Place Name in Ethiopia: Practice,

Challenges and Solutions

Best world Practices

Debebe Ayele:selamydebebe@gmail.com

April, 2024

Addis Abeba, Ethiopia

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

I would like to express our deepest gratitude to the Almighty God for granting us the wisdom,
strength, and guidance throughout the journey of conducting this research on Ethiopian place name
policy and standardization. I extend our heartfelt appreciation to our families for their unwavering
support, understanding, and encouragement during the course of this study. Their love and patience
have been indispensable, and I profoundly grateful for their sacrifices and belief in my endeavors.

My sincere appreciation also goes to the scholars, researchers, and practitioners in the fields of
geography, linguistics, anthropology, and cultural studies whose work has enriched our
understanding of place names and their significance within the Ethiopian context.

Finally, I would like to acknowledge our colleagues, friends, and mentors for their invaluable
support, feedback, and encouragement throughout the process. Their insights and constructive
criticism have contributed significantly to the development and refinement of this study. To all
those mentioned above, I extend my heartfelt gratitude. Thanks more my nuclear family.

i
WHAT NEXT?

As we move forward, the next steps in addressing the challenges of place name governance in
Ethiopia involve a multifaceted approach that combines research, stakeholder engagement, policy
development, capacity building, technology integration, community empowerment, awareness
campaigns, and monitoring and evaluation.

Firstly, conducting comprehensive research and analysis is crucial to understanding existing place
name governance frameworks in other countries and identifying best practices and lessons learned
that can be adapted to the Ethiopian context. This research will serve as the foundation for
informed decision-making and policy development.

Secondly, stakeholder engagement is essential to gather insights, perspectives, and

recommendations from key stakeholders including government agencies, local communities,
academic institutions, and cultural organizations. Engaging with a diverse range of stakeholders
will ensure that the resulting policies and frameworks are inclusive, responsive, and representative
of the needs and aspirations of all stakeholders.

Thirdly, policy development is necessary to draft and advocate for the implementation of
legislation, policies, and standards that address the governance of place names in Ethiopia. This
process will involve collaboration with policymakers, legal experts, and relevant stakeholders to
develop robust governance mechanisms that uphold cultural heritage, promote geographic
accuracy, and foster social cohesion.

Fourthly, capacity building initiatives will be implemented to provide training and skill
development opportunities for stakeholders involved in place name management. This includes
cartographers, geographers, historians, community leaders, and other relevant professionals who
play a critical role in the identification, documentation, and decision-making processes related to
place names.

Fifthly, exploring the integration of digital mapping technologies, Geographic Information

Systems (GIS), and crowdsourcing platforms will streamline the collection, verification, and
dissemination of place name data in Ethiopia. Leveraging technology will enhance efficiency,
accuracy, and accessibility in place name governance processes.

ii
Sixthly, community empowerment efforts will empower local communities to actively participate
in the process of place name governance. This includes providing opportunities for community
engagement, consultation, and decision-making to ensure that their cultural perspectives and
linguistic diversity are respected and preserved.

Seventhly, awareness campaigns will be launched to educate the general population about the
importance of place names, their cultural significance, and the benefits of adopting standardized
governance practices. These campaigns will aim to foster a culture of appreciation and stewardship
for Ethiopia's rich heritage of place names.

Lastly, mechanisms for monitoring and evaluation will be established to track the effectiveness of
place name governance initiatives, identify areas for improvement, and ensure accountability and
transparency in the implementation process. Regular monitoring and evaluation will enable
adaptive management and continuous improvement of place name governance systems in
Ethiopia.

iii
ABSTRACT

This paper explores the challenges surrounding Ethiopian place names governance and proposes
strategies informed by global best practices. Ethiopia faces significant obstacles in establishing a
coherent system for managing place names due to the absence of comprehensive policies,
standards, and laws in this domain. This absence has led to inconsistencies, ambiguities, and
disputes in the naming of geographical features, hampering effective governance and causing
confusion among citizens and stakeholders. Drawing on insights from international examples of
place name governance, this study highlights the importance of clear legal frameworks,
standardized procedures, and community engagement in ensuring accurate and culturally
sensitive place naming practices. It examines various models of place name governance from
around the world, identifying key principles and approaches that could be adapted to the Ethiopian
context. Additionally, the paper considers the role of technology and digital mapping tools in
enhancing place name management, emphasizing the potential for innovation and collaboration
to address governance challenges. By synthesizing global best practices with local needs and
contexts, Ethiopia can develop a robust framework for place name governance that promotes
cultural heritage preservation, geographic accuracy, and social cohesion.

iv
PREFACE

Place names are not merely labels on maps; they are reflections of cultural heritage, historical
narratives, and geographical identities. In Ethiopia, the significance of place names is deeply
rooted in the country's rich history and diverse cultural landscape. However, the governance of
place names in Ethiopia has long been a neglected area, characterized by a lack of comprehensive
policies, standards, and legal frameworks. This preface serves as an introduction to the
complexities surrounding Ethiopian place names governance and the urgent need for effective
solutions. It acknowledges the challenges posed by the absence of coherent governance structures
and highlights the importance of adopting global best practices to address these challenges.
Through this exploration, we aim to raise awareness of the importance of place name governance
in Ethiopia and advocate for the development of robust policies and frameworks that uphold
cultural heritage, promote geographic accuracy, and foster social cohesion. It is our hope that this
preface will inspire further research, dialogue, and action towards enhancing Ethiopian place name
governance for the benefit of present and future generations.

v
 Table of Contents
1. Introduction ......................................................................................................................................... 1
2. What is geonames? .............................................................................................................................. 3
3. Types of Place Names ......................................................................................................................... 4
3.1. Administrative boundaries ............................................................................................................ 4
3.2. Populated place ............................................................................................................................. 5
3.3. Hypsographic features................................................................................................................... 6
3.4. Transportation features ................................................................................................................. 7
3.5. Area features ................................................................................................................................. 9
3.6. Spot features................................................................................................................................ 10
3.7. Vegetation features ..................................................................................................................... 11
4. Place Name, Map History and Origin ............................................................................................. 12
4.1. Place name .................................................................................................................................. 12
4.2. The Relationship between Maps and Place Names..................................................................... 14
4.3. Benefits of A Place Name ........................................................................................................... 15
4.3.1. Identification ....................................................................................................................... 15
4.3.2. Location .............................................................................................................................. 16
4.3.3. Classifications ..................................................................................................................... 16
5. National Place Name Authority ....................................................................................................... 17
5.1. Key requirement of national PlaceName authority ..................................................................... 19
5.1.1. Establishment of a centralized body ................................................................................... 21
5.1.2. Standardization of Place Names.......................................................................................... 24
5.1.3. Effective Coordination with Relevant Stakeholders ........................................................... 25
5.1.4. Technological Infrastructure and Data Management Capabilities ...................................... 26
5.1.5. Public Awareness and Education Initiatives ....................................................................... 27
5.2. Structures of Place Name Authority ....................................................................................... 29
5.2.1. Centrally Structure Place Name Authority ......................................................................... 29
5.2.2. A Decentralized Structure Place Name Authority .............................................................. 30
5.2.3. A Federated Structure Place Name Authority ..................................................................... 33
5.3. National Place Name Committee ................................................................................................ 35
5.3.1. Responsibility of the Committee......................................................................................... 37

vi
6. Best Experiences of GeoNames ........................................................................................................ 38
6.1. American Experience .................................................................................................................. 38
6.2. Canadian Experience................................................................................................................... 41
6.3. Great England Experience .......................................................................................................... 44
6.4. Australian Experience ................................................................................................................. 48
6.5. Botswana Experiences ................................................................................................................ 50
6.6. South Africa ................................................................................................................................ 54
6.7. Kenya .......................................................................................................................................... 57
7. Geonames Standards and Polices .................................................................................................... 60
7.1. National Place Name Standardization......................................................................................... 62
7.2. International Place Name Standardization .................................................................................. 65
7.3. Languages and PlaceName ......................................................................................................... 67
7.3.1. Spoken Languages .............................................................................................................. 69
7.3.2. Written Language ................................................................................................................ 70
7.3.3. Writing System and Script .................................................................................................. 71
8. Place Name Changing, Renaming and Deleting ............................................................................. 74
8.1. The Reasons of Geonames Change, Rename and Deleting ........................................................ 76
8.1.1. Colonial Reasons................................................................................................................. 76
8.1.2. Obscene/Disrespectful Names ............................................................................................ 79
8.1.3. Change of Governments Systems ....................................................................................... 83
8.1.4. Expansion and Growth ........................................................................................................ 85
8.1.5. Related To Individuals, Groups and Tribes ........................................................................ 88
8.1.6. New names .......................................................................................................................... 90
8.2. Place Name Standard Procedures ............................................................................................... 93
8.2.1. Research and Consultation .................................................................................................. 93
8.2.2. Establishing criteria............................................................................................................. 94
8.2.3. Submitting a proposal ......................................................................................................... 95
8.2.4. Public Notification .............................................................................................................. 96
8.2.5. Documentation and Record-Keeping .................................................................................. 97
8.2.6. Implementing ...................................................................................................................... 99
8.2.7. Monitoring and evaluation ................................................................................................ 100
9. United Nations Recommendations on Place Names ..................................................................... 102
9.1. Respect for Local Naming Practices ......................................................................................... 102

vii
 9.2. Consistency and Standardization .............................................................................................. 103
9.3. Avoidance of Political Bias....................................................................................................... 104
9.4. The Recognition of Historical Names ....................................................................................... 105
9.5. Use of Official Names............................................................................................................... 107
9.6. Transliteration and Translation ................................................................................................. 108
9.7. Documentation and publication ................................................................................................ 109
10. Place Name Data Collection ....................................................................................................... 111
10.1. Preparation Stage .................................................................................................................. 111
10.1.1. Research and Planning ...................................................................................................... 111
10.1.2. Resource Gathering ........................................................................................................... 112
10.1.3. Training ............................................................................................................................. 113
10.2. Field Stage ............................................................................................................................ 114
10.2.1. Data collection .................................................................................................................. 115
10.2.2. Verification ....................................................................................................................... 116
10.3. Approved Stage ..................................................................................................................... 117
10.3.1. Data processing ................................................................................................................. 118
10.3.2. Quality Assurance ............................................................................................................. 119
10.3.3. Documentation .................................................................................................................. 120
10.3.4. Approval ........................................................................................................................... 121
11. Dual Naming Standards ............................................................................................................. 123
11.1. Australia ................................................................................................................................ 124
11.2. New Zealand ......................................................................................................................... 124
11.3. Canada................................................................................................................................... 124
11.4. South Africa .......................................................................................................................... 124
12. A Gazetteer Data ......................................................................................................................... 125
12.1. Gazetteer ISO Standards and Codes ..................................................................................... 127
13. Ethiopian Place Name History, Challenges and Solutions ...................................................... 128
13.1. Historical Background .......................................................................................................... 128
13.2. Maps and Place Names of Ethiopia ...................................................................................... 130
13.3. Place Name Challenges in Ethiopia ...................................................................................... 131
13.4. Place Name Awareness Problem .......................................................................................... 132
13.5. Absence of Policy and Law .................................................................................................. 134
13.6. The Absence Place Name Authority ..................................................................................... 135

viii
 13.7. The Absences of Gazetteer Data ........................................................................................... 136
13.8. Possible solutions .................................................................................................................. 137
13.9. African Country Names ........................................................................................................ 139
13.10. Some African Capital Cities ................................................................................................. 140
13.11. Changed Place Name in Ethiopia.......................................................................................... 142
14. General Place name views in Ethiopia ...................................................................................... 144
15. Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 144
References:............................................................................................................................................... 146

ix
1. Introduction
Place names have been created since the creation of the earth and the first name maker is the creator
and the first name is Adam. There is a place name story that says that Adam gave names to
everyone on earth. Place name standards have been in use since the 1890s in the United States and
have been attempted to be governed by law and systems. It is believed that the United States is one
of the pioneer countries for place names to be governed by law and policy. Many countries in
Europe, Asia and Africa are implementing their own place names in different structures and
organizations by organizing place name resources in a database as an example for other countries.

The benefits of a place name are endless. In order to use this in the right way, the United Nations
has shown that it is important to prepare standard place names. Thus, in 1890, the first standardized
place name guide was prepared. In the same year, the first National Place Names Board was
established. In 1919, a permanent committee headed by a place name was established in England,
but at that time the British International Committee was working on place names for colonial
countries outside the country. As a result, many African countries and Latin America have their
place names in Great Britain even today (USGS, 2020).

The importance of place names at the international level, which should be governed by laws and
regulations, was proclaimed in the 1940s by the United States. For this, the support of the United
Nations was high. In 1967, the International Conference on Place Names was held in Geneva for
the first time. It was agreed in the conference that the use and importance of place name
information should be of national and international standards to be implemented properly. In this
way, all countries have been directed to customize their own toponym laws and regulations.
Following the Geneva conference, 9 international toponym conferences were held in different
countries. The main purpose and goals of the conferences are to encourage countries to establish
national place name authorities, Information shows that the key tasks of the conference were to
work out the meaning and essence of place names, to identify place name locations and types of
place names at the national level (United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names
[UNGEGN] Working Group on Toponymic Data Files and Gazetteers, 2017).

1
Especially when it comes to place names, the change of identity and history that took place in
colonial countries takes a significant place. A place name is a book that preserves the history and
universal identity of a community. A place name tells the origin and ancestors of a country or
community, and if it is not properly handled, if it does not have continuity, it destroys the history
and identity of the community. Genocide of identity has been carried out especially in African
countries. Even though the colonialists left in the long struggle against Africans, the identity-based
changes they made continue to this day. For example, South Africa is one of the first African
countries to make some attempt to correct the names of places that have been changed and created
by European colonists. For this purpose, it is working to establish an independent place name
institution at national level. At present, African countries whose names have not even been
secured, and other colonized Latin American and Asian countries are being called by the names
given to them by their colonists, who have abandoned their own names and identities. For example,
history tells us that today's Ghana was formerly known as Cold Ghost. Of course, even if America
is the leader of the world today, it continues with the place names given by the colonists. For
example, Chicago is a name given by the Spanish and means garden (Hagos, Berhane, &
Gebregiorgis, 2019).

When it came to the land of hope, Ethiopia, due to the lack of place name law and system, a lot of
place name change and destruction took place. Even though Ethiopia is not a country ruled by the
right, there are meanings of place names that are not in its own language. Especially during the 5-
year Italian occupation, many city, neighborhood and street names were changed and renamed by
the invaders and history was lost. We will see this in detail in the future. Ethiopia's failure to
establish a place name law and system has led to many identity and history crises. Ethiopia is a
multi-cultural and multi-ethnic country and many place names have changed and disappeared in
the course of history. It is still in progress to change the name of the place, delete it and replace it
with another name. Due to the fact that this place name information (Gazetteer) is not managed by
system and law and there is no place name authority, the problem continues to worsen even today.
In Ethiopia's long history, in its prehistory, middle history and modern history, many place names
have been changed frequently and have reached today (Alemayehu & Negatu, 2020).

As a general place name, it is a historical asset that preserves the history and identity of a
community. In addition to preserving the history of the place name, it has a great advantage in the

2
information system. It defines the location, direction and nature of a place, and being guided by
law and order is of great benefit to the technological construction system we use today. Therefore,
in this book, an attempt has been made to survey the Ethiopian place name problems and their
solutions.

2. What is geonames?
"A place name, also known as a toponym, is a term used to identify and designate a specific
location on the Earth's surface (Clark, 2009). Place names can refer to a wide range of geographic
features, including cities, towns, villages, mountains, rivers, lakes, valleys, and other natural or
human-made landmarks. Place names serve as linguistic identifiers that help people communicate
about locations, navigate spaces, and establish a sense of place and identity. They are often deeply
rooted in history, culture, and language, reflecting the traditions, heritage, and narratives of the
communities that inhabit or have inhabited those places. Place names can vary widely in form and
origin, depending on factors such as language, history, and cultural influences. They may derive
from indigenous languages, historical events, geographical features, notable individuals, or
religious or cultural significance. Overall, place names play a fundamental role in human
geography, cartography, and everyday communication, providing essential reference points for
spatial orientation, mapping, and understanding the world around us (Clark, 2009).

The elements that give place names are the following.

They are:

1. Places inhabited by people, for example, cities, villages,

2. Administrative levels, for example:- region, district, zone, kebele,
1. Natural topography, for example mountains, rivers, hills and the seas,
2. Built infrastructures such as airlines, dams, railway,
3. Unrestricted areas or those with specific local meaning Areas (e.g. pastures, fishing
grounds, It includes holy places and etc.

3
3. Types of Place Names
According to the United Nations Group of Experts on Place Names, the world is divided into 9
main categories of place names with 645 unique codes (UNGEGN, 1967). Upon examining the
real-time database, over 25 million place name data entries were collected. This database was
developed by the US National Geospatial Information Agency, encompassing place name
information from all countries globally. However, it's notable that the collection and organization
of place names within this database may not align with the cultural and national standards of
individual countries. This highlights the legal challenges surrounding standards and regulatory
frameworks for place names.

As a general place name, they are divided into 9 main divisions.

3.1. Administrative boundaries

An administrative boundary serves as an essential delineation of a country's administrative
organization, representing one aspect of a place name (UNGEGN, Year). The administrative level
varies in accordance with the political structure of individual countries, organized based on
national governance frameworks and subject to periodic adjustments as necessary. Notably, the
administrative framework differs between federal and unitary states; for instance, Ethiopia and
Eritrea exemplify this distinction. Ethiopia, structured into four levels, contrasts with Eritrea's two-
level framework. As classified by the United Nations Group of Experts on Spatial Names or the
US National Geospatial Information Agency, administrative levels are segmented into
Administrative One (ADM1), Administrative Two (ADM2), Administrative Three (ADM3), and
Administrative Four (ADM4) (UNGEGN, Year). Various countries have adapted these standards,
organizing administrative boundaries into second, third, and fourth levels as required.

However, despite the numerous countries worldwide, only a fraction have established
comprehensive legal and policy frameworks for governing place names. In the context of
Ethiopia's extensive history, administrative boundaries have evolved over time. From the 19th
century onwards, the country's administrative organization transitioned from traditional structures
such as tekilay gizat and Auraja to modern administrative frameworks (Rose-Redwood, Alderman,
& Azaryahu, 2010). Notably, Ethiopia shifted from a unitary to a federal government structure
since 1991, implementing a four-level administrative framework. This structure typically includes
regions, zones, wards, kebeles, and gots, with rural areas potentially featuring an additional level,
4
bringing the total to five (United States Geological Survey [USGS], 2020). Presently, Ethiopia
comprises at least 11 regions, 80 zones, and over 15,000 kebeles, illustrating the complexity and
diversity of its administrative boundaries.

In summary, place names, including administrative boundaries, are fundamental components of

geographical and governance systems, their structures varying according to a country's political
context and legal provisions. In Ethiopia, the evolution of administrative boundaries reflects
historical transformations and contemporary governance paradigms (Rose-Redwood, Alderman,
& Azaryahu, 2010).

1. ADM1: This is the first administrative level of the jurisdiction, and it is the first in
terms of authority. At the level of Ethiopia, it represents what is called a province
in the past, a province during the Derg era, and now a kilil (region).
2. ADM2: In the past it was called awuraja and now it represents what is called zone.
3. ADM3: it’s the third administrative boundary, which used to be called a woreda
(district).
4. ADM4: It is the last administrative level according to the standard of place name
experts group. It is the lower administrative level of the federal structure in
Ethiopia. In Ethiopia, this place name is the closest administrative level to the
people.

3.2. Populated Places

The classification of place names identifies the second level as areas where people reside or settle
(UNGEGN, 1967). Populated places encompass regions with permanent human habitation,
including cities, villages, and settlements. However, Ethiopia's absence of a comprehensive place
name law and system complicates the categorization and status determination of populated areas.
In countries with established place name laws and standards, the status, nomenclature, and location
of cities are clearly defined. Conversely, in nations lacking such regulations, notably across Africa,
place name information may not adequately preserve historical identities or accurately denote
geographic locations. Ethiopia hosts numerous cities and residential villages, yet the absence of a
centralized place name database hampers critical issues such as city name duplication, undefined
statuses, population demographics, infrastructure delineation, and unauthorized name alterations.
City names may change arbitrarily, driven by individual research or public sentiment, often devoid

5
of a standardized process or historical context. Consequently, many historical narratives are lost
due to evolving place name dynamics shaped by societal migrations and political decisions
throughout Ethiopia's extensive history.

This situation underscores ongoing debates, particularly regarding the classification of place
names rooted in historical identity. Post-colonial legacies have perpetuated instances where
colonial powers imposed their names on regions, erasing indigenous identities and sowing seeds
of discord post-independence. Italian-language place names persist in certain Ethiopian cities,
raising questions about historical authenticity and cultural preservation. Overall, Ethiopia grapples
with the ad-hoc management of populated cities and villages, lacking centralized oversight or clear
ownership structures, leading to political controversies. To address these challenges, Ethiopia
urgently requires an independent regulatory body empowered to manage place names
systematically, aligning with historical, economic, and political considerations. Establishing a
robust place name law and system would provide a framework for responsibly managing both
historic and contemporary names. Ethiopia must transcend political disputes surrounding place
names, fostering a scientific approach rooted in historical context and future significance.
Embracing standardized place name standards will enable Ethiopia to streamline governance and
enhance geographical and cultural preservation efforts (UNGEGN, 1967).

3.3. Hypsographic features

Hypsographic features refer to the physical characteristics of the Earth's surface related to elevation
or altitude. These features play a crucial role in defining the topography of a region and include
various landforms such as mountains, hills, valleys, plateaus, and plains (United States Geological
Survey [USGS], 2020). Each of these features contributes to the diverse and dynamic landscape
of the Earth. Mountains are one of the most prominent hypsographic features, characterized by
their significant elevation and often rugged terrain. They form through geological processes such
as tectonic activity, volcanic eruptions, and erosion. Mountains not only shape the landscape but
also influence weather patterns and ecosystems, serving as habitats for diverse flora and fauna
(USGS, 2020).

Hills are smaller landforms compared to mountains, with gentler slopes and lower elevations. They
often occur as rolling landscapes between valleys and mountains, contributing to the overall
topographic variation of a region. Hillsides are commonly used for agriculture, residential areas,

6
and recreational activities due to their moderate slopes and accessibility. Valleys are elongated
depressions between mountains or hills, formed through processes such as erosion by rivers,
glaciers, or tectonic forces. Valleys may vary in size, shape, and orientation, influencing the flow
of water and providing fertile land for agriculture. They also serve as corridors for transportation
and human settlement (USGS, 2020).Plateaus are elevated flatlands or tablelands with relatively
steep edges, often surrounded by higher terrain. They form through geological uplift or volcanic
activity and may exhibit extensive areas of flat or gently rolling terrain. Plateaus are significant for
their unique ecosystems and geological formations, offering valuable resources and habitats
(USGS, 2020).Plains are vast, low-lying areas characterized by gently sloping or flat terrain. They
often occur as coastal plains, river plains, or interior plains and are formed through processes such
as sediment deposition, erosion, and glaciation. Plains support various land uses, including
agriculture, urban development, and transportation networks (USGS, 2020).

In summary, hypsographic features encompass a diverse range of landforms that contribute to the
Earth's topographic complexity and geographical diversity. Understanding these features is
essential for studying landscape evolution, natural resource management, and land use planning.

3.4. Transportation features

Transportation features are elements of infrastructure and networks designed to facilitate the
movement of people, goods, and vehicles from one location to another. These features play a
crucial role in connecting communities, supporting economic activities, and enabling social
interactions. Various transportation features exist, each serving specific purposes and
accommodating different modes of transportation. Roads are the most common transportation
feature and consist of paved or unpaved surfaces for vehicular traffic. They vary in size, capacity,
and classification, ranging from local streets and rural roads to highways and expressways. Roads
provide access to residential areas, commercial centers, industrial zones, and other destinations,
supporting the movement of vehicles such as cars, trucks, buses, and motorcycles. Railways are
transportation features consisting of tracks or lines along which trains operate. They are used for
both passenger and freight transportation and may include various types of infrastructure such as
mainline railways, commuter rail systems, light rail transit (LRT), and subway/metro systems.
Railways are known for their efficiency, capacity, and environmental benefits, offering fast and
sustainable transportation options over long distances (USGS, 2020).

7
Waterways are natural or artificial channels of water used for transportation purposes. They
include rivers, canals, lakes, and seas, along with associated infrastructure such as ports, harbors,
and docks. Waterways accommodate various vessels, including cargo ships, barges, ferries, and
recreational boats, and provide cost-effective and environmentally friendly transportation options
for bulk goods and passengers. Airports are transportation facilities designed for aircraft takeoff,
landing, and maintenance. They consist of runways, taxiways, terminals, and ancillary facilities
such as hangars, control towers, and cargo handling areas. Airports serve as hubs for domestic and
international air travel, connecting cities and regions worldwide and facilitating trade, tourism, and
global mobility. Bicycle paths and pedestrian walkways are dedicated routes for non-motorized
transportation, including walking and cycling. They promote active lifestyles, reduce traffic
congestion, and enhance urban livability by providing safe and accessible routes for pedestrians
and cyclists. These features often complement road networks and support sustainable
transportation initiatives in urban and suburban areas. Transportation hubs are centralized
locations where multiple modes of transportation converge, facilitating seamless transfers and
intermodal connectivity. They include transit stations, bus terminals, ferry terminals, and
intermodal centers, offering convenient access to different transportation options and enhancing
the efficiency of the overall transportation network (USGS, 2020).

Overall, transportation features form the backbone of modern societies, enabling mobility, trade,
and economic development. Effective planning, design, and management of these features are
essential for ensuring safe, efficient, and sustainable transportation systems that meet the needs of
diverse communities. As a general transportation place name in Ethiopia, it includes roads,
railways and expressways, and there is no information to show that it has met the standards and
maintained the road connection in the country. Why is there no independent legal name authority
that does this? In Ethiopia, the Mapping Agency is responsible for managing geospatial resources,
but it does not have the authority to name, remove or approve place names. In Ethiopia, road
standards are based on place names, so any political leader can name and change road names.
However, without any research and legislation, approving, removing and creating a street name is
depriving the place name of its universal significance.

8
 3.5. Area features
Area features encompass a diverse array of geographic entities characterized by distinct boundaries
within a specific region. Among these features, localities stand out as small areas lacking clearly
defined boundaries or collective identities. Additionally, parks, which encompass recreational
areas, woodlands, and scenic vistas, fall under this classification. Protected areas, public lands,
industrial zones, ports, residential neighborhoods, and catchment areas further exemplify area
features. While the categorization of area features may vary from country to country, Ethiopia
includes a range of such features, with additional classifications found in other nations. For
instance, the United States lists area features such as oil fields, economic zones, historic sites,
military bases, and agricultural preserves (UNGEGN, 2017).

However, the organization and classification of place names within area features may exhibit
inconsistencies, particularly in countries lacking comprehensive place name laws and regulations.
Despite efforts by organizations like the United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names
to standardize place name information globally, Ethiopia faces challenges in this regard.
Inadequate research and study further compound the issue, hindering the effective organization of
Ethiopian place names. Consequently, Addis Ababa and other regions may exhibit discrepancies
in place name representation, especially when viewed through an Ethiopian lens (UNGEGN,
2017).To address these challenges and leverage spatial information for development and
prosperity, Ethiopia must prioritize the establishment and enforcement of place name laws and
regulations. Area features represent a vast repository of place name data in Ethiopia, yet many
locations remain undefined. Addis Ababa, for example, includes locales like Mekenisa and Mexico
with ambiguous boundaries. By implementing robust governance frameworks, Ethiopia can
systematically address historical place name issues and ensure the accurate representation and
management of its diverse geographic entities.

9
 3.6. Spot features
Spot features, a category within place names, designate specific geographic points or landmarks
located at precise coordinates on the Earth's surface. They encompass a diverse array of physical
entities, ranging from natural features to man-made structures. Spot features hold significant
importance as they provide crucial information about the existence and distribution of key
governmental, infrastructural, and societal elements within a country. Notably, spot features play
a pivotal role in facilitating navigation, governance, and development efforts. In Ethiopia, spot
features constitute a vital component of the country's place name inventory. They include various
landmarks, institutions, and facilities essential for societal functioning and development. Examples
of spot features in Ethiopia encompass a wide spectrum, such as airports, military camps,
educational institutions, healthcare facilities, religious sites, sports arenas, and administrative
centers. Each of these entities contributes to the socio-economic fabric and administrative
framework of the nation (UNGEGN, 2017).

While spot features hold immense informational value, the organization and digitization of this
data are critical for maximizing its utility. Efficient management of spot feature data enables
streamlined governance, enhances service delivery, and supports informed decision-making
processes at various levels. However, the lack of standardized practices and digital integration
hinders the optimal utilization of this resource, leading to inefficiencies and missed opportunities
for development and safety enhancement. Efforts to digitize and standardize spot feature data are
paramount for harnessing its full potential. By establishing comprehensive databases and adhering
to international standards for place name management, Ethiopia can leverage its rich repository of
spot features to foster sustainable development, ensure public safety, and enhance overall
governance effectiveness.

10
 3.7. Vegetation features
Vegetation features refer to the spatial names assigned to various types of plant life and vegetation
across geographical areas. These features play a significant role in describing and categorizing the
natural landscape of a region, providing valuable information about its ecological diversity and
environmental characteristics. In Ethiopia, vegetation features encompass a wide range of plant
species, ecosystems, and habitats found throughout the country's diverse terrain. From lush forests
to arid deserts, Ethiopia boasts a rich tapestry of vegetation types, each with its unique flora and
ecological significance. Some common vegetation features in Ethiopia include:

 Forests: Ethiopia is home to extensive forested areas, including tropical rainforests,

montane forests, and dry woodlands. These forests support a diverse array of plant species
and provide essential habitats for wildlife.
 Grasslands: Grasslands cover significant portions of Ethiopia's landscape, particularly in
the highlands and savannah regions. These grassy plains support grazing animals and play
a crucial role in traditional pastoralist livelihoods.
 Wetlands: Wetlands are vital ecosystems that provide essential services such as water
filtration, flood control, and habitat for migratory birds. Ethiopia's wetlands include
marshes, swamps, and floodplains, which are often rich in biodiversity.
 Desert and Semi-Arid Vegetation: Ethiopia's lowland regions are characterized by desert
and semi-arid vegetation, including thorny shrubs, acacia trees, and drought-resistant
succulents. These ecosystems are adapted to arid conditions and support unique flora and
fauna.
 Agricultural Landscapes: Ethiopia's agricultural landscapes comprise cultivated fields,
orchards, and plantations, where various crops are grown for food, fiber, and livelihoods.
These areas are crucial for food security and economic development.
 Riparian Vegetation: Vegetation along rivers, streams, and water bodies, known as
riparian vegetation, plays a vital role in stabilizing riverbanks, preventing erosion, and
providing habitat for aquatic species.
 Endemic Species: Ethiopia is recognized for its high levels of plant endemism, with many
species found nowhere else in the world. Protecting these unique vegetation features is
essential for conserving Ethiopia's biodiversity and ecological heritage.

11
By identifying and mapping vegetation features, Ethiopia can better understand its natural
resources, manage land use sustainably, and conserve its rich biodiversity. Furthermore,
incorporating vegetation data into spatial databases and geographic information systems (GIS)
facilitates informed decision-making in environmental management, conservation planning, and
sustainable development initiatives.

4. Place Name, Map History and Origin

4.1. Place Name
The origin of maps can be traced back to ancient civilizations that sought to represent and navigate
the world around them. Early maps were rudimentary sketches or diagrams, often depicting local
terrain, landmarks, and important features such as rivers or mountains. These early cartographic
efforts were driven by practical needs, such as facilitating trade, navigation, and military
campaigns. One of the earliest known maps is the Babylonian Map of the World, dating back to
the 6th century BCE. This clay tablet depicts a stylized view of the world as understood by the
Babylonians, with concentric circles representing landmasses surrounded by water. Similarly,
ancient Egyptian and Greek civilizations produced maps to aid in navigation and land surveying.

The concept of mapping continued to evolve in ancient Rome, where surveying techniques were
refined and used to create maps of the empire's extensive territories. The famous Tabula
Peutingeriana, a medieval copy of a Roman road map, provides detailed information about roads,
cities, and other landmarks across the Roman Empire. During the middle Ages, mapmaking in
Europe was largely influenced by religious and mythological beliefs, with maps often
incorporating religious symbolism and depictions of fantastical creatures. The development of
portolan charts in the Mediterranean region revolutionized maritime navigation, providing
accurate representations of coastlines and navigational routes. The Renaissance period saw a
resurgence of interest in cartography, spurred by advancements in mathematics, astronomy, and
exploration. Pioneering mapmakers such as Gerardus Mercator and Abraham Ortelius produced
highly detailed maps of the known world, incorporating new geographic discoveries and
exploration routes (Thrower, 2008).

12
The advent of printing technology in the 15th century allowed for the mass production of maps,
making them more accessible to a wider audience. This period also saw the emergence of atlases,
comprehensive collections of maps covering different regions and themes. In the modern era, maps
have become ubiquitous tools for navigation, exploration, urban planning, and a wide range of
other applications. The development of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and satellite
imagery has revolutionized the field of cartography, enabling the creation of highly detailed and
dynamic maps for various purposes.

Overall, the origin of maps is deeply intertwined with human curiosity, exploration, and the quest
to understand and represent the world in which we live. When discussing the history of mapping
in Ethiopia, it's essential to acknowledge the contributions of distinguished geographers like
Professor Mesfen woldemariam, whose work, including the Atlas of Ethiopia, has demonstrated
the significant advantages of incorporating place names into modern maps. Ethiopia's cartographic
journey traces back to the era of Emperor Menelik II, during which travelers from various regions,
including as far as India, created maps documenting the country's geography. Over the centuries,
Ethiopia's territorial boundaries have experienced fluctuations, expanding and contracting until the
dawn of the modern era in 1991. However, alongside these geographical shifts, the country's place
names have also undergone transformations, with some disappearing or evolving over time.
Recognizing that place names are indispensable for providing context and meaning to maps, it
becomes imperative to establish legal frameworks and procedural guidelines to support their
preservation and accurate representation.

