Upgrade to Pro — share decks privately, control downloads, hide ads and more …

Keynote Speaker - David Cowen: The Changing GeoSpatial Landscape

Keynote Speaker - David Cowen: The Changing GeoSpatial Landscape

Dr. David Cowen

More Decks by Texas Natural Resources Information System

Other Decks in Technology

Transcript

  1. 1 The Changing GeoSpatial Landscape Dr. David J. Cowen, Distinguished

    Professor Emeritus University of South Carolina Available @www.fgdc.gov/ngac Versions to appear in Photogrammetic Engineering and Remote Sensing ArcNews
  2. Outline •  Personal Perspective – 45 years •  Federal Data

    Policy – the way things were suppose to work •  Evolution & trends – reality •  Report Card – How are we doing? •  Parcels – the holy grail ? 2
  3. Research Interests DOE – Environmental Atlas State – Economic Development

    NASA - Commercial Apps Parcel Level Analysis Campus 3D models
  4. Mapping Science Committee 1990 Pre FGDC 1991 R & D

    1993 Defined NSDI 1994 Partnerships 1995 Foundation 1997 Future 2001 Partnership Programs 2002 State Dept 2003 National Map 2004 Licensing
  5. 11 “Building a viable NSDI to serve the needs of

    all levels of government and the private sector requires a solid foundation that is strategic, deliberate, and assembled in discrete, manageable units.” FGDC Mission or Lip service ?
  6. My Interpretation - As Chair of NGAC §  We don’t

    live in a 1:24,000 world §  NSDI – Means acquire and use most appropriate data (high resolution and current) §  Local & crowd sourced §  Challenges: §  “It’s easy to make a decision in the absence of information” §  “How do we make geospatial information so accessible that it cannot be ignored?”
  7. Key NGAC Products NGAC  Transi,on     Recommenda,ons   Changing

     Geospa,al  Landscape     White  Paper  
  8. 20 Shock Waves •  Personal Navigation Systems < $100 • 

    Navteq - Street Centerlines valued @ $8.1 Billion o Nokia – Centimeter with GPS & Telecom o Purchased (2015) by German Auto makers for $3 Billion •  Google Earth/ Map - the 4th innovation in computing o GIS users grow from 1,000,000 to 100,000,000 + o Now ubiquitous - on smart phones & dashboards •  Zillow.com - More than 110,000,000 properties •  Open Street Map – Volunteered Geographic Information •  Location Based Social Networks via cell phones •  IPHONE as a field data collection device •  Drones
  9. 21 Themes •  Data Capture –  Conversion of existing maps

    > on screen digitizing field collection automated feature extraction –  In-situ remotely sensed –  Public Commercial Volunteered –  Static Real Time
  10. 22 Themes •  Computing Environment –  Mainframe workstation personal computer

    GPS embedded smartphones and tablets •  Software –  Full function Toolbox on demand services SaaS –  Technical manuals intuitive •  Data Sources –  Vector maps precise high resolution imagery –  WorldView-3, 30 cm resolution aerial imagery, –  Aircraft 4 inch vertical and oblique –  Drones
  11. 23 Themes •  Data Models –  Layers Objects –  2D

    3D 4D •  Data Storage –  Local hard drives “Clouds” –  Free Google Mailbox 15 GB Google Drive, Gmail, and Google Photos
  12. 24 Themes •  Users –  Technician driven (chauffeurs) Public (

    High expectations) –  Application specialists managers / decision makers •  Institutional Setting –  Third Generation SDI (Spatial Data Infrastructure) –  Product-based Process-based development Virtual •  Products –  Paper maps location based services –  Service Oriented Architecture (SOA) •  Relationship to IT –  Stand alone department integrated part of enterprise •  Development languages and environment –  Procedural (Fortran/ANSI C) object oriented (C++) scripting (Visual Basic/JavaScript) managed code (Java/C#)
  13. 25 Themes •  User Interfaces and Access –  Text (command

    line) GUI (Dashboards) –  Specialized graphic terminals broad band connected personal computers –  Web Web 2.0 (lots of user provided content - collaboration) –  Maps Decision support systems •  GI Data Collection and Distribution –  Federal (top down) local (bottom up) –  Proprietary Data Exchange Standards Open De Facto ( Shape , KML)
  14. Federal Leadership •  USGS National Mapping Program – 1: 24,000

    quads the de facto national base map •  Census DIME / TIGER – address matching •  DOD – GPS network 26
  15. 29 GPS – 1970’s Freely accessible in 2000 GPS was

    designed in the mid 1970s to support U.S. Department of Defense missions. In the mid 1990s, the 24 satellites that formed the GPS Operational Constellation made it possible to locate geographic coordinates without reference to any landmarks or features on Earth. By recording signals from at least four of the satellites, these GPS receivers were able to determine the X, Y and Z coordinates of the receiver anywhere on the Earth’s surface or on an aircraft. Since 2000 almost any GPS receiver is able fix a location within a few meters of its actual location. President Bill Clinton’s May 1 2000 announcement, that the accuracy-degrading selective availability (SA) superimposed on the navigation signals of (GPS) was to be removed
  16. Moore’s Law 35 "Today, your cell phone has more computer

    power than all of NASA back in 1969, when it placed two astronauts on the moon." But a Cray-1's raw computational power of 80 million floating-point operations per second (FLOPS) is laughable by today's standards; the graphics unit inside the IPhone 5S produces about 76.8 GFLOPS – nearly a thousand times more. In 1965, Gordon Moore extrapolated that computing would dramatically increase in power, and decrease in relative cost, at an exponential pace - the number of transistors in a dense integrated circuit doubles approximately every two years.
  17. Geotagged Flickr (Eric Fischer) 45 Black is walking (less than

