INFRASTRUCTURES FOR SHARING GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION
AMONG ENVIRONMENTAL AGENCIES
Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planningin partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree ofDoctor of Philosophy in Information Systems in Planningat theMassachusetts Institute of Technology
June 1997
© 1997 John D. Evans. All rights reserved.The author hereby grants to MIT permission to reproduce and to distribute publicly paper and electronic copies of this thesis document in whole or in part.
| Signature of Author | John D. Evans May 30, 1997 |
| Certified by | Joseph Ferreira, Jr. Professor of Urban Planning and Operations Research |
| Accepted by | Frank Levy Chair, Departmental Ph.D. Program |
among environmental agencies
by
John D. Evans
Submitted to the Department of Urban Studies and Planningin partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree ofDoctor of Philosophy in Information Systems in Planning
ABSTRACT
This research draws on several organizational and technological perspectives to examine the design and growth of infrastructures for inter-organizational geographic information sharing, and their role in collaborative environmental management. The study draws, first, on the experiences of selected coalitions of government agencies to discern their organizational dynamics; and on a software prototype that illustrates coming technological trends. The study gives special attention to geographic information, which often requires special handling and promises particularly important influences on organizations and joint policy-making. It also seeks to understand the interdependence between human and technical aspects of geographic information infrastructures.
The first research phase is a case study of three groups of government agencies that are building networked information-sharing systems for the joint protection of large ecosystems (the Great Lakes, Gulf of Maine, and Pacific Northwest rivers). These cases richly illustrate the challenges and benefits of designing flexible standards, rethinking organizational structures, and adjusting decision-making processes to depend on shared geographic information. The study’s second phase, a prototype networked service for digital orthophotos, suggests that shifting the focus of information sharing from datasets to data services is becoming increasingly feasible, but that organizations may need to adapt to new forms of information sharing. Together, these findings suggest an expanded view of standards as layered, strategic choices; and of organizations in complex, interdependent relationships.
Thesis Supervisor: Joseph Ferreira, Jr.
Title: Professor of Urban Planning and Operations Research
Title: Professor of Urban Planning and Operations Research
Chapter 1: Introduction
Chapter 2: Background and Scope
1. Overview2. Concept Definitions3. Related researcha. Organizational aspects of geographic information sharingb. Technological aspects of geographic information sharingc. Interdependence of organizational and technological aspectsd. Organizational and technological change
Chapter 3: Research Methods
1. Overview2. Organizational case studies3. Prototype development4. Synopsis
Chapter 4: The Great Lakes Information Network
1. Overview2. Brief history3. Context of the infrastructure4. Infrastructure choices5. Information sharing characteristicsd. Quality of the information infrastructure6. Infrastructure impacts7. Challenges and lessonsc. Adjusting to a complex network-of-networks8. Conclusions
Chapter 5: The Gulf of Maine Environmental Data and Information Management System
1. Overview2. Brief history3. Context of the infrastructure4. Infrastructure choices5. Information sharing characteristicsd. Quality of the information infrastructure6. Infrastructure impacts7. Challenges and lessons8. Conclusions
Chapter 6: The Northwest Environmental Database, Coordinated Information System, and StreamNet
1. Overview2. Brief history3. Context of the infrastructurea. Institutional contextb. Technological context4. Infrastructure choicesa. Institutional arrangementsb. Technological design5. Information sharing characteristicsd. Quality of the information infrastructure6. Infrastructure impacts7. Challenges and lessons8. Conclusions
Chapter 7: Case Study Synthesis
1. Salient findings from the three cases2. Differing views of information and sharinga. "We will serve no data before its time!": Information sharing as data management
b. "Democracy in action": information sharing as public disclosure
c. If we build it they will come: information sharing as a networking project
d. "We learn from each other": information sharing as a meeting of the minds
e. Getting it right: creatively solving new problems, organizational change, integrated choices3. Mutual influence of technology, organizations, and policy/planning4. Technology choices5. Organizational choices
Chapter 8: Prototype Development: a Digital Orthophoto Browser for the Boston area
1. Introduction2. The National Spatial Data Infrastructure and the orthophoto browser3. Design goals and development stagesi. FGDC-compliant metadata for pilot orthophotos; begin manipulating images
ii. Preliminary Web-based interface to (tiled) orthophoto excerpts
iii. Build a final orthophoto browser interface with custom image "snippets" and GIS headers
iv. Unveil full-scale service to a wide audience; examine management and replication issues.
