Geospatial Industry Outlook 2.0, Opening Panel Remarks at GeoTec 2008
Joseph K. Berry
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 2008 GeoTec Conference, Ottawa,
Ontario, Canada, June 3-5; click here for .pdf
version)
Moderator:
Panelists: 
Xavier Lopez, Director of Spatial Technologies,
Oracle Corporation — David Linen, President, DSI Consulting — Kenneth
Clay, Tele Atlas Corporation —
___________________________
(Click here for a
.pdf version) The
following is a synopsis of Dr.
QUESTIONS
EXPECTED TO BE ADDRESSED IN THE FIRST HOUR…
1. The
world appears to be settling into an “uncertain” economic climate, with most
indicators appearing negative. What kind of impact do you think this will have
on the geospatial industry? Will our industry “cool down,” or does it have the
potential to rise above the uncertainty around it? Also, does the geospatial
industry have the ability to help economies recover (i.e., can it be used to
limit fuel consumption/prices, can location technologies make businesses more
efficient, etc.)?
My
maverick vote is that there will be a “cool-down” …maybe even a melt-down for
some portions of the Geotechnology industry because new technological
advancements tend to be capital investments that compete with operational budgets
and involve high $/time/restructuring/training costs before a Return on
Investment is achieved. Good economic
times fuel these advancements; bad economic times are a wet blanket. The low-hanging fruit of automating existing
organizational functions already has been accomplished for most “natural”
industries and applications. It is
difficult to muster support for implementing new and unfamiliar initiatives in
times of uncertainty—“circle the cost control wagons” is the normal reaction.
Could
Geotechnology help economies recover? …an emphatic YES BUT only for
organizations with capabilities in-place as investment skittishness trumps new
initiatives. Most potential savings and
possible new revenue streams from technological advancements are viewed with skeptical
eyes as uncertain and/or long-term bets.
New ways of doing things are easily delayed for better economic times
and cash flows.
However,
there are “killer apps” exceptions, such as MapQuest in the late 90’s and
Zillow more recently, that completely change the playing field and how folks
gott driving directions and real estate estimates. A “killer app” is hard to keep under wraps
but normal re-tooling of existing business processes can’t poke its head above
a wet blanket economy and a skittish senior management mindset.
2. One of
our panelists, David Linden, has proposed that the geospatial industry is now
entering its “second generation,” as many of the original "players"
have retired, and there are many new "players" that really have no idea
of the industry's history or roots. Do you agree with this statement? And, if
so, does this help or hurt the industry? And where do you see more innovation
coming from, the remaining established geospatial companies or the new breed?
The
new wave of vendors and practitioners have made Geotechnology “a mile wide and
an inch deep” through a very utilitarian view of the technology. The “Technology Adoption Curve” from the
popular book Crossing the Chasm seems
to be at play. Zealots and Innovators of
the 60’s and 70’s and the Early Adopter’s
of the 80s tended to be GIS’ers first, and applied disciplinarians second—there
was an excitement for an emerging technology and comradery among a fairly small
set of actors coalescing around an unfolding common vision.
The
90’s saw the Respected Few and Deliberate Majority joint the ranks as
GIS became a more mainstream technology.
Today in the 2000’s, many GIS applications are down to the Laggards who reluctantly join out of
fear of being left behind—catapulting Geotechnology from the friendly few and
mainstream to a mass-market mentality.
This tends to “pull” the technology toward what the market thinks it
should do instead of leaders “pushing” the technology to what it can do
…more direction from the board room than from the research wing. This situation that isn’t all bad as it tends
to maximize utility and stability, but it does stifle out-of-the-box thinking a
bit.
Although
our history/roots enriches (and sometimes embellishes) the technology and also
keeps us from repeating old errors, new perspectives are what advances it—and
in turn becomes new history as the cycle proceeds.
Innovation
can come from either the Established or New Breed camps but both need vision
and a grasp of new techniques as the catalyst.
The Established camp has a good hold on a broad vision (as well as
considerable scar tissue experience), but a murky understanding of new
techniques can cloud the way to get there.
The New Breed has a good hold on new techniques but can lack the holistic
perspective that results from years of experience. More importantly, they lack the
“power-hitting” position that allows them to steer the ship.
A
symbiotic relationship between the Established and New Breed camps is the ideal
seedbed for innovation. The technical
life span for most individuals is 10-15 years before they get kicked-up to
management (or kicked-out on the street).
The career path from technician to power-hitter can be about the same
duration. If the cycles mesh and are
in-phase and collaborative, a killer innovative team is born; if they don’t,
discord and corporate demise likely await.
3. 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?
3-D
collection hard/software is most often thought of as Lidar digit terrain
surfaces …X,Y,Z coordinates in geographic space. This is a very exciting field for its high
precision and broad coverage that had to wait for storage, processing and
display capabilities to catch up with the sensors. Lidar has been around since the 70’s when I
was a shave-tail remote sensing student (the Geotechnology pre-Paleolithic
period) but had to tread water in the research arena until the operational
computing environment grew up.
