Land Administration, Spatial Systems and Cities – an Australian Perspective

Land Administration, Spatial Systems and Cities –

an Australian Perspective

Ian P. Williamson

Professor of Surveying and Land Information

Department of GeomaticsThe University of MelbourneParkville, Victoria Australia 3052Phone: 03 - 9344 4431 Fax: 9347 4128Email: i.williamson@eng.unimelb.edu.auURL: www.geom.unimelb.edu.au/people/ipw.htmlABSTRACT

The paper argues that any spatial information strategy for urban, local government orcity jurisdiction is intimately linked to and influenced by the state or national landadministration and cadastral systems where it is located. It is these state or nationalsystems which usually provide the spatial infrastructure for urban information systems.Therefore to understand current trends in urban information systems, changes and trendsin state and national land administration systems must also be understood. The paperaddresses this topic by exploring the changing humankind-land relationship and theglobal drivers of sustainable development, micro-economic reform, globalisation andtechnology, with emphasis on Australian state spatial information systems. It draws onresearch being undertaken at the University of Melbourne to highlight some of thetrends and issues.

KEYWORDS: Spatial information management, land administration, cadastre, cadastral reform,spatial data infrastructures, GIS, WWW, IT, spatial hierarchy, urban, citiesINTRODUCTION

This paper attempts to explore the future directions for spatial information management in Australiafrom an urban land administration perspective. It recognises that there is an inter-dependencebetween the development of spatial information strategies at a local government or city level andthose at a state or federal level. The paper draws on current spatial data infrastructure (SDI) andcadastral research being undertaken in the Department of Geomatics at the University of Melbourneto highlight issues and trends. This research highlights that land administration systems are a keycomponent of the infrastructure that supports and facilitates the way society interacts with land. It isacknowledged that the views expressed in the paper are influenced by this research and theinevitable bias of the author.

As a result any spatial information management strategies at a local government or city level musttake a broad view of land administration systems at a state and federal level. While this researchfocuses on Australia it is undertaken in a global context.

When planning future strategies for spatial information management, governments worldwide

sometimes just concentrate on the technology and do not consider other influences or drivers – theydo this at their peril. Importantly land, land issues and land administration are critical componentsof Geographic Information Systems (GIS); but all too often they are forgotten. Too many

administrators and researchers unfortunately just focus on narrow technical and scientific issues.Within the land administration context, it is land which distinguishes GIS from being just the spatialcomponent of information technology (IT).

There is no doubt that we are in the midst of a spatial information revolution which itself is acritical component of the IT revolution. How is this manifesting itself and what is its impact? Insimple terms this includes the emergence of new disciplines and professions, the emergence of anew private sector and new institutional structures at all levels of government. It is resulting in newresearch, new scientific and professional journals and new educational programs. But most

importantly it is resulting in the availability of on-line spatial data, especially about land and landparcels, which has the potential to significantly change the dynamics of civil society. This is havinga dramatic impact on how cities manage themselves (see for example the WWW based systems toaccess data in Greene County < http://www.co.greene.oh.us/gismapserver.htm> and MecklenburgCounty in the USA with examples in Australiaand elsewhere starting to come on-line).

Three related perspectives are considered in understanding theseGlobal Drivers for Changedevelopments which generally focus on land administrationinfrastructures. First is an appreciation of the global drivers for

Land Administration andchange in the spatial information world. Next is an analysis of the

Cadastral Environmentimpacts on the design of the land administration systems, andparticularly the cadastral component, which underpin much of thespatial information trends and developments. This in turn identifiesSpatial Information Toolsissues and opportunities in the spatial information tools whichsupport these trends and developments, such as spatial dataFigure 1. Hierarchy of Perspectivesinfrastructures and the Internet. This hierarchy of perspectives is

shown in Figure 1. This is expanded in the research framework used for SDI and cadastral researchat the University of Melbourne (Figure 2).

This research framework attempts to describe the social system in which spatial data infrastructuresand cadastral systems develop. In simple terms it recognises that society has certain needs for

spatial and land related data, albeit these continually change. The model recognises there are legal,administrative, technological, innovation and diffusion processes and pressures, which influence theinevitable conceptual models which are developed to address the needs of society. The researchframework also recognises that these needs, pressures and resulting models operate on a hierarchyof levels from local to global.

The paper is based around this research framework and more specifically the three perspectives ofglobal drivers for change, land administration and cadastral trends, and spatial information tools.

Social System in which SDI and cadastral systemfeedbackGlobalRegionalEngineering analysis and design methodologyLegal/Administrative FrameworkNeeds forSDI/CadastralsystemTechnological DeploymentData/Information Management ProcessInnovation Diffusion ProcessConceptual/WorkingModel ofSDI/CadastralSystemNationalProvinceStateLocalFigure 2. Research framework for Spatial Data Infrastructures and Cadastral ResearchTHE DRIVERS FOR CHANGE

There is no doubt that technology is a major driving force in changing the face of our spatial

information world, but in many discussions and policies it is considered the only driver. In additionto technology, the major drivers of sustainable development, micro-economic reform andglobalisation are discussed below.Sustainable development

Sustainable development will be the driving force in the development of land administrationpolicies, at all levels of government, in the decades ahead. Even though sustainable developmenthas been the catchcry across the globe since the mid-1980s, the implementation of seminal

documents such as Agenda 21 arising out of the United Nations (UN) Environment Summit and theHabitat II Global Plan of Action arising out of the UN Cities Summit, has been disappointing.Sustainable development means development that effectively incorporates economic, social,

political, conservation and resource management factors in decision-making for development – inother words for society to be able to exist and grow in sympathy with the environment in perpetuity.The challenge of balancing these competing tensions using sophisticated decision making requiresaccess to accurate and relevant information in a readily interactive form. In delivering this

objective, information technology, spatial data infrastructures, multi-purpose cadastral systems andland information business systems will play a critically important role. Unfortunately modern

societies still have a long way to go before they will have these infrastructure and business systemsrequired to support sustainable development. Understanding the land administration requirementsand infrastructure to support sustainable development will be one of the major issues facinggovernments over the next decade.