    7mph), Red is bicycling or equivalent speed (less than 19mph), Blue is motor vehicles on normal roads (less than 43mph); Green is freeways or rapid transit.
  18. Geospatial Platform –ambitious 50 Through the GeoPlatform, users have access

    to •  A one-stop shop to deliver trusted, nationally consistent data and services •  Authoritative data to support informed decision making •  Problem-solving applications and services that are built once and can be used many times across multiple Federal agencies and other organizations •  A shared infrastructure to host data and applications •  A national and Federal focal point where governmental, academic, private, and public data and applications can be visualized together to inform and address national and regional issues
  19. Report  Card  on  the     U.S.  National  Spatial  

          Data  Infrastructure  (NSDI)     Prepared  for  the  Coalition  of  Geospatial   Organizations  (COGO)   DAVID  J.  COWEN,  VICE  CHAIRMAN   PROFESSOR  EMERITUS,  UNIVERSITY  OF  SOUTH  CAROLINA  
  20. Coalition  of  Geospatial  Organizations  (COGO)     Thirteen  national  nonprofit

     organizations  focused   on  geospatial  technologies  
  21. Work  on  the  Report  Card  began  in  2014  with  

    the  selection  of  the  Expert  Panel   James  E.  Geringer   Chair   Dr.  David  J.  Cowen   Vice-­‐Chair   John  J.  Moeller   Vice-­‐Chair   Susan  Carson  Lambert   Thomas  D.  Rust   Dr.  John  D.  Bossler   Robert  T.  Welch  
  22. the  end  of  the  process  was  the  public  release  of

      the  Report  Card  on  February  6th  2015  
  23. Grading  Criteria   •  A  =  FIT  FOR  THE  FUTURE

            •  B  =  ADEQUATE  FOR  NOW         •  C  =  REQUIRES  ATTENTION   •  D  =  AT  RISK.   •  F  =  UNFIT  FOR  PURPOSE  
  24. Conclusions   • The  Framework  requires  attention     • The  original

     vision  and  the  greatest  potential  value  of  the   NSDI  Framework  have  not  yet  been  fulfilled.   • Definitive  sets  of  nationally  consistent,  fully  integrated,   and  reliable  data  do  not  exist  for  the  entire  nation.   • Current  representations  exist  as  seven  separate  themes   rather  than  a  fully  integrated  system.   • Federal  agencies  charged  with  the  stewardship  of  the   seven  Framework  data  layers  face  serious  obstacles  in   terms  of  authority  and  funding.     • The  shift  in  data  production  from  the  federal  government   to  the  private  sector  and  state  and  local  government  calls   for  new  forms  of  partnership.    
  25. Recommendations  of  the  Expert  Panel   • The  concept  of  the

     Framework  needs  to  be   reaffirmed.     • A  new  model  for  Framework  data  needs  to   be  adopted,  and  this  new  model  must   acknowledge  the  importance  of  local   partners.     • This  model  should  be  transaction  based  and   emphasize  the  use  of  current  information   technologies,  federated,  and  web-­‐based   capabilities;  and  support  web-­‐based  services   and  applications.  
  26. Recommendations  (continued)   • The  Federal  Geographic  Data  Committee  (FGDC)  

    needs  to  emphasize  that  the  Framework  is  part  of   its  Strategic  Plan,  and  that  it  will  work  in   collaboration  with  non-­‐federal  and  non-­‐ governmental  partners  to  build  an  effective  NSDI   Framework.     • In  today’s  environment  the  most  accurate  and   current  geospatial  data  are  often  collected  by  local   government.  A  successful  NSDI  demands  that  these   high  resolution  data  become  part  of  the   Infrastructure.   • Budgetary  and  leadership  investments  must  be   made  to  implement  a  new  model.    
  27. Closing  Comments   A BILL To improve the coordination and

    use of geospatial data Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Geospatial Data Act of 2015’’. •  This legislation promises to solve some of the issues that have hampered progress on the NSDI. •  Ed Cox, Legislative Assistant for Senator Hatch is the Point of Contact for this legislation.  
  28. Geospatial  Data  Act  of  2015     1)    Providing

