Infrastructure Engineering - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 10 of 23
-
ItemLessons from design and construct projects(Ministry of Settlements & Regional Infrastructure, 2002)
-
ItemSeismic design requirements for non-structural components of highrise buildings(Ministry of Settlements & Regional Infrastructure, 2002)
-
ItemThe role of land administration in the accession of Central European countries to the European Union(ELSEVIER SCI LTD, 2002-01)
-
ItemStochastic modelling of GPS phase observations for improved quality estimation(Informa UK Limited, 2002-01-01)
-
ItemSpatial Data Infrastructure: an integrated architecture for Location Based Services( 2002-12)Trends in wireless communication towards the development of smaller, faster, cheaper devices are contributing to a radical change in the spatial information user base. With the ability to access information using a mobile phone or a Mobile Internet enabled Personal Digital Assistant, combined with the capability to determine the position of mobile devices, a range of applications known as Location Based Services (LBS) are emerging. These services provide relevant information to users based on the position of their mobile device. This information can be both spatially and non-spatially related, but must be presented in a useful way. The broader issues of LBS, that revolve around enabling a range of users to access spatial information, can be considered under the domain of Spatial Data Infrastructures (SDI). Since the SDI components of people, data, access networks, policy and technical standards parallel the issues of LBS, it is proposed that the SDI concept be augmented to support the development and deployment of wireless LBS applications. This paper describes a proposed case study approach for LBS development so as to determine how SDI needs to adapt in order to support these emerging applications.
-
ItemThe role of institutional mechanisms in spatial data infrastructure development that supports decision-making(Australian Institute of Cartographers, 2002-01-01)Improved economic, social and environmental decision-making are principal objectives for investing in the development of Spatial Data Infrastructure (SDI) at all political and administrative levels. Indeed, Resolution 7 of the recent 5th Global Spatial Data Infrastructure (GSDI) conference in Cartagena, Colombia (GSDI, 2001) argued that the purpose of the GSDI is to improve the availability, accessibility, and applicability of spatial information for decision-making. While accepting the development of institutional mechanisms to support decision-making by promoting the availability and accessibility of spatial information as part of SDI institutional frameworks, many institutional mechanisms fall short of addressing the application of spatial data to decision-making. From an institutional perspective, the motivation for SDI implementation is the impracticality of a single organisation producing and maintaining the wide variety of data and models needed to inform many decisions, resulting in a need for sharing of data and a range of analytical and display tools. This is being seen particularly in the natural resource, environment and government sectors in Australia. These sectors are utilising institutional mechanisms to support spatial decision-making processes in a number of different ways including the development of community resource centres, departmental development of decision support tools, as well as the development of atlases, spatial data directories and on-line land information services. In Australia these institutional mechanisms are playing a crucial role in providing the building blocks for the institutional framework of SDIs and address different levels of the decision-making process. This paper looks at how availability and accessibility of spatial data are being achieved by reviewing examples from each of the institutional mechanisms mentioned. The variety of decision-making levels supported by these different initiatives is reviewed in terms of decision process theory. The paper concludes with a discussion of the implications of the approaches to developing institutional support for decision-making as part of SDI development, as well as a consideration of directions for SDI development in the future to support spatial decision-making processes.
-
ItemDirections for the Future of SDI Development( 2002)Understanding the role of Spatial Data Infrastructure (SDI) is important to acceptance of the concept and its alignment with spatial industry objectives. Much has been done to describe and understand the components and interactions of different aspects of SDIs and their integration into the transactions of the spatial data community. However, what fails to be received through these perceptions, is that the role SDI plays is by necessity greater than the sum of individual components of SDI and stakeholder groups.SDI is fundamentally about facilitation and coordination of the exchange and sharing of spatial data between stakeholders in the spatial data community. To this end, the authors propose that the roles of SDI have been pursued through different approaches: product-based and process-based. Both approaches have value, but contribute to the evolution, uptake and utilisation of the SDI concept in different ways. They provide different frameworks for dealing with SDI mandates for the objectives of spatial data access and sharing. This paper reviews the nature and concept of SDI, including the components, which have helped to build understanding about the importance of an infrastructure to support the interactions of the spatial data community. Several examples of how SDIs have been described are offered to aid understanding of their complexity. The need for descriptions to represent the conflict between the role and deliverables of an SDI and thus contribute to a simpler, but dynamic, understanding of the complexity of the SDI concept, are postulated. The transition between the understanding of SDIs from product-based to process-based approaches is investigated, with a review of the positions taken by current SDI initiatives throughout the world. A model of how these approaches provide a framework to meet the mandates of the relevant jurisdictions is proposed, and factors contributing to the success of such positions in the future are discussed.
-
ItemFundamental partnerships driving Spatial Data Infrastructure development within Australia( 2002)Recent models of Spatial Data Infrastructures (SDIs) are overly simplistic and fail to address the dynamic nature, complexity, inter- and intra-jurisdictional nature and important role of partnerships. There is a need by governments and administrators to better understand the complex nature of SDIs to facilitate implementation of this form of infrastructure in an information society. This paper aims to build upon current SDI research at local, state and regional levels to better understand the complex and multi-dimensional nature at a national level, while building onthe principles of Hierarchical Spatial Reasoning (HSR) theory. To date little work has been undertaken on mapping these partnerships particularly at the national level within a country that is a federation of states. This paper will introduce the notion that better understanding of the partnerships that support SDI will enable administrators of spatial information to implement this type of infrastructure into the future. The paper will also highlight new research being conducted by the Centre for Spatial Data Infrastructures and Land Administration at the University of Melbourne on the Australian SDI (ASDI) and the aims to develop a methodology to map the complex nature of national SDI (NSDI).
-
ItemThe cultural aspects of sharing and dynamic partnerships within an SDI hierarchy(Informa UK Limited, 2002-01-01)
-
ItemSnapshot of SDI Development in Australia: Models, Partnerships and Lead Agencies Advancing Implementation( 2002)Australia is entering a new era for spatial data infrastructure (SDI) demonstrated by the unification of prime sectors of the spatial information industry and a renewed Government focus on spatial information. A spatial information stock take is required to review progress to date and evaluate current directions. SDI is deemed essential for the provision of services to support modern society's information needs and can be considered in the same manner as other public service infrastructure such as roads and utilities.This paper will evaluate progress since the release of ANZLIC's (1996) model for a SDI for Australia and New Zealand, identify the agencies driving SDI in Australia and will highlight key initiatives contributing to the ASDI development. Selected countries with advanced National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) programs will also be discussed in relation to developments of the SDI model within Australia. The paper contributes to research conducted by the Centre for Spatial Data Infrastructures and Land Administration at the University of Melbourne on SDI and to a new project being undertaken to develop a methodology to map the complex nature of the institutional arrangements and partnerships that support NSDI with particular focus on the ASDI.