The last three decades have been an era of growing environmental awareness. Without doubt thishas dramatically influenced Australian land administration systems. The 1990s have seen the

growth of importance of social issues relating to land. Evidence of this is the fall of apartheid, thefall of communism, indigenous land rights and women’s access to land. Both the environmental andsocial drivers are key components of sustainable development.Micro-economic reform

Micro-economic reform has had a dramatic impact on the development of spatial informationmanagement in Australia. These reforms have impacted on all levels of government and haveresulted in the now common activities of downsizing, privatisation, cost recovery, performancecontracts, quality assurance, and the list goes on. In the State of Victoria, an important element ofthe reform had been the restructuring of government departments (based on the Funder-Providermodel) to sharpen their focus on core business or service delivery objectives and improve costefficiency. This is to ensure that management decisions take account of the full costs of servicedelivery (Williamson et al.1998). Interestingly the funder-provider model is now being increasinglycriticised. This trend is equally reflected at a local government level.

Another important component of micro-economic reform in Australia has been the National

Competition Policy introduced by the Federal Government in 1993. All State governments agreedto implement this policy in 1995. The Victorian State Government also committed itself to theintroduction of competitive neutrality principles to both government-owned businesses andpredominantly tax-funded government services. The principles of competitive neutrality aim toensure that government businesses and services do not enjoy any net competitive advantage throughimmunity from taxes, regulations, debt charges, and in general, full cost attribution (Williamson etal. 1998).

The result of all these initiatives has seen a dramatic change in the structure, mandate and operationof the government, private and academic sectors in Australian society. These changes have had avery large impact on the spatial information environment. This impact has accelerated with theincreasing recognition by governments at all levels that spatial information, and more specificallyappropriate spatial business systems and associated spatial data infrastructures, are essential

components of any modern economy. Simply without these structures the vision of a virtual worldbased on electronic commerce will not be possible.Globalisation

Within tomorrow’s world, political patterns, economies and social systems worldwide are

undergoing a process of profound and continuing structural change, often termed globalisation.Globalisation is becoming a reality driven by IT and communication technologies. Globalisationmeans the process of increasing interconnectedness between societies and jurisdictions from a

social, economic and political perspective, such that events in one part of the world have increasingpotential to impact on peoples and societies in other parts of the world. A globalised world is one inwhich political, economic, cultural and social events become more interconnected. In other words,societies are affected more and more extensively and more deeply by events of other societies.However the big challenge of globalisation is for individuals, societies and countries to fullyparticipate in this global revolution.

Globalisation has a social, economic and political dimension. The world seems to be shrinking withpeople being increasingly aware of the phenomenon. The WWW is the most graphic example ofthis trend, since it is improving interconnectedness between and within individuals in a way neverbelieved or dreamed possible, even a decade ago. It is a pattern of events that seems to have

changed the nature of world politics from what it was just a few years ago. The important point isthat the world is changing and the global village is becoming a reality. The WWW has the potential

of dramatically changing the way civil society and particularly local government functions, due tothe ease of access to local data.

Within this era, there is an emerging global policy, with multinational social and political

movements and the beginnings of a sharing of allegiance from the local to state, national, regionaland international bodies. Globalisation is a new stage in world policy that will assist in improvingthe quality of lives of people by thinking, working and cooperating together on common concerns.There are many factors which encourage people to work together as part of globalisation. Thesefactors include:

• synergy of information, technology and access, which affect each other;• expanding global interdependence;

• increasing emphasis on sustainability; and

• increasing focus on the individual in areas such as health, personal rights, privacy, quality oflife, recreation, etc.By understanding globalisation and its social, economic and political impact on our society, we arein a much better position to develop appropriate spatial information strategies. One of the mostimportant results is that today, more than ever before, it is important to look beyond our own local,state and national boundaries. With this in mind, many countries throughout the world believe thatthey can benefit from better management of their spatial information by taking a perspective thatstarts at a local level and proceeds through state, national and regional levels to a global level. Thishas resulted in the development of the Spatial Data Infrastructure concept with a hierarchicalrelationship between these different levels.Technology trends

New technologies have certainly dictated changes in the development of spatial informationmanagement systems. For data capture some examples of the new technologies include satellitepositioning systems such as the USA Global Positioning System (GPS), and remote sensing

technologies and especially the new high resolution satellite imagery. The data base technologiesthat affect the storage of very large data sets have had a major impact on the spatial informationrevolution and especially on managing large spatial databases and data warehousing. The GIStechnologies for data management, manipulation, analysis and integration arguably have had thegreatest impact on the spatial information environment, although in the future the communicationtechnologies such as the WWW and the Internet are rapidly becoming the focus of attention. Thesetechnologies are increasingly being used for viewing, locating and using spatial data. This paperhowever is not about describing current and future GIS technologies since they are expertly dealtwith in many other forums.

