Article of the Month -
May 2007
|
Role of Spatial Data Infrastructures in
Managing Our Cities
Paul KELLY, Chair of FIG Commission 3 Working Group 3.2,
Australia
![](http://bbjd.fig.net/resources/monthly_articles/2007/may_2007/kelly_120.jpg)
This article in .pdf-format.
SUMMARY
The aim of this presentation is to outline
the role of spatial data infrastructures (SDI) in managing cities. The
presentation will contain an overview on current status and application of
SDI including:
- Institutional arrangements, information policy and legal frameworks
needed to create and share data, information and tools within and
between levels of government
- Respective roles of government, private sector, professional bodies
and community groups in creating and managing SDI
- Implementing international best practice standards in SIM at all
levels, including use of ISO/TC 211, OpenGeospatial® Consortium, etc.
Australia will be used as a case study of how SDI is used to support
urban land planning; real estate management and development; environmental
management; public safety; and social and economic infrastructure.
This material will be used to support subsequent discussion on the role
of local, regional and national SDI in managing mega cities to help firm up
the work program of FIG Working Group 3.2 over the next three years. These
topics include:
- Identify institutional, policy and
legal frameworks that can be incorporated in SDI to address mega city
issues
- Identify specific technical
innovations in SIM that can improve management of mega cities
- Roles and benefits to surveyors,
government, associations engaged with spatial data and users of spatial
data and spatial information
(This paper was presented as keynote address at the FIG
Commission 3 2007 Annual Meeting and Workshop “Spatial Information
Management Toward Legalizing Informal Urban Development”, Sounio, Athens,
Greece, 28-31 March 2007)
1. INTRODUCTION
Geographically referenced information has become indispensable for
numerous aspects of urban and rural development, planning and management.
The increasing importance of spatial information has been due to recent
strides in spatial data capture (especially satellite remote sensing),
management (utilizing GIS and database tools) and access (witness the growth
in web mapping), as well as the development of analytical techniques such as
high resolution mapping of urban environments.
The concept of spatial data infrastructures (SDI) has been developed to
encompass the efficient and effective collation, management, access and use
of spatial data. SDI has been adopted in many countries around the world,
notably at national level, but frequently found at sub-national levels based
on regional or local government areas. SDI has been seen as a purely
governmental mechanism and it is true that government agencies constitute
the greatest collectors and users of spatial information. However, there is
a clear trend to involve diverse user communities that incorporate elements
of the private sector and non-governmental organisations to ensure that
investments in spatial data development yield the greatest possible benefit.
Developing and implementing an SDI should be seen as an integral component
of a jurisdiction’s overall social and physical infrastructure planning.
However, the development of an SDI is problematic. Key issues have been
the diversity of data sources and management of spatial data, usually spread
across a multitude of agencies and organisations focused on single mandates.
A challenge has been to develop new institutional arrangements to allow
implementation of appropriate integration of data, adoption of relevant data
standards and meet a growing range of needs for spatial data products. These
arrangements vary from choosing an existing agency to lead SDI development
(such as the agency responsible for land administration), through formal
coordinating committees to formation of a specialist “SDI” agency. The
choice will be based on prevailing administrative, legal and social cultures
found in a jurisdiction.
The role that SDI initiatives are playing within society is changing.
