SHINE

Selected Heritage Inventory for Natural England

Selected National Heritage Dataset

Enhancement Project

Recap - SNHD

• SNHD – Selected National Heritage Dataset• Created in late 2004 in time for launch of ES• Data came primarily from the NMR• Ten HERs contributed data• Selection criteria for sites:

– a list of Monument Types– must be substantive, verifiable and of known character– must be closely mapped– should be able to benefit from an ES option

• Intended to populate ES maps with HE features

Recap - ES

• Environmental Stewardship launched in 2005• Divided into two tiers: Entry Level and Higher

Level Stewardship (ELS and HLS)• ELS is open to all land owners – farmers chose

from a suite of environmentally beneficial land management options

• Five HE options exist• Uptake of these options is almost entirely

dependent upon data provision• Approx. £3billion will be spent on ES by 2013

How is your data used?

• SNHD has been loaded onto NE’s IT system• Populates the Environmental Information Map

received by ELS applicants from NE• A short description of each site is included in an

accompanying document• Farmers pick the option they would like to use

on a feature• Cross-compliance regulations provide a baseline

level of protection, regardless of whether an option has been used

What are the problems?

• Data coverage is very patchy

• Only 10 HERs have had the opportunity to properly input into this dataset

• Polygons are variable in quality and accuracy

• Selection criteria may not represent our priorities

Why do we need to improve it?

• ‘Hands-off’ scheme, but this doesn’t mean that it won’t deliver for HE

• Unlike HLS, uptake of options for ELS is driven by the data provided on application maps rather than consultation with HERs

• ELS represents the majority of spend for ES• By May 2007, the SNHD was generating

£2.2million pa on management of HE features• We MUST be able to justify value for money

What’s in it for you?

• SHINE presents an opportunity:– to replace the current dataset– to help secure funding for the management of

important archaeological sites– to feed into a process that is delivering real benefits

on the ground in your area– to ensure that where public funds are spent, it

represents value for money– to help ensure that ELS delivers as much as it can,

rather than relying on the limited funds of HLS

How did this project get started?

• Natural England has funded the first two stages of a three stage project to create SHINE

• Project put out to tender; exeGesIS successful • Stage 1 : assessment of the SNHD, assessment

of what HERs might be able to deliver, presentation of options

• Stage 2 : creation of a detailed methodology and recommended workflow that we hope will enable HERs to more easily participate

• Stage 3 : data capture, delivery of SHINE

Analysis of old SNHD Methodology

• Compared SNHD data with submitted data and current HER data from eight pilot HERs.– Data created using different methodologies.– Inconsistencies in data structure and content.– Records from NMR not present in HER data.– Inconsistent, haphazard post processing.– Problems with final data supply to Natural England.

• Conclusions– ELS dataset cannot be created as queried subset of

monuments.• No reliable selection method (monument type lists, evidence etc)• Monument polygons rarely appropriate for ELS.

– Post-submission processing of the data should be minimised.

Towards a new methodology…

Do you have GIS integrated with your HER?

2144%

2450%

36%

ArcGIS

MapInfo

Other

Which database system do you use to manage your HER?

3266%

00%

1021%

613%

HBSMR

Off-the-Shelf

In-House Access

In-House Other

Questionnaire (48/51 replies): HER Systems

Questionnaire Results

Resource estimates for 2008/9?

36%

12%

1327%

2246%

919%

None

1-4 wks5-8 wks

9-12 wksOther

Annual resource estimates?

36%

00%

1429%

2246%

919%

None

1-2 wks3-4 wks

5-8 wksOther

Resources available for new SNHD

Questionnaire Results

Is the ALGAO definition for candidate sites to be included OK?

2756%

2144%

Sound

Problematic

Definition of sites to include for ELS

Questionnaire Results

How useful would you find regional seminars?

2246%

2348%

36%

Essential

Useful

Not Useful

How useful would you find regular visits from project staff?

3063%

12%

1225%

510%

Essential

Useful

Not Useful

Did not answer

Central support

Questionnaire Conclusions

• HERs are positive about producing and maintaining a fit-for-purpose dataset for ELS.BUT...

• HERs are concerned over quality/currency of existing data.

• HERs have been concerned about lack of feedback and perceived lack of outcomes from previous initiatives.

• Uncertainty whether HERs can commit sufficient resources to create dataset.SO…

• HERs want clear methodology, support and guidance.• HERs need sensible timescales.

New SHINE methodology

• Simple clearly-defined dataset.• Dataset created and maintained as a new GIS layer.• No prescriptive methodology (eligible monument type list

etc)• Recommended workflows provided, but can be tailored

(or ignored!). Start-up pack provided.• Dataset supplied to SHINE coordinator at predetermined

intervals.• Data merged and cleaned by coordinator using

automated toolkit for submission to Natural England.• Clear mechanisms for progress review and feedback.

