The Geographic Institute Agustin Codazzi -IGAC is responsible for mapping, cadastre, agrology, geography and remote sensing activities in Colombia, as part of this broad mission the institute provides technology transfer within Latin-America. This is why IGAC is active in promoting geographic activities at the local, national and regional levels.
Latin-America, the focus of this article, with some exemptions namely Brazil, Mexico and Colombia, is just starting to look seriously at the importance of having some kind of national spatial data infrastructure. Contrasts within the region can be shocking: while for some nations, the production of a 1: 500.000 analog map is still the mapping goal, others are developing significant GIS and digital markets. Concerning data production, policies, seamless data and standards there is no regional integration at all. Governments' budget applied to mapping activities is, in the average nation, marginal and local authority relies heavily on technical cooperation from outside the region. Also, there is evident need for training, especially at higher levels. With the exemption noted, one can say that in Latin-America there is more geography than geomatics.
In this context, PAIGH, DIGSA, the GSDI Steering Committee, the UNRCC and the IGO's have a crucial role to play in the introduction of more open, advanced and integrated mapping systems in the region.
Pertaining to GSDI, an action plan is proposed in the paper, including a set of activities to be executed by different actors. The GSDI, "all inclusive" by nature, has the challenge to move the region in the direction of the new ideas and technologies involved in the project. At their own paces, Latin-American nations will respond. To support an "information for all" option and to promote sustainable development, should be key products encrypted in the GSDI initiative.
There are not many regional geospatial data infrastructures initiatives in Latin-America. Besides, those pioneered by Latin-Americans, excluding Brazil, right now are first steps or just sound ideas.
Experts can say that is not surprising at all. South America, for instance, is mostly covered by analog maps elaborated at small scales averaging 1:500.000, with significant levels of obsolescence. In a space twice as large as Europe there are 10 national mapping organizations while in the Old Continent there are over 40. This is a sub-region of significant contrasts, for example as for production capacity, some institutes have over 50 digital stations while others have only one, also only a few geographic organisms are privileged enough to have a full covering support and maintenance policy for its hardware, software or data.
Considering that "an attitude" is today fundamental for an efficient participation in the elaboration and management of global data, one can see that the road ahead is not paved for initiatives like GSDI. Why is this happening in the developing world? Is this isolation, a consequence of nationalism, ideas are not yet clear, language barriers, a lack of financial resources, all of them?
Following Joel Morrison's stages in technologically induced paradigm shift (PAIGH, 1995) in Latin-America, it can be said that simultaneously there are surveying and mapping organizations in the level of "initial acceptances" and others are introducing "changes in old organizational structures". It is also a problem of budget and one of adaptation to change: when specialists are in the process of redefining their own data in the digital format from a local perspective, generating applications in accordance to their specific needs, then, it is difficult to affirm that Latin America is ready to go for regional or global infrastructures.
This article faces this reality, however, with an optimistic approach to this challenge. By now, it only pretends to be an "eye-opener". The use of spatial information all over is growing rapidly and, though there is a limited capacity to produce and consume digital information, the region is already immersed in the technology change.
It was not the most comfortable or ideal situation, but most of the national mapping agencies were very used to analog cartographic production by the time the digital world came into the region announcing the upbringing of the Information Society. The modern idea of users, clients and the "intromission" of the outside world took most of the cartographic experts by surprise. Some of them adjusted quickly to the new conditions, many of them not and, to get fully into this new environment, many are asking for additional time.
How this process is understood and managed will have an impact on the way regional infrastructures will grow. Before it happens plenty of work needs to be done, from the bottom-up and from the top-down. Professionals working in the region have lots of questions and problems. It is in this context, which they will need to understand the benefits of initiatives like GSDI and why, concerning economic growth and sustainable development, it is essential for many of them to become internationally open and more globally oriented.
In Latin-America, the Colombian Geographic Institute Agustin Codazzi -IGAC stands as one key organisation for institutional development, introduction of technology change and competitiveness, focusing in the promotion of territorial development.