SDIs were initially conceived as a mechanism to facilitate access and
sharing of spatial data for use within a GIS environment. This was achieved
through the use of a distributed network of data custodians and stakeholders
in the spatial information community. Users however, now require the ability
to gain access to precise spatial information in real time about real world
objects, in order to support more effective cross-jurisdictional and
inter-agency decision making in priority areas such as emergency management,
disaster relief, natural resource management and water rights. The ability
to gain access to information and services has moved well beyond the domain
of single organisations, and SDIs now require an enabling platform to
support the chaining of services across participating organisations (from
The Role of Spatial Data Infrastructures in Establishing an Enabling
Platform for Decision Making in Australia, Williamson, Rajabifard and Binns,
GSDI-9 Conference Proceedings, 6-10 November 2006, Santiago, Chile)
2. USING SDIS TO MANAGE CITIES
Applying spatial information can help to solve problems in cities. For
example, Lagos Metropolis has emerged as one of the fastest urbanizing
cities in the West African Sub-region. In the absence of a regular use of
information management systems, limited effort had been made to keep track
of change in the rapidly growing city for policy making in land
administration. The ubiquitous energy radiated by the rapid urbanization
rate in the area not only created unprecedented consequences by diminishing
the quality of the environment but it raises serous implications for land
management in the region. The factors fuelling the land crisis in the area
which are not far fetched consists of socio-economic, ecological and policy
elements. To tackle these issues in a mega city, up-to-date knowledge would
be required to capture and analyze land information in order to control
city’s expansion as well as infrastructure development and make
well-motivated choices in planning and (spatial) designs (from The
Applications of Geospatial Information Technology in Land Management: A Case
Study of Lagos, Nigeria, Albert Osei et al, GSDI-9 Conference Proceedings,
6-10 November 2006, Santiago, Chile)
City Governments are entrusted with the stewardship of land to ensure
that it is equitably exploited amongst a diverse set of users without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs for
land. Decisions to support the sustainable development of this land, as a
valuable and finite resource, merit a holistic approach to impact
assessment. Many aspects and options need to be explored to arrive at an
appropriate, objective decision. This can only be achieved if the decision
makers, both city officials and citizens, have access to consistent and
integrated information about land. A key element in providing this relevant
land information is City-wide Land Information Management (LIM), the
institutional and technical arrangements whereby information about all land
and real property within a city are administered.
Cities currently manage considerable collections of land related
information. However, the traditional separation of this information into
different component themes (see Figure 1 below), combined with disjoint
information management regimes, leads to a considerable loss in the value of
the information as a resource. City-wide LIM provides the means to
technically and institutionally integrate these component themes of land
information into a truly corporate information resource. The figure below
illustrates how City-wide LIM can add value by combining information
concerning use, condition, value and tenure of land and disseminating this
to the decision makers.
![](http://bbjd.fig.net/resources/monthly_articles/2007/may_2007/may_2007_kelly-filer/image001.jpg)
Figure 1: City-wide LIM Supporting
Sustainable Development Decision Making (from FIG Publication No. 31 Land
Information Management for Sustainable Development of Cities: Best Practice
Guidelines in City-wide Land Information Management, 2002)
The Marrakech Declaration (FIG Publication No. 33) recommends the
development of a comprehensive national land policy, which should include:
- Institutional and governmental actions required for providing good
governance.
- Land administration infrastructures for steering and control of land
tenure, land value and land use in support of sustainable land
management.
- Tools for capacity assessment and development at societal,
organisational and individual level.
This should in turn form the basis for sound administration at local
level. While the focus has been on land administration, management of a city
includes other factors, such as public safety. So, while an SDI should
provide the basis for a good land administration system, it must also serve
a range of city management processes not necessarily dependent on use of
land. For example, the availability of a sound cadastral database covering
spatial, legal and valuation systems is a key element of an SDI; other data
sets not necessarily based on cadastral parcel are just as valid. Datasets
can include census districts, administrative units defining communities and
government agency services, road and utility service networks and natural
feature boundaries.
There are a number of key issues faced by the growth of cities, which
places severe strains on their management. Key issues that need to be
addressed and possible use of spatial information are shown in the following
table.
Issue
|
Use of spatial information
|
Examples
|
Environmental
|
Land use planning |
Describe spatial extent of
allowable land uses |
Land zoning maps |
Impact of development |
Describe land capability and
sustainability |
Terrain maps showing
vulnerability to land slippage |
Impact of climate change |
Vulnerability to rising sea
level and tidal surges |
Flood prone land mapping and
real-time weather mapping |
Access to water |
Location of dams and fresh
and waste water reticulation networks |
Catchment terrain maps |
Pollution and hazards |
Location of broad and point
specific pollution and hazardous wastes |
Inventory of properties
where hazardous wastes are stored |
Governance
|
Land allocation |
Describe pattern of current
land use |
Digital cadastral database |
Access to serviced land |
Current location of serviced
land |
Cadastral map overlaid by
current aerial photography and utility service networks |
Secure property rights |
Spatial extent of existing
property rights |
Land titles register
containing all rights, restrictions and obligations for each
property |
Community participation |
Public access to cadastral,
planning and environmental information affecting individuals and the
community |
Public display of proposed
developments, land suitability and other maps |
Fiscal sustainability |
Comprehensive and accurate
records of the extent of existing property rights and land use |
Land valuations shown on
cadastral maps |
Public safety |
Comprehensive data about
roads, properties and hazards |
Emergency dispatch system;
bushfire models |
Slum reduction |
Location of vacant or
under-utilised land and population growth predictions |
Current aerial photography,
predictive modeling of land use |
Measuring performance |
Land change over time |
Land change mapping |
Social and economic infrastructure
|
Employment |
Location of existing
enterprises and land zoning for future business use based on
predicted population growth |
Maps showing land zoned for
business use |
Communal facilities |
Location of land set aside
for communal facilities |
Street map showing location
of communal facilities |
Utility services |
Location and attributes of
fresh water, sewer, storm water, electricity and telephone networks |
Cadastral maps showing
utility services |
Transport |
Location and attributes of
public roads |
In
car navigation device using up-to-date road network and GPS |
External effects
|
Rural sustainability |
Location, size and
productive capacity of rural properties |
Satellite images of rural
areas overlaid by cadastral boundaries |
Access to raw materials |
Location of sources of food
and mineral production and transportation corridors for their
movement to the city |
Topographic mapping series |
3. THE BROAD CONTEXT OF SDI
SDIs are more than a collection of spatial data sets. They are also more
than a land administration system. SDI form an under layer of policies,
administrative arrangements and access mechanisms to allow integration of
data from various providers, systems and services to support end-to-end
processes across organizational and technology boundaries within a defined
jurisdiction.