THE LAND ADMINISTRATION PERSPECTIVE

The global drivers described above influence the form of land administration infrastructures whichsupport and facilitate the way societies interact with land. These drivers influence the developmentof the different land administration policies and models adopted by state and national governments,which in turn influence and provide the systems on which local government and city

administrations rely. These models and concepts can only be developed with a clear understandingof current land administration issues and trends. By its very nature land administration focuses onland tenure and cadastral (land parcel related) issues. The land administration perspective includesunderstanding the changing humankind to land relationship, cadastral issues such as national

cadastral systems in countries which are a federation of states, and land tenure issues such as nativetitle.

At the same time local government or city administrations must fully recognise these landadministration trends and the impact they have on their own spatial information strategies.The changing humankind-land relationship

One of the most importantinfluences on the developmentof spatial information

management is the changingrelationship of humankind toland and the resulting landadministration infrastructurerequired by these changes(Figure 3). To put this in

context, it is just over 200 yearsago that land markets, as we

Figure 3. Sketch of evolution of western land administration systemsnow know them, developed.This was driven by the

Industrial Revolution and the growth of modern cities. In this environment land changed from beingequated to wealth to being a commodity. This then saw the development of land administrationsystems such as the Torrens System to facilitate land markets. In simple terms the cadastre hasevolved in response to these demands from society (Ting et al., 1999). These state or national landadministration systems provide much of the infrastructure for local government and themanagement of cities.

In simple terms the broad development phases of the changing humankind to land relationship havebeen:

• Agricultural Revolution: land as wealth and cadastre as basic record and fiscal tool• Industrial Revolution: land as commodity and cadastre as a land market tool• Post-War: land as a scarce resource and cadastre as a planning tool

• 1980s and into the next millennium: land as a scarce community resource and cadastre as a landmanagement toolThese changes in the relationship of humankind to land and the corresponding changes to land

administrative infrastructures (Ting and Williamson 1999) are shown diagrammatically in Figure 4.

Main Phases in Humankind/Land RelationshipUp to late 1700’sAgriculturalRevolution thenFeudalismLand = WealthLate 1700’s -WWIIIndustrial Revolution& Land MarketsLand = Commodityas well as WealthPostWWII & Post-War ReconstructionLand = Scarce as well asResourceWealth andCommodity1980s onwardsInformation RevolutionSustainableDevelopment SocialEquityLand = Community,Scarce ResourceWealth and CommodityFiscal/JuridicalLand TransferPlanningMulti-PurposeEvolution of Applications for CadastreFigure 4. Evolution of the Land Administrative InfrastructureThe lesson from this research is that the relationship of humankind to land is dynamic with theresulting land administrative infrastructures also being dynamic. As a result any government at anational, state or local level which is attempting to develop future land administration or planningpolicies and strategies, must take this changing relationship into account. For example it is onlyabout 30 years ago that Strata Titles were introduced and only about 15 years ago that Cluster Titlescame into being.Cadastral reform

Cadastral systems, as a critically important component of land administration systems, arecontinually evolving as society’s attitudes and relationship to land changes. As society’s

relationship with land becomes more complex in terms of the ever increasing number and form ofrights, responsibilities and obligations, our land administration information systems that supportdecision-making, primarily in support of sustainable development, must also adapt to remainrelevant. The resulting cadastral reforms, which have increasingly occurred across all Australianjurisdictions over the last 20 years, give an insight to the issues and trends in both land

administration and the supporting spatial information management. Following is an overview ofsome of the issues and trends that have formed the basis of some of the cadastral research over thelast decade.

Cadastral systems can no longer rely on manual processes or traditional structures that supportedeconomic or taxation imperatives in the past. Stand alone or isolated approaches that supportedindividual purposes where data and processes were maintained in separate “data silos”, such as landvaluation and land titling, are not sustainable. They are being replaced by multipurpose cadastralsystems where information about natural resources, planning, land use, land value and land titles,including Western and indigenous interests, can be integrated for a range of business purposes. Thedesign of modern cadastres has seen the application of contemporary system development toolssuch as case study methodologies and information system concepts and principles. As we movefurther into the information revolution, a view of what cadastres might look like in a decade or socan give a clearer view of the road ahead.

Commission 7 (Cadastre and Land Management) of the International Federation of Surveyors (FIG)has developed a vision for a future cadastral system called Cadastre 2014 (in the year 2014)

(Kaufmann and Steudler 1998). Cadastre 2014 is based on international trends following extensiveworldwide research over a four-year period. This document provides the first internationalbenchmark against which cadastres can be measured in terms of development and reform. Aparallel part of the process to develop Cadastre 2014 was an international benchmarking ofcadastral systems around the world also undertaken by Commission 7 (Steudler et al., 1997).The creation of a digital representation of the spatial cadastre or digital cadastral data bases

(DCDBs) has brought not only the benefits of digital information but also challenges in terms ofhow these layers are maintained and improved in terms of spatial accuracy. These DCDBs are nowrecognised as the most important component of a local government spatial data infrastructure. Atthe same time local government or city administrations are intimately linked to the maintenanceand integrity of these spatial systems.

