Transcript Geo Information and Governance

Geo Information and Governance
WUH TUD Advisory Board meeting 14 May 2013 in Delft
Bas Kok, Associate Professor GI and Governance
Director Knowledge and Research Centre GI Governance
Past President GSDI Associaton
Delft
University of
Technology
Challenge the future
Experiences Bas Kok in Geo Governance domain
National and International
- 1989-1993: Secretary General Council Real Estate Information
-
1994-2006: Director Netherlands Council for Geo Information
1998: Associate Professor TU Delft GI and Governance
1999-2004: Chairman Committee Dutch GI Innovation Programme
2007-2012: Director International Affairs Dutch Cadaster
May 2012 : Director TU Delft Knowledge Centre GI Governance
-
1994-1998: Foundation EUROGI (vice president-chairman legal aspects)
1998-2003: Initiative Group INSPIRE
1996-1998: Foundation GSDI Association (President 2007-2010)
2010
Past President GSDI Association
2
Geo Information and Governance
• Geo Information and Governance
• TU Delft Knowledge Centre Geographical information and
Governance
• Conclusions WUH and TUD workshop on 12 November 2012
• Lectures Wuhan University as visiting professor
• Inventory project Geo Information and Governance
3
Geo Information and Governance
•
•
•
•
•
GI and Governance
GI and Governance
GI and Governance
GI and Governance
Governance trends
focus
in the Netherlands
in the European Union
in the America’s and Asia Pacific
4
GI and Governance focus (1)
Institutional, organisational, and legal arrangements of the
government to organise the collection, processing, data sharing,
and data provision of geo information to government,
companies, academic and research communities, and citizens.
Focus on the development of institutional and organizational
preconditions resulting in optimal cooperation and use of geoinformation.
5
GI and Governance focus (2)
Governance issues relate to the processes that lead to the
successful realization of geo information infrastructures (sdi’s).
Including the influence of worldwide and European development
of administrative and institutional environments/aspects.
Institutional issues concern the organization of sdi’s particularly in
the public sector, their policies, responsibilities and control.
6
GI and Governance focus (3)
The organizational, legal and financial policy in the context of data
sharing of geo-information (including digital rights management,
harmonized business models).
The role of stakeholders in the development of spatial data
infrastructures, the dynamic processes in developing cooperation
between the parties in a changing environment and the
changing role of government in governance processes.
GI Governance performance models (such as SDI assessments).
7
GI and Governance in the Netherlands
Coordination Geo Information Netherlands
Economic Planning
Spatial Planning
Land use
Transport
Environmental issues
Coordination High Quality
Data needed
8
Spatial planning authority initiatives
related to Dutch SDI
Characteristics Dutch spatial planning system
• Very strict spatial planning regime
• Many protected areas such as forest regions, rural conservation areas,
wetlands, etc.
• Many building restrictions
9
Coordination real estate and geoinformation
in the Netherlands
Information Coordination Policy: effective government performance from the 1980s
Traditionally: High Quality registrations Dutch Cadastre and Land Administration
Coordinating Minister for Real Estate Information: in 1984 and establishing National
Advisory Council Real Estate and Geo Information
High need to compose new public registrations: harmonization taxation/ registration
real estate, public restrictions, topography, cables and pipelines
Dutch structure plan for Geo Information: approved by Council of Ministers in 1993
Cooperation models between national government, provinces, and municipalities:
based on the Structure plan vision (Spatial Data Infrastructure)
10
Dutch Structure Plan for Geo Information
11
Infrastructure framework (1992)
Administrative
Link
Geometric
-
address
- 1:10.000
- 1:1000/2000
population
cadastre
enterprise
topographic set
buildings
12
Dutch approach
Late 1980s
- SDI infrastructure vision developed by public agencies.
- Key vision was information exchange between 8 core registrations.
1993
- Vision approved by Council of Ministers and Parliament.
- Public platform established responsible for standard definition and implementation.
- Quality standards for collecting, maintenance and updating developed and implemented.
1997
- SDI adopted in e-government programs.
2000
- Legal status core registrations as Authentic Registers till 2015.