Some trends in SDI development include:
- Most countries recognise the value of spatial capabilities and are
developing SDI strategies at national and sub-national levels
- Key applications are disaster management, national security, natural
resource management and land administration
- City and local governments are a growing user of spatial information
for delivering community services
- Public use is growing through navigation and online services
While individual city governments are developing their SDI, experience
shows that they are more effective if they:
While individual city governments are developing their SDI, experience
shows that they are more effective if they:
- Implement international best practice (such as use of ISO and OGC
standards)
- Use data from higher levels (such as regional cadastral database,
utility and transport network data and national topographic database)
- Provide end-to-end processes merged with surrounding jurisdictions
(such as regional planning processes and land use plans).
In fact, city SDIs should look like a microcosm of regional and national
SDI, perhaps differentiated by use of higher resolution data.
![](http://bbjd.fig.net/resources/monthly_articles/2007/may_2007/may_2007_kelly-filer/image003.jpg)
Figure 2: An SDI Hierarchy (from
Prof Ian Williamson)
Experience in countries such as Australia shows that
problems encountered in developing an SDI at any level include:
-
Immature institutional arrangements and user/provider
relationships
-
Inconsistencies in the availability and quality of
spatially referenced data
-
Inconsistent policies concerning access to and use of
spatially referenced data
-
Incomplete knowledge about the availability and quality
of existing spatially referenced data
-
Lack of best practice in the utilisation of enabling
technologies.
4. DEVELOPING AN SDI
The following development
guideline is drawn from the Australian Spatial Data Infrastructure Action
Plan 2002-2004.
SDI governance
Goal. |
Holders of spatial data, service providers and
users in government agencies, business enterprises, academic
institutions and community groups are involved in implementation
and use of the SDI. |
The focus of
SDI governance efforts is to improve institutional arrangements in support
of the SDI. The key outcome to be achieved is the removal of barriers to
access and use of spatially related data. Often, institutional arrangements
are based on a cooperative approach supported largely by personal
relationships, which while assisting with communication and action, can fall
over when personnel changes occur. Therefore, there is a need to develop
enduring
underpinning structures. The need to engage user communities and the
emerging role of the non-government sector has highlighted the need for
arrangements that take into account the balance between public and private
sectors, data sources and data users.
The development of an SDI should be the means of brokering partnerships
between diverse data providers and users, led by a lead organisation
acceptable to all key stakeholders. It should also provide the opportunity
to engage the local community, provide more open access to information and
encourage participation in decision-making.