SHINE Data Standard

• Polygon Attribute Structure– SHINEUID, a nationally unique identifier for each polygon. 2-

letter code for each HER + integer, e.g. DE457.– Name, a descriptive name including the principle characteristics

(type, period and form) of the manageable site in non-technical terms.

– Form, the predominant form, constrained to ‘Structure’, ‘Earthwork’, ‘Cropmark’ or ‘Sub surface deposit’ (EH thesaurus definitions).

– Signif, the significance of the site, constrained to High/Medium/Low (definitions to be confirmed).

– WebURL, optional URL to online record for main monument.– LastEdit, the date and time of last data edit (ISO 8601 format).

All fields are mandatory except WebURL

SHINE Polygon Standards

Only one polygon per SHINEUID

Polygons mustnot overlap

Polygons must notbe smaller than400 square meters(0.04 hectares)in area

Polygons created asa buffer around apoint (such as abarrow) must notbe less than 15meters in radius

SHINE Polygon Standards

Polygons musthave no ‘spikes’

Polygons must not have self-intersections

Polygons must have a minimum internal dimension of no less than 10 meters

SHINE Polygon Standards

Polygons must be captured against a base mapping at a scale of 1:10000 or larger, or against suitable highresolution, accurately geo-referenced aerial photography

Polygons must not contain any holes

The minimum gap between polygonsmust be no less than 20 meters,where polygons are less than 20 meters apart they should be merged into a single polygon

SHINE Polygon Standards

Polygons created through heads-up digitizing should be captured at a scale of no smaller than 1:5000

Where a polygoncontains or abutsa SM polygon the additional SHINE polygon area must meet all of the other polygon standards

Where a polygon contains or intersects a SM polygon the SM polygon should NOT be ‘clipped’ from SHINE polygon.

All records must havea single closedpolygon

SHINE criteria

• 2004 definition felt to be workable, with minor enhancement. In summary, a SHINE polygon must include a monument or monuments that …– Are substantive (surviving physical remains)– Are verifiable (reliably observed & observable)– Have known character (confidently classified with

thesaurus terms)– Can be closely mapped (with a polygon meeting

above standards)– Would benefit from ELS management

Suggested workflow

• Add a new “SHINE candidate status” to monument records, with possible values: “Yes”, “Probable”, “Possible”, “Unlikely”, “No”.

• Automatically populate this with “Probable”, “Possible” or “Unlikely”, based on existing data (including monument types, evidence, SNHDv2, MPP, survival/significance data as available).

• “Manually” review “Probable” monuments, by parish or map sheet. Where monument (or group of monuments) meets SHINE criteria, create a SHINE polygon.

• Uncertain records must be omitted!• Submit data to SHINE coordinator.• Where time/resources permit, review “Possible” records as well.• Maintain SHINE data – add/update polygons when new information

becomes available.• Re-supply at agreed intervals.

SHINE resource estimates

Item Time required

Preparation for start-up (incl. candidate status)

1-6 days

Creation of basic SHINE dataset

7-11 days per 10K monuments

Creation of complete SHINE dataset

25-35 days per 10K monuments

Submission and review 0.5 day per submission

Maintenance (year 2 on) 1-4 days

SHINE coordinator toolkit

A simple set of tools for use by the SHINE facilitator.1. Imports and checks new dataset from HER.2. Reports on any problems found:

– Can fix polygons that are too small, but other problems cause polygon to be dropped.

– Opportunity for provider to review and fix problems and re-supply.

3. Merges cleaned HER dataset into national SHINE dataset.

4. Updates metadata tables automatically.5. Exports SPIRE-compliant data and metadata to

Natural England.

Stage 3 – Data Capture

• We aim to have the first version of SHINE ready to upload by March 2009

• Thereafter, we hope to be able to upload to NE IT systems every six months

• We are optimistic that HEEP will fund a 1 year facilitator post

• We hope work will begin in the first HERs by September 2008

Stage 3 – Data Capture

• We hope that the facilitator post will:– Enable start-up visits to be made to all HERs– Enable a number of follow-up visits to HERs,

where needed– Help to support the data capture process– Manage the collation and amalgamation of

data from HERs into SHINE– Manage the upload and update of SHINE to

NE’s IT system

Reminder – What’s in it for me?

• Initial outlay of time and effort is a significant issue for HERs

• Resources such as the workflow will help manage and prioritise the work, which can be spread out over months

• Facilitator post will help to advise and liaise with HERs, as well as manage the delivery of SHINE

• SHINE will help to enhance the core HER dataset, and could be used for any number of additional uses

Reminder – What’s in it for me?

£ £ £ £ £ £• There’s a BIG funding stream out there – if

we can deliver this dataset we can tap into that money, ensuring good management of archaeological sites year after year