NSDI Implementation Milo Robinson FGDC U. S. Policy OMB Circular A-16 From Global GSDI To Local Canadian/ U.S. Projects
Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) A US Federal Interagency committee responsible for facilitating geospatial related activities and implementation of the NSDI across the Federal government 19 Federal agencies are members Cooperate and coordinate with organizations from state, local and tribal governments, the academic community, and the private sector.
U.S. Geospatial Policy Roots Source Year Description EO T.R. 1906 Created U. S. Geographic Board. EO 3206 Wilson EO 9094 FDR OMB (BOB) A-16 1919 1942 1953 Created a new Board of Surveys and Maps that took over the responsibilities of U.S. Geographic Board. Abolished Board of Surveys and Maps and authorizes Director of OMB to perform the functions of the Board. Describes responsibilities of Federal agencies with regard to the coordination of surveying and mapping activities.
Primary U.S. Policy based on: OMB Circular A-16 Exhibits A,B,C, & D 1953 to 1964 A-16 Revised 1967 OMB M 83-12 1983 A-16 Revised 1990 Attachments to A-16 that outline prog.and oper. for Topographic, Atlas, Geodetic, Int. Boundaries. Some Exhibits were revised. Better describes responsibilities of Federal Agencies (leadership and coordination). Establishes coordination of Federal digital cartographic data programs. Establishes Federal Geographic Data Committee and links more programs. EO 12906 1994 Establishes the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI). A-16 Revised 2002 Strengthens coordination responsibilities of Federal agencies and incorporates NSDI
National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) The Vision of the NSDI: to assure that spatial data from multiple sources (Federal, State, and local governments, academia, and the private sector) are widely available and easily integrated to enhance knowledge and understanding of our physical and cultural world.
How is the A-16 structured? National Spatial Data Infrastructure Federal Geographic Data Committee Scope-Federal Agencies & Activities Federal Responsibilities Appendices
What are the Significant Changes in A-16? Incorporation of NSDI Assignment of Roles and Responsibilities including Agency responsibility for a spatial data theme in appendix E OMB is Vice Chair of FGDC More Compelling Language Q/A Format Link to Budget See www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/
Is A-16 New policy? Avoid duplication of work and improve the standardization of maps (1906) Invite the map using public to meetings for conference and advice (1919) A central information office that was to furnish all map and survey data information within the government as well as from other sources (1919)
Is it Improved Policy? Interoperability of Federal information systems Enhance E-government Support Global Spatial Data Infrastructure
Global Spatial Data Infrastructure GSDI 1 Bonn Germany Sept 1996 GSDI 2 Chapel Hill NC October 1997 GSDI 3 Canberra Australia November 1998 GSDI 4 Capetown South Africa March 2000 GSDI 5 Cartagena Colombia May 2001 GSDI 6 Budapest Hungary September 2002 Over 250 attendees Over 50 Nations represented GSDI 7 Bangalore India February 2004 GSDI 8 Cairo (with FIG) April 2005
GSDI Evolution Steering Committee formed at GSDI 3 in 1998 together a number of Working Groups Technical Working Group produced first edition of SDI Cookbook for GSDI 4 in 2000 FGDC in secretarial role after GSDI 4 Proposal to create a GSDI Association agreed at GSDI 5 in 2001 GSDI Association operational in 2004 for GSDI 7
Create a Global Spatial Data Infrastructure (GSDI) To encourage the collection, processing, archiving, integrating, and sharing of geospatial data and information using common standards and interoperable systems and techniques.. and accessible via the web
Why did FGDC get involved? GSDI is consistent with mission of FGDC FGDC involved from the beginning Rationale: Truly transnational issues Exchange of issues -- successes/problems Lessons to be learned Serious interest in global interoperability It just makes good business sense
GSDI An idea at the cusp Foster SDI development locally to globally Access data at a variety of scales and from multiple sources Common standards an interoperable systems and techniques Heavy reliance on partners world-wide Support sustainable development Poverty and famine reduction Advancing health, safety, & social well being of all nations
Joint US-Canada Spatial Data Infrastructure Projects Access, Metadata/Clearinghouse Standards Partnerships Framework
Objectives of the joint demonstration projects Refine US/ Canadian spatial data infrastructure (SDI) Have an interoperable SDI for North America & beyond Stimulate cross border cooperation between Canada and the US for common objectives Obtain down to earth user perspective at the application level or local level Receive practical recommendations on technical and policy issues to advance SDI Encourage private sector participation Visibility, communications and outreach on SDI initiatives
Funding Funded through GeoConnections and FGDC Based on cost sharing - project participants must leverage funds by matching through cash or inkind contributions
Project Requirements Project participation - minimum of 4 organizations (2 from Can. & US - including private sector ) Projects cover a common geographic area of mutual concern that crosses the international boundary Demonstration of collaborative approaches in solving regional/community issues using framework data The project has to find tangible solutions to a specific issue
The Yellowstone to Yukon (Y2Y) Roughly defined by the Rocky Mountains from central Wyoming to the Yukon Territory
Red River Basin
Data Challenges Non-Uniform Standards and Formats Mismatch at the Border Restricted Data Sets Uncertain Spatial Data Quality No understanding of how data was derived What data would you trust? Some Data sets are Missing Merging data across jurisdictional boundaries Management agency State/Provincial National Lack of consistent data models Source scales vary Inconsistent positional accuracy Attribute systems vary Challenge to cross walk the attributes Edge matching is difficult Vertical integration is difficult
Challenging Hydrology Example Hydrology across a portion of the U.S./Canada border Different densities Different scales
Challenging Connectivity Example at the Border features at border
Provided by JOR Engineering
What have we learned? Never assume that they know everything that they should some training may be required remember the learning curve In this new High Tech. Environment, face to face meetings are still one of the best ways to understand each others! Be patient and be flexible when they ask for something, be ready to guide them, provide contacts, avenues--leadership
Pathfinder: Milo Robinson, Federal Geographic Data Committee mrobinson@fgdc.gov (703) 648-5162 www.fgdc.gov www.gsdi.org www.geoconnections.ca