175-714-6-PB

8/13/2019 175-714-6-PB

1/22

International Journal of Spatial Data Infrastructures Research, 2011, Vol.6, 389-409

388

Spatial Data Infrastructure

for Malaysian Land Administration

Abdul Rashid Mohamed Shariff1, Abd Halim Hamzah1, Ahmad Rodzi Mahmud1,Nik Mohd Zain Nik Yusof2and Hishamuddin Mohd Ali3

1Spatial and Numerical Modelling Laboratory, Institute of Advance Technology,Universiti Putra Malaysia, Malaysia

[email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

2Department of Land Management, Faculty of Agriculture, Universiti PutraMalaysia, Malaysia, [email protected]

3Department of Property Management, Faculty of Geoinformation and RealEstate, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Malaysia

[email protected]

Abstract

Land administration started with a manual land tax collection and subsequentlymoved towards computerised system to improve the land information deliveryservices. However, three factors in non-technical integration issues (institutional,legalisation and social) have turned out to be the main problems for land

administration stakeholders especially at national level for multi-governmentcountries. The implementation of Spatial Data Infrastructures can reduce non-technical integration issues among land administration stakeholders to producebetter decisions for a spatially enabled government. The result from this researchcould act as a guideline for the making of policy, strategy and management forland information delivery services for multi-government country (federal, stateand local). This research will be useful for land administrators, land strategymanagement decision makers and multi-land researchers in land ownership, landuse and land value fields.

Keywords : Spatial Data Infrastructure, Land Administration and InformationSystem

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Non commercial Works 3.0 License.To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ or send aletter to Creative Commons, 543 Howard Street, 5th Floor, San Francisco, California, 94105, USA.

DOI: 10.2902/1725-0463.2011.05.art17

8/13/2019 175-714-6-PB

2/22


389

1. INTRODUCTION

Today, government agencies are moving towards creating and updating theirland information infrastructure to improve land information delivery services. Theplayers of land administration such as land surveyors, lawyers, planners,appraisers and land administrators are experts in designing, creating, definingand managing land parcels and associated rights in land administration activities.By the mid nineteenth century, land administration involved buying, selling,mortgaging and leasing of rights of lands. By the mid twentieth century, landadministration and cadastral officials involved associated legal and surveyingprofessionals, assuming that they understood land markets, and have developedappropriate professional skills to serve the needs. Land administration is more ofa multi-disciplinary endeavour with a focus on land use; land management; landinformation delivery services and supporting framework for trading in complex

commodities toward spatially enabling government.

The objective of this paper to identify the key issues related to theimplementation of Spatial Data Infrastructure for Malaysian land administration,focusing on land information delivery services from a non-technical integrationperspective.

2. LAND ADMINISTRATION SCENARIO

The land administration field, including the structure of an institutional, land multi-activities, legal protection, Information System (IS) is practiced at federal, stateand provincial or district government level. The implementation of an SDI for landadministration activities such as registration, taxation and development can help

the government to move towards a spatially enabling government.

UN-ECE (1996) and Steudler and Williamson (2002) defined land administrationas "the processes of determining, recording and disseminating information aboutthe tenure, value and use of land when implementing land management policies.It is considered to include land registration, cadastral surveying and mapping,fiscal, legal and multi-purpose cadastres and land information systems. In manyjurisdictions, land administration is closely related to or facilitates land useplanning and valuation/land taxation systems, although it does not include theactual land use planning or land valuation processes" (p. 3).

Land administration started with mapping or land surveying field and involvesseveral activities such as land registration; land acquisition; land development;

land consent (related to land dealing transaction) and land enforcement as aguide for manual tax collection. Land administrations are concerned with thesocial, legal, economic and technical framework within land managers and landadministrators (UN-ECE, 1996). Williamson and Wallace (2007) mentioned that

8/13/2019 175-714-6-PB

3/22


390

the primary tools of land administration are based on the current practices such

as land surveying, land registration and databases run by governmentorganisations or institutions (federal/national, state and provincials/districts).Enemark et al (2005) also stressed that land administration SDI, particularly withthe core cadastral components are important infrastructures, which facilitate theimplementation of land policies in both developed and developing countries.Williamson et al (2005) further explained that land administration is presentlymoving towards information management stage using IS especially torevolutionise collection, management, presentation and use of spatialinformation. Such a system can support land markets and is concerned with theadministration of land as a natural resource to ensure sustainable development.

Figure 1: Cadastral Systems Facilitate Three Key Attributes of Land Administrationtoward Spatial or Land Information

Source: Adopted from Dale and McLaughlin (1999), Steudler and Williamson (2002) andEnemark et al (2005).

SPATIAL / LAND INFORMATION

Land Ownership/Tenure

(Land RightsLegal Means)

Social Stability(Economic Growth, Efficient Land Market,

Securit of Tenure and Investments

Land Use(Planning ControlEnvironmental Means)

Land Development

(Resource ManagementEnvironmental Sustainability)

Land Value(Valuation, TaxationFiscal Means)

Collateral and Tax Basis

(Financial ServicesPublic Services)

Attribute Information on Land Value Attribute Information on Land Use

Attribute Information on land Ownership/tenure

8/13/2019 175-714-6-PB

4/22


391

Enemark et al (2005) stated that the IS related to land administration should be

concerned with providing detailed information at the individual land parcel level. Itwill bring benefits to both the individual and the community in future. Thesebenefits include:

i. Guaranteeing ownership, security of tenure and credit;ii. Facilitating efficient land transfers and land markets;iii. Supporting management of assets; andiv. Providing basic information in physical planning processes, land

development, environmental control and backbone for society.

