Land data integration is one of the most
important information technology projects that government can
undertake. As a citizen this statement may not be self-evident so I’ll
explain why.
Imagine there is a bungalow that you want to
buy… now landed property is very expensive here and you will probably
need a loan. You and the finance company will want to know all there
is to know about this property, for example, you want to be sure that
it has a good and clean title, that is, the person offering the
property has the legal right to do so; that the physical property and
its location match its legal description; that there are no
encumbrances, obligations or other interests in the property; that
there are no plans by government authorities to resume the land or
otherwise plan to interfere with it for purposes such as road
construction; that the land use zoning allows you to carry out your
purposes for the property and so on. The task of answering these
questions is usually given to your lawyer but if you ever tried to do
it yourself you would be driven crazy visiting and queuing at a
seemingly endless list of government departments and statutory
authorities. An integrated land information system uses information
technology that allows the databases of many such organisations to
link associated land records and seamlessly share the data making it
available to one another and the public at large from a single point
of access.
Probably every developed and developing nation
is engaged to some extent in land data integration at this moment such
is the importance of this process. The development of land for
commercial, industrial, residential - any purpose – requires access to
lots of land information and the economic development of a city,
province, state or nation is dependent on the efficacy of this
process.
Technically, land data integration means
finding all the data about a particular item of land, called a lot or
parcel, and piecing it together to form a complete picture. A land
parcel is given a unique identifier and all related information is
linked to this so that a computer can quickly find and retrieve
everything there is to know about that parcel. This means that the
legal record (land title), personal ownership, valuation and taxation
records, public utilities information, land use, planning and
environmental information, census, soil and geological data referring
to a specific parcel can be retrieved by searching on the unique
parcel identifier.
Land data is both textual and graphic, e.g.
address, owner’s name and valuation are obviously textual. The
description of a land parcel can be graphic, i.e. a collection of
points and lines which define the geographic boundaries of the parcel
with its neighbours. Similarly, pubic utilities can be represented
graphically by points and lines representing pipes and valves while
land use and planning information is often depicted by an area which
is coloured or cross-hatched representing different land use or
planning zones. Each point, line or area feature may have textual
information linked to it to describe it further. For example, a line
representing a water pipe may have textual data – called attributes –
which give it a unique reference, define pipe diameter, direction of
water flow, maximum pressure, etc. When viewed on a computer an
operator can click on a feature and retrieve its attribute data.
Alternatively, an operator can key in an identifier or a specific
attribute and retrieve and display the corresponding graphic data.
Thus the integration of land information brings together different
types of information in order to describe land in terms of its textual
and graphical attributes. Such integration is essential for the
process of land administration and enables government to provide
services such as; street maps, location of underground facilities to
construction contractors, issuance of building licenses, assists in
urban planning and environmental monitoring, and levying rates and
land taxes.
The graphic data is more than just a picture;
each point, line and area feature have coordinates that define exactly
where the feature is located in the real world. So, in a perfect
world, when integrated, the graphical data representing street curbs,
gutters, footpaths, pipes, wires, property boundaries, building
outlines would all lie neatly on top, alongside or perpendicular to
each other according to their correct geographic relationship. But
because the various agencies that collect land data do so at different
accuracies, at different times and sometimes using different points of
reference according to their particular needs, the graphic data when
overlaid is usually a chaotic mess. The same problem occurs with
textual data too. For example, when a property is sold, change of
ownership information takes time to reach all of the affected
agencies. There is a period during which there is conflicting
information about who owns the property. The difficult task of
integrating land information is making it all fit together so it can
be shared transparently and simultaneously across the entire
(government) enterprise. Clearly information technology has a vital
roll to play and indeed is the only way to create this environment.
Geographic Information Systems (GIS), database, local and wide area
networks, and Internet publishing provide the tools and technology to
pull together and host land data collected by various government
agencies in a truly integrated manner.
The concept of integrated land information
systems (LIS) is not new. Studies and development in this field date
back to the 1970’s when computing power offered the promise of storage
and rapid retrieval of massive amounts of data. In Singapore,
development of an integrated land information system can be traced to
the original Land Data Hub project (1988) in the State Land Authority
(SLA). Neighbouring Malaysia has a National Land Information System
(NaLIS). There are many other examples of integrated LIS attempts in
ASEAN but none can claim to fully and successfully integrate data
across the boundaries of many government agencies. Despite many years
of development, it is a common reality that LIS today are at best only
partially successful, never having reached their full potential.
