INSPIRE Implementation in Europe Obligation or Opportunity?

1. INSPIRE Implementation in Europe Obligation or Opportunity? Lessons learnt from the State of Play (2002-2012) Danny Vandenbroucke Spatial Applications Division, KU Leuven Co-chair INSPIRE DT MR Project Leader INSPIRE SoP PCC Plenary Meeting Cyprus

2. Outline • Ten years INSPIRE State of Play: • Status and some Best Practice examples accross Europe • Cost/benefits considerations • Opportunities and the role of cadaster agencies • Conclusions

3. Outline • Ten years INSPIRE State of Play: • Status and some Best Practice examples accross Europe • Cost/benefits considerations • Opportunities and the role of cadaster agencies • Conclusions

4. Ten years State of Play • INSPIRE SoP • Initiated to study the (emerging) NSDI in Europe • Started in August 2002 • Was repeated annually with a break of almost two years • 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2010, 2011 • Assessing the building blocks of 32 (34) countries in Europe • Organisational, legal & funding, data, metadata, services, standards and environmental issues • 32 indicators reflecting the status and development • Looking back 10 years • Did we approach the objectives of INSPIRE? Lessons to be learnt? • Best Practices detected • Which critical reflections can be made?

5. Ten years State of Play MR MR Reports Reports MR MR 8 indicators 8 indicators Assessment: Assessment: Indicators Indicators 34 country Desktop 34 country SoP SoP Desktop Qualitative Qualitative Study 32 indicators Study reports reports 32 indicators | | Conclusions Conclusions Recommendations Recommendations Detailed Detailed Survey Survey • Methodology

6. Ten years State of Play

7. Trends and NSDI developments • Overall trends • Countries at different speeds and with different approaches • This is not necessarily a problem • Potentially competing and overlapping goals for different SDI initiatives • INSPIRE <> NSDI, INSPIRE <> eGov, INSPIRE <> GMES, … • Changed leadership and involvement of major user communities • From NMA having the lead to shared responsibilities • Dynamic sub-national initiatives and emerging local developments • Challenge to integrate and streamline • FR: Of the 35 members of the Council, 8 represent the local authorities Each country is an habitat on its own: hence there exists a country-specific culture of sharing data with public sector and other users

8. Trends and NSDI developments • Overall trends • The users and user communities of INSPIRE & the NSDI are not always very clear • They only start to emerge, if they emerge at all • Open data and open data policies, open source software, open standards • What will be the impact ? • Fast technological developments • Linked data, cloud computing, sensor web, augmented reality, smart locations … The complex and pressing societal problems, together with the fast technological developments require a dynamic, flexible and effective development of INSPIRE linked to and integrated with other initiatives

9. Trends and NSDI developments • Organisation • Different organisational approach in different countries • Hierarchy <> network • Shared responsibilities and division of tasks • Environmental agencies take legal lead • Operational lead mostly in the hands of the NM(C)A • Large majority of the countries involve users • Knowledge about the users, usage and user needs is limited • Formally and through other channels: e.g. forums, social networks, … • Good Practice: SE monitors user satisfaction as part of a BSC approach • Involvement of non-public sector could improve • Private sector only partially active • No structured involvement universities for education / research INSPIRE is a success story when it comes to stakeholder involvement. Also most countries succeeded in building their NSDI as a network of stakeholders

10. Trends and NSDI developments • Legal issues and funding • Transposition phase can be considered almost finalised • Quality of the transposition not known • It remains a concern that there are very few implementation strategies and plans • Good Practice: UK location strategy • More and more countries take into account other legal aspects • PSI, privacy, IPR issues, … • Framework for sharing between public authorities improved • E.g. Belgium, Spain, France, Lithuania and Poland made considerable progress • Funding remains a concern – also indicated by Member States Practice of sharing is not really known. There has been overall improvement but still too many barriers exist.

11. Trends and NSDI developments • Spatial data • 2010: 13796 data sets reported • Different approaches, there are many more existing data sets • Best Practice – NL: authentic registers and other data sets – other options exist ! • The thematiccoverage of the data is relativelygood • The spatialcoverage of the data is no problem • Interoperability of spatial data sets – matching the data specs • This work has to start yet! • Metadata • Variableamong the Member States • 15 countries have metadata for more than 70% • Conformity • 14 and 15 countries reach 70% for Annex I and II • Best Practice– PT: network of metadata managers dedicated tools

12. Trends and NSDI developments • Network services • Discovery of spatial data sets and services remains a concern • For 9 of the 24 countries more than 70% of the data sets and services can be discovered through such a service • Viewing and downloading services • More and more are emerging and they are reported (800 > 2300) • Only two countries for which >70% of the data sets can be viewed + downloaded • Best Practice - ES, example of Carto Ciudad - Nationwide integrated spatial data accessible through network services • Most successful service in Spain is a service of the Cadaster • Other services emerge as well • Standardisation – increased active involvement Technological components are being developed at a fast pace

13. Best Practices • In almost all countries Best Practices can be detected • France API offer for integrating services in own portals and applications • The use of registers for glossaries, M&R, conformity testing, … , in Germany • The validation tool for checking data and metadata conformity in The Netherlands • The metadata editor and metadata managers network in Portugal • The monitoring of the usage of services and related funding model in Norway • The application of testbeds for implementing SOA and the network approach, Belgium (also NL, DE) • Tiling and cashing mechanisms for high performance • Security and authentication mechanisms: UK, DE, BE

14. Best Practices • Overall assessment • Top three – first tier • Germany, Spain and Norway • Second tier • Czech Republic, Netherlands, Switzerland, UK, Denmark, Portugal • Third tier • Finland, Lithuania, Estonia, Sweden, France

