Land Administration: Australia and France - Case Study Example

Land Administration: Australia and France Name Institution Name Date Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 Introduction/Background 3 Justification of the Selected Evaluation Criteria 4 Evaluation Framework and its Attributes 4 Compare and Contrast of Country Systems 5 Case Study Australia: Evaluation of the System 5 Policy level aspects 5 Management level Aspects 6 Operational Level aspects 8 External Factors Aspects 8 Review Process Aspects 9 Case Study France: Evaluation of the System 9 Policy level aspects 9 Management level Aspects 10 Operational Level aspects 11 External Factors Aspects 12 Review Process Aspects 12 Conclusion 13 References 14 Introduction/Background Spatial Data Infrastructure is regarded as a consistent means for sharing geographic data across all its users in order to produce savings for collecting and using data together with enhancing decision making process. Spatial Data Infrastructure (SDI) are the technologies, policies, and people essential for promoting sharing of geographical data across all government levels, the non-profit and private sectors, and the larger academic community (Vandenbroucke and Biliouris, 2010). The main goal for SDI is to significantly reduce data duplication across government agencies, improve data quality, and more importantly, cut on costs related to geographic information, make geographic data accessible to the larger public, elevate the benefits associated with using the available data, and establish partnerships (Steudler 2004). National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) is defined as the policies, technology, standards, criteria, and people necessary to promote the sharing of geospatial data across all government levels, private and non-private sectors, and the academia. NSDI provides a framework that defines practices and relationships among data users and producers in order to enhance data use and sharing. Similarly, NSDI is the set of actions together with new means of accessing, using, and sharing geographic data which allows for comprehensive data analysis in order to help decision makers to take the best course of action. The SDI task is to support the Core Mapping and Core Information Services with regard to the dissemination of products and services to users. This paper compares and contrasts SDIs in Australia and France. In this regard, the Steudler’s Land Administration Systems Evaluation Framework will in the evaluation of the SDIs in the two countries. Justification of the Selected Evaluation Criteria The Steudler’s Land Administration Systems Evaluation Framework has been chosen for this task due to the fact that it provides specific evaluation area thus providing clear and well-defined criteria for evaluation of land administration systems in the two countries (Steudler 2004). For instance, Steudler’s Land Administration Systems Evaluation Framework has five specific evaluation areas with distinct stakeholders well identified with each tasked with specific duties within the land administration system (Gensel, Josselin and Vandenbroucke, 2012). Evaluation Framework and its Attributes The Steudler’s Land Administration Systems Evaluation Framework has five areas of evaluation which include: Policy Level: the government and the parliament are the main stakeholders and they are responsible for defining any government task and setting the objectives of the land administration system (Gensel, Josselin and Vandenbroucke, 2012). Management Level: the administration is the main stakeholder here and is mandated by the government to carry out specific land administration duties. It is here that strategic targets are developed including the definition of organizational and institutional structures (Vandenbroucke and Biliouris, 2010). Operational Level: the operational units are the stakeholders here and they are tasked with carrying out daily land administration duties (Steudler 2004). External Factors: the stakeholders for this attribute are neither involved in the management nor operational activities of the land administration system, however, their products and services have massive impact on the functionality of the land administration system (Steudler 2004). These factors may include the available technology, capacity building aspects, academia, and human resource. Review Process: all those interested in the overall review the performance of the land administrative system like an independent boards are the stakeholders. They are involved with the regular review of strategic targets and objectives, user and client satisfaction, and how the entire system tackles the systems vision together with its integration. Compare and Contrast of Country Systems Case Study Australia: Evaluation of the System Policy level aspects Land policy aspects and objectives: Australia is a federation and thus operates a separate cadastre within each state and territory. The Australian land policies were initially established during the settlement of Australia and they are continually being integrated with the land use policies. These policies determine what lands should to be reserved for public use and which land should be released for alienation (Vandenbroucke and Biliouris, 2010). Accordingly, these policies are developed at state government level through planning and implementation by local government. The federal government takes the leading role in dealing with issues across all state boundaries, particularly in the event that environmental sustainability is an issue (Jacoby et al., 2012). There are separate Acts with sale of land, land transfer, planning, valuation, pollution, heritage protection, building, subdivisions, stamp duty, land tax, and mining (Gensel, Josselin and Vandenbroucke, 2012). The land policy is in line with principles of fairness and equity (Harris and Browning 2013). Historical, political and social context: the awareness of the historical background is excellent similar to the social acceptance of the cadastral system (Jacoby et al., 2012). The land administration structures across all states of the country are well adapted to the available administrative