SPATIALIST Spatial Data Infrastructures and Public

Sector Innovation in Flanders (Belgium)

Joep Crompvoets,

7 November 2011

Contents

■ Project SPATIALIST

■ Results

0-measurement

Case studies

MAMCA

SPATIALIST

Website: www.spatialist.be

Project research question

What are the

- technological,

- legal,

- economic,

- organizational and

- inter-organizational

requirements to further develop the Spatial Data

Infrastructure in Flanders?

Location of Flanders

Project characteristics

Start: September 2007

Duration: 4.5 years

Funding: Agency for the promotion of Innovation by Science and

Technology in Flanders (IWT)

Scientific disciplines:

- Public administration

- Geomatics

- Law

- Sociology

- Economics

Motivation

- GI-Research primarily focused on technological issues of GIS

- Institutional framework, policy and human resources described as

stable, non-moving factors

- More technology: Not a sufficient condition for an SDI to be used

- Failing Implementation of SDI due to non-technological issues

- Limited number of studies about organizational, public

administration, legal, and economics SDI-issues -> Not much

knowledge what must be done to avoid failure

- Need to improve the Flemish SDI

Partners

Katholieke Universiteit Leuven

2. Public Management Institute

(Geert Bouckaert)

3. Spatial Applications Division Leuven

(Jos Van Orshoven)

4. Interdisciplinary Centre for Law

& ICT

(Jos Dumortier)

5. Centre for Sociological Research

(Geert Van Hootegem)

Vrije Universiteit Brussel

1. Laboratory MOSI

(Cathy Macharis / Frank Plastria)

Scientific expert board

Public administration science Prof. Victor Bekkers

Geomatics (GI-Technology) Prof. Arnold Bregt

Law Dr. Mireille van Eechoud

Economics Prof. Eddy Torfs

Sociology/Management science Prof. Paul Hendriks

Multicriteria decision aid Prof. Johan Springael

Spatial data infrastructures Prof. Yola Georgiadou

Prof. Zorica Nedovic

Prof. Ian Masser

User group

• Providing input about SDI key issues

• Participating in case studies

• Providing feedback on (intermediate) results

• Evaluating/validating the (project) results

• Enhancing the interdisciplinary character of the research

Members • Association of Flemish Cities and Municipalities

• City of Leuven

• Association of Flemish provinces

• Co-ordination cell Flemish e-Government

• AGIV

• INcGEO

• National Geographic Institute

• Flemish Services for Government Policy

(April 2008)

Results

- 0-measurement (2008)

- Case studies

- MAMCA

Definitions I

■ Few define SDI as a (dynamic) network – Tulloch & Harvey (2007)

User

User

Producer

User

User

User/producer

Producer

Coordinator3 levels

Organisation (Node)

Data flow (Link)

Network (SDI)

Definitions II

An SDI is an

■ Shared network of organizations

■ to facilitate

■ the access, use and sharing of spatial

data

0-measurement: response

Total 255 509 (public) organisations 50%

Federal 11 40 organisations 28%

Flemish 61 109 organisations 56%

Provincial 8 10 organisations 80%

Municipal 166 308 organisations 54%

Local authorities 9 42 organisations 21%

Municipal response (May 2008)

0-Measurement: Organisations

■ 60% mainly user, 40% user as well as producer

■ GIS Use in public organisations in Flanders:

65% no GIS use – 20% as a tool

13% integrated in process – 2% steering

■ 75% organisations: no policy for data exchange

0-Measurement: Data flows

AGIV main spatial data supplier in Flanders, other

important suppliers Federal Public Service Finance and

Provinces

90% of data flows free or dissemination costs

40% of data flows ready for use

SDI – network in Flanders (1)

SDI-network in Flanders(2)

Perceelsnetwerk Adresnetwerk

Wegennetwerk Hydrografienetwerk

Parcels network Address network

Roads network Hydrography network

SDI-network in Flanders (3)

West-Flanders Limburg

East-Flanders

Antwerp Flemish-Brabant

Network as a whole

Density Distance

Parcels 0,0119 1,312

Addresses 0,0062 1,832

Roads 0,0046 1,519

Hydrography 0,0044 1,709

Individual characteristics

Centrality within the

parcel network

FOD Financiën 89,000

AGIV 62,000

Oost – Vlaanderen 17,000

R-O Vlaanderen 7,000

Strengths & Weaknesses

Strengths of current SDI in Flanders

1. Wide supply of spatial data

2. Centralized data provision

3. Data access

Weaknesses of current SDI in Flanders

1. Data actualization

2. Lack of coordination

3. Lack of human capacity

Priority GDI-investment

In case you would get 100,000 € to be invested in the development of

the Flemish SDI, for what would you invest?

Links to Priorities of stakeholders for further development of

Flemish SDI

GDI-investment (€ 100,000)

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000

13. Other activities

12. Better cooperation

11. Other processing structures

10. Strengthen exist. coord. structure

9. Education

8. New applications

7. Network services at coord. organ.

6. Own network services

5. Metadata descrip & maintenance

4. Purchase external datasets

3. Better harmonisation/standardis.

2. More frequent updates

1 Produce new spatial datasets

13

12

11

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

Euros

GDI-investment

Entire population (109 respondents)

Flemish (24) Provinces (7) Municipalities (67) Local authorities (6)

Final measurement (2011)

Final measurement (Results)

Little change compared with 2008

Similar use of geodata within business processes

Strengthening central position AGIV

- 54% of the flows refer to AGIV

- >90% of the municipalities receive AGIV-data

Cadastre + Provincies: Important players

Strengths: Accessibility + Central access AGIV

Weaknesses: Actualisation + Access constraints

Final measurement (Results)

Opinion improvement

(2008 – 2011) Improvement No improvement

1. Data accessibility 63,4% 18,8%

2. Extension data/service offer 57,0% 8,6%

3. Standardisation / harmonisation 34,9% 22,6%

4. Integration in work processes 33,3% 23,7%

5. Actualisation 29,0% 37,1%

6. Extension demand 22,0% 4,8%

7. Education 22,0% 20,4%

8. Cooperation 19,9% 35,5%

9. Financing / Funding 2,7% 22,0%

10. Others 1,1% 2,7%

11. Do not know 10,2% 23,7%

Case Studies

■ Case = process within the public sector in Vlaanderen, wherein spatial data plays a role

■ Production, exchange and use of

Spatial planning (RUP)

Maintenance of Address Data

Registration of Traffic Accidents

Mapping floods

■ Embedded cases:

5/6 organizations within a case

Case studies

Detailed study

Spatial data access, use and sharing happens in a

network of business processes

Case: specific business process in which the exchange

of spatial data is important

Process step

Organisation

A

B

C

F

E

D

H

G

I

Process step

Organisation

A

B

C

F

E

D

H

G

I

Case studies

■ Focus: public sector

■ Objective: To map the spatial data Access, Use and Exchange of

specific business processes

To examine possible reasons or factors that influence the spatial data Access, Use and Exchange – Technological

– Organizational

– Public administration science

– Legal

– Economic

Workshop AD SDI Assessment 33

Scheme

SET-UP

Technology – geo-standards

Legislation

Licensing & Funding

Organisation

Coordination & cooperation

PERFORMANCE Access, use and sharing

+

Contribution to the

Performance of the process

Analysing business processes

• Spatial Planning

• Mapping floods

• Registration of traffic accidents

• Maintenance of addresses

Case-Performance results

Spatial

planning

Addresses Accident

registration

Risk maps

Flooding

Efficiency High Medium Low High

Intensity of use Medium /

High

Low Medium High

Degree of

sharing

Medium /

High

Low Low Medium

Success factors:

- Degree of Standardisation

- Open Attitude towards Privacy

- Consistent Data Policy

- Organisational geodata management integrated in

work processes

Case adresses

Case Maintenance of Address

data ■ Process

Production of address data

Use of address data in processes of the organization

Internal and external exchange of address data

■ Selection of organisations

2 provinces: Antwerp, West-Flanders

3 municipalities: Leuven, Mechelen, Zwijndrecht

Embedded case

Side case

Adressennetwerk

Key chain

Side chain

Gemeente

Zwijndrecht

Stad Mechelen

Stad Leuven

AGIV Provincie

Antwerpen

Provincie

West-

Vlaanderen

Rijksregister AAPD KBO

De Lijn

Set-up – General

■ High demand for address data

■ Similar problems with address data maintenance and improvement

■ Awareness of the need to improve and integrate

■ Separation between personal and company data

■ Numerous sources of address files within organization

■ Little integration between address files of the different services

■ Awareness of privacy issues

Set-up - Differences

■ Some organizations disseminate address data via services,

other organizations work with (analogue) list

■ Security is sometimes very high, sometimes low

Performance – General /

Differences ■ Limited GIS-integration within address maintenance

process

■ Limited use of GIS for (address) analyses

■ Low exchange of address data among services

Differences

■ Level of GIS-use between processes and organizations

Registration of Traffic Accidents

Registration of Traffic Accidents

■ Process

Registration of traffic accidents

Use of traffic accident data in processes of the

organization

Internal and external exchange of traffic accident data

■ Selection of organizations

3 police zones: Leuven, Vlas, Het Houtsche

2 provinces: Flemish-Brabant, West-Flanders

Federal Police

Statistic office

Embedded case

Side case

Verkeersongevallennetwerk

Key chain

Side chain

Politiezone

Dilbeek

Politiezone

Het Houtsche

Politiezone /

Stad Leuven

FOD Financiën Provincie

West-Vlaanderen

Provincie

Vlaams-Brabant

Departement MOW

Steunpunt Verkeersveiligheid

BIVV

Agentschap Wegen en Verkeer

Federale politie

Federale werkgroep

ongevallenstatistiek

Vlaams verkeerscentrum?

BE-Mobile?

ISLP?

Ziekenhuizen?

NIS

Set-up – General

■ Process steps at many organizations

■ No much interaction between process steps

■ Localization of individual accidents happens independently at

different organizations

■ Different methods applied for localization (from only x,y-

coordinates to a detail drawing of the accident)

■ Two levels of registration – localization – analysis – use

Set-up - Differences

■ Ways of traffic accident data exchange

■ Level of involvement

■ Level of metadata production and use

■ Level of outsourcing

Performance – General /

Differences General

■ Access to accident data not optimal

■ Police: own measurement and mapping techniques

■ Application GIS low; just for consultation/geocoding, not for

analyses

Differences

■ Access to spatial data (own data, external data)

■ Use of spatial data

■ Dissemination of spatial data

Summary results Case Studies

Set-up: Use and Exchange of spatial data not fully integrated in

business processes

Differences set-up: Big differences between organizations

and cases

Performance: Use and Exchange of spatial data far from

optimal

Differences Performance: Big differences between organisations

and cases

MAMCA (Method)

Stakeholder analysisStakeholder analysis

Stake-holder 1

Stake-holder 1

C11C11 CCAlternativesAlternatives

Cn1Cn1 Cnm

Cnm

Stake-holder m

Stake-holder m

Ref.Ref.

AlternAltern

C11C11 Results

Implemen-

tation

Implemen-

tation

scenariosscenarios

resultresult

resultresult

CnmCnm

resultresult

resultresult

IndicatorsIndicators Measurement

methods

Measurementmethods

C11C11

CnmCnm

Mitigation

strategies

Mitigation

strategies

C11C11 CC

Wn1Wn1 Wnm

Wnm

W11W11 Wnm

Wnm

Overall analyses

(MCA)

+/0/-+/0/-Deployment

scenarios

Deployment

scenarios

11

22

6655

44

33

77

Steps of Multi-Actor

Multi-Criteria Analysis

MAMCA

Private

sector Govern-

ment

Going concern

Less Hierarchy /

More market

More

Hierarchy

Hierarchy/ Market

Less Hierarchy /

more Network

R&D

sector

Utili-

ties

OVERALL

Tangible results ■ 3 Staten-Generaal Flanders Geoland

■ 4 PhDs

■ 5 Books

■ 28 Book chapters

■ 15 articles in scientific journals

■ 60 articles in popular magazines

■ 80 Conference papers

■ 8 Research reports

■ 150 presentations during scientific meetings

■ 20 study day presentations in Flanders

■ 8 presentations at high political/administrative platforms

■ 13 workshops organised for uses

■ Contribution to GDI-Flanders (Flemish government agreement,

Flanders in Actie, GDI-Council / Working group)

Assignment

What are the requirements to develop

successful Spatial Data Infrastructures?

Questions

Website: www.spatialist.be