1

Lessons learned from Standards for Data and Software for Spatial Information: : Considerations for the Spatial Tenure Considerations for the Spatial Tenure Domain ModelDomain Model

Keith Clifford BellRural Development, Natural Resources and Environment Sustainable Development DepartmentWorld Bank - East Asia and the Pacific RegionWASHINGTON D.C., USAWorkshop: The Social Tenure Domain Model: From concept to implementation, March 12, 2009

Keith Clifford BellRural Development, Natural Resources and Environment Sustainable Development DepartmentWorld Bank - East Asia and the Pacific RegionWASHINGTON D.C., USAWorkshop: The Social Tenure Domain Model: From concept to implementation, March 12, 2009

2

OutlineOutline

Initial thoughts

Past experiences

Issues for consideration

Final thoughts

3

Initial thoughtsInitial thoughts

Replicability of STDM in in different countries, in different regions

Implications of “Templating” for the complex land tenure issues

Impact on any future transaction costs

Legal status of STDM

Previous experiences with standards for data models, data transfer, public domain and interoperability.

4

Some Past ExperiencesSome Past Experiences

Software

1980s and early 1990s public domain software – driven by high GIS costs

Open GIS Consortium focus on systems interoperability

FLOSS – Free Libre Open Source, making available source code. Evolved from the free software movement 1983 and Software Freedom Law Center to advance FLOSS established in 2005. GIS has picked up on this around 2006.

Data Transfer Standards

ASCII – American Standard Code for Information Interchange – first published 1963

FIPS – Federal Information Processing Standards program established in early 1960s

SDTS –US Spatial Data Transfer Standard conceived 1980 and approved in 1992 as FIPSPub. 173 . Ratified as ANSI NCITS 320-1998. Various data profiles published.

SAIF – Canada’s Spatial Archive and Interchange Format, draft 1991, accepted 1993

Data Models

NSDI – National Spatial Data Infrastructure1994 (US Presidential E.O.)

AGDB – Australian Geographic Data Base Model (early 1990’s), based on SDTS profiles

Geospatial Metadata – initiated 1992, approved by US Federal Geographic Data Committee, 1994

5

Some Models from Australia and New ZealandSome Models from Australia and New Zealand

6

Australia New Zealand (continued)Australia New Zealand (continued)

7

Tenure IssuesTenure Issues

8

Tenure IssuesTenure Issues

i

9

Issues to ConsiderIssues to Consider

Prescriptive nature of standards vs the diverse nature of land administration systems of each country/jurisdiction

Replicability – can one template work?

Every extra data field means a cost escalation in data capture and maintenance

What data are essential vs what the user want?

What data do donors want?

Privacy and confidentiality issues

System security and accessibility

Capacity of a country/jurisdiction to develop/implement/maintain systems be they open source or proprietary

Custodianship of STDM-LAMS

Cluttering of the LAMS with “all kinds of land & property/spatial units regardless of the level of formality”

10

Final ThoughtsFinal Thoughts

The benefits of STDM, are arguably in the learnings that come from its development and dissemination

As a rule data acquisition and maintenance costs are comparatively high to software acquisition and maintenance

Does STDM simply represent a re-allocation of costs that should be invested in software license maintenance agreements and development costs

Before any jurisdiction takes on STDM, they should do a business case that would compare investing in SDTM and open source software versus proprietary systems with maintenance agreements and extrapolate over at least 10-15 years (?)

11

So can one model fit all?So can one model fit all?