The land information infrastructure for land and properties should be parallel withthe interrelated systems within the four areas of land tenure, land value, land useand land development. This should be organised at the national, regional/federaland local government levels based on relevant policies for data sharing, cost

recovery, access to data and standards. From that, they can build efficient andeffective access to land market and land use management in land administration.The Bathurst Declaration stressed that sustainable development needs soundland administration (good land information; better land policy; better landadministration and management; and better land use) (UN-FIG, 1999).

Thus, Steudler (2007) identified the following land administration toolboxprinciples:

i. Land Policy Principles (such as state and national land policy, role of landadministration to supporting in land market and managing naturalresources);

ii. Land Tenure Principles (such as recognition of indigenous and

information tenures);iii. Land Administration and Cadastral Principles (such as national landinformation system and implementation of reform);

iv. Institutional Principles (such as government, ministerial, departmentalstructure and decentralisation);

v. Spatial Data Infrastructure Principles (such as SDI roles in supportingland administration and development of infrastructure vs. businesssystem); and

vi. Human Resource Development and Capacity Building Principles (such assustainable long-term capacity of educated and trained personal tooperate the system in both public and private sectors).

The expansion of our land administration to support the trading of complexcommodities offers many opportunities for land administrators. For example, land

information as one particular commodity can provide the potential for significantchange of the way societies operate, and how the governments and the privatesector do business. The fundamental idea can rebuild land administration tosupport emerging needs of the government, business and society to deliver more

8/13/2019 175-714-6-PB

5/22


392

integrated and effective information, and to use this information throughout

government and non-government processes by organising technical systems inthe virtual environment around a particular place or location. At the same time,land administration can support several norms to achieve good governance suchas sustainability, efficiency, transparency and accountability, equity and security.

3. LAND ADMINISTRATION AND SDI

GSDI (2004) summarised that Spatial Data Infrastructures (SDI) aretechnologies, policies and institutional arrangements available to facilitate accessto spatial data. SDIs provide a basis for spatial data discovery, evaluation andapplication for all levels of government (federal, state or local/provincial level),commercial sector (profit sector and non-profit sector), multi-level academic andthe public. SDIs facilitate the conveyance of virtually unlimited packages of

Geographic Information (GI) with the use of standards and specifications. Thecreation of specific organisations or programs for developing or overseeing thedevelopment of SDI, particularly by the government at various scales can beseen as the logical extension of the long practice of co-ordinating the building ofother infrastructures necessary for on-going development.

Rajabifard et al (2003) identified the following four SDI initiatives based ondifferent groups of people, organisations and agencies in the development andimplementation of SDI:

i. Regional SDI or Global SDI - interested to cooperate with multiplecountries in different fields which need lower data resolution;

ii. National SDI - using lower resolution or small scale data, frequentlyproducing and using data at lower level of detail and cover broad areas;

iii. State SDI - using large scale and particularly land parcel data. However, ituses less detailed data covering large regions that pertains to a particularlayer; and

iv. Local SDI - creates and uses a great deal of detailed information coveringsmall area or smaller scales within jurisdictional boundaries and needsthe framework dataset as a base for applications and frequently dataintegration.

Williamson et al (2003) observed the growth of regional SDIs such as PermanentCommittee on GIS Infrastructure for Asia and The Pacific (PCGIAP) thathappened in parallel with the conferences and forums on SDI at national level.SDI development at national level is normally driven by the national mappingagency or national land agency. The responsibility for SDI initiative in Malaysia is

led by the Malaysian Centre for Geospatial Data Infrastructure. However, the SDIactivity for land administration or cadastral activities in several countries areunder the state or provincials/district authority. Williamson et al (2005) identified

8/13/2019 175-714-6-PB

6/22


393

four factors based on the relationship between SDI implementation and land

administration. These are:i. The objective of SDI is to link people to data;ii. If a country is made up of multi governments, the SDI must have both inter-

jurisdictional and intra-jurisdictional linkages between the different levels;iii. The SDI concept must evolve from First Generation (Product Based Model

such as definition of data, collection of data and integration of data) toSecond Generation (Process Based Model such as knowledgeinfrastructure, capacity building and more coordination); and

iv. Understand that SDI is not a database; it is an infrastructure which linkspeople to data and comprises policies, access technologies and standards.

The concept of people-relevant data in the land administration field can providerichness to the implementation of SDI, which distinguishes it from the typically

small-scale data in national, regional or global SDIs. Williamson et al (2003)observed that the last decade had seen the evolving SDI concept focussing onNational SDIs. There is an expectation that next decade will focus on large scaleSDIs and particularly those related to land administration activities.

Mohammadi et al (2006) highlighted the two stage focus in the development ofthe National SDIs. The first is the technical stage (such as application; standard;and interoperability) and the second is the non-technical stage (such asarrangements of a single standard of data model; awareness of existing spatialdata; and development of collaboration models).

