1. Day: Wednesday 9 th November Session: 14.30am - 15.45 Coordinators: Ian Williamson & Stig Enemark Topic:Components of the vision- break out groups

2. Day 1 – Wednesday Nov 9 th Welcome & Research Vision Presentations - European Perspective of Paradigm European Group Coordinator: Ian Williamson Rapporteur: Paul van der Molen Report Back - Discussion European Lessons Learnt Australian Group Coordinator: Stig Enemark Rapporteur: Steve Jacoby Evaluate – Components of the vision

3. Presentations - Australian Perspective of Paradigm European Group Coordinator: Ian Williamson Rapporteur: Daniel Steudler Report Back - Discussion Australian Lessons Learnt Australian Group Coordinator: Stig Enemark Rapporteur: Grahame Searle Evaluate – Components of the vision Day 2 – Thursday Nov 10 th

4. Report Back - Discussion Group 1 (based on Australian & European Perspectives) Rapporteur: Warwick Watkins Evaluate – Issues in Designing a New Generation of LAS Day 3 – Friday Nov 11 th Presentation – Spatially Enabling Government Final Presentation Next Generation of LAS Ian Williamson, Stig Enemark, Jude Wallace Group 2 (based on Australian & European Perspectives) Rapporteur: Holger Magel

5. Key Components and Tools 1.Authentic registers? 2.The IT architecture to deliver the vision? 3.The spatial dimension- SDI? 4.Infrastructure to support trading in complex commodities?

6. Key Components and Tools How do we record public rights? Do we need to? How accurate does identification of RRR need to be? Geo coding

7. Future Challengers, Issues & Improvements 1.Achieving a national system in a federated country 2.Achieving spatially enabled government 3.Should the land registry system contribute to SD? How? 4.Relationship between the land registry and spatial cadastre 5.Can international comparative monitoring be established? 6.Administration of restrictions and responsibilities 7.Is the land parcel still central to LA? 8.The role of buildings in land administration

9. Observations/ Learnings (1) Denmark far in advance of other european countries (Stig) How do we engage the community? Relevance! Title is fundamental and is still undervalued Institutional Issues: Primary problem. How? Model encompasses core elements. Different jurisdictions have different focus. From e to i: End-User orientated approach is required rather than technology focus Environmental Issues: policy response in Europe has been far different to Aus –Unbundling rights in AUS/Unheard of in Europe Country Context is important- Education, Institutional arrangements

10. Observations/ Learnings (2) Land Administration enables does not deliver Sus Dev EU seems to be impacting on each country? Top down vs Bottom up Changes seem to have occurred without legislation? Authentic Registers well supported. We do not have these authoritative registers in Australia Local Government more empowered in Europe – more problematic in AUS SDI: Need to retain simple messages (de Soto) – for users / politicians

11. The Paradigm or Model In Australia: –Unbundling has resulted in disparate management of ‘new property’ i.e. managing outside the LAS and they’re not TAXED –Politics has had a large impact in rural Australia- diff to Europe –We’ve yet to unlock value of the ‘parcel’ and existing land administration systems How do you promote this model to end-users, key stakeholders (e.g. Utilities) AND politicians –Fundamentally there appears nothing wrong with Australian LAS Conceptually attractive model (efficiencies etc.), but, is it visionary enough? link between LAS functions and sustainable development is not unique – other contributors Where are the people in this model? Is the parcel approach limited? Geo-coding and addressing offers far more opportunities Arrows: Policy in a vacuum? Making the model loops?

12. Key Drivers Technology appears to be one of the strongest drivers Traditional economic drivers were evident e.g Holger Environmental drivers have prevailed in Australia Where were the environmental drivers in Europe (e.g. Kyoto). Are they already culturally embedded in Europe (e.g. Swiss civil code)? ICT enabled efficiencies (cost improvements) Cross-country initiatives- Will these be key drivers in the future?

13. Future Challengers, Issues & Improvements Historical institutional frameworks are key barriers- ICT can just ‘mask’ these problems The language used in the spatial sector fails to sell spatial technologies and information (simple / relevant) Multi-jurisdictional problems- state vs. federal vs. local vs. regional authorities- Should the model+ include these relationships / roles? Funding and governance arrangements need attention- These need to be understood to make the model relevant to a particular jurisdiction Looping the components together (not linear)