The Future of the Spatial Information Infrastructure

Onsrud, Harlan J.; Poore, Barbara S.; Rugg, Robert D.; Taupier, Richard; Wiggins, Lyna L.

doi:10.1201/9781420038330-8

Cited by 5 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other SDIs are being developed at regional, state, and local levels. Billions of dollars are spent worldwide on these activities each year (Rhind 2000;Onsrud et al 2004). These infrastructures are created to facilitate the coordinated production, access, and use of geospatial data among producers and users in an electronic environment (Groot and McLaughlin 2000;Masser 2005a).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconceptualizing the role of the user of spatial data infrastructure

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Spatial data infrastructures, which are Internet-based mechanisms for the coordinated production, discovery, and use of geospatial information in the digital environment, have diffused worldwide in the last two decades. Currently, there are about one hundred spatial data infrastructures at the national level and many other at supra-and sub-national levels. These contemporary spatial data infrastructures operate with two main assumptions: formal organizations are the producers and suppliers of geospatial information; users are the passive recipients of information. The recent phenomenon of volunteered geographic information departs from these assumptions. In this paper, we argue that reconceptualizing the user of a spatial data infrastructure can accommodate this new phenomenon. Such a reconceptualization creates a middle ground between spatial data infrastructure and volunteered geographic information, which has important implications for future research.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconceptualizing the role of the user of spatial data infrastructure

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many of the HPGIS project participants argue that their contributions to local data resources would significantly improve the reliability and completeness of these data, an idea that is remarkably similar to calls by academic researchers for stronger involvement of the general public in local data development (Onsrud et al 2005, Tombs 2005. For instance, one of the community organisation staff members notes the valuable potential of residents' local knowledge for addressing gaps and omissions in local data resources:…”

Section: Envisioning Solutions: Alternatives For Grassroots Data Usersmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…Governmental structures and citizen expectations for public data availability can influence the data collected and made available, as can laws and policies for data access, acceptable uses, and fees (Onsrud et al 2005). Craglia and Masser (2003), for instance, illustrate vast differences in spatial data collection and dissemination policies in the US and many European countries.…”

Section: Geospatial Data Challenges At the Grassroots: Propositions Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Martin (2003) notes that devolution of governance to highly localised levels necessitates research examining how appropriately scaled data for these efforts will be integrated into SDIs. Onsrud et al (2005) argue that local organisations and the general public are ideally positioned to contribute local spatial data, and to identify errors, omissions and inconsistencies in these data. This focus on integrating local knowledge into SDIs extends beyond the academic literature.…”

Section: Geospatial Data Challenges At the Grassroots: Propositions Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Onsrud et al (2005) call for research exploring ways of increasing public participation in identifying, producing, and sharing spatial information, and Tombs (2005), touting the societal value of public geospatial data dissemination, calls for stronger coordination of national and local efforts. Martin (2003) notes that devolution of governance to highly localised levels necessitates research examining how appropriately scaled data for these efforts will be integrated into SDIs.…”

Section: Geospatial Data Challenges At the Grassroots: Propositions Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Grassroots groups as stakeholders in spatial data infrastructures: challenges and opportunities for local data development and sharing

Elwood

2008

International Journal of Geographical Information Science

105

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper investigates the unique challenges of an expanding group of stakeholders making demands upon shared geospatial data resources: non governmental organisations participating in local governance. In spite of efforts to improve local data integration in spatial data infrastructures and development of strategies from public participation GIS to expand access to geospatial data and technologies, grassroots data users still experience difficulties with the accessibility, quality, and usefulness of local government data resources. Drawing from extended ethnographic research conducted in Chicago, Illinois, I illustrate these problems and how they are shaped by grassroots groups' resource constraints, knowledge systems, and socio-political positions; and assess the feasibility and impacts of proposed alternatives for better meeting grassroots spatial data needs. I contend that the needs and challenges of these stakeholders are unique from those of other users, but are nonetheless rooted in central dilemmas of spatial data handling, and so might be addressed through stronger engagement with GIScience research in this arena.

show abstract