|
The other part of the map
Life is changing…
In a last few decades, life has changed considerably. With the advent of GIS, GPS and Internet, neither the needs of the users nor the atmosphere in which our national mapping organisations used to operate remains the same. Moreover, every year reducing budget from government is also forcing these organisations to think on the lines of fund generation for their own survival. The private sector, even if it is not that organised, is also emerging as a key player. There is a need to think if users need large-scale maps in digital version, what to do with those paper maps which are mostly outdated even if they are excellent and of very high quality? You keep precious data to your heart but even if you want to sell it, are there people to buy it? If maps are made with so much of effort and investment they have to be used. All these clearly indicate on the need to change. And change with a sense of urgency. The issue needs to be addressed at two levels. If policy needs to be changed, there is also a need for the national mapping organisations to reorganise themselves to meet the present day challenges.
…So have to change policies
There are two perceptions regarding the map restriction policy. One is of the Ministry of Defence, which has its own reasons and appre-hensions regarding making available these data in public domain. After WTC attack, the way Government of the USA started withdrawing some of the spatial data from the public domain, this viewpoint has further strengthened. Given the vulnerability of India from terrorists attacks well demonstrated by the Parliament attack on December 13 last year, people who are responsible to defend the country will surely think twice about the implications of any decision, which they take to release spatial data in public domain. On the other hand, there are people who feel that given the present technological development especially with the arrival of high resolution satellite imageries such as IKONOS and QuickBird, GPS and the Internet, these restriction basically do not address the security issues for which they are meant. Moreover, the maps we try to restrict, at times are available outside the country.
We must find a way out? May be on the lines suggested by R Narasimha and S R Shetye in Current Science, Volume 79, No 4, 25 August 2000. They write, “…restricting access to data on the grounds of national security stems from two features of the systems: a) The system either lacks the mechanism for or does not possess confidence in the technical analysis that should lead to decisions to restrict access to data. In this situation playing safe in the face of fear of unanticipated uses of data determines policy at the expense of hard technical analysis and b) The agencies charged with the task of distribution of data have no incentive to encourage them, and restrictions in force seem to serve only to hinder dissemination. They further write, “We urge the government to follow a policy of conditional classification, rather than that of case-to-case clearances that is now the norm; i.e. all data acquired at public expense should be conveniently accessible to the public, except where clearly understood security considerations demand that access be restricted. Any other policy will, we believe, damage the national interest rather than protect it, by discouraging the creative exploitation of the data for scientific, commercial and cultural purposes.”
It is heartening that the Government of India has agreed that a new series of maps on WGS84 datum will be prepared and made available to everyone for unrestricted civilian use. However, some experts have different opinion on this. N K Agarwal writes in GIS@development Nov 2001 issue, “It is not understood if good reasons exist for restricting data in Indian system then why the same reasons do not exist for WGS84? To my mind de-restriction of WGS84 may not be in our interest as it is an accurate system, which will be useful if launching pad and target of intercontinental missile are in WGS84, whereas if the coordinates are in local system, e.g. Everest Spheroid the target may not be reached. We should therefore consider de-restricting maps/data in Indian system for civil use for development whereas data in WGS84 may have some restrictions, and may be used for defence and scientific purpose only.”
…and organisations
Dr P Nag, Surveyor General of India, writes in his article ‘Maponomics: Map products and their commercialisation’ in GIS@development, February 2002, “It has become imperative for the survival and flourishing of mapping organisations that their products should be market viable. These products should be directly linked with economy and its changing facets… Commercialisation is possible in the ways by taking up projects in the respective field of specialisation, outsourcing of a part of the activities, joining hands with industry and universities and offering services in terms of training, consultancy, etc. However, Dr Nag mentions, “Since the policy regarding digital map production and its dissemination is yet to be finalised, the digital products are limited and mostly for official use.” The same concern was echoed by P C Mandal, Director General, Geological Survey of India in an interview with GIS@development May 2002. While responding to a question on how accessible are the GIS prepared maps to its users especially in the private sector, he said, “Regarding the digital products, the department is bounded by Ministry of Defence guidelines.”
No doubt, policies are the issues, which have very serious impacts. Still these can be taken as external factors, which organisations can do very little with especially when issues pertains to defence and security related. However, there is a lot which mapping organisations can do internally. Assuming if there are no major policy issues to confront with, are national mapping organisations of India at present ready to cope up with new scenario and market dynamics? What market and relevance do they have for their products? Has there been any market research regarding that? There is a need to appreciate the shift in their role from passive data generator to active data provider. They also need to look at market needs and reorient them and their products accordingly. Hence, with or without restriction, they can work upon various issues related to their size, structure, state of the art technology infrastructure, training of man power, capacity building, their outputs, relevance of their products, how to reduce financial dependence on the government, etc. In this background, one must appreciate the initiatives taken by the Survey of India recently to reengineer itself to present day needs.
Positive indications
There have been efforts, and they are not in waste. One can recall the workshop on National Geo-spatial Data Infrastructure (NGDI) held in Delhi in February 2001. The workshop can be considered as a landmark development on two counts: one, it was a first public poser of Government of India on NGDI and second, is the release of a discussion document NSDI: Strategy and Action Plan. The discussion document was well received and appreciated during the workshop and held long term prospects in making NGDI a reality. In this context I would quote one presentation in the workshop by Georgiadou, Y. and R. Groot (2001): ‘Advancing the concept of NGDI: Reflections on the bottom line’, “There cannot be, nor will there be, a single organisation responsible for designing and implementing some kind of GDI blue print, especially at the national (NGDI) level. Instead we can imagine almost organic web of partnerships and relationships evolving purposefully within a given jurisdiction. It will sometimes be pushed by technology, sometimes pulled by market requirements. But at some point there will be sufficient inter-connectedness of databases, a level of access to the data and use of the data, as well as the maturing interest of stakeholders, to participate and invest in the partnerships required for a nascent NGDI to be recognised. Having said, this evolution of any GDI concept will most likely to emerge from a combination of “top-down” and “bottom-up” strategies, the specific mix of which will vary significantly from one jurisdiction to another.” It means, if NGDI has to be a success, all the other leading mapping organisations also need to gear up and actively participate in it.
The other part of the map
This year in April, on the occasion of bi-centennial celebration of the Great Arc Dr Murli Manohar Joshi, Union Minister of Human Resource Development, Government of India made some landmark announcements: Survey of India (SoI)plans to revitalise, modernise and re-engineer the institution, SoI intends to offer a wide range of products and services to meet the geo-spatial needs of users and NSDI will be launched by 15th August 2002 (GIS@development, April 2002).
Seems a new era emerging in this country. And if that happens, may our search for other part of the map ends.
| Previous |
|
