1. Challenge the future Delft University of Technology 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

2. 2 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

3. 3 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

4. 4 Geo Information and Governance GI and Governance focus GI and Governance in the Netherlands GI and Governance in the European Union GI and Governance in the America’s and Asia Pacific Governance trends

5. 5 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 geo- information. GI and Governance focus (1)

6. 6 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. GI and Governance focus (2)

7. 7 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).

8. 8 GI and Governance in the Netherlands Coordination Geo Information Netherlands Economic Planning Spatial Planning Land use Transport Environmental issues Coordination High Quality Data needed

9. 9 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

10. 10 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)

11. 11 Dutch Structure Plan for Geo Information

12. 12 Infrastructure framework (1992) Administrative Link Geometric - population address - 1:10.000 - cadastre - 1:1000/2000 - enterprise topographic set - buildings

13. 13 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

14. 14 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 Authentic registrations

15. 15 GEO information hub in e-Government Key register cadastre Key register topography Key register buildings Key register addresses (Possible) future key registers: Large scale base map Cables and pipe line information Valuation information …

16. 16 Development of an SDI Stand alone Exchange/ standardisation Inter- mediary Network Time Extent of cooperation. Information need.

17. 17 Stage Aspect Stand aloneExchangeIntermediaryNetwork VisionFocus on individual organisation Developed with all stakeholders ImplementationCommonly shared, and frequently reviewed LeadershipFocus on individual organisation QuestionedAcceptedRespected by all stakeholders CommunicationFocus 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

18. 18 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

19. 19 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

20. 20 GI Governance EUROPE INSPIRE Successful SDI implementations in: Denmark Norway Spain Sweden Finland

21. 21 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 Principles INSPIRE

22. 22 INSPIRE process Commission Services co-ordinate Spatial Data Interest Communities participate Projects contribute Drafting Teams Consolidation Team Proto- types test Pilots validat e CEN, ISO, OGC contribute INSPIRE Expert Group advises INSPIRE Committee votes EC adopts Public reviews Implementing Rules Draft Implementing Rules Formal Internet Consultation Review Call for Interest Existing Reference Material Experts are proposed Association phaseDrafting phaseReview phase LMOs re- view MS apply

23. 23 GI Governance America’s USA Canada Asia Pacific Malaysia, Singapore,.. (The People’s Republic of China?) Australia

24. 24 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

25. 25 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 e- gov Western Australia SLIP provides citizens and user groups Land Info. Victoria state made agreement Google Map for access to citizens cadastre parcel

26. 26 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

27. 27 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

28. 28 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

29. 29 Research at Knowledge Centre for GI and Governance Focus on the development of institutional and organizational preconditions resulting in optimal cooperation and use of geo- information: 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?

30. 30 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)

31. 31 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?

32. 32 Data sharing and organisational interoperability How to stimulate data sharing? To improve data sharing, remove technical, organisational, legal, and financial barriers

33. 33 Interoperability

34. 34 SDI Assessment SDI implementation and development often require an impact assessment or cost benefit analysis Cost benefit ratio is always positive

35. 35

36. 36 Stage Aspect Stand aloneExchangeIntermediaryNetwork VisionFocus on individual organisation Developed with all stakeholders ImplementationCommonly shared, and frequently reviewed LeadershipFocus on individual organisation QuestionedAcceptedRespected by all stakeholders CommunicationFocus 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

37. 37 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?)

38. Challenge the future Delft University of Technology 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