Mohammadi et al (2006) again highlighted that the integration of multi-sourceddatasets not only involves geometrical and topological datasets and

correspondence of attributes but should also provide social, legal, institutional,policy mechanisms and technical tools. At the same time, the non-technicalstages are mostly handled by managers, strategy-makers and policy-makers ininteraction with other layers of spatial data stakeholders.

4. LAND ADMINISTRATION TOWARD SPATIALLY ENABLINGGOVERNMENT

Masser et al (2007) observed that the vision of a Spatially Enabled Government(SEG) is to establish an enabling infrastructure that will facilitate the provision ofthe place or location for all human activities and government actions, decisionsand policies. The enabling infrastructure provides the set of tools combiningtechnical, institutional, legal and policy aspects that can be used to assist the

delivery of sustainable development at all levels of government and society. Suchspatial enablement allows business transactions to be linked to a place orlocation and further facilitates the evaluation and analysis of relationships

8/13/2019 175-714-6-PB

7/22


394

between people, business transactions and government. Masser et al (2007)

identified that a SEG plans to achieve three broad goals:i. More effective and more transparent coordination, where voters are able to

access the spatial information they require to evaluate the choices made byelected decision makers;

ii. The creation of economic wealth through the development of products andservices based on spatial information collected by all levels of governmentagencies; and

iii. The maintenance of environmental sustainability through regular andrepeated monitoring of a wide range of spatial indicators distributedthroughout the world as a whole.

Williamson and Wallace (2006) also stressed that bringing spatial enablementinto land administration requires ability, and the utility of land information is

significantly improved by spatially enabling information, geo-referencingsignificant core data, graphical mapping and overlaying of details anddescriptions. Spatial enablement and interoperability of the core informationlayers enable hierarchical access and use (among other uses). At the same time,the real-time, pinpoint accuracy in land identification and measurement might bethought necessary: indeed demands for land information accuracy,comprehensiveness, completeness and accessibility through the hierarchy oflocal, regional and national governments in a country are frequently voiced.

Figure 2: SDI and Land Adminis tration Arrangements in Land Management Model

Adopted from Enemark et al (2005). Source: Rajabifard & Binns (2006)

Rajabifard and Binns (2006) observed that the organisational structures for landmanagement or land administration must consider local cultural and judicialsettings with institutional arrangements to better support the implementation of

e-Government e-CitizenshipSpatial

Data Infrastruc ture(SDI)

LandPolicy

Framework

Land Administration Functions(Land Tenure, Land Value

Land Use, Land Development)

Country Context(Institutional Arrangements)

Land InformationInfrastructure

Sustainable Development(Economic, Social and Environmental)

8/13/2019 175-714-6-PB

8/22

8/13/2019 175-714-6-PB

9/22


396

the standard of living.

Draft and implement planning methodologies, policies, plans andguidelines.

Involves several legalisation such as Town and Country PlanningAct 1976 (Act 172), Local Government Act 1976 (Act 171), UniformBuilding By-Law 1984 and Street, Drainage and Building Act 1974(Act 133)

Land Value

Ministry:

Ministry of FinanceAgencies:

Department of Valuation and Property Services (JPPH)Several activities:

Provide accurate, comprehensive and timely information regardingthe demand and supply of property for government agencies,property developers and all parties involved in the property industry.

Provide comprehensive, quality and up-to-date property data

especially property demand and supply data from various parties. Portray the actual situation pertaining to the demand and supply of

property.

Develop and maintain a national property stock warehouse.

Advise the government on property development.

Source: JKPTG (2007), JPBD (2006), and JPPH (2006)

Figure 3: The Structure of Land Ownership Activities for Malaysian LandAdministrat ion with SDI

Source: JKPTG (2007)

Yidris (2005) emphasised the structure of the Malaysian land ownership for landadministration and land law practices based on the Torrens system introduced bythe British. Three main land laws are in use: National Land Code (Act 56 of 1965)implemented at all state for peninsular of Malaysia only; Sarawak Land Code

National

SDIlevel

State

SDIlevel

Local/District

SDIlevel

Focus onFederal Government Land(such as lands of Ministry orFederal Agencies and as an

advisor for state

government land activitiessuch as law and policy)

Focus onState Government Land

(such as alienation of land, disposal of land,enforcement, land development, land

acquisition and land revenue)

Department of Director General of Land and Mines (JKPTG)(Federal Level)

Land and Mines Office(PTG)

(State Level)

Department of Director Generalof Land and Mines (JKPTG)

(State Level)

District Land Office(PTD)

(District Level)

8/13/2019 175-714-6-PB

10/22


397

(Cap 81) implemented for Sarawak only; and Sabah Land Ordinance (Cap 68)

implemented for Sabah only. The structure of the Malaysian land ownershipactivities is based on Part VI, Chapter 1, Article 74, and Second List (State List)in Ninth Schedule stresses that the Legislature of a State may make laws withrespect to any of the matters enumerated in the State List (Malaysia FederalConstitution, 2008). However, Part Three, Chapter 1, Section 40 (MalaysiaNational Land Code (Act 56 of 1965) and Regulations, 2008) also stressed allproperty in State land, minerals and rock material within the territories of State.

