A Local-State Government Spatial Data Sharing Partnership

7.4.4 Assessment of the Outcome Component
215
Chapter 7 – Model Development and Discussion
The assessment of the outcomes of each partnership are summarised in Table 7.4 and
provide a snapshot of the achievements for each state initiative.
Table 7.4 Assessment of partnership outcomes in each state
Outcome Indicator Victoria Tasmania Queensland
Digital Mapbase A combined digital
mapbase which now covers
most of the state (+)
Authoritative Dataset An authoritative address
database that is serving
government agencies
including emergency
services (+)
Web Portal A web portal that provides
basic property information
to the community and
industry (+)
SDI Development A major contribution to SDI
development in the state
and a capstone project (+)
Governmental
Relations
Improved intergovernmental
relations (+)
Improved management of
the digital mapbase and
upgrade in accuracy
through less duplication (o)
A “whole of Government”
approach to data sharing
and not just between state
and local government (+)
An exemplary web portal for
property and spatial
information (+)
Significant contribution to
the state and local SDI
development (+)
Improved intergovernmental
relations (+)
Some improvement in the
mapbase but not a direct
outcome of the partnership
(o)
Progressive improvements
in creating a state-wide
address and property file,
but further efforts required
(o)
No public portal at this
stage but under
development (-)
Limited contribution at this
stage (-)
Improved intergovernmental
relations now occurring (+)
As can be seen in Table 7.4 the partnership initiatives have delivered a number of
significant outcomes which are generally in agreement with the assessments across the
other two components. Again Victoria (5+) and Tasmania (4+) have delivered
significantly more positive outcomes than the Queensland partnership (1-). The potential
impact on SDI development will be examined in more detail in the following section.
7.4.5 Overall Summary of Assessment
A summary of the overall evaluation of the three case studies is given in Table 7.5.
Table 7.5 Overall assessment of partnerships
Model Component Victoria Tasmania Queensland
Institutional and
Jurisdiction
Environments
Positive Most positive Generally neutral
Collaborative Process Most positive Positive Negative
Outcomes Most positive Most positive Generally neutral
The data sharing partnerships in the states of Victoria and Tasmania have been identified
through the evaluation process as strongly positive across the three dimensions of the
model. These findings are in agreement and supported by the qualitative assessments