However,
what I think will be the lasting legacy of the laser-focused terrain
application (pun intended) is its impact on how we conceptualize mapped
data—from discrete map features composed of points, lines and polygons,
to continuous map surfaces composed of grid cells.
The
paradigm-shift from X,Y discrete to X,Y,Z continuous forms of mapped data sets
the stage for tremendous advancements in both capabilities and
applications. For example, think of a
continuous product sales surface for a city replacing a complex pattern of
jigsaw puzzle pieces (polygons) indicating just three discrete levels of sales
with the boundaries are defined by subjective thematic ranges (Low, Medium and
High). Significantly more information
about the spatial variation is retained in the continuous surface through the
highly resolved analysis frame to position the data (X,Y) and a continuous
range numbers with decimals (Z) instead of just a few broad categories.
This
grid-based expression for mapped data with X,Y indicating placement (Where) and
Z indicating characteristic (What) is often referred to as 2.5-D; “official”
3-D data requires that all three axes are geographic coordinates. However, if your mind will allow without exploding,
imagine the X,Y,Z coordinates defining a continuous set of cubes floating
everywhere in geographic space (at, above and below the Earth’s surface) to
identify position in 3-D geographic space and a fourth value to indicate the
characteristic/attribute occurring within each cube …3.5-D space.
Because
of the alignment limitations of the squares and cubes used in Cartesian
geometry, tomorrow’s representation of continuous space likely will use regular
hexagon and dodecahedral (12-sided volume) shapes as their geometry “nests”
without gaps in representing our curved earth (2D circle; 3D ball). How about we call this new coordinate system
“Berry-ball space?” …I am sure Descartes won’t mind. What is important is that the 3-D
continuous surface and volume features are a direct extension
of the 2-D discrete point, line and polygon features used in traditional mapping. This will be a revolutionary step in the
evolution of Geotechnology.
EXTRA QUESTIONS…
4. Spatial data are being created at astounding
rates, but is there enough spatial analysis going on? Is the geospatial data
being put to good use to provide decision support and business intelligence? Is
spatial analysis adequately addressed by today’s practitioners to make the most
of the time and effort that goes into data creation and data maintenance?
Geotechnology
is in its fourth decade—70s Computer Mapping; 80s Spatial Data Mining;
90s Map Analysis and Modeling …and 00s Multimedia Mapping which has
our current focus on the Internet and Display (e.g., data portals, Google and
Virtual Earths). It seems we have come
full circle with the visualization/display emphasis a modern echo of computer
mapping’s original focus ...70s emphasis but using modern computer expressions.
While
never enough (my view), there is a lot of spatial analysis going on …but
proportionally there is a lot more basic mapping going on. This mapping for and by the masses has
considerable WOW-factor appeal and is capturing most of the attention. Heck, zooming-in on some cool static maps
draped on a 3-D terrain surface with a high-resolution satellite image as a
backdrop …what’s not to like? The technological
“pieces” for the feat, however, have been around for years; just not in a
comprehensive, universally accessible, easy-to-use, and quite frankly “sexy”
package.
Basic mapping has been telling us “Where is What” for
thousands of years, but spatial analysis extends geographic inventories to “Why
and So What” that supports decision-making by investigating spatial
patterns and relationships. For example,
you can hang a bunch of maps of crop yield and soil nutrient levels of a
farmer’s field on the wall (or slam them into Google Earth for that matter) but
the farmer hasn’t the analytical capacity to translate the “visceral viewing”
into an on-the-fly variable rate map that continuously adjusts the application
rate of fertilizer throughout a field.
Similarly, a retail marketer can’t visually translate the detailed
patterns and relationships in a bunch of side-by-side sales maps into a
targeted bulk mailing. Nor can a
pipeline routing team effectively site a pipeline by simply looking at a 3-D
terrain display—the visualization leap from maps to spatially directed actions
rarely crosses the decision-making chasm; there is just way too much detail and
complex patterns/relationships to absorb like a stroll by a Monet painting in
the Louver.
There is a huge disconnect between today’s practitioners and spatial
analysis. We are in our second round of
a massive map-down that, like a black hole, is sapping most practitioners’
energy …the first round was in the 80s converting paper maps to digital
maps. Today, the map-down is converting
our spatial data bases from corporate computers to Internet portals.
5. Geospatial data rights is an issue that’s receiving much
attention lately, particularly with government-created data. Do governmental
organizations “own” their data, or should they be considered completely “public
access?” Should any government agency be allowed to sell its data at more than
the cost of production? Are there any exceptions? Also, should governments be
able to “classify” any data that they see fit (for security or other reasons),
or are “public data” truly public and shouldn’t be withheld?
Governments don’t “own” the data; the public that bought and paid for
its generation are the owners. However,
this doesn’t necessarily translate into “free public access” as simply a
by-product of the process. If through
legislative means (not administrative edit), the “public owners” deem it in the
collective best interest to cash-in on the value-added component of commercial
use, so be it. However, there is ample
evidence that freely distributed data has tremendous social value and can serve
as a huge economic stimulus, as well as support sound decisions in the private,
public, academic and non-profit sectors.