IGAC was founded in 1935 as a military organisation. In 1955, IGAC evolved into a civilian entity, an exception in South America, to develop policy and to produce, analyse and publish geo-referenced information on cartography, agrology (soil studies), cadastre and geography. The Institute has up-to-date digital facilities and well-equipped laboratories, also an educational centre, CIAF.
At the international level, since 1965, IGAC promotes technology transfer in remote sensing, cartography and geoinformation systems. Also, the Institute is an active member of many geographic organizations like ISPRS, ICA, FIG, DIGSA, PAIGH, and promotes in the region vanguard initiatives such as GSDI. Of course, there are other similar cases in the region, especially Brazil and Mexico. Since 1996, IGAC acts as Technical Secretariat promoting standards, metadata and clearinghouse for the Colombian Spatial Data Infrastructure -ICDE.
The Pan American Institute of Geography and History -PAIGH, created in 1928 is a correspondent member of the Organization of American States (OAS). Headquarters are located in Mexico City. The Institute provides technical assistance, training through research centres, distributes publications and supports technical meetings about cartography, geography, history and geophysics.
In spite of PAIGH financial difficulties, some distance with vanguard technologies and modern management tools, its dedication and commitment to the region as a whole, strongly influences effective execution of any strategy oriented to the formation of spatial data infrastructures in Latin-America. Two explanatory examples of this Institute's contributions are now, briefly, referenced.
PAIGH elaborates the "Status of Mapping in the Americas'" index maps describing the availability of geospatial data trough the Americas. There is a 1993 electronic version.
And since 1997, one available in Internet.
PAIGH created in 1961 a Working Group intended to produce cartographic standards for the region. In 1968, the group approved the proposal submitted by Colombia under the name " Standard for Analog Cartography in Latin America". In spite of the effort, it must be noted that very soon almost every mapping agency introduced significant modifications to the standard, "adjusting" it to local conditions. Therefore, it can be said that formally there is a standard but, in practice, there is almost none.
Concerning standardisation of digital and spatial data, among other activities, PAIGH work is directly linked to the following five initiatives:
Additional information, regarding Latin-America's attitude towards standardisation is obtained from the RELANG experience. The Interamerican Geodetic Survey (IAGS) during the 1960's introduced a program to establish for Latin-America, a reference system to which all gravity anomaly surveys in the region could be referred. In 1972 PAIGH and the Canadian government joint the project and produced in 1977 an absolute datum as defined by the International Gravity Standardization Net1971. Consequently, it was adopted as gravity reference standard for Latin America. Since then, RELANG has survived under the care of Canada. Once it was transferred to Chile in 1982, where it experienced severe operational difficulties and in 1987 returned to Canada. However, in 1997, Canada withdrew from PAIGH and IGAC-Colombia agreed to take over the responsibility for the operation and maintenance of the RELANG database, which interconnects some 1500 stations in 22 countries.
Created in 1978, DIGSA is the summit reunion of national mapping institutions in South America, Spain and Portugal. It is a meeting of policy-makers. DIGSA eases exchange of information between members and stimulates formation of common policy in specific areas for mutual benefit. During the XI DIGSA meeting held in Bogota in 1995, the issue of spatial data infrastructures was included in its agenda. Nancy Tosta, then FGDC Secretariat, was invited to introduce the theme. Although DIGSA concedes priority to aspects like licensing, copyright and training policies, also digital data production, maintenance and quality are issues of its attention.
Consequently, this Directorate also has potential to induce relevant policy regarding regional and global information infrastructures. These are two examples that explain DIGSA's performance:
As mentioned before SIRGAS will be a unique geodetic reference system for South America, used also to standardize aeronautical data. Since there are various local systems of reference, SIRGAS will eliminate existing anomalies concerning geographic position and cartographic representation among nations in the region, by providing common ground to the system of geodetic coordinates.
