[Ica-sdistandards] A review of the ICA model of stakeholders in an SDI

[Antony Cooper]

Dear Members of the ICA's Commission on SDI and Standards

I trust that you are all well and have recovered from the COVID-19 pandemic, the lock downs, and so on.  Hopefully, some of you remember me!  😊

Two years ago, early in the pandemic, we were looking at taking further our model of the stakeholders in an SDI.  In April 2020, it was agreed that we should aim at producing two papers:

1. A review of the literature that referenced the ICA Commission's SDI papers, to extract and collate comments on our ICA models and suggested changes, etc, focusing on stakeholders in an SDI.  This also included the results of our workshop in Dresden in 2013.  I presented an extended abstract based on this at the ICC in Tokyo in 2019, see: https://www.abstr-int-cartogr-assoc.net/1/49/2019/

2. A new, improved model of the stakeholders in an SDI, based on the above review, etc.  We will come back to this paper later.


During 2019 and 2020, we worked on these two papers via email.  Unfortunately, there were then three different versions of the paper and because of the lock down and whatever, I did not get around to consolidating them.  I have eventually done so, and the result is attached.

Please note that this is just a review of only those papers that cite our Commission's four papers on the SDI model (for your reference, I list them at the bottom of this email).  I used Google Scholar to identify the papers and I went through all of them that I could access (a few are behind paywalls) to see what they had to say about our models.  Unsurprisingly, most just reference our papers briefly, such as our "definition" of an SDI, and some use our models without commenting on them.  Those papers that make comments or suggestions about our models are included in the attached draft version of our paper.

For all its faults, Google Scholar is unlikely to exclude any references to the Commission's four papers on the SDI models, which is why I used it.  However, I do need to check if there are any new and relevant references from the last couple of years.  Once I have done that, I will share the lists with you.


Subsequently, some of you have been working on beyond-SDI or post-SDI paradigms or ecosystems or whatever.  These might be (geo)spatial information infrastructures (GIIs or SIIs), (geo)spatial knowledge infrastructures (GKIs or SKIs), or even (geo)spatial wisdom infrastructures (GWIs or SWIs) - or something entirely different.  However, I think that our SDI models are sufficiently robust to cater for these new and evolving SDI versions 2.x, 3.x, 4.x, etc.  The models can be enhanced, though, which is the point of these two new papers by the Commission.  An example might be catering for chains of services.  Generally, the problems with SDIs are caused by the lack of funding, uncooperative stakeholders, politics, legislation and the lack of good data and metadata - and not by SDI architectures or models, etc.


Finally, I hope that you will all be at the 31st International Cartographic Conference and 19th ICA General Assembly in Cape Town, 14-18 August 2023.  The deadline for papers is next week, but as Serena is the Chair of the Scientific Programme Committee, I am sure that she will give you a bit of an extension if you ask nicely!  See: https://icc2023.org/

Serena's current term as the Chair of this Commission will end at this General Assembly and it is my understanding that Franz-Josef will be retiring as well.  So, for our work to continue, do we need a new ICA Commission on standards and/or SDIs and/or post-SDIs and/or geospatial ecosystems, etc?  If so, we need someone to volunteer to be the new Chair and to propose the new Commission.  Any volunteers?


For your reference, the following are the four Commission papers on the SDI models:

Hjelmager, J., Moellering, H., Delgado, T., Cooper, A. K., Rajabifard, A., Rapant, P., Danko, D., Huet, M., Laurent, D., Aalders, H. J. G. L., Iwaniak, A., Abad, P., Duren,¨ U. and Martynenko, A., 2008. An initial formal model for spatial data infrastructures. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 22(11), pp. 1295–1309.

Cooper, A. K., Rapant, P., Hjelmager, J., Laurent, D., Iwaniak, A., Coetzee, S., Moellering, H. and Duren, U., 2011.¨ Extending the formal model of a spatial data infrastructure to include volunteered geographical information. In: 25th International Cartographic Conference (ICC 2011), Paris, France.

Cooper, A. K., Moellering, H., Hjelmager, J., Rapant, P., Delgado, T., Laurent, D., Coetzee, S., Danko, D. M., Duren, U., Iwaniak, A., Brodeur, J., Abad, P., Huet, M. and Rajabifard, A., 2012. A spatial data infrastructure model from the computational viewpoint. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 27(6), pp. 1133– 1151.

Cooper, A. K., Coetzee, S., Rapant, P., Laurent, D., Danko, D. M., Iwaniak, A., Peled, A., Moellering, H. and Duren, U., 2013. Exploring the impact of a spatial data infrastructure on value-added resellers and vice versa. In: 26th International Cartographic Conference (ICC 2013), Dresden, Germany, pp. 395–406.

Regards
Antony

Antony K Cooper, PhD
Inclusive Smart Settlements and Regions
Smart Places Cluster
CSIR
PO Box 395
PRETORIA
0001
South Africa
Cellular: +27 82 497 3812
Email: acooper at csir.co.za

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Cooper et al - A review of the ICA model of stakeholders in a spatial data infrastructure - 20221129.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 470022 bytes
Desc: Cooper et al - A review of the ICA model of stakeholders in a spatial data infrastructure - 20221129.docx
URL: <http://lazarus.elte.hu/pipermail/ica-sdistandards/attachments/20221130/20b9331b/attachment-0001.docx>