Maturity within the industry allows us to look at decentralised update mechanisms involving anumber of the sources, where updates flow across the WWW. DCDBs are moving from graphicalaccuracy towards survey accuracy related to land use and land value, as user needs in the utility andengineering fields become more demanding. The rapid improvement in accuracy available to usersof positional technology, such as with GPS and electronic distance measuring equipment, is also

driving the need to upgrade the accuracy of our cadastral databases. This in turn presents manyproblems concerned with a “shifting cadastre” where many local government or utility assets arerelated to the base cadastral layer or DCDB (see Wan and Williamson 1994a, 1994b, 1995a and1995b).

Low cost cadastres are being developed for low value lands such as Australia’s semi-arid lands orrangelands. These models are increasingly moving towards multipurpose systems where data iscaptured by remote sensing technologies. Natural features and improvements such as roads,

railways and fence lines can then be used as coordinated occupational boundaries rather than usingthe traditional fixed boundary approach.

Increasingly cadastres that are complete in terms of coverage and content and kept up to date willbe a fundamental requirement for the development of spatial data infrastructures at both the stateand national levels. The institutional arrangements for the cadastre as a component of SDIs are alsobeing examined and in particular the role of government as a regulator of cadastral surveying. Therole of regulatory boards which have operated on behalf of governments to ensure that competencystandards are maintained in this regard where they underpin Torrens title and the state guarantee, isbeing questioned. Cadastre 2014 and current trends in Australia point towards less governmentintervention in this area.

THE CHANGING SPATIAL INFORMATION MANAGEMENT ENVIRONMENT

There are a range of concepts, principles and technologies that have been developed or are evolvingto assist in establishing modern cadastral and land administration systems which either impact on orare equally relevant to local government or city administrations. Following are some of the issues,developments, concepts and trends which have evolved or been highlighted in the spatialinformation environment in recent times in Australia and have been the subject of researchundertaken at the University of Melbourne. They are all characterised by being part of theincreasingly rapid change in the spatial information environment and give an insight in currenttrends and future directions in spatial information management in Australia.

Understanding the business-infrastructure relationship in spatial informationmanagement

After studying the uptake and utilisation (diffusion) of GIS in state governments (Chan and

Williamson 1996, 1999a), Chan (1998) details and validates a business-infrastructure model thatcan better describe how and why agencies cooperate to develop aGIS. In this model, a corporate GIS is viewed as comprisinginter-related mutual-supporting multi-levelled modules of

business process GIS and infrastructure GIS in the context of thebusiness/production activities of the organisation (Figure 5).GIS/SDI forBased on this model, an SDI is disaggregated into a collection ofmodules of hierarchical infrastructure GIS (the shaded ovals).The business process GIS represents the GIS capabilitiesdeveloped by the users (the clear ovals) that rely on the SDImodules to deliver the products and services needed by thegeospatial information industry. This GIS may, in turn, nurturethe development of new SDI modules, and link different SDImodules together. The inherent relationships between the SDIand the business process GIS in the business-infrastructure

businessactivities in anBusiness processorganisationGISInfrastructure GIS/SDI moduleFigure 5. The business-infrastructure model.model provide a broad framework for spatial information management.

GIS development in an organisation is driven by visions of individual business managers. Based onthe support of senior management, Chan and Williamson (1999c) identify four main patterns of GISdevelopment, namely, opportunistic, systematic, opportunistic-infrastructure, opportunistic-business process. The long-term success of a corporate GIS relies on a management strategy that isrigid enough to promote data/information sharing but flexible enough to accommodate themanagers' visions to develop specific GIS capabilities that they need.

Based on the work of Chan and Williamson, Figure 6 describes such an approach to GIS

development, which comprises three stages. GIS capabilities are developed in an ad hoc manner inan organisation initially and raises the corporate awareness of GIS in Stage 1. In Stage 2, seniormanagement support enables GIS capabilities to be developed in a systematic manner, resulting in aset of standard practices laid down in a centralised corporate GIS. Within the framework of standardpractices, specific GIS capabilities are allowed to be developed in business units in differentpatterns in Stage 3 depending on the needs of each business unit.

Stage 1Develop amodule ofbusinessprocess GIS toraise awarenessand gainorganisationalsupportStage 2Secure organisationalresources andcommitmentDevelop a centralisedcorporate GIS torealise benefitspromised to usersStage 3Facilitate development of GIS modules forbusiness functions and units in the organisationbased on a set of standard practicesSystematicpatternOpportunistic-business process patternOpportunistic-infrastructure patternTimeLegends

BusinessprocessGIS

SupportingGIS productsand services

Systematicpattern of GISdevelopment

Infrastructure GISFigure 6. Three-stage development of a corporate GIS.

Fitzgerald et al. (1999) describe the experience of the City of Port Phillip (the Council) in

Melbourne, Australia, which has adopted such a flexible approach while maintaining some elementsof a structured implementation. This is achieved through developing a set of core data, standards,hardware and software in the traditional systematic manner to provide a GIS infrastructure.Flexibility is introduced by not fully specifying implementation outcomes or time frame, usingpower users to encourage ownership of the technology and a GIS working group that moulds theGIS to meet the business needs of the Council and oversees the entire process of GIS development.