However, Part VI, Chapter 1, Article 76 Clauses (4) (Malaysia FederalConstitution, 2008) mentions that the federal government has the power toensure uniformity of law and policy such as to make laws with respect to landtenure; registration of titles and deeds relating to land; transfer of land;mortgages; leases and charges in respect of land; and local government.

5.1. Malaysian Land Administrations and SDI

NRE (2007) identified the Malaysian Centre for Geospatial Data Infrastructure(MaCGDI) as the leader for the Malaysian National SDI especially in relation togeospatial data. The functions of the MaCGDI include advising the Malaysiangovernment in the formulation and implementation of policies and thedevelopment of information standard for geospatial data that can guide federal,state and private agencies in the geospatial activities. However, SDIimplementation for the Malaysian land administration elements of landownership, land value and land use belongs to various agencies or departments(see Table 1).

The relationship between the SDI hierarchy and the components for theMalaysian land administration is shown in Table 2. The federal and stategovernments handle issues of policy, strategy and finance. The local governmentis responsible for creating awareness and managing financial and humanresources. There is a pressing need for the federal and state governments tohelp the local government on up-to-date information for the land administration.

5.2. Land Information Infrastructures for Malaysian Land Adminis tration

The development of a land information infrastructure in Malaysia began when theFederal Cabinet officially established the development of the Land InformationSystem on 23rdSeptember 1987 (JKPTG, 2007). The setting up of the NationalInfrastructure for Land Information System (NaLIS) followed in October 1989; andsubsequently, in December 2002, NaLIS evolved into what is today called the

Malaysian Centre for Geospatial Data Infrastructure ((MaCGDI, 2007). Howeverthe implementation of IS for the Malaysian land information infrastructure for landadministration should now focus on the capability of the IS especially in the fourthera of IS as defined by Ward and Peppard (2002).

8/13/2019 175-714-6-PB

11/22


398

Ward and Peppard (2002) and Abd.Halim et al (2009) stressed that the Cadastral

Information System (CIS) involved three central dimensions: first, fusing ISknowledge and business knowledge to ensure the conception of strategies to utilizetechnological innovation; to seize opportunities quickly; and to implement thesestrategies successfully. It includes managing change and making appropriatetechnology-sourcing decisions and involves knowing the extent of change that thebusiness is capable of absorbing. Secondly, a flexible and reusable IT infrastructureprovides the technical platform and resources needed to have the ability to respondquickly to competitor moves, as well as the capacity to launch innovative ISapplications supporting new process designs or business initiatives. Meanwhile thethird dimension in CIS is the effective use of processes to link IS/IT assets withvalue realisation; through the application of the technology to create an environmentconducive for collecting, organising and maintaining information; together withembracing the right behaviours for working with information. The use process has

two aspects; using the technology and working with information.

Table 2: Comparison between SDI Hierarchy and SDI Components for theMalaysian Land Administration Government Agencies

SDICOMPONENTS

SDI HIERARCHY

NATIONAL SDI STATE SDI LOCAL SDI

INSTITUTIONAL

FRAMEWORK

Include several activities such as administration, financial, facilities,human resources, coordination, custodianship, data access, sponsorship,leadership, education & training, policy and legislation (needs successful

partnerships & communication between agencies and jurisdictions)

JKPTG / PTG / PTD Supported by stateand local

government

JPBDSupported by federal government

JPPH

FUNDAMENTAL

DATASETS

Include several activities such as geodetic control, topographic features,cadastre map, administrative boundaries, geographic names and

localities, street address and position of national & state projects (notdefinitive and dependent on the priorities of the responsible agency within

each jurisdiction)

National GeodeticControl Networks, Land

use & Land covers

National & StateControl Networks

National & LocalControl Networks

JKPTG / PTG / PTD Following:i. Custodianship Data Circular (PKPA 2001)

ii. Pricing and Delivery Geospatial Data Circular (PKPA 2005)iii. Security Order for Geospatial Document Categories Circular (PKPA

2007)

JPBD

JPPH

8/13/2019 175-714-6-PB

12/22


399

TECHNICAL

STANDARDS

Consistent standards and policy such as National Standards or

International (ISO/TC211) are required to enable the sharing, integrationand distribution of spatial data; hence standards for data models,

metadata, transfer and interoperability of storage and analysis software.Policy particularly needs to be consistent for the pricing and access to

spatial data within and between jurisdictions.

JKPTG / PTG / PTDFollowing:

i. MS1759 (Feature and Attribute Codes)ii. Malaysian Metadata Standard (International Standard Metadata

ISO/TC211 19115 : Geographic Information)iii. Geography Name Database and Gazette

iv. Land Administration Boundaries and Code Structure (UPI)

JPBD

JPPH

ACCESS NETWORK

Involves the acquisition, storage, integration, maintenance and enhancement ofspatial data. Consists of the access and distribution networks and clearinghouse

for getting spatial information/datasets to users

National Directory

System

State Directory

System

Local Directory

System

JKPTG / PTG / PTD Limited for state orlocal governmentorganisation only

JPBDLimited for federal government organisation only

JPPH

PEOPLEInclude users, providers, administrators, custodians of spatial data, value-added re-sellers and the users can be governments agencies, academia,

small or large business or individuals and non-profit sectors

JKPTG / PTG / PTD Limited for state orlocal governmentorganisation only

JPBDLimited for federal government organisation only

JPPH

Source: Adopted from Rajabifard et al (2003), Warnest et al (2005) and McDougall (2006)