     FGDC  with  authority  to  make  other   agencies  follow  the  rules   2)    Providing  Congressional  oversight  to  make   FGDC  and  the  other  agencies  accountable   3)      Allowing  Congress  to  find  out  where  the  money   is  really  going  –they  will  be  able  to  see  that  the   budgets  really  are  inadequate.   4)      Providing  a  great  deal  more  ‘clout’  to  NGAC  and   requiring  FGDC  to  address  NGAC’s  concerns  –    
  29. Technology •  “Current technology is adequate in most cases for

    the surveying, mapping, data collecting, filing and dissemination of information. •  Advancement in computer applications, communication networks and copying processes promise of more- efficient use of the multipurpose cadastre.”
  30. Obstacles •  The major obstacles in the development of a

    multipurpose cadastre are the organizational and institutional requirements.
  31. Parcel  Discussion     • comprehensive  parcel  database  for  cadastral  

    information  does  not  exist.     • The  results  have  shown  that  a  collaborative   model  has  not  worked  in  such  a  complex   situation.     • New  authority  will  be  needed  to  bring  a  National   Parcel  Dataset  to  a  reality.   • should  be  considered  for  removal  from  the   Framework  layers  and  re-­‐addressed  as  a  separate   significant  initiative.  
  32. Presenter’s Name June 17, 2003 91 What benefits do you

    perceive from having a national multipurpose cadastre? •  Parcel data is the fundamental building block for all geographic analysis and serves as the raw material for most applications – most geographic analysis is benefit from the ability to understand the result at the parcel level •  A multipurpose cadastre enables a vast range of location-based services that will improve safety and increase efficiency of current operations •  Available, critical data for emergency response •  Local parcel data were still being sought 8 weeks into the response to Hurricane Katrina •  Impact from most disasters is best understood at the parcel level •  GIS is becoming the way disasters are managed. A common operating picture depends on an available multipurpose cadastre •  National response centers such as IMAAC depend on the availability of local data for accurate hazard predictions and health recommendations such as shelter in place •  Most DHS programs depend on geographic data that is at the parcel scale - for example Critical Infrastructure Program • The ability to protect the privacy of individuals is dependent on an accurate parcel-level database
  33. What Have Americans Paid (and Maybe the Rest of the

    World) for Not Having a Public Property Rights Infrastructure? Daniel ROBERGE, Canada and Bengt KJELLSON, Sweden “… we believe that a good property rights infrastructure could have mitigated the effect of the land market crisis and thereby avoided the loss of many hundreds or even thousands of billion dollars.” FIG Working Week 2009 Surveyors Key Role in Accelerated Development Eilat, Israel, 3-8 May 2009
  34. 2000 – Call for Early Warning System In April 2000,

    The National Task Force on Predatory Lending Chaired by Secretary Cuomo and Secretary Summers “Curbing Predatory Home Mortgage Lending” FHA will customize data from its Neighborhood Watch system to develop early warning indicators of emerging foreclosure "Hot Zones." … help local officials better assess real estate trends and spot possible patterns of appraisal abuse. This public information will include performance data on individual appraisers generated by the Credit Watch for Appraisers system and posted on the HUD website. •  http://www.huduser.org/publications/hsgfin/curbing.html
  35. What is an early warning system ? John Snow’s Cholera

    Map Toxic Well RealtyTrac’s Foreclosure Map Toxic Real Estate
  36. Chairman Ben S. Bernanke December 4, 2008 “Foreclosures create substantial

    social costs. Communities suffer when foreclosures are clustered, adding further to the downward pressure on property values. Lower property values in turn translate to lower tax revenues for local governments, and increases in the number of vacant homes can foster vandalism and crime.” * Source: Federal Reserve System Conference on Housing and Mortgage Markets, Washington, D.C. *Reference :John P. Harding, Eric Rosenblatt, and Yao Vincent (2008), "The Contagion Effect of Foreclosed Properties," Leaving the Board Social Science Research Network working paper 1160354 (July).
  37. “The Contagion Effect of Foreclosed Properties” •  The discount is

    roughly one percent per nearby foreclosed property and appears to be roughly proportional to the number of nearby distressed properties. The discount diminishes rapidly as the distance to the distressed properties increases. •  John P. Harding, Eric Rosenblatt, and Yao Vincent (2008), "The Contagion Effect of Foreclosed Properties," Leaving the Board Social Science Research Network working paper 1160354 (July)
  38. Distance Decay Function Just like proximity to Snow’s Contaminated Wells

    Discount of 7% with 4.5 foreclosures Within 300 Feet
  39. Status Started in Late 2009 •  70% of Russian territory

    covered (100% by December) •  160,000 settlements •  50 million parcels (80 million) Users •  12 000 users per day •  700,000 transactions 2010 •  10 million transactions 2011 106
  40. 110 Summary •  What a great time to be involved

    in geography ! –  People actually know what we do –  Citizens rely on our technology –  What would we do without GPS –  Great new ways to capture real time high resolution information –  Unprecedented public private partnerships –  Easy ways to share –without conceding ownship •  Challenge - Use the technology and data For a fairer, more equitable, more efficient, greener, and safer place to live