2004
- SDI innovation 40 million EURO program Space for Geo Information launched.
2007
- Policy Council established.
- Platform established to improve the access to core data in NL.
2008-2011
- New vision: GIDEON
2009
- INSPIRE portal launched
13
Authentic registrations
• One place for the information
• One authority is legally responsible
• Every government agency required to use this information
• Several registrations of geo-information formalized by law
14
GEO information hub in e-Government
Key
Key
Key
Key
register
register
register
register
cadastre
topography
buildings
addresses
(Possible) future key registers:
Large scale base map
Cables and pipe line information
Valuation information
…
…
15
Development of an SDI
Extent of cooperation.
Information need.
Stand
alone
InterExchange/
standardisation mediary
Time
Network
16
Stage
Stand alone
Exchange
Intermediary
Network
Vision
Focus on
individual
organisation
Developed with Implementation
all stakeholders
Commonly
shared, and
frequently
reviewed
Leadership
Focus on
individual
organisation
Questioned
Accepted
Respected by
all stakeholders
Communication
Focus on
individual
organisation
Open between
public parties
Open between
all stakeholders
Open and
interactive
between all
Self-organising
ability
Passive
problem
recognition
Neutral
problem
recognition
Actively helping
to solve
identified
problems
Actively
working on
innovation
Aspect
17
Lectures Geo Information Governance
-
General Spatial Data Infrastructures
Innovation of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure
Development of organizational and institutional aspects
Coordination of Geo Information
Development National Spatial Data Infrastructure (responsibility)
Developments Electronic Government Programme across the globe
Legal system Authentic registrations
Relationship with the development of European Spatial Data
Infrastructure (INSPIRE), PSI Directive, Privacy and Data base
protection Act
18
Lectures Geo Information and Goverance
in Europe
- Foundation of Eurogi
- Info 2000 and GI 2000 of the European Commission
- Infrastructure for Spatial Information in Europe-INSPIRE
(institutional and organizational process, legislation)
- Strategic documents (Horizon 2020 program)
- Digital agenda for Europe
- GMES programme
- Development of Spatial Data Infrastructures in 27 EU member
States/relationship with INSPIRE/role National Mapping Agencies
- Important European Legislation
- Important scientific organizations in Europe
19
GI Governance EUROPE
INSPIRE
Successful SDI implementations in:
Denmark
Norway
Spain
Sweden
Finland
20
INSPIRE
Principles
• Data should be collected once and maintained at the level where
this can be done most effectively
• Combine seamlessly spatial data from different sources and share
it between many users and applications
• Spatial data should be collected at one level of government and
shared between all levels
• Spatial data needed for good governance should be available on
conditions that are not restricting its extensive use
• It should be easy to discover which spatial data is available, to
evaluate its fitness for purpose and to know which conditions
apply for its use
21
INSPIRE process
Commission Services co-ordinate
EC
adopts
Implementing Rules
Formal Internet
Consultation
Review
Consolidation Team
Existing Reference
Material
Call for Interest
Drafting
Teams
Prototypes
test
Draft
Implementing Rules
INSPIRE
Committee
votes
INSPIRE Expert Group
advises
Pilots
validat
Projects
e
contribute
Experts are
proposed
LMOs
review
Spatial Data Interest Communities participate
Public
reviews
MS
apply
CEN, ISO, OGC
contribute
Association phase
Drafting phase
Review phase
22
GI Governance
America’s
USA
Canada
Asia Pacific
Malaysia, Singapore, .. (The People’s Republic of China?)
Australia
23
USA approach
• Federal SDI and FGDC launched by Clinton order in 1993
• Partnerships between Fed’s and States
• Data access promotion and launching Clearing House globally
• SDI and interoperability essential tool in e-gov one stop shop
• Marketplace approach stimulates federal agency involvement
• Interoperability of OGC standards enable NSDI data services
• Important initiator of GEO GEOSS activities/portals/clearinghouses
• Since the end of 2008 all the satellite images free on the web
available
24
Australian approach
• Many differences in approaches in various states
• Interesting initiatives in Queensland and Western Australia
• Queensland investments integrated systems and ease citizens
access maps
• Shared Land Information Platform (SLIP) in line with electronic egov
• Western Australia SLIP provides citizens and user groups Land
Info.
