National Academies Press: OpenBook

National Spatial Data Infrastructure Partnership Programs: Rethinking the Focus (2001)

Chapter: DEFINITION OF A STATE OR TRIBAL NATION EXTENDED FRAMEWORK

« Previous: DEFINITION OF A CITY OR COUNTY EXTENDED FRAMEWORK
Suggested Citation:"DEFINITION OF A STATE OR TRIBAL NATION EXTENDED FRAMEWORK." National Research Council. 2001. National Spatial Data Infrastructure Partnership Programs: Rethinking the Focus. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10241.
×
Page 66
Suggested Citation:"DEFINITION OF A STATE OR TRIBAL NATION EXTENDED FRAMEWORK." National Research Council. 2001. National Spatial Data Infrastructure Partnership Programs: Rethinking the Focus. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/10241.
×
Page 67

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

AN EXTENDED NATIONAL SPATIAL DATA INFRASTRUCTURE FRAMEWORK: 66 THE ROLE OF OTHER ORGANIZATIONS the resolutions at the state or national level). Traditionally, soils data have been collected at the county level. Traffic accidents and crime statistics are collected locally. Incidences of disease data are most useful at the local level. Other possible themes include ZIP code areas, zoning requirements, and traffic flows. It is evident that a local extended Framework must be defined with the cooperation of city and county officials, and that only those additional themes used for the majority of applications should be incorporated into an extended Framework. To do this, county officials need to be involved in the discussions leading to the definition and establishment of an extended Framework. These discussions should take the form of a nation wide needs assessment which would develop a clear articulation of the content and necessary scale of spatial data required to meet specific objectives and mandates at each level of government. The outcome of this must be a list of themes and their content that can be applied at the local level. This bottom-up approach is in line with the I- Team initiatives advocated by OMB. The committee is encouraged that the National Association of Counties (NACo) began formal cooperation with the FGDC in 1997. This cooperation needs to be continued with specific goals established relating to the definition of an extended Framework. DEFINITION OF A STATE OR TRIBAL NATION EXTENDED FRAMEWORK The starting point of a state or tribal nation extended Framework is also the FGDC’s Framework. Therefore, a state Framework will include geodetic control, orthophoto imagery, elevation, transportation, hydrography, governmental units, and cadastral information. The geodetic control, elevation, and orthophoto imagery layers may be supplemented by the state. Governmental units, a state responsibility that is often delegated to the local level (municipal boundaries, school district boundaries), would probably not receive much additional supplementation except for such features as state legislative district boundaries, state parks, and state forests. Similarly, the cadastral layer augmentation at the

AN EXTENDED NATIONAL SPATIAL DATA INFRASTRUCTURE FRAMEWORK: 67 THE ROLE OF OTHER ORGANIZATIONS state level might be limited to state-owned lands, however, some states such as Maryland maintain tax parcels on a statewide basis. A tribal nation Framework would differ from state Frameworks in several ways. Among the most important is the complex pattern of property ownership on many reservations, with some property held by the community, some by individuals, and some by non-tribal owners. This makes distribution of income from tribal assets (e.g., oil and gas lease income) particularly difficult. The involvement of the federal Bureau of Indian Affairs adds an additional bureaucratic layer that makes geospatial data management somewhat more difficult. One major difference between a state and tribal nation Framework and the FGDC Framework is the definition of the content of the transportation layer. For example, at the state level linear transportation features such as roads may still be defined by their centerlines (as in the federal contribution to the NSDI), but they may carry additional information (county limits, mileage, snow removal, signage placement, and other maintenance responsibilities). New technologies, such as GPS-equipped vans, roadway sensors, high-resolution (1- meter) remote sensing, and digital photogrammetry, are revolutionizing the availability of accurate geospatial data in the transportation layer. In most states, departments of transportation are major agencies that handle such services as driver licensing, vehicle title and registration, interstate commerce taxes, in addition to the features listed above. As the spatial dimensions of these layers become increasingly in demand, the states will find that this information should be made compatible with the SSDI. Hydrography is also of major concern at the state level, and includes navigation, energy, and recreational users as well as point and non-point pollution sources. There are also regional concerns over water rights and quality. Watersheds often contain several local jurisdictions, and therefore the state must assume responsibility for data relating to drainage basins. The state that handles fishing licenses typically designates public access points to lakes and waterways, patrols open water, and plays a major role in the mitigation of natural disasters involving its watercourses. Even though it is highly recommended that NAD 83 and NAVD 88 and latitude and longitude be used as the bases of a

Next: SUMMARY OF SPATIAL DATA THEMES »
National Spatial Data Infrastructure Partnership Programs: Rethinking the Focus Get This Book
×
 National Spatial Data Infrastructure Partnership Programs: Rethinking the Focus
Buy Paperback | $47.00 Buy Ebook | $37.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

The National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) was envisioned as a way of enhancing the accessibility, communication, and use of geospatial data to support a wide variety of decisions at all levels of society. The goals of the NSDI are to reduce redundancy in geospatial data creation and maintenance, reduce the costs of geospatial data creation and maintenance, improve access to geospatial data, and improve the accuracy of geospatial data used by the broader community. At the core of the NSDI is the concept of partnerships, or collaborations, between different agencies, corporations, institutions, and levels of government. In a previous report, the Mapping Science Committee (MSC) defined a partnership as "...a joint activity of federal and state agencies, involving one or more agencies as joint principals focusing on geographic information." The concept of partnerships was built on the foundation of shared responsibilities, shared costs, shared benefits, and shared control. Partnerships are designed to share the costs of creation and maintenance of geospatial data, seeking to avoid unnecessary duplication, and to make it possible for data collected by one agency at a high level of spatial detail to be used by another agency in more generalized form.

Over the past seven years, a series of funding programs administered by the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) has stimulated the creation of such partnerships, and thereby promoted the objectives of the NSDI, by raising awareness of the need for a coordinated national approach to geospatial data creation, maintenance, and use. They include the NSDI Cooperative Agreements Program, the Framework Demonstration Projects Program, the Community Demonstration Projects, and the Community-Federal Information Partnerships proposal. This report assesses the success of the FGDC partnership programs that have been established between the federal government and state and local government, industry, and academic communities in promoting the objectives of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure.

READ FREE ONLINE

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!