Vermelding onderdeel organisatie 1 Economic models for the development of Spatial Data Infrastructures Forum June 2004 Bastiaan van Loenen OTB Research Institute for Housing, Urban and Mobility Studies, section Geo-information and Land Development

2 Overview Introduction Economic models Best practices Conclusion

3 Why SDI? providing easy, public access to integrated land- related information in support of informed decision making (New Brunswick) creating a national network linking databases and users and enhancing the accessibility, communications and use of geographic information (FGDC) to ensure that spatial data users will be able to acquire consistent datasets to meet their requirements (Australia)

4 Spatial data are special Expensive to create: high expertise and advanced equipment needed data does not ‘come’ to the gatherer Many use spatial data but few are aware of their value Spatial data commercially the most interesting

5 Source: Rajabifard, et al, 1999 Different levels of Detail required for Different SDI levels Less detailed data Global level Regional level National level State level Local level GSDI RSDI NSDI SSDI LSDI More detailed data

6 Economic models Open access model Cost recovery model Public private partnerships

7 Open Access Model Minimum of use restrictions Maximum price of marginal costs of distribution

8 Open Access Model Data Product Public funds VAT Income/Company tax Price Government users End-users Professional Users End-users Treasury Government agency

9 Open Access Successful if sufficient awareness for the value of geographic information exists at the decision making levels and is sustainable Difficult to cooperate with private sector

10 Cost Recovery Model Use restrictions imposed No limit on price

11 Cost Recovery Model Data Product Public funds VAT Income/Company tax Price Government users End-users Professional Users End-users Treasury Government agency

12 Cost Recovery Probably useful if awareness for the value of geographic information is lacking at the decision making levels Allows for cooperation with private sector

13 Public Private Cooperation: MetroGIS Many public organisations needed road centreline data (school districts, counties, cities, water districts, etc.) but did not have it One private company had (parts of the) dataset and was willing to share the dataset with the MetroGIS community

14 Public Private Cooperation The Deal: One time $300,000 investment Dataset for a total price of $50,000 per year for a 5 year period available for all MetroGIS participants (>300) MetroGIS participants provide updates of their road datasets, and/ or road plans to private company No redistribution is allowed

15 Public Private Cooperation The Benefits: Public organisations now use the data that meets their needs against low cost Private company has the most up to date road data against low cost Private company has guaranteed income stream for 5 year period

16 Public Private Partnership: Dutch Large Scale Base Map Common data needs for large scale topographic data Local government Utilities Water boards Kadaster

17 Public Private Partnership The Large scale base map of the Netherlands: uniform dataset 1:500, 1,000 or 2,000 core topography: buildings roads bridges waterways utility facilities street names

18 Public Private Partnership Total cost: > € 200,000,000 Yearly maintenance: € 27,000,000 Investment: € 27,000,000 Price for non-participants: % of costs Restrictive use conditions Without PPP (and cost recovery model) no GBKN!

19 The case of three counties County A: excellent GIS data, open access model County B: excellent GIS data, cost recovery model County C: paper data, not yet decided on the policy Real estate agent covering County A,B, and C but only with GIS data for County A Manufacturing company seeks a new location in County A, B, or C

20 The case of three counties Result: Manufacturing company moves to County A Benefits: - County generates more tax (value added, income, property, and/or company) - Manufacturing company finds quickly new location - Real estate agent is more efficient in location searches

21 Conclusions Public private partnerships may be beneficial in meeting both public and private needs If awareness for SDI is sufficient and sustainable the open access model probably outweighs the cost recovery model No blue print for best access policy

22 Further information Spatial data infrastructure and policy development in Europe and the United States Database with SDI literature

Vermelding onderdeel organisatie 23 Economic models for the development of Spatial Data Infrastructures Thank you for your attention Forum June 2004 Bastiaan van Loenen OTB Research Institute for Housing, Urban and Mobility Studies, section Geo-information and Land Development