• Victoria state made agreement Google Map for access to citizens
cadastre parcel
25
Impacts of successful SDI implementation
In the countries mentioned many differences in SDI occurs, but always a
key role for Cadastral Agencies and Mapping agencies
Successful SDI implementation lead to:
• Sound e-government performance/effective government business
processes
• Better access of reliable public spatial information for citizens
• Increasing arrangements governments and industries improving data
access
• Increasing production of high tech products by geo spatial industry
• Innovation of SDI products by government, research and business
community
• Sound position of the geo spatial industry in IT business processes
26
Governance trends on global level
- GI Governance strategic iniatives in Europe (Horizon 2020) and
US (place based policies)
- More need for regulation because of fast growing technologies
- Growing need for cooperation related to data policy issues
- Convergences between SDI communities, GEO GEOSS and
Digital Earth Communities (GSDI 11 2009 conference theme)
- Current information age requires high quality GI ranking system
27
TU Delft Knowledge Center on Geographical
Information and Governance
• New expertise center (started May 2012)
• Supported by Dutch stakeholders
• Building on expert knowledge, outstanding national, and
international network (GSDI, DigitalEarth, INSPIRE/Digital
Agenda, NCG/Geonovum)
• Performing research for:
• Dutch government
• European Commission (European location framework initiative: legal
interoperability)
• http://www.otb.tudelft.nl/gigovernance
28
Research at Knowledge Centre for GI and
Governance
Focus on the development of institutional and organizational
preconditions resulting in optimal cooperation and use of geoinformation:
•
•
•
•
Governance of geo-information
How to provide access to public geo-information?
Impact of data sharing on SDI objectives
How to assess the success of SDIs from an institutional
perspective?
29
Geo Information Governance part of WUH/TUD
agreement
• Governance of geo-information and cooperation models
• Impact of data sharing on SDI objectives
• Assessment of Spatial Data Infrastructures (SDIs)
30
Governance of GI
• Typical GI world: many players, many datasets, many different
responsibilities, technology driven
• How to organise these to benefit both the individual organisation
and society?
• New technology (smart phones, social media), new players
(citizens as sensor), rethinking the roles of government and
other players
• Which governance model are utilised today and how successful
are they? What may Europe learn from The People’s Republic of
China and what may The People’s Republic of China learn from
Dutch, EU initiatives and the INSPIRE process?
• New governance models?
31
Data sharing and organisational interoperability
• How to stimulate data sharing?
• To improve data sharing, remove technical, organisational, legal,
and financial barriers
32
33
Interoperability
SDI Assessment
• SDI implementation and development often require an impact
assessment or cost benefit analysis
• Cost benefit ratio is always positive
34
35
Stage
Stand alone
Exchange
Intermediary
Network
Vision
Focus on
individual
organisation
Developed with Implementation
all stakeholders
Commonly
shared, and
frequently
reviewed
Leadership
Focus on
individual
organisation
Questioned
Accepted
Respected by
all stakeholders
Communication
Focus on
individual
organisation
Open between
public parties
Open between
all stakeholders
Open and
interactive
between all
Self-organising
ability
Passive
problem
recognition
Neutral
problem
recognition
Actively helping
to solve
identified
problems
Actively
working on
innovation
Aspect
36
Cooperation Geo Information Governance WUH TUD
Lectures Program / Workshops on GI Governance in China
Inventory project points of interest of NASG, WUH, Dutch Kadaster
TNO, Grontmy, TUD (and other possible partners from the People’s
Republic of China)?
How to facilitate the knowledge exchange (e.g., a PhD candidate
from NASG?)
37
Geo Information and Governance
WUH TUD Advisory Board meeting 14 May 2013 in Delft
Bas Kok, Associate Professor GI and Governance
Director Knowledge and Research Centre GI Governance
Past President GSDI Associaton
Delft
University of
Technology
Challenge the future