Consequently, with this aim, the initiative of PAIGH, DMA from the United States and the International Geodetic Association -AIG was submitted to and approved by DIGSA in 1993. The results will in 1999 be presented at the assembly of the International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics -IUGG.
The methodology applied for SIRGAS will also influence regional and global data infrastructure initiatives. SIRGAS has been a teamwork project and, given circumstances, is working well. The project directly relates use of GPS technology and spatial data, with important levels of institutional involvement and compromise.
In 1992 at the X DIGSA meeting, Uruguay proposed and all members agreed to produce a digital and analog map of South America 1:5'000.000, as a first way to elaborate seamless regional data, looking also to enrich several thematic applications. In 1996 in Spain, the Map was finally delivered.
With digitisation of data now huge amounts of information are produced in DIGSA's region. Though every body is now defining independently their own data sets, there is growing consciousness that data is important if it is accessible to most users.
Thematic data and mapping production is commonly carried out in different places, both public and private, resulting in enormous diversification, lacking standards, with significant quality problems and incomplete documentation of data.
Of course, as happens with basic cartography, there is evident need for standards, metadata, and infrastructures for thematic applications in Latin-America. For instance, there are no standards for land classification systems, though, soil surveys follow the standards develop in the Soils Survey Manual (1993), soil taxonomy (1998) and soil survey laboratory methods manual, as introduced by the USDA. However, important exemption applies in the region: Mexico uses the FAO soil classification system and Brazil has its own national soil classification system. Also, regarding small-scale information, FAO's Global and National Soil and Terrain Digital Database (SOTER) is widely used in Latin-America.
As mentioned before regarding PAIGH's Analog Cartographic Standard for Latin America, concerning soil survey classifications, most nations in the area follow the Land Capability Classification, develop in the United States, but adapted to country conditions. Colombia and Venezuela, for instance, have incorporated their own Agroecological Land Classification System and Biophysical Land Zoning Method.
Pertaining cadastral standard the current situation is not this advanced. Most nations do not have cadastre information structured or referenced. There are, however, important exemptions. Colombia, for example, follows the cadastre standard developed by FGDC, since data content is quite similar. Also, this issue is just starting to be studied within the context of sub-regional markets, which includes possibilities of investment in real state. There is some demand for seamless data related to bordering areas and titling processes.
A final note in this section concerns environmental applications. For instance, in Colombia coexists, the spatial data infrastructure initiative (ICDE) and the National Environmental Information System (SINA). Although there is intention to work harmonically both nets, initial analysis concerning international reference systems suggest a potential obstacle since, simultaneously, the Inter-American Geospatial Data and the Inter-American Biodiversity Information Networks are being developed. A situation, not necessarily similar, is observed in the United States regarding NSDI and the proposed "Framework for Information Sharing" prepared by the Biodiversity Conservation Information System.
In spite of growing awareness regarding the importance of supranational data infrastructures, institutional participation of Latin-Americans in the international geographic community is still low. For example, presence in the ISO/TC211 is limited to Jamaica, Cuba and Colombia (observer).
In favour of responsible decision-makers in the region it can be said that fundamental aspects, within the concept of spatial data infrastructures, are not clear or not yet well defined. Even the meaning of its words in Spanish are still confusing. As Beatrice Labonne from the UN, expressed in Chapel Hill during GSDI 2, the whole idea is not easy "to palate".
This far, IGDN is the only regional effort developing a regional spatial data infrastructure for the Americas. Introduced in 1994, IGDN is in the prototyping stage under the responsibility of the EROS data center in partnership with the USAID. As presented at the UNRCC in 1997, IGDN focuses on application of Internet capabilities in the Western Hemisphere for electronic access to information describing the existence and availability of geospatial data. The project is a key part in any strategy to increase integration in the Americas (from: IGDN Mission Statement, USGS/USAID).
