Geospatial Technology Outlook, Opening Panel Remarks at GeoTec 2007
Joseph K. Berry1
W. M. Keck Visiting Scholar
in Geosciences,
Principal, Berry &
Associates // Spatial Information Systems (BASIS)
Phone:
970-215-0825; Email: jberry@innovativegis.com;
Website: www.innovativegis.com
(Note:
these notes outline J.K. berry’s remarks at the Plenary Opening Panel on
Geospatial Technology Outlook for the 2007 GeoTec Conference,
Moderator: Matt Ball, Editor, GeoWorld Magazine, Denver, CO,
Panelists:
• Joseph Berry, Keck Scholar in the Geosciences,
Joseph K. Berry is a leading consultant and
educator in the application of GIS technology.
He is the principal of BASIS, consultants and software developers in GIS
technology and the author of the “Beyond Mapping” column for GeoWorld magazine for over 17 years.
He has written over 200 papers on the theory and application of map
analysis techniques, and is the author of the popular books Beyond Mapping and Spatial Reasoning, as well as his newly released book, Map Analysis.
Since 1976, he has presented college courses and professional workshops
on geospatial technology to thousands of individuals from a wide variety of
disciplines.
• Ed Parsons, Geospatial Technologist, Google,
Ed Parsons was the first Chief Technology
Officer in the history of Ordnance Survey.
Parsons developed technology strategy, identified strategic technology
partners and market opportunities. He
also directed all Information Systems activities, including IT strategy,
direction, and positioning. Parsons came to the Ordnance Survey from Autodesk,
where he was an EMEA Applications Manager for the GIS Division. Earlier in his career he was a part-time
geospatial technology consultant and full-time Senior Lecturer at
• Elizabeth Cannon, Dean, Schulich
School of Engineering and Professor, Department of Geomatics
Engineering, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
• Peter Batty, ex-CTO, Intergraph,
Peter Batty is recognized as a technical
leader in the geospatial industry. Batty
has worked in the geospatial industry for 20 years and has served as CTO for
two leading companies in the industry, Intergraph and Smallworld
(now part of GE Energy), as well as a being a founder and CTO of a leading-edge
startup, Ten Sails (now Ubisense). He has successfully led a number of major
spatial software development projects.
He has been a member of the GeoWorld magazine
Editorial Advisory Board since 1996, has spoken at many conferences around the
world, and has received a record seven speaker awards from GITA.
___________________________
(Click here for a .pdf
version) The
following is a synopsis of Dr.
Geospatial Web
Consumer-oriented geospatial Web tools, such as Google Maps and Earth and
Microsoft Virtual Earth, have taken the industry by storm over the past
year. We see that geospatial capability
has become a primary battleground for search.
Where will this flurry of activity lead the geospatial technology
industry vendors and practitioners?
The Google Earth (GE) and Virtual Earth (VE)
competition is less with technology as it is with “business models.” The battle ground for Internet search has
radically different strategies— GE is looking for “eyeballs” (increase
visitation) while VE is focusing on integration with Office products to
increase software sales.
Both GE and VE are representative
of the visualization “Killer Ap” of 2007, meaning a GIS application that is
significant and adopted by the masses.
An earlier killer ap was MapQuest’s maps and
driving directions, that now is a field of many including Yahoo Maps, MapPoint
and Google Maps (aside: GM happens to have the most hits of any webpage
on the Internet).
During the heady Dot Com days, MapQuest
that started in a garage was sold for 1.2 billion dollars …a figure that
captured my attention, so as a class assignment we attempted to determine its
significance with respect to the “greater” GIS industry. We roughly estimated the value of publicly
traded GIS companies (e.g., MapInfo), pro-rated the GIS activities of
multi-tiered companies (e.g., Intergraph) and estimated the worth based on
market share for privately held companies (e.g., ESRI). While a bit of guesstimating was involved, as
hard as we tried, we couldn’t get the total worth of the entire GIS industry to
reach even 1.0 billion dollars.
My point is that one killer GIS application, that only
involves a small subset of the discipline’s capabilities and data, can catapult
the industry based on a wholesale “new way” of doing business with maps. While automation of current business
practices can make strides in efficiency and cost-savings, it is the innovative
application of GIS that leaps forward and has the masses re-thinking the value
of geospatial data/information.
Visualization
New 3-D collection hardware and software make 3-D data collection easier
and less expensive. 3-D data viewing in Geographic Exploration Systems is
fueling some interest, but so too are the parallel interests of architectural
design, military planners and online gaming platforms. What are the implications of this development
and what kind of advancements can we expect in how we are able to visualize and
interact with our data?
Visualization has had a huge impact on geospatial
technology …particularly in advancing acceptance and adoption by mass consumer
markets. The gee-wiz/wow factor of 3D is
a large part of the current usage/interest.
Maps by their very nature are abstractions and the movement from
traditional 2D representations using colors and symbols to interactive 3D
terrains with draped aerial images as background lessens the abstraction and is
very powerful in creating a sense of place.