Understanding the complexity of cadastral systems and the maintenance of thespatial component

A cadastral system has two components: textual and spatial. The spatial component consists ofcadastral maps, the geodetic framework and survey plans. Maintenance of this spatial componentinvolves updating and upgrading of the proposed, current legal and as built spatial data of landsubdivision activities through various means including the Internet (Effenberg, et al. 1999, Falzonand Williamson 1998, Phillips, et al. 1998, Polley, et al. 1997) as illustrated in Figure 7. The goalof the maintenance exercise is to provide a homogeneous statewide coverage of cadastral data withminimum maintenance duplication. As shown in Figure 7, the objective is not just a matter ofupdating the state DCDB but of providing an updated digital environment for the effectivefunctioning of the cadastral system.

DigitalSpatialPlanningLocal CouncilsGasTelecomsElectricityWaterutilitiesIncrementalUpdateState DCDBSurveyor/DeveloperDigitalLodgementLand Titles OfficeReferralProcessViewing and SearchingE-Commerce Internet DeliverySpatial Data CustomersFigure 7. Complexity of Cadastral Systems

State and local governments are increasingly operating in a fully digital environment with the resultthat they are having to consider the complete digital environment and complexity of cadastralsystems described above. On of the major issues is maintaining and improving the quality of thecadastral base which is basic infrastructure for both the state’s land administration system as well aslocal government. States like Victoria have established a Property Information Project (PIP) wherepartnership arrangements have been established with all local governments in the state. The Statehas provided the State digital cadastral map free to councils, have agreed to maintain it free ofcharge and have provided funds to help establish the maintenance cycle. Councils have agreed inexchange to adopt the map base, to provide changes and updates to the State that affect the mapbase and to work with the State Government to improve the maintenance cycle to everyone’sbenefit.

Local government, utilities and state governments are increasingly recognising the benefits ofdigital subdivisional data and an electronic approach to update and maintenance incorporatinginternet and email. They have traditionally found it difficult to obtain digital survey geometry in atimely and efficient manner from its source as no standards currently exist for the handling andmanagement of this digital survey geometry. In conjunction with all parties, there is an acceptance

of the need to remotely lodge plan information in electronic form to facilitate the business of theland titles offices and to reengineer the electronic lodgment process in line with other electroniccommerce.

Another important development concerns incremental updates to local government digital cadastralmap (DCDB). This includes automatic integration of changed DCDB spatial data in the map base ofcustomers with due reference to the associativity issue mentioned previously. This includes theability of the custodian of the DCDB to source planning information at early stages to ensure

maximum currency of DCDB land infrastructure eg roads and addresses. As mentioned the abilityto search and deliver land information using the Internet, WWW technology and current

communication technologies and practices for the delivery and purchase of products is integral tothe development of the digital environment which intimately links local government to the state’sland administration system.

The changing nature of spatial data infrastructures

Current spatial data infrastructures (SDIs) are in reality a sophisticated digital version of the

systems that most developed nations have had for over 50 years. One important development is therecognition that SDIs comprise people, a clearinghouse/access network, technical standards, aninstitutional framework and framework data. The spatial data infrastructures of the past were

designed and driven primarily by the providers of the infrastructure. An important change over thelast decade has been the rapidly expanding numbers of users of spatial data, which are resulting in aproliferation of spatial business systems. These are increasingly influencing and demanding specificcharacteristics from SDIs. With the rapidly changing spatialglobalinformation environment and the impact of such

regionaltechnologies as the WWW, GPS, high resolution satellite

nationalimagery, communication technologies and sophisticated

decision support systems based on GIS technologies, thesestatespatial data infrastructures will inevitably change anddevelop.

local

In exploring such changes it is important to recognise thatcorporateSDIs are increasingly being grouped into a hierarchy (Figure8) comprising six levels of SDIs, namely, global, regional,Figure 8. Hierarchy of SDIsnational, state (also called provincial), local and corporate

(Chan and Williamson 1999b). Ideally with compatible sets of SDIs, users working on issues at ahigher level in the hierarchy can draw on data from SDIs in all other levels lower in the hierarchy(Rajabifard, et al. 1999).

The spatial hierarchy problem

With the advent of an increasing number of spatial business systems demanding more and morefrom spatial data infrastructures, problems with the “spatial hierarchy” are increasingly becomingan issue. The spatial hierarchy issue refers to the difficulties in exchanging, aggregating andanalysing different data sets based on non-coterminous boundaries (Eagleson, et al. 1999).

Figure 9. Current situation of managing spatial

data among state agenciesFigure 10. Ideal situation of managing spatial data

among state agencies

Figure 8 illustrates the current situation where each agency collects and aggregates data based on itsown hierarchically structured boundaries. The bottom layer is the land parcel map. Land parcels arerecognised as indivisible units. This is common practice in most countries. As a result, data

aggregation is possible within each agency but it results in great difficulties if the aim is to use datafrom various agencies.

