A Local-State Government Spatial Data Sharing Partnership

A Local-State Spatial Data Sharing Partnership Model to Facilitate SDI Development
Defining the rules and protocols for communication can greatly improve the efficiency and
effectiveness of partnership communication. Other rules may include the definition of
exchange standards, frequency of the exchange and the expected deliverables from each
partner. The definition of appropriate standards is critical to large
formalised data sharing initiatives. In the Victorian case study,
there were 79 local governments with eight different property
systems and five different GISs. Without a clear exchange
standard, the potential for data errors during exchange is high.
Responsibilities for resourcing of the sharing arrangements must
be clearly defined to reduce the likelihood of disputes over resources contributed by each
of the partnership members.
Data Exchange and Maintenance
The data exchange and
maintenance process often
becomes the focus of data
sharing initiatives. The research
identified that the initiation of a
new data sharing arrangement
within local government often
necessitates building the capacity of the LGA or the individual staff. Until automated
procedures can be established, the early stages of any operational processes require
constant communication and effort. As the data sharing matures the process moves into a
stage of ongoing operation and maintenance where defined procedures and processes
become the norm.
Partnership
Strategy and
Formulation
A common misconception with the data exchange process is that the effort and funding
requirements diminish once these procedures have been established. In all three case
studies this was not the case. Although the degree of automation has improved along with
the completeness and quality of data, continuing changes in application software and
heightened exchange expectations often required resources to be expanded.
Interoperability and automation to improve the currency, efficiency and accuracy of the
data exchange should be a goal for any systemised data sharing initiative. An e-business
model which more clearly quantifies the inputs from each partner may also improve the
auditing and performance assessment of the exchange process. These exchange processes
are dynamic, so constant technological change requires constant monitoring and review of
processes to continually improve their effectiveness.
208
Governance
Partnership
Management
Business Rules
and
Responsibilities
Data Exchange
and Maintenance
Performance
Monitoring
Business Rules and
Responsibilities
Custodianship
Communications Protocols
Exchange periods
Deliverables
Exchange Standards
Data Exchange and
Maintenance
ICT and Technology
Operation and Maintenance
Review and Improve
Interoperability