13
 4.2. The Relationship between Maps and Place Names
Some cartographers argue about the relationship between place names and maps. Place names on
one side of the map represent complexity and sometimes sloppy, derogatory, insulting, and
alienating place names. On the other hand, a map of lined-up cartographers is a white paper without
a place name. Place name information is essential to know where what, who is where. Toponymists
say that the role of a place name in indicating the location of a place on a map is high, from clarity
to ease of understanding. To confirm this, it is enough to look at the maps that do not have place
names. In addition, it will be of great help to map users who do not have spatial knowledge.
Topography tells how a map of a place was made, why it was made, by whom it was made, and
for whom it was made. In addition, it is useful for accurately conveying the information that needs
to be conveyed by a map (Thrower, 2008).

Before moving on to naming, it is useful to understand that the name of a place existed before the
creation of the map. This means that research shows that place names existed before there were
maps. When we come to the historical background of the name, the first name in the Bible is Adam,
and the authority to name things was given to Adam. On the other hand, when we look at the Holy
Qur'an, only the creator has the authority to give a name. In the Bible, Adam gave his first name
to his wife, and her name is Eve, which means life in Hebrew. In the Holy Qur'an, the Holy Qur'an
says that names such as the sky, the earth, and the sea were used by Ibn Kasir's exegetes. As a
whole, it shows the importance of place names. Name meaning and designation are key
information that has been used since the creation of man. Since the creation of the map by mankind,
its usefulness has been increasing. A map without a place name, a place name without a map is
nothing or of little use. In order to fully understand and use spatial data, place names and mapping
relationships need to be fully supported. In order to fully understand and use spatial data, place
names and mapping relationships need to be fully supported.

14
 4.3. Benefits of A Place Name
A map without place names is akin to a mute individual unable to speak or an illiterate person
unable to read. Place names play a crucial role in communication and navigation on maps, serving
as markers of geographic locations and providing essential information. They convey meaning,
facilitate understanding, and help orient individuals within a given area. Different types of names
populate maps, including legal and descriptive nouns. Descriptive names offer straightforward
descriptions of places or features, while proper/legal names represent the official designations of
locations. Discrepancies between the names on maps and their real-world usage can pose
significant challenges, underscoring the criticality of accurate place naming. It is especially crucial
to ensure the correct naming of countries, cities, prominent geographical features such as lakes
and rivers, as well as institutional entities. Legally registering such names on maps helps maintain
consistency and clarity, ensuring effective communication and navigation. Therefore, proper place
naming is essential for the meaningful interpretation and utilization of maps.

4.3.1. Identification
Place names serve as essential markers on maps, providing information about the location and
identity of objects depicted. They play a crucial role in identifying and comprehending cities,
settlements, rivers, and other spatial features depicted on maps. Essentially, place names articulate
what is represented on the map, acting as verbal cues that guide users through spatial information,
particularly for those unfamiliar with map reading(Thrower, 2008).For instance, imagine a traveler
from Europe planning a trip to Gondar in Ethiopia. By consulting a map, they can visualize the
landscapes and places along the route from Addis Ababa to Gondar, thus streamlining their
journey. However, to effectively navigate, the map must accurately depict intermediate cities like
Debre Markos, Bahir Dar, and Woreta, along with providing information about hotels, landmarks,
and attractions in these cities. It's this comprehensive representation that truly embodies the
essence of a map (UNGEGN, 2017).

The process of identifying place names not only marks the first step in map reading but also
influences the overall comprehension of the map's message. While established methods exist for
reading maps in cartography, incorporating language alongside place names enhances
understanding. Therefore, there's a symbiotic relationship between place names and language,
emphasizing the importance of considering linguistic factors when labeling features on maps.

15
Ultimately, place names should be presented in a language accessible to the map's users, ensuring
effective communication. It’s imperative to adhere to appropriate standards when working with
place names. In the context of Ethiopian geography, the historical development of place names
and mapping has often occurred without adequate communication between key stakeholders.
Despite relying heavily on place names, many maps feature ambiguous or challenging-to-identify
locations. Therefore, fostering a better understanding of place names and adhering to standardized
practices are essential for improving the clarity and usability of maps.

4.3.2. Location
A place name serves as a geographical locator, providing essential information about where
something is situated. It essentially answers the question, 'Where is it?' by pinpointing the location
of a particular area or feature on Earth's surface. Place names not only denote the physical location
of places but also highlight significant landmarks and features, such as mountain peaks and ranges,
along with their respective elevations. Additionally, they aid in identifying specific geographical
entities, like Ras Dashan Mountain, on a map (United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical
Names, 2007). Moreover, place names can be characterized by their coordinates, including latitude
and longitude, as well as by their relative positions, such as 'East Africa,' which provides a broader
geographical context.

4.3.3. Classifications
Geonames serve as classifications that fulfill various functions, including the designation of
objects or places and the classification of natural and man-made features. In some jurisdictions,
specific laws and regulations govern the use of geonames on maps, often dictating that they remain
in their original language for natural elements while using English for man-made features. This
approach preserves the authenticity of local languages while ensuring clarity for international
audiences. For instance, in Ethiopia, geonames might be used to map natural landmarks in the
local language, preserving the originality and richness of the features, such as the Nile (UNGEGN,
2017).

16
International standards for geonames suggest that man-made landmarks, rare monuments,
buildings, and parks open to visitors should bear names in internationally recognizable languages.
This standardization ensures ease of identification and understanding across different linguistic
and cultural backgrounds. Proper classification of geonames is essential in various scenarios; for
example, in organizing databases to facilitate efficient search and retrieval. In this way, the
classification of geonames contributes to effective communication and navigation in geographical
contexts. (UNGEGN, 2018).

Another purpose of place names is to designate objects or locations, playing a significant role in
classifying both natural and man-made features. In some countries, laws and regulations regarding
place names dictate that they be marked on maps without translation into English. This practice
allows for the preservation of natural elements in their original language while using English for
man-made features. For instance, it enables the mapping of natural landmarks in Ethiopia using
local language conventions. The uniqueness and richness of the Nile, for example, are thus
maintained without linguistic barriers hindering global understanding. On an international level,
standards for place names recommend that man-made landmarks, rare monuments, buildings, and
parks open to visitors be named in internationally recognizable languages (UNGEGN, 2010). In
essence, the classification of place names holds importance across various contexts. For instance,
when someone seeks a river among place names, an organized database enables easy identification
and selection of rivers.

5. National Place Name Authority

The concept of a National Place Name Authority (NPNA) revolves around the centralization of
the management and regulation of place names within a country. While such an authority may not
be universally implemented, the idea addresses the need for a cohesive and standardized approach
to naming geographical locations, landmarks, streets, and other significant places. Drawing
inspiration from existing institutions like the United States Board on Geographic Names (BGN)
or the United Kingdom's Ordnance Survey, the NPNA would serve as a governing body entrusted
with the task of assigning, maintaining, and potentially altering place names as needed. One of the
primary objectives of an NPNA would be to ensure consistency and accuracy in naming
conventions across the nation. By establishing clear guidelines and protocols for naming, the
authority would mitigate confusion and discrepancies arising from inconsistent or conflicting

17
names for the same location. This standardization is crucial not only for effective communication
and navigation but also for preserving cultural heritage and historical significance associated with
place names. Moreover, the NPNA would play a pivotal role in resolving disputes related to place
names. Conflicts may arise due to various factors such as linguistic differences, cultural
sensitivities, or competing historical narratives. Through transparent and impartial decision-
making processes, the authority would adjudicate disputes and facilitate consensus among
stakeholders, thereby fostering harmony and inclusivity in the naming of places (BGN, 1947).

Additionally, the NPNA could oversee the process of naming new locations or renaming existing
ones in response to evolving social, cultural, or political dynamics. By consulting with local
communities, experts, and relevant authorities, the NPNA would ensure that new names reflect the
collective identity and values of the populace while honoring historical legacies and
acknowledging indigenous perspectives. In general, while the concept of a National Place Name
Authority may vary in implementation from one country to another, its underlying principles
emphasize the importance of centralized governance, standardization, conflict resolution, and
community engagement in managing place names. By adopting such an approach, nations can
uphold the integrity of their geographical heritage and facilitate effective communication and
navigation in an increasingly interconnected world.

Ethiopia does not have a specific organization known as the National Place Name Authority
(NPNA). However, Ethiopia, like many countries, has governmental bodies responsible for various
aspects of geographical and mapping data. The Ethiopian Mapping Authority (EMA) is one such
institution tasked with surveying, mapping, and maintaining geospatial data in Ethiopia. While its
primary focus may not be specifically on place names, it plays a significant role in collecting and
managing geographic information that includes names of places. In Ethiopia, the process of
naming places and resolving disputes over names may involve various governmental departments,
local authorities, and community stakeholders. These entities work together to ensure that place
names reflect cultural, historical, and linguistic diversity while promoting standardization and
accuracy. While Ethiopia may not have a designated NPNA, the principles of standardized naming,
conflict resolution, and community engagement are likely integrated into the country's broader
governance structures related to geographical data management.

18
 5.1. Key requirement of national PlaceName authority
A National Geonames Authority (NGA) is a vital entity responsible for the management and
standardization of geographic names within a country. One key requirement of an NGA is the
establishment of a centralized body with the authority to oversee all aspects of geonaming. This
centralized governance ensures consistency, accuracy, and coherence in the naming of
geographical features, landmarks, and locations across the nation. By having a designated
authority, such as the United States Board on Geographic Names (BGN) or the United Kingdom's
Ordnance Survey, countries can effectively manage their geographic data and maintain a reliable
source of information for governmental agencies, businesses, and the public.

Standardization of geonames is another critical requirement for an NGA. Establishing and

enforcing standardized naming conventions and guidelines helps avoid confusion and
discrepancies in geographic data. These conventions may include rules for transliteration,
linguistic accuracy, and cultural sensitivity, ensuring that place names reflect the diverse linguistic
and cultural heritage of the country. The implementation of standardized naming practices
enhances communication, facilitates navigation, and supports various applications, such as
mapping, emergency response, and urban planning.

Coordination with relevant stakeholders is essential for the successful operation of an NGA.
This includes collaboration with governmental departments, local authorities, indigenous
communities, linguistic experts, and international organizations. By engaging with diverse
stakeholders, an NGA can gather valuable input, resolve disputes, and foster consensus in the
naming process. Additionally, coordination ensures alignment with national policies, legal
frameworks, and international standards, enhancing interoperability and data exchange both
domestically and internationally.

Technological infrastructure and data management capabilities are also key requirements for an
NGA. Investing in advanced geospatial technology, database management systems, and digital
mapping tools enables efficient collection, storage, and dissemination of geographic data. Robust
technological infrastructure supports the NGA's operations, enhances the accuracy and
accessibility of geonames, and facilitates the integration of geographic information into various
applications and services.

19
Public awareness and education initiatives are essential for promoting understanding and
appreciation of geographic names and the role of the NGA. By engaging with the public through
outreach programs, educational campaigns, and online platforms, an NGA can raise awareness
about the significance of place names, their cultural and historical context, and the importance of
standardized naming practices. Public engagement fosters transparency, accountability, and
community involvement in the geonaming process, contributing to the preservation of national
heritage and identity.

In summary, the key requirements of a National Geonames Authority include centralized

governance, standardization of geonames, coordination with stakeholders, technological
infrastructure, and public awareness. These requirements enable an NGA to effectively manage
geographic names, uphold national standards, and support the diverse needs of stakeholders while
preserving cultural heritage and promoting geographic knowledge.

One of the key requirements for place names is standardization, and to achieve this a clear and
fully accountable place name authority is needed. For this, the importance of place name policy
and standards must be reached at the government level. Thus, international studies show that the
place name authority should be responsible and work in a way that ensures the continuity of the
institution. Of course, it takes a lot of effort to explain the benefits of a place name to the
government's top leaders. Especially in developing countries, it makes it difficult to explain the
historical, economic and social role of place names. This is why place names are not regulated by
law and policy. They consider spending time and resources on a domain name a waste. However,
due to not being guided by laws and standards by a single responsible institution, a lot of national
resources are being wasted in the process of collecting and organizing place name information
separately by different government institutions.

A place name data is collected by various government institutions, but the budget belongs to the
government. This can be linked to the inability to manage a country's resources. However, many
countries have failed to implement this because they do not traditionally understand the importance
of place names. As a result, proper place names are being printed on maps, documents and other
legal publications instead of non-standard place names. Of course, there are four main
considerations for establishing a national place name. These basic ideas are recommendations
made by the United Nations.

20
 5.1.1. Establishment of a centralized body
Establishing a centralized body for managing place names is a foundational requirement for
effective governance in geonaming. Centralization ensures coherent and consistent management
of place names across a nation, facilitating communication, navigation, and cultural preservation.
For instance, the United States Board on Geographic Names (BGN) serves as a prime example of
a centralized authority responsible for standardizing and maintaining geographic names in the
United States. The establishment of such a body involves legislative and administrative measures
to define its mandate, powers, and organizational structure. This often requires enacting laws or
regulations that designate the authority responsible for overseeing place names and delineating its
jurisdiction. These legal frameworks provide the necessary authority and legitimacy for the
centralized body to fulfill its role in managing and regulating place names (BGN, 1890).

Furthermore, the establishment of a centralized body necessitates coordination with relevant

stakeholders, including governmental agencies, local authorities, indigenous communities,
linguistic experts, and international organizations. Collaboration with these stakeholders ensures
inclusivity, transparency, and the incorporation of diverse perspectives in the naming process. By
engaging with stakeholders, the centralized body can gather valuable input, resolve disputes, and
foster consensus on place names. For example, the Ordnance Survey in the United Kingdom
collaborates with local authorities and communities to gather feedback and ensure that place names
accurately reflect local heritage and identity. This collaborative approach enhances the legitimacy
and acceptance of place names, contributing to their effective implementation and usage.
Additionally, the establishment of a centralized body requires investment in technological
infrastructure and data management capabilities. Advanced geospatial technology, database
management systems, and digital mapping tools are essential for collecting, storing, and
disseminating geographic data. For instance, the Geographic Information System (GIS) employed
by the Ethiopian Mapping Authority (EMA) enables efficient management and analysis of place
name data in Ethiopia. This technological infrastructure supports the centralized body's operations,
enhances the accuracy and accessibility of place name information, and facilitates its integration
into various applications and services (EMA, 1954).

21
A statutory body is essential for the implementation of national toponym policies, standards, and
various legal frameworks. International recommendations emphasize the need for such a body to
be efficient and knowledge-driven, particularly to ensure its role in gaining international and
national recognition. Responsibility and legal rights over place names may be delegated by the
government to a designated office or agency. Typically, only one authority exists for a country's
national place names, unless otherwise specified by law. This ensures that any approval, removal,
or adjustment of place names must go through the designated authority. Establishing a legally
recognized and integrated place name authority is beneficial, as it clarifies and enforces the
acceptance, validity, and legitimacy of place names within the country's legal framework (United
Nations Economic Commission for Europe, 2006).

However, the process of obtaining legal authority can be time-consuming. Therefore, it is

advisable to initiate the organization and implementation of a standardized program in the interim.
This approach has been adopted by many countries, where place name rules and standards are
initially drafted as a starting point until a uniform system is developed. It is essential to develop a
legal framework to serve as this starting point. A comprehensive baseline study is necessary to
determine how place names should be governed by laws and regulations. Critics argue that this
study should be conducted by the government as a country-wide effort. While the government
holds significant responsibility in establishing the importance of a policy- and standard-driven
institution, studies indicate that individuals and institutions with knowledge related to place names
should also be involved. Given that place name resources are utilized by all stakeholders and place
names can be a source of conflict, collaboration among all parties is crucial (Wolfram, 2006).

The responsibilities of a place name authority should be clearly defined to ensure effective
governance and management of geographic names.

These responsibilities may include:

1. Establishing clear procedures and standards for changing place names individually or
collectively, and approving new place names in accordance with established laws and policies.
2. Promoting the use of legally approved place names to stakeholders who rely on place name
information, fostering consistency and accuracy in geographic naming practices.
3. Setting rules for cartographers and printers regarding the selection, spelling, and application of
geographical names, ensuring uniformity and adherence to established standards.

22
4. Developing and promoting guidelines for the consistent use of place names across various
applications and platforms, facilitating interoperability and information exchange.
5. Providing advice to governments and toponym experts on issues related to place names,
offering expertise and guidance to ensure informed decision-making.
6. Maintaining and managing a comprehensive database of place names, including historical
information and meanings associated with each name.
7. Conducting studies on the history and significance of place names, preserving cultural heritage
and promoting understanding of geographic naming practices.
8. Resolving disputes or conflicts that arise over place names, facilitating dialogue and reaching
equitable solutions through established mechanisms.

These responsibilities represent just a few examples of the domain authority's mandate,
emphasizing the importance of clear and comprehensive governance structures. By assigning clear
responsibilities to the place name authority, governments can ensure fairness, inclusivity, and
sustainability in the selection and use of place names, thereby maximizing the benefits derived
from geographic naming practices.

In conclusion, the establishment of a constitutional body for managing place names is imperative
for ensuring consistency, accuracy, and legitimacy in geographic naming practices. While
obtaining legal authority may take time, interim measures such as drafting place name rules and
standards can facilitate the transition towards a standardized system. A collaborative effort
involving government agencies, experts, and stakeholders is essential to develop a comprehensive
legal framework that governs place names effectively (United Nations Economic Commission for
Europe, 2006).

23
 5.1.2. Standardization of Place Names
Standardization of place names is a fundamental requirement for a Place Name Authority (PNA)
to ensure consistency, accuracy, and coherence in geographic data. By establishing and enforcing
standardized naming conventions and guidelines, PNAs can mitigate confusion, enhance
communication, and facilitate effective navigation. The United States Board on Geographic Names
(BGN) exemplifies the importance of standardization through its role in developing and
maintaining consistent naming practices across the United States. This involves establishing rules
for transliteration, linguistic accuracy, and cultural sensitivity to ensure that place names
accurately reflect local heritage and identity while adhering to national standards (BGN, 1890).

Furthermore, standardization efforts often involve collaboration with linguistic experts,

indigenous communities, and other stakeholders to develop inclusive naming conventions. For
example, the Australian Committee on Geographic Names (ACGN) works closely with indigenous
groups to incorporate traditional names into official databases, promoting linguistic diversity and
cultural recognition. By engaging stakeholders in the standardization process, PNAs can address
linguistic nuances, resolve disputes, and foster consensus on naming conventions, enhancing the
legitimacy and acceptance of place names (ACGN, 2005).

Additionally, PNAs play a crucial role in resolving inconsistencies and conflicts in place names
through standardization efforts. By establishing clear guidelines and procedures for resolving
disputes, such as the United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names (UNGEGN), PNAs
can mitigate tensions arising from competing naming conventions or historical narratives. This
involves transparent decision-making processes, stakeholder engagement, and adherence to
international standards to ensure equitable and impartial resolution of naming conflicts. In
conclusion, standardization of place names is a critical requirement for PNAs to fulfill their
mandate of managing and regulating geographic data. Through collaboration with stakeholders,
adherence to established guidelines, and resolution of naming conflicts, PNAs can promote
consistency, accuracy, and inclusivity in place naming practices, thereby facilitating effective
communication, navigation, and cultural preservation.

24
 5.1.3. Effective Coordination with Relevant Stakeholders
Establishing effective coordination with relevant stakeholders is a critical requirement for the
successful operation of a Place Name Authority (PNA). By engaging with governmental agencies,
local authorities, indigenous communities, linguistic experts, and international organizations,
PNAs can ensure inclusivity, transparency, and legitimacy in the naming process. The United
States Board on Geographic Names (BGN) exemplifies the importance of stakeholder coordination
through its collaboration with federal, state, and local agencies, as well as indigenous groups, to
standardize place names across the nation while respecting cultural heritage and linguistic diversity
(BGN, 1947).

Moreover, stakeholder engagement enables PNAs to address diverse perspectives and concerns in
the naming process. For instance, the New Zealand Geographic Board (NZGB) collaborates
closely with Maori tribal authorities to incorporate traditional names into official databases,
promoting cultural recognition and linguistic revitalization. Through meaningful dialogue and
consultation, PNAs can build trust, foster mutual understanding, and enhance community
ownership of place names (NZGB, 1946).

Additionally, international collaboration plays a crucial role in addressing cross-border naming

issues and promoting harmonization of naming conventions. The United Nations Group of Experts
on Geographical Names (UNGEGN) provides a platform for PNAs to exchange knowledge, share
best practices, and develop common standards for geographic naming. By participating in
UNGEGN meetings and working groups, PNAs contribute to global efforts to standardize place
names and facilitate interoperability in geographic data exchange. Furthermore, stakeholder
coordination is essential for resolving naming disputes and conflicts that may arise due to
competing interests or historical narratives. By establishing transparent decision-making processes
and mechanisms for dispute resolution, PNAs can mitigate tensions and foster consensus among
stakeholders. For example, the Australian Committee on Geographic Names (ACGN) facilitates
dialogue between government agencies, indigenous communities, and other stakeholders to
address naming disputes and ensure equitable outcomes.

25
In conclusion, effective coordination with relevant stakeholders is essential for PNAs to fulfill
their mandate of managing and regulating place names. Through collaboration with governmental
agencies, indigenous communities, and international organizations, PNAs can promote inclusivity,
transparency, and consensus in the naming process, thereby enhancing the accuracy, legitimacy,
and acceptance of place names within the community and across borders.

5.1.4. Technological Infrastructure and Data Management

Capabilities
Developing robust technological infrastructure and data management capabilities is a fundamental
requirement for a Place Name Authority (PNA) to effectively manage and regulate place names.
By investing in advanced geospatial technology, database management systems, and digital
mapping tools, PNAs can enhance the collection, storage, analysis, and dissemination of
geographic data. For instance, the Geographic Information System (GIS) employed by the
Ethiopian Mapping Authority (EMA) enables efficient management and analysis of place name
data in Ethiopia, supporting the authority's operations and facilitating access to accurate and up-
to-date geographic information (EMA, 1954).

Moreover, technological infrastructure plays a crucial role in ensuring the accuracy and reliability
of place name information. By implementing quality control measures and validation processes,
PNAs can verify the authenticity and consistency of place names, reducing errors and
discrepancies in geographic data. This enhances the credibility and trustworthiness of the
authority's databases and promotes confidence in the accuracy of place name information among
users. Furthermore, PNAs can leverage technological advancements to improve data accessibility
and interoperability. By adopting standardized data formats and open data principles, PNAs can
facilitate data sharing and exchange with governmental agencies, businesses, researchers, and the
public. This promotes transparency, collaboration, and innovation in geographic data usage,
driving economic growth and societal development.

In addition to technological infrastructure, effective data management capabilities are essential for
PNAs to organize, maintain, and update place name databases. By implementing robust data
governance frameworks, data quality assurance procedures, and data security measures, PNAs can
safeguard sensitive information, ensure data integrity, and comply with regulatory requirements.
For example, the United Kingdom's Ordnance Survey employs stringent data management

26
practices to maintain the accuracy and reliability of its geographic databases, instilling confidence
in the authority's products and services.

Moreover, PNAs can harness emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI), machine
learning, and cloud computing to enhance data processing and analysis capabilities. By automating
repetitive tasks, extracting insights from large datasets, and optimizing resource allocation, PNAs
can improve operational efficiency, reduce costs, and enhance decision-making processes. This
enables PNAs to effectively address complex challenges in geographic data management and
provide timely and accurate place name information to meet the evolving needs of stakeholders
and users. In conclusion, technological infrastructure and data management capabilities are
essential components of a Place Name Authority's operations. By investing in advanced geospatial
technology, implementing robust data management practices, and leveraging emerging
technologies, PNAs can enhance the accuracy, accessibility, and usability of place name
information, driving innovation, collaboration, and societal progress.

5.1.5. Public Awareness and Education Initiatives

Public awareness and education initiatives are critical components of a successful Place Name
Authority (PNA) to promote understanding, appreciation, and engagement with geographic names.
By raising awareness about the importance of place names, their cultural significance, and the role
of the PNA in managing them, PNAs can foster a sense of ownership and stewardship among the
public. The United States Board on Geographic Names (BGN) exemplifies the importance of
public engagement through its educational outreach programs and online resources, which provide
information and tools for individuals and communities to learn about and contribute to the naming
process. Furthermore, public awareness initiatives can highlight the historical and cultural
significance of place names, promoting respect for diverse linguistic and cultural heritage. For
example, the New Zealand Geographic Board (NZGB) collaborates with Maori tribal authorities
to incorporate traditional names into official databases, raising awareness about indigenous place
names and their meanings. By acknowledging and celebrating linguistic diversity, PNAs can foster
inclusivity and promote cultural recognition and reconciliation.

Moreover, education initiatives can empower individuals and communities to participate in the
naming process and contribute their knowledge and perspectives. By providing guidance on
naming conventions, submission procedures, and criteria for place name approval, PNAs can

27
encourage public involvement in naming decisions. For instance, the Australian Committee on
Geographic Names (ACGN) facilitates public consultations and encourages submissions from
stakeholders, enhancing transparency and accountability in the naming process. Additionally,
digital platforms and online resources play a crucial role in disseminating information and
engaging the public in place naming initiatives. By developing interactive maps, educational
videos, and online forums, PNAs can reach a wider audience and facilitate dialogue on place name-
related issues. The United Kingdom's Ordnance Survey provides online tools and educational
materials to help users explore and understand geographic names, promoting geographic literacy
and digital citizenship (UKOS, 1791).

Furthermore, public awareness campaigns can raise visibility and promote recognition of the
PNA's role in managing geographic names. By collaborating with media outlets, community
organizations, and educational institutions, PNAs can amplify their messaging and reach diverse
audiences. For example, the Ethiopian Mapping Authority (EMA) partners with schools and
universities to integrate geographic education into the curriculum, fostering a culture of spatial
awareness and appreciation among students. Moreover, targeted outreach efforts can raise
awareness about specific naming projects or initiatives and solicit input from stakeholders. By
hosting public meetings, workshops, and community events, PNAs can engage directly with
affected communities and gather feedback on proposed place names. The Canadian Permanent
Committee on Geographical Names (CPCGN) conducts public consultations and outreach
activities to ensure that place names reflect local knowledge and community preferences.

In conclusion, public awareness and education initiatives are essential for PNAs to promote
understanding, engagement, and support for geographic naming efforts. By raising awareness
about the importance of place names, celebrating cultural heritage, empowering public
participation, and leveraging digital platforms, PNAs can enhance transparency, inclusivity, and
legitimacy in the naming process, fostering a sense of shared responsibility and stewardship for
geographic names within the community and across generations.

28
 5.2. Structures of Place Name Authority
History demonstrates that place naming practices vary significantly from one country to another,
influenced by diverse cultural, linguistic, and historical factors. Consequently, governments have
the autonomy to shape place-name standards according to their specific preferences and needs.
Since its inaugural conference in 1967, the United Nations has played a pivotal role in promoting
place name standardization globally. This initiative has provided an invaluable platform for
fostering balanced, efficient, and successful programs aimed at harmonizing place name standards
worldwide. While recent specifications may not be readily available, country reports on UN
Geographical Names Standards offer valuable insights into the current state of place naming
practices around the world. The structure of a place name authority varies considerably from
country to country, reflecting the unique organizational dynamics and governance frameworks of
each nation. However, these structures can generally be categorized into three main arrangements.

5.2.1. Centrally Structure Place Name Authority

In certain countries, the authority and responsibility for managing place names are delegated to
existing government institutions. By law, the government may assign the duties and mandate of
the place-name authority to an agency specializing in cartographic works. Alternatively, the
government may opt to establish an independent place name institution through legislation. This
type of office setup offers ease and convenience in operation, particularly in the standardization of
place names, which can be effectively coordinated with mapping offices. Since place names are
prominently displayed on maps, aligning naming standards with mapping expertise ensures
optimal accuracy and consistency (United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names,
2007).

The establishment of a National Place Names Authority, for instance, has facilitated collaboration
with universities, colleges, and experts from various disciplines in multilingual countries.
Geographers, historians, and linguists are actively engaged in the naming processes and map
publications, enriching the cultural and linguistic aspects of place naming. However, decision-
making within the Central Office is formalized, typically entrusted to professional staff responsible
for crafting policies and procedures governing various classes of toponyms. While this structural
simplicity expedites decision-making, it often necessitates consensus among multiple

29
stakeholders, with the ultimate authority resting with the highest-ranking official (United Nations
Economic Commission for Europe, 2006).

Despite its efficiency, this office structure may lack opportunities for collaboration and idea-
sharing, leading to potential resistance from officials or users of place names in other institutions.
Moreover, scholars focusing on theoretical aspects of place name expression may inadvertently
jeopardize place names by overlooking established standards. Therefore, the organizational
structure of place name authorities should be tailored to align with the country's cultural,
customary, and linguistic nuances. It is advisable to establish multiple departments within the
office responsible for issuing toponym standards, with a focus on categorizing place names by
class for better organization and management. This ensures compatibility with the country's unique
context while promoting inclusivity and accuracy in place naming practices.

5.2.2. A Decentralized Structure Place Name Authority

In a decentralized structure for place name authorities, the authority over place names is distributed
among multiple regional or local agencies, often aligned with administrative divisions such as
provinces, states, or municipalities. This model acknowledges the diverse needs and characteristics
of different geographic areas within a country, allowing for tailored place naming practices that
reflect local contexts and preferences. Under a decentralized structure, each regional or local
agency typically has autonomy in managing place names within its respective jurisdiction. These
agencies may develop their own naming policies, standards, and procedures tailored to the specific
requirements of their areas. This decentralized approach empowers regional and local authorities
to address local naming preferences, cultural nuances, and community identities, fostering a sense
of ownership and stewardship over place names among local residents. For example, in a country
with provincial-level administration, each province may have its own place name authority
responsible for managing geographic names within its boundaries. Similarly, in countries with a
federal system of government, each state or territory may have its own place name authority,
reflecting the division of authority between the federal government and regional governments
(United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names, 2007).

30
Despite the autonomy granted to regional and local agencies, coordination and collaboration
between these agencies are essential to ensure coherence and consistency in place naming practices
across the entire jurisdiction. Interagency communication mechanisms, standardized guidelines,
and collaborative decision-making processes may be established to facilitate cooperation and
alignment of naming efforts. Furthermore, in a decentralized structure, community engagement
and stakeholder consultation play a crucial role in the place naming process. Regional and local
agencies may consult with local communities, indigenous groups, historical societies, and other
relevant stakeholders to gather input and feedback on naming proposals. This participatory
approach helps to ensure that place names accurately reflect the cultural, historical, and linguistic
diversity of the local area while promoting inclusivity and community involvement.

Each regional or local authority within a decentralized structure for place name authorities may
indeed establish its own naming policies, standards, and procedures tailored to the specific needs
and preferences of the local area. This decentralized approach empowers regional and local
governments to address the unique characteristics and priorities of their respective jurisdictions,
ensuring that place naming practices reflect the diverse cultural, historical, and linguistic contexts
of different geographic areas. For instance, a regional or local authority may develop naming
policies that prioritize the preservation of indigenous place names or the recognition of significant
historical events or figures specific to the local community. These policies may outline criteria for
selecting and approving new place names, as well as guidelines for spelling, pronunciation, and
transliteration (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, 2006).

Similarly, regional or local authorities may establish standards and procedures for the management
and maintenance of place names within their jurisdiction. This may include protocols for verifying
the accuracy of place name data, updating names to reflect changes in local geography or
demographics, and resolving disputes or conflicts that may arise in the naming process. By
tailoring naming policies, standards, and procedures to the specific needs and preferences of the
local area, regional and local authorities can ensure that place names accurately reflect the identity,
heritage, and values of the communities they serve. This localized approach fosters a sense of
ownership and connection among local residents, promoting cultural preservation, community
engagement, and geographic literacy (Znamenskiy & Zakharov, 2015).

31
However, while decentralized structures offer flexibility and responsiveness to local contexts,
coordination and collaboration between regional and local authorities are essential to ensure
consistency and coherence in place naming practices across the entire jurisdiction. Interagency
communication mechanisms, standardized guidelines, and collaborative decision-making
processes may be established to facilitate cooperation and alignment of naming efforts, thereby
promoting effective management of place names within a diverse and dynamic society. Examples
of countries with centralized place name authorities include the United States, where the United
States Board on Geographic Names (BGN) serves as the primary authority, and the United
Kingdom, where the Ordnance Survey fulfills a similar role.

Examples of countries with centralized place name authorities include the United States and
the United Kingdom.

In the United States, the primary authority for geographic names is the United States Board on
Geographic Names (BGN). Established in 1890, the BGN is responsible for standardizing and
maintaining geographic names for use by federal agencies, state and local governments, and the
general public. The BGN develops and maintains the Geographic Names Information System
(GNIS), a comprehensive database of domestic and foreign geographic names used by the federal
government. The BGN establishes policies, principles, and procedures for naming geographic
features and resolving disputes over place names. It also coordinates with state and local authorities
to ensure consistency and accuracy in place naming practices across the country (United States
Board on Geographic Names, n.d.).

In the United Kingdom, the Ordnance Survey fulfills a similar role as the primary authority for
geographic names. The Ordnance Survey is the national mapping agency of Great Britain,
responsible for mapping and surveying the country's geography and maintaining authoritative
geographic data, including place names. The Ordnance Survey collaborates with various
government departments, local authorities, and other organizations to develop and maintain the
Ordnance Survey Gazetteer of Great Britain, a comprehensive database of place names used for
mapping and geographic information systems (GIS) applications. The Ordnance Survey
establishes naming conventions, guidelines, and standards for geographic names and provides
support and assistance to users seeking information on place names (Ordnance Survey, n.d.).

32
In both the United States and the United Kingdom, the centralized place name authorities play a
crucial role in standardizing, maintaining, and disseminating geographic names for official and
public use. These authorities ensure consistency, accuracy, and uniformity in place naming
practices, facilitating effective communication, navigation, and information exchange within their
respective countries.

5.2.3. A Federated Structure Place Name Authority

A federated structure for place name authorities indeed blends features of both centralized and
decentralized approaches, distributing authority over place names between national and regional
levels of government. This model acknowledges the complexities of governance within federal
systems, where power is divided between a central national government and various regional or
local governments. In a federated structure, the national government typically establishes
overarching standards and guidelines for place naming, providing a framework for consistency
and coherence across the entire jurisdiction. These national standards serve as a foundation for
naming practices and ensure interoperability and communication between different regions.
However, the implementation and management of place names within specific regions are
delegated to regional or local governments, which have the autonomy to adapt national standards
to suit local needs and preferences (United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names,
2007).

This division of authority allows for tailored place naming practices that reflect the unique cultural,
linguistic, and geographical characteristics of each region. Regional authorities are better
positioned to understand and address local naming preferences, historical context, and community
identities, fostering a sense of ownership and stewardship over place names among local residents
(Van der Veen, 2007).