5.2.1. Land Ownership/Tenure Activities

The land information infrastructure for land ownership/tenure activities refers tothe implementation of the e-Tanah system as an internal system towardsmodernization of land ownership/tenure at all District Land Offices. According tothe e-Tanah Project Team (2008), the e-Tanah system was introduced in April2004. Bakar (2006) described it as a pilot project at the Penang LandAdministration upon approval by the Cabinet on 19 January 2005. The structureof the e-Tanah project management involves two levels; first the federal level ledby the Natural Resources and Environment Ministry (NRE) secretary leader asthe chairman for the e-Tanah Steering Committee and supported by the e-TanahAdvisory Committee, the Quality Assurance Group, the e-Tanah LegalCommittee, the e-Tanah Project Team and the e-Tanah Contractor/Vendor.Second, the state level led by the State Government Secretary as the chairman

for the Electronic Good Governance Steering Committee supported by the Statee-Tanah Team (Land and Mines Officer as secretariat) and all districts of the e-Tanah team (e-Tanah Project Team, 2008). Chong (2008) explained that the e-Tanah system involves nine core modules of land administration such as

8/13/2019 175-714-6-PB

13/22


400

registration (as a main module), land development, disposal of land, land consent

and land revenue. The e-Tanah system has several important characteristicssuch as combination of concepts of centralised and distributed systems (HybridSystem) between the Land and District Office and the Land and Mines Office; asystem that is safe to use, simplifies work, and prepares information on landadministration in an accurate, expedient, efficient, integrated and uniformmanner.

Chong (2008) also stressed, based on pilot project at the Penang LandAdministration, that the e-Tanah project can give several benefits to thegovernment, such as increasing the revenue collection of the state and federalgovernments; enabling the government to plan land development in a specificarea correctly; moreover, collaboration with MaCGDI can ease the process ofobtaining comments and suggestion from the technical department. At the same

time, this project can give several benefits to the public, as the public can obtaininformation and services online; with the Single Point of Contact Conceptusersobtain more effective, secure and user-friendly services; and centralised counterswith direct transactions.

Figure 4: The Concept of the e-Tanah System

Source: Chong (2008)

e-Tanah System

Support Module

Core Module

Public Portal

InternalPortal

StateSecretaryOffice

EXCO

On-lineServices

Single Pointof Contact

One-StopPayment Centre

Customer(Public, Business, Government)

SPEK

ExternalIntegration

e-MMKN

e-JKPTG

MyGDI

SPDK

TechnicalDepartmen

PaymentGateway

8/13/2019 175-714-6-PB

14/22


401

5.2.2. Land Use Activities

The land information infrastructure for land use activities refers to the IntegratedLand Use Planning System (I-Plan). JPBD (2006) identified the I-Plan as aninternal system and can update the sharing of more comprehensive informationamong JPBD headquarters, State JPBD and Zone Office base on RelationalDatabase Management System (RDMS). The National Land Use InformationDivision (NLiD) is the custodian for land use data for JPBD and has threefunctions of NLiD; first to manage and coordinate database (involved inmanagement of geodata collection, verification, standardization, storage andsharing); second, to manage and coordinate data sharing between all divisionsand project offices; and third, to manage data applications from governmentagencies and private sectors.

NLiD has two units dealing with land use information and customer support. The

implementation of SDI and GIS activities for land use elements falls under therespective information unit. JPBD (2006) identified several functions for land useinformation unit such as to implement GIS auditing in order to support andmaintain continuous development of the national land use information; to prepareand coordinate the National Physical Plan (NPP), Structure Plan (SP), Local Plan(LP), Spatial Plan (SP) Land use information through Land Use PlanningIntelligent System (LaPiS), State Land Use Intelligent System (SLaPiS) andDistrict Land Use Intelligent System (DLaPiS); and to develop, manage andcoordinate national land use database.

5.2.3. Land Value Activities

The land information infrastructure for land value activities refers to the Valuation

Information System (VIS), Mapping using GIS and Property InformationManagement System (PRISM). The VIS is an online system, operating in theUNIX environment and using Oracle relational database management systemand Arc/Info GIS software (JPPH, 2006). It consists of three main modulesnamely Management Information System (MIS), Computer-Aided ValuationSystem (CAV) and GIS.

The MIS system has the ability to capture and store information pertaining to landproperties in order to facilitate online enquiries and production of reports foranalysis and control (JPPH, 2006). The system enables forecasting of trends forthe property market, which can then help the public decisions on investments inthis market. In addition, the registration sub-module of MIS updates the maindatabase with information pertaining to property transactions and valuation

carried out by the department, which is under the Finance Ministry. The statisticalsub-module of MIS, meanwhile, allows monthly reports of workload from thedepartment's offices and individual technical officers to be generated, in order tomonitor the performance of each office and the department as a whole. The CAV

8/13/2019 175-714-6-PB

15/22


402

module of the VIS allows calculations of property values to be done automatically

by the computer, thus expediting valuation processes. At the end of theprocesses, certificates to report the values for valuation cases can be generated.The GIS component, meanwhile, captures spatial and non-spatial information ofland properties, and offers a variety of analytical functions to process andproduce accurate information fast. The implementation of the VIS at all itsbranches nationwide will lead to the department phasing out the use of itsprevious system, which does not support computerised calculations of propertyvalues.

