Posted by Davina Jackson on 1 Apr 2013

Professor Abbas Rajabifard, Dean of Melbourne University's Infrastructure Engineering Department.

Professor Abbas Rajabifard, Dean of Melbourne University’s Infrastructure Engineering Department.

Australia’s three tiers of government are not effectively co-ordinating their information to help manage Nature’s complex behaviours across the nation, claim data sciences experts at the University of Melbourne’s Department of Infrastructure Engineering.

The editors of a new book proposing a National Infrastructure for Managing Land Information (NIMLI) say that state government land information agencies are not effectively collating important datasets being collected by local governments – and there’s a need for state members of ANZLIC – The Spatial Information Council to pressure the Commonwealth Government to set clear requirements for consistent management of land information by the states and territories.

Edited by Professors Abbas Rajabifard, Ian Williamson and Mohsen Kalantari, the NIMLI book claims that a national land administration infrastructure framework is necessary to underpin more effective and ‘harmonised’ governance of society, the economy, and both built and natural environments. Examples include more reliable systems for taxing and trading land, managing disasters, enforcing laws, delivering social inclusion policies and providing more single-point access to information held by different agencies.

The NIMLI report claims there are eight design elements needed to set up an effective national land management system:

—Shared vision,

—Common language or ontology (for handling data),

—A national governance framework,

—A business case,

—Clarity on information requirements and a data model,

—Technical infrastructure,

—An implementation and maintenance model, and

—Compatability with international land information management systems.

The NIMLI book also identified 16 data management criteria that will need to be effectively organised to enable an integrated national system for managing land information:

—Formats for creation and collection,

—Co-ordination and flow of information,

—Storage and maintenance,

—Technology and technical issues,

—A services funding and pricing model,

—Dissemination and use,

—Economic considerations,

—Environmental considerations,

—Social considerations,

—Communication between agencies,

—Public participation,

—Structure of organisations,

—Commitments and responsibilities,

—Resources of relevant agencies,

—Dispute resolutions, and

—Capacity building.

Authors of several essays in the NIMLI book promoted acceleration of several new technology innovations:

—3D spatial co-ordinates (and 3D visuals) for the national Cadastre of land information (an advance on traditional 2D mapping),

—Resolutions of technical differences (semantics, geometry and levels of details) between building information models (BIMs) and general geospatial domain data models such as those used increasingly for modelling cities, and

—Automated life-cycle management of spatial metadata (data about data) through five key stages: collect, store and maintain, share, use and archive or dispose.

—Information from Abbas Rajabifard, Ian Williamson and Mohsen Kalatari (eds.) 2012. Research Snapshot: A National Infrastructure for Managing Land Information. Melbourne: University of Melbourne.