasets. Now, they “lease access” through cloud portals controlled by external providers. While cloud-based GIS improves scalability, it also restricts user autonomy by enforcing subscription fees, limiting interoperability, and often locking critical geodata behind paywalls or vendor-specific APIs.

This isn’t just technical consolidation; it’s political. When spatial data about communities is stored, analyzed, and visualized by global technology firms, the balance of power shifts away from citizens and toward platform owners. GIS becomes less about empowering insight and more about monetizing geography.

A Call to Recenter Purpose

Despite these challenges, GIS does not have to succumb to enshitification. The field’s heritage—open data, shared knowledge, and public utility—still holds immense power.

To reclaim GIS, practitioners must:

• Support open-source projects that prioritize transparency.

• Advocate for public access to spatial data.

• Resist vendor dependency by building interoperability into workflows.

• Reconnect GIS with its civic and ethical roots.

GIS should be a lens for understanding and improving the world, not just another rent‑seeking service. Maps have the power to bring people together to solve problems. It is time to free GIS.