A Local-State Government Spatial Data Sharing Partnership

A Local-State Spatial Data Sharing Partnership Model to Facilitate SDI Development
Data Share in Queensland, the Land Information System Tasmania or the Property
Information Project in Victoria. Seven LGAs indicated that they had not signed the
exchange agreement at the time of the survey. Six of these LGAs were from Queensland
and one was from Tasmania. The reasons given for not signing the agreements varied but
included: a lack of trust, lack of business need or the process was too bureaucratic.
The Data Sharing Partnership has been Worthwhile
This section of the questionnaire firstly examined the value of the data sharing
arrangement to each respondent’s organisation to gauge if it had been worthwhile. Figure
6.18 graphs the responses in each of the three states.
% of LGAs for Each State
60.0%
40.0%
20.0%
0.0%
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Neither
Agree nor
Disagree
Disagree
180
State
QLD
TAS
VIC
Strongly
Disagree
Did Not
Sign
The Data Sharing Partnership has been Worthwhile
Figure 6.18 Value of the data sharing arrangement to their organisation
The results show that 83% of the total respondents who had signed a data sharing
partnership arrangement either agreed or strongly agreed that it had been worthwhile for
their organisation. The levels of agreement were highest in Tasmania and Victoria whilst
there was a lower level of agreement (approximately 60%) in Queensland.
The Data Sharing Partnership has Improved Data Quality
A similar trend was observed on the question on whether the data sharing partnerships had
improved their organisation’s data quality. Again, the overall level of agreement to this
question was high (71%) across the aggregated state data, with both Victoria and Tasmania
responding positively (see Figure 6.19). However, the level of agreement from
Queensland LGAs was only 36% which reflects that the initial data sharing arrangement
was primarily a one way exchange process and had done little to improve the quality of the
LGAs data.