The “small change” generated by sales of the data is hardly worth it,
compared to the impediments it poses to national advancement.
Cost recovery, at first glance, seems an equitable compromise pricing
of the data. A higher price derives
profit that sort flies in the face of a public good and blurs the line between
public and private sectors. Pricing
mapped data below cost moves it from a cost-accounting perspective to an
investment instrument. Governments
invest in many arenas from vaccines to bolster public health to national parks
to enhance enjoyment and understanding of the natural world. Underwriting mapped data seems an ideal
mechanism for advancing the collective good with high returns on investment in
both economic and social terms …a “no-brainer” from my perspective and seems to
be the
Sensitive data, on the other hand, needs to be safe-guarded …the rub is
“who” determines what is sensitive. An
administrative “data gatekeeper” tends to clamp-down on access, in part, to
bolster their important position and minimize hassle. In the “U.S. Litigation Society” the courts
are the ultimate arbitrators—sue to get what you want (or don’t want) to be
distributed. For example, Madonna sued
the State of
EXTRA, EXTRA QUESTIONS IF AUDIENCE DISCUSSION LAGS…
6. 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?
The
cross-fertilization between CAD and GIS has been recognized since the inception
of computer drafting and mapping in the 70s.
However, the pending marriage is still in the “stilted courtship” phase
because of the perceived “near irreconcilable differences” in spatial
interpretation and implementation …engineers and geographers rarely cross paths
on campus, little alone date and marry.
GIS can greatly benefit from the “object-oriented-ness” of CAD;
likewise, CAD can greatly benefit from the “down-to-earth-ness” of
GIS. The marriage seems made in heaven,
but the legacy mindsets can be worlds apart (read family-feud as in Romeo and
Juliet). It just might that the marriage
counseling of the greater Information Systems discipline in the form of OGIS
might be the needed arbitrator …stay tuned because we ain’t quite there yet.
7. State
of
Innovation
is rapidly shifting from “flagship” systems and established GIS vendors to 1)
large IS firms for commodity applications and 2) to relatively small
“developers” providing laser-focused custom solutions for well defined specific
industry and individual organization applications ...both are capitalizing on
web-based services as the mechanism. An
interesting spin to both is a growing set of Open Source solutions that
capitalize on the “Wiki-mania” approach to systems development. In this scenario, GIS tools are hung out on
the web for free (or relatively low cost) and the cyber-swarm nurtures it. The applications of system can vary from
basic mapping to fully-functioning targeted apps that require considerable
spatial understanding; these solutions can be freely distributed or
commercially restricted.
My
advise to the best of the best grad students is that “Solution Developers” will
be tomorrow’s leaders of Geotechnology.
There will always be a place for “GIS Specialists” in nurturing the ever
expanding Geotechnology bubble …read job security. However those who translate current needs and
future capabilities that the client didn’t even know about is at the cutting
edge.
8. 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?
GeoExploration
tools like Goggle and Virtual Earths primarily are vying for eyeballs. Both are like remora attached to a shark, as
they feed off the “advertising clicks” that follow one’s virtual tour of the
globe. However, VE extends the business
model to fully integrate the visualization tool into Microsoft’s Office
suite. This added boost beyond just
eyeball-locking software brings VE closer to GIS-like utility …beyond mapping
per se.
While
3-D visualization has captured the world’s attention, it’s the big-hitters in
database technology that will determine Geotechnology’s future. As Oracle, Sybase and other DB vendors
swallow GIS functionality (and possibly whole GIS vendors) the playing field
will most certainly change …but for the better?
I am not sure. But for the
current array of vendors and practitioners it will be different—that’s for
certain.
9. Legal and Ethical Issues — Jerome Dobson with Kansas University notes
that the same geospatial technology that has so many beneficial uses also has
the potential to create a highly sophisticated form of "geoslavery,"
that can be used not only to spy on people but to control them as well. Is this
threat real or imagined and will the perception of geoslavery significantly alter
the development and implementation of Geotechnology.
With
any technological advancement there comes a potential downside. The threat of “geoslavery” is real but
greatly exaggerated and, for the most part, offset by the “cyber-liberation”
brought on by shedding the paper map and out-dated magnetic compass. While the thought that “great-honking
computers” will know everything that we do, what we buy and where we go
affronts our private space psyche and smacks of Orwellian control, the reality
is much different. In modern society
spying and control occurs without geo-referencing all the time. Your shopping basket is scanned to
automatically total the bill, keep inventory, help determine in-store specials
and out-of-store marketing. If you use a
preferred customer card “they” know who you are and, yes, where you live. But that’s a far step from a knock on your
door and confrontation over purchasing a sleazy brown-bag novel …it hasn’t
happened yet, and Orwell’s book spoke of 1984.