1. Meeting of the workshop on GI/GIS matters for Phare Countries Luxembourg, 24/10/2001
Part 1
Questionnaire on the Use of GI and GIS in the NSIs and NMAs of the Candidate Countries
Part 2
Mission Report of the Visit to the NMA and NGI of Poland and Romania
T. Steenberghen
A. Willekens
D. Vandenbroucke

2. Questionnaire on the Use of GI and GIS in the NSIs and NMAs of the Candidate Countries
Meeting of the workshop on GI/GIS matters for Phare countries
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001
T. Steenberghen
A. Willekens
D. Vandenbroucke

3. Objective of the Questionnaires
Provide a better view on the technical aspects of GI and GIS in the statistical system of the candidate countries: - organisation details - GIS hardware and software environment - digital geographic data
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

4. Response to the Questionnaires
Country NSI NMA
Response Response
Bulgaria  -
Czech R.  
Estonia  
Hungary  
Latvia  
Lithuania  
Poland  
Romania  visit
Slovak republic  
Slovenia  
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

5. Findings Comparison of GIS expertise: Data access restrictions
Countries
NSI / NMA
Data access restrictions
Nomenclature changes and updates:
Update process
Frequency
Projection systems, scales
Metadata
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

6. GIS Expertise
The evaluation of GIS expertise in the institutes is based on the following information:
Number of years of GIS use;
Utilisation of GIS in the organisation (ex. SDE more sophisticated than desktop mapping) ;
Formal collaboration between institutes;
Number of data sets
Property rights;
(Number of GIS licences)
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

7. Number of years of GIS use
NSI: 1990: : 5
1995: : 7
1997: : 10
NMA (2 non-response):
1990: 1
1991: 2
1995: 3
1996: 4
1997: 5
1998: 6
2000: 8
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

8. Collaboration NSI - NMA
No co-operation agreement NSI - NMA
BU, RO , LT
Informal co-operation (or different response NSI -NMA)
PL , SL
Formal agreement
CZ, EE , HU , LV, SK
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

9. Data Access Restrictions
From easiest to most difficult access: 1. Free public access 2. Commercial public access 3. Commercial restricted access 4. Internal restricted access 5. Not owner of the data
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

10. Data Access Restrictions
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

11. Comparison of GIS Expertise in NSI and NMA
Average: NSI = 2.2 NMA = 3.9
More GI and GIS experience in NMA: 7 equal GI and GIS experience in NSI and NMA: 2
More variation between countries than between NSI and NMA
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

12. Major Differences in GIS Expertise in Different Countries3 4 5 2 5
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

13. Nomenclature Updates
The process and frequency of changes in nomenclature varies between countries: more analysis required
The process and frequency of data updates varies between countries and topics
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

14. Scale, projection system, datum
Projection systems, datum and scales vary widely between countries
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

15. Metadata CZ-NMA: cen tc287 HU-NMA: IOS TC211 and CEN TC287
LT-NSI: iso tc211
SK-NSI: cen tc287
SK-NMA: cen tc287
SL-NSI: cen tc287
Other metadata: 8
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

16. Mission Report of the Visit to the NMA and NGI of Poland and Romania
Meeting of the workshop on GI/GIS matters for Phare countries
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001
T. Steenberghen
A. Willekens
D. Vandenbroucke

17. Objective of the Missions
Gain in-depth understanding of the use of GIS in mapping agencies and statistical institutes of candidate countries
More detailed information than the questionnaires
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

18. Example: Comparison Based on Questionnaire Results
Poland: NSI  very little GIS experience, NMA  rather well developed GIS expertise, long tradition of GIS use
Romania: NSI  little GIS experience NMA  well developed expertise, Restricted use of data set
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

19. Main Differences, Based on Missions: Extent and Intensity of the Use of GI and GIS
Poland,
- Different institutes have a lot of experience and/or knowledge about the use of GI and GIS
- HOGC is using different GIS software packages
- Previously privileged high - resolution Russian satellite images access
Romania
- Institutes started using GIS later
- Use of GIS is rather limited
- NOCGC is carrying out interesting GIS projects, mainly for local authorities
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

20. Main Differences, Based on Missions: Funding and Plans
Poland
- CSO: EU-funding (Phare projects)  needs assessment  plan to develop a central unit in charge of central services and data bases for GIS
Romania
- Suffers from limited financial and human resources
- One of the main objectives = build a complete digital data base based on the existing topographic maps
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

21. Main Similarities, Based on Missions NSI
Mainly focused on statistical mapping
More use of GIS planned with new census
Few overlays: - statistical data / topographic map elements - Poland: also overlays with soils and crops layers
Most use of GIS: demography, agriculture, environment
Main users = ministries
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

22. Main Differences, Based on Missions
Poland
Clearly defined procedure for changes to administrative boundaries (NMA), names (NMA), codes (NSI)
Informal agreement for data exchange NSI-NMA (formal agreement in preparation)
Romania
Commercial supplier of administrative boundary data
No standardized quality control for errors (no problem since used for small scale mapping)
Unresolved problem of update procedures
Limited co-operation
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

23. Issues Requiring More Detailed Analyses
Subdivision of administrative data:
Administrative boundaries in line with NUTS regions
Poland
NUTS 4 (Powiads) important level for statistical data
Romania
subdivision of NUTS 5 with link to build-up areas and link to localities data (typology of urban areas)
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