and political structures (Nijkamp, Baycan and Girard 2012). There is good governance as well as civic participation. Land tenure and legal aspects: The land tenure arrangements in Australia are well defined and suitable to cultural and social circumstances (Jacoby et al., 2012). The legal aspect of land administration is excellent; there is legal ownership of land, there are restrictions and responsibilities, and there is also registering the rights with to land through surveying methods that are precise (Vandenbroucke and Biliouris, 2010). Financial and economic aspects: the land market determines various aspects of Australia’s land value system. Land valuation here is done by professionals whereby the sale prices estimates and capital worth of the land is done (Jacoby et al., 2012). The land administration system is supportive and suitable circumstances. The funding of cadastral surveying is in-line with the state and federal structures. Environmental sustainability aspects: The federal government has ensured that the country’s land administration system support environmental sustainability. Management level Aspects Strategic aspects: the land management together with its associated instruments such as zoning and development control plans, and conservation plans are justified by externalities and are undertaken in an efficient and transparent manner (Jacoby et al., 2012). The main strategy is to provide land administration information that is reliable, sufficient and accessible at reasonable cost. The land administration strategies are inclined towards digitization of land administration information for ease of access and use by the public and the private sector for efficient and effective decision making. Institutional and organizational aspects: the land administration institutions have clear mandates and operate transparently, cost effectively and sustainably. The roles and responsibilities of all interested agencies are well defined and are followed strongly (Jacoby et al., 2012). This applies to both horizontally i.e. between agencies and horizontally between levels of hierarchy and including the community and private sector involvement (ICSM, 2014). The land administration institutions are cost-effective and reliable in service delivery which is an essential attribute for measuring governance in land administration. Human resource and personnel aspect: Australia is committed to human resource development for land administration. A certain percentage of the country’s budget is dedicated towards developing the personnel; education and training. Cadastral and land administration principles: There is a cadastral and land administration infrastructure that is designed to meet the social, legal, cultural, institutional, economic and administrative goals. There is also adequate protection of land rights, together with massive support for the land market. Operational Level aspects Definition of users, products and services: the definition of land administration is based on four important attributes. The attributes are information on land ownership, information on land value, information on land use and spatial information on land (Jacoby et al., 2012). Aspects affecting the user – the users are supposed to submit their personal details that are feed into the system. Some of the information includes addresses and names, which are important in identification of land and the purpose of the land. Aspects affecting the products and services – the government and federal governments determine the use of the land and also determine the type of technology including supporting mechanisms to fulfill the requirements of consumers (Jacoby et al., 2012). External Factors Aspects Capacity building, education – human resource is crucial and the Australian government including the federal states have formulated and implemented numerous measures that are aimed at improving the services and also the welfare of the employees (Jacoby et al., 2012). The two governments understand the important of capacity building and employee development; therefore, mechanisms exist in which employees are continuously developed. Technological supply – the two governments (central and federal) have invested and continuously update the technology based on the environmental requirements and how the services and products can be improved to fulfill the requirements of consumers and other stakeholders. Professional association aspects – some of the bodies that guide the process include Commonwealth Spatial Data Policy Executive (CSDPE), Commonwealth Spatial Data Management Group (CSDMG), Commonwealth Office of Spatial Data Management (OSDM), and ANZLIC – the spatial information council. Others include Committee for Geographical Names in Australia (CGNA) and Intergovernmental Committee on Surveying and Mapping (ICSM) Review Process Aspects Review process – the governments takes into consideration different views from stakeholders and they integrate the information with the aim of determining whether they are on the right track or not. Moreover, the information from the stakeholders is utilized to determine the direction of the technology. User satisfaction – the different departments collects information periodically and measures are in place whereby complains and satisfaction can be filed. The information collected is utilized in ensuring users are satisfied and corrective mechanisms are introduced in those scenarios whereby users are not satisfied. Vision and reforms – Environmental, social, economic and technological changes forces the Australia governmental agencies to continuously improve its services. The government periodically sets the vision and determines when reforms should be instituted with contribution from different stakeholders. Case Study France: Evaluation of the System Policy level aspects Land policy aspects and objectives: France has well established land administration policies that are constituted in the country’s constitution (Vandenbroucke and Biliouris, 2010). The land registration responsibility in the Land Register and the Cadastre is controlled by the Ministry of Economic Affairs, Finance and Industry (MINEFI) which is charged across the