GSDI Marine/Coastal SDI Capacity Building Workshop INSPIRE CONFERENCE 2016 Survey of National Coastal and Marine SDI geoportals: worldwide developments Jade Georis Creuseveau Roger Longhorn Joep Crompvoets
Presentation Context Aim & Scope Methodology Results Outlook and conclusion
Context: Marine and Coastal zones specificities Complex area where human, natural and physical components interact All over the world, over exploitation of resources and related use conflicts (UNEP, 2012)
Context: Marine and Coastal zones specificities Increasing needs in integrated management Implementation of collective processes and tools to increase our knowledge of these territories and manage them better (Cicin Sain et al., 1998 ; Douvere, 2008) Information systems are one of these tools Cuq, 1999 (Belfiore et al., 2006)
Context: Spatial data infrastructures (SDIs) specificities ~1990 s : development of SDIs : international needs to better manage and share spatial data held by many stakeholders so as to maximize its use and re use(crompvoets et al., 2004) Several definitions SDI components : data, policy, access networks, standards, and people (Rajabifard et al., 2002) (Rajabifard et al., 200
Context: Coastal and Marine SDIs specificities ~ 2000 s : implementation of Coastal and Marine SDIs to make spatial data related to marine and coastal areas more accessible and available at various levels (Longhorn, 2005) F. CUQ, 2000
Context: Integrated Coastal Zone Management and maritime spatial planning Deliver a sustainable approach to managing coastal zones, oceans and seas, across sectors, between different levels of government, and across jurisdictional boundaries Provide promising context for increasing spatial data production and improving availability and accessibility
Aim & Scope Needs for coastal and marine SDIs : a priori evident to inform ICZM/MSP decision making (IHO, 2011) What are the current worldwide developments? Aim: International Web survey to assess the worldwide developments of existing geoportals of SDIs or similar Web services Scope: Geoportals implemented by national public bodies in the world enabling the access and the use of spatial data specifically related to marine and/or coastal zones
Aim & Scope Geoportal: central web gateway for spatial data discovery, access, and related added value services (Crompvoets et al., 2004; Maguire and Longley, 2005) way to assess what processes a country implements in order to enable the access and use of spatial data
Methodology: general overview 2 successive steps: Geoportals inventory : November 2014 Browsing of the Internet with monitoring tools & keywords Scanning various international networks and events (GSDI, CoastGis, IHO, IODE, INSPIRE) Geoportals Survey: November 2014 March 2015 November 2015 March 2016 12 Characteristics sourced from the geoportal Web pages 5 Components: Data, Technology, People, Policy, Standards every six month since October 2014 Monitor the current developments
Results: characteristics 1. Name of national geoportal 2. Year of first implementation 3. Languages used 4. Data themes 5. Number of datasets 6. Level of openness for data access 7. Licensing 8. Data searching mechanisms 9. Data access services 10. Monthly number of users 11. Number of data suppliers 12. Standard metadata
Results: # geoportals assessed 121 geoportals assessed 20 % not operational Nov.2014 (24) 42 % 6 % not operational After Nov. 2014 (7) out of the scope (39) part of the survey (51) 32 %
Results: Geographic Distribution 51 geoportals implemented by 27 countries Large majority of the countries: one or two geoportals USA, France, Australia, Canada: Major maritime countries manage several (from 4 to 5) geoportals
Results: typology Combination of the characteristics : Data thematic Data access policy Typology resulting into the following Search data mechanisms four types of geoportals: Access data mechanisms Oceanographic/Marine Data Centre geoportals (18) Atlas like geoportals (15) Hydrographic Office geoportals (10) Hybrid geoportals (8)
Results: typology Geoportal Class Number Affiliation Atlas Like 16 International Coastal Atlas Network (ICAN) Hydrographic Offices 18 International Hydrographic Organization (IHO) Oceanographic Data Centres 24 Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) of UNESCO & Programme "International Oceanographic Data and Information Exchange" (IODE) Hybrid 10 Total 51
Results: Year of implementation 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% Implementation around the mid 2000 s But, information not available online for 77% of geoportals 30% 20% 10% 0% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 n/a
Results: Data theme 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% Provision of a wide ranges of themes + Variety between geoportal types + No evolution Nov 2014-March 2016 Atlas Like (15) Hydro. Office (10) Oceano DC (18) Hybrid (8) Total (51) 0% Adminitrative Physical Biological Human Almost no evolution between November 2014 and March 2016
Results: Number of datasets 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% Provision of a limited number of datasets + Variety between geoportal types + Static Atlas like Nov2014 Atlas like March2015 Atlas like Nov2015 Atlas like March2016 Hyfro. office Nov2014 Hyfro. office March2015 Hyfro. office Nov2015 Hyfro. office March2016 Oceano. DC Nov2014 Oceano. DC March2015 Oceano. DC Nov2015 Oceano. DC March2016 Hybrid Nov2014 Hybrid March2015 Hybrid Nov2015 Hybrid March2016 Total Nov2014 Total March2015 Total Nov2015 Total March2016 0% 0 10 11 50 51 100 101 500 501 1 000 1 001 5 000 5 001 10 000 10 001 50 000 50 001 100 000 100 001 500 000 n/a
Results: Level of Openness 100% 90% 80% 70% Variety between geoportal types 60% 50% 40% 30% Free access Free access granted Paid access Atlas Like (15) Hydro. Office (10) Oceano. DC (18) Hybrid (8) Total (51) 20% 10% 0% free online registeration & requested form fee paying Almost no evolution between November 2014 and March 2016
Results: Licensing Data policy: Atlas Like geoportals : Open License (3/15) or Specific Data Use Agreements (3/15). Hydrographic geoportals : General Conditions of Sale of the distribution agents (10/10) Oceanographic/Marine Data Centre geoportals : IOC (Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission) Oceanographic Data Exchange Policy (18/18)
Results: Search Mechanisms 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Different searching mechanisms applied + Mechanisms combined for most geoportals + Variety between geoportal types + Map interface (& List) : most common Catalog Map List Atlas Like (15) Hydro. Office (10) Oceano DC (18) Hybrid (8) Total (51) Almost no evolution between November 2014 and March 2016
Results: Access Mechanisms 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Different access mechanisms applied + Atlas Like (15) Mechanisms combined for most Hydro. Office (10) Oceano. DC (18) geoportals Hybrid (8) Total (51) + Variety between geoportal types + Downloading services (& retail sources): Dowload OGC Services Transfert Dist. Agent most common Almost no evolution between November 2014 and March 2016
100% Results: Number of data suppliers 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% Information not available online for 61 % of geoportals + Limited number of suppliers (less than 50) + Variety between geoportal types Atlas Like (15) Hydro. Office (10) Oceano. DC (18) HYBRID (8) Total (51) 0% 0 10 11 50 51 100 101 150 151 200 not available Almost no evolution between November 2014 and March 2016
Results: Metadata Standards The Hydrographic Office geoportals provide metadata according to the IHO transfer standard for digital hydrographic data (S 57) The remaining geoportals provide metadata in the ISO/INSPIRE and FGDC Metadata standards No evolution between October 2014 and March 2015
Conclusion Worldwide developments underway Four types of geoportals enabling access to different kinds of data through various mechanisms Not very dynamic High similarity with terrestrial oriented geoportals Despite the integrated approach promoted by IZCM /MSP Well operating geoportals with access to a wide range of data not very common True data harmonisation and service interoperability need to be improved : fundamentals principles for SDIs
Thanks for your attention Jade Georis Creuseveau LETG Brest Geomer, European Institute of Marine Studies, Plouzané, France jade.georis creuseveau@univ brest.fr and jade.georis creuseveau@cnrs.fr Roger Longhorn Global Spatial Data Infrastructure (GSDI) Association, USA & Belgium rlonghorn@gsdi.org Joep Crompvoets KU Leuven, Public Governance Insitute, Leuven, Belgium joep.crompvoets@soc.kuleuven.be