1 / 27

Lars H. Backer lars.backer@mdmapping.se European Forum for GeoStatistics (EFGS)

A Vision towards a useful ISD and an SDI to support it; Response to an inductive approach to the formulation of real user needs. Lars H. Backer lars.backer@mdmapping.se European Forum for GeoStatistics (EFGS). Why VISIONS?.

quincy
Download Presentation

Lars H. Backer lars.backer@mdmapping.se European Forum for GeoStatistics (EFGS)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. A Vision towards a useful ISD and an SDI to support it;Response to an inductive approach to the formulation of real user needs. Lars H. Backerlars.backer@mdmapping.se European Forum for GeoStatistics (EFGS)

  2. Why VISIONS? A Vision without Action may probably be called a daydream, but an Action vithout a vision is definitely a nightmare !

  3. In search of Real Usersand their Needs Two Much- used Approaches: • Deductive method (The method of Science) • The Survey is a deductive response to user needs • Based on experience from efforts to describe and explain the world • Focus on the Found and finding • Inductive method (The method of Praxis) • The Vision is an inductive (design) response to user needs • Based on experience from efforts to change the world • Focus on the Made and making • I represent Praxis in this context responsible for formulating a Vision for the Geostat project and its context.

  4. The UsersResponding to ”The human condition” • Baudelaire on modernity and modernism: ”Modernity is the transient, the fleeting, the contingtent; it is the one half of Art, the other being the eternal and the immutable” (The painter of modern life (1863). • Quest 1: The transient, the fleeting(The dream of universal consumption)Quote Berman from ”All that is solid melts into air” • Quest 2: The eternal and imutable(The dream of a unified science)Quote Isaiah Berlin ”Against the current”

  5. Q1: The Maelstrom of Change • ”There is a mode of vital experience – experience of space and time, of the self and others, of life’spossibilities and perils – shared by men and women all over the world today. I willcall this body of experience ”modernity”. To be modern is to findourselves in an environment that promisesadventure, power, joy, growth, transformation of ourselves and the world – and at the same time, that threatens to destroyeverythingwehave, everythingweknow, everythingwe are. Modern environments and experiencescutacrossboundaries of geography and ethnicity, of class and nationality, of religion and ideology: in this sense, modernitycan be said to unite all mankind. But it is a paradoxicalunity, a unity of disunity; it poursus all into a maelstrom of perpetual disintegration and renewal, of struggle and contradiction, of ambiguity and anguish. To be modern is to be part of a universe in which, as Marx said, ”all that is solid meltsinto air”. From Marshall Berman ”All that is solid meltsinto air.” (1980) • We are nowrealizing that this very process threatens to destroy the prospects for future generations. This dimention of modernity is not sustainable in the longerperspective.

  6. Q2: The Eternal and Imutable • ”Theysoughtall-embracing schemas, universal unifyingframeworks, withinwhicheverything that existscould be shown to be systematically – e.g. logically or causally-interconnected, vaststructures in whichthereshould be no gaps leftopen for spontaneous, unattendeddevelopments, whereeverything that occursshould be, at least in principle, whollyexplicable in terms of imutable general laws.” From Isaiah Berlin ”Against the Current” (1980) • Wehavenowrealised that there is no foundation for this project. Wedo not pursue science because it provides truedescriptions, wepursue it onlybecause it works, it is potentiallyuseful. Science and knowledge is a means not an end. The ultimate test of knowledge is itsusefulness for ouroveriding projects in a long and shortperspective.

  7. Long or short perspective? The Societies of Men (Systems Processing information) PRAXIS 1. Analyse 2. Design SCIENCE 4. Use 3. Build The Environment(Systems Processing matter/energy) Future Past

  8. Public Authority responsible for the long term perspective • Public authorities primarily rely on: • The support of the ”long term” scientific community • Humaniora (hermneutics) • Natural sciences (scientific inquiery • Formal sciences (Logic, mathematics) as theory) • To provide information the raw-material for practical action for: • The support of the ”long term” praxis community • The liberal ”arts” • The practical ”arts” architecture and engineering • Formal technologies (Logic, mathematics) as praxis) • It is not primarily intended to serve ”short term” interests of business and industry (the maelstrom of consumption)

  9. This Conference • Not a conference to serve Business and Industry • ScienceNot a scientific conference specifically designed to improve their efforts to describe and explain the world • PraxisNot a conference for architects and engineers specifically oriented towards their efforts to change the world. • To serve Public Authority Actions • Representatives of civil servants dedicated to serve our gorvernments by the people, by the people and of the pelople. • Supported by

  10. User Needs • The Compound Object ApproachThe integrated object approach involving the use of complex objects to describe MES to faciliate integration. • System modelling (for the ecological approach)The horisontal proposition and the need to check the implications for actions on all aspects of a man environmental system. (e.g. SC, SE, NE and AE) etc. • The 3 TIER structureThe vertical proposition and the idea if the integrated use of the 3 TIER structure on all levels of development efforts from local to *Global • All to be communicated over the INTERNET

  11. 1. The Object approach Double perspective : (1) ”Interactingwholes” and (2) ”Kits of Parts”

  12. The Compound Object Strategy • A integration of object components • Semantic description from Narrative provides Object Name and Code (ONC) • Attribute Objects (ONC+A) • Feature Objects (ONC+F) • Method Objects (ONC+M) • Reference literature (ONC+R)( reference library) • Complex Objects = ONC+A+F+M+R

  13. Many to one relationships • We discuss far too little the problem of one to many relationships between object components! • Population data related to several different Feature objects • ONC + F1 (Residential Units) • ONC + F2 (Buildings) • ONC + F3 (Real estate units) • Etc.