15. Critical reflections • Focus should be on sharing • To much focus on fulfilling the technical obligations and requirements of the INSPIRE implementing rules? • Increased involvement of user communities • No such thing as ‘the single user community’ for the NSDI • Involve the user communities as much as you can! • We need a maximum of stakeholders involved • Private and academic sector have an important role to play • Let those sectors build added value on top of the infrastructure ! • Knowledge and skills gap that might impede the successful development of INSPIRE & NSDI Public Private Academic

16. Critical reflections • What is in, what is out ? • Cover all spatial data sets and services useful and used for environmental and related policies, covering the 34 themes • From the user perspective and according to the INSPIRE principles consider as many data sets as possible to be part of INSPIRE • Making existing components accessible • Many spatial data sets and network services are available. However, many of them can’t be discovered yet, and many can’t be viewed or downloaded • A strategy is needed for doing so, adding many different views to the data • It is advisable to integrate services as much as possible in existing applications or to develop new applications • Creating a test environment (ref. OGC approach)

17. Outline • Ten years INSPIRE State of Play: • Status and some Best Practice examples accross Europe • Cost/benefits considerations • Opportunities and the role of cadaster agencies • Conclusions

18. Cost Benefit • Important but difficult question • What is the expected impact of INSPIRE implementation? • What is the real impact? On what? • Extended Impact Assessment INSPIRE • Many other attempts were made to quantify/qualify

19. Cost Benefit • Early Impact studies in countries (2009) • Examples developed in CZ, FI, PL, UK • Poland • analyzed by a team appointed by the Surveyor General of Poland • influence on the state budget for INSPIRE specific tasks • additional burden on the state budget • simplify the flow of information • increase of competitiveness of the economy • increasing the number of jobs reduced need for collecting the same reference data repeatedly, construction of maintenance of duplicating IT systems, efficient monitoring of the environment, implementation of policies concerning environmental protection, protection of citizens, crisis management, execution of trans-European projects

20. Cost Benefit Cost calculations Poland

21. Cost Benefit • Detailed survey on use and usability (2011) • Qualitative assessment • Can you describe two examples of business processes in which components of the INSPIRE & NSDI are used? • What are the benefits of the infrastructure from the perspective of G2G, G2C and G2B? • What are the improvements that can be made to the infrastructure? • Use of a WMS in the River Information System (RIS) • "X-border GDI" offering access to spatial and related data on industrial and commercial parcels using web services

22. Cost Benefit • Assessment of the gains for G2G, G2B, G2C

23. Cost Benefit • Gains in time for searching and accessing the necessary spatial data • … and in consequence improve the efficiency of the processes • Access to the latest data and complete metadata • … allows users to use the right data • Flexibility is said to increase • … because so many different types of users can make use of the same infrastructure • Contributes to openness & transparency • … since open to the public through the services • Improved integrity and trust • … also because the infrastructure is improved continuously

24. Cost Benefit • Particular examples from countries • BG: establishment of efficient transportation schemes for public transport and therefore also help reducing air pollution • CH: inventory of historic transport routes of national and regional importance by using a thematic geoportal – without (+2 million€) • CZ, NO: integration of the SDI components in the systems and in decision making processes (CZ: Building Act) • DE: planning of surface mining, promotion of renewable energy and information service on flood-prone areas • NL: Due to the BAG – Building and Address Registry - Citizens only provide information once; information is re-used by different public authorities; prevents fraud and raises tax revenues But how?

25. Cost Benefit • Workshop on cost/benefits reporting for INSPIRE • Organised by JRC 15-16/10/2012 • Reporting obligation 2013 • Interesting examples from Denmark and Finland • Discussions of how we might do it in the future • More guidance on how to report C/B • Working mostly by example • Efficiency gains • Time saved in internal queries • Time saved in internal processes • Time saved in serving the public • Reduced cost of integrating data • Better re-use of existing datasets • Effectiveness and broader benefits

26. Parcels Addresses Hydrography Roads Data Flows Analysis

27. Analysing business processes

28. Outline • Ten years INSPIRE State of Play: • Status and some Best Practice examples accross Europe • Cost/benefits considerations • Opportunities and the role of cadaster agencies • Conclusions

29. Opportunities • The uptake of INSPIRE components is starting • Some new businesses emerge • E.g. geoSparc developed new technology and is building new applications using among others INSPIRE components • E.g. Goolzoom.com – exposing INSPIRE services and bringing it to the citizens • Fast technological developments • Linked data • Sensor Web • VGI and crowdsourcing • 3D and 4D developments • Augmented Reality • Smart Grid, smart cities, smart location

30. Cadaster Agencies • Cadaster agencies play a vital role • They have key data sets for INSPIRE • They have already different applications / systems in place that have proved to work well • They are supporting already many user communities • Financial Departments for taxation • Land valuation; housing market • Common Agricultural Policy (LPIS) • … • Improved integration in other business applications • The cadastral parcel is everywhere! • More services for the citizens – connect all relevant information regarding a parcel • Linking to new technologies, e.g. augmented reality

31. Outline • Ten years INSPIRE State of Play: • Status and some Best Practice examples accross Europe • Cost/benefits considerations • Opportunities and the role of cadaster agencies • Conclusions

32. Conclusions • No final conclusions needed! • INSPIRE is developing and being implemented everywhere • Components are becoming available • It is time to start using them in real business processes • INSPIRE is a story that is being written ... • … and will continue to be (re-)written over the next years We will achieve all the objectives of INSPIRE the day that each stakeholder of the INSPIRE network can say that it can leave the network without having any impact at all …

33. Thank you! danny.vandenbroucke@SADL.kuleuven.be