session - EC GI & GIS Portal

More documents

Recommendations

Info

SESSION SDI makers, research institutes, governmental agencies, and clearinghouses organisations. In general, they focus on their own sector, and changes in institutional settings are extremely slow with an overall interest to protect their own interest. They do not differ in terms of purpose as any other horizontal data infrastructure, predominantly in terms of ICT functionalities and in the domain of policy making, governments tend to develop general spatial data infrastructure policies for facilitating the sharing of spatial data among different sectors. The successful grow of an infrastructure generates changes on their nature, scale, and purpose that in turn, will demand for adding new extensions to an existing infrastructure or for creating a complete new infrastructure. Most common is for adding new extensions to an existing infrastructure in the sense that their purpose remains the same, but the nature and scale are changed. Making or evolving to a new infrastructure means the creation of a new infrastructure or the change of purpose of an existing infrastructure. The latter usually occurs when changing from being a horizontal to a vertical infrastructure or vice-versa. Finally, the paper concludes that spatial data infrastructures are also unique in terms of its evolution process. This study envisages the evolution of current spatial data infrastructures into the realms of spatial information infrastructures, which implies the change from data horizontal infrastructures to information vertical infrastructures. Mainly because the observed trend is not to support generic products (e.g. new data types) for more users nor improve the quality of spatial data sets, but instead, the trend is focused on developing complementary geo-information services according to specific needs of a sector and its existing services. Although large investments have still to be made in the future, geo-information infrastructures having a vertical structure will provide greater efficiency, more effective analysis and modelling, and as a result, greater use. It is difficult to identify the driving force behind this particular development, but overall, it is a combination of the frustration of users and the innovations of technology However, more research is needed to discover the socio-economical process surrounding such an evolution of spatial data infrastructures. References Bernard, L., Craglia, M. Gould, M. and Kuhn, W. (2005). Towards an SDI research agenda. Proceedings of the 11th EC_GIS Conference, Sardinia. Groot, R. (1997). Spatial data infrastructure (SDI) for sustainable land management. ITC Journal 3/4: 287-294. Groot, R. and McLaughlin, J. (2000). Geospatial Data Infrastructure: Concepts, Cases and Good Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Star, S.L. and Ruhleder, K. (1996). Information Infrastructure Transition: Challenges with implementing standardised checklists. Proceedings of 22nd Information Systems Research Seminar in Scandinavia, T.K. Käkölä (ed.), Finland, pp. 95-110. Williamson, I., Rajabifard, A., and Feeney, M.E. (2003). Developing Spatial Data Infrastructures: From Concept to Reality. London: Taylor & Francis. Acknowledgements This research was supported by the Bsik Programme – Ruimte voor Geo-informatie (RGI) funding, under the project Development of framework to assess National Spatial Data Infrastructures, RGI 005. 8
SESSION PEER GROUP The Importance of Geographic Information in Biodiversity and Nature Conservation R.A. Wadsworth, A. Watt 1. CEH Monks Wood, Abbots Ripton, Cambridgeshire PE28 2LS, UK. e-mail: rawad@ceh.ac.uk 2. CEH Banchory, Hill of Brathens, Banchory, Aberdeenshire, AB31 4BW, UK. Abstract All studies of biodiversity and nature conservation make use of Geographic Information. A great deal of biodiversity research is concerned with extrapolating observations at specific points (geographic place) into inferred processes (over geographic space). Nature conservation is often crucially concerned with particular unique locations (such as designated sites), but endless debates rage over how representative these unique sites are. The Centre for Ecology and Hydrology is the NERC (Natural Environment Research Council) designated data centre for a wide range of extensive and long-term data sets on biodiversity and the natural environment. The “flag-ship” of the biodiversity data is Biological Records Centre most of whose 12 million records (on 12,000 species) are accessible through the NBN (national biodiversity network) Gateway project (http://www.nbn.org.uk). Other major holdings include the four Countryside Surveys conducted in 1978, 1984, 1990 and 2000 (http://www.cs2000.org.uk/) and the two land cover maps LCMGB (Land Cover Map of Great Britain, part of CS90) (Fuller et al., 1994) and LCM2000 (Land Cover Map 2000, part of CS2000) (Fuller et al., 2002). CS 2007 and an associated land cover map are in the final planning stages. Studies of biodiversity and nature conservation can depend on many data sets, which might include habitats, climate, topography, geology and soils. Activities like the EU initiative INSPIRE (Infrastructure for Spatial Information in Europe) 1 and the UK Research Councils e-science and GRID initiatives 2 are encouraging seamless access to data over the Internet. While these initiatives are to be applauded, they are not without problems; it is increasingly difficult for the data producer to anticipate who the users of the data are going to be, data producers seem to expect the data user to share a common understanding of the way the world works and how it should be characterised, but it is increasingly less likely that producer and user share a common understanding, in many cases class descriptions have atrophied to little more than simple labels or ciphers, the interaction between user and producer necessary to clarify any inconsistencies has been reduced. The reasons for these problems are not hard to identify. Thirty or forty years ago the map was used to support a description of the phenomena contained in a detailed survey monograph; a traditional monograph may not be available to the user and may not even have been produced (Fisher 2003). Not only has the “balance of power” between the spatial (map) and textual (monograph) changed, but crucially the user may be led to wrongly treat the map as if it were data (a measurement) and not as information (an interpretation). Over time scientific knowledge advances, policy objectives change and technology develops these three factors all contribute to this common problem in the environmental sciences that almost every survey creates a new “base line” rather than being part of a sequence (Comber et al. 2002; 2003). Central to the effective use of GI in Biodiversity research and nature conservation within CEH is the new established Environmental Informatics Programme which has been established “to provide researchers with access to the coordinated data resources and informatics tools required to deal with complex, multidisciplinary environmental questions.” It is hoped that the newly established geoinformatics pillar of the PEER consortium will provide a useful forum to discuss the generic issue of semantics and ontology of environmental information. Some innovative approaches to the problem of geographic data to biodiversity problems will be discussed using the issue of land cover as case study. 1 http://eu-geoportal.jrc.it/ 2 http://www.nerc.ac.uk/funding/escience 9
Page 1 and 2: The mission of the JRC is to provid
Page 3 and 4: Table of Contents MISSION STATEMENT
Page 5 and 6: SESSION NATIONAL SDI II Table of Co
Page 7 and 8: SESSION SDI INSPIRE from the Nation
Page 9 and 10: SESSION SDI The Spirit of INSPIRE l
Page 11 and 12: SESSION SDI Will INSPIRE come up to
Page 13: SESSION SDI Framing the evolution o
Page 17 and 18: SESSION PEER GROUP Setting up a GI
Page 19 and 20: SESSION PEER GROUP Landscape Charac
Page 21 and 22: SESSION PEER GROUP Contaminated Env
Page 23 and 24: SESSION NATIONAL SDI development of
Page 25 and 26: - Political level - Conceptional le
Page 27 and 28: SESSION NATIONAL SDI The Spanish SD
Page 29 and 30: SESSION NATIONAL SDI Strengths and
Page 31 and 32: SESSION METADATA AND CATALOGUES Nea
Page 33 and 34: SESSION METADATA AND CATALOGUES Sta
Page 35 and 36: SESSION METADATA AND CATALOGUES STY
Page 37 and 38: SESSION METADATA AND CATALOGUES be
Page 39 and 40: SESSION: NATIONAL SDI II of Turku m
Page 41 and 42: SESSION: NATIONAL SDI II public sec
Page 43 and 44: SESSION: NATIONAL SDI II in August
Page 45 and 46: SESSION: NATIONAL SDI II available,
Page 47 and 48: SESSION: NATIONAL SDI II forest emp
Page 49 and 50: SESSION SDI TECHNOLOGY “Where wou
Page 51 and 52: SESSION SDI TECHNOLOGY CSCAT: Catal
Page 53 and 54: SESSION SDI TECHNOLOGY The role of
Page 55 and 56: SESSION SDI TECHNOLOGY Therefore in
Page 57 and 58: SESSION SDI TECHNOLOGY Figure 2. Ge
Page 59 and 60: SESSION NATIONAL / REGIONAL SDI OUT
Page 61 and 62: SESSION NATIONAL / REGIONAL SDI DEV
Page 63 and 64: SESSION NATIONAL / REGIONAL SDI REA
Page 65 and 66:
SESSION NATIONAL / REGIONAL SDI EU-
Page 67 and 68:
SESSION NATIONAL / REGIONAL SDI Geo
Page 69 and 70:
SESSION: DATA HARMONISATION is to d
Page 71 and 72:
SESSION: DATA HARMONISATION A New P
Page 73 and 74:
SESSION: DATA HARMONISATION Figure
Page 75 and 76:
SESSION: DATA HARMONISATION The GML
Page 77 and 78:
SESSION: DATA HARMONISATION (CSML)
Page 79 and 80:
SESSION: DATA HARMONISATION Data ce
Page 81 and 82:
SESSION: DATA HARMONISATION Figure
Page 83 and 84:
SESSION: DATA HARMONISATION Step by
Page 85 and 86:
SESSION: NATIONAL / REGIONAL SDI II
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
SESSION SDI IMPACTS A Roaming-enabl
Page 95 and 96:
SESSION SDI IMPACTS Transparency of
Page 97 and 98:
SESSION SDI IMPACTS Pricing models
Page 99 and 100:
SESSION SDI IMPACTS CC has develope
Page 101 and 102:
SESSION SDI IMPACTS improve the tra
Page 103 and 104:
SESSION SDI IMPACTS MOTIIVE Experie
Page 105 and 106:
SESSION SDI IMPACTS identify the fu
Page 107 and 108:
The adopted Standards. SESSION REGI
Page 109 and 110:
SESSION REGIONAL SDI How Municipali
Page 111 and 112:
SESSION REGIONAL SDI Metadata about
Page 113 and 114:
SESSION: DATA SHARING Eliminating O
Page 115 and 116:
SESSION: DATA SHARING the maker of
Page 117 and 118:
SESSION: DATA SHARING Tools of the
Page 119 and 120:
SESSION: DATA SHARING Availability
Page 121:
European Commission EUR 22318 DG Jo
show all

session - EC GI & GIS Portal

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?