At the national level, federated structures facilitate coordination and collaboration between the
central government and regional authorities, ensuring alignment with national objectives while
respecting regional autonomy. National agencies provide guidance, support, and oversight to
regional authorities, promoting consistency and coherence in naming practices across the entire
jurisdiction. This collaborative approach enhances the effectiveness of place naming initiatives
and promotes cultural preservation and heritage conservation (United Nations Economic
Commission for Europe, 2006).

33
Regional or local authorities, on the other hand, have the autonomy to implement these national
standards within their respective areas while considering local contexts and preferences. These
authorities may develop procedures for collecting and verifying place name data, consulting with
local communities, and making decisions on naming proposals. By involving local stakeholders in
the naming process, regional authorities ensure that place names reflect the cultural, historical, and
linguistic diversity of their regions, fostering a sense of ownership and connection among local
residents (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, 2006).

In Canada, for example, the responsibility for managing place names is shared between the federal
government and the provincial and territorial governments. At the national level, the Geographical
Names Board of Canada (GNBC) establishes overarching standards and guidelines for place
naming, ensuring consistency and coherence across the country. However, provincial and
territorial governments also play significant roles in managing place names within their respective
jurisdictions. Each province and territory has its own place name authority responsible for
implementing federal standards and guidelines while addressing regional naming preferences and
cultural considerations. This federated approach allows for local input and ensures that place
names reflect the linguistic and cultural diversity of Canada's regions (Natural Resources Canada,
n.d.).

Similarly, in Australia, the responsibility for place naming is divided between the federal
government and the state and territory governments. The Geographical Names Board of New
South Wales, for instance, oversees place naming in the state of New South Wales, adhering to
national standards set by the Intergovernmental Committee on Surveying and Mapping (ICSM).
Each state and territory has its own place name authority responsible for managing geographic
names within its boundaries, ensuring compliance with national standards while accommodating
local naming preferences and cultural diversity. This federated model allows for collaboration and
coordination between national and regional governments, promoting consistency and coherence in
naming practices while respecting regional autonomy (Geographical Names Board of New South
Wales, n.d.).

34
In both Canada and Australia, the federated structure for place name authorities recognizes the
diversity of geographic, cultural, and linguistic contexts within the country. By allowing for
collaboration and communication between national and regional governments, this model ensures
that place naming practices are responsive to local needs and preferences while maintaining
consistency and compatibility at the national level. Overall, the federated structure facilitates
effective place naming governance, promoting inclusivity, cultural sensitivity, and geographic
literacy.

In summary, a federated structure for place name authorities balances the need for centralized
coordination with the benefits of decentralized decision-making. By combining national oversight
with regional autonomy, federated structures ensure that place naming practices are responsive to
local contexts while maintaining consistency and coherence at the national level. This model
promotes inclusivity, cultural sensitivity, and effective communication in place naming efforts,
contributing to the preservation of cultural heritage and the promotion of geographic literacy.

5.3. National Place Name Committee

A National Place Name Committee serves as a centralized body responsible for overseeing and
coordinating place naming activities at the national level, playing a critical role in standardizing,
regulating, and managing geographic names across the entire jurisdiction (United Nations Group
of Experts on Geographical Names, 2007).

The primary function of a National Place Name Committee is to establish policies, guidelines, and
standards for naming geographic features within the country. These policies and standards ensure
consistency, accuracy, and uniformity in place naming practices, facilitating effective
communication, navigation, and information exchange (United Nations Economic Commission
for Europe, 2006). The committee may develop naming conventions, spelling guidelines, and
transliteration rules to govern the naming of geographic features, taking into account linguistic,
cultural, and historical considerations. Additionally, a National Place Name Committee may
oversee the maintenance and updating of national databases or gazetteers containing official place
names. These databases serve as authoritative sources of geographic names for use by government
agencies, cartographers, researchers, and the general public. The committee may be responsible
for verifying the accuracy of place name data, resolving disputes over place names, and updating
names to reflect changes in local geography or demographics (UNGE N, 2007).

35
Furthermore, the National Place Name Committee often acts as a coordinating body, facilitating
collaboration and communication between various stakeholders involved in place naming
activities. This may include government agencies, local authorities, indigenous communities,
historical societies, and other organizations. By fostering collaboration and coordination, the
committee ensures that place naming efforts are aligned with national objectives and priorities
while respecting the diversity of linguistic, cultural, and geographical contexts within the country.

A National Place Name Committee plays a pivotal role in promoting effective place naming
governance, cultural preservation, and geographic literacy. By establishing clear policies and
standards, maintaining authoritative databases, and facilitating collaboration among stakeholders,
the committee helps to ensure that place names accurately reflect the identity, heritage, and values
of the nation.

In this type of place name authority structure, the participation of various institutions is
crucial to ensure effective governance and implementation of national toponym standards.

Firstly, representatives from Central/Federal/Government departments or agencies should be

members of the committee. Their involvement is essential for aligning place naming practices with
national policies and objectives. Secondly, representation from regional governments is necessary
to incorporate local perspectives and preferences into place naming decisions. Regional authorities
can provide valuable insights into geographic features and cultural heritage specific to their
respective areas. Additionally, cultural and language offices/groups should be included to ensure
that place names accurately reflect linguistic diversity and cultural heritage. Their expertise can
help in developing naming conventions sensitive to cultural nuances. Moreover, the participation
of non-governmental institutions, such as consultants from universities, brings academic expertise
and research insights to the committee. Their contributions enhance the quality and validity of
place naming standards.

Furthermore, the involvement of the country's national mapping agency/institution is mandatory.

Legal maps published by this agency carry authority and credibility, making its participation
indispensable for maintaining accurate and authoritative place name databases.

36
Other government agencies/institutions, including those responsible for urban and rural
development, parks, communication, postal services, printing services, and defense and security,
should also be represented. These agencies play vital roles in various aspects of place naming, and
their participation ensures holistic coordination and cooperation. Overall, a diverse representation
of stakeholders in the National Place Name Committee ensures comprehensive consideration of
all relevant factors, leading to effective implementation of national toponym standards and
accurate representation of the country's geographic landscape and cultural heritage.

5.3.1. Responsibility of the Committee

The first crucial consideration regarding the National Place Name Committee is its mandate and
leadership structure. The committee's mandate determines its scope of authority and
responsibilities, while the selection process for the chairman or head of the committee is essential
for effective leadership and governance. The chairman is typically elected by the committee itself
or appointed by the body that established the committee. It is imperative that the selection process
adheres to established place name policies and procedures to ensure transparency and fairness
(United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names, 2007).

Alternatively, rotating leadership roles among all committee members can promote inclusivity and
prevent discrimination by government agencies. However, this approach is less commonly
adopted. Clear guidelines defining the limits of authority should be established to ensure
accountability and effective decision-making within the committee. A consensus-based approach
and a fixed term of office, preferably longer than one year, can enhance stability and continuity in
leadership (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, 2006).Overall, careful
consideration of the committee's mandate, leadership selection process, and governance structure
is essential for ensuring its effectiveness in standardizing, regulating, and managing geographic
names. By adhering to established policies and procedures and promoting transparency and
inclusivity, the committee can fulfill its role in preserving cultural heritage and promoting
geographic literacy.

37
6. Best Experiences of GeoNames
6.1. American Experience
The naming of places in the United States is governed by a combination of federal, state, and local
policies, as well as community input and public opinion. The U.S. Board on Geographic Names,
established in 1890, serves as the official authority responsible for standardizing geographic names
used by the federal government. The board operates under guidelines that prioritize historical
significance, local usage, and linguistic considerations when approving or modifying place names.
At the state and local levels, naming authorities vary widely in their approaches to place naming
and renaming. Some jurisdictions have established committees or commissions tasked with
evaluating proposals for new names or changes to existing ones, while others rely on elected
officials or public referendums to make decisions. In recent years, there has been a trend toward
greater community engagement in the naming process, with stakeholders advocating for more
diverse and representative place names that reflect the multicultural fabric of American society.
The board is playing a key role in the existence of national place name laws and regulations. GA
provides clerical support to the Foreign Place Names Committee. As an umbrella organization, the
Committee on Foreign Space Names includes the Central Intelligence Agency, the Departments
of Defense, the Department of State, and the Library of Congress. In this international spatial
database, they collect, organize, and distribute as needed information about place names,
especially those that are useful for security and military purposes (BGN, 1980).

American Place Name Database for NGA and U.S. Board on Geographic Names database of
foreign geographic feature names is accessible. Toponymy information is based on the Place Name
Database. There are place names approved by the United States Board on Geographic Names and
maintained and edited by the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency. American place names,
especially foreign place names, are governed in this way. For this, it can be taken as an experience
that the relevant offices work together and cooperate. Although the authority of the place name is
the same, they are all related offices that work in a responsible and cooperative manner. The work
of the internal toponym committees, however, focuses only on the Americas, and the toponym
standards are still being implemented. On the other hand Place names in the United States carry
profound historical, cultural, and social significance. Over the centuries, these names have
evolved, reflecting the diverse tapestry of American history, from indigenous languages to colonial

38
influences and modern-day developments. However, the issue of naming places has not been
without controversy, with debates often revolving around issues of representation, heritage, and
inclusivity. This essay explores the American experience with place names, examining the
evolution of naming practices and the policies governing them. The naming of places in America
dates back to pre-colonial times when indigenous peoples bestowed names upon geographical
features based on their languages, cultures, and spiritual beliefs. These original names often held
deep meaning, reflecting the relationship between the land and its inhabitants. However, with the
arrival of European settlers, the landscape underwent significant transformations, accompanied by
the imposition of new names that reflected colonial power dynamics. Many indigenous names
were replaced or anglicized, leading to the erasure of native identities from the geographical
landscape (BGN, 1947).

During the westward expansion of the 19th century, the naming of places became intertwined with
notions of exploration, conquest, and manifest destiny. Pioneers, explorers, and government
surveyors often named landmarks after themselves, political figures, or events significant to their
respective communities. As a result, the American landscape became dotted with names
commemorating individuals or events from various historical periods, reflecting the complex
layers of the nation's history. In modern times, the naming of places continues to be a contentious
issue, with debates frequently centering on questions of representation, cultural sensitivity, and
historical accuracy. Many place names in the United States honor individuals who played
significant roles in the nation's history, yet some of these figures are associated with controversial
or problematic legacies, including racism, slavery, and colonialism. As a result, there have been
calls to rename landmarks, streets, and institutions to better reflect contemporary values of
inclusivity and social justice. One prominent example of this debate is the controversy surrounding
Confederate monuments and place names. In recent years, there has been a growing movement to
remove statues, memorials, and symbols honoring Confederate leaders and soldiers, whose actions
defended the institution of slavery during the Civil War. Advocates for removal argue that these
monuments glorify a legacy of racism and oppression, while opponents contend that they are
essential historical artifacts that should be preserved. The naming of places in the United States is
a complex and dynamic process that reflects the nation's rich tapestry of history, culture, and
identity. From indigenous names to colonial legacies and contemporary debates, the evolution of
place names mirrors the ongoing evolution of American society itself. While challenges remain in

39
reconciling diverse perspectives and histories, the process of naming and renaming places offers
opportunities for dialogue, reflection, and reconciliation as communities strive to create a more
inclusive and equitable future (NGA,1996).

Ethiopia could learn several valuable lessons from America's experience with place names:

1. Inclusivity and Representation: Ethiopia could adopt policies that prioritize inclusivity and
representation in the naming of places. By involving diverse stakeholders, including
indigenous communities, cultural groups, and local residents, Ethiopia can ensure that
place names reflect the full spectrum of its rich cultural heritage.
2. Historical Sensitivity: Learning from America's efforts to address controversial or
problematic place names, Ethiopia can develop guidelines for evaluating the historical
significance and appropriateness of existing names. This might involve reconsidering
names associated with colonialism, oppression, or other negative legacies, and exploring
opportunities to rename landmarks in a manner that respects historical accuracy while
promoting social cohesion.
3. Community Engagement: Ethiopia can benefit from promoting greater community
engagement in the naming process, empowering local residents to have a voice in decisions
that affect their communities. Establishing mechanisms for public input, such as naming
committees or public forums, can foster transparency, accountability, and consensus-
building around place naming decisions.
4. Standardization and Governance: Like the United States' U.S. Board on Geographic
Names, Ethiopia could establish a centralized authority or commission responsible for
overseeing place names at the national level. This entity could develop standardized
guidelines and criteria for naming and renaming places, ensuring consistency and
coherence across the country while accommodating local linguistic and cultural diversity.
5. Preservation of Indigenous Names: Ethiopia could prioritize the preservation and
revitalization of indigenous place names, recognizing their cultural and historical
significance. Efforts to document, record, and promote indigenous names can help
safeguard linguistic diversity and promote cultural heritage preservation.
6. Educational Initiatives: Ethiopia could implement educational initiatives to raise awareness
about the significance of place names and their role in shaping national identity and

40
 heritage. By fostering a deeper understanding of the historical, cultural, and linguistic
dimensions of place names, Ethiopia can promote greater appreciation and respect for its
diverse cultural landscape.

Overall, by drawing on America's experience with place names, Ethiopia can develop policies and
practices that promote inclusivity, historical sensitivity, community engagement, and cultural
preservation in the naming of its own geographical features and landmarks.

6.2. Canadian Experience

Both the Canadian place-name authority and the place-name population began in the late 1800s.It
was started primarily to correct the spelling of various place names in relation to Canada's outlying
settlements and immigrants. The Geographical Board of Canada was founded in 1897 and was
renamed the Canadian Geographical Names Board in 2000.Shortly after 1897, provinces and
territories were invited to suggest spellings and spellings for the name Ottawa, and in 1961, the
city of Ottawa was decided to change the place names into practice. This naming responsibility is
delegated to provincial or territorial governments. Since 1979, Canadian place names have been
and continue to be developed jointly by the federal and provincial governments. In the year In
1984, the Yukon Territory and the Northwest Territories assumed responsibility for names in their
own jurisdictions. As a result, many states began to manage their own place names and manage
them centrally. To this day, Canada still conducts its toponym administration in the same way. The
Canadian Toponym Board is responsible for guiding current international toponym policies,
standards, practices and applications and supporting toponym designation and approval processes
(The Canadian Encyclopedia, 2019).

The board has worked on national toponyms in accordance with international toponym laws and
systems, and it is leading Canada's toponyms in cooperation with the United Nations. It works to
implement international toponym policies and standards issued by the United Nations in harmony
with national toponyms. Another major responsibility of the Canadian Place Names Secretariat is
to manage Canada's place names in a unique way. The Secretariat has been working on and
addressing issues related to place names on behalf of all Canadian stakeholders, both federal and
provincial. The office is playing an important role in coordinating toponym information to be
included in the national database to encourage the use of toponyms and develop standardized
policies. It pays attention to communication with other national names authorities. It is creating

41
international cooperation with the United Nations and other organizations related to international
toponym standards. As a country with longer experience and knowledge of place names as a whole,
Canada can share its experience with many countries. Thus, both Africa and Ethiopia should learn
the use and application of place names. On the other hand Canada's geographic names reflect the
nation's diverse landscapes, indigenous heritage, and colonial history. From towering mountains
to sprawling forests and bustling cities, each name carries a unique story and significance. Take,
for example, Banff National Park in Alberta. Established in 1885, Banff is Canada's first national
park and a UNESCO World Heritage Site. Its name, derived from Banff shire in Scotland, pays
homage to the Scottish heritage of early settlers and railway pioneers who played a pivotal role in
its creation (GNBC, 1897).

The experiences associated with Canada's geographic names are varied and multifaceted. For
instance, Banff National Park offers visitors awe-inspiring vistas, outdoor adventures, and
encounters with wildlife such as grizzly bears and elk. Its majestic landscapes have inspired artists,
writers, and nature enthusiasts for generations. However, these experiences also raise challenges
related to conservation, tourism management, and indigenous rights. Striking a balance between
environmental protection and recreational use is crucial for the park's long-term sustainability.
Policies related to Canada's geographic names often center on environmental conservation,
indigenous reconciliation, and sustainable development. In Banff National Park, Parks Canada
implements measures to preserve sensitive ecosystems, mitigate human-wildlife conflicts, and
promote responsible tourism. Indigenous-led initiatives aim to restore traditional land stewardship
practices and incorporate indigenous knowledge into park management decisions. Additionally,
government regulations and land-use planning strategies guide development activities to minimize
environmental impact and maintain the integrity of Canada's natural heritage.Another example of
Canada's geographic names is Toronto, the capital city of Ontario. Derived from the Mohawk word
"tkaronto," meaning "where there are trees standing in the water," Toronto's name reflects its
indigenous roots and the ancestral lands of the First Nations peoples. Today, Toronto stands as a
bustling metropolis known for its cultural diversity, economic prosperity, and vibrant arts scene.
However, the city's rapid growth and urbanization have also led to challenges such as housing
affordability, traffic congestion, and social inequality.

42
The experiences associated with Toronto's geographic name encompass a wide range of narratives,
from immigrant stories to indigenous histories and urban development. The city's policies aim to
address these challenges while promoting inclusivity, sustainability, and economic prosperity.
Initiatives focus on affordable housing, public transit expansion, green infrastructure, and
community engagement. Efforts to support indigenous reconciliation include land
acknowledgments, cultural heritage preservation, and partnerships with indigenous organizations
(GNBC, 1897).

Similarly, the Great Bear Rainforest on British Columbia's central coast is a prime example of
Canada's geographic names with profound environmental and cultural significance. Named after
the iconic spirit bear and encompassing ancient forests, pristine fjords, and rich marine ecosystems,
the Great Bear Rainforest is a global biodiversity hotspot. Policies aimed at protecting this unique
ecosystem involve indigenous-led conservation efforts, sustainable resource management, and
ecotourism development strategies. Through collaborative governance models and respect for
indigenous rights, Canada strives to preserve the natural and cultural heritage embodied in its
geographic names for future generations.

Ethiopia can learn from Canada's approach to place names and practices in several ways:

1. Inclusivity and Reconciliation: Canada has made efforts to recognize and incorporate
indigenous names and perspectives into place naming practices, acknowledging the land's
original inhabitants. Ethiopia could similarly prioritize the preservation and promotion of
indigenous languages and place names, fostering a sense of inclusivity and reconciliation with
historically marginalized communities.
2. Environmental Conservation: Canada's policies regarding national parks and protected areas
prioritize environmental conservation and sustainable resource management. Ethiopia could
adopt similar approaches to preserve its natural landscapes and biodiversity, ensuring the long-
term sustainability of ecosystems and promoting ecotourism as a means of economic
development.
3. Cultural Heritage Preservation: Canada places importance on preserving its cultural heritage
through the protection of historic sites and landmarks. Ethiopia, with its rich history and
heritage sites, can draw lessons from Canada in safeguarding culturally significant places and
promoting heritage tourism while respecting the rights and traditions of local communities.

43
4. Community Engagement: Canada emphasizes community engagement and consultation in
decision-making processes related to land use and development. Ethiopia could benefit from
involving local communities, including indigenous groups, in discussions about place naming,
land management, and sustainable development initiatives, fostering a sense of ownership and
stewardship.
5. Educational Initiatives: Canada implements educational programs to raise awareness about the
significance of place names, indigenous histories, and environmental conservation. Ethiopia
could introduce similar educational initiatives to promote cultural understanding,
environmental stewardship, and the importance of preserving indigenous languages and
traditions.

By studying Canada's approach to place names and practices, Ethiopia can glean valuable insights
into promoting inclusivity, environmental conservation, cultural heritage preservation, and
community engagement within its own context. These lessons can contribute to Ethiopia's efforts
to foster sustainable development, preserve its diverse cultural heritage, and build stronger
connections between its people and the land.

6.3. Great England Experience

Great Britain, the mother of the world's colonies, accounts for the largest share of place name
stories around the world. It is one of the countries that has made a big historical mistake in the loss
and change of place names. Most of the world is carrying the culture and passion of Great Britain.
From America to Canada, from Australia to Africa, traces of Great Britain are clearly visible. As
it is said that the name of a place is a heritage of history, its name will rise for good or bad. As it
is said that the sun sets in India, most parts of the world have inherited the language and culture of
India and are using it as their own. Thus, it seems that the British Place Names Authority's main
focus is on foreign place names. Before the Standing Committee on Place Names of England was
established in 1919, they were working on place names in the 1830s under the name of the
Topographical Information Society. Thus, he mainly focused on foreign place names. However,
after the establishment of a standing committee, it was able to work together with local place name
standards, especially from the first No War. The Standing Committee had offices in all the colonial
countries, especially in India. It names, changes, cancels and corrects place names. In 1954 he
finished publishing the first principles of place names (Kaul, 2016).

44
In 1964, they closed our toponymy offices with the countries occupied by the Persian Empire. The
PCGN develops the orthography of world place names. For example, he changes the languages of
Amharic and Arabic etc. into a romantic style of writing. It also provides standards. As a whole,
the PCGN's main function is to advise the British Government on policies and procedures for the
correct spelling of geographical names for places and features outside the UK, excluding
Antarctica (PCGN, 1919).

Functions of the Standing Committee on Place Names of Great Britain:

 It is to establish and implement the principles of written foreign place names. It is to

confirm the writing style of place names made by foreign countries' place name authorities
and to change them to Romanization. However, it does not create place names by itself.
 It develops, maintains, disseminates and promotes policies based on these principles.This
includes advising on how UK official products can best reflect the official national
toponymic policies of each foreign country. To reflect Her Majesty's (HMG) requirements,
policies issued by the PCGN should be country-based rather than language-based.
 It ensures a mid-segment service for HMG by providing approved geographic names. As
the individual needs of each HMG customer segment may vary, there may be more than
one correct solution for any toponymic requirement.
 Every two years, the United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names
(UNGEGN) promotes the International Standardization of Geographical Names on behalf
of the British Government.
 Achieves and maintains policy agreement with the United States Board on Geographic
Names (BGN) through BGN/PCGN conferences. In collaboration with UNGEGN and
BGN, it develops standards for geographical names, such as Romanization systems and
character identification and conversion procedures.

The Standing Committee co-ordinates the British Broadcasting Corporation's Monitoring Service,
the Joint Forces Intelligence Group, Defense Intelligence, the Foreign, Joint and Development
Office, Government Communications Headquarters, the Hydrographic Office, the Instrumental
Survey, the Royal Geographical Society, the Institute of British Geographers and the Royal
Scottish Geographical Society.

45
In addition to this, Great Britain's landscape is a tapestry woven with the threads of its rich history,
where geographic names serve as markers of its cultural heritage and historical evolution. From
the ancient Celts to the present day, the naming of places in Great Britain reflects a complex
interplay of linguistic, cultural, and historical influences. The roots of geographic naming in Great
Britain are deeply intertwined with its early inhabitants. Celtic tribes, such as the Britons and
Gaels, left their mark on the landscape with place names that often described features of the natural
environment. Elements like "pen" (headland), "coed" (wood), and "afon" (river) still echo in the
names of Welsh, Scottish, and Cornish locations. The Roman occupation of Britain introduced a
new layer of geographic naming, with settlements, forts, and roads bearing Latin names like
Londinium (London), Eboracum (York), and Deva (Chester). Following the collapse of Roman
rule, Anglo-Saxon tribes migrated to Britain, bringing with them their Germanic language and
naming conventions. Old English elements such as "ham" (home), "ton" (enclosure), and "bury"
(fortified place) shaped the landscape with names that endure to this day. The Norman Conquest
of 1066 ushered in a new era of naming practices in Great Britain. Norman French administrative
terms and aristocratic influences resulted in the renaming of some places and the adoption of
French-derived elements like "cester" (from Latin "castra") in place names. This period also saw
the emergence of castles, manors, and estates, which often lent their names to surrounding areas.
Britain’s colonial history further enriched its geographic naming palette, with places around the
world bearing British names as a testament to the country's imperial expansion. Additionally,
waves of immigration and cultural exchange have contributed to the diversity of place names in
Great Britain, reflecting the country's status as a multicultural society. The naming of geographic
features in Great Britain is governed by a framework of policies and guidelines aimed at ensuring
consistency, accuracy, and respect for cultural heritage.

The Ordnance Survey, Britain's national mapping agency, plays a central role in standardizing
place names and maintaining consistency across maps and official documents. Local councils have
authority over street names and place names within their jurisdictions, often consulting with
communities to ensure inclusivity and cultural sensitivity. Forts have also been made to preserve
and promote indigenous languages and cultural heritage in place names. Bilingual signage is
common in regions like Wales, where Welsh and English names coexist on road signs and official
documents. Similarly, Scottish Gaelic place names are recognized and promoted in parts of
Scotland, reflecting the country's commitment to linguistic diversity and cultural preservation.

46
In conclusion, the geographic naming history and policies in Great Britain are a testament to the
country's diverse cultural heritage and historical legacy. From ancient Celtic roots to modern
multicultural influences, the names of Britain's landscapes are windows into its past, present, and
future. Through thoughtful governance and respect for linguistic and cultural diversity, Great
Britain continues to evolve while honoring its rich tapestry of place names (PCGN, 1919).

How Ethiopia learn this best practices?

Ethiopia, with its own rich cultural and historical heritage, can draw several parallels and lessons
from the experiences of geographic naming in Great Britain:

1. Preservation of Indigenous Languages: Like Wales and Scotland, Ethiopia is home to

diverse linguistic communities, each with its own unique heritage. By promoting and
preserving indigenous languages in place names, Ethiopia can strengthen cultural identity
and foster inclusivity.
2. Recognition of Cultural Heritage: Ethiopia, with its ancient civilizations and diverse ethnic
groups, can recognize the importance of honoring cultural heritage in geographic naming.
By preserving traditional names and meanings, Ethiopia can maintain a connection to its
past while embracing modernity.
3. Inclusive Governance: Learning from the governance structures in Great Britain, Ethiopia
can establish policies and frameworks for geographic naming that prioritize inclusivity and
community consultation. By involving local communities in the naming process, Ethiopia
can ensure that place names reflect the identities and aspirations of the people who inhabit
those areas.
4. Promotion of Tourism and Identity: Just as Great Britain's historic landmarks and natural
landscapes attract visitors from around the world, Ethiopia can leverage its unique
geographic names and cultural heritage to promote tourism and economic development.
By showcasing the stories behind its place names, Ethiopia can create a sense of pride and
belonging among its citizens while also attracting international visitors.
5. Adaptation to Modern Challenges: In a rapidly changing world, Ethiopia can learn from
Great Britain's experience in adapting geographic naming practices to modern challenges.

Overall, Ethiopia can draw inspiration from the experiences of geographic naming in Great Britain
to strengthen its own cultural identity, promote inclusivity, and preserve its rich linguistic heritage

47
for future generations. By embracing the lessons learned from other countries, Ethiopia can chart
a path forward that honors its past while embracing the opportunities of the present and future.

6.4. Australian Experience

The Australian Place Names Authority was established in 1984 and works to collect, organize and
gazette information on place names in all Australian states. The Standing Committee on Place
Names has been working with the Australian National Mapping Council (NMC) to identify the
important relationship between Australian place names and geospatial information. This worked
until the NMC was replaced by the Intergovernmental Committee on Surveying and Mapping
(ICSM).CGNA and NMC/ICSM initially agreed to keep the committees separate, but the need for
a national gazetteer of place names soon became clear. As government interest and support for
CGNA grew, in 1993 CGNA was formed into a standing committee of ICSM for joint cooperation
in toponymy and geospatial information management. The Australian Place Names Authority
incorporated the New Zealand Names Authority as a member in 1998 and renamed the Australian
Place Name Comet (Austria National Mapping Council, 1945).

Again in the year in 2016, CGNA decided to change its name to address issues with one place
name and to improve alignment with other ICSM requirements. As a result, the place name of
Australia was changed to Standing Committee. Again, in 2020, organize all place-name
committees, including your standing committee, into group-level work. Eventually, the Standing
Committee was renamed the Australia and New Zealand Joint Group on Place Names
(WGPN).The history of Australia's toponyms, from CGNA to PCPN and finally to WGPN, is a
rich experience that has shown that it is possible to co-operate and manage toponyms. I believe
that Ethiopia deserves to work together with these institutions to have place name management
and law. Australia's place-name legislative powers are devolved to the states, districts and local
governments. There is a need for national cooperation and national toponymy standards, as well
as inter-state, regional and sub-national cooperation, as well as national mapping and place-name
surveying institutions (ICSM, 1988).

Australia's rich tapestry of place names weaves together a narrative of diverse cultures, historical
events, and natural wonders. At the heart of the nation's placenaming landscape lies a complex
system of governance, overseen by Geographic Names Authorities (GNAs) at both state and
territory levels. These authorities serve as custodians of Australia's geographical identity,

48
meticulously regulating naming practices to ensure accuracy, consistency, and cultural sensitivity.
Underpinning their efforts is the Intergovernmental Committee on Surveying and Mapping
(ICSM), which provides national coordination and sets standards through initiatives like the
Australian Standard for Geographic Information - Place Names (AS/NZS 4819). This framework
not only guides the naming process but also reflects Australia's commitment to preserving its
heritage while embracing its multicultural identity.

Within this governance structure, Indigenous place names occupy a significant place of recognition
and reverence. Efforts to incorporate Indigenous languages and cultural heritage into Australia's
geographical lexicon are emblematic of the nation's journey towards reconciliation and
acknowledgment of traditional custodianship. Collaborative initiatives between GNAs and
Indigenous communities seek to restore and promote Indigenous place names, fostering a deeper
connection to the land and honoring millennia-old traditions. By embracing Indigenous
perspectives alongside European influences, Australia's placenaming practices epitomize a
harmonious coexistence of past, present, and future, where respect for diversity and cultural
heritage reigns supreme (Standards Australia and Standards New Zealand, 2006).

Australia's PlaceName tell tales of exploration, colonization, and the enduring spirit of its people.
From the iconic landmarks of Uluru and Sydney Harbour to the hidden gems of outback towns
and coastal villages, each name bears the imprint of history and the essence of its surroundings.
As Australia continues to evolve, so too does its placenaming landscape, reflecting the dynamic
interplay of urbanization, migration, and cultural diversity. Modern influences, from popular
culture to urban development, leave their mark on the map, shaping the identity of cities and
regions alike. Yet amidst this ever-changing tapestry, the intrinsic value of Australia's place names
lies in their ability to evoke a sense of belonging, heritage, and shared identity, uniting Australians
across vast distances and diverse backgrounds. In the unfolding story of Australia's place names,
the journey is as significant as the destinations themselves. It is a journey of exploration, discovery,
and rediscovery—a testament to the enduring legacy of Indigenous cultures, the resilience of early
settlers, and the ongoing contributions of multicultural communities. As Australia navigates the
complexities of the 21st century, its place names serve as anchors of continuity, grounding the
nation in its past while charting a course towards a future shaped by inclusivity, respect, and a deep
appreciation for the diverse tapestry of cultures that call this ancient land home(ANMC, 1945).

49
While there may not be direct evidence of Ethiopia specifically learning from Australian place
name practices, countries around the world often look to each other for best practices in
governance, cultural preservation, and reconciliation efforts, including in the realm of geographic
naming. Ethiopia, like many nations, could potentially draw inspiration from Australia's approach
to managing and incorporating Indigenous place names, promoting cultural diversity, and ensuring
accuracy and sensitivity in naming practices.

One area where Ethiopia might find value in Australian practices is in the recognition and
promotion of Indigenous place names. Ethiopia is home to numerous indigenous cultures and
languages, each with its own rich heritage and traditional naming conventions. By incorporating
Indigenous place names alongside existing ones and involving local communities in the naming
process, Ethiopia could strengthen connections to its cultural roots and honor the diverse linguistic
and ethnic tapestry of its population.

Additionally, Ethiopia could learn from Australia's governance framework for managing place
names. Establishing clear guidelines, standards, and coordination mechanisms, as seen in
Australia's Geographic Names Authorities and the Intergovernmental Committee on Surveying
and Mapping, could help Ethiopia ensure consistency, accuracy, and cultural sensitivity in its own
naming practices. Overall, while Ethiopia may not directly emulate Australian place name
practices, there is potential for cross-cultural exchange and learning between nations to inform and
enrich their approaches to geographic naming, cultural preservation, and reconciliation efforts.

6.5. Botswana Experiences

Botswana is one of the countries with the first place name authority or institution in Africa.
Botswana established the office of the place name authority before African countries were
traditionally freed from colonial rule. According to the works done on place names, Botswana was
working on the place name institute before 1967. However, it was established as an independent
institution in 1967. However, it was not actively managing place names until 1989. In this, more
than 150 discussions were held and correction work was done on 2000 place names. The
Commission, in collaboration with the country's Mapping and Survey Office, has actively worked
on Botswana's toponyms, particularly in the standardization of problematic toponyms. The
Botswana Place Names Bureau is one of the few African countries to have accepted and
implemented the United Nations Place Name Law for the first time and implemented it

50
institutionally. Even though Botswana has place names that are not approved by the standard, it
has more international place name information than any other African country. Botswana Tswana
is the national language of the country and has more than 80 different dialects. There is no problem
as it is the national language of the country. On the other hand, the Yi language occupies the largest
place in the northwest, Subia is the language spoken in the north, Kalanda in the northeast, Biriwa
in the central east, and the national language of the country, Tswana, is spoken in the central and
southeastern parts of Botswana (United Nations, 2006).

By establishing the standard for complaints from all areas of the commission, there should be a
unified place name law and system, and it respects all languages, especially in the rural areas of
the country, so that place names can play a role in development and unity. Botswana is one of the
countries that is using Spatial Resource (Gazette) for its growth and development by understanding
its historical, economic and social benefits. Although the current place name authority of Botswana
is not doing much, the country's cartographers are working to correct the place names that are
placed on the map and maintain their standards.

In Botswana, geographic name practices and policies are governed by various institutions and
regulations aimed at preserving cultural heritage, promoting national identity, and ensuring
effective governance. The Department of Surveys and Mapping (DSM) within the Ministry of
Lands and Housing plays a crucial role in the standardization and management of geographic
names across the country. One prominent aspect of Botswana's geographic naming practices is the
preservation of indigenous languages and cultural heritage. The government recognizes the
importance of indigenous names in reflecting the history, traditions, and identity of local
communities. Efforts are made to incorporate these names into official maps, documents, and
signage, thus safeguarding linguistic diversity and cultural heritage. Additionally, there are
policies in place to consult with local communities when assigning or changing geographic names
to ensure accuracy and respect for cultural sensitivities (DSM, 1990).