Research is being undertaken to examine trends in such organisations as the Australian Bureau ofStatistics (ABS), health and social security departments, and Australia Post to explore the use ofHierarchical Spatial Reasoning (HSR) in assisting in the spatial hierarchy problem. Such anapproach has been applied in different applications such as way finding for navigation systems

(Car, 1997). The properties inherent in HSR theory make it suitable as the base for a re-organisationof spatial units under a common hierarchy. This research aims to apply the principles of HSR theoryto the re-organisation of spatial boundaries. Figure 10 shows a model where all agencies share acommon structure that enables cross analysis. By applying HSR to this problem, GIS will hopefullyimprove its capacity for data integration (one of the items on the agenda of GIS institutions such asthe National Center for Geographic Information and Analysis (NCGIA) and the UniversityConsortium for Geographic Information Science (UCGIS)).Developing partnerships

Partnership refers to the association of two or more people as partners in the carrying on of a

business with shared risks and profits. In this context it is generally recognised that no one agencycan develop a National SDI (NSDI) with the result that different national SDI coordinating agenciesare encouraging NSDI development through partnerships (Federal Geographic Data Committee1997, AUSLIG 1999). In the USA alone, over 50 major partnership initiatives have been

established since 1995 on a thematic, state wide and regional basis. As mentioned previously stateslike Victoria have recently achieved considerable success in developing strong partnerships withlocal government in providing the State’s SDI.

Australia has accumulated significant experience in the development of the cadastral component ofits NSDI through a wide range of public-public and public-private partnerships (Mooney and Grant1997, Williamson et al. 1998). Some are successful and some are not, but all are important inunderstanding how partnerships can be better utilised in cadastral and NSDI development. Theissues include standards, cost sharing, privacy, copyright and inter-state/inter-person rivalry.However, the Australian experience also suggests that where there is a need, there is always a

solution. It is expected that the determining factors in an on-going research project into partnershipsin SDI development will be the type of partnership, the objective, the business driver, organisationsettings of the partners and leadership by visionary managers. There is no doubt that local

government will be an increasingly important partner in future spatial information systems at stateand national levels.

Evolving government institutions

The spatial information industry has gone through a major re-engineering over the last 20 years andparticularly the last decade. As a result of micro-economic reform, government has increasinglymoved away from service delivery to directing and setting policy in the spatial informationenvironment. This has resulted in the growth of a spatial information industry. In the past thisindustry was considered no more than a cottage industry but through these policies an increasingnumber of relatively large private sector companies are evolving. Such companies are now able toinvest in research and development and can begin to have an export focus.

At the same time as governments recognise the importance of spatial information to economicdevelopment and environmental management (sustainable development), government institutionshave continued to evolve. A major trend has been the amalgamation of all the land related

information organisations into one department, group or unit. A good example is Land Victoria inthe Government of Victoria.

There has also been an important increase in spatial information development at a national level inAustralia. In the past the only organisation with the ability to provide national spatial data was theFederal Government. However as a result of its mandate the Federal Government focussed onsmall-scale data. With the growth of medium and large-scale digital data at a state and territorylevel in Australia, usually based on the cadastre, users have increasingly demanded access to thisdata as an aggregated product at a national level. This has seen the growth of the Public SectorMapping Agencies, an excellent example of the partnership concept in Australia, to provide theseproducts.

Another outcome of these changing institutions has been more partnerships between academicinstitutions and both government and the private sectors. With universities also having been

dramatically affected by micro-economic reform policies resulting in reduced government funding,universities are increasingly providing the research and development to government, research whichwas previously provided in-house. This is resulting in some spatial information departments inuniversities relying on external funds for over 50% of their operating budget.Impact of the WWW and communications technologies

The WWW and communication technologies are having a dramatic impact on the evolving spatialinformation marketplace. The use of GIS in land administration over the years, in both the naturalresources and parcel based areas, has resulted in the proliferation of many large distributed spatialdatabases. Such spatial databases require very efficient means of data management and access toolsthat intelligently guide users to the data. Metadata (data about data) and metadata engines are

examples of intelligent spatial access tools, areas where there is considerable research being

undertaken. Metadata provides users with information about the data prior to retrieving and usingthe data. A Metadata engine can use the metadata for searching and retrieving datasets from acrossthe WWW (Phillips et al, 1998). The WWW is also often viewed as storage banks where spatialinformation can be stored and retrieved locally by Internet users. A prototype has been developedby Polley using Java and the Computer Gateway Interface (CGI) language to facilitate a two-wayflow of spatial data through the WWW (Polley, 1999).

Increasingly the WWW is seen as an alternative to delivering cadastral information by public bodiesto the public. In fact some government organisations are seeing their whole delivery strategy basedon the WWW. This is equally the case with local government and city administrations which arerapidly adopting the WWW for facilitating access to land related and particularly land parcel relateddata.

WWW servers and the emergence of Map Servers also facilitate the move towards the realisation ofthe multi-purpose cadastre concept described over 20 years ago and more recently in the BogorDeclaration on Cadastral Reform (UN/FIG 1996) and Cadastre 2014. However it is only now, dueto the technology, that the vision is becoming a reality. Together with distributed databases, and theWWW and Map Servers, a multi-purpose cadastre is expected to allow government agencies tooverlay cadastral maps, title registers, planning and other vital land resources live and interactivelyin order to show the complete legal situation of the land to Internet users across the world (Majid etal, 1999). In other words it is becoming increasingly possible to identify all rights, restrictions andresponsibilities relating to land over the WWW. No doubt the WWW, together with advancedcommunication and information technologies, will continue to be one of the major drivers for thefuture development of spatial information management in Australia.CONCLUSION

In attempting to overview future directions for spatial information management in Australia from anurban land administration perspective, examples have been drawn from the SDI and cadastralresearch. These examples have tried to highlight the complexity and inter-dependency of issues inthe area of spatial information management and their multi-disciplinary nature. Most importantlythey have endeavoured to show that any spatial information strategy at any level of government isan important component of that jurisdiction’s wider land administration strategy. In the Australianstates and territories, spatial information management is strongly influenced by land administrationwhich is responsive to global drivers. As such any spatial information management strategy musttake into account sustainable development, micro-economic reform and globalisation trends andChanging humankind-land relationshipissues, in addition to the obvious technology issues,as they affect land administration. Simply put, any

Sustainable development strategiesspatial information strategy at a local governmentlevel must take a more integrated and broader view

TechnologyLand administration systemsof the land administration environment.