However visualization isn’t the sole domain for 3D
environments and 3D in a visualization context is radically different from an
analytical context. A case in point is
But there is a much bigger picture—interest and use
of terrain analysis will spur the movement from current 2D “coincidence”
dominated map analysis (map layers) toward true three-dimensional “flows” in
geographic space… now that’s a revolution in our 8,000 year old mapping
paradigm.
Geospatial for Infrastructure
There is increasing pressure on those that create and maintain
infrastructure to increase efficiency.
The concepts and tools for Building Information Management (BIM) are
maturing. Through the work of the Open
Geospatial Consortium, standards to enable greater integration between CAD, BIM
and GIS are being worked out. What is
the future of GIS for infrastructure?
CAD (Computer Aided Design) and BIM (Building
Information Modeling) provide detailed information on spatial objects
and their linkages. Imagine a
cut-away drawing of an engine …CAD (and BIM for buildings in an analogous
manner) keeps track of each bolt and washer and what assembly they are screwed
into— object-oriented drawings with extended information like “that screw goes
on the left side and holds the water pump to the block (object relationships)
and costs 39 cents (object attributes).”
GIS, on the other hand, provides information on geographic
context …once the engine is assembled with the car, GIS/GPS can track where
the car goes—it places objects in geographic space.
What GIS can learn from CAD & BIM is that
object relationships need to be part of our simple descriptive attribute
tables. For example, a road line segment
might be identified as a bridge and linked to the electric conduit, gas and
water pipelines sharing the structure (spatial linkages). In another context, a property line might
coincide with a road segment …a spatial linkage would automatically adjust if
one of the feature’s alignment was updated.
What CAD & BIM can learn from GIS is that
real world positioning of objects is critical for assessing spatial
relationships and extended geographic contexts.
For example, “off-line” analysis
of integrity/risk/impact assessment for pipeline infrastructure …it’s not
enough to know where, what and linkages for the structure itself, but many
critical decisions need information on how the feature relates to its
surroundings.
The bottom line is that the line between CAD/BIM and
GIS is blurring and expect future software to meld the two spatial mindsets.
Analysis
Large global problems such as our energy demands and climate change
require a greater breadth of analysis tools to make the most of the detailed
global data that we’ve collected. Adding
the dimension of time to such analysis holds the promise to unlock a much
richer understanding of the interconnectedness of global systems. What’s the current state of geospatial
analysis and what types of functionality can be added for greater global awareness?
The bulk of the current state of geospatial analysis
focuses on “static coincidence modeling”
using a stack of geo-registered map layers.
But the frontier of GIS research is shifting focus to “dynamic flows modeling” that tracks
movement over space and time in three-dimensional geographic space.
The impact of this evolution will be huge and shake
the very core of GIS—the Cartesian coordinate system itself (a spatial
referencing concept introduced by mathematician Rene Descartes 400 years
ago).
The current 2D square for geographic referencing is
fine for “static coincidence” analysis over relatively small land areas, but
woefully lacking for “dynamic 3D flows.”
It is likely that Descartes’ 2D squares will be replaced by hexagons
(like the patches forming a soccer ball) that better represent our curved
earth’s surface …and the 3D cubes replaced by nesting polyhedrals
for a consistent and seamless representation of three-dimensional geographic
space. This change in referencing
extends the current six-sides of a cube for flow modeling to the twelve-sides (facets)
of a polyhedral—radically changing our algorithms as well as our historical
perspective of mapping.
The new geo-referencing framework provides the
needed foothold for solving complex spatial problems, such as intercepting a
nuclear missile using supersonic evasive maneuvers or tracking the air, surface
and groundwater flows and concentrations of a toxic release. While the advanced map analysis applications
coming our way aren’t the bread and butter of mass applications based on
historical map usage (visualization and geo-query of data layers) they
represent natural extensions of geospatial conceptualization and analysis
…built upon an entirely new set analytic tools, geo-referencing framework and a
more realistic paradigm of geographic space.
Marginalizing geospatial analysis and focusing on
the number of website hits today misses the true future of GIS. It’s akin to the questioning the idea several
centuries ago of sailing West to get to the East (
Keep in mind what Socrates almost said “…the
unanalyzed map is not worth keeping” (actually
the quote is "…the
unexamined life is not worth living…" from Plato’s Allegory of the Cave in Book VII of the Republic.)
GIS is increasingly being integrated with other large-scale enterprise
systems through enhanced relational database management systems, middleware and
database amalgamation software. How will GIS
practitioners be affected by broader enterprise adoption and IT integration?
GIS used to be “down the hall and to the
right”—isolated from the rest of IT and only called upon when a map was needed
for the boardroom wall. This was the
result of our paper map legacy of mapping and inventorying physical assets,
conditions and characteristics primarily supporting field operations.
So what’s different now? Knowing where is what (graphical inventories)
is valuable data but not inherently information for decision-making
… “can’t see the forest for the trees.”
Broader adoption of geospatial technology hinges on processing
techniques that weeds through and translates the tsunami of spatial data for
useful information within a problem context.
The basis of the integration isn’t so much “mash-ups” that are graphical
regurgitations of otherwise non-spatial databases (e.g., address geo-coding)
but a fully integrated spatial bade interacting with all components of IT.
What
GIS practitioners need to realize is that raw mapped data
has to be refined into useful information within the context of a decision. For example, the Big Guy in the Boardroom
doesn’t want a Forest Parcel map as much as a Principle Net Worth map of the
forest holdings that changes as different discount rates and mill requirements
are simulated.
What
IT folks need to realize is that location (X,Y,Z
position) is a universal key for organizing and accessing information as robust
as the traditional key of date/time. Geospatial
data is a powerful new way to organize, access and
analyze database records.
State of
Consumer-oriented Web mapping tools seem to
add a new functionality every month.
This pace is difficult to match on the geospatial platform tool
side. What’s the current state of
geospatial technology innovation, and where are the frontiers with the greatest
promise?
What I find interesting is that current geospatial
innovation is being driven more and more by users. In the early years of GIS one would dream up
a new spatial widget, code it, and then attempt to explain to people how they
might use it …sounds like the proverbial “cart in front of the horse.”
However, “user-driven innovation” is in part an
oxymoron, as innovation (a creation (a new device or process) resulting from
study and experimentation, Dictionary.com) is usually thought of as
canonic advancements leading technology and not market-driven solutions
following demand. At the moment, the
over 500 billion dollar advertising market with a rapidly growing share in
digital media is dominating attention and competition for eyeballs is directing
innovation.
User-driven GIS innovation will become more and more
schizophrenic with a growing gap between the two user communities…
“Analysis”
…impact measured by conceptual/application changes
(models)
|--
Experienced/Expert à Platform Tools
Users ------------| <widening gap>
|--
General user/Masses à Web Postings
“Visualization” …impact measured by eyeballs/hits to websites (interpretation)
Another interesting point is that “radical”
innovation often comes from fields with minimal or no paper map legacy, such as
agriculture and retail sales, because these fields do not have pre-conceived
mapping applications that constrain spatial reasoning and innovation.
In the case of Precision
Agriculture, geospatial technology (GIS/RS/GPS) is coupled with robotics
for “on-the-fly” data collection and prescription application as tractors move
throughout a field. In Geo-business, when you swipe your credit
card an analytic process knows what you bought and where you live/work and can
combine this information with lifestyle and demographic data through spatial
data mining to derive “propensity to buy” maps for various products throughout
a market area. In both cases, mapping
and map analysis was non-existent a dozen years ago but millions of acres and billions of
transactions are now part of the geospatial “stone soup” mix.
Who is GIS
Is the educational system turning out the right mix of skills to respond
to industry's needs? Is there enough depth
(e.g., basic skills like computer programming, stats, etc.) and breadth
(understanding of applications)?
Wow!!! …a Socratic question like “what is beauty,”
what is justice,” and “what course of life is best.” Whoa, question like “Who is GIS” ought to be
debated all night with free-flowing casks of wine.
In a large sense, “who we are” is a reflection of
our professional and educational experiences.
For the educational component, it can be divided into two groups—
“Theory/Concepts”
…of the computer and mapped data (GIS experts)
|-- Education à programmers, GIS developers,
system managers, data providers
“Who We Are” --|
|-- Vocation à GIS specialists, general
users, masses
“Skills/Practice” …of the application and access (Domain experts)
The bottom line is that one academic shoe (program)
does not fit all under the ever enlarging GIS tent. Historically, GIS was thought to be “owned”
by Geography but, like statistics, the applied disciplines are claiming their own
GIS turf on campuses and GIS courses in <fill-in the blank> (e.g., natural resources, agriculture,
business, epidemiology, engineering, etc.) are increasingly prevalent on
campuses.
Also, early on GIS was thought to be the domain of
computer science, but with increasing computer literacy and access on campuses
this aspect is diminishing. For example,
at the University of Denver we are moving into our eighth year of requiring
students to have a notebook computer and the entire campus has wired or wireless
access—a very computer savvy student body.
Effective GIS solutions need folks that know the
right questions (Breadth of the applications) and know the right tools
(Depth of the GIS procedures). This
combination is rarely embedded in a single individual and best addressed within
a team environment. What seems to be
missing from many GIS academic programs is team-based problem-solving
and experience in clear/concise communication of spatial solutions.
________________________
1Joseph K. Berry is a leading consultant and educator in the application of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) technology. He is the Principal of BASIS, consultants and software developers in GIS and the author of the “Beyond Mapping” column for GeoWorld magazine. He has written over two hundred papers on the theory and application of map analysis, and is the author of the popular books Beyond Mapping, Spatial Reasoning and recently Map Analysis. Since 1976, he has presented college courses and professional workshops on GIS to thousands of individuals from a wide variety of disciplines. Dr. Berry conducted basic research and taught courses in GIS for twelve years at Yale University's Graduate School of Forestry and Environmental Studies, and is currently a Special Faculty member at Colorado State University and the W. M. Keck Visiting Scholar in Geosciences at the University of Denver. He holds a B.S. degree in forestry, an M.B.A. in business management and a Ph.D. emphasizing remote sensing and land use planning.