As a conclusion, the implementation of an SDI for Malaysian land administrationclearly shows the boundaries among the land administration governmentagencies. Several challenges related to this issue involve awareness of datasharing, legislation and human resources management especially among multi-

government agency.

5.3. Towards World-Class Land Adminis tration

Several countries today have started thinking, talking, discussing and takingactions to make land administration activities more efficient and effective (suchas institution structure or framework, legislation, land information deliveryservices and data or information sharing). The examples include the BathurstDeclaration (Land Administration for Sustainable Development) under the UN-FIG and Work-Group 3 (Land Administration) under the annual PCGIAP meeting.Isahak (2005) identified four mains aspects for Malaysia to improve its landadministration organisation towards world-class level. These are:

i. System including Land Office must identify electronic land tax payment

method and generate the coverage and develop a comprehensiveNational Land Information Centre.

ii. Technology means land administrators must use electronic hardware ifthey need to carry out land service-related job. Land offices servicecounters need to use electronic hardware for completion of task.

iii. Structure including physical structure (the building design and officelayout need greater cleanliness and to promote the upbringing of apleasant environment to reflect the image and credibility of the land office)and organisational structure (improve the service quality for the public).

iv. Human Resources especially to improve land administration services inthe future and at the same time have good leadership especially related tothe organisation. Skills, knowledge and experience are the basicingredients for creating professional specialists in land administration.

The right man for the right job concept must be implemented in landadministration.

8/13/2019 175-714-6-PB

16/22


403

However, there are several issues such as legal constraint among different levels

of government agencies or territory and human resources management amongfederal levels, state levels or provincial levels. These issues must be givenpriority as not all countries in the world have the same land administration andmanagement concept.

5.4. Non-Technical Integration Issues in SDI Implementation

Integration issues based on Mohammadi et al (2006) involve two levels; first non-technical issues (Institutional, legal, policy and social); and second technicalissues (such as data quality, data model and metadata). However, this paperfocuses on non-technical integration issues, especially for Malaysian landadministration, because they involve strategy, policy, financial planning anddecision making for future plans such as Information System Strategy Plan andLand Information delivery services. Table 3 shows three issues that must begiven emphasis if the government is to successfully implement SDI in nationalland administration.

Table 3: Non-technical Integration Issues in the Implementation of SDI in NationalLand Administration

ISSUES FACTORS

Institutional

Governance and Cross-Government Collaboration Model among landadministration government agency or stakeholders (federal, state andprovincials or local government)

financial preparation and constrain

human resources management among land administration governmentagency or stakeholders (federal, state and provincials or localgovernment)

data and information sharing

Legalisation

Rights, Restrictions and Responsibilities (RRR)

Copyright, Paten and Intellectual Property Rights (IPR)

data access and data privacy

data security

Social

cultural and education awareness

background stakeholders

current practice of land information delivery services

Source: Adopted from Mohammadi et al (2006) and Abd.Halim and Shariff (2008)

In institutional issues, the implementation of SDIs for land administration atnational level must clarify the significant dynamic impacts of the inter and intra-jurisdictional partnership and their relationships with users and suppliers ofspatial data. It will be difficult to implement an SDI for land administration anddevelop a spatially enabled government without recognising the importance ofinstitutional factors.

8/13/2019 175-714-6-PB

17/22


404

However, the success of implementations of SDI for Malaysian land

administration is dependent on the awareness of stakeholders. For exampleBakar (2006) identified the e-Tanah system as a modernising Land OfficeSystem Program. The core module of the e-Tanah system is applied at theDistrict Land Office monitored by the State Land and Mines Office. This systemonly focuses on land ownership activities and has no connection with the twoother elements in land administration (land value and land use). Otherimplementation issues of SDI belong to different agencies or ministries at federal,state government and local government (see Figure 3). From that, several factorsin institutional aspects can help the decision maker to reduce the non-technicalintegration issues among land administration stakeholders especially for a multi-level government country such as Malaysia.

The relationship between legal framework and land administration field can find

out the land societies involvement; emergence of national land administrationinfrastructure; and dynamic balancing legislation between individual right, publicinterest and government. At the same time, the legal framework has to be themain key principle to facilitate the dialogue between the governments and privateor public interests related to SDI implementation for land administration at thenational level. However, land decision-makers must consider the basicrequirements for countries with multi-government (federal, state and localgovernment) such as State Land Rules and Local Government Act in landownership, taxation and valuation; rights, restrictions and responsibilities;copyright and Intellectual Property Rights; and data access, privacy and datasharing. Williamson (2002) stressed that a comprehensive land informationmanagement should disclose the complete legal status of all lands, and all publicand private rights and restrictions, including rights acquired under adverse

possession.