IGDN is also being presented to participants in training courses in the US and outside. For instance, at the Digital Mapping and GIS Pilot Project, financed by PAIGH, CIDA and the Inter American Development Bank -IDB. Within IGDN, this project aims to provide technology to countries in the elaboration of national and Latin-American electronic atlases and clearinghouse.
Participants include Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Mexico, Panamá, Peru, Venezuela and Colombia. IGDN will support sharing of metadata. It has been considered by many in the region that definitions of metadata, following ISO standards, should be expressed in local language. Right now the project uses the gateway existing in Washington and is creating Internet nodes in the listed nations.
At the Sixth UNRCC for the Americas (NY, June 1997), regarding geographic policy formulation and data production in Latin America, slight advance and substance was achieved. Moreover, during one session, deliberations focused on whether the Conference is "for" the Americas or only taking place "in" the region. Therefore, it was convened to create an intersessional working group of experts whose task is to "re-engineer" the UN regional conferences, propose a new mission statement and agenda, incorporating issues relevant to each region and giving priority to "development of national, regional and global strategies for managing geospatial data".
Furthermore, a resolution was approved concerning creation of a Permanent Committee on GIS Infrastructure for the Americas, bearing in mind that such body could provide a forum to cooperate in the development of regional and global geographic information infrastructure. As a necessary complement, a resolution on SDI was approved encouraging all state members to participate in the works of the proposed Committee, ISO Technical Committee 211 and recommending to link the Americas' SDI to the Global Spatial Data Infrastructure.
PCA was supposed to be created one year after the UNRCC in New York. However, its promotion needs additional effort. While 38 countries were represented in New York, just a few of the mapping and specialized agencies in the Americas attended the discussions. Indeed, no more than five delegations included decision-makers. PCA then is moving ahead but slowly, trough a "feeder road". While many understand the GIS/SDI orientation of the committee, a good portion still is interpreting PCA as "cartographic" and perfectly fitted within PAIGH.
Consequently, PCA must start by convincing all Latin-American state members that harmonic spatial data infrastructure at the local, national, regional and global levels is fundamental to maximize economic, social and environmental benefits of geographic information.
The Working Group of Experts joined in Aguascalientes, Mexico in March, 1997. There were advances about PCA, an Ad-hoc working group was created, including Canada, Colombia, Mexico, United States, Brazil and El Salvador. In addition, Colombia volunteered as facilitator to stimulate the following stages. Resembling the existing PCGIAP in Asia and the Pacific and the European Umbrella Organization for Geographic Information (EUROGI), the next steps will be the definition of
A meeting of the Group will take place before an assembly of state members is reunited.
In 1996 Colombian producers and users coincided on the need to develop a Colombian data infrastructure to efficiently build, share and distribute geographic data nationwide. Due to the importance of Colombian bio-diversity, environmental aspects are receiving especial attention from ICDE.
ICDE considers achievements and experiences in several countries, mainly in the United States, Canada and the Netherlands. They have influenced ICDE's development. Also, for a metadata standard, IGAC is considering that of FGDC and ISO, and the European reference CEN pr EN 287009.
In 1996, ICONTEC, the ISO-like organisation in Colombia, created a committee addressed to normalisation and standardisation of geographic information. IGAC acts as Technical Secretariat of a national committee. General standards follow those established in the ISO/TC211 work.
ICDE's expected result includes a Colombian definition of the following:
Publishing of standards, training, inventory of existing data and creation of metadata bases are included in the next step.
By nature, GSDI incorporate policies, organisational arrangements, data, technologies, standards, delivery mechanisms, financial and human resources. So far in this article there are comments concerning most of these elements. A brief note on technologies, resources and data maintenance, in addition, seems appropriate: According to a DIGSA report (1996), all mapping agencies in the region have digital stations, the majority are structuring large national cartographic data bases, some have capacity for thematic applications, and budget allocation for training, data maintenance and systems support is low.
