Transcript Document

• Day:
• Session:
• Coordinators:
Wednesday 9th November
14.30am - 15.45
Ian Williamson & Stig
Enemark
• Topic:
Components of the
vision- break out groups
Day 1 – Wednesday Nov 9th
Welcome & Research
Vision
Presentations - European
Perspective of Paradigm
Australian Group
Coordinator: Stig Enemark
Rapporteur: Steve Jacoby
Evaluate – Components of
the vision
Report Back - Discussion
European Lessons Learnt
European Group
Coordinator: Ian Williamson
Rapporteur: Paul van der Molen
Day 2 – Thursday Nov 10th
Presentations - Australian
Perspective of Paradigm
Australian Group
Coordinator: Stig Enemark
Rapporteur: Grahame Searle
Evaluate – Components of
the vision
Report Back - Discussion
Australian Lessons Learnt
European Group
Coordinator: Ian Williamson
Rapporteur: Daniel Steudler
Day 3 – Friday Nov 11th
Presentation – Spatially
Enabling Government
Group 1
(based on Australian &
European Perspectives)
Evaluate – Issues in
Designing a New
Generation of LAS
Rapporteur: Warwick Watkins
Group 2
(based on Australian &
European Perspectives)
Rapporteur: Holger Magel
Report Back - Discussion
Final Presentation
Next Generation of LAS
Ian Williamson, Stig Enemark,
Jude Wallace
Key Components and Tools
1. Authentic registers?
2. The IT architecture to deliver the
vision?
3. The spatial dimension- SDI?
4. Infrastructure to support trading in
complex commodities?
Key Components and Tools
•
•
•
How do we record public rights? Do we need to?
How accurate does identification of RRR need to be?
Geo coding
Future Challengers, Issues & Improvements
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Achieving a national system in a federated
country
Achieving spatially enabled government
Should the land registry system contribute to
SD? How?
Relationship between the land registry and
spatial cadastre
Can international comparative monitoring be
established?
Administration of restrictions and
responsibilities
Is the land parcel still central to LA?
The role of buildings in land administration
Observations/ Learnings (1)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Denmark far in advance of other european countries
(Stig)
How do we engage the community? Relevance!
Title is fundamental and is still undervalued
Institutional Issues: Primary problem. How?
Model encompasses core elements. Different
jurisdictions have different focus.
From e to i: End-User orientated approach is required
rather than technology focus
Environmental Issues: policy response in Europe has
been far different to Aus
–
Unbundling rights in AUS/Unheard of in Europe
Country Context is important- Education, Institutional
arrangements
Observations/ Learnings (2)
•
•
•
•
•
•
Land Administration enables does not deliver Sus Dev
EU seems to be impacting on each country? Top down
vs Bottom up
Changes seem to have occurred without legislation?
Authentic Registers well supported. We do not have
these authoritative registers in Australia
Local Government more empowered in Europe – more
problematic in AUS
SDI: Need to retain simple messages (de Soto) – for
users / politicians
The Paradigm or Model
•
In Australia:
–
–
–
•
How do you promote this model to end-users, key
stakeholders (e.g. Utilities) AND politicians
–
•
•
•
•
•
Unbundling has resulted in disparate management of ‘new
property’ i.e. managing outside the LAS and they’re not TAXED
Politics has had a large impact in rural Australia- diff to Europe
We’ve yet to unlock value of the ‘parcel’ and existing land
administration systems
Fundamentally there appears nothing wrong with Australian LAS
Conceptually attractive model (efficiencies etc.), but, is it
visionary enough?
link between LAS functions and sustainable development is
not unique – other contributors
Where are the people in this model?
Is the parcel approach limited? Geo-coding and addressing
offers far more opportunities
Arrows: Policy in a vacuum? Making the model loops?
Key Drivers
•
•
•
•
•
•
Technology appears to be one of the strongest drivers
Traditional economic drivers were evident e.g Holger
Environmental drivers have prevailed in Australia
Where were the environmental drivers in Europe (e.g.
Kyoto). Are they already culturally embedded in Europe
(e.g. Swiss civil code)?
ICT enabled efficiencies (cost improvements)
Cross-country initiatives- Will these be key drivers in the
future?
Future Challengers, Issues & Improvements
•
•
•
•
•
Historical institutional frameworks are key barriers- ICT
can just ‘mask’ these problems
The language used in the spatial sector fails to sell spatial
technologies and information (simple / relevant)
Multi-jurisdictional problems- state vs. federal vs. local vs.
regional authorities- Should the model+ include these
relationships / roles?
Funding and governance arrangements need attentionThese need to be understood to make the model relevant to
a particular jurisdiction
Looping the components together (not linear)