v. Discussion of development stages4. Product functionality5. Evaluation6. Implications: what’s different about the orthophoto browser?7. Implications for the National Spatial Data Infrastructure8. Implications in the case-study contexts
Chapter 9: Some implications for technology, organizations, and policy
1. Overview2. Technology implications: choosing strategic standards3. Organizational implications: towards dynamic interdependencea. Inter-agency teamwork and collaborationb. Redistributing responsibilities, costs, and benefits4. Policy implications: role of government, impacts on governmenta. Government policy in infrastructure developmentb. Infrastructures in government policy5. Hypotheses for further research
Table 3-1. Case study parameters
Figure 4-1. Great Lakes geography
Table 4-2. Organizations on the GLIN Advisory Board (May 1997)
Figure 4-3. Areas of Concern joint Web map
Figure 5-1. Gulf of Maine geography
Figure 6-1. Pacific Northwest States and Columbia River Basin
Table 6-2. Sizes of state River Reach files
Figure 7-1. Mutual influence of technology, organization, and policy/planning on people and actions
Figure 8-1. Preliminary "tiled" images
Figure 8-2. Internet subdomains using the orthophoto browser, Sept. 1996-March 1997
Figure 8-3. Orthophoto browser usage, Sept. 1996-March 1997
Figure 8-4 Orthophoto project homepage
Figure 8-5. Orthophoto browser main page
Figure 8-6. Choosing image and header formats
Figure 8-7. Metadata: keyword search
Figure 8-8. Metadata: spatial and temporal search
Figure 8-9. Multi-site query for the National Geospatial Data Clearinghouse
Figure 4-1. Great Lakes geography
Table 4-2. Organizations on the GLIN Advisory Board (May 1997)
Figure 4-3. Areas of Concern joint Web map
Figure 5-1. Gulf of Maine geography
Figure 6-1. Pacific Northwest States and Columbia River Basin
Table 6-2. Sizes of state River Reach files
Figure 7-1. Mutual influence of technology, organization, and policy/planning on people and actions
Figure 8-1. Preliminary "tiled" images
Figure 8-2. Internet subdomains using the orthophoto browser, Sept. 1996-March 1997
Figure 8-3. Orthophoto browser usage, Sept. 1996-March 1997
Figure 8-4 Orthophoto project homepage
Figure 8-5. Orthophoto browser main page
Figure 8-6. Choosing image and header formats
Figure 8-7. Metadata: keyword search
Figure 8-8. Metadata: spatial and temporal search
Figure 8-9. Multi-site query for the National Geospatial Data Clearinghouse
"Begin at the beginning," the King said gravely,
"and go on till you come to the end: then stop."
- L. Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland
I’d like to thank my advisor, Prof. Joseph Ferreira, Jr., for sticking it out with me all these years and giving liberally of his time, especially in the home stretch. My thanks also go to Prof. Wanda Orlikowski, of MIT’s Sloan School of Management, for opening up new ways to do research, and for restoring my hope with three simple words: "important, fascinating work!" And I thank Prof. Lyna Wiggins, at Rutgers University, whose straight talk got me back in motion several times when I was fogged in. I am indebted to my 61 interviewees for giving their time, insights, and enthusiasm to the three case studies, whether in person, by phone, or by e-mail. Special thanks to fellow denizens of the Computer Resource Laboratory, especially Lijian Chen, Kamal Azar, and Annie Kinsella, who brightened my graduate school experience with their humor and friendship. Thanks to my wife Suvia for standing with me through a lot more than she’d bargained for. And thanks to God, "our dwelling place through all generations."
This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation, under Grant No. SBR-9507271, and by the 1995 Competitive Cooperative Agreements Program of the Federal Geographic Data Committee. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are my own and don’t necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation or of the Federal Geographic Data Committee.
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق