Day: Wednesday 9th November - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Day: Wednesday 9th November PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 6b4e7f-NGE0M



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Day: Wednesday 9th November

Description:

Day: Wednesday 9th November Session: 14.30am - 15.45 Coordinators: Ian Williamson & Stig Enemark Topic: Components of the vision- break out groups – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:18
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 14
Provided by: andrewb
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Day: Wednesday 9th November


1
  • Day Wednesday 9th November
  • Session 14.30am - 15.45
  • Coordinators Ian Williamson Stig Enemark
  • Topic Components of the vision- break out
    groups

2
Day 1 Wednesday Nov 9th
3
Day 2 Thursday Nov 10th
4
Day 3 Friday Nov 11th
Presentation Spatially Enabling Government
Evaluate Issues in Designing a New Generation
of LAS
Group 1 (based on Australian European
Perspectives) Rapporteur Warwick Watkins
Group 2 (based on Australian European
Perspectives) Rapporteur Holger Magel
Report Back - Discussion
Final Presentation Next Generation of LAS Ian
Williamson, Stig Enemark, Jude Wallace
5
Key Components and Tools
  1. Authentic registers?
  2. The IT architecture to deliver the vision?
  3. The spatial dimension- SDI?
  4. Infrastructure to support trading in complex
    commodities?

6
Key Components and Tools
  • How do we record public rights? Do we need to?
  • How accurate does identification of RRR need to
    be?
  • Geo coding

7
Future Challengers, Issues Improvements
  1. Achieving a national system in a federated
    country
  2. Achieving spatially enabled government
  3. Should the land registry system contribute to SD?
    How?
  4. Relationship between the land registry and
    spatial cadastre
  5. Can international comparative monitoring be
    established?
  6. Administration of restrictions and
    responsibilities
  7. Is the land parcel still central to LA?
  8. The role of buildings in land administration

8
(No Transcript)
9
Observations/ Learnings (1)
  • Denmark far in advance of other european
    countries (Stig)
  • How do we engage the community? Relevance!
  • Title is fundamental and is still undervalued
  • Institutional Issues Primary problem. How?
  • Model encompasses core elements. Different
    jurisdictions have different focus.
  • From e to i End-User orientated approach is
    required rather than technology focus
  • Environmental Issues policy response in Europe
    has been far different to Aus
  • Unbundling rights in AUS/Unheard of in Europe
  • Country Context is important- Education,
    Institutional arrangements

10
Observations/ Learnings (2)
  • Land Administration enables does not deliver Sus
    Dev
  • EU seems to be impacting on each country? Top
    down vs Bottom up
  • Changes seem to have occurred without
    legislation?
  • Authentic Registers well supported. We do not
    have these authoritative registers in Australia
  • Local Government more empowered in Europe more
    problematic in AUS
  • SDI Need to retain simple messages (de Soto)
    for users / politicians

11
The Paradigm or Model
  • In Australia
  • Unbundling has resulted in disparate management
    of new property i.e. managing outside the LAS
    and theyre not TAXED
  • Politics has had a large impact in rural
    Australia- diff to Europe
  • Weve yet to unlock value of the parcel and
    existing land administration systems
  • How do you promote this model to end-users, key
    stakeholders (e.g. Utilities) AND politicians
  • Fundamentally there appears nothing wrong with
    Australian LAS
  • Conceptually attractive model (efficiencies
    etc.), but, is it visionary enough?
  • link between LAS functions and sustainable
    development is not unique other contributors
  • Where are the people in this model?
  • Is the parcel approach limited? Geo-coding and
    addressing offers far more opportunities
  • Arrows Policy in a vacuum? Making the model
    loops?

12
Key Drivers
  • Technology appears to be one of the strongest
    drivers
  • Traditional economic drivers were evident e.g
    Holger
  • Environmental drivers have prevailed in Australia
  • Where were the environmental drivers in Europe
    (e.g. Kyoto). Are they already culturally
    embedded in Europe (e.g. Swiss civil code)?
  • ICT enabled efficiencies (cost improvements)
  • Cross-country initiatives- Will these be key
    drivers in the future?

13
Future Challengers, Issues Improvements
  • Historical institutional frameworks are key
    barriers- ICT can just mask these problems
  • The language used in the spatial sector fails to
    sell spatial technologies and information (simple
    / relevant)
  • Multi-jurisdictional problems- state vs. federal
    vs. local vs. regional authorities- Should the
    model include these relationships / roles?
  • Funding and governance arrangements need
    attention- These need to be understood to make
    the model relevant to a particular jurisdiction
  • Looping the components together (not linear)
About PowerShow.com