Course Spatial Data Infrastructures

GRS21304 / K075219

Period 1 2003-2004

INTRODUCTION

Case ‘SDI-Policy’

Week 5

29 September 2003 (10.30 –12.30)

Joep Crompvoets

Overview

IntroductionCultural SDI-aspectsInstitutional SDI-aspects SDI-coordination bodiesEconomic SDI-aspectsLegal SDI-aspects

Introduction to Case ‘SDI-Policy’

• Administration

• Coordination

• Institution

• Legislation

• Organisational partnerships and collaboration

• Financial commitment

• Culture

People Policy Data

Standards

Access Networks

Policy

People Policy Data

Standards

Access Networks

• Users, Providers, Administrators, Custodians, Value Added Resellers, Corporate or Individual

• Public or Private

• Partnerships, Collaboration

People (strong link with policy)

Standards (strong link with policy)

• Open GIS, Interoperability

• Consistent Policy – Pricing, Access, VAR restrictions

Examples• International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO)

www.isotc211.org– Technical Committee for Geographic Information/Geomatics

(ISO/TC 211)– 19100-19140 Geographic Information Series– 19115 Geographic Information - Metadata, Final Draft

International Standard (to be formalised mid 2003)– 19111 Geographic Information – Spatial Referencing by

Coordinates (NEW!)

• OpenGIS Consortium (OGC) www.opengis.org• WorldWideWeb Consortium (W3C) www.w3c.org

People Policy Data

Standards

Access Networks

Main bottlenecks for SDI-implementation

• Technical issues– lack of data, standards, metadata, search

engines, communication network/bandwidth• Economic/financial issues

– cost sharing• Social/institutional/organisational issues

– awareness, education, pricing, security, freedom of access

• Political/legal issues– sensitive data, intellectual property

Mainly Policy-related!!

social groups and society at large are kept together

through culture and institutions

Policy dependent on culture and institutions

Culture• values and norms

• ‘controls’ relationships between members

• learned responses• deeper levels of basic assumptions and beliefs

• that are shared by members of a group

• that operate unconsciously

• and that define in a basic “taken-for-granted” fashion the group’s view of itself and its environment

personality

culture

human nature

Specific to individual

Specific to group

Universal

Inherited and learned

Learned

Inherited

Three levels of uniqueness in human mental programming (Hofstede, 1997, p.6)

Culture four dimensions Hofstede (1997)

• power distance (PD)• accommodates human inequality

• uncertainty avoidance (UA)• accommodates uncertainty

• masculinity/femininity (MAS)• accommodates masculine and feminine values

• individualism/collectivism (IDV)• accommodates the individual and the ‘group’

Culture: keys for success or bottlenecks of SDI-implementation

Cultural indicators vis-à-vis access to and participatory use of GIPower distance

Uncertainty avoidance

Masculinity versus Femininity

large small strong weak masc. fem.

Access to GI L H H L L/H H

Participatory use of GI

L H L/H L L H

L, H = low, high support for access to and part. use of GI

Institutions

• rather stable cluster of norms and normative behaviours

• develops around a basic social need

• can be concrete and specific like a nation’s central bank or quite diffuse and general such as money

• not all organizations are institutions• not all “institutional arrangements” are

institutions• Part of culture

SDI is about:Access to, use of, participation in GI …

essentially:

• based on behaviour and attitude

• social processes

• hence: subject to cultural and

institutional conditions

culture and institutions

spatial

problem

solving

participation

use access

Data

Institutional FrameworkRepresented by SDI-coordination bodiesLinked to SDI-hierarchy levels

Regional SDIs

National SDIs

Corporate SDI

Global SDI

State SDIs

Local SDIs

Vertical RelationshipsVertical Relationships

Horizontal Horizontal relationshipsrelationships

Global GSDINon-profit organizationMembers from more than 50 countriesUSA-initiativeAnnual conference

(Feb. 2004/Bangalore/India)

Regional EUROGIEuropean Umbrella Organisation for Geographic Information

PCGIAPPermanent Committee on GIS Infrastructure for Asia & the Pacific

PCIDEAPermanent Committee on SDI for the Americas

Africa SDIAfrica Spatial Data Infrastructure Initiative

Background of PCGIAPEstablishment : 1995 (based on a Resolution of

the 13th UNRCC-AP held in 1994)Member Countries : 55Our Goal : Development of APSDIMeeting : Once a year

PCGIAP

UNRCC -Asia and the Pacific

PC-IDEA

UNRCC -the Americas

UNRCC -Africa

ECOSOC

Cooperation with other SDI bodies

Global SDI

Regional SDI

National SDI

EUROGI PCIDEA

ISCGMISCGM

ISISOO

PCGIAP

UNGIWG

EUROGI

• Evolution– Since its foundation in 1993 the membership

of EUROGI has increased by 50 % to 25 – Two types of members

• National GI associations from all Europe• Pan European organizations

– Collectively EUROGI represents about 6000 public and private sector organizations

