Transcript Document

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
Introduction
Cultural SDI-aspects
Institutional SDI-aspects
SDI-coordination bodies
Economic SDI-aspects
Legal SDI-aspects
Introduction to Case ‘SDI-Policy’
Policy
Access Networks
People
• Administration
• Coordination
• Institution
• Legislation
• Organisational partnerships
and collaboration
• Financial commitment
• Culture
Policy
Standards
Data
People (strong link with policy)
Access Networks
People
Policy
Standards
• Users, Providers,
Administrators, Custodians,
Value Added Resellers,
Corporate or Individual
• Public or Private
• Partnerships, Collaboration
Data
Standards (strong link with policy)
Access Networks
People
• Open GIS, Interoperability
Policy
Standards
• 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
Data
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!!
Policy dependent on
culture and institutions
social groups and society at
large are kept together
through 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-forgranted” fashion the group’s view of itself
and its environment
Three levels of uniqueness in human mental
programming
(Hofstede, 1997, p.6)
Specific to
individual
Inherited and learned
personality
Learned
Specific to group
Universal
culture
human nature
Inherited
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’
Cultural indicators vis-à-vis access to and
participatory use of GI
Access to GI
Power
distance
Uncertainty
avoidance
large
strong
small
Masculinity
versus
Femininity
weak masc.
fem.
L
H
H
L
L/H
H
Participatory L
use of GI
H
L/H
L
L
H
L, H = low, high support for access to and part. use of GI
Culture: keys for success or bottlenecks of
SDI-implementation
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
participation
Data
problem
solving
use
access
Institutional Framework
Represented by SDI-coordination bodies
Linked to SDI-hierarchy levels
Vertical Relationships
Global SDI
Regional SDIs
Horizontal
relationships
National SDIs
State SDIs
Local SDIs
Corporate SDI
Global
GSDI
Non-profit organization
Members from more than 50 countries
USA-initiative
Annual conference
(Feb. 2004/Bangalore/India)
Regional
EUROGI
European Umbrella Organisation
for Geographic Information
PCGIAP
Permanent Committee on GIS
Infrastructure for Asia & the Pacific
PCIDEA
Permanent Committee on SDI for
the Americas
Africa SDI
Africa Spatial Data Infrastructure
Initiative
Background of PCGIAP
 Establishment : 1995 (based on a Resolution of
the 13th UNRCC-AP held in 1994)
 Member Countries : 55
 Our Goal : Development of APSDI
 Meeting : Once a year
ECOSOC
UNRCC Asia and the Pacific
PCGIA P
UNRCC -
UNRCC -
the Americas
Africa
PC-IDEA
Cooperation with other SDI bodies
Global SDI
UNGIWG
ISO
ISCGM
Regional SDI
EUROGI
PCGIAP
National SDI
PCIDEA
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 Information
AFIGEO Association Française pour
l'Information Géographique
DDGI Deutscher Dachverband fur
Geo-Information e.V. (Germany)
RAVI Netherlands Council for Geographic
Information
AGI 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 geoinformation
infrastructure by
means of cooperation and
agreement
Introduction Ravi
Members
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
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
Lead Agencies
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
Regional
Organisations
ie. PCGIAP
ANZLIC
Commonwealth
PSMA
8 States and Territories
New Zealand
ICSM
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-Vlaanderen
CEGI (North-Rhine Westfalia)
New Brunswick (Canada)
New York State GIS
Louisiana State GI Center
Oklahoma Center for GI
WALIS (West-Australia)
Economic Issues associated with SDIImplementation

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)
Funding
Agencies
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
Legal aspects associated with
SDI-implementation
•
•
•
•
•
•
Liability
Accessibility
Privacy
Discrimination to buyers
Copyright
Selling to third parties (Forbidden
by contracts/Royalties)
• Commercialisation of public
information
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 geoinformation
Accessibility
Accessibility:
– Secrets
– Lack of capacity
– Policy: passive
accessibility
– Technology
– Standardisation
– Metadata systems
Discrimination of buyers
- Government
- Private enterprises
- Consumers
Copyright
– Authenticity (Genuine,
Real, legally attested or executed)
– Completeness
Introduction Case SDI-Policy
Assignment
Address 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?
Final result case assignment (+ motivation)
List Policy issues relevant for Utopia SDI
Determine potential measures or countermeasures regarding
these policy issues
Determine their impacts
Thanks for your keen interest in
the presentation