It would be most convenient to suggest that
the reason for this predicament is that technology has failed to
deliver the required solution, or that data integration of this
magnitude is beyond the capability of technology at the present time.
Technology continues to evolve and improve for sure but adequate
technology is available and - has been for some time - to address the
needs of integrated land information systems. To add to the confusion,
some well known IT vendors peddle this view and of course they would
be new boys on the block with little or no previous experience with
integrated LIS, or which have an agenda to push the ‘next new thing’
in IT. But it would be untrue and futile to either lay the blame for
failure or look for deliverance in technology alone because the nature
of the problem is not technological.
Successful implementation of an integrated
information system requires selfless collaboration among people and
the entities they represent and a willingness to share for the common
good.
Here are three issues that always come into
play in an integrated LIS project:
1. Information is gathered at a certain cost
and for those that can afford to do so it becomes a competitive
advantage and both a valuable and powerful asset. Given the trend to
corporatisation and even privatization in the pubic sector, no chief
executive will freely part with such an asset; yet the temptation to
impose a fee on the sharing of data is a common cause of failure for
integrated LIS.
2. Furthermore, after enduring the cost of
collecting data, an entity has an inherent, but not necessarily
correct, belief that their data is accurate and complete. (It may be
accurate and complete by their standards but not necessarily others.)
Only when the data is integrated with other’s data will this become
apparent and then neither organization will admit fault or
responsibility to correct data, which in their belief, is already
correct. Yet unless the data is coherently integrated it has little
meaning and no value-added content.
3. A strong political mandate is required to
effect the necessary level of interdepartmental and cross-ministry
collaboration to prize data from one organization and make it
available and suitable for another’s use. Conversely, politicizing the
project sabotages the chance of establishing the free-will to
collaborate and obscures the common goal. The establishment of a
separate political entity to oversee the project creates a hierarchy
where a network should suffice; promotes authoritarianism where
democracy is needed.
Now everyday of my professional life I have
been self-employed or engaged in business; I haven’t a background in
politics or public administration and (although I am a good student of
human nature) therefore I cannot offer an authoritative solution to
these issues. But to support my argument, if not my credibility, it is
true to say that the fundamental issues above are not novel and have
been mooted in forums for integrated LIS for as long as the systems
themselves have been contemplated. That these issues are still around
30 years later is testimony to the stubbornness of human nature and
perhaps its resistance to information technology. Perhaps the old LIS
practitioners are bored with this problem and having left it to a new
batch of professionals, old ground is inevitably covered again.
Perhaps those given the political mandate see the issues all too
clearly and find the only effective influence they can wield is
through technological change. Or perhaps global IT corporations with
mega marketing budgets and a desire to capture this market are more
than willing to take the fall and gain the subsequent opportunity to
introduce a new technological panacea. Three corporations in Singapore
are evidently willing to jointly ‘invest’ $25million to show how their
next new thing can develop the full potential of Land Data Hub. But a
successful roll-out from pilot to production system is assuredly not
going to happen since no new technology will address the fundamental
issues.
Instead of a wasteful experiment with
unnecessary new technology to which only the technology vendors can be
truly committed, a good start would be for government to review the
ultimate goal of an integrated LIS to produce coherently integrated
data for the common good. First, there should not be any fees imposed
for the provision of up-to-date data between the collaborating
agencies. Second, any analysis of return on investment should include
consideration of the efficacy of government resulting from access to
coherently integrated land information. Third, the entity given the
political mandate to lead the establishment of an integrated LIS
should itself be a data provider or data integrator involved in
collecting, managing, processing of land data.
Technology companies have a key roll to play
in the design and implementation of information technology solutions
for complex projects such as integrated LIS. For its part, government
has the responsibility to provide an environment into which the
technology can be effectively placed. Both are important and neither
can succeed without the other. At this point in time a technology
company might fail to properly implement its technology but there is
no inherent limitation in the technology that would cause an
integrated LIS to fail.
|