Data Access
Goal. |
Spatial data users are able to find and access existing data sources
and services with minimum impediments. |
Mechanisms need to be provided for data sources and service providers to
advise potential users about the availability of their spatial data and
services. Mechanisms should include:
- Consistent policies and best practice procedures that minimise
regulatory and administrative barriers to access (such as consistent
data pricing, protection of privacy and intellectual property and
mandating data management best practice standards and procedures)
- Tools such as directories and catalogues that assist users find and
access existing spatial data and services
- Tools that assist users to access existing spatial data and
services, such as over-the-counter services at local government offices,
display of maps in public places and web portals
- Communication mechanisms to assist users to be heard on data access
needs
Data Quality
Goal. |
Users
are able to easily ascertain the quality of existing spatial data
and its fitness to meet their needs. |
Availability of metadata is the key to providing users with documentation
about data quality. There also needs to be use of best practices in spatial
data management, including adoption and use of data quality documentation
standards. In Australia, this has taken the form of:
- Data quality metadata records held by a distributed clearinghouse
(40,000 records in the Australian Spatial Data Directory)
- A minimum set of SDI-endorsed data quality standards, especially ISO
19115 and ISO 19139 implemented in commercial software products
- Development of an SDI technical architecture and a Harmonised Data
Model (HDM) and published best practice toolkits for local government
Interoperability
Goal. |
Access to and combination of spatial data sources and services is
made time and cost efficient for users through use of world’s best
practice interoperable technologies. |
The availability of online Web Services models, Internet standards and
spatial interoperability standards now allows digital data to be viewed and
overlain using common web browsers. Australian governments support
implementation and use of the open systems specifications promulgated by the
OpenGeospatial® Consortium (OGC) and the World Wide Web Consortium (WWWC) in
SDI, as part of the e-Government Interoperability Framework. Action can
include:
- A collaborative partnership approach between the public and private
sectors in providing interoperability;
- Identify the costs of implementing interoperability and how these
can be shared;
- Promote adoption of interoperability specifications and technologies
through targeted pilots, test beds and case studies which conform to
world’s best practice
- Promote development of reference implementations and geospatial web
services in both the public and private sectors capable of supporting
and using an interoperable environment.
Integratability
Goal. |
Spatial data sources conform to common standards that enable
integration with other data, where such integration enables
efficient and effective solutions for users. |
Just as important as interoperability, is the ability to integrate data
to improve its usability. The true value of many datasets are realised when
they are integrated with companion datasets to allow spatial analysis to
occur. Standards relevant to the SDI in general should be focused on making
individual data and systems fit/work together. Areas for integration need to
be defined by user needs rather than because a standard exists. There is a
need to consider privacy issues, as they can restrict some forms of data
integration. Actions can include:
- Identify priorities and support development of consistent and
integratable spatial data sets that meet demonstrated user needs
- Adopt common classification systems, spatial referencing and content
standards, data models and other common models to facilitate data
development, sharing and use of these data sets
- Encourage data providers to make priority data sets available
through the SDI
5. MEASURING PERFORMANCE OF AN SDI
Figure 3: Possible Indicators for
Evaluating SDIs (from Prof Ian Williamson)
6. FURTHER DISCUSSION
This material will be used to support subsequent discussion on the role
of local, regional and national SDI in managing mega cities to help firm up
the work program of FIG Working Group 3.2 over the next three years. Topics
will include:
- Identify institutional, policy and legal frameworks that can be
incorporated in SDI to address mega city issues
- Identify specific technical innovations in SIM that can improve
management of mega cities
- Roles and benefits to surveyors, government, associations engaged
with spatial data and users of spatial data and spatial information
BIOGRAPHICAL NOTES
Paul Kelly has extensive experience in the development of spatial
information policy and operational management at both national and state
government levels.
Paul has headed the national office of ANZLIC – the Spatial Information
Council for Australia and New Zealand from 2001 to 2004 where he worked with
key users of spatial information in natural resource management, emergency
management, counter-terrorism and local government.
During an eclectic career, he has also been the Chief Information Officer
of a New South Wales (NSW) natural resource agency and Deputy
Surveyor-General of NSW.
He has degrees in surveying, geography, history and political science.
He is currently the Director of Spatial Strategies Pty Ltd, which offers
advice on land administration reform and the strategic use of spatial
information in government agencies and business enterprises. He has recently
completed the Land Administration Strategy for Vietnam and the Spatial
Information Strategy for the NSW State Government.
He is the chair of FIG Commission 3 Working Group 3.2 – Spatial Data
Infrastructure for 2007-2010.
CONTACTS
Mr. Paul Kelly, Director
Spatial Strategies Pty Ltd
AUSTRALIA
Tel. + 61 437 274 449
Email: spatials@smartchat.net.au
![Hit Counter](http://bbjd.fig.net/_vti_bin/fpcount.exe/C:/inetpub/www.fig.net/?Page=resources/monthly_articles/2007/kelly_may_2007.asp|Custom=/images/counter.gif|Digits=4) |