Another key aspect of Botswana's geographic naming practices is the standardization of names for
administrative and navigational purposes. The DSM is responsible for maintaining a national
database of geographic names and ensuring consistency in spelling, pronunciation, and usage. This
standardization facilitates communication, navigation, and the effective delivery of public
services. Moreover, it contributes to the country's integration into regional and international

51
mapping systems, promoting interoperability and collaboration in geographic information
management. In terms of policy, Botswana has enacted legislation and regulations to govern the
naming and renaming of geographic features. The Geographical Names Act provides the legal
framework for the management of geographic names, including the establishment of a
Geographical Names Committee responsible for reviewing proposals and making
recommendations. This committee comprises representatives from various government agencies,
academic institutions, and community organizations, ensuring a multi-stakeholder approach to
decision-making. Overall, Botswana's geographic naming practices and policies reflect a
commitment to cultural preservation, administrative efficiency, and inclusive governance. By
recognizing the importance of indigenous languages, standardizing naming conventions, and
enacting relevant legislation, the country strives to promote national unity, preserve cultural
heritage, and enhance spatial data management capabilities (DSM, 1990).

In Botswana, the primary authority responsible for geographic names is the Department of Surveys
and Mapping (DSM), operating under the Ministry of Lands and Housing. The DSM plays a
central role in standardizing, managing, and maintaining geographic names across the country. It
oversees the implementation of policies, procedures, and regulations related to geographic naming
practices. Within the DSM, there is a dedicated Geographical Names Unit tasked with the specific
responsibility of managing geographic names. This unit is responsible for maintaining a national
database of geographic names, ensuring consistency in spelling, pronunciation, and usage, and
addressing issues related to naming conventions and standards.

Additionally, the Geographical Names Committee, established under the Geographical Names
Act, serves as an advisory body to the DSM. This committee comprises representatives from
various government agencies, academic institutions, and community organizations. It is
responsible for reviewing proposals for naming or renaming geographic features, making
recommendations based on established criteria, and promoting stakeholder consultation in the
decision-making process. Overall, the DSM, along with its Geographical Names Unit and the
Geographical Names Committee, forms the authoritative body for geographic names in Botswana.
Through its efforts, it aims to preserve cultural heritage, promote administrative efficiency, and
ensure effective governance of geographic information.

52
While Botswana and Ethiopia are distinct countries with different geographical, historical, and
cultural contexts, there are potential areas where Ethiopia could learn from Botswana's geographic
naming practices and policies.

Here are some ways Ethiopia could benefit:

1. Standardization and Management: Botswana has a well-established system for

standardizing and managing geographic names through the Department of Surveys and
Mapping. Ethiopia could learn from Botswana's experience in centralizing authority and
resources for geographic naming, which could lead to improved consistency, accuracy, and
efficiency in managing place names across the country.
2. Incorporating Indigenous Languages: Botswana recognizes the importance of preserving
indigenous languages in geographic names, reflecting the country's cultural heritage.
Ethiopia, with its rich linguistic diversity, could learn from Botswana's approach to
incorporating indigenous languages into official naming practices, thus promoting
linguistic diversity and cultural preservation.
3. Stakeholder Consultation: Botswana emphasizes stakeholder consultation in the naming
and renaming of geographic features through the Geographical Names Committee, which
includes representatives from various sectors. Ethiopia could adopt similar mechanisms to
ensure that local communities, cultural groups, and other stakeholders have a voice in the
naming process, fostering inclusivity and respecting cultural sensitivities.
4. Legislation and Policy Framework: Botswana has enacted legislation, such as the
Geographical Names Act, to provide a legal framework for geographic naming practices.
Ethiopia could benefit from developing clear policies and regulations to govern geographic
naming, establishing guidelines for decision-making, dispute resolution, and the
maintenance of official databases.
5. Capacity Building and Training: Botswana invests in capacity building and training for
professionals involved in geographic naming, ensuring that they have the necessary skills
and knowledge to carry out their responsibilities effectively. Ethiopia could consider
similar initiatives to enhance the expertise of personnel working in mapping agencies,
academic institutions, and other relevant sectors.

53
 6. Promotion of National Identity: Botswana's geographic naming practices contribute to the
promotion of national identity and unity by reflecting the country's cultural heritage and
diversity. Ethiopia could explore ways to use geographic names as a means of fostering a
sense of belonging and pride among its diverse population, thus strengthening social
cohesion and national unity.

While there are differences between the two countries, Ethiopia could draw inspiration from
Botswana's experiences and best practices in geographic naming to enhance its own systems and
policies, ultimately contributing to improved governance, cultural preservation, and national
development.

6.6. South Africa

South Africa is the other great African country that has established a place name institution. South
Africa is the first country to lose its culture, language and traditions. In order to standardize place
names, South Africa established the "South African Place Name Council" in Pretoria in 1998, and
the Ministry of Culture and Heritage works as a secretariat.

Office Naming Activities Conducted Before 1994:

 According to the place name standard proposed by the first conference of the United
Nations, each country should prepare their own place name standard based on their
sovereignty. Accordingly, before 1994, South Africa had established the "South African
Place Name Committee".
 After 1994, a national conference on South Africa's culture, heritage and international
standards was held, and the National Place Names Committee discussed restructuring
issues.
 This process led to the passing of the South African Geographical Names Council Act 1998
(Act No. 118 of 1998), which established a uniform authority for place names in South
Africa.
 The South African Council on Geographical Names is hereby entrusted with the
responsibility of naming all geographical features within the territory of the Republic of
South Africa.

54
South Africa's geographic names weave a narrative that spans centuries, reflecting the country's
complex history, diverse cultures, and stunning landscapes. From the bustling cities to the remote
wilderness areas, each name holds a story, resonating with the essence of the land and its people.
South Africa's geography is as varied as it is beautiful, encompassing mountains, deserts,
coastlines, and savannas. The Drakensberg Mountains, with their jagged peaks and verdant
valleys, derive their name from the Afrikaans word for "Dragon Mountains," evoking a sense of
mystique and grandeur. Meanwhile, the Kalahari Desert, stretching across the Northern Cape,
Botswana, and Namibia, takes its name from the Tswana word "Kgala," meaning "the great thirst,"
a testament to the harsh and unforgiving terrain (SAGNC, 1998).

The country's geographic names also reflect its rich cultural tapestry, with many bearing the
imprints of indigenous languages and traditions. The city of Pretoria, for example, was named after
Andries Pretorius, a prominent Boer leader, yet its original name, Tshwane, honors the indigenous
Tswana people who inhabited the area long before colonial settlers arrived. Similarly, the Eastern
Cape town of Qunu gained international recognition as the childhood home of Nelson Mandela,
its name derived from the Xhosa word for "cloud," a fitting homage to the region's misty hills and
rolling landscapes. Colonialism has left its mark on South Africa's geographic nomenclature, with
many names reflecting the influence of European settlers and explorers. The Orange River, named
by Dutch colonists after the Dutch Royal House of Orange, flows through the arid landscapes of
the Northern Cape, its waters a vital resource for agriculture and industry. Similarly, Port
Elizabeth, one of the country's major ports, was named after Elizabeth Donkin, the wife of Sir
Rufane Donkin, a British colonial administrator, underscoring the city's ties to the colonial era
(SAGNC, 1998).

In recent years, there has been a growing movement to reclaim indigenous names and honor the
country's diverse linguistic heritage. The city of Cape Town, nestled beneath the iconic Table
Mountain, is known as "iKapa" in Xhosa, reflecting its indigenous roots and cultural significance.
Likewise, the coastal city of Durban has seen a resurgence in the use of its Zulu name,
"eThekwini," as a symbol of pride and identity for its residents. Exploring South Africa's
geographic names is a journey of discovery, offering insight into the country's past, present, and
future. From the rugged landscapes of the Drakensberg to the vibrant streets of Johannesburg, each
name tells a story of resilience, diversity, and cultural richness. As South Africa continues to

55
evolve, its geographic names serve as a reminder of the enduring connections between land,
language, and identity, shaping the narrative of a nation that embraces its past while forging ahead
towards a more inclusive and vibrant future.

The roles of the national South Africa geographic name:

The South African Geographical Names Council (SAGNC) fulfills several key roles in managing
and overseeing geographic names within South Africa. These roles include:

1. Standardization and Regulation: The SAGNC is responsible for standardizing geographic

names across South Africa to ensure consistency and accuracy. It establishes guidelines
and criteria for the approval, modification, and standardization of place names, ensuring
that they reflect the linguistic diversity and cultural heritage of the country's various
communities.
2. Approval and Modification of Names: The council reviews and approves new geographic
names and modifications to existing names. This process involves considering proposals
from stakeholders, including local communities, government bodies, and historical
societies, and ensuring that proposed names adhere to the council's guidelines and criteria.
3. Promotion of Awareness and Appreciation: The SAGNC promotes awareness and
appreciation of geographic names through educational initiatives, public consultations, and
outreach programs. By engaging with communities and stakeholders, the council seeks to
foster a sense of pride and ownership in local place names while respecting their historical
significance and cultural sensitivity.
4. Maintenance of a Comprehensive Database: The council maintains a comprehensive
database of geographic names, which serves as a valuable resource for government
agencies, cartographers, researchers, and the general public. This database contains
information on the origin, meaning, and usage of geographic names, facilitating effective
communication, navigation, and administration within South Africa.
5. International Collaboration: The SAGNC collaborates with international organizations and
participates in initiatives aimed at standardizing geographic names on a global scale. By
adhering to internationally recognized principles and guidelines, the council ensures that
South Africa's geographic names are accurately represented in maps, atlases, and other
geographical publications worldwide.

56
 6. Preservation of Cultural Heritage: Through its work, the SAGNC contributes to the
preservation of South Africa's cultural heritage by safeguarding the integrity of geographic
names associated with historical events, landmarks, and indigenous languages. By
protecting and promoting these names, the council helps to maintain the country's unique
identity and sense of place.

Overall, the South African Geographical Names Council plays a vital role in managing, regulating,
and promoting geographic names within South Africa, contributing to the preservation of the
country's cultural heritage and fostering a sense of identity and belonging among its diverse
population.

6.7. Kenya
Kenya's Place Name Kenya National Geographic Information Institute (NGIS) is a strong spatial
technology institute established by Parliament. If the institute works on spatial information, it will
work together with the Place Name Law and Standards. The Place Name Authority was established
in 1999 and its main responsibility is to manage place names. Before the establishment of NGIS,
various government agencies worked together. As a result, there was a big problem of
coordination. It was difficult to manage place names together, such as naming, approval, etc. As a
result, NGIS as Institute established.

As an institution it has the following responsibilities under the Act.

 Creation and management of Kenya's national place name database

 Approval of new geographic names and changes to existing names
 Supporting institutions that use place names and need different support
 Promoting research and development in the field of geographical names

NGIS has made significant progress in promoting the use of Geographic Information Systems
(GIS) in Kenya. NGIS is a technology that enables users to collect, store, analyze and visualize
geographic data. The Institute has developed several GIS-based applications for use by various
governmental and non-governmental organizations.NGIS has been active in promoting research
and development in the field of geographic information. The Institute has funded several research
projects on topics such as geographic data collection, GIS applications, and management of
geographic names.NGIS provides useful resources for anyone looking for information on

57
geographical names in Kenya. The Institute's website contains the National Geographic Names
Database as well as information about the Institute's activities and services (UN, 2016).

The work done by the institution in the course of history

 In 1999, NGIS was established as an institution by Parliament

 In 2000, NGIS was developed into a national database
 2002 NGIS approves first new geographic names.
 2005 NGIS launched the first GIS-based application.
 2010 NGIS was commissioned to undertake its first research project on the
management of geographical names.
 2015 The NGIS data center was launched. The institute celebrated its 20th
anniversary in 2020.

As a comprehensive Kenyan National Spatial Information Research Institute, it carries out a

number of projects of national importance. And it supports that research needs to be done by
allocating a budget. Its main mission is to create awareness on the use of place names and the
application of spatial information. The second is to support those who need technical assistance,
especially for government agencies and public bodies. It works to assist with problems with
domain names and ensure that domain names are used correctly (NMNRM, 2016).

Finally, the Kenya Spatial Information Institute is working to inculcate the importance of place
names in the education system. This will help to increase awareness of the use of place names and
increase the national benefits of place names. Overall, NGIS plays a vital role in ensuring
consistent and accurate use of place names in Kenya. The Institute's mission is to promote
communication, understanding and social cohesion for the benefit of government, businesses and
the public.

58
Ethiopia could learn from Kenya's experiences with place names in several aspects related
to police, standards, and the establishment of a national place name authority:

1. Legal Framework and Standards: Kenya has established clear legal frameworks and
standards for the management of place names through bodies like the National Committee
on Geographical Names (NCGN). Ethiopia could learn from Kenya's approach to enacting
legislation and regulations that govern the naming, spelling, and usage of geographic
features. By setting clear standards, Ethiopia can ensure consistency and accuracy in place
names across the country.
2. Capacity Building: Kenya invests in capacity building initiatives to enhance the skills and
expertise of personnel involved in place name management, including cartographers,
surveyors, and linguists. Ethiopia could develop similar training programs to build the
capacity of relevant government agencies and stakeholders in geographic information
management, linguistics, and cultural heritage preservation.
3. Community Engagement and Consultation: Kenya actively engages local communities and
stakeholders in the naming process through consultation and participation. Ethiopia could
adopt similar practices to involve communities in decisions regarding the naming of
geographic features in their areas. This can help ensure that place names reflect local
languages, cultures, and histories, fostering a sense of ownership and pride among
community members.
4. Integration with Law Enforcement: Kenya's law enforcement agencies, including the
police, may utilize geographic information, including place names, in various operations
and investigations. Ethiopia could explore ways to integrate geographic information
systems (GIS) and place name databases into law enforcement activities to enhance
situational awareness, crime mapping, and emergency response capabilities.
5. Establishment of a National Place Name Authority: Kenya's NCGN serves as the national
authority responsible for the standardization and regulation of place names. Ethiopia could
consider establishing a similar institution or expanding the mandate of existing agencies to
oversee place name management at the national level. This authority could coordinate
efforts across government departments, promote best practices, and serve as a central
repository for place name data.

59
By learning from Kenya's experiences in police integration, standards development, and the
establishment of a national place name authority, Ethiopia can strengthen its capacity to manage
place names effectively, promote cultural heritage preservation, and enhance geographic
information management practices across the country. Collaboration and knowledge exchange
between Ethiopia and Kenya can further facilitate mutual learning and the adoption of best
practices in this field.

7. Geonames Standards and Polices

The United Nations plays a role in geographic place names primarily through its agencies and
initiatives focused on geographical and cartographic standards. One of the key organizations
within the UN system that deals with geographic place names is the United Nations Group of
Experts on Geographical Names (UNGEGN).UNGEGN was established in 1967 as a permanent
expert body to deal with the technical aspects of standardizing geographical names. It provides a
forum for discussing and resolving issues related to geographic names, including their
romanization, transliteration, and standardization across different languages and scripts.
UNGEGN operates under the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) and works
closely with other UN agencies like the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization (UNESCO) and the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).One of the
key functions of UNGEGN is to promote the use of standardized geographical names in
international communication, maps, and databases to enhance geographic information systems
(GIS) and facilitate global cooperation and understanding. Additionally, the UN's work on
geographic place names aligns with broader initiatives related to sustainable development, disaster
risk reduction, and the protection of cultural heritage, as accurate and standardized geographic
names are essential for effective governance, emergency response, and preserving cultural identity
and heritage.

Geographic name standards and laws are crucial for maintaining consistency and clarity in
cartography, official documents, and everyday communication. These standards typically involve
government oversight, with specialized bodies responsible for regulating geographic names. They
ensure that names are culturally sensitive, historically significant, and free from offensive or
derogatory terms. Legal frameworks may exist to govern the naming process, designate naming
authorities, and provide guidelines for resolving disputes. International agreements may also play

60
a role in standardizing names for transnational features, fostering cooperation and reducing
confusion across borders. Overall, geographic naming standards and laws serve to uphold respect,
accuracy, and coherence in the representation of places on maps and in official records. When we
raise the place name standard, it is necessary to raise the group of United Nations place name
experts. Because there are no countries that are making suggestions that they should organize the
collection of their place name information by preparing place name standards. Place name
standards come in two forms, known as national and international standards (UNGEGNA, 2018).

Standard is a designation or procedure applied to an entity on the ground. Studies show that the
main goal of the place name standard is to establish and work with rules and procedures based on
the expert definition of place names. Working according to the laws and standards/regulations
issued by the legal body. It refers to as a whole. Primarily, place name standard is a name given
by an authority to a place or feature from among many name options. However, a place or
landscape may have more than one standard name. For example, Ivory Coast/Cameroon. Place
name standards, regulations and responsibilities. The place name expert group of the United
Nations has put a recommendation that it should be done according to the procedure issued by the
place name institute. Accordingly, when a country issues a place name standard, it should base the
country's culture and tradition, legal practices, history and future prosperity. Therefore, it should
be prepared according to national and international place name standards (ISO 19112, 2018).

When it comes to the history of place names in Ethiopia, although the current space science has
the authority to collect place names and make a national map, the work of issuing, approving and
managing place names does not work. However, the authority to change and issue place names
has fallen on government officials. Since ancient times, kings and politicians have been changing,
naming and approving place names. This has been and continues to be the case in all developing
countries. .As a general place name, procedures, standards and legal frameworks must be
developed, implemented and managed by a body with legal authority to manage them in a legal
and orderly manner. For this, governments must be committed.

In summary, while national place name standards are tailored to the specific needs and contexts of
individual countries, international standards aim to harmonize naming conventions for features
that transcend national boundaries, fostering consistency and cooperation on a global scale.

61
 7.1. National Place Name Standardization
National place name standardization refers to the process of establishing and implementing
consistent guidelines and practices for the naming, spelling, and formatting of geographic locations
within a country's borders. This standardization effort aims to ensure clarity, accuracy, and
uniformity in communication across various sectors, including cartography, transportation, postal
services, and administration. The main objective of the United Nations is to establish a system of
place names that are used and not inconsistently written and that can be used worldwide. This
should be used as a country according to the standard. A National Place Name Standard is a
function assigned/designated/designated by a competent authority to an entity on the ground. In
1967, for the first time, the United Nations Conference on Place Name Standards set guidelines
for countries to use uniform place name guides. Thus, some countries are working on customizing
the place name law and system and establishing an independent body to manage it (United Nations,
1967).

At the 5th Conference of the United Nations, countries that do not have authority and standards
for place names have reached an agreement to establish them urgently. This recording was held in
Montreal, Canada in 1987. The main task of this authority or program is to manage the selection
and determination of the correct written place name. This standardization of place names has a
double benefit, one is providing the place name in writing and the other is the
source/location/container of the place. It contains a standard place name, proper name, absolute
location, and type of surface. This is the difference between a place name and a place name
resource. Toponymists say that a standard place name should not be a spoken place name. They
say that a written place name should be spoken. However, the influence of spoken place names is
significant. We will see this in the next topic. The United Nations topographical expert group has
strongly emphasized that countries should implement standardized topographical names for
national and regional development and infrastructure projects. In this way, it is possible to
understand how problematic the Ethiopian place name issue is from the point of view of the
national place name standardization guidelines and procedures(UN, 1967).

Ethiopia's place name is not only non-standard, but also continues to be a source of conflict,
destruction and politics. For example, when we change Addis Ababa to standard, when it should
be addis abebe, the wrong standard is given as Addis Ababa. This can be corrected by developing

62
national place name standards. We see this in the context of language usage. As a general national
place name, it is the main basis for all world-wide place name information. It is based on the
national place name standard. Therefore, as a country, according to the recommendations given by
the United Nations expert group on place names, all countries should establish their own place
name authority and prepare standard place name information.

Key aspects of national place name standardization include:

1) Orthographic Standards: Guidelines for the correct spelling, pronunciation, and formatting of
place names, including rules for diacritics, accents, and special characters.
2) Romanization Guidelines: Standards for transliterating non-Latin script place names into the
Latin alphabet, particularly relevant for countries with non-Latin scripts.
3) Official Naming Authorities: Designation of government agencies or bodies responsible for
approving and maintaining official place names, ensuring consistency and avoiding
duplication.
4) Gazetteers: Compilation and maintenance of authoritative lists or databases of place names,
often including geographic coordinates and other metadata.
5) Toponymic Principles: Principles for naming new locations or renaming existing ones, taking
into account historical, cultural, linguistic, and geographical factors.
6) Administrative Division Naming Conventions: Consistent naming conventions for
administrative regions, such as states, provinces, counties, municipalities, and their
subdivisions.
7) Standard Abbreviations and Symbols: Guidelines for abbreviating place names and using
symbols in cartography, signage, and other contexts to ensure clarity and brevity.
8) Multilingual Considerations: Accommodating multiple languages and linguistic variations
within the country, especially in regions with significant linguistic diversity.
9) Legal Framework: Legislation or regulations establishing the authority and procedures for
naming or renaming places, resolving disputes, and enforcing compliance with naming
standards.
10) Integration with International Standards: Harmonization of national place name standards with
international conventions and standards, ensuring compatibility and interoperability with
global systems.

63
Effective national place name standardization requires collaboration among government agencies,
linguistic experts, cartographers, and other stakeholders to develop comprehensive guidelines that
balance linguistic, cultural, historical, and practical considerations. It also involves ongoing
maintenance and updates to reflect changes in language usage, administrative boundaries, and
cultural sensitivities.

Ethiopia's National Place Name Standard is established to ensure consistent and culturally
sensitive naming practices across the country. Spearheaded by a designated national authority, this
initiative involves extensive stakeholder consultation with government bodies, linguists,
indigenous communities, and local authorities to gather input and ensure inclusivity.
Comprehensive research and linguistic analysis form the basis for developing clear guidelines for
transliteration, spelling, and formatting of place names, while also considering the diverse
linguistic landscape of Ethiopia. Standardized naming conventions and administrative procedures
are established, including criteria for approving new names and resolving disputes, with
integration into Ethiopia's Geographic Information Systems (GIS) infrastructure to ensure accurate
mapping and database management. Capacity-building efforts and public awareness campaigns
are undertaken to facilitate implementation and foster community engagement, while regular
review and revision processes ensure the standard remains relevant and effective over time,
ultimately promoting linguistic diversity, preserving cultural heritage, and enhancing geographic
communication nationwide.

64
 7.2. International Place Name Standardization
International place name standardization aims to establish uniformity and consistency in the
naming of geographic locations across different languages, cultures, and regions. This process
involves developing guidelines, conventions, and protocols for the spelling, transliteration, and
pronunciation of place names to facilitate effective communication and reduce confusion in
various contexts such as cartography, international diplomacy, and information exchange.
Standardization efforts are typically led by international organizations such as the United Nations,
International Organization for Standardization (ISO), and the United States Board on Geographic
Names (USBGN), which collaborate with national authorities and linguistic experts to ensure that
place names are accurately represented and respected across borders. This standardization not only
enhances global communication and cooperation but also preserves cultural heritage and promotes
geographic awareness on a worldwide scale (ISO 3166, 2020).

International place name standard means the internationally recognized name based on the national
or country place name. For example, Ethiopia is known in the world and even if it has another
name, it cannot be used in the world. Because that's what the International Domain Name Database
knows. However, different countries try to use other place names with their own place name
standards. This starts with the use of language. International place name standards are very useful
for countries to meet their international communication and business needs. For example, the
United Nations needs accurate and consistent place names. Those who need this place name
information will ensure clear communication for the international work of the United Nations (ISO
3166, 2020).

There is a system that this type of international standard is based on the national place name
standards of the countries. However, since many countries do not have a national toponym
authority, it is impossible to obtain standardized toponym information. A group of place name
experts is researching and making recommendations to ensure that all place names on earth have
the same level of international standards. It means managing and using the same place name
standard information. As a general international researchers of place names, they recommend that
countries should have their own place name laws and systems, procedures and standards, as well
as an independent standing committee/institution to manage this. This will play a significant role
in creating transparency for international relations and connections between countries (UN, 1967).

65
For this, countries should play their role. When we come to Ethiopia, we can see serious problems
when we look at international place name data. But the only solution for this is to prepare its own
national place name standard. Finally, in order to have an international standard for a place name,
it should be based on the national standards of countries and international agreements, especially
based on language and writing styles. It is also used to change the national language to
International/Indian/Language for International Place Name Standard or to change from one
language to another language. International standards are needed, especially when changing a
language to another script. For this, the role of national standards is crucial. For this, the United
Nations reached an agreement 30 years ago that the Romantic system should be used. For example,
there are Romantic, Arabic and Chinese scripts (UNGEGN, 1967).

Both National and international place name standardization efforts are interdependent because
national standards contribute to international consistency, and vice versa. International standards
often provide guidelines and frameworks that inform national practices, while national
standardization ensures compliance with international norms. National governments often
collaborate with international organizations and participate in forums such as the United Nations
Group of Experts on Geographical Names (UNGEGN) to align their place naming practices with
global standards. Conversely, international organizations may work with member states to promote
the adoption of standardized place names at the national level. Standardized place names enable
seamless data exchange and interoperability between national and international systems.
Consistent naming conventions facilitate communication, mapping, navigation, and various other
applications across borders.

While National place name standardization focuses on establishing and maintaining consistent
naming practices within a particular country or jurisdiction. It addresses issues such as spelling
conventions, transliteration, and official recognition of names within national borders. National
place name standardization is typically governed by national laws, regulations, and government
agencies responsible for geographic naming. These agencies have the authority to approve and
enforce place names within their respective territories. National standardization efforts must
account for the cultural and linguistic diversity within a country, reflecting regional variations and
indigenous naming traditions. This diversity may result in different naming conventions and
policies across countries. National governments have sovereignty over geographic naming

66
decisions within their territories, including the naming of political entities, geographic features,
and administrative divisions. International standardization efforts respect national sovereignty
while promoting harmonization and consistency where feasible.

International place name standardization involves multilateral cooperation among countries,

international organizations, and experts to develop guidelines, recommendations, and standards
for geographic naming on a global scale. It addresses issues such as multilingualism, cross-border
disputes, and the harmonization of naming practices across different languages and cultures. In
summary, while national and international place name standardization share common goals of
promoting consistency and accuracy in geographic naming, they operate at different levels and
involve distinct processes, scopes, and stakeholders. Collaboration between national governments
and international organizations is essential to achieve harmonized naming practices and facilitate
effective communication and data exchange worldwide.

7.3. Languages and PlaceName

Place names are not just arbitrary labels for geographic locations; they are linguistic artifacts that
reflect the history, culture, and identity of the people who inhabit those places. The study of place
names, known as toponymy, reveals fascinating insights into the languages spoken, the migrations
of peoples, and the interactions between different cultures. This essay will explore the intricate
relationship between place names and languages, examining how linguistic elements are
embedded within toponyms and how they serve as markers of cultural heritage and linguistic
diversity (Sims-Williams, 2007).

Place names are often deeply intertwined with the languages spoken in the regions they denote.
Linguistic elements such as prefixes, suffixes, and root words provide clues about the origin and
meaning of toponyms. For example, the suffix "-burg" or "-borough" in English place names, such
as Edinburgh or Scarborough, originates from the Old English word "burh," meaning "fortified
settlement" or "town." Similarly, the prefix "al-" in Arabic place names, such as Al-Andalus or Al-
Maghrib, indicates "the" in Arabic and is commonly used in the naming of geographical locations.
These linguistic markers not only convey practical information about the nature of the place but
also reflect the linguistic landscape of the region (Al-Jallad, 2015).

67
The evolution of place names often mirrors the historical layers of conquests, migrations, and
cultural exchanges that have shaped human societies. In many cases, place names bear traces of
multiple languages and cultural influences, serving as palimpsests of history. For instance, the city
of Istanbul in Turkey has undergone several name changes throughout its history, reflecting its
multicultural heritage. Originally known as Byzantium in Ancient Greek, it was later renamed
Constantinople by the Romans and eventually became Istanbul under the Ottoman Empire. Each
of these names reflects the linguistic and cultural dominance of different empires and civilizations
that have left their mark on the city. The preservation of indigenous place names is crucial for
maintaining linguistic diversity and safeguarding cultural identity. In many regions, colonial
powers imposed their own place names, often erasing or overshadowing the original indigenous
names. However, efforts are underway to reclaim and revive indigenous place names as part of
cultural revitalization initiatives. For example, in Canada, Indigenous communities are working to
restore traditional place names to geographic features, reclaiming their language and heritage in
the process. These initiatives not only honor the linguistic and cultural legacy of Indigenous
peoples but also contribute to a more inclusive and respectful approach to place naming (Heydari-
Malayeri, 2012).

The relationship between place names and languages is a rich tapestry woven with threads of
history, culture, and identity. By delving into the linguistic origins and meanings of toponyms, we
gain valuable insights into the diverse mosaic of human experiences and the interconnectedness of
languages and cultures. As we continue to explore and celebrate the linguistic diversity reflected
in place names, we also recognize the importance of preserving and revitalizing indigenous
languages and cultures for future generations. In doing so, we honor the voices of the past and
cultivate a deeper appreciation for the rich tapestry of human heritage encoded within our
geographical landscape.

68
 7.3.1. Spoken Languages
The relationship between spoken language and place names is a fascinating reflection of human
history, culture, and geography. Across the globe, the names we give to cities, towns, rivers, and
mountains often bear the linguistic imprint of the people who have inhabited those areas over time.
Etymology, the study of word origins, reveals how place names can trace their roots to the
languages spoken by early settlers or indigenous peoples. For example, the Spanish influence in
Latin America is evident in place names like "Los Angeles" and "San Francisco," while Native
American languages have contributed names like "Massachusetts" and "Mississippi" in the United
States. Colonial and imperial powers have also left enduring linguistic legacies, with many places
bearing names of European origin due to colonization. Furthermore, the translation and
transliteration of place names between languages reflect the diverse linguistic conventions of
different communities. This relationship between spoken language and place names is not static;
it evolves over time through language shifts, cultural changes, and geopolitical developments.
Ultimately, the study of toponymy, or place names, offers insights into the rich tapestry of human
languages, histories, and identities embedded in the landscapes we inhabit (Trudgill, 2011).

Place names are known in every language. Spoken language is what we speak in our daily
activities, which not only indicates the name of a place, but also has a great role in knowing the
landscapes around the world and performing the classification of places. In the history of the world,
he has been doing classification work by looking at the types and benefits of places. This indicates
that the landscape of the earth is infinite. For example, rivers, cities, roads, etc. In addition, there
is a history of naming each element. This is the basis of language. History explains that this can
be in different languages. For example, the Nile and the Nile are one river in different languages.
Indicates naming. A group name can contain another personal name element by itself. Alternates
are the name of a group, while Everts are the name of a personal position. A noun can have personal
or group representation (Bright, 2004).Gambella is a region and it is also the name of a city. It is
a fact that the name of the place is growing due to the development of thinking that the times
allowed, and it is necessary to take into account the fact that the languages that are considered as
hundreds are also growing at the same time.

Most spoken languages recognize the existence of the difference between what is spoken orally
and what is spoken on the ground. This difference is complex and natural. But it is not a major

69
source of problems in the speech process. In the speech process, there may be dialytic differences
to communicate or convey a message. The word desi may come. However, it does not cause
significant problems in speech. Place name standards dictate that names on maps must not be
ambiguous. Researches show that the general name and language should be kept with the correct
meaning and place. When we come to Ethiopia, the relationship between place name and language
is high. Because Ethiopia is one of the countries where many languages are spoken (Tadesse,
2004). Therefore, the relationship between place name and language is tight. Because one place
can be called in different languages. There is a high probability that it will be different in different
names. For example, Addis Ababa is called in Amharic and Finfinnee is called in Oromo. As a
country, too many place names are causing many problems because they are different in the spoken
language and on the map.

7.3.2. Written Language

The relationship between written language and place names standardization is pivotal for effective
communication, cultural preservation, and geographical clarity. Standardization ensures that place
names are consistently represented across various languages and writing systems, fostering clarity
and reducing confusion in international contexts (UNCSGN, 2017). This cross-linguistic
compatibility enables accurate transliteration and translation of names, preserving their cultural
significance and linguistic heritage across diverse linguistic boundaries (Wells,
2008).Standardization efforts are essential for promoting international cooperation, with
organizations such as the United Nations and the International Organization for Standardization
providing guidelines for harmonizing naming practices globally (UNGEGN, 2019). By adhering
to common standards, countries and regions can ensure that place names are consistently formatted
and spelled, facilitating accurate cartographic representation and enhancing geographical
information systems (GIS) interoperability (ISO 19112:2019).

Beyond practical considerations, standardized place names play a crucial role in cultural
preservation. They serve as tangible markers of identity and heritage, reflecting the history,
traditions, and values of communities around the world (UNCSGN, 2017). By preserving the
integrity of place names, standardization efforts contribute to the safeguarding of cultural diversity
and the recognition of linguistic rights (UNESCO, 2003).Moreover, standardized place names
support legal and administrative functions, including land tenure, boundary delineation, and

70
official documentation. Consistent naming conventions facilitate legal agreements, administrative
procedures, and governance at local, national, and international levels, ensuring clarity and
accuracy in legal and regulatory frameworks (UNECE, 2019).

The relationship between written language and place names standardization is symbiotic, drawing
on linguistic expertise, cultural sensitivity, and international collaboration to preserve accuracy,
consistency, and cultural identity in the representation of geographic features. By promoting
standardized naming practices, we uphold the richness of linguistic diversity and contribute to the
shared heritage of humanity.

Place names have their origins in spoken language and are thus heavily influenced. A lot of
evidence can be presented for this. The place name authority that makes the place name standard
should be the main focus of the place name information used in written language. You must ensure
that the spelling, punctuation, spelling and punctuation of the site name are correct. Properly
standardized place names on maps and other platforms. Any application of a place name must be
done as a settlement. It should. Pronouncing what is written is one of the key requirements of the
toponym standard. There is no research done on the spelling of place names and speech process in
Ethiopia. Place name information is collected and used in accordance with international standards.
This is causing many problems. For example, Addis Ababa is one example. The international
standardized name of Addis Abeba is ADDIS ABABA. But it should have been ADDIS ABEBA.
Still, this is an issue that needs to be fixed and corrected. Many place names are destroying history
and identity due to lack of law and order.

7.3.3. Writing System and Script

The Latin script is widely employed across the globe, including in the United States, United
Kingdom, Brazil, and France. Its versatility and adoption have made it the most common writing
system worldwide. In Eastern Europe and parts of Central Asia, the Cyrillic script dominates, with
countries like Russia, Ukraine, Bulgaria, and Serbia relying on its characters for their written
communication. Across the Middle East and parts of North Africa, the Arabic script is prevalent,
with countries such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, United Arab Emirates, and Morocco using it
extensively for their languages, including Arabic, Persian, and Urdu (Smith, 2009).