To contribute with ideas, in view of the need for action addressed to accelerate GSDI processes in the Region, as a conclusion, the following nine actions are now suggested:
1. A GSDI invitation to all actors involved in the development of local, regional and global SDI projects.
To increase regional knowledge about "data infrastructure" and "global spatial data bases", it will be positive to send a letter signed by the GSDI speaker to all parties involved (not only those responsible for national mapping), explaining the initiative and inviting to include GSDI activities in their institutional, technical and scientific forums. A GSDI speaker could also intervene in these meetings.
2. To encourage creation of the Permanent Committee for the Americas (PCA)
Although this work is the direct responsibility of the Ad-hoc Working Group established in Aguascalientes, Mexico, it will be highly stimulating for them if GSDI addresses the parties involved expressing the need for this body, as a necessary step in the development of regional and global spatial data infrastructures.
3. To promote a regional workshop on Satellite Imaging applications
Not much work is being done in the region regarding consequences of new space imaging technologies and applications, for instance, economic and social benefits for developing nations. An exemption can be the work of SELPER, the regional ISPRS branch and the preparation to UNSpace 1999. However, presentation of these issues is quite fragmented and without coherence. A regional workshop of this kind seems a priority and, if possible, can be a good opportunity to introduce GSDI and, why not, to have "on-the-spot" one next GSDI steering committee meeting.
4. To obtain a more clear statement from the multilateral organisms concerning global spatial data initiatives, specially from the United Nations
In many aspects the GSDI initiative can move forward without support from organisms like the United Nations, The World Bank or, in the Americas, IDB. This could be the case of standards and metadata production. In others, for example "making GSDI benefits accessible to all nations", direct involvement from them seems essential. These organisations are and will be highly influential in developing nations and the need for a more clear endorsement pertaining GSDI is essential.
The situation was studied during the UNRCC Special Working Group meeting in Mexico, concluding with a proposal for the creation of a UN Permanent Geographic Information Commission and the need to re-engineer its Regional Cartographic Conferences. The problem may not necessarily be the form of this commission or even allocation of geographic topics to the existing UN Statistical Division. The main issue is how UN recognizes GSDI importance and what will be its involvement in fixing an agenda for the next decade. Of course, sponsorship of the UN for some key activities, particularly those oriented to ease participation and access of developing countries in this global development, appears vital.
As of the World Bank there is a recent step ahead. The World Development Report of 1998/99 focuses the Bank attention on the information revolution and signals three main areas of activity:
This statement, coming from the Bank, is an open invitation to GSDI authorities.
5. The indispensable support from IGO's
International geographic organisations need to develop closer links and advance more activities in Latin-America. There are important members in many IGO's representing the region. Therefore, a clear message from the board of the most important IGO's will contributes greatly to promotion of this very important but still young GSDI initiative.
6. To obtain support for specific GSDI- related pilot projects
One most important way to understand the many benefits derived from GSDI is, evidently, by practicing it. This is a fundamental educational process, "working locally but acting globally". In Latin America there is need to promote schemes for technology transfer trough pilot projects within the GSDI idea. For instance, this is evident in situations like spatial data production, delivery mechanisms and metadata standards.
7. Training activities in the Region (CIAF)
There are not enough resources trained in spatial data infrastructures in Latin America. IGAC, trough its training center CIAF is now preparing a proposal to be submitted to parties interested in this kind of cooperation, starting with a course on NSDI activities in 1999.
8. To express support in Latin-America to the PAIGH /IGDN initiative
IGDN initiative, as described in section II.b, directly benefits GSDI in the region. Therefore, as with other initiatives in the world, it will be convenient to recognize this as a GSDI official activity. A statement addressed to PAIGH and other facilitators in the region in this direction, will provide additional backup to this project.
9. To clarify some confusions
From the Latin-American perspective there are some aspects, which are very easy to clarify, that may affect landing of GSDI in the region. For example, the difference between the International Steering Committee for Global Mapping ISCGM, and the Global Spatial Data Infrastructure Steering Committee - GSDI .