Upload
tobias-atkins
View
216
Download
3
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Spatial Data Infrastructure
Introduction and Practice
Dr. Francis Harvey
SDI or NSDI
• National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) in US is where concept originates
• It has since evolved (mainly in Europe)
• Elements remain the same
• Principles have changed
• Still very complex
NSDI in AmericaThe Political Culture
▪From DC Beltway to “Main Street”
▪Jeffersonian Democracy
▪Federalism
▪Enfranchised, pluralistic, participative populace
▪Participative Democracy
Dimensions of American Government
▪In mid-1990s non-defense Federal agencies employed about 2.1 million people and spent about $1.6 trillion
▪State and local governments employed 19.5 million people and spent about $1.3 trillion (1994)
▪There are about 39,000 general purpose units of local government
▸3000 counties▸19,000 cities▸16,000 towns▸14,000 school districts▸31,000 special districts
From Randy Johnson, MetroGIS
Minneapolis, St. Paul Metropolitan Area
7 700 km2
around 1 million residentsabout 900 000 parcels
293 independent local units of government
7 counties188 Other
governm. units59 school districts
39 water boards
General
NSDI originates in U.S. Federal Government
▪Executive Order 12906 (1994) calls for sharing
▸Avoid duplicate efforts▸More efficient use of resources
▪This only involves Federal Agencies▸Coordinated through Federal Geographic Data
Committee
▪Framework should provide foundation▸No master blueprint
NSDI to serve many needsAt all levels of government
▪Transportation, Navigation & Commerce
▪Public Land & Marine Sanctuary Management
▪Agriculture & Natural Resource Development
▪Environmental Protection and Ecosystem Management
▪Community and Economic Development
▪Emergency Management
▪Public Service Delivery
▪National Defense
▪Earth System Science & Geographic Information Technologies
▪Public Information
▪Property & Voting Rights
▪Revenues Source: National Academy of Public Administration, 1997
What is the NSDI?
▪Infrastructure for Institutions▸Big vision:
–From local citizen to Federal Secretaries
▸Builds on locally distinct institutions and infrastructures
–Mainstreet
▸Not a template, but a framework to guide development▸Not a uniform code, only guidelines and standards
NSDI Components
▪Framework
▪Framework Cone
▪Involvement and data sharing
▪Metadata
▪Clearinghouses
FrameworkData
Application Users
Land Suitability Analysis
Transportation Planning
DevelopmentPlanning
Added Application-Specific Data
TrafficLoads
Population
Soils
Three Key NSDI Components
Vertical and Horizontal Integration
Free Data Sharing
NSDI starts with Framework DataFederal Government Project/Proposal
Framework Cone
Involvement and Data Sharing Federal, Regional, State, Tribal, Local, Private Companies,
Utilities
FrameworkData
Application Users
Land Suitability Analysis
Transportation Planning
DevelopmentPlanning
Added Application-Specific Data
TrafficLoads
Population
Soils
NSDI Iceberg
Concepts
Practices
FrameworkData
Application Users
Land Suitability Analysis
Transportation Planning
DevelopmentPlanning
Added Application-Specific Data
TrafficLoads
Population
Soils
??
Recognized Issues
▪Data Sharing (level 1 interoperability)▸How is data exchanged?
▪Defining geographic objects (semantics)▸What is a road?
▪Sharing costs (financial)▸Who pays?
▪Involving local governments (participation)▸More bureaucracy?
▪Vertical Integration (control, use, and distribution)▸Data and Organizations
The two sides of data sharing are the two sides of integration
Simplistic: Technical and Institutional Issues
▪Technical issues▸Multiple scales▸Data exchange
▪Institutional Issues▸Cost-sharing▸Maintenance▸Metadata
Cone of Vertical Integration
Vertical Integration
Technical Issues can be resolved
▪Products and levels▸Multiple producers, multiple users, multiple
products▸State, Federal, Local
▪NSDI operates like a federation▸Distributed production▸Diffused use▸Multiple production and use arrangements
Institutional Issues for Integration
▪Relevance▸Scale related
▪Partnerships to provide resources▸Joint funding▸Cost sharing▸Work sharing
Underlying Organizational Issues Difficult to assess
▪“Pride of Authorship”▪Adequacy for use▪Duplication of effort▪Reprocessing costs▪Not easily automated▪Political and public pressures▪Disparate data▪Lack of time▪Legal issues
Evolution of the NSDIDevelopment of Capabilities and Political Turf
▪FGDC▸Coordinating (federal) actvities▸19 member interagency committee
▪Geospatial One-Stop▸Access way to geospatial information
▪The National Map▸Partnerships to provide integrated geographic
data (synthesis)
FDGCwww.fgdc.gov
▪In existence since 1990▸Big push came after 1994 Executive Order to
develop the NSDI
▪Develops and promotes standards▸Notably for metadata
–The CSDGM, Content Standard for Digitial Geographic Metadata
▪Promotes inter-governmental activities
▪Responsible for clearinghouses
GeoSpatial OneStopGeodata.gov
▪What is it?▸Federal agencies (24) continuing NSDI activities▸Part of Bush’s e-government agenda
–Strong private sector involvement
▸Focus: Spatially enable the delivery of government services
▪Technology is a portal▸A gateway to gateways and data
National Maphttp://nationalmap.usgs.gov/
▪What is it?▸“a seamless, continuously maintained set of public
domain geographic base information that will serve as a foundation for integrating, sharing, and using other data easily and consistently”
▪Linked to the National Atlas▸National Map has data▸National Atlas has maps
Is this all just a mess?