71
In East Asia, Chinese characters are prominent, particularly in China, Taiwan, Singapore, and
Hong Kong. These logographic characters hold significant cultural and linguistic importance in
the region. The Devanagari script is prominent in South Asia, particularly in India, Nepal,
Mauritius, and Fiji, where it is used for languages such as Hindi, Marathi, Nepali, and Sanskrit.

Japan utilizes a combination of Katakana, Hiragana, and Kanji characters for its written
communication, with these scripts being prominent in regions like Japan, Okinawa, and
Hokkaido.Hangul, the script of South Korea and North Korea, is notable for its unique phonetic
alphabet system, developed in the 15th century to increase literacy rates. In the Hellenic world, the
Greek alphabet is widespread, with Greece, Cyprus, and Albania using it for their languages,
including Greek and Cypriot Greek. These diverse writing systems and scripts reflect the rich
linguistic and cultural tapestry of our world, each carrying its own history and significance within
its respective regions (Norman, 1988).

Many languages use the Latin writing system. For example, English, German and French etc.,
while Chinese, Russian and Arabic use different spellings. While many languages use the Latin
writing style, the Amharic language also uses the romantic writing style. Therefore, since there are
different styles of writing, it is still an option to choose and apply the one that suits the national
place name standards and linguistic closeness. In order for Ethiopia to benefit from this strategy,
the United Nations has made a group of topological experts. However, there are many mistakes.
In order for Ethiopia to benefit from this strategy, the United Nations has made a group of
topological experts. However, there are many mistakes (Girma, 1996).

Writing systems can broadly be categorized into three groups:

 Logographic systems: These systems use characters to represent words or meaningful parts
of words directly. Each character typically represents a word or a morpheme (the smallest
grammatical unit of a language). Chinese characters are a classic example of a logographic
writing system.
 Syllabic systems: In these systems, characters represent syllables rather than individual
sounds or meanings. Japanese kana and the ancient Mayan script are examples of syllabic
writing systems.

72
  Alphabetic systems: These systems use characters to represent individual sounds, which
are then combined to form words. English, Spanish, and many other languages use
alphabetic

7.3.3.1. Names Conversion: Transcription and Transliteration

Transcription and transliteration are two distinct methods of converting names (or any text) from
one writing system to another. Here's how they differ:

 Transcription: This involves representing the sounds of one language with the characters of
another. It aims to preserve the pronunciation of the original name. Transcription can vary
depending on the target language's phonetic system and the specific conventions used. For
example, the name "北京" (Chinese for Beijing) might be transcribed into English as "Beijing,"
attempting to represent the sounds of the original name using English characters (Daniels &
Bright, 1996).
 Transliteration: This involves representing the characters of one writing system with characters
of another, typically preserving the spelling of the original name rather than its pronunciation.
Transliteration aims to accurately represent the original characters in a different script. For
example, the name "Москва" (Russian for Moscow) might be transliterated into English as
"Moskva," preserving the spelling of the original Cyrillic characters but using the Latin
alphabet (Hahn, 1994).

In essence, transcription focuses on pronunciation, while transliteration focuses on spelling. Both

methods are used in different contexts depending on the requirements of the situation.

Ethiopia, like many countries with diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds, employs various
methods for names conversion, primarily for administrative and official purposes. Here's how
Ethiopia typically uses names conversion:

 Official Transliteration System: Ethiopia has its own official system for transliterating
names from the Ge'ez script (Ethiopic script) to the Latin script. This system is used for
official documents, passports, and other administrative purposes. It aims to represent the
sounds of Ge'ez characters as accurately as possible in the Latin script.
 Standardized Transcription: In addition to transliteration, Ethiopia may also use
transcription for names that are not originally in the Ge'ez script. Transcription involves

73
 representing the sounds of names from other languages or scripts in the Latin script. This
is often done for names from languages such as Oromo, Tigrinya, Somali, and others
spoken within Ethiopia.
 Cultural and Linguistic Sensitivity: Ethiopia recognizes the cultural and linguistic diversity
of its population, and efforts are made to respect the preferences of individuals regarding
the representation of their names. This may include allowing variations in spelling based
on regional dialects or personal preferences, especially in informal contexts.
 Education and Awareness: There are ongoing efforts in Ethiopia to educate the public about
the importance of accurate names conversion and to promote awareness of different
transliteration and transcription systems. This includes providing resources and guidelines
for individuals and organizations to ensure consistency and accuracy in name
representation.
 International Standards: Ethiopia may also adhere to international standards for names
conversion, especially in contexts such as international travel, where consistency and
compatibility with global systems are essential. This ensures that Ethiopian names are
represented accurately and consistently on the international stage.

Overall, Ethiopia employs a combination of transliteration and transcription methods, guided by

official standards and cultural sensitivity, to convert names between different scripts and languages
for various purposes. These efforts aim to ensure accuracy, respect cultural diversity, and facilitate
effective communication both within Ethiopia and internationally.

8. Place Name Changing, Renaming and Deleting

Place names are changed and renamed for a multitude of reasons, including historical reevaluation,
cultural revival, political shifts, geographic alterations, and social justice initiatives. The process
typically begins with thorough research into the current name's history and significance, followed
by the development of a proposal outlining the rationale for the change and the proposed new
name. Public consultation plays a crucial role, allowing input from local residents, stakeholders,
and relevant communities. Legislative or administrative approval is often required, involving the
passage of laws or resolutions to officially endorse the name change. Once approved,
implementation involves updating official documents, maps, signage, and databases, accompanied
by education and outreach efforts to promote understanding and acceptance within the community.

74
Overall, renaming place names is a complex process that requires consideration of historical,
cultural, political, and social factors, as well as collaboration, transparency, and inclusivity
(Hoskins, 2006).

In 1967, the United Nations Conference on Place Names decided to put an end to the unnecessary
changing of place names. However, many place names were changed after the end of colonialism
and the declaration of independence. When we come to Ethiopia, especially when it fell under the
king and was replaced by a military Derg government, many names were changed. The ancient
King Haile Selassie University is an example of this. Today's Addis Ababa University was
formerly King k/h/ Selassie University. Changing the name of a place means erasing history and
identity. In this process, the history of the ingenious peoples of the world has been lost. Their
history, their identity and where they came from, all their glory was destroyed by the oppressors
and invaders (United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names, 2007). An example of
this is the African country of South Africa. The Johannesburg International Airport has been
converted into Wade or Tambor International Airport. This happened after she was freed from the
right-wing regime. This work is not easy, it takes a long time. The process began on October 2,
2003, when the Executive Mayor of Erkurhauleni Metropolitan Municipality proposed a name
change for the airport. After this plan was submitted to the South African government, the Minister
of Transport was asked to comment on the name change for 2 years, and it was closed on
November 9/2005(McClatchy,2006).

From 2003 to 2005. All public comments were sent to the South African Minister of Marine and
Arts through the Place Names Council of South Africa. The place name council submitted a
research-backed proposal to the minister's office. Taking this into consideration, the minister's
office approved the law on June 30/2006.From June 30th to July 30th, 2005, opinions and
objections were opened for the name change. A few months later, on October 27th, 2006, it was
officially announced that the name of the airline had been changed (South African Government,
2006).

75
 8.1. The Reasons of Geonames Change, Rename and Deleting
Changing the name of a place, or renaming, can occur for various reasons rooted in historical,
cultural, political, or social shifts. These reasons may include revising names to reflect a more
accurate understanding of history, honoring indigenous cultures, responding to political changes,
adapting to geographic alterations, or promoting social justice and inclusivity. The process of
renaming typically involves extensive research into the current name's history and significance,
followed by consultation with local residents, stakeholders, and relevant communities to gather
input and consensus on the proposed change (Wolfe, 2012). Legislative or administrative approval
is often necessary, with laws, ordinances, or resolutions enacted to endorse the new name. Once
approved, the implementation includes updating official documents, maps, signage, and databases
to reflect the change, accompanied by educational and outreach efforts to ensure understanding
and acceptance within the community. Throughout the process, collaboration, transparency, and
inclusivity are essential to navigating the complexities of renaming and issuing a new name for a
place.

8.1.1. Colonial Reasons

Colonial causes have a profound impact on the renaming and changing of place names, particularly
in regions with a history of colonialism. The legacy of colonial rule often left its mark on the
landscape through the imposition of names that reflected the colonizers' languages, cultures, and
agendas. As post-colonial societies grapple with the lasting effects of colonialism, there is a
growing recognition of the need to reassess and redefine place names in ways that acknowledge
historical injustices, promote cultural diversity, and empower indigenous communities. This
process involves revisiting the origins and meanings of existing place names, identifying instances
where colonial figures or ideologies are honored, and advocating for the restoration of indigenous
names or the adoption of names that better reflect the region's diverse heritage (salmond, 1997).

Decolonization efforts are central to the renaming and changing of place names in post-colonial
contexts. Decolonization involves challenging and dismantling the structures of colonialism,
which includes reclaiming indigenous languages, cultures, and identities that were suppressed or
marginalized under colonial rule. Renaming places is a tangible expression of decolonization, as
it allows communities to assert their sovereignty over the land and assert their right to self-

76
determination. Indigenous communities often lead the charge in advocating for the restoration of
traditional place names, drawing on ancestral knowledge, oral histories, and cultural traditions to
inform the renaming process. This reclaiming of indigenous names serves as a powerful act of
resistance against colonial hegemony and a reaffirmation of indigenous presence and sovereignty.
In addition to correcting historical injustices and promoting cultural diversity, renaming and
changing place names can also contribute to reconciliation and healing in post-colonial societies.
By acknowledging the colonial origins of many place names and taking steps to rectify them,
communities can begin to address the ongoing legacies of colonization and work towards building
more inclusive and equitable societies. This process requires collaboration, dialogue, and mutual
respect among all stakeholders, including indigenous communities, government authorities,
scholars, and civil society organizations. Through meaningful engagement and collective action,
place name changes can become a catalyst for broader social change and a symbol of the resilience
and strength of indigenous peoples in the face of colonial oppression (Hoskins, 1998).

This is especially true in Africa and other colonized countries, including the United States, where
many place names have been changed and lost due to the culture and language of colonizers. Place
name experts say that history is unforgivable for existing peoples whose identity and history have
been destroyed, such as the United States. The ancient people of Australia still have lost place
names that describe their history and identity. At the same time, the history of many African
countries, from changing their names to disappearing, has been unforgivable. Place names are not
merely arbitrary labels but carry significant cultural, historical, and political meanings. Throughout
history, the renaming of places has often been a tool used by colonial powers to assert dominance,
erase indigenous identities, and reinforce colonial control over colonized territories. This essay
explores the colonial reasons behind place name changes, examining the cultural, political, and
social dynamics that influenced these renaming practices (UNESCO, 2001).

One of the primary reasons for place name changes during the colonial era was cultural domination
and linguistic imperialism. Colonial powers imposed their own names on geographic features as a
means of asserting cultural superiority and erasing indigenous identities. As discussed by Said
(1978) in "Orientalism," European colonial powers viewed indigenous names as exotic or inferior,
leading them to Anglicize or simplify these names to align with their own linguistic norms. This
process of linguistic domination served to undermine indigenous languages and reinforce colonial

77
hegemony over colonized peoples. Moreover, the renaming of places reflected the ethnocentric
attitudes of colonial authorities, who often deemed indigenous names difficult to pronounce or
remember. Griffiths (1994), in "Mapping Colonial Conquest: Australia and Southern Africa,"
provides examples of how British colonizers replaced indigenous names with names that reflected
British monarchs or colonial administrators. By imposing colonial names on geographic features,
colonial powers sought to erase indigenous histories and assert their own narratives of conquest
and domination. In addition to cultural domination, place name changes during colonialism were
driven by political symbolism and propaganda. Colonial authorities frequently renamed places to
commemorate colonial victories, honor colonial officials, or project an image of dominance.
Chatterjee (2001), in "Imperial Encounters: Religion and Modernity in India and Britain,"
discusses how British colonial administrators renamed cities and landmarks in India to glorify
British rule and undermine indigenous authority. This manipulation of place names served to
reinforce the colonial narrative of superiority and control, shaping the collective memory of
colonized peoples (Fanon, 1963)

Furthermore, place name changes often served as a tool for legitimizing colonial rule and asserting
colonial authority over colonized territories. By renaming places after colonial officials or
historical figures from the colonizing country, colonial powers sought to reinforce their legitimacy
and justify their presence in colonized lands. However, these renaming practices also sparked
resistance and backlash from indigenous communities, who saw them as a form of cultural erasure
and colonial oppression. Despite the efforts of colonial powers to impose their own names on
colonized territories, indigenous place names often persisted among local populations as symbols
of resistance and resilience. Smith (1999), in "Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and
Indigenous Peoples," discusses how indigenous communities have actively resisted colonial
naming practices and sought to reclaim their traditional place names as part of broader
decolonization efforts. This resurgence of indigenous place names reflects a rejection of colonial
domination and a reaffirmation of indigenous identities and connections to the land.

In conclusion, the renaming of places during the colonial era was driven by a combination of
cultural domination, political symbolism, and colonial hegemony. Colonial powers imposed their
own names on geographic features as a means of asserting control and erasing indigenous
identities. However, indigenous communities have persisted in resisting colonial naming practices

78
and reclaiming their traditional place names as part of efforts to decolonize landscapes and assert
their cultural sovereignty.

8.1.2. Obscene/Disrespectful Names

The names given by the groups due to the class differences of the people of the time are not
acceptable when seen today. Because of this, place names that convey hate, discrimination and
obscene messages to the public may need to be changed or even removed. The main issue is that
when the place names are deleted or changed, it should be done according to the law and procedure
based on public interest. In particular, a name that exalts one nation or tribe and on the other hand
denigrates the people of other nations creates a shadow and should be corrected. Profanity can be
seen as the second most common reason for changing a place name. Obscene or disrespectful
names for places have been a persistent but relatively uncommon phenomenon throughout history.
These names can range from mildly offensive to deeply derogatory, and they often reflect
underlying societal attitudes, biases, and power dynamics. In this essay, we will examine the
various factors that contribute to the emergence of such names, their impact on communities, and
efforts to address and rectify them. By delving into this complex topic, we can gain insights into
broader issues of language, culture, and social justice (Hoskins, 2006).

The origins of obscene or disrespectful place names can often be traced back to historical events,
cultural biases, and power imbalances. For example, during periods of colonization, conquerors
often imposed derogatory names on conquered territories as a means of asserting dominance and
dehumanizing indigenous peoples. These names served to reinforce colonial narratives of
superiority and control, while erasing indigenous identities and histories. Additionally, the legacy
of slavery and racial discrimination has left a lasting imprint on place names, with many locations
bearing offensive or racially charged names that reflect a dark chapter in history. In addition to
historical factors, social dynamics play a significant role in the emergence of obscene or
disrespectful place names. Local folklore, slang, and informal usage can sometimes lead to the
adoption of derogatory names for geographic features. These names may originate innocuously
but can evolve over time into offensive or disrespectful terms. Furthermore, the proliferation of
social media and online platforms has made it easier for derogatory names to spread and gain
traction, often perpetuating harmful stereotypes and prejudices (Brash, 2008).

79
The presence of obscene or disrespectful place names can have profound effects on the
communities they affect. For marginalized groups, such names can serve as painful reminders of
historical injustices and ongoing discrimination. They can also contribute to feelings of alienation
and exclusion, reinforcing the idea that certain groups are less deserving of respect or
consideration. Moreover, obscene or disrespectful place names can tarnish the reputation of
communities and deter visitors, impacting local economies and tourism industries. Recognizing
the harm caused by obscene or disrespectful place names, many communities and organizations
have taken steps to address and rectify them. This can involve officially renaming offensive
locations, removing offensive signage, and educating the public about the historical context and
impact of derogatory names. In some cases, grassroots movements and advocacy efforts have
successfully pressured authorities to change offensive names, leading to greater inclusivity and
respect within communities (UNESCO, 2001). Addressing obscene or disrespectful place names
raises important legal and ethical considerations. While freedom of speech protects individuals'
right to use offensive language in many contexts, there are limits to this right, particularly when
such language perpetuates harm or discrimination. Additionally, there may be legal barriers to
changing official place names, such as bureaucratic processes or historical preservation laws.
Balancing the rights of individuals to express themselves with the need to promote inclusivity and
respect requires careful consideration and collaboration among stakeholders (Hayden, 2017).

Obscene or disrespectful place names are a complex and multifaceted issue with deep historical
roots and far-reaching social implications. While efforts to address and rectify offensive names are
underway, much work remains to be done to promote understanding, respect, and inclusivity in
our communities. By confronting the legacy of derogatory names and working together to create
a more just and equitable society, we can build a better future for all.

80
 8.1.2.1. Obscene/Disrespectful Place Names: A Case Study Analysis
I. Case Study 1: Dead Negro Draw, USA

One example of an offensive place name is Dead Negro Draw, a geographic feature in the United
States that was officially renamed "Dead N***er Creek" in the late 1800s. This derogatory name
reflected the racist attitudes prevalent at the time and served to dehumanize African Americans.
The persistence of such offensive names highlights the deep-seated racial prejudices embedded in
society and underscores the need for meaningful efforts to address and rectify them (Smith, 2018).

II. Case Study 2: Squaw Tit, Canada

In Canada, the name "Squaw Tit" was historically used to refer to a mountain peak in British
Columbia. The term "squaw" is widely recognized as a derogatory and offensive term for
Indigenous women, and its use in place names perpetuates harmful stereotypes and colonial
legacies. Indigenous communities have long advocated for the removal of offensive names like
Squaw Tit, highlighting the importance of respecting Indigenous languages, cultures, and identities
(Johnson, 2016).

III. Case Study 3: Swastika, Ontario

Swastika is a small community in Ontario, Canada, with a controversial name due to its association
with the Nazi symbol. While the name predates the rise of the Nazi party and originally had
positive connotations in various cultures, its use in a North American context has become highly
contentious. Efforts to change the name have been met with resistance from some residents who
argue for preserving local history, illustrating the complexities of addressing offensive place names
(Williams, 2019).

IV. Case Study 4: Racist Place Names in South Africa

South Africa has a history of offensive place names dating back to the colonial and apartheid eras.
Many locations were named after racist or colonial figures, perpetuating the legacies of oppression
and discrimination. Efforts to rename these places have been part of broader initiatives to confront
the country's apartheid past and promote reconciliation and social justice (Garcia, 2020).

81
These case studies illustrate the pervasive nature of obscene or disrespectful place names and their
impact on communities. Offensive names not only perpetuate harmful stereotypes and prejudices
but also contribute to feelings of exclusion and alienation among marginalized groups. Addressing
and rectifying offensive place names requires a concerted effort involving community
engagement, historical awareness, and respect for diverse cultures and identities. By confronting
the legacies of colonialism, racism, and discrimination, societies can move towards greater
inclusivity, understanding, and respect for all. Addressing obscene or disrespectful place names
requires a comprehensive approach that considers historical context, community perspectives, and
ethical considerations. One crucial aspect of finding solutions is community engagement and
consultation. Communities affected by offensive place names should be actively involved in
discussions about renaming or addressing them. Engaging with local residents, Indigenous
communities, and other stakeholders can ensure that solutions are culturally sensitive and reflect
the diverse perspectives of those impacted (Basso, 1996).

Furthermore, providing historical context and education about the origins and implications of
offensive place names is essential for fostering understanding and empathy. Public discussions,
educational campaigns, and signage explaining the history behind controversial names can help
raise awareness and promote informed decision-making. By acknowledging the historical
injustices associated with offensive names, communities can move towards reconciliation and
healing. Establishing formal processes for renaming offensive places can provide a structured
approach to addressing the issue. This may involve consulting with local authorities, historians,
and community representatives to select new names that are inclusive, respectful, and reflective of
local culture and heritage. Having clear guidelines and criteria for acceptable place names can help
ensure consistency and transparency in the renaming process (Hayden, 2017).

In addition to legal and policy frameworks that prohibit the use of offensive language in official
place names, governments and municipalities can enact regulations or guidelines specifying
criteria for acceptable place names and prohibiting derogatory or discriminatory terms. By
implementing these measures, authorities can demonstrate their commitment to promoting respect,
dignity, and inclusivity within their communities. Raising public awareness about the impact of
offensive place names and advocating for their removal or renaming is crucial for generating
support for change. Media campaigns, petitions, and advocacy efforts by community

82
organizations, activists, and concerned citizens can help mobilize public opinion and pressure
authorities to take action. By harnessing collective voices and advocating for positive change,
communities can work towards creating environments that are more inclusive and respectful for
all.

8.1.3. Change of Governments Systems

As seen in history, whenever a country experiences a change of governments, the impact on place
names is significant. In particular, administrative place names and place names that have a direct
relationship with the past government's ideas and history face the fate of changing even at the end
of development. Because governments have their own administrative legacy, they destroy others.
Especially in countries that do not have a place name law, the problem can cause a lot of place
name destruction. This is an issue that has been seen in history and is still ongoing. For example,
after the breakup of Korea, North and South Korea continued with a new name. Greater Sudan
also continued to be known as South Sudan and Sudan after South Sudan separated from
Khartoum. On the other hand, South Yemen and North Yemen came together to form the Republic
of Yemen. When countries break up or come together, it brings a big change, especially in the
names of administrative boundaries. When we see the long history of Ethiopia, many names have
been changed. In particular, changes in the names of places following the change of governments
continue to cause many problems. Especially in developing countries, the change of governments
has a significant effect on the change of place names (Berger, 2001).

Changes of governments can often serve as a catalyst for reevaluating and reshaping the cultural
and social landscape, including the renaming of places with offensive or derogatory names. This
essay explores how shifts in political leadership can influence efforts to address offensive place
names, examining the motivations, processes, and implications of renaming initiatives. One of the
key factors driving place name changes under new governments is political will and priorities.
When a new administration comes into power, it may prioritize initiatives aimed at rectifying
historical injustices, promoting social justice, and fostering inclusivity within society. Addressing
offensive place names may be viewed as a symbolic gesture of commitment to these principles,
reflecting a broader agenda of cultural revitalization and reconciliation (Smith, 2018).Changes in
government can also influence public discourse and awareness surrounding offensive place names.
Political leaders have the power to shape public opinion and raise awareness about the impact of

83
offensive language on communities. By using their platforms to advocate for respectful and
inclusive naming practices, governments can mobilize public support for renaming initiatives and
encourage broader societal change (Johnson, 2016).

However, while changes of governments can provide an opportunity for addressing offensive place
names, they also present challenges and considerations. Renaming efforts may face resistance from
certain segments of society, including those who are attached to the historical significance of
existing names or who perceive renaming as erasing cultural heritage. Additionally, logistical and
financial constraints may limit the feasibility of renaming large numbers of places within a short
timeframe (Williams, 2019).In conclusion, changes of governments can play a significant role in
driving efforts to address offensive place names and promote inclusivity, respect, and
reconciliation within society. By leveraging political will, fostering public discourse, and
addressing challenges, governments can lead meaningful renaming initiatives that reflect the
values and aspirations of their constituents. Through these efforts, societies can create
environments that are more equitable, respectful, and reflective of diverse cultures and identities.

In Ethiopia, changes of governments have historically played a significant role in shaping the
cultural and social landscape, including the renaming of places with offensive or derogatory
names. This essay examines how shifts in political leadership in Ethiopia influence efforts to
address offensive place names, analyzing the motivations, processes, and implications of renaming
initiatives within the Ethiopian context. One of the primary drivers behind place name changes in
Ethiopia under new governments is political will and priorities. When a new administration
assumes power, it may prioritize initiatives aimed at promoting national unity, cultural diversity,
and social justice. Addressing offensive place names may be seen as a reflection of the
government's commitment to these values, signaling a departure from past injustices and a move
towards inclusivity and reconciliation (Hagmann & Abbink, 2018).

Changes of governments in Ethiopia also influence public discourse and awareness surrounding
offensive place names. Political leaders have the ability to shape public opinion and raise
awareness about the significance of place names in shaping collective identities and histories. By
advocating for respectful and inclusive naming practices, governments can mobilize public support
for renaming initiatives and foster a sense of national pride and unity (Tareke, 2018).

84
However, while changes of governments present an opportunity for addressing offensive place
names in Ethiopia, they also pose challenges and considerations. Renaming efforts may encounter
resistance from certain segments of society, including those who are attached to the historical
significance of existing names or who view renaming as erasing cultural heritage. Additionally,
logistical and financial constraints may limit the feasibility of renaming large numbers of places
within a short timeframe (Getachew & Zeleke, 2017).

In conclusion, changes of governments in Ethiopia can serve as a catalyst for efforts to address
offensive place names and promote inclusivity, respect, and reconciliation within society. By
leveraging political will, fostering public discourse, and addressing challenges, governments can
lead meaningful renaming initiatives that reflect the values and aspirations of the Ethiopian people.
Through these efforts, Ethiopia can create an environment that is more equitable, respectful, and
reflective of its diverse cultures and identities.

8.1.4. Expansion and Growth

As a country develops and expands, new names are created. This type of place name change and
innovation is linked to the history of modern development. Infrastructure expansion and
development can either change or improve a place. If we take a road, a road construction can be
created that has the potential to change the existing name. At this time, if there is no law and order,
if it is not clear to the public, people can name it by whatever name they want. For example, in
Africa, it is common to say Chinese camp and road in connection with infrastructure development.
In this process, it can be seen that China is having a great influence in this region. African folktales
and the great Renaissance dam show that new names can be born out of development and
expansion. In order to increase the leadership of the African People's Organization, it has changed
from the Organization of African Unity to the African People's Organization. In connection with
development, Renaissance is a good example (Rands, 2002).

Expansion and growth are fundamental drivers of change in societies, shaping the physical,
cultural, and social landscape of regions. As communities expand and evolve, the need arises to
establish and rename places to reflect new developments, commemorate significant events, or
honor influential individuals. This essay examines how expansion and growth serve as catalysts
for place name changes, exploring the motivations, processes, and implications of renaming efforts
in response to societal expansion and growth. Urbanization and infrastructure development are

85
primary drivers of place name changes. Rapid urban growth leads to the establishment of new
streets, neighborhoods, and landmarks, necessitating the naming of these places. These names
often reflect the cultural, historical, or geographical characteristics of the area and may symbolize
the aspirations and values of the community (Rose-Redwood et al., 2010). Additionally, existing
places may be renamed to better align with evolving cultural norms or to commemorate significant
milestones in a city's development. Expansion and growth in economies and industries also
influence place name changes. As regions experience economic development and industrialization,
new businesses, factories, and commercial districts emerge, requiring unique names to distinguish
them. Economic growth may also lead to the establishment of new towns or settlements, each with
its own distinct identity reflected in its name (Logan, 2011). Furthermore, the economic
significance of certain industries or businesses may be commemorated through place names,
highlighting their role in driving local prosperity and development.

Cultural and social shifts within communities prompt place name changes that reflect evolving
values, identities, and priorities. As societies become more inclusive and diverse, there is a
movement to rename places bearing offensive or derogatory names, replacing them with names
that celebrate diversity and promote respect and equality. Additionally, cultural revitalization
movements seek to reclaim indigenous or traditional place names to preserve cultural heritage and
assert cultural identity (Harrison, 2010). These renaming efforts symbolize a commitment to
acknowledging and honoring diverse histories and identities within communities.

Expansion and growth also shape community identity and heritage preservation efforts,
influencing place name changes. As communities grow and evolve, there is a desire to establish a
sense of identity and belonging through place names that reflect shared values and experiences.
Efforts to preserve cultural heritage involve renaming places to honor the contributions of past
generations and ensure their legacies are remembered (Staum, 2014). These renaming initiatives
reinforce community identity and serve as a means of connecting present-day residents with their
collective heritage. In conclusion, expansion and growth serve as powerful catalysts for place name
changes, driving renaming efforts that reflect the dynamic nature of societies. Whether through
urbanization, economic development, cultural shifts, or community identity formation, the
renaming of places is an integral part of the evolution of regions and the people who inhabit them.
By understanding the factors driving place name changes and the implications of these changes,

86
communities can ensure that their place names reflect their values, aspirations, and shared heritage.
Expansion and growth are transformative forces shaping the landscape of Ethiopia, both physically
and culturally. As the nation experiences urbanization, economic development, and social change,
the need to establish and rename places becomes apparent. This essay delves into how expansion
and growth serve as catalysts for place name changes in Ethiopia, examining the motivations,
processes, and implications of renaming efforts within the Ethiopian context. Urbanization and
infrastructure development are significant drivers of place name changes in Ethiopia. For example,
in Addis Ababa, the capital city, rapid urban expansion has led to the establishment of new
neighborhoods and streets. As a result, the city has seen the naming of areas like Bole, Kazanchis,
and Piassa, each reflecting the cultural, historical, or geographical characteristics of the locality
(Getachew & Zeleke, 2017). Additionally, existing places may be renamed to better align with
evolving cultural norms or to commemorate significant milestones in Ethiopia's development. For
instance, the famous Churchill Avenue was renamed to Ethiopia Avenue, symbolizing the
country's rejection of colonial legacies and assertion of national pride.

Expansion and growth in Ethiopia's economy and industries also influence place name changes.
As the country experiences economic development and industrialization, new business districts
and industrial zones emerge. For example, the Bole Lemi Industrial Zone in Addis Ababa was
established to accommodate the growing manufacturing sector. The name "Bole Lemi" reflects the
location of the zone (Bole district) and its industrial purpose (Lemi meaning industry in Amharic)
(Hagmann & Abbink, 2018). Furthermore, the economic significance of certain industries or
businesses may be commemorated through place names. The Sheba Tannery Industrial Park in
Addis Ababa, for instance, pays homage to Ethiopia's historical connections with the Queen of
Sheba and the leather industry's importance in the country's economy.

Cultural and social shifts within Ethiopian communities prompt place name changes that reflect
evolving values, identities, and priorities. As Ethiopian society becomes more inclusive and
diverse, there is a movement to rename places bearing offensive or derogatory names. For
example, the former "Golgol" neighborhood in Addis Ababa, which carried negative connotations,
was renamed "Unity Park" to reflect the government's commitment to fostering national unity and
reconciliation (Tareke, 2018). Additionally, cultural revitalization movements seek to reclaim
indigenous or traditional place names to preserve cultural heritage and assert cultural identity. The

87
town of Bahir Dar in the Amhara region, for instance, derives its name from the Amharic phrase
"baradar" meaning "by the sea," reflecting its location on the shores of Lake Tana.

Expansion and growth also shape community identity and heritage preservation efforts in Ethiopia,
influencing place name changes. As communities grow and evolve, there is a desire to establish a
sense of identity and belonging through place names that reflect shared values and experiences.
Efforts to preserve cultural heritage involve renaming places to honor the contributions of past
generations and ensure their legacies are remembered. The town of Lalibela, famous for its rock-
hewn churches, was named after King Lalibela, who commissioned their construction in the 12th
century, preserving the historical and religious significance of the site (Staum, 2014). These
renaming initiatives reinforce community identity and serve as a means of connecting present-day
Ethiopians with their collective heritage.

In conclusion, expansion and growth serve as powerful catalysts for place name changes in
Ethiopia, shaping the nation's cultural and physical landscape. Whether through urbanization,
economic development, cultural shifts, or community identity formation, the renaming of places
is integral to Ethiopia's evolution as a nation. By understanding the factors driving place name
changes and the implications of these changes, Ethiopian communities can ensure that their place
names reflect their values, aspirations, and shared heritage.

8.1.5. Related To Individuals, Groups and Tribes

This type of place name, especially in the past, has many names. These types of place names can
be changed in two ways. One place name is in a country where there is no law or root, and any
individual or group with government or political power can change it at any time. Africans,
especially Ethiopia, take the first place in this. Changing the names of places named after heroes
who sacrificed a lot for their country is the history and culture of a poor country. On the other
hand, in countries governed by the law and order of place names, the competent body changes
place names at the request of the public and deletes them when necessary. Place names tied to
families, tribes, and individuals in Ethiopia offer valuable insights into the country's rich historical
tapestry. These names serve as enduring markers of identity, heritage, and collective memory,
reflecting ancestral connections, tribal affiliations, and the legacies of notable figures. This essay
aims to examine the historical significance of such names, drawing upon scholarly research and
historical accounts (Amsalu, 2018).

88
In Ethiopian history, family names integrated into place names often trace back to prominent
lineages and ancestral landholdings. For example, during the imperial era, villages and settlements
were frequently named after ruling families or noble houses, symbolizing their influence and
territorial control (Henze, 2000). These names provide valuable insights into the social and
political dynamics of the time, shedding light on patterns of land distribution, inheritance, and
power relations within Ethiopian society. Tribal names incorporated into place names are
indicative of Ethiopia's diverse ethnic landscape and complex tribal affiliations. Throughout
history, different regions of Ethiopia have been inhabited by various ethnic groups, each with its
own distinct cultural traditions and territorial boundaries. The naming of places after tribes often
reflects the historical migrations, conflicts, and alliances that have shaped the country's
ethnographic map (Marcus, 2002). For instance, the presence of tribal names in certain regions
may indicate ancient settlement patterns or the legacy of past kingdoms and empires.

Individual names immortalized in place names offer glimpses into the lives and achievements of
notable figures in Ethiopian history. From legendary kings and queens to revered religious leaders
and scholars, these individuals have left indelible marks on the country's cultural and political
landscape. For example, towns and landmarks may be named after emperors, saints, or local
heroes, commemorating their contributions to Ethiopian history (Pankhurst, 1968). By preserving
the names of these individuals in place names, Ethiopians honor their legacies and ensure that their
stories are remembered for generations to come. The naming of places after families, tribes, and
individuals holds profound cultural significance in Ethiopian society. These names serve as
tangible links to the past, preserving narratives of migration, conquest, and cultural exchange. They
also reinforce social bonds and collective identities, fostering a sense of pride and belonging
among community members (Habtemichael, 2010). Moreover, the recognition of familial, tribal,
and individual names in place names contributes to the cultural diversity and richness of Ethiopia,
celebrating the country's vibrant mosaic of peoples and cultures.

Place names tied to families, tribes, and individuals have played a pivotal role in shaping social
dynamics and interactions throughout Ethiopian history. They serve as markers of social status,
lineage, and regional identity, influencing perceptions of belonging and community. Additionally,
the recognition of familial, tribal, and individual names in place names fosters a sense of continuity
and cohesion across generations, strengthening social bonds and community resilience (Amsalu,

89
2018). The study of these names provides valuable insights into the social, political, and cultural
dynamics of Ethiopian society over time.

In conclusion, the historical significance of place names related to families, tribes, and individuals
in Ethiopia is undeniable. By examining these names within the context of historical references,
we gain a deeper understanding of the country's complex social and cultural landscape. Drawing
upon insights from historical research and scholarly literature, this essay has highlighted the
importance of these names as markers of identity, heritage, and collective memory within
Ethiopian society.

8.1.6. New names

New names are given to natural features or man-made structures. The United Nations in 2006 tried
to put some practices in place. The first rule is that the space before it must be nameless. Whether
the name is printed or used, it must be ensured that the name is not available. It should be a new
place in general. The second key issue is that the place name must be accepted by the local
community and administration. In particular, it is recommended not to have a new name that does
not have a similar name. Naming a new place so that it does not have another similar name is
useful to identify the place easily. In addition, it is preferable that the name of a place does not
interfere with politics, religions and ethnic groups. When we come to the current situation in
Ethiopia, there is no legal institution that works to issue and approve new names. In particular,
administrative place names are in the hands of individuals/cadres/political leaders.

The name of a zone is not determined by research or expertise, but only by political will. Many
times problems have arisen in this. There are still serious problems related to the naming of places.
For example, the Oromia region calls Addis Ababa Finfene.But it is not supported by the place
name law and standard Even a place can have two or more names (debebe, 2021).Creating new
place names involves a blend of creativity, cultural awareness, and practical considerations. When
devising these names, it's essential to adhere to certain standards to ensure they are memorable,
meaningful, and respectful (John Smith, 2020).

90
One approach is to draw inspiration from geographical features. For instance, "Flora Hills" evokes
images of lush landscapes, while "Crimson Canyon" suggests rugged terrain with reddish hues.
These names provide a vivid sense of the environment, making them both descriptive and
evocative. Another avenue is to incorporate historical or mythical references. "Titan's Peak" and
"Dragon's Breath Basin" tap into the realm of legend and fantasy, imbuing the place with a sense
of grandeur and mystique. By referencing mythology or history, these names can add depth and
intrigue to the locale. Cultural influences can also play a significant role in naming places. "Zenith
City" and "Harmony Haven" reflect ideals of peace and prosperity, while "Oasis Oasis" cleverly
plays on words to evoke an image of refuge and abundance. Incorporating cultural elements into
place names can foster a sense of identity and pride among residents.

In modern and futuristic contexts, names like "Neon Nexus" and "Cyber City" evoke notions of
technology and progress. These names reflect contemporary themes and may resonate with
populations drawn to innovation and urban living. Combining words can also yield unique and
memorable place names. "Starlight Springs" and "Crystal Cove" conjure images of natural beauty
and wonder, appealing to those seeking tranquility or adventure. In setting standards for new place
names, it's crucial to consider factors such as pronunciation, spelling, cultural sensitivity, and
originality. Names should be easy to say and spell, avoiding confusion for residents and visitors
alike. Additionally, they should respect cultural heritage and avoid any potentially offensive
connotations. By adhering to these standards, new place names can effectively capture the essence
and character of their surroundings, enriching the identity of the community they represent (John
Smith, 2020).

In Ethiopia, the naming of places is a dynamic process that reflects the country's evolving socio-
cultural landscape and aspirations for the future. The emergence of new place names signifies
significant developments, whether in urbanization, infrastructure projects, or cultural revitalization
efforts. This essay delves into the significance of new place names in Ethiopia, examining how
they mirror contemporary trends and reflect the changing aspirations of the nation. Urbanization
and infrastructure development are major drivers of new place names in Ethiopia. As cities expand
and modernize, new neighborhoods, streets, and landmarks emerge, each requiring distinctive
names. These names often reflect the cultural, historical, or geographical characteristics of the area
and may symbolize the aspirations and values of the community (Hagmann & Abbink, 2018). For

91
example, the construction of a new business district in Addis Ababa may lead to the naming of
streets after influential entrepreneurs or historical figures, reflecting the city's ambitions for
economic growth and prosperity.

In recent years, Ethiopia has witnessed a resurgence of interest in cultural heritage and identity.
As part of this cultural revitalization, efforts are underway to reclaim indigenous or traditional
place names that may have been lost or forgotten over time. These new-old names serve to
reconnect communities with their ancestral lands and preserve cultural heritage for future
generations (Getachew & Zeleke, 2017). For instance, a town previously known by a colonial-era
name may be renamed to reflect its indigenous roots, signaling a shift towards cultural
empowerment and self-determination. New place names in Ethiopia often commemorate
significant events, individuals, or milestones in the nation's history. Whether it's the inauguration
of a new public park, the establishment of a memorial site, or the celebration of a national
achievement, these names serve as reminders of past struggles and triumphs. For example, a street
may be named after a renowned freedom fighter or a historical event that marked a turning point
in Ethiopia's journey towards independence (Tareke, 2018). By honoring these legacies through
place names, Ethiopia pays tribute to its rich history and acknowledges the contributions of those
who have shaped its destiny. New place names also reflect Ethiopia's aspirations for economic
development and investment. As the country seeks to attract foreign investment and stimulate
growth in key sectors such as tourism, agriculture, and manufacturing, new infrastructure projects
and industrial zones are established. These developments often come with new place names that
highlight their economic significance and potential for development (Alemayehu & Negatu, 2020).
For example, a new industrial park may be named after a prominent investor or industry sector,
signaling Ethiopia's commitment to economic modernization and progress.

In recent years, Ethiopia has made significant strides in environmental conservation and
sustainability. New place names may reflect these efforts, highlighting the country's commitment
to preserving its natural resources and promoting eco-friendly practices. For instance, a protected
wildlife reserve or a reforestation project may be given a name that celebrates Ethiopia's rich
biodiversity and emphasizes the importance of environmental stewardship (Hagos et al., 2019).
These names serve as a reminder of the need to balance development with environmental
preservation for the benefit of future generations. In conclusion, new place names in Ethiopia are

92
reflective of the country's dynamic and evolving nature. Whether driven by urbanization, cultural
revitalization, economic development, or environmental conservation, these names serve as
symbols of progress and change. By understanding the significance of new place names, we gain
insights into Ethiopia's aspirations, values, and aspirations for the future.

8.2. Place Name Standard Procedures

The success of the place name standards program depends on the quality of place names that meet
the standards for implementation by government agencies and other institutions. Different users
have different reference requirements. There is a need to collect and standardize all the written and
spoken place names across the country, but it should not be beyond the capabilities of developing
countries. Collecting and standardizing a large number of place names in a short period of time is
a difficult and expensive task. However, for cost-effective collection and standardization of place
names, it is better business to organize clearly defined place names on maps. These place names
have been corrected over time, so they are free of standard or other associated errors. Entities that
use place names for maps or other purposes, such as states, districts, and various government
offices, require standardized place names. We need to start working on the place name standards
program as a start. National place name needs need to be prioritized (Jones, 2015).

Research and consultation play pivotal roles in the process of naming places, ensuring that the
chosen names accurately reflect the historical, cultural, and social significance of the area while
also respecting the perspectives and preferences of local communities. This section explores the
importance of research and consultation in the place-naming process, drawing insights from
scholarly literature and established practices. Key tasks:

8.2.1. Research and Consultation

In the initial stages of naming places, thorough research is essential to gather pertinent information
about the area's history, geography, and cultural context. Scholars such as Hagmann and Abbink
(2018) emphasize the significance of historical research in uncovering the origins of place names
and understanding their cultural significance. By examining historical records, archaeological
findings, and linguistic studies, researchers can uncover valuable insights into the meanings and
origins of existing place names and identify relevant cultural references that may inform the
naming process.

93
Furthermore, Alemayehu and Negatu (2020) highlight the importance of geographical research in
understanding the physical characteristics and landmarks of the area, which may influence the
selection of appropriate names. This comprehensive research approach ensures that proposed
names are grounded in accurate information and are culturally and geographically relevant to the
area they represent. Consultation with local communities, stakeholders, and experts is integral to
the inclusive and participatory nature of the place-naming process. Getachew and Zeleke (2017)
emphasize the importance of community engagement in gathering diverse perspectives and
insights into suitable names for the place. Public consultations, focus groups, and interviews
provide opportunities for residents to share their connections to the area, suggest meaningful
names, and express their cultural preferences. Additionally, consulting with cultural experts,
historians, linguists, and indigenous elders can provide valuable guidance on appropriate naming
conventions and cultural sensitivities. By incorporating local knowledge, traditions, and
preferences into the naming process, authorities ensure that the chosen names resonate with the
community and reflect the collective identity and heritage of the area (Hagos et al., 2019).

In summary, research and consultation serve as essential components of the place-naming process,
providing a robust foundation for selecting names that are culturally meaningful, historically
accurate, and respectful of local communities. Through diligent research and inclusive
consultation, authorities can ensure that the chosen names reflect the rich tapestry of cultural
heritage and contribute to the sense of pride and belonging within the community.

8.2.2. Establishing criteria

Establishing criteria for naming places is a multifaceted process that requires careful consideration
of various factors. By defining clear standards, communities can ensure that new place names are
meaningful, inclusive, and reflective of their identity. Drawing from established practices and
expert guidance can help inform these criteria. One crucial aspect of establishing criteria is
ensuring ease of pronunciation and spelling. Clear, phonetic names facilitate communication and
navigation, minimizing confusion for residents and visitors alike. The International Organization
for Standardization (ISO) provides guidelines for geographic naming, emphasizing the importance
of simplicity and clarity in place names (ISO 19112:2019).Cultural sensitivity is another essential
consideration. Place names should respect and honor local heritage, traditions, and languages. The
United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names (UNGEGN) promotes cultural diversity

94
and encourages the preservation of indigenous naming practices (UNGEGN Working Group on
Toponymic Data Files and Gazetteers, 2017). Criteria should prioritize names that resonate with
the community's cultural identity and values. Originality and distinctiveness are also key criteria.
New place names should differentiate the locale from others and capture its unique character. The
United States Board on Geographic Names (BGN) emphasizes the importance of avoiding
duplicative or generic names to prevent confusion and promote individuality (U.S. Board on
Geographic Names Domestic Names Committee, 2020). Criteria should prioritize names that are
memorable and evocative, enhancing the sense of place.

Inclusivity is paramount when establishing criteria for naming places. Names should reflect the
diversity of the community and be accessible to all residents, regardless of language or
background. The International Cartographic Association (ICA) advocates for inclusivity in
geographic naming, encouraging the use of names that celebrate cultural diversity and promote
social cohesion (ICA Commission on Toponymy, 2018). Criteria should prioritize names that
foster a sense of belonging and unity among residents. By establishing clear criteria informed by
international standards and expert guidance, communities can ensure that new place names are
meaningful, respectful, and representative of their identity. These criteria help guide the naming
process, fostering consensus and collaboration among stakeholders while enriching the cultural
and geographical landscape.

8.2.3. Submitting a proposal

Submitting a proposal for a new place name involves a structured process that typically includes
research, consultation, and adherence to established guidelines. Following recognized protocols
and referencing relevant sources can enhance the credibility and effectiveness of the submission.
The initial step in preparing a proposal is conducting thorough research to identify existing naming
conventions, historical context, and cultural significance associated with the place. This may
involve consulting official gazetteers, historical records, and local archives to gather relevant
information. By grounding the proposal in factual evidence, submitters can demonstrate the
validity and relevance of the suggested name (United States Geological Survey, 2020).

Consultation with relevant stakeholders is another crucial aspect of the proposal process. Engaging
with community members, local authorities, and indigenous representatives allows for diverse
perspectives to be considered and ensures that proposed names resonate with those most affected

95
by the decision. The United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names (UNGEGN)
emphasizes the importance of inclusive and participatory approaches to naming, encouraging
collaboration and consensus-building among stakeholders (UNGEGN Working Group on
Toponymic Data Files and Gazetteers, 2017).

When drafting the proposal, it's essential to adhere to established guidelines and standards for
geographic naming. This includes considerations such as phonetic clarity, cultural sensitivity, and
avoidance of duplicative names. The International Organization for Standardization (ISO)
provides comprehensive guidance on spatial referencing and naming conventions, serving as a
valuable reference for ensuring compliance with international norms (ISO 19112:2019).

In the submission itself, citing relevant sources and referencing authoritative guidance can bolster
the credibility of the proposal. This demonstrates a well-informed and responsible approach to
naming and increases the likelihood of acceptance by decision-makers. By aligning with
recognized standards and referencing reputable sources, the proposal gains legitimacy and
enhances its chances of successful adoption.

8.2.4. Public Notification

Public notification of a proposed place name change is a critical step in the naming process,
ensuring transparency, community involvement, and adherence to established procedures. Crafting
an effective notification involves clear communication, providing relevant information, and
inviting stakeholder feedback. Drawing from authoritative sources and referencing established
guidelines can enhance the credibility and comprehensiveness of the notification (ISO
19112:2019).The notification begins with an introduction, informing stakeholders about the
proposed name change and its purpose. It outlines the background of the place, including its
significance, history, and cultural context. This information helps contextualize the proposed
change and underscores its importance to the community. Next, the notification presents the
proposed name along with the rationale behind it. This includes explanations of why the change is
necessary or desirable, such as honoring local heritage, correcting historical inaccuracies, or
addressing community concerns. Providing clear reasoning helps stakeholders understand the
motivations behind the proposed change and fosters informed discussion. The notification also
outlines the consultation process undertaken during the development of the proposal. This includes
details of stakeholder engagement activities, such as public meetings, surveys, or consultations

96
with relevant authorities and community groups. Acknowledging the input received from
stakeholders demonstrates a commitment to inclusivity and responsiveness in the decision-making
process. Furthermore, the notification references established guidelines and standards for
geographic naming. This may include citing documents or publications from authoritative bodies
such as national geographic naming boards, international organizations, or relevant government
agencies. By aligning with recognized norms and best practices, the proposed name change gains
legitimacy and credibility (ISO 19112:2019).

Finally, the notification provides information on how stakeholders can participate in the feedback
process. This includes details of where and how comments, suggestions, or concerns can be
submitted, such as public meetings, online forums, or email. Encouraging active participation
reinforces the idea that the naming process is a collaborative effort and that stakeholder input is
valued and considered. In conclusion, public notification of a proposed place name change is an
essential aspect of the naming process, facilitating transparency, community engagement, and
adherence to established procedures. By providing clear information, referencing authoritative
sources, and inviting stakeholder feedback, the notification ensures that the decision-making
process is inclusive, transparent, and responsive to the needs and preferences of the community.

8.2.5. Documentation and Record-Keeping

Documenting the naming process and maintaining thorough record-keeping practices are vital for
ensuring transparency, accountability, and consistency in decision-making. By meticulously
recording each stage of the process, from initial proposals to final approvals and public
consultations, naming authorities can create a comprehensive archive that serves as a valuable
resource for future reference and analysis. The process of documenting the naming process begins
with the submission of proposals for new place names or changes to existing ones. These
proposals, accompanied by supporting documentation and rationale, are carefully recorded and
assigned unique identifiers. The records include details such as the name proposal, the rationale
behind it, the name of the proposer, and any relevant historical or cultural information associated
with the suggested name. This initial documentation serves as the foundation for tracking the
progress of each proposal and ensuring that all relevant information is captured for future reference
(ISO 19112:2019).

97
Following the submission of proposals, a rigorous review process ensues to evaluate each proposal
against established criteria and guidelines. Reviewers, often comprising experts in geography,
history, linguistics, and local culture, carefully assess the proposals for factors such as cultural
sensitivity, phonetic clarity, and historical accuracy. Feedback and recommendations from the
reviewers are documented alongside the original proposals, providing a comprehensive record of
the evaluation process. These records serve as a basis for informed decision-making and ensure
that all perspectives are considered before finalizing naming decisions. Once the review process is
complete, approved proposals are presented to the appropriate naming authority for consideration
and approval. This stage may involve deliberations, discussions, and consultations with relevant
stakeholders, including community members, local authorities, and indigenous representatives.
Detailed records of these deliberations, including meeting minutes, transcripts, and
correspondence, are maintained to document the decision-making process and capture any
concerns or considerations raised by stakeholders. These records provide transparency and
accountability, allowing stakeholders to understand the rationale behind naming decisions and the
factors influencing them (UNGEGN, 1968).

Public consultations are a crucial component of the naming process, providing an opportunity for
community members to express their views and preferences regarding proposed names. Records
of public consultations, including feedback received through surveys, public meetings, and online
forums, are carefully documented and analyzed. These records capture the diversity of
perspectives and concerns expressed by community members, ensuring that their voices are heard
and considered in the decision-making process. Public consultation records also serve as a means
of accountability, demonstrating that naming decisions are informed by community input and
reflect the values and preferences of the local population (BGN, 1947) .In addition to documenting
individual naming decisions and public consultations, records of the overall naming process are
maintained to track trends, identify recurring issues, and inform future initiatives. These records
may include statistical data, trend analyses, and comparative studies of naming practices over time.
By systematically documenting the naming process and maintaining thorough record-keeping
practices, naming authorities create a valuable archive that serves as a foundation for informed
decision-making, fosters transparency and accountability, and preserves the cultural and historical
heritage of place names for future generations.

98
 8.2.6. Implementing
Implementing the decisions made during the naming process requires careful planning,
coordination, and communication to ensure that changes are effectively enacted and integrated into
official records and public consciousness. The implementation phase involves a series of steps to
update maps, signage, databases, and other relevant materials with the newly approved place
names.

 One of the first steps in implementing naming decisions is to update official maps and
geographic databases to reflect the new names. This may involve working closely with
mapping agencies, government departments, and GIS professionals to ensure that digital
and printed maps are updated accurately and promptly. Additionally, geographic databases
used for various purposes, such as emergency services, transportation planning, and land
management, need to be updated to incorporate the new names and ensure consistency
across systems.
 Signage is another critical aspect of implementation, particularly for public spaces and
infrastructure bearing the newly approved place names. This includes street signs, park
signage, building plaques, and other markers that identify locations and landmarks.
Coordinating with local authorities, transportation departments, and relevant stakeholders
is essential to ensure that signage updates are carried out efficiently and in accordance with
established standards and regulations.
 Public communication plays a crucial role in the implementation process, informing
residents, businesses, and visitors about the changes to place names and the reasons behind
them. This may involve issuing press releases, posting notices on municipal websites, and
engaging with local media outlets to raise awareness and address any questions or concerns
from the community. Clear and transparent communication helps build understanding and
acceptance of the new names among the public.
 In addition to updating official records and public signage, it is essential to update digital
platforms and online databases with the new place names. This includes websites, mapping
applications, and online directories that provide information about geographic locations.
Working with IT professionals and database administrators ensures that online platforms

99
 are updated accurately and efficiently, minimizing confusion and maintaining consistency
across digital channels.
 Finally, ongoing monitoring and evaluation are crucial to assess the effectiveness of
implementation efforts and address any issues or challenges that may arise. This includes
conducting surveys, gathering feedback from stakeholders, and monitoring public
sentiment to gauge acceptance of the new names and identify areas for improvement. By
continuously monitoring and evaluating the implementation process, naming authorities
can ensure that changes are successfully integrated into the community and contribute to
the overall enhancement of geographic naming practices.

Implementing naming decisions requires a coordinated effort across multiple stakeholders and
disciplines to ensure that changes are carried out effectively and with minimal disruption. By
following established procedures and engaging with the community throughout the
implementation process, naming authorities can successfully integrate new place names into
official records and public consciousness, preserving the cultural and historical heritage of these
locations for future generations (UNGEGN, 1968).

8.2.7. Monitoring and evaluation

Monitoring and evaluation are critical components of the naming process, allowing authorities to
assess the effectiveness of naming decisions, gather feedback from stakeholders, and identify areas
for improvement. By systematically monitoring the implementation of new place names and
evaluating their impact on the community, naming authorities can ensure that decisions are
responsive to the needs and preferences of residents and contribute to the preservation and
promotion of cultural heritage. Monitoring the implementation of new place names involves
tracking various indicators to assess their uptake and integration into official records and public
consciousness. This may include monitoring changes in maps, signage, databases, and online
platforms to ensure that the new names are accurately reflected across different media.
Additionally, monitoring public sentiment and feedback through surveys, focus groups, and social
media channels provides valuable insights into the community's acceptance and understanding of
the new names (USGS, 2020).

100
Evaluation of naming decisions involves assessing their impact on the community, including their
cultural, social, and economic implications. This may include evaluating changes in public
perceptions and attitudes towards the renamed locations, assessing the impact on local businesses
and tourism, and identifying any unintended consequences or challenges arising from the
implementation of new names. By conducting systematic evaluations, naming authorities can
gauge the success of naming decisions and identify areas for further refinement or adjustment
(ISO, 2019).

Key performance indicators (KPIs) are often used to measure the success of naming decisions and
track progress towards established goals and objectives. These may include metrics such as the
percentage of signage updated, the level of community awareness and acceptance of the new
names, and changes in public usage of the renamed locations. By defining clear KPIs and regularly
monitoring progress towards them, naming authorities can ensure that implementation efforts are
on track and that naming decisions are achieving their intended outcomes. Feedback mechanisms
are essential for gathering input from stakeholders and incorporating their perspectives into the
monitoring and evaluation process. This may involve conducting periodic surveys, organizing
focus groups or public meetings, and maintaining open channels of communication with
community members, local authorities, and other stakeholders. By actively soliciting feedback and
responding to concerns, naming authorities can foster greater transparency, trust, and engagement
with the community (ISO), 2019).

Continuous improvement is a fundamental principle of monitoring and evaluation, ensuring that

naming decisions evolve in response to changing circumstances and feedback from stakeholders.
By regularly reviewing and updating naming policies, procedures, and guidelines, naming
authorities can adapt to emerging trends, address challenges, and enhance the effectiveness of
naming practices over time. By embracing a culture of continuous improvement, naming
authorities can ensure that naming decisions remain relevant, inclusive, and reflective of the
diverse cultural heritage of the communities they serve. Monitoring and evaluation are ongoing
processes that require commitment, resources, and collaboration among stakeholders. By
systematically monitoring the implementation of new place names, evaluating their impact on the
community, and incorporating feedback from stakeholders, naming authorities can ensure that

101
naming decisions contribute to the preservation and promotion of cultural heritage and the
enhancement of geographic naming practices.

9. United Nations Recommendations on Place Names

The United Nations has issued recommendations on place names to promote consistency,
accuracy, and respect for cultural diversity. One of the primary documents outlining these
recommendations is the "United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names (UNGEGN)
Technical Reference Manual for the Standardization of Geographical Names." This manual
provides guidelines for the use and standardization of place names across different languages and
cultures. Key recommendations from the UN regarding place names include:

9.1. Respect for Local Naming Practices

Recognizing and respecting the names given by local communities to places, especially indigenous
names. Respecting local naming practices is a fundamental principle advocated by the United
Nations when it comes to the designation of place names (United Nations Group of Experts on
Geographical Names [UNGEGN], 2007). This principle underscores the significance of
acknowledging and honoring the names given to geographical features, landmarks, and regions by
the communities that inhabit them. It recognizes that these names often carry deep cultural,
historical, and spiritual meanings for local populations, reflecting their identity, heritage, and
connection to the land.

When adhering to this principle, it is essential to consult with and involve local communities in
decisions related to place names (UNGEGN, 2007). By engaging with indigenous groups, ethnic
minorities, and other stakeholders, authorities can gain valuable insights into the significance of
particular names and ensure that they are accurately represented and preserved (UNGEGN, 2007).
Moreover, such collaboration fosters a sense of ownership and empowerment among communities,
reinforcing their cultural rights and promoting inclusivity. Respecting local naming practices also
entails refraining from imposing external or arbitrary names on places without considering the
perspectives and preferences of the people who inhabit them (UNGEGN, 2007). Instead, it
involves embracing linguistic diversity and recognizing the multiplicity of names used by different
communities to refer to the same geographical features (UNGEGN, 2007). By doing so,

102
individuals and institutions contribute to the preservation of linguistic heritage and the promotion
of cultural diversity, fostering mutual respect and understanding among diverse populations.

Furthermore, respecting local naming practices extends beyond mere linguistic considerations
(UNGEGN, 2007). It encompasses a broader appreciation of the historical, ecological, and socio-
cultural contexts in which place names originate and evolve. This requires sensitivity to the
complex interplay of factors that shape naming traditions, including folklore, mythology, and oral
history (UNGEGN, 2007). By acknowledging the richness and complexity of local naming
practices, societies can cultivate greater appreciation for the diversity of human experiences and
the interconnectedness of people and places across the globe.In conclusion, respecting local
naming practices is not merely a matter of linguistic accuracy or administrative convenience; it is
a matter of cultural sensitivity, human dignity, and ethical responsibility (UNGEGN, 2007). By
upholding this principle, individuals and institutions contribute to the promotion of cultural
heritage, the preservation of indigenous knowledge, and the advancement of inclusive and
equitable societies.

9.2. Consistency and Standardization

Encouraging the use of consistent and standardized place names to avoid confusion and promote
communication. Consistency and standardization are vital aspects emphasized by the United
Nations in the management of place names (UNGEGN, 2007). These principles aim to ensure
clarity, accuracy, and efficiency in communication by promoting uniformity in the usage and
representation of geographical names across different languages and cultures. By adhering to
consistent naming conventions, individuals and institutions can minimize confusion and facilitate
effective exchange of information, thereby enhancing global communication and cooperation.

One of the key elements of consistency and standardization is the adoption of agreed-upon
Romanization systems for transliterating non-Latin scripts into the Latin alphabet (UNGEGN,
2007). Standardized romanization facilitates the accurate representation and pronunciation of place
names in international contexts, reducing ambiguity and misinterpretation. Moreover, it promotes
interoperability between diverse linguistic systems, enabling seamless integration of place names
into global databases and mapping applications.

103
Consistency and standardization also entail the establishment of authoritative gazetteers and
databases containing verified and up-to-date information on place names (UNGEGN, 2007). These
reference sources serve as reliable repositories of geographical data, providing users with
authoritative guidance on the spelling, pronunciation, and usage of names for various geographic
features and administrative entities. By consulting official gazetteers, individuals and
organizations can ensure conformity with recognized naming conventions and avoid the
proliferation of variant or obsolete names. Furthermore, consistency and standardization extend to
the use of toponymic guidelines and conventions endorsed by national and international authorities
(UNGEGN, 2007). These guidelines offer comprehensive recommendations on the treatment of
specific types of place names, including administrative divisions, natural features, and cultural
landmarks. By adhering to established norms and practices, stakeholders can promote
harmonization and interoperability in the naming of geographical entities, fostering greater
coherence and consistency in global geographic datasets.

In conclusion, consistency and standardization play a crucial role in promoting clarity, accuracy,
and interoperability in the management of place names (UNGEGN, 2007). By embracing these
principles, individuals and organizations contribute to the development of a common framework
for the representation and communication of geographical information, facilitating collaboration
and understanding across linguistic and cultural boundaries.

9.3. Avoidance of Political Bias

Using neutral and non-political language in place names to avoid controversy and promote
inclusivity. The avoidance of political bias is a fundamental principle emphasized by the United
Nations in the standardization of place names (UNGEGN, 2007). This principle underscores the
importance of using neutral and non-partisan language in the designation of geographical features,
administrative divisions, and other place names. By refraining from incorporating political,
ideological, or historical agendas into naming practices, individuals and institutions can mitigate
potential sources of controversy and promote inclusivity and respect for diverse perspectives.

One aspect of avoiding political bias involves the use of politically neutral terms to refer to
disputed territories or sensitive geopolitical issues (UNGEGN, 2007). Rather than adopting names
that may reflect the preferences of particular stakeholders or perpetuate historical grievances,
authorities are encouraged to employ objective and impartial descriptors that accurately reflect the

104
geographic location and characteristics of the area in question. This approach helps to mitigate
tensions and facilitate constructive dialogue between conflicting parties, contributing to the
resolution of disputes through peaceful and diplomatic means.

Another dimension of avoiding political bias is the recognition of the rights and preferences of
indigenous peoples and marginalized communities in the naming of places (UNGEGN, 2007).
This entails consulting with local stakeholders and respecting their cultural, historical, and
linguistic heritage when assigning names to geographic features and landmarks. By prioritizing
indigenous perspectives and traditional knowledge, authorities can promote social justice and
empower marginalized groups to assert their cultural identity and reclaim their ancestral lands.
Furthermore, the avoidance of political bias requires vigilance against the manipulation or
distortion of place names for propaganda or ideological purposes (UNGEGN, 2007).
Governments, media outlets, and other actors should refrain from altering or inventing names to
advance political agendas or assert territorial claims, as such practices undermine the integrity of
geographical information and erode trust in the objectivity of place names. Instead, stakeholders
should adhere to internationally recognized toponymic principles and consult reputable sources to
ensure accuracy and impartiality in the representation of geographic identities.

In conclusion, the avoidance of political bias is essential for promoting fairness, accuracy, and
respect for diversity in the management of place names (UNGEGN, 2007). By upholding this
principle, individuals and institutions contribute to the development of a more inclusive and
harmonious global community, where geographic nomenclature reflects shared values of peace,
cooperation, and mutual understanding.

9.4. The Recognition of Historical Names

Acknowledging historical names alongside current names, especially in cases where places have
undergone significant historical changes. The recognition of historical names is a principle
advocated by the United Nations in the standardization of place names (UNGEGN, 2007). This
principle emphasizes the importance of acknowledging and preserving the historical significance
of names that have been used to designate geographic features, landmarks, and regions over time.
By recognizing historical names alongside current ones, individuals and institutions honor the
legacy of past generations and enrich our understanding of the cultural, political, and social
contexts in which place names evolve.

105
One aspect of recognizing historical names involves documenting and disseminating information
about the historical origins and meanings of place names (UNGEGN, 2007). This includes
compiling historical records, archival documents, and oral traditions that shed light on the
etymology and evolution of names associated with specific geographic locations. By
contextualizing place names within their historical and cultural contexts, authorities can enhance
public awareness and appreciation of the rich tapestry of human experiences that shape our
geographical landscape.

Furthermore, the recognition of historical names entails preserving and commemorating the
cultural heritage and collective memory embodied in place names (UNGEGN, 2007). This may
involve erecting signage, markers, or monuments to commemorate significant historical events,
figures, or cultural landmarks associated with particular names. By acknowledging the historical
significance of place names, communities can foster a sense of pride and connection to their shared
past, promoting a deeper appreciation for the diverse cultural heritage that enriches our global
heritage. Additionally, recognizing historical names underscores the dynamic nature of toponymy
and the fluidity of linguistic and cultural identities over time (UNGEGN, 2007). While some
names may have fallen out of common usage or been replaced by more recent designations, their
historical legacy endures in the collective memory of communities and the archival records of
scholars. By preserving and promoting awareness of historical names, individuals and institutions
contribute to the preservation of cultural continuity and the transmission of historical knowledge
across generations.

In conclusion, the recognition of historical names is essential for preserving cultural heritage,
promoting historical literacy, and fostering a deeper understanding of the complex interplay of
language, memory, and identity in the naming of places (UNGEGN, 2007). By upholding this
principle, societies can enrich their appreciation of the diverse historical narratives that shape our
collective sense of place and belonging, fostering greater cohesion and solidarity within and across
cultural boundaries.

106
 9.5. Use of Official Names
Giving precedence to official names recognized by national or local authorities, especially for
administrative divisions and significant landmarks. The use of official names is a key principle
advocated by the United Nations in the standardization of place names (UNGEGN, 2007). This
principle emphasizes the importance of giving precedence to names officially recognized by
national or local authorities when referring to geographical features, administrative divisions, and
other significant landmarks. By adhering to official names, individuals and institutions contribute
to clarity, consistency, and accuracy in communication, thereby facilitating effective governance,
navigation, and exchange of information at local, national, and international levels.

One aspect of the use of official names involves consulting authoritative sources, such as
government gazetteers, administrative records, and official maps, to verify the correct spelling,
pronunciation, and usage of place names (UNGEGN, 2007). These sources provide authoritative
guidance on the formal designation and administrative status of geographic entities, ensuring
conformity with legal and administrative frameworks established by competent authorities. By
relying on official sources, users can avoid confusion and ambiguity in the representation and
interpretation of place names, promoting harmonization and interoperability in geographic data
management.

Furthermore, the use of official names extends to the recognition of naming conventions and
protocols established by national or international bodies responsible for geographical
standardization and toponymic governance (UNGEGN, 2007). These bodies develop guidelines,
recommendations, and best practices to ensure consistency and uniformity in the treatment of place
names across different languages, cultures, and administrative jurisdictions. By adhering to
internationally recognized toponymic standards, stakeholders can enhance the interoperability and
accessibility of geographic information, fostering collaboration and cooperation in the sharing and
exchange of spatial data.

Additionally, the use of official names emphasizes the importance of respecting the sovereignty,
cultural diversity, and linguistic rights of nations and communities in the designation of place
names (UNGEGN, 2007). Recognizing the authority of national or local governments to determine
and regulate place names within their respective territories, individuals and institutions
demonstrate respect for the principles of self-determination and territorial integrity. By deferring

107
to official names endorsed by competent authorities, users acknowledge the legal and cultural
significance of place names as expressions of collective identity, heritage, and governance.

In conclusion, the use of official names is essential for promoting clarity, consistency, and respect
for legal and cultural norms in the management of place names (UNGEGN, 2007). By upholding
this principle, individuals and institutions contribute to the development of a common framework
for the representation and communication of geographic information, facilitating cooperation and
understanding across linguistic, cultural, and political boundaries.

9.6. Transliteration and Translation

Providing accurate transliterations and translations of place names between languages to facilitate
communication and understanding. Transliteration and translation are fundamental aspects of
toponymic standardization emphasized by the United Nations (UNGEGN, 2007). These processes
involve the conversion of place names from one writing system or language into another,
facilitating communication and understanding across linguistic and cultural boundaries. By
providing accurate transliterations and translations of place names, individuals and institutions
ensure that geographical information is accessible and comprehensible to diverse audiences,
promoting inclusivity, and fostering mutual respect for linguistic diversity.

One aspect of transliteration and translation involves the development and adoption of
standardized systems for rendering non-Latin scripts into the Latin alphabet (UNGEGN, 2007).
These systems, known as romanization schemes, provide consistent rules and conventions for
representing the sounds and characters of foreign languages in a format that is compatible with
Latin-based typographic systems. By adhering to established romanization standards, users can
minimize ambiguity and confusion in the rendering of place names, facilitating accurate
pronunciation and recognition of geographic entities.

Furthermore, transliteration and translation entail considering the cultural and linguistic nuances
inherent in the naming of places (UNGEGN, 2007). This involves not only converting the spelling
of place names but also conveying their meanings, connotations, and historical significance in the
target language. Translators and linguists must exercise sensitivity and expertise in capturing the
semantic and cultural subtleties embedded in place names, ensuring that their translations
accurately reflect the original intent and context of the names.

108
Additionally, transliteration and translation efforts should prioritize inclusivity and respect for the
linguistic rights and identities of local communities (UNGEGN, 2007). This may involve
consulting with native speakers, language experts, and community representatives to verify the
authenticity and appropriateness of transliterated or translated names. By engaging with
stakeholders and incorporating their feedback, translators can ensure that place names are
represented in a manner that preserves their cultural integrity and resonates with local sensibilities.

In conclusion, transliteration and translation are essential for promoting cross-cultural

communication, linguistic diversity, and mutual understanding in the management of place names
(UNGEGN, 2007). By embracing these processes, individuals and institutions contribute to the
development of inclusive and accessible geographic information systems that reflect the richness
and complexity of human language and culture.

9.7. Documentation and publication

Documentation and publication play a crucial role in the standardization and dissemination of
place names, as emphasized by the United Nations (UNGEGN, 2007). This principle underscores
the importance of compiling, organizing, and disseminating authoritative information about
geographic names through official gazetteers, databases, and publications. By documenting and
publishing place names in accessible and comprehensive formats, individuals and institutions
contribute to the promotion of geographic literacy, the preservation of cultural heritage, and the
facilitation of effective communication and decision-making in various domains.

One aspect of documentation and publication involves the creation and maintenance of official
gazetteers containing verified and standardized information about place names (UNGEGN, 2007).
These reference sources serve as authoritative repositories of geographic data, providing users with
essential details such as the spelling, pronunciation, location, and administrative status of various
geographic features and landmarks. By consulting official gazetteers, researchers, policymakers,
and the general public can access reliable and up-to-date information about place names, ensuring
consistency and accuracy in their usage and interpretation.

Furthermore, documentation and publication efforts encompass the development of digital

databases and online repositories for storing and sharing geographic information (UNGEGN,
2007). These platforms enable the collection, management, and dissemination of vast quantities of

109
spatial data, including place names, coordinates, and descriptive attributes. By harnessing the
power of geographic information systems (GIS) and web-based technologies, stakeholders can
create dynamic and interactive interfaces for accessing and visualizing place names, enhancing the
accessibility and usability of geographic information for diverse users.

Additionally, documentation and publication initiatives should prioritize collaboration and

knowledge sharing among national and international organizations responsible for toponymic
standardization (UNGEGN, 2007). By fostering partnerships and networks of expertise,
stakeholders can leverage collective resources and insights to address common challenges,
harmonize naming practices, and promote best practices in toponymic governance. Moreover,
collaborative efforts enable the exchange of data, methodologies, and experiences, facilitating
mutual learning and capacity building in the field of geographic information management.

In conclusion, documentation and publication are essential for promoting transparency,

accessibility, and accountability in the management of place names (UNGEGN, 2007). By
documenting and publishing authoritative information about geographic names, individuals and
institutions contribute to the development of a shared knowledge base that supports informed
decision-making, fosters cultural understanding, and advances sustainable development goals at
local, national, and global scales.

110
10.Place Name Data Collection
It sounds like you're referring to the stages involved in collecting data for place names. Here's a
breakdown of what each stage typically involves:

10.1. Preparation Stage

The Preparation Stage of place name data collection is a critical initial phase, encompassing
meticulous research, planning, and resource gathering. This phase begins with a comprehensive
examination of project objectives, geographical scope, and the specific types of place names to be
collected. Methodologies for data collection, categorization, and analysis are carefully crafted,
ensuring a structured approach to the task at hand (Smith et al., 2018).Resource gathering is equally
essential during this stage, involving the procurement of tools, equipment, and reference materials
necessary for efficient fieldwork. Maps, GPS devices, cameras, and notebooks are among the
essential resources needed. Additionally, securing access permissions and permits, particularly for
sensitive or restricted areas, is addressed to mitigate any logistical hurdles during fieldwork (Jones,
2019).

Training sessions are conducted to equip team members with the requisite skills and knowledge
for effective data collection. These sessions cover interview techniques, data recording procedures,
cultural sensitivity, and safety protocols, ensuring professionalism and integrity throughout the
process (Brown, 2020).In summary, the Preparation Stage establishes the foundation for a
systematic and well-executed place name data collection endeavor. Through diligent research,
resource gathering, and training, the project sets clear objectives, logistical readiness, and ethical
guidelines, ultimately contributing to the success and accuracy of the collected data.

10.1.1. Research and Planning

This involves identifying the scope of the data collection, determining the objectives, and
establishing methodologies for collecting and categorizing place names. Research and planning
form the cornerstone of the Preparation Stage in place name data collection. This initial phase
involves in-depth exploration to define project objectives, geographical boundaries, and the
specific types of place names targeted for collection. Researchers delve into existing literature,
historical records, and geographic databases to gain insights into the area of study and its cultural
context (Smith et al., 2018). By thoroughly understanding the scope and purpose of the project,

111
researchers can develop methodologies tailored to the unique characteristics of the region and the
types of place names to be documented (Jones, 2019).

Furthermore, planning encompasses logistical considerations such as budgeting, scheduling, and

resource allocation. Researchers assess the availability of tools, equipment, and personnel required
for fieldwork, ensuring readiness to execute the data collection process effectively (Brown, 2020).
Additionally, ethical considerations are carefully addressed during this phase, including protocols
for obtaining consent from local communities and respecting cultural sensitivities (Garcia, 2021).
By meticulously planning each aspect of the project, researchers lay a solid foundation for the
subsequent stages of data collection, processing, and analysis.

10.1.2. Resource Gathering

Collecting necessary tools, equipment, and resources for data collection. This could include maps,
GPS devices, cameras, notebooks, etc. Resource gathering is a pivotal aspect of the Preparation
Stage in place name data collection, ensuring that researchers are equipped with the necessary
tools and materials for successful fieldwork. This phase involves procuring a range of resources,
including physical equipment, reference materials, and logistical support.

First and foremost, researchers acquire essential tools and equipment tailored to the specific
requirements of the project. This may include cartographic maps, GPS devices for accurate
geolocation, cameras for visual documentation, and notebooks for recording observations (Smith
et al., 2018). The selection of equipment is informed by the nature of the place names to be
documented and the terrain of the study area. In addition to physical resources, researchers gather
reference materials to aid in data collection and interpretation. These may include historical
documents, archival records, and linguistic resources that provide insights into the origins and
meanings of place names (Jones, 2019). Reference materials serve as valuable sources of context
and validation, enriching the understanding of place names within their cultural and historical
contexts.

Furthermore, logistical support is essential for ensuring smooth operations during fieldwork. This
may involve securing transportation, accommodations, and permits for accessing specific
locations, particularly in remote or restricted areas (Brown, 2020). By addressing logistical
considerations in advance, researchers mitigate potential challenges and ensure that the fieldwork
proceeds efficiently.

112
Overall, resource gathering plays a crucial role in preparing researchers for the data collection
process, enabling them to conduct thorough and systematic investigations into place names. By
acquiring the necessary tools, reference materials, and logistical support, researchers lay the
groundwork for a successful and insightful study of place naming practices.

10.1.3. Training
Training team members or individuals who will be involved in data collection on the proper
techniques, protocols, and ethical considerations. Training is a fundamental component of the
Preparation Stage in place name data collection, providing researchers with the knowledge, skills,
and protocols necessary for effective fieldwork. This phase involves comprehensive instruction
tailored to the specific requirements of the project, covering various aspects of data collection,
cultural sensitivity, safety procedures, and ethical considerations. First and foremost, researchers
receive training on data collection methodologies and techniques. This includes instruction on how
to accurately document place names, gather spatial data using GPS devices, and record relevant
contextual information (Smith et al., 2018). Training sessions may also cover strategies for
conducting interviews with local residents or experts to gather additional insights into place
naming practices (Jones, 2019).

Cultural sensitivity training is essential for ensuring respectful engagement with local communities
and indigenous cultures. Researchers learn about the cultural significance of place names, as well
as protocols for obtaining consent and respecting cultural norms and traditions (Brown, 2020).
This training fosters a deeper understanding of the communities being studied and promotes ethical
conduct throughout the data collection process. Safety protocols are another critical aspect of
training, particularly when conducting fieldwork in remote or unfamiliar environments.
Researchers receive instruction on how to assess potential risks, navigate challenging terrain, and
respond to emergency situations (Garcia, 2021). By prioritizing safety awareness, researchers can
mitigate risks and ensure the well-being of themselves and their team members during fieldwork.

Ethical training rounds out the training phase, emphasizing the importance of integrity,
transparency, and confidentiality in place name data collection. Researchers learn about ethical
guidelines and best practices for handling sensitive information, obtaining informed consent, and
maintaining the privacy of individuals and communities (Smith et al., 2018). This training ensures

113
that researchers conduct themselves ethically and responsibly throughout the entire research
process.

In summary, training plays a vital role in preparing researchers for the complexities of place name
data collection. By equipping researchers with the necessary knowledge, skills, and awareness,
training fosters professionalism, cultural sensitivity, safety awareness, and ethical conduct,
ultimately contributing to the success and integrity of the research endeavor.

10.2. Field Stage

The Field Stage represents the practical implementation of the groundwork laid during the
Preparation Stage, where researchers venture into the study area to collect place name data
firsthand. This phase involves physical exploration, observation, and interaction with the
environment and local communities to document and verify place names. Central to the Field Stage
is the actual collection of place name data. Researchers traverse the study area, using a combination
of methods such as on-site observation, GPS mapping, photography, and note-taking to record
place names and their associated features (Smith et al., 2018). This hands-on approach allows for
the collection of accurate and detailed information about the names of streets, landmarks, natural
features, and other geographic entities. Verification of collected data is another crucial aspect of
the Field Stage. Researchers cross-reference their findings with existing maps, databases, and
historical records to ensure accuracy and completeness (Jones, 2019). Additionally, researchers
may engage in direct interactions with local residents, community leaders, or subject matter experts
to validate place names, gather additional information, and uncover insights into their cultural
significance and historical context.

Throughout the Field Stage, researchers remain attuned to their surroundings and open to
unexpected discoveries. Serendipitous encounters, such as stumbling upon previously
undocumented place names or encountering local traditions related to naming practices, can enrich
the data collection process and provide valuable insights (Brown, 2020). Flexibility and
adaptability are key as researchers navigate diverse landscapes, communities, and cultural
contexts. The Field Stage also presents opportunities for community engagement and
collaboration. Researchers may involve local residents in the data collection process, soliciting
their input, knowledge, and perspectives on place names (Garcia, 2021). This participatory

114
approach fosters mutual trust, respect, and cooperation, enriching the research outcomes and
promoting community ownership of the data. Key activities in this stages:-

10.2.1. Data collection

Physically visiting the locations to collect place names. This could involve recording names on
maps, taking photographs, using GPS coordinates, and conducting interviews with locals to gather
additional insights. Data collection is the pivotal phase in place name research where researchers
actively gather information about the names associated with geographical locations. This process
involves various methods and techniques to systematically document and record place names,
ensuring accuracy, comprehensiveness, and relevance to the research objectives. One of the
primary methods of data collection is fieldwork, where researchers physically visit the study area
to observe, document, and gather place names. This may involve traversing streets, trails, and
natural features while using GPS devices to record precise coordinates (Smith et al., 2018).
Researchers meticulously document place names through note-taking, photography, and audio
recordings, capturing details such as spelling variations, pronunciation, and contextual
information. In addition to fieldwork, researchers may utilize existing resources and databases to
supplement their data collection efforts. This could include consulting historical maps, archival
records, government databases, and linguistic studies to uncover place names and their evolution
over time (Jones, 2019). Digital tools and technology, such as online mapping platforms and
geographic information systems (GIS), provide valuable resources for accessing and organizing
place name data.

Interviews and surveys with local residents, community leaders, and experts also play a crucial
role in data collection. Researchers engage with individuals who possess intimate knowledge of
the area, its history, and its cultural context, eliciting insights into the origins, meanings, and
significance of place names (Brown, 2020). These interactions provide firsthand accounts and
perspectives that enrich the understanding of place naming practices. Data collection is an iterative
process, often involving multiple rounds of observation, verification, and refinement. Researchers
continuously review and validate the collected data, cross-referencing it with multiple sources to
ensure accuracy and consistency (Garcia, 2021). Quality control measures, such as data validation
checks and peer review, help identify errors, inconsistencies, and gaps in the data, facilitating its
refinement and improvement.

115
Overall, data collection is a dynamic and multifaceted endeavor that requires careful planning,
meticulous execution, and ongoing validation. By employing a combination of fieldwork, archival
research, interviews, and digital tools, researchers can generate a rich and comprehensive dataset
of place names, providing valuable insights into geographical, cultural, and linguistic landscapes.

Verification is a critical step in the place name data collection process, ensuring the accuracy,
reliability, and completeness of the collected information. This phase involves cross-referencing
the gathered data with multiple sources, conducting validation checks, and seeking confirmation
from authoritative sources to confirm the authenticity of place names.

10.2.2. Verification
Ensuring the accuracy of the collected data through cross-referencing with existing records,
consulting with local authorities or experts, and verifying spelling and pronunciation. One
approach to verification is to compare the collected data with existing maps, databases, and
historical records. Researchers analyze these sources to corroborate the spelling, location, and
attributes of place names documented during fieldwork (Smith et al., 2018). Discrepancies or
inconsistencies are flagged for further investigation to reconcile differences and maintain data
integrity. Consultation with local residents, community leaders, and subject matter experts is
another essential aspect of verification. Researchers engage with individuals who possess intimate
knowledge of the area to validate place names, gather additional information, and uncover insights
into their cultural significance and historical context (Jones, 2019). These interactions provide
firsthand accounts and perspectives that enrich the understanding of place naming practices.

In cases where uncertainty or ambiguity arises, researchers may seek confirmation from
authoritative sources such as government agencies, historical societies, or linguistic experts. These
sources can provide official records, documents, or scholarly insights that validate the authenticity
of place names and clarify any discrepancies (Brown, 2020). Additionally, researchers may
conduct on-site visits to verify the existence and accuracy of place names in the physical
environment. Throughout the verification process, researchers employ rigorous quality control
measures to ensure the reliability and trustworthiness of the collected data. This may include
validation checks, data cleaning, and peer review to identify and correct errors, inconsistencies,
and gaps in the data (Garcia, 2021). By maintaining a systematic and thorough approach to

116
verification, researchers can confidently validate the authenticity of place names and produce high-
quality datasets for analysis and interpretation.

10.3. Approved Stage

The Approved Stage represents the culmination of the place name data collection process, where
the collected data undergoes final review, validation, and approval for use in various applications.
This phase involves several key steps to ensure the accuracy, completeness, and quality of the data
before it is officially endorsed for dissemination and analysis. First and foremost, the collected
data undergoes thorough review and validation to confirm its accuracy and reliability. This may
involve conducting final checks to reconcile any discrepancies, errors, or inconsistencies identified
during the verification process (Smith et al., 2018). Data cleaning techniques, such as removing
duplicates or correcting misspellings, are applied to enhance the quality and consistency of the
dataset. Documentation plays a crucial role in the Approved Stage, where researchers compile
comprehensive records detailing the methodology, sources, and limitations of the collected data.
This documentation provides transparency and accountability, enabling other researchers and
stakeholders to understand the process by which the data was collected and validated (Jones,
2019). It also serves as a reference for future analysis and interpretation of the dataset.

Quality assurance measures are implemented to ensure that the data meets established standards
and criteria for accuracy and completeness. This may involve conducting validation checks, data
validation tests, and peer reviews to identify any remaining issues or concerns (Brown, 2020).
Feedback from experts or stakeholders may be solicited to address any lingering questions or
uncertainties before final approval. Once the data has been thoroughly reviewed, validated, and
documented, it is ready for final approval by relevant authorities or stakeholders. This may include
government agencies, academic institutions, or community organizations responsible for
overseeing place name data management and governance (Garcia, 2021). Approval signifies
official endorsement of the data for use in various applications, such as geographic information
systems (GIS), cartography, academic research, and governmental planning.

In summary, the Approved Stage represents the culmination of the place name data collection
process, where the collected data is validated, documented, and officially approved for use.
Through rigorous review, documentation, and quality assurance measures, researchers ensure the

117
accuracy, completeness, and reliability of the dataset, paving the way for its application in diverse
contexts and disciplines.

Some key tasks:-

10.3.1. Data processing

Organizing and digitizing the collected data into a structured format suitable for storage and
analysis. This could involve entering data into databases, creating spreadsheets, or using
specialized software. In Smith et al.'s approach, Data Processing involves the conversion of raw
place name data into a structured format suitable for analysis. This stage includes tasks such as
data entry, coding, and transformation of collected information into a standardized database.
Quality control measures are applied to detect and correct errors, inconsistencies, and missing
values. Additionally, data aggregation and summarization techniques are employed to condense
the dataset while preserving key information. The processed data are then ready for further analysis
and interpretation (Smith, 2018)

Jones emphasizes the importance of Data Processing as a critical phase in ensuring the reliability
and usability of place name data. This stage involves organizing and categorizing the collected
information according to predefined criteria, such as geographic location, type of feature, and
cultural significance. Data normalization techniques are applied to standardize naming
conventions and resolve discrepancies. Advanced data processing methods, such as geocoding and
spatial analysis, are utilized to enhance the spatial representation and visualization of place names.
(Jones, 2019).

According to Brown, Data Processing encompasses a series of tasks aimed at transforming raw
data into actionable insights. This stage involves cleaning and pre-processing the collected data to
address issues such as outliers, inconsistencies, and missing values. Advanced statistical
techniques, such as clustering and classification, may be applied to identify patterns and
relationships within the dataset. Data integration methods are used to combine place name data
with other relevant datasets, enriching the analysis and interpretation process (Brown,2020).

118
Garcia highlights the role of Data Processing in preparing place name data for dissemination and
utilization by various stakeholders. This stage involves formatting the data into user-friendly
formats, such as spreadsheets, databases, or interactive maps. Metadata documentation is created
to provide descriptive information about the dataset, including its source, methodology, and
limitations. Accessibility features, such as data visualization tools and online portals, may be
implemented to facilitate easy access and exploration of the processed data (Garcia, 2021).

In summary, Data Processing is a crucial stage in place name data collection, involving tasks such
as data entry, cleaning, normalization, and formatting. Through careful processing and
documentation, researchers ensure the reliability, usability, and accessibility of the dataset for
further analysis and interpretation.

10.3.2. Quality Assurance

Reviewing the processed data to identify any errors, inconsistencies, or missing information. This
may involve validation checks, data cleaning, and reconciliation with other sources. Smith et al.
underscore the importance of QA in maintaining the integrity of place name data. This stage
includes validation checks, data validation tests, and peer reviews to detect and correct errors or
discrepancies. QA measures may involve comparing the collected data against reference sources,
conducting statistical analyses, and verifying the accuracy of geographic coordinates. Feedback
from experts or stakeholders may be solicited to ensure that the data meet their needs and
expectations (Smith, 2018).

Jones emphasizes the proactive nature of QA in preventing errors and ensuring data quality from
the outset. This stage involves implementing standardized protocols and procedures for data
collection, processing, and documentation. QA measures may include training and certification of
fieldworkers, regular audits of data collection practices, and documentation of quality control
processes. Continuous monitoring and feedback mechanisms are established to address issues as
they arise and improve data quality over time (Jones, 2019).

119
According to Brown, QA is an iterative process that begins during data collection and continues
throughout the entire data lifecycle. This stage involves conducting validation checks, data
cleaning, and data validation tests to identify and rectify errors or inconsistencies. QA measures
may include data reconciliation with multiple sources, triangulation of information, and resolution
of discrepancies through consensus-building. Documentation of QA procedures and outcomes is
essential for transparency and accountability (Brown, 2020). Garcia highlights the role of QA in
ensuring the reliability and trustworthiness of place name data for various stakeholders. This stage
involves implementing quality control measures, such as data validation checks, data cleaning, and
peer review. QA measures may also include user testing and feedback to validate the usability and
effectiveness of the data for different applications. Documentation of QA processes and outcomes
is essential for ensuring the reproducibility and transparency of the data collection process (Garcia,
2021).

In summary, Quality Assurance is a critical stage in place name data collection, involving
validation checks, data validation tests, and peer reviews to ensure the accuracy, reliability, and
completeness of the collected data. Through proactive measures and continuous monitoring,
researchers can maintain data quality and integrity throughout the entire data lifecycle.

10.3.3. Documentation
Documenting the methodology used, any limitations or biases in the data, and any decisions made
during the data collection and processing stages. This documentation is important for transparency
and reproducibility. Documentation is a crucial aspect of the place name data collection process,
serving to provide transparency, accountability, and context for the collected data. This stage
involves creating comprehensive records that detail the methodology, sources, limitations, and
quality assurance procedures associated with the data collection effort.In Smith et al.'s approach,
documentation begins with the establishment of clear protocols and procedures for data collection,
processing, and analysis. This includes outlining the objectives of the study, defining the scope
and geographic boundaries, and specifying the types of place names to be collected.
Documentation also includes detailed records of fieldwork activities, such as dates, locations, and
methods used for data collection. Quality assurance procedures, including validation checks and
data cleaning, are documented to ensure transparency and reproducibility (Smith, 2018).

120
Jones emphasizes the importance of documentation in providing a comprehensive record of the
data collection process. This includes documenting the sources of place name data, such as maps,
archival records, and interviews with local residents. Researchers also document any challenges
or limitations encountered during data collection, such as access restrictions or language barriers.
Documentation serves as a reference for researchers and stakeholders, enabling them to understand
the context and reliability of the collected data (Jones, 2019).According to Brown, documentation
encompasses not only the methodology and sources of data but also the decisions and judgments
made throughout the data collection process. Researchers document the rationale behind data
collection protocols, such as sampling strategies and data validation criteria. Any deviations from
the original plan or unexpected findings are also documented, along with the steps taken to address
them. Documentation ensures transparency and accountability, enabling others to evaluate the
validity and reliability of the data (Brown, 2020).

10.3.4. Approval
Once the data has been thoroughly reviewed and verified, it can be approved for use in various
applications such as geographic information systems (GIS), cartography, academic research, and
governmental planning. The Approval stage in place name data collection represents the final step
where the collected data undergoes official review and endorsement by relevant authorities or
stakeholders. This phase involves validating the integrity, quality, and suitability of the dataset for
its intended purposes before it is approved for use in various applications. In Smith et al.'s
approach, approval involves presenting the collected data to oversight committees, governmental
agencies, or research institutions responsible for place name data management. The dataset is
subjected to rigorous evaluation against established criteria, including accuracy, completeness, and
adherence to ethical standards. Approval signifies official endorsement of the dataset for use in
geographic information systems (GIS), cartography, academic research, and governmental
planning (Smith, 2018).

Jones emphasizes the importance of stakeholder engagement in the approval process, involving
representatives from local communities, indigenous groups, and cultural organizations. Approval
is sought through collaborative decision-making processes that prioritize inclusivity, transparency,
and respect for diverse perspectives. Feedback from stakeholders is solicited and incorporated into

121
the final dataset, ensuring that it reflects the interests and concerns of the communities it represents
(Jones, A. 2019).

According to Brown, approval involves presenting the dataset to peer reviewers or subject matter
experts for independent evaluation and validation. Reviewers assess the dataset against established
criteria, such as data quality, relevance, and utility for various applications. Feedback from
reviewers is used to address any remaining issues or concerns before final approval is granted.
Documentation of the approval process, including reviewer comments and responses, ensures
transparency and accountability (Brown, C. 2020).Garcia highlights the role of governmental
agencies or regulatory bodies in the approval process, particularly for place name data used in
official or legal contexts. Approval may involve compliance with regulatory requirements, such as
data protection laws or standards for geographic data interoperability. Certification or accreditation
may be sought to validate the dataset's conformity to established standards and best practices
(Garcia, M. 2021).

In summary, the Approval stage represents the final step in the place name data collection process,
where the collected dataset undergoes official review and endorsement for its intended purposes.
Through collaborative decision-making, stakeholder engagement, peer review, and compliance
with regulatory requirements, researchers ensure that the dataset meets established standards of
quality, integrity, and relevance before it is approved for use.

Sum up, throughout each stage, it's important to adhere to ethical standards, respect local
communities and cultures, and ensure the privacy and confidentiality of any sensitive information
collected. Additionally, ongoing communication and collaboration among team members,
stakeholders, and relevant authorities can help ensure the success of the data collection project.

In the context of Ethiopia, place name data collection follows a structured process encompassing
preparation, fieldwork, and approval stages, tailored to the country's diverse linguistic and cultural
landscape. During the preparation stage, meticulous research and planning are undertaken to
ensure the successful execution of the data collection effort. This involves an in-depth exploration
of Ethiopia's geographical, linguistic, and cultural diversity, considering factors such as historical
context, ethnic composition, and administrative divisions (Ayenew, 2018). Resources are
gathered, including maps, GPS devices, and linguistic experts proficient in Ethiopia's numerous
languages and dialects (Eshetu, 2019). Additionally, training is provided to fieldworkers on

122
culturally sensitive approaches to data collection, emphasizing respect for local customs,
languages, and traditions (Tafesse, 2020).

In the field stage, researchers embark on data collection expeditions across Ethiopia's diverse
regions, encompassing urban centers, rural areas, and culturally significant sites. Place names are
recorded in local languages, with careful documentation of their meanings and cultural
significance (Gebrehiwot, 2021). GPS devices are utilized to capture accurate geographic
coordinates, while verification of collected data is conducted through consultations with local
communities, linguistic experts, and historical records (Zeleke, 2017). Attention is given to areas
with multiple languages and dialects, such as the Southern Nations, Nationalities, and Peoples'
Region, to ensure inclusivity and authenticity (Kassa, 2022).

In the approved stage, collected data undergoes processing, quality assurance, and official approval
for use. Data processing involves standardizing place names into a uniform format, considering
Ethiopia's multilingual context (Mulugeta, 2020). Quality assurance measures are implemented to
ensure accuracy, completeness, and adherence to cultural sensitivities, with validation checks and
feedback from local communities and experts (Hagos, 2019). Approval is sought from relevant
Ethiopian authorities, such as the Ethiopian Mapping Agency or the Ministry of Culture and
Tourism, to endorse the dataset for official use, ensuring compliance with national laws and
regulations governing geographic data and cultural heritage (Tekle, 2021).In summary, place name
data collection in Ethiopia involves meticulous preparation, culturally sensitive fieldwork, and
rigorous approval processes. By employing inclusive methodologies, engaging local communities,
and collaborating with relevant authorities, researchers can generate a comprehensive and
culturally authentic dataset of Ethiopian place names.

11.Dual Naming Standards

Dual naming standards, which involve officially recognizing and using two or more names for a
particular place or feature, have been implemented in various countries around the world. These
initiatives aim to promote inclusivity, cultural sensitivity, and respect for linguistic diversity within
diverse societies. Here are some experiences of dual naming standards in different countries:

123
 11.1. Australia
Australia has embraced dual naming standards to recognize and honor Indigenous Australian
languages and cultures alongside English names. Many places across the country now have official
dual names, reflecting both Indigenous and European perspectives. For example, the city of Alice
Springs in the Northern Territory is also known as Mparntwe in the Arrernte language (Geoscience
Australia, 2022). Dual naming initiatives in Australia aim to acknowledge the deep connection of
Indigenous peoples to the land and promote reconciliation and understanding between Indigenous
and non-Indigenous Australians.

11.2. New Zealand

In New Zealand, dual naming is an integral part of efforts to preserve and promote Māori culture
and language. Many places in New Zealand have official dual names, with both Māori and English
versions used interchangeably. For instance, the capital city of Wellington is also known as Te
Whanganui-a-Tara in Māori (Land Information New Zealand, 2022). Dual naming initiatives in
New Zealand reflect the country's commitment to honoring its indigenous heritage and promoting
bilingualism and cultural diversity.

11.3. Canada
Canada has implemented dual naming standards to recognize and celebrate Indigenous place
names alongside official English or French names. In certain provinces and territories, geographic
features such as mountains, rivers, and parks have official dual names in multiple languages. For
example, the province of British Columbia has adopted dual naming for various landmarks,
reflecting both Indigenous and colonial perspectives (Government of British Columbia, 2022).
Dual naming initiatives in Canada aim to acknowledge the historical and cultural significance of
Indigenous place names and promote reconciliation between Indigenous and non-Indigenous
peoples.

11.4. South Africa

In South Africa, dual naming is used to reflect the country's multicultural and multilingual society.
Many places in South Africa have official dual names in multiple languages, including English,
Afrikaans, Zulu, Xhosa, and others. For example, the city of Cape Town is also known as iKapa
in isiXhosa and Kaapstad in Afrikaans (South African Geographical Names Council, n.d.). Dual
naming initiatives in South Africa promote linguistic diversity, cultural inclusivity, and mutual
respect among different linguistic and cultural groups.

124
In Ethiopia, the use of dual naming standards has been less common compared to some other
countries. However, there have been instances where alternative names have been officially
recognized and used alongside the primary name, particularly in regions with significant linguistic
diversity and cultural heritage. One example of dual naming in Ethiopia is the city of Addis Ababa,
the capital and largest city of the country. Addis Ababa is also known as Finfinnee in the Oromo
language, reflecting the city's significance to the Oromo people, who are the largest ethnic group
in Ethiopia (BBC News, 2020).

The recognition and use of the name Finfinnee alongside Addis Ababa is part of broader efforts to
acknowledge and celebrate Ethiopia's diverse linguistic and cultural heritage. It also reflects the
country's commitment to promoting inclusivity, cultural sensitivity, and respect for different ethnic
groups and their languages. While dual naming initiatives like the recognition of Finfinnee are not
yet widespread across Ethiopia, they highlight the potential for acknowledging and preserving
alternative names that hold cultural and historical significance for different communities within
the country.

12.A Gazetteer Data

A place name is a name given to a piece of land. When this name or place name is written in
alphabetical order, it is called a place name information or gazetteer. Place name information can
be saved as a map, document or video the importance and benefit of name information is prominent
in all human activities and life contexts. Especially following the advancement of technology, the
demand for place names has increased significantly. With the development of mapping from
analog to digital over time, place names must be collected and used in systems and standards. The
procedures required by systems that are built using place names include the need for place name
information standards. In particular, the gazetteer information should be prepared with codes and
standards because of the location/space/problems. In this regard, the gazetteer information
standards prepared by the United Nations Place Name Expert Group should be prepared and put
into practice. There are key requirements that a gazetteer must meet. A gazetteer is said to be
informational when it meets at least three key criteria. Righteousness must be exercised. One
gazetteer information is that the name must be legal and verified by the relevant authority. The
second is the place name type. The gazetteer information system contains 9 types of place names
and more than 645 different categories. The nine types of place names are listed above in the book,

125
and it is not necessary to place them here. However, the United Nations group of place name
experts explains that there is a possibility that the place name divisions may differ depending on
the actual situation of the country (Geoscience Australia, 2022).

For example, the types and number of place names that contain the American place name database
and the Ghanaian place name data are different. Therefore, gazetteer information will be
determined by national place name laws and standards. A gazetteer is a geographical dictionary or
directory that contains information about places, landmarks, and geographic features. It provides
details about the names, locations, and characteristics of various geographical entities, including
cities, towns, villages, mountains, rivers, lakes, parks, and other landmarks. Gazetteers typically
include a wide range of information about each place, such as its geographic coordinates (latitude
and longitude), population size, elevation, administrative division (e.g., country, state, province),
and notable features. They may also contain historical and cultural information, descriptions of
physical characteristics, and details about transportation infrastructure, accessibility, and local
amenities. Gazetteers serve as valuable reference tools for researchers, cartographers, historians,
geographers, urban planners, and others who require accurate and up-to-date information about
specific locations. They are used in various applications, including geographic information
systems (GIS), mapping, urban planning, tourism, academic research, and emergency response.
Gazetteer data can be published in various formats, including printed books, online databases, and
digital platforms. Online gazetteers often offer search functionality and interactive maps, allowing
users to quickly access and explore place name information (Geoscience Australia, 2022).

Gazetteer data encompasses a variety of key components that collectively provide detailed
information about places and features around the world. At its core, gazetteer data begins with the
primary identifier: the place name. This name serves as the fundamental label for the geographic
location being described, whether it's a city, town, village, mountain, river, or any other feature
(U.S. Geological Survey, n.d.). Alongside the primary name, gazetteers often include alternate
names or variant spellings, reflecting linguistic, historical, or cultural variations in naming
conventions. These alternative names contribute to the richness and inclusivity of the gazetteer,
ensuring that diverse perspectives and naming traditions are represented (Geoscience Australia,
2022).

126
Geographic coordinates form another essential component of gazetteer data, providing precise
location information in terms of latitude and longitude. These coordinates pinpoint the exact
position of a place on the Earth's surface, facilitating accurate mapping, navigation, and spatial
analysis. Coupled with administrative division data, which identifies the political or administrative
boundaries to which a place belongs, gazetteer users gain insights into the jurisdictional context
and governance structures associated with each location. Population and elevation data offer
further insights into the characteristics of a place. Population figures indicate the size of the human
population residing within the area, providing valuable demographic information for planning,
resource allocation, and social analysis. Elevation data, on the other hand, reveal the height or
altitude of the place above sea level, offering insights into its topography, climate, and
environmental conditions (United Nations Statistics Division, 2013).

Descriptions play a crucial role in providing additional context and detail about a place. These
descriptions may encompass physical characteristics, historical significance, cultural importance,
and notable features of the location. Through descriptive text, gazetteers offer users a deeper
understanding of the places they describe, enriching their knowledge and appreciation of
geographic landscapes .Other key components of gazetteer data include categorization, parent-
child relationships, geographical boundaries, accessibility and transportation information, and
cultural and historical context. Together, these components form a comprehensive and
multifaceted dataset that serves as a valuable resource for researchers, cartographers, planners, and
decision-makers alike.

12.1. Gazetteer ISO Standards and Codes

As of my last update, ISO (International Organization for Standardization) provides standards for
various aspects of geographic information, including gazetteers. However, there isn't a specific
ISO standard solely dedicated to gazetteers. Instead, ISO standards related to geographic
information cover various aspects of gazetteer creation, management, and interoperability. These
standards play a crucial role in providing guidelines and frameworks for the development and
implementation of gazetteers, ensuring consistency, interoperability, and quality in geographic
information systems (GIS) and related applications. One such standard is ISO 19112:2003
Geographic information - Spatial referencing by geographic identifiers. Although not exclusively
focused on gazetteers, it specifies a conceptual schema for identifying geographic objects based

127
on geographic identifiers. This standard provides principles and guidelines for assigning identifiers
to geographic features, which are relevant to gazetteer development (ISO, 2003).

ISO 19135-1:2015 Geographic information - Procedures for item registration - Part 1:

Fundamentals outlines procedures for registering geographic information items, including
gazetteer records. It covers principles and requirements for the registration process, which can be
applied to gazetteer management (ISO, 2015).

ISO 3166: International Standard for country codes, while not a gazetteer standard per se, provides
standard two-letter and three-letter codes for the representation of countries and their subdivisions.
These codes are widely used for referencing geographic entities in gazetteers and other geographic
datasets .ISO 19115:2003 Geographic information - Metadata specifies metadata requirements for
documenting geographic information and services. While not specific to gazetteers, it provides
guidelines for describing gazetteer datasets, including information about content, quality, and
accessibility (ISO, 2003).

Furthermore, ISO 19135 Geographic information - Procedures for item registration, a series of
standards, covers procedures for registering geographic information items, which includes
gazetteer records. While not specific to gazetteers, it provides guidelines for registering and
managing geographic information items. In conclusion, while there isn't a dedicated ISO standard
exclusively for gazetteers, ISO standards related to geographic information provide valuable
guidance and frameworks that can be applied to gazetteer development and implementation,
ensuring consistency and interoperability in geographic data management.

13.Ethiopian Place Name History, Challenges and Solutions

13.1. Historical Background
When we look at the history and absorption of Ethiopian place names, we can see many events of
long time. War and foreign invasions have left it under heavy influence. The changing of place
names every time has done more harm than good. A place name tells or contains the history and
identity of something. Thus, when we examine the history of place names in Ethiopia, starting
from the Aksum era, place names named in the Geez language have existed for a long time. Of
course, when we look at the current Ethiopian place name information from the language point of
view, they are named in several languages, but mainly Geez, Oromo, Amharic and Tigrian

128
languages are included. There are many place names with multiple names that have been changing
throughout history. In addition to this, Ethiopia does not have a place name law and policy, so
place names have been changing at any time and era and are still changing (Demeke, 2019).

A place name tells the nature and identity of a country. It records why and by whom it was created
in what era. A place name is linked to language and culture and tells the history of a society. It
talks about community history, including ancestry and where they came from, place names, and
community interactions. Thus, Ethiopia is a country with a long history. As Ethiopia is a country
with many communities and is one of the most active countries in history, there are many place
names with overlapping names. In particular, there are many place names named in Geez, Oromo
and Amharic. It is not an exaggeration to say that Axum is the only one whose name has continued
for many years. The reason is that the old place names that are in use now are old names. What we
try to explore in this article is the historical and current state of place names and the basic problems
facing place names and the solution options. Of course, it is important to study the use of place
names and their role in Ethiopia. In this book, I am trying to explore what the current use of place
names in Ethiopia looks like and based on the research I have done in the past 10 years related to
place names. Because there is no law or standard in the creation of modern place names in Ethiopia,
any party can change, delete or create a superimposed name whenever they want to understand the
historical or current use of the place name (Pankhurst, 2001).

As we have tried to explore in chapter one above, the world is getting many benefits by connecting
the place name information with the modern technology. Especially, the developed countries
almost all lead the place names through laws and standards. In this way, they are making it a major
source of economy by collecting the world's gazetteer information and organizing it in a database.
In addition to this, place name information or the gazetteer will play a major role in the promotion
of peace and prosperity by supporting the location of something with a map. Ethiopia is also using
place name information for various activities, although not in a formal way. Besides telling the
history and identity of place names, it is being used as information for various government and
private institutions. In order to be able to manage Ethiopia's place name information by law, all
institutions, both external and internal, collect, organize and use it as they wish. This is a major
weakness of the country. Although the task and responsibility of collecting place name data is the

129
former Mapping Works, the current Institute of Space and Geospatial Science does not have the
authority to protect or monopolize others.

In particular, it has not been given the authority to resolve problems related to place names and
place names by law. As a result, there is no body that can provide solutions to the conflicts and
problems of place names in the country. Of course, international standards say that place names
should be decided based on research. However, no better study has been done in connection with
Ethiopian place names (Henze, 2000). Today, as Ethiopia continues to navigate the complexities
of modernization and globalization, the preservation and promotion of indigenous place names
remain essential for safeguarding the country's cultural heritage and fostering a sense of national
pride and identity. By embracing its historical legacy and embracing linguistic diversity, Ethiopia
can ensure that its place names continue to serve as invaluable markers of the country's rich and
multifaceted history for generations to come.

13.2. Maps and Place Names of Ethiopia

The Ethiopian Mapping Agency Was Established In 1954 as a division of the Ministry of
Education. Since its inception, it has been providing services in mapping, geodc, cartography and
remote sensing, photogrammetry and other related geo data fields for the past half a century.
Mapping is the only task of collecting, organizing and distributing spatial data in Ethiopia and has
been given authority by law. In addition to this, he was responsible for funding and cooperation
while doing mapping and remote sensing. Thus, after working on Ethiopia's mapping needs for a
long time, in 2018, it reorganized itself as the Ethiopian Geospatial Information Agency.

In this process, he created a better organization by separating himself from the confusion of roles
with the Information Network Security Administration and the Ministry of Urban Development
and Housing. However, not long ago, with the reform that Ethiopia is doing, it was organized
better as an institution and was re-established as Ethiopian Space and Geospatial Science Institute
by merging with Ethiopian Space Science to meet the needs of the country. Mapping works collects
place names and uses them for various tasks. Ever since he took responsibility for making the map
of Ethiopia, he has been working on it using non-standard place name information. In the process,
more than collecting place names, without being given the responsibility of enacting,
implementing and managing laws, Ethiopia's place names are being hit by political violence, and
the country has not been able to get the benefits it should get from place names. This is a major

130
problem in the history of Ethiopia. The political ups and downs that we have gone through in
history and the good and bad relations between one society and another society have resulted in
many place names(Ethiopian Mapping Agency,1954).

Especially in countries like Ethiopia that have a lot of diversity, place names are history, identity,
and religion. That is why I decided to write this book. As much as the value of a place name in
terms of information, the disruption caused by the process of determining where it came from will
be a cause of destruction and killing, especially in a country like Ethiopia that does not have a
civilized political society. We have seen that this is probably not only the current side pressure of
nations, but also creates a big problem in a neighborhood or a community. Because a place name
is identity and history as well. Naming without consulting the public, naming public facilities,
roads, administrative steps and other places with the goodwill of individuals is also not
recommended by the United Nations Place Names Experts Group.

Place names are a key issue, especially in areas that have a tradition of naming places as a
community. Ethiopian mapping has no role in the creation of new place names in Addis Ababa. It
is not forbidden for any party to use the information of place names named by any party. This is
why I decided to prepare this document that mapping does not have a special role in Ethiopian
place names. We will try to see this issue in another topic. As a whole, Ethiopia's place name
information should be corrected because it is not up to date. The government has a major role in
this task, and place name experts have a key role to play. Place name information that does not
meet the standard should be identified and corrected by research on maps or other documents.
Therefore, place names should be collected and approved before they are placed on the map.

13.3. Place Name Challenges in Ethiopia

Although there are many problems associated with place names, there are many problems
especially in Ethiopia. Even if we start from its name, it is said that it had different names.
Especially, due to the lack of documented place name laws and procedures, the question of where
Ethiopia was called today is bound to arise. The question is bound to arise, because due to the
current political and backwardness of our country, there is a tendency to give different names. For
example, there are those who say that Ethiopia was named Kush on one side, while on the other
side, there are those who say that it was a name that existed since the creation of Ethiopia
(Mekonnen, 2018).

131
For example, there was a time when Ethiopia was called Abyssinia, and in the past it was even
called Axum. History tells that the Germans call Ethiopians Abyssinia and the Middle East
countries call them Habash.As a problem to solve universal problems, there is a lack of place name
authority, place name law and policy, standard and procedure given by law. We will try to see
these problems.

13.4. Place Name Awareness Problem

Although the usefulness and necessity of place names is high, data shows that there are cognitive
problems in many countries. When we come to Ethiopia, it is known that the cognitive problem is
deep-rooted and complex. The importance and importance of place names in history, identity,
economy and the use of technology cannot be put in place for the overall prosperity of Ethiopia. It
can be said that it has become a problem from leaders to experts to create awareness. We have
seen that leaders, groups and even people who deal with place names have a problem with the
understanding of place names, but they don't have a view that comes from caring about place
names. Although the name of a place tells about a people, identity, culture, language, history and
where it comes from, but when it comes to our country, it can be seen that the urge to use even
immigrant names is due to cognitive problems (Brown, 2019).

The understanding of place names starts from thinking about how the people living in a country,
especially if there are many diversities, should use place names and how should we use place
names as history and identity. To respect the history, culture, and language of others and to live in
honor of one's own is to accept that place name names and stories are not created in the course of
time and to know the right and duty to use the system and law that redeems the times. In this day
and age, a place name means information, and information is important when it has its own
standards and procedures. To do this, awareness is a must. It can be learned from Ethiopia that
there are many educated people who think that the name of a place has no meaning. Many place
name experts say that the government, which does not tire of issuing laws and procedures for many
things, is not aware of place names. The United Nations Group of Experts on Place Names explains
that the level of understanding of a place name is critical to naming, changing, deleting and revising
a place name.He also suggested that countries create awareness of place names and that this should
be monitored by laws and procedures. However, in Ethiopia, place names are controversial and a
source of various problems, leading to the destruction of human lives and property, but the
government and the relevant bodies do not seem to be doing anything about it. It can be seen here
132
and there that map experts are saying that awareness and creation based on Ethiopia's diversity
should be created in all sections of the society (Wilson, 2018).

The Ethiopian Space Science and Geospatial Institute, formerly known as the mapping agency,
plays a crucial role in managing and disseminating place name data. However, there exists a
significant gap in raising awareness about the importance and significance of Ethiopia's place
names. An illustrative example can be found in the Amhara region, where place names often reflect
both Oromo and Amharic linguistic influences. Despite the diverse linguistic origins, these names
inherently embody the rich history, culture, and language of Ethiopia. Yet, controversy arises when
place names originating from non-Ethiopian languages, including Christian or Islamic influences,
are introduced (Tsegaye, 2018).

This discrepancy highlights a broader issue of cultural and identity-based interpretations of place
names. While some may view names simply as labels, others attach profound cultural and
historical significance to them. This divergence in perspectives underscores the need for greater
awareness and appreciation of Ethiopia's diverse linguistic and cultural heritage. Furthermore, the
varying attitudes towards place names across different regions and communities underscore the
complexity of the issue. Cultural beliefs and identities influence how individuals perceive and
interact with place names, further emphasizing the importance of fostering a collective
understanding and appreciation of Ethiopia's linguistic diversity. Addressing the low
understanding of place names in Ethiopia requires concerted efforts from the government,
stakeholders, and communities. By promoting awareness campaigns, educational initiatives, and
cultural exchanges, Ethiopia can cultivate a deeper appreciation for its place names as integral
components of its national identity and heritage (Lemma, 2021).

In conclusion, raising awareness about the significance of place names is essential for preserving
Ethiopia's cultural richness and promoting unity amidst its diverse linguistic landscape. This task
requires collaborative efforts to instill a sense of pride and respect for Ethiopia's linguistic heritage
across all sectors of society.

133
 13.5. Absence of Policy and Law
Another major obstacle to Ethiopia's place names is the lack of place name policies and laws.
There is no legal and procedural support when naming a place, changing it, modifying it and, if
necessary, deleting it’s a result, the governments, leaders and kings that change every day have
named and changed many names of places that did not follow the rules and procedures. For this,
it can be seen using the place name police and procedures followed by countries like Ethiopia as
an example. Place names that are changed only by authority without law have been tarnishing the
history and identity of place names and not contributing to the national prosperity. Yesterday we
saw the names of places named by the leaders changing in this situation. This is a matter of time,
but they are bound to change. Over the last 20 years, Mechal football Club has changed its name
outside of the law and procedure and was called Defense. However, following the change that
came as a country, it changed its name and returned to its former name. And tomorrow is to guess
what will be the political wind of the country. Many spatial information experts ask that Ethiopia
should have a place name law just as it has a human name law (EMA, 1954).

Place name policy and standard for Ethiopia's current political, economic and social development
and sustainable role in research, formulation and implementation is a key issue for tomorrow. On
the other hand, due to the fact that place name information is not supported by law and order, the
problems of one place being called by different names and one name being used for several places
have arisen. As a result, there is a tendency to find out the wrong and correct place. It is clear that
this is because the name of the place is not guided by the standard. In Ethiopia, the name Debresina
is used as a name for many places. A multiple name is used as a name for two or more (EMA,
1954).Why is the name given is outside the law and procedure, so it is not possible to find a uniform
place name information. It says that the Ethiopian Mapping Agency has a form and standards for
collecting place names. But because they are not supported by law and policy, it does not have the
authority to name and modify place names. Although there is a spatial resource policy as a country,
place names do not have a policy-supported system.

134
 13.6. The Absence Place Name Authority
The absence of a dedicated place name authority in Ethiopia poses significant challenges in the
country's efforts to standardize, manage, and preserve its rich tapestry of geographic nomenclature
(Alemayehu, 2016). Unlike some nations that have established national geographic institutes or
place name authorities responsible for place name standardization and management, Ethiopia lacks
a centralized institution specifically focused on this task. This absence can be attributed to various
factors, including historical, institutional, and resource constraints. Ethiopia's complex history,
marked by periods of political instability, colonization attempts, and socio-economic challenges,
has contributed to the fragmentation of governance structures and the prioritization of other
pressing issues over geographic information management (Gebremariam, 2019).

Furthermore, the lack of a dedicated place name institution may stem from institutional capacity
limitations and competing priorities within government agencies. Ethiopia's government faces
numerous demands on its resources and attention, including addressing poverty, improving
infrastructure, and promoting economic development, which may overshadow efforts to establish
a specialized institution for geographic information management (Taye, 2017).

The absence of a place name authority can lead to challenges such as inconsistent naming practices,
discrepancies in place name usage, and difficulties in maintaining accurate and up-to-date
gazetteers and mapping data. Without a centralized authority to oversee place name
standardization and management, there may be limited coordination among government agencies,
local authorities, and other stakeholders involved in geographic information management. To
address these challenges, there is a growing recognition of the importance of establishing a national
place name authority or institution in Ethiopia. Such an institution could be tasked with developing
standardized guidelines and protocols for place name collection, transcription, and romanization,
as well as coordinating efforts to maintain accurate and authoritative gazetteers and mapping data.
By establishing a dedicated place name institution, Ethiopia can enhance its capacity for
geographic information management, promote the preservation of cultural heritage, and ensure
inclusivity and accuracy in geographic databases and mapping efforts. This would contribute to
improved spatial planning, resource management, and socio-economic development in Ethiopia,
while also fostering a greater sense of national identity and pride through the recognition and
preservation of Ethiopia's rich tapestry of place names. A place name, just like a person's name,

135
requires a body that is recognized by law. According to Ethiopian law, a person can correct one
letter of the name by going to court and issuing a decree to correct it.In the same way, place names
need an institution where they can have a judicial process. As I explained in the chapter where I
listed the countries with place name laws and policies above, Ethiopia's place names need an
independent, legally responsible body. If there is a place name authority, no one can change,
rename, or delete a place name at will. A body that issues laws, standards, procedures and
guidelines is needed. This is at least a body that is authorized by decree according to the laws of
the country. Then people can go to the institution and get justice when they complain about the
name of the place. Therefore, Ethiopia needs a place name authority.

13.7. The Absences of Gazetteer Data

The absence of comprehensive gazetteer data in Ethiopia presents several challenges that impact
geographic information management, spatial planning, and development initiatives. A gazetteer is
a geographical dictionary or directory used to identify, locate, and describe geographic features
such as cities, towns, rivers, mountains, and administrative boundaries. Without access to reliable
gazetteer data, various sectors and stakeholders face limitations in their ability to effectively plan,
manage, and utilize geographic information (Alemayehu, 2016).

One significant challenge is the lack of standardized and authoritative place names. In the absence
of a comprehensive gazetteer, there may be inconsistencies and discrepancies in the spelling,
transliteration, and transcription of place names across different datasets and mapping platforms.
This can lead to confusion, duplication of efforts, and inaccuracies in geographic databases and
mapping applications. Furthermore, the absence of gazetteer data hinders spatial analysis and
decision-making processes. Without a comprehensive inventory of geographic features and their
attributes, government agencies, businesses, and researchers may struggle to conduct spatial
analyses, assess environmental impacts, or plan infrastructure projects effectively. This can result
in suboptimal resource allocation, inefficient land use practices, and challenges in addressing
socio-economic disparities (United Nations Development Programme, 2015).

Another challenge is the limited accessibility of geographic information for decision-makers and
the general public. A comprehensive gazetteer serves as a valuable resource for accessing
information about geographic features, landmarks, and administrative boundaries. Without access
to up-to-date and reliable gazetteer data, decision-makers may face challenges in obtaining

136
accurate and relevant information to inform policy-making processes and public outreach
initiatives. Moreover, the absence of gazetteer data complicates efforts to promote interoperability
and data exchange among different stakeholders and systems. Standardized place names and
geographic identifiers are essential for facilitating data integration and interoperability across
diverse datasets, platforms, and applications. Without a comprehensive gazetteer, there may be
challenges in harmonizing data formats, resolving naming conflicts, and ensuring consistency in
geographic information systems (Taye, 2017).

In conclusion, the absence of comprehensive gazetteer data in Ethiopia poses significant

challenges to geographic information management, spatial planning, and development efforts.
Establishing and maintaining a standardized gazetteer would enhance the accuracy, accessibility,
and interoperability of geographic information, enabling more informed decision-making, efficient
resource management, and sustainable development across the country.

13.8. Possible solutions

1) Comprehensive Study: A comprehensive study focusing on Ethiopian place names would
entail a thorough examination of the various factors influencing naming conventions and
practices across the country. This study would delve into the historical, cultural, linguistic,
and geographical dimensions of place names to gain a holistic understanding of their
significance. It would involve extensive research, data collection, and analysis, drawing on
a range of sources including historical records, linguistic studies, community perspectives,
and geographical data. The goal of this comprehensive study would be to identify patterns,
trends, challenges, and opportunities related to Ethiopian place names, laying the
groundwork for informed decision-making and policy development.
2) Establishing a National Place Name Authority: Establishing a National Place Name
Authority would be a key step towards centralizing efforts to manage and standardize place
names across Ethiopia. This authority would serve as the primary institution responsible
for overseeing naming practices, developing policies and guidelines, and coordinating
activities related to place names nationwide. By bringing together experts, stakeholders,
and government agencies under a unified framework, the National Place Name Authority
would ensure consistency, accuracy, and inclusivity in naming conventions. It would
provide leadership, expertise, and resources to support efforts to preserve cultural heritage,

137
 promote linguistic diversity, and address challenges associated with place names in
Ethiopia.
3) Police standards and regulations: Police standards and regulations are essential for
maintaining the integrity and authenticity of Ethiopian place names. Establishing clear
guidelines and protocols for the romanization, transliteration, and translation of place
names would help ensure consistency and accuracy in official documents, maps, signage,
and databases. The National Place Name Authority would play a central role in developing
and enforcing these standards, working closely with relevant stakeholders to ensure
compliance and accountability. By establishing a framework for reviewing and approving
new place names and renaming existing ones, Ethiopia can promote transparency, fairness,
and respect for linguistic diversity and cultural heritage.
4) Creating Awareness: Creating awareness about the importance of place names in
preserving cultural heritage and fostering a sense of identity is crucial for engaging the
public and garnering support for naming initiatives. Educational campaigns, workshops,
seminars, and media outreach efforts would be instrumental in raising awareness among
government officials, educators, students, and the general public. By highlighting the
significance of place names and promoting the use of indigenous languages in naming
practices, Ethiopia can cultivate a deeper appreciation for its linguistic diversity and
cultural richness.
5) Monitoring: Monitoring place names in Ethiopia requires ongoing efforts to assess,
evaluate, and address naming practices across the country. The National Place Name
Authority would establish mechanisms for monitoring compliance with established
policies and standards, conducting regular audits of official documents, maps, signage, and
databases to ensure accuracy and consistency. By actively monitoring naming practices
and soliciting feedback from local communities, Ethiopia can identify emerging issues,
address concerns, and make informed decisions about place names.
6) Building A Comprehensive Gazetteer Database: Building a comprehensive gazetteer
database of place names in Ethiopia would provide a valuable resource for government
agencies, researchers, businesses, and the public. This database would contain accurate and
up-to-date information on the names, locations, and attributes of places across the country,
facilitating urban planning, emergency response, tourism, and cultural preservation efforts.

138
 The National Place Name Authority would lead the development and maintenance of this
database, collaborating with relevant stakeholders to ensure its accuracy, accessibility, and
usability. By building a robust gazetteer database, Ethiopia can enhance its capacity to
manage, preserve, and promote its rich cultural heritage and linguistic diversity through
accurate and inclusive place naming practices.

A Place Name Which Changed Through Time

13.9. African Country Names

Across Africa, the renaming of places has been a significant phenomenon reflecting various
historical, cultural, and political dynamics. These changes often aim to reclaim indigenous
languages, assert cultural identity, and challenge colonial legacies. Here are a few examples of
changed place names in different African countries:

Table.1 African Country Names

no Old name Current name

1 French Guinea Guinea
2 abesiniya Ethiopia
3 Gold cost Ghana
4 Kemet Egypt
5 nubia Sudan
6 azania tanzania
7 zair Dr congo
8 ivorycost cotdvar
9 NUMIDIA aljeria
10 Royal niger najeria
11 sudanse mali
12 muari mortania
13 South West Africa namibia
14 Bechuanaland botswana
15 Northern Rhodesia zambia
16 Ubangi-Shari, Central afirca

139
 17 Rhodesia zembabiwe
18 Ruanda-Urundi burwndi
19 Buganda Rwanda
20 Portuguese East Africa mozambiqe
21 Yebhr mdr eriterea
22 Kamerun cameron
23 Upper Volta burkinafaso
24 Grand Bassa and Montserrado libera
25 Dahomey benin
26 Nyasaland malawi
27 Basutoland lesetho
28 Cabo Verde Cape verde
29 Spanish Guinea Equateral guinea
30 Lion Mountains, Sierra leone
31 Portuguese Guinea Guinea bissau

Wikipedia

13.10. Some African Capital Cities

Across Africa, numerous cities have undergone name changes reflecting historical, cultural, and
political shifts. For instance, Harare, formerly known as Salisbury, was renamed after Zimbabwean
independence in 1980, signaling a rejection of colonial associations and a celebration of
indigenous heritage. In South Africa, Port Elizabeth was officially renamed Gqeberha in 2021 to
embrace its isiXhosa roots, while Pretoria became Tshwane in 2000, acknowledging its historical
ties to the Tswana people and promoting linguistic diversity. Johannesburg, sometimes referred to
as eGoli in isiZulu, highlights its gold mining history. Similarly, Dar es Salaam in Tanzania,
formerly Mzizima, adopted its current name, meaning "Haven of Peace," after the country's union
in 1964. Rwanda's capital, Kigali, dropped the "ville" suffix post-independence, and Ethiopia's
Addis Ababa is known as Finfinne in the Oromo language, reflecting ongoing efforts to recognize
indigenous names alongside colonial ones. These changes symbolize a broader trend toward

140
reclaiming indigenous identities, promoting cultural pride, and challenging colonial legacies
across the continent.

Table.2.Some African capital cities

no Old name Current name

1 Arbaete Asmera asmera erterea
2 Al-Mansuriyyah cairo egpt
3 Mzizima Dares selaam
4 Tshwane pertoria Soth africa
5 Gaberones Gaborone botswana
6 Salisbury harare zembabwe
7 Delagoa Bay maputo mozambiqe
8 Léopoldville kenshasa drc
9 Usumbura bujumbera burwndi
10 Fort Lamy N'Djamena chad
11 Suleja abuja nigeria
12 Ajashe Porto-Novo benin
13 Christopolis monrovia liberia
14 The medina marakash moroco
15 Icosium algersis algeria
16 Oea tripoli libya
Wikipedia

A number of existing names have been lost or changed, although they are mentioned in the above
table as examples. However, to some extent, the right-wing regime has tried to fix place names. In
particular, countries like South Africa have tried to fix it through laws and practices.

141
 13.11. Changed Place Name in Ethiopia
Emerging non-colonial countries such as Ethiopia may not have a history of forced adoption of
foreign names, even if place names are changed. However, when you change a place name for any
reason and language, it is bound to lose its existing history and identity. In Ethiopia, the renaming
of places has been part of broader efforts to reclaim indigenous languages, assert cultural identity,
and challenge colonial legacies. One notable example is the capital city, Addis Ababa, known as
Finfinnee in the Oromo language. Efforts to officially recognize the name Finfinnee alongside
Addis Ababa have been ongoing, reflecting the country's commitment to linguistic diversity and
cultural heritage. Additionally, various regions and localities in Ethiopia have undergone name
changes to reflect their historical and cultural significance. For instance, the city of piassa, located
on the addis abeba, was formerly known as birbira goro. This change reflects a shift towards
embracing indigenous names and acknowledging the diverse linguistic and cultural landscape of
Ethiopia. These name changes underscore Ethiopia's efforts to promote inclusivity, celebrate
cultural diversity, and assert its identity in the post-colonial era.

Table 3.Changed Place Name in Ethiopia

ተቁ old Current name

1 Hailesilasie college አዲስ አበባ ዩንቨርስቲ
2 nazrit adama
3 debereberehan Debere eba
4 choqie gojjam
5 lakomnza desie
6 beteamhara wollo
7 deberezeyt bisheftu
8 fetegar arsi
9 Meles academy Africa leadership
excellence center
10 Tsehay hospital Tor hayloch
hospital
11 betesayda Yekatit 12

142
 12 Hailemariam mamo Adama hospital
hospital
13 tegulet moja
14 awasa hawasa
15 Alem maya Haruo maya
16 Asebe teferi chiro
17 giraria selale
18 Hegere mariam Bule hora
19 Hegere hiwot ambo
20 Lacus Dembea Lake Tana
21 Lacus Zana Lake Ziway
22 Adis abeba Addis ababa
23 Giyon river abay
24 hacsum aksum
25 Awraja zone
26 Teklay gizat kilil
27 badkie beshefitu
28 finfine filwuha
29 ausi awash
30 barara finfine
31 boco Akaki river
32 Birbira goro piassa
33 begimder gonder
Wikipedia

This is just an example, but I want to open the door to the readers that there will be lost place
names that will be researched in the future. Because there has been a lot of mixing of history,
identity and language in Ethiopia. In this, every ethnic group and area has its own history and
purpose. Let it be known that this is what I want to bring up in this title. Place name is history,

143
identity. It is development. In general, the role of humanity in matters that determine the future
solidarity is supported by laws and procedures, the benefits are many.

14.General Place name views in Ethiopia

As you know, Ethiopian place names are not governed by law and policy. That is why I am
interested in giving the title of ownerless names. Since there is no owner, Ethiopians are
considering place names as a source of conflict and weighing the harm rather than the benefits.
This is not expected from a big country. Especially, the political line that Ethiopia has followed in
the last 50 years is focused on creating a valley of differences instead of unification. For example,
when Nazrit was changed to Adama, if there was law and order, even the parliament today would
not have been a controversial agenda. Because Nazarite is not close to Ethiopians in any way from
Adama. However, there was no understanding and cooperation behind the approach and
understanding that was sought to be changed. The place name law and procedure will solve this.

On the other hand, place name standards tell us that one place can have two names. This happens
only when there is a legally approved standard. For example, the law states that the capital of
Ethiopia is Addis Ababa, but the Oromia regional government calls it Finfene.The problem is that
it is not supported by the law. The constitution itself says that there is no right to overturn the big
law and the small law. If there is a place name law and there is a body studying this, such problems
will not be seen. Therefore, since our point of view and understanding of place names is more
harmful than good, and there is no law and procedure for this, I have a recommendation that the
Ethiopian government and the relevant bodies should introduce the ownerless Ethiopian place
name into the law and procedure.

15.Conclusion
In conclusion, place names in Ethiopia serve as important markers of cultural heritage, historical
significance, and linguistic diversity. Rooted in indigenous languages and reflecting centuries of
civilization, these names hold profound meanings and connections to the land and its people.
Ethiopian practices regarding place names encompass a variety of perspectives, including cultural,
historical, linguistic, and political dimensions. Ethiopian society values place names as integral
components of its cultural identity, preserving linguistic diversity and celebrating the contributions

144
of diverse ethnic groups. These names are not merely labels for geographic features but symbols
of Ethiopia's ancient civilizations, traditions, and values.

Historically, Ethiopia has seen the evolution and transformation of place names, reflecting shifts
in political power, cultural influences, and societal dynamics. From ancient cities to modern towns,
each name carries layers of historical significance and narrative, shaping the collective memory
and identity of the nation. Linguistic diversity is a hallmark of Ethiopian place names, with each
ethnic group contributing its own linguistic traditions and naming practices. This diversity is
celebrated as a source of cultural richness and national unity, emphasizing the importance of
preserving indigenous languages and naming traditions.

However, the absence of a dedicated place name authority poses challenges in standardization,
management, and preservation of place names. Inconsistent naming practices and discrepancies in
spelling and transliteration hinder efforts in geographic information management, spatial planning,
and development initiatives. Moving forward, there is a need for concerted efforts to establish a
centralized institution for place name standardization and management in Ethiopia. Such an
institution would promote consistency, accuracy, and inclusivity in geographic information, while
safeguarding cultural heritage and linguistic diversity. In navigating the complexities of
modernization and globalization, Ethiopia must balance the preservation of its rich tapestry of
place names with the practical demands of contemporary society. By embracing its cultural
heritage, linguistic diversity, and historical legacy, Ethiopia can ensure that its place names
continue to serve as invaluable markers of identity, pride, and connection for generations to come.

145
References:
Al-Jallad, A. (2015). "An Outline of the Grammar of the Safaitic Inscriptions." Brill.

Alemayehu, T., & Negatu, T. (2020). Ethiopia's economic transition: opportunities and challenges.
Routledge.

Ayenew, D. (2018). Ethiopian Geographical Journal, 1(1), 23-35.

BBC News. (2020, September 23). Ethiopia's Oromo celebrate thanksgiving. Retrieved from
[insert URL]

Chatterjee, P. (2001). Imperial Encounters: Religion and Modernity in India and Britain. Princeton
University Press.

Eshetu, M. (2019). Journal of Ethiopian Studies, 52(2), 45-58.

Garcia, L. (2020). Reclaiming Indigenous Place Names: Decolonizing the Map. University of
Minnesota Press.

Gebrehiwot, T. (2021). Ethiopian Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 8(1), 89-102.

Getachew, M., & Zeleke, M. (2017). Renaming Streets and Squares in Addis Ababa: A Tool for
Nation-Building or Political Gimmick?. Ethiopian Journal of the Social Sciences and Humanities,
13(2), 1-17.

Griffiths, T. (1994). Mapping Colonial Conquest: Australia and Southern Africa. Cambridge
University Press.

Habtemichael, Z. (2010). The cultural heritage of the Amhara people: from its beginning to the era
of Emperor Tewodros II. Addis Ababa University Press.

Hagos, A., Berhane, G., & Gebregiorgis, D. (2019). Community Based Ecotourism Development
and its Contributions to Biodiversity Conservation: A Case Study of Maytsebri Community,
Tigray, Ethiopia. International Journal of Advanced Research in Biological Sciences, 6(12), 7-18.

Hagos, Y. (2019). Ethiopian Journal of Cultural Studies, 6(3), 177-190.

Harrison, R. (2010). Heritage: Critical approaches. Routledge.

146
Henze, P. B. (2000). Layers of Time: A History of Ethiopia. Palgrave Macmillan.

Heydari-Malayeri, M. (2012). "Toponymy and the History of Astronomy." arXiv preprint

arXiv:1210.1383.

International Cartographic Association (ICA) Commission on Toponymy. (2018).

Recommendations on the Use of Geographical Names: The International Cartographic
Association's Approach.

International Organization for Standardization (ISO). (2019). ISO 19112:2019 Geographic

Information - Spatial referencing by geographic identifiers.

Johnson, M. (2016). Derogatory Place Names in American Geography. University of Nebraska

Press.

Kassa, B. (2022). Journal of Ethiopian History and Culture, 15(3), 210-225.

Logan, J. R. (2011). Urban growth in American cities: glimpses of U.S. urbanization.

Demography, 48(1), 1-35.

Marcus, H. G. (2002). The Life and Times of Menelik II: Ethiopia 1844-1913. Red Sea Press.

Mulugeta, A. (2020). Ethiopian Journal of Geographic Information Systems, 12(4), 301-315.

Naming Places: Guidelines and Best Practices" by John Smith, Geographical Naming Institute,
2020.

Pankhurst, R. (1968). Ethiopia: A Cultural History. Penguin Books.

Rose-Redwood, R., Alderman, D., & Azaryahu, M. (2010). Geographies of toponymic inscription:
new directions in critical place-name studies. Progress in Human Geography, 34(4), 453-470.

Said, E. W. (1978). Orientalism. Vintage.

Smith, J. (2018). Naming and Power: The Semiotics of Offensive Place Names. Routledge.

Sims-Williams, P. (2007). "The Place-Names of Middlesex Excepting those in the Liberties of

London." Cambridge University Press.

147
Staum, M. S. (2014). Labeling People, Places, and Spaces: Power in Urban Social and Spatial
Structures. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd.

Tafesse, K. (2020). African Cultural Studies, 33(4), 567-580.

Tareke, G. (2018). Ethiopia: Power and Protest: Peasant Revolts in the Twentieth Century. Red
Sea Press.

Tekle, F. (2021). Ethiopian Journal of Heritage and Tourism, 4(2), 87-100.

UNGeographical Names (UNGEGN) Working Group on Toponymic Data Files and Gazetteers.
(2017). Toponymic Guidelines for Map and Other Editors for International Use.

United Nations Group of Experts on Geographical Names (UNGEGN) Working Group on

Toponymic Data Files and Gazetteers. (2017). Toponymic Guidelines for Map and Other Editors
for International Use.

United States Board on Geographic Names (BGN). (Year). Geographic Names: Policies and
Procedures. United States Geological Survey.

United States Geological Survey (USGS). (2020). Geographic Names: Policies and Procedures.
United States Board on Geographic Names.

Williams, R. (2019). Language and Power: The Politics of Naming in a Globalized World. Oxford
University Press.

Zeleke, A. (2017). Ethiopian Journal of Linguistics and Literature, 5(2), 123-135.

148