National AGEO Austrian Umbrella Organization

for Geographic Information GeoForum Denmark - society for

Geographical InformationAFIGEO Association Française pour l'Information Géographique DDGI Deutscher Dachverband fur Geo-Information e.V. (Germany)RAVI Netherlands Council for Geographic InformationAGI UK Association for Geographic Information FGDC Federal Geospatial Data Committee NSIF National Spatial Information Framework –South-Africa ANZLIC Australian New Zealand Land Information Council

Ravi-The Netherlands 1992

Aim

• Improve the geo-information infrastructure by means of co-operation and agreement

Introduction RaviMembers

• Association of Waterboards

• Association of Dutch Municipalities

• Cadaster

• Central Bureau of Statistics

• Chambers of Commerce

• Department of Land Development and Research

• Government Service for Land and Water Use

• Institute for Natural Resources of Ministry of Agriculture

• Joint Dutch Utility Companies

• Joint Provinces

• Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and Environment

• Ministry of Interior

• National Spatial Planning Agency

• Netherlands Institute for Geological Technology

• National Mapping Agency

• Royal Association of Civil Law Notaries

• Survey Department of the Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management

Usage of data (1998) in The Netherlands

–36.000 datasets Dutch government

–25.000 geo information

–70 % for free

–mostly between governments

–problem of accessibility

Commonwealth

PSMA

8 States and Territories

ANZLIC

ICSM

New Zealand

Regional Organisationsie. PCGIAP

National• ANZLIC The Spatial Information Council (ANZLIC)• Intergovernmental Committee for Surveying and Mapping (ICSM)• Public Sector Mapping Agencies Australia Ltd. (PSMA)

Jurisdictions• Commonwealth Spatial Data and Information Agencies• State/Territory Land Administration and Mapping Agencies and Councils -

All Member ANZLIC, ICSM and PSMA

QL

D

VIC

NS

W

WA

TA

S

NT

AC

T

SA

Lead Agencies

Australian SDI (ASDI)

ANZLIC’s Vision:

Australia's spatially referenced data, products and services are available and accessible to all users

• The ASDI is a national framework for linking users with providers of spatial information

• The ASDI comprises the people, policies and technologies to enable the use of spatially referenced data through all levels of government, the private sector, non-profit organisations and academia

• Some existing components are:• Australian Spatial Data Directory (ASDD)• Standards and Protocols• Spatial Metadata

State GIS-VlaanderenCEGI (North-Rhine Westfalia)New Brunswick (Canada)New York State GISLouisiana State GI CenterOklahoma Center for GIWALIS (West-Australia)

Economic Issues associated with SDI- Implementation

Associated with the implementation of a SDI are a number of economic issues. Some of the more significant ones are:– Benefit Cost Analysis– Funding– Pricing Policies and – Marketing

The Concept of Funding Models

The first generation of SDIs were mainly financed through an ad hoc manner

Structured funding mechanisms required for the second generation of SDIs.

A guide for SDI program managers on how to formalize and source financing for the implementation and maintenance of a SDI

Existing Funding Models A Structured view of current SDI/Infrastructure

Financing

Government Contribution

(Derived from Taxation)

FundingAgencies

SDI Funding Pool

Private/Public Sector

Contribution

Pricing Policies

Pricing alternatives• Free• Below price of

provision• Price of provision• Price of provision

‘plus’: reproduction, distribution

• Price of provision and part of the maintenance costs

• Price dependency – Political choice– Infrastructure independent of marketplace– No barriers for usage– Infrastructural value– Costs of provision plus– Economic potential

• Liability• Accessibility• Privacy• Discrimination to buyers• Copyright• Selling to third parties (Forbidden

by contracts/Royalties)

• Commercialisation of public information

Legal aspects associated with SDI-implementation

Liability

Liability: The state of being legally bound or obligated, as to make any loss or damage that occurs in a transaction

Liability for incomplete or incorrect geo-information

Accessibility:– Secrets– Lack of capacity– Policy: passive

accessibility– Technology– Standardisation– Metadata systems

Accessibility

- Government- Private enterprises- Consumers

Discrimination of buyers

– Authenticity (Genuine,

Real, legally attested or executed)

– Completeness

Copyright

AssignmentAddress and access policy issues that (may) influence the function of the Utopian SDI, both positively and negatively. What are the potential measures or countermeasures regarding these policy issues that can secure a proper functioning of a created SDI?

Introduction Case SDI-Policy

Final result case assignment (+ motivation)

List Policy issues relevant for Utopia SDI

Determine potential measures or countermeasures regardingthese policy issues

Determine their impacts

Thanks for your keen interest in Thanks for your keen interest in the presentationthe presentation