A key requirement in developing appropriate spatial

information management strategies is

understanding the interaction between the changinghumankind-land relationship, sustainabledevelopment strategies, land administration

systems, spatial business systems and spatial datainfrastructures, while recognising the impact of

Spatial business systemsSpatial data infrastructuresFigure 11. Developing spatial informationmanagement strategiestechnology across all these dimensions (Figure 11). In addressing this need, spatial data

infrastructures will evolve to accommodate the business needs of sophisticated decision supportsystems and complex multi-purpose cadastres. The increasing emphasis on business needs asdistinct from infrastructure needs of spatial information will inevitably see a re-engineering ofcurrent SDIs. Local government will be a key partner in these developments.

Sustainable development will be the focus for the changing humankind to land relationship into thenext millennium. This demands sophisticated land administration infrastructures for the necessarydecision-making. These in turn require support from the more generic information technologiesintegrated with spatial information technologies that can process and package data that is of

sufficient quality, accuracy, relevance and inter-operability to the decision-maker. Herein lie themany challenges that need to be tackled in developing the next generation of spatial informationsystems at all levels of government.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The author gratefully acknowledges the support of Land Victoria (LV) of the Victorian Government, the Land

Information Centre (LIC) of the New South Wales Government, the Australian Surveying and Land Information Group(AUSLIG) of the Commonwealth Government and the Australian Research Council (ARC) (Grants C19700324 andC49930403) in the research mentioned in the paper. The author also acknowledge the assistance provided by researchercolleagues colleagues Dr Francisco Escobar, Dr Tai On Chan, Wolfgang Effenberg, Malcolm Park, Abbas Rajabifard,Paul Harcombe, Clare Brazenor, Serryn Eagleson and Sam Majid

(http://www.geom.unimelb.edu.au/research/SDI_research/) at the Department of Geomatics, the University of

Melbourne in the preparation of the paper. However, the views expressed in the paper are those of the author and do notnecessarily reflect the views of LV, LIC, AUSLIG or ARC.

The author acknowledges that this paper draws on three recent papers presented by the author. The first was titled

“Future Directions for Spatial Information Management in Australia– A Land Administration Perspective” presented atAURISA 99 - the 27th Annual Conference of AURISA, Blue Mountains NSW, 22-26 November 1999. The second andthird were by the author and Lisa Ting titled “Land administration and cadastral trends: the impact of the changing

humankind-land relationship and major global drivers” and “Land administration and cadastral trends – a framework forre-engineering” and presented to the United Nations-International Federation of Surveyors International Conference onLand Tenure and Cadastral Infrastructures for Sustainable Development in Melbourne 24-27 October, 1999.REFERENCES

AUSLIG, (1999) Webpage on Australian Spatial Data Infrastructure Partnerships Program. Accessed 1 July 1999..

Brazenor, C., Ogleby, C.L. and Williamson, I.P. (1999) The Spatial Dimension of Aboriginal Land Tenure. To bepresented at 6th South East Asian Surveyors Congress, Fremantle, 1-6 November 1999.

Car, A., (1997) Hierarchical Spatial Reasoning: Theoretical Consideration and its Application to ModelingWayfinding. PhD thesis, Technical University, Vienna.

Chan, T. O., (1998) The Dynamics of Diffusion of Corporate GIS. PhD thesis , The University of Melbourne.Chan, T. O. and Williamson, I. P., (1996) A model of the decision process for GIS adoption and diffusion in agovernment environment. In Proceedings of URISA '96, (Utah: URISA) pp. 247-260.

Chan, T. O. and Williamson, I. P., (1999a) The different identities of GIS and GIS diffusion. International Journal ofGeographical Information Science, 13(3), 267-281.

Chan, T. O., and Williamson, I. P. (1999b) Spatial data infrastructure management: lessons from corporate GISdevelopment. Paper presented at AURISA 99, Blue Mountain, NSW, 22-26 November, 10 pages.

Chan, T. O. and Williamson, I. P., (1999c), Long term management of a corporate GIS. International Journal ofGeographical Information Science, forthcoming.

Eagleson, S., Escobar, F., and Williamson, I. P., (1999) Spatial Hierarchical Reasoning Applied to AdministrationBoundary Design Using GIS. To be presented at 6th South East Asian Surveyors Congress, Fremantle, 1-6 November1999.

Effenberg, W. W., Enemark, S. and Williamson, I. P. (1999) Framework for Discussion of Digital Spatial Data Flowwithin Cadastral Systems. Australian Surveyor, 44(1).