24. Main Similarities, Based on Missions NMA
Large, traditional organizations
Very pronounced administrative structure, with local entities in charge of data gathering, field control, …
Focus on traditional mapping
NMA in charge of cadastral maps
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

25. Main Differences, Based on Missions NMA
Poland
Head office of geodesy and cartography = only department responsible for topographic data
More systematic approach of data issues (standardization committee, …)
Romania
Military department of topography also deals with topographic data
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

26. Main Differences, Based on Missions NMA
Poland
Head Office of Geodesy and Cartography has special duties, not generally part of NMA
Also responsible for national register of geographical names
Cost recovery policy
Romania
Recent period of restructuring
Works most “on demand” for local authorities and other users using topographic information
Link to other databases is weak
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

27. Conclusions of the Overall Similarities and Differences
Although the current GIS practice, as it appears from the questionnaire, is not so different, Poland has better perspectives, mainly due to:
- Funding (Phare)
- Systematic approach to data issues
- Co-operation efforts between NMA and NSI
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

28. Important Issues Discussed Poland
1. The use of gis
2. Geographical units and nomenclature
3. The issue of data ownership - data exchange between nsi and nma - cost recovery - legal basis for protecting ownership of data
4. Gi characteristics of boundaries - changes to spatial statistical units
5. Organisational framework
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

29. Use of GIS, Based on Questionnaires Poland
NSI  mostly visualization NMA  mostly visualization, also analysis, thematic mapping
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

30. More in Depth View on the Use of GIS, Based on the Mission Poland
GIS = maintenance instrument of administrative data bases (head office of geodesy and cartography). Data collection and aggregation boundary maps = based on CSO’s territorial register. Address information = included in CSO data, related to the territorial units. Updates: CSO
 Some of the maps used by CSO are provided by the mapinfo supplier, and are used without major changes. The regulation on new powiats, that will enter in effect on january 2002 will require updates of these maps
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

31. More in Depth View on the Use of GIS, Based on the Mission Poland
GIS use for arithmetical manipulations and to generate statistical aggregate data from geographical details (limited, agriculture and environment statistics division of CSO)
GIS for the production of map based presentations (currently the main use)
GIS for easier user access to the data. This is currently not implemented. (Will be possible when considered in the new NMA-NSI data agreement currently in preparation)
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

32. Geographical Units and Nomenclature Poland
Head office of geodesy and cartography: developed own software for maintenance of official names (not linked to GIS)
Boundaries updates in GIS
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

33. Data Ownership Poland
GIS centre to be developed in Ĺódź will be responsible for technical issues of data exchange. CSO Warsaw for organisational issues
Cost recovery: general indicators free of charge, other data require subscription
Legal basis for protecting ownership of data: no restrictions on use of official statistics
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

34. GI Characteristics of Boundaries Poland
Responsibility of the Head Office of Geodesy and Cartography, annual changes in the boundaries of Gminas
Scale: 1/50.000, exceptionally 1/ Regional data disseminated based on the administrative division, (1/ ). Pilot applications (city statistics) 1/ and 1/20.000
3 level structure since To be evaluated after two years. The number of Voivodships will stay. In January the number of Powiats will change.
When substantial changes occur (i.e. 1999), time series are recalculated.
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

35. Organisational framework Poland
Interaction Vovoidship - central offices based on national agreement
Also local co-operation examples between NMA and CSO (varies)
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

36. Use of GIS, Based on Questionnaires Romania
NSI  data capture and editing, visualization, analyses, thematic mapping NMA  data capture, cartographic production, visualization, analysis. Restricted use of data set
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

37. More in Depth View on the Use of GIS, Based on the Mission Romania
Use of GI and GIS at INSSE
= preliminary phase
= mainly for statistical mapping
based on data coming from different thematic departments (different formats). GIS service links information to basic administrative layer to produce choropleth maps, pie-chart maps, etc. The statistical data are not integrated in one comprehensive data base system as is the case in EUROSTAT for the REGIO and SIRE data bases.
GIS service acts as a central service to potential clients (departments). This situation is comparable to DG AGRI where the GIS service is also mainly a central service.
aggregation of statistical data not frequent
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

38. Geographical Units and Nomenclature Romania
INSSE: commercial data. Errors were eliminated, but changes not documented. This makes it difficult to track changes over time. Luckily, the administrative data that are used most by the INSSE do not often change and the nomenclature is fixed with the use of the SIRUTA codes.
NOCGC: builds all its data layers starting from the topographic maps (mainly 80’s)
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

39. Data Ownership Romania
No data exchange NSI-NMA
NMA owns data
No collaboration with DTM
Cost recovery: no policy
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

40. GI Characteristics of Boundaries Romania
Administrative data base of INSSE = a snapshot (specific time) + can’t be used broader than the INSSE itself. + NOCGC data have higher level of detail  in the future, the administrative data base of the NOCGC could be used as starting point
The administrative boundaries, railways, rivers, ... 1/ Elevation contour lines 1/ (interval 20 meter). Also version at 1/
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

41. Organisational framework Romania
Mission and preparation for the Workshop on GI and GIS improved co-operation
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001

42. THANK YOU!
Remarks?
Questions?
Luxembourg, 24/10/2001