The relationship between the legal framework and Malaysian land administrationfor land ownership activities started with section 5A sub sections 1, (MalaysiaNational Land Code (Act 56 of 1965) & Regulations, 2008) related to theimplementation of Computerised Land Registration System (CLRS) for all districtland offices in the Peninsular Malaysia only. Since 2008, the National Land Codewith new amendment (section 5D with Schedule 16), stresses that all district landoffices in the Peninsular Malaysia must implement the e-Tanah system for landownership activities. However, the success of the e-Tanah systems or CLRSimplementation is under the state authorities responsibility and collaborationbetween the federal and state government (Chong, 2008; Yidris, 2005).

In the meanwhile, social issues refer to several factors such as cultural aspect ofhuman resources, which include leadership in organisation, skills, knowledge andexperience in land administration services. The right man for the right jobconcept (Yidris, 2005) must be implemented, and together with the IS

8/13/2019 175-714-6-PB

18/22


405

development will help in the making of strategy or policy in land administration

field. This means the selected personnel or officer in the land administration fieldmust be familiar and knowledgeable about land administration activitiesespecially land registrations, land taxation, land planning and land development.At the same time, the selected personnel or officer must have the knowledgeabout IS Capability in land administration information system delivery servicessuch as strategic management information system especially to make better andright decisions. Other issues are related to the background of land administrationstakeholders, such as awareness about SDI implementation and collaborationmodel among different levels of government agencies; data access, data sharingor privacy; and rights, restrictions and responsibility. On the other hand,awareness from the top management or non-technical organisation is veryimportant because they are involved in designing the goal and objectives; policyand strategy; and law or act amendment.

6. RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

As a conclusion, the success of SDI implementation for national landadministration is based on the finding from Table 3 and also several factors suchas the current practice of land law and land policy; the government vision,strategies and action plan; and relationship between land administrationstakeholders among federal, state, or provincial government. The combination ofnew management styles, computerisation activities, land information datasetcreation, and improved interoperability of valuation, planning, spatial andregistration information would allow much more flexibility. These situations cangive impact especially to improve the land information delivery service amongdifferent land administration stakeholders as a specific objective and the national

land administration as a general target.

Rajabifard and Binns (2006) point out that the modern land administration shouldsupport SDI and should accommodate the trading complex commodities withinmodern land markets. However, land decision makers must identify and evaluatethe best solution to improve the land information delivery service system andfacilitate decision making at a community level in national land administration. Onthe other hand, land decision makers need to develop strategies, policies andpartnership/cooperation models toward data and information sharing amongdifferent land administration stakeholders. This is because SDI is not merely foradministration or management activities, but also for serving users needs amongland administration stakeholders from multi-government to achieve spatiallyenabled society and government.

Moreover, the comparison between SDI hierarchy and SDI component for theMalaysian land administration among government agencies adopted fromRajabifard et al (2003); Warnest et al (2005) and McDougall (2006) is the

8/13/2019 175-714-6-PB

19/22


406

alternative approach to guide the land administration decision maker to identify,

manage and monitor the implementation of SDI among multiple landadministration agencies related to land information delivery services.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Our utmost gratitude to the Spatial Research Group (Universiti Putra Malaysia);the e-Tanah Project Team, the Malaysian Centre for Geospatial DataInfrastructure (MaCGDI), the Institute of Survey and Land National (INSTUN), theDepartment of Director General of Land and Mines (JKPTG); the Department ofValuation and Property Services (JPPH), the Department of Federal Town andCountry Planning (JPBD) and the anonymous reviewers of the earlier relatedtopic of this paper for their encouragements, comments and suggestions.

REFERENCES

Abd.Halim, H., and A. R. M Shariff. (2008). "The Implementation of Spatial DataInfrastructure toward Spatially Enabling Government for Malaysia LandAdministration System", Proceedings 7th International Symposium andExhibition on Geoinformation, 13- 15 October 2008 (ISG2008), KualaLumpur, Malaysia.

Abd.Halim, H., Shariff, A. R. M., Mahmud, A. R., Yusof, N. M. Z. N., and H. M. Ali,(2009). Strategic Management Information System Approach forMalaysia Land Administration Information System with Spatial DataInfrastructure, Proceedings 8th Annual Asian Conference and Exhibitionon Geospatial Information, Technology and Applications (Map Asia 2009),, 18th - 20th August 2009, Singapore.

Bakar, M. I. A. (2006). The Customer-centric e-Tanah. athttp://www.gisdevelopment.net/magazine/malaysia/2006/july-sep/26.htm,[accessed 20 December 2009].

Chong, L. C. (2008). The e-Tanah System: Towards the Modernization of theLand Administration System in Malaysia, Proceedings 10th InternationalSurveyor's Congress, June 26-27 2008, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

Dale, P., and J. McLaughlin (1999). Land Administration, New York: OxfordUniversity Press Inc.

e-Tanah Project Team. (2008). Official Portal of e-Tanah System, Ministry ofNatural Resources and Environment, Malaysia. at

http://www.etanah.gov.my, [accessed 10 December 2009].Enemark, S., Williamson, I., and J. Wallace (2005). Building Modern Land

Administration Systems in Developed Economies. Spatial SciencesJournal, 50 (2): 51-68.