Falzon, K. and Williamson, I. P. (1998) Digital Lodgement of Cadastral Survey Data in Victoria. Proceedings of the39th Australian Surveyors Congress, Launceston, Tasmania, 8-13 November 1998

Federal Geographic Data Committee (1997) A Strategy for the NSDI. Federal Geographic Data Committee, Reston,VA, 25 March, 1999 .

Fitzgerald, M., Dooley, P., and Chan, T. O., 1999, Just when you thought you had finished the GIS implementation.Presented at Infrastructure '99, (: 5-9 September 1999), 14 pages.

Kaufmann, J. and Steudler, D. (1998) Cadastre 2014: A Vision for a Future Cadastral System (Rheinfall, Switzerland:FIG).

Majid, S. I., and Williamson, I. P. (1999) Cadastral Systems on the World Wide Web: A Multi-Purpose Vision.Presented at AURISA 99, Blue Mountain, NSW, 22-26 November, 9 pages

Mooney, J. D. and Grant, D. M. (1997) The Australian Spatial Data Infrastructure. In Framework of the World, editedby D. Rhind. (Cambridge: GeoInformation International), pp. 187-201.

Park, M., Ting, L. and Williamson, I.P. (1998) Adverse possession of Torrens land. 72(11) Law Institute Journal 77Park, M. and Williamson, I.P. (1999a) Australian cadastres: the role of adverse possession of part parcels. TheAustralian Surveyor (forthcoming)

Park, M. and Williamson, I.P. (1999b) The effect of adverse possession to part on a future Australian cadastre. To bepresented at 6th South East Asian Surveyors Congress, Fremantle, 1-6 November 1999.

Phillips, A., Williamson, I. P., and Ezigbalike, I. C. (1998) The Importance of Metadata Engines in Spatial DataInfrastructures. Proceedings of AURISA '98, Perth, Western Australia, 23-27 November 1998

Polley, I., Williamson, I. P., and Effenberg, W. W. (1997) Suitability of Internet Technologies for Access, Transmissionand Updating Digital Cadastral Databases on the Web. Proceedings of AURISA 97, Christchurch, New Zealand, 17-21November 1997

Polley, I. (1999) Facilitating the use of Cadastral Data Through the World Wide Web. MastersThesis, University ofMelbourne, Melbourne, 124 pp.

Rajabifard, A., Chan, T. O., and Williamson, I. P. (1999) The Nature of Regional Spatial Data Infrastructures. Paperpresented at AURISA 99, Blue Mountain, NSW, 22-26 November, 10 pages.

Steudler, D., Williamson, I.P., Kaufmann, J. and Grant D.M. (1997) Benchmarking Cadastral Systems. The AustralianSurveyor, 42(3), 87-106

Ting, L., Williamson, I., Grant, D. and Parker, J. R. (1999) Understanding the evolution of land administration systemsin some common law countries, Survey Review, 35(272), 83-102.

Ting, L. and Williamson, I.P. (1999) Cadastral Trends: A Synthesis. The Australian Surveyor, 44(1), 46-.UN/FIG (1996) Bogor Declaration on Cadastral Reform. FIG Webpage accessed on July 30 1999.http://www.sli.unimelb.edu.au/fig7/Bogor/BogorDeclaration.htmlWan, W.Y. and Williamson, I.P. (1994a) Problems in Maintaining Associativity in LIS with Particular Reference to theNeeds of the Utility Industry. The Australian Surveyor, Vol. 39, No. 3, 187-193.Wan, W.Y. and Williamson, I.P. (1994b) Solutions to Maintaining Associativity in LIS with Particular Reference to theNeeds of the Utility Industry. The Australian Surveyor, Vol. 39, No. 4, 290-297.Wan, W.Y. and Williamson, I.P. (1995a) A Review of the Digital Cadastral Databases in Australia and New Zealand.The Australian Surveyor , Vol. 40, No. 1, 41-52.Wan, W.Y. and Williamson, I.P. (1995b) The Users' View of Digital Cadastral Databases in Australia. The AustralianSurveyor, Vol. 40, No. 1, 53-62.Williamson, I. P., Chan, T. O., and Effenberg, W. W. (1998) Development of spatial data infrastructures - lessonslearned from the Australian digital cadastral databases. Geomatica, 52(2), 177-187.NOTE: Most of the articles by Williamson and his colleagues can be found at

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH

Professor Ian Williamson PhD (NSW), DrHC (Olsztyn), FTSE, FISAust, FIEAust, HonFMSIAust, LS, CPEng isProfessor of Surveying and Land Information and Head of the Department of Geomatics at the University of

Melbourne. He teaches and undertakes research in the areas of cadastral, land and geographic information systems,land administration and spatial data infrastructures, in conjunction with his research team. He has undertaken

consultancies worldwide in his area of expertise including for AusAID, the United Nations and the World Bank. Hewas Chairperson of Commission 7 (Cadastre and Land Management) of the International Federation of Surveyors 1994-98, and is currently Director, FIG/UN Liaison 1999-2002. At Melbourne he has been President of the Academic Boardand Pro-Vice-Chancellor. He is currently Chairperson of the Victorian Government’s Geospatial Information ReferenceGroup. Professor Williamson was awarded the AURISA Eminent Individual Award in 1996 and the Medal of theInstitution of Surveyors, Australia in 1997, was elected a Fellow of the Academy of Technology Sciences and

Engineering and was awarded the honorary degree of Doctor Honoris Causa, Olsztyn University of Agriculture andTechnology, Poland, in 1998.