  14. 2. System modelling What is wrong with this illustration?

  15. Man Environmental Systems II (MES) Human Systems Environmental Systems Natural environment Semantic description from Narrative provides Object Name and Code (ONC) Systems of Attribute Objects (ONC+A) Systems of Feature Objects (ONC+F) Systems of Method Objects (ONC+M) Reference literature Objects (ONC+R)( reference library) Complex Objects = ONC+A+F+M+R Man-made environment Semantic description from Narrative provides Object Name and Code (ONC) Systems of Attribute Objects (ONC+A) Systems of Feature Objects (ONC+F) Systems of Method Objects (ONC+M) Reference literature Objects (ONC+R)( reference library) Complex Objects = ONC+A+F+M+R • Human system Semantic description from Narrative provides Object Name and Code (ONC) • Systems of Attribute Objects (ONC+A) • Systems of Feature Objects (ONC+F) • Systems of Method Objects (ONC+M) • Reference literature Objects (ONC+R)( reference library) • Complex Objects = ONC+A+F+M+R • Socio- Economic system Semantic description from Narrative provides Object Name and Code (ONC) • Systems of Attribute Objects (ONC+A) • Systems of Feature Objects (ONC+F) • Systems of Method Objects (ONC+M) • Reference literature Objects (ONC+R)( reference library) • Complex Objects = ONC+A+F+M+R

  16. The Ecological Approach (praxis)The Inspire Annexes • An example: A project for the develop the Man-made environment. • Will focus on the task at hand that is to improve mainly physical man-made structures. • Will have to consider (seriously) the impact of (and the consequences for) on the broader context ( the natural environment, the economic system, and the socio-cultural system.) • Proposal: • That any project could be based on one standard GIISS (Geographical integrated information system of systems) based an the same shared spatial data infrastructure. • That the Annexes to the Inspire directive describes a seed for such a system. • That this will require a development of a vision for the future of the Inspire annexes. • That this will require a development of the spatial data infrastructure specified by the Inspire project. • Focus: • BE: Man-made environment • Layer ((ONC+A+F+M+R) theme 1) • Layer ((ONC+A+F+M+R) theme 2 • Layer ((ONC+A+F+M+R) theme ...n) • Context: • NE: Natural environment • Layer ((ONC+A+F+M+R) theme 1) • Layer ((ONC+A+F+M+R) theme 2 • Layer ((ONC+A+F+M+R) theme ...n) • ES: Economic system • Layer ((ONC+A+F+M+R) theme 1) • Layer ((ONC+A+F+M+R) theme 2) • Layer ((ONC+A+F+M+R) theme ...n) • SS: Sociocultural system • Layer ((ONC+A+F+M+R) theme 1) • Layer ((ONC+A+F+M+R) theme 2) • Layer ((ONC+A+F+M+R) theme ...n)

  17. 3. The Three Tier Approach

  18. The Vertical ”Three TIER” structure • The vertical structure is based on the fundamental idea that as in the Ecological approach every action must be judged on its effects upon its sister or brother systems, so also • The consequences for every action must be judged according to its effects (at the very least) on its neighbours in the hierarchy of systems, suprasystems and subsystems. • Suprasystem • System • Subsystem • This is called the Three Tier Principle

  19. The ”upper” Three Tiers • Tier 1: The National Initiative • A National dataset that may serve international efforts to atainsustainability for itself and the Eart. • A national data infrastructure (NSDI) • A natioanlinfrastructure of data (Dataset: National Popuilation on Grids) • Tier 2: The European Initiative • An European dataset that may serve international efforts to atainsustainability for Europe and the Eart. • A n European data infrastructure (ESDI or INSPIRE) • An European infrastructure of data (Dataset: Europe’s Population on Grids) • Tier 3: The Global Initiative. • A Global dataset that may serve international efforts to atainsustainability for the Earth. • A Global data infrastructure (GSDI project) • A Global infrastructure of data (Dataset: Global Popuilation on Grids)

  20. To be communicated over the INTERNET 1. Making sense of things? 2. Survive

  21. Conclusion • Focus on Public Authorityuserneeds • Object Approach (Solve the one to many problem)Weneed to stress the idea of a compoundobjectIdea as a betterpathtowardsreallyusefulobjects. • DEVELOP THE INSPIRE DATA INFRASTRUCTURE • System Modelling (Horisontal consquenceanalysis)Weneed to stress the need for Statistics to serve the cross disciplinaryEcological Approach (See the GGIISS proposal) • DEVELOP THE INSPIRE ANNEXES TO A USEFUL TOOL • Three TIER principle (Verticalconsequenceanalysis)Weneed to stress the importance of scales and scale intervals to satisfy the real need for scalablehierarchialmodels • A NATIONAL POPULATION GRID INITIATIVE FOR GEOSTAT 1B • A GLOBAL POPULATION GRID INITIATIVE THROUGH THE UNECE

  22. Population explosion? Resource constraints?Climate Change? Solvable Problems? Not without GeoStatistics !

  23. Thank You! Lars H. Backerlars.backer@mdmapping.se European Forum for GeoStatistics (EFGS)

More Related