8/13/2019 175-714-6-PB

20/22


407

GSDI. (2004). Developing Spatial Data Infrastructures: The SDI Cookbook

Version 2.0: GSDI-Technical Working Group.Isahak, Y. M. S. (2005). Ke Arah Pengurusan Tanah Bertaraf Dunia. Journal

INSTUN - Mendahului Cabaran, 1(1): 1-10.

JKPTG. (2007). Official Portal of Department of Director General of Land andMines, Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, Malaysia. athttp://www.kptg.gov.my, [accessed 8 December 2009].

JPBD. (2006). Official Portal of Department of Town and Country Planning,Ministry of Housing and Local Government, Malaysia. athttp://www.townplan.gov.my, [accessed 8 December 2009].

JPPH. (2006). Official Portal of Department of Valuation and Property Services,Ministry of Finance, Malaysia. at http://www.jpph.gov.my, [accessed 8

December 2009].

MaCGDI. (2007). Official Portal of Malaysia Centre for Geospatial DataInfrastructure (MaCGDI), Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment,Malaysia. at http://www.mygeoportal.gov.my, [accessed 4 December2009].

Malaysia Federal Constitution. (2008). Laws of Malaysia; Federal Constitution(pp. 303). Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia: International Law BookServices.

Malaysia National Land Code (Act 56 of 1965) and Regulations. (2008). Laws ofMalaysia; National Land Code (Act 56 of 1965) and Regulations (pp. 551).Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia: International Law Book Services.

Masser, I., Rajabifard, A., and I. Williamson (2007). Spatially EnablingGovernments through SDI Implementation. International Journal ofGeographical Information Science, 22(1): 5-.20.

McDougall, K. (2006). A Local-State Government Spatial Data SharingPartnership Model to Facilitate SDI Development. University ofMelbourne, Melbourne, Australia.

Mohammadi, H., Binns, A., Rajabifard, A., and I. Williamson, (2006), SpatialData Integration, Proceedings 17th UNRCC-AP Conference and 21thMeeting of The PCGIAP, September 18-22 2003Bangkok, Thailand.

NRE. (2007). Official Portal of Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment,Malaysia. at http://www.nre.gov.my, [accessed 13 December 2009].

Rajabifard, A., and A. Binns (2006). SDI Requirements of Land AdministrationSystem, In Williamson, I., Enemark, S. and J. Wallace (Eds.),Sustainability and Land Administration System. Melbourne: Department ofGeomatics, University of Melbourne.

8/13/2019 175-714-6-PB

21/22


408

Rajabifard, A., Feeney, M. E. F., and I. Williamson, Spatial Data Infrastructures:

Concept, Nature and SDI Hierarchy, in Williamson, I., Rajabifard, A. andM. E. F. Feeney (Eds.), Developing Spatial Data Infrastructures: FromConcept to Reality. New York: Taylor and Francis Inc.

Steudler, D. (2007). An Evaluation Framework for Land Administration Systems,in Rajabifard, A. (Ed.), Towards a Spatially Enabled Society (pp. 400).Melbourne: Centre for SDIs and Land Administration, Department ofGeomatic.

Steudler, D., and I. Williamson (2002). A Framework for Benchmarking LandAdministration Systems, Proceedings FIG XXII International Congress,September 18-22 2003, Washington, D.C. USA.

UN-ECE. (1996). Land Administration Guidelines; with Special Reference toCountries in Transition. New York and Geneva: United NationsPublication.

UN-FIG. (1999). The Bathurst Declaration on Land Administration for SustainableDevelopment. Bathurst, NSW, Australia.

Ward, J., and J. Peppard (2002). Strategic Planning for Information Systems(Third ed.), Baffins Lane, Chichester, West Sussex PO19 1UD, England:John Willey and Sons Ltd.

Warnest, M., Rajabifard, A., and I. Williamson (2005). A Collaborative Approachto Building National SDI in Federated State Systems: Case Study ofAustralia, Proceedings FIG Working Week/GSDI-8, 16-21 April 2005,Cairo, Egypt.

Williamson, I. (2002). Land Administration and Spatial Data Infrastructures -Trends and Developments, Proceedings Implementation Models of Asiaand the Pacific Spatial Data Infrastructure (APSDI) Clearinghouse,Bandar Seri Begawan, Brunei.

Williamson, I., Grant, D., and A. Rajabifard (2005). Land Administration andSpatial Data Infrastructures, Proceedings FIG Working Week/GSDI - 8,,April 16-21 2005, Cairo, Egypt.

Williamson, I., Rajabifard, A. M. E. F. Feeney (Eds.) (2003). Developing SpatialData Infrastructures: From Concept to Reality. New York: Taylor andFrancis Inc.

Williamson, I., and J. Wallace (2006). Spatial Enabling Government: A NewDirection For Land Administration Systems, Proceedings FIG XXIII

Congress - Shaping The Change, October 8-13 2006, Munich, Germany.

Williamson, I., and J. Wallace (2007). New Roles of Land AdministrationSystems, Proceedings International Workshop on Good Land

8/13/2019 175-714-6-PB

22/22


409

Administration - Its Role in Economic Development, June 27-29 2007,

Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia.Yidris, A. (2005). Sistem Pentadbiran Tanah Di Malaysia - Cabaran Masa Kini.

Journal INSTUN - Mendahului Cabaran, 1(1): 59-76.

Documents

175-714-6-PB