▪No, simply what happens when politics and bureaucracy intersect with technologies
MaterialsA Brief Selection
▪The best starting web site is www.fgdc.gov▸From this site you will be able to find links to all
sorts of information on the NSDI▸Global SDI information is at www.gsdi.org
▪For technical issues start out with www.opengis.org
▪For operational examples go to nsdi.usgs.gov or search for ‘NSDI’
NSDI Practices
In the beginning...Aligning scientific communities with policy communities
▪Re-inventing government▸Gore-lead initiative: National Performance Review
–Management for results–Inter-government activities–Performance-based organizations
▸Activities (relevant)–G-Gov–NSDI–Reinventing government
▪Continued under Bush e-government initiatives
Government Needs for the 21st Century
▪Interoperable systems that are trusted and secure▪Methods and measures of citizen participation in democratic
processes▪Models of electronic public service transactions and delivery
systems▪New models for public-private partnerships and other
networked organizational forms▪Intuitive decision support tools for public officials▪Archiving and electronic records management▪Better methods of IT management▪Matching research resources to government needs
NSDI ... a verb?
▪Nancy Tosta’s commentary▸A key figure in 1990s NSDI work▸Politics and bureaucracy
▪Troubles▸“diverse interpretations”▸“broad management options”
▪Failures▸No nationally consistent data sets▸Slow development of standards
Research
▪Interactions among levels of government and public and private sectors
▪Policy guidelines, organizational forms, and technology tools constantly interact
Institutional Issues for Integration
▪Relevance▸Scale related
▪Partnerships to provide resources▸Joint funding▸Cost sharing▸Work sharing
Critical Organizational Issues Difficult to assess
▪“Pride of Authorship”▪Adequacy for use▪Duplication of effort▪Reprocessing costs▪Not easily automated▪Political and public pressures▪Disparate data▪Lack of time▪Legal issues
Decentralizing InfrastructureNeo-liberalizationof governance
▪Does Decentralization = Devolution?
▪Different strategies▸Shift dissatisfaction▸Shift economic and political powers to increase
local revenue▸Shift of expenditures w/o revenues
Economic Explanation
▪Shift expenditures decisions to the level of government that best incorporates a community of common interests
▪Central government concessions to maintain political stability
▸Very fluid structure of governance–Network
No easy JobChanging the relationship between central and local
governments
▪Problems of public service delivery▸Local service provision cannot be changed in
isolation▸Different degrees of political, economic, and
decision making powers
Three Elements of Success
▪Clear distinction of functional responsibilities
▪Financial rules governing local governments reward good performance
▪System of accountability that balances central regulation and local political participation
Assumptions
▪Difficulties of defining the beneficiaries of a particular service (benefit-jurisdiction model)
▪Many services have local and wider benefits
▪Administrative costs associated with service provision are not factored in
▪Data sharing occurs to share data
Successful DecentralizationFinances and Politics
▪Democratic local decision process with transparent costs and benefits and all stakeholders have an equal opportunity to influence the decision
▪Costs of local decisions are borne by those who make decisions
▪Benefits stay in the jurisdiction
Policy GuidelinesDoes NSDI fulfill these?
▪Who benefits, pays?
▪Transparent lines of accountability
▪Provide enforcement mechanism
Technology and Organizations are inseperable
NSDI AwarenessWhat is the NSDI????
▪For “small” local governments the NSDI has no relevance
▪They don’t know what it is
▪They can’t imagine what it is
Yes (43.10%)
Unsure (6.90%)
No (50.00%)
Do you know what the National SpatialData Infrastructure is? (Y/N)
Results from 2001 Kentucky Survey
Informal data sharing dominatesResults for local governments from 1996 Framework Survey
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Have Policy
Share Data
in percent
Kentucky (n=15) Kansas (n=20) North Carolina (n=70)Washington (n=31)
Data DistributionAre there conditions [e.g., "no use", "no distribution"]
stipulated upon the sharing, use, or redistribution of data?
▪Regional differences▸Established regional agencies▸With colleges and tribal authorities
▪Specific Issues▸“liability disclaimer required”▸“data only used for requested purpose
& not shared w/ others w/o permission”▸"the only data we want to "protect" is
the cadastral layer”
Yes No N/A etc
Results from Best Practices Research
Limits to the Effectiveness of Standards
Do you rely on any standards in your geographic information activities?
▪What does “yes” mean?▸“when I'm aware of standards that I can meet”▸“standards??? Order of priorities-real time
needs first”▸“ArcView shapefiles, UTM or County
coordinates for basemap purposes”▸“occasionally we will use the National Spatial
Accuracy Standards (when create metadata)”Yes No NA n/a etc
Terminological Problem: standard can mean little more than using
what is available when there is only one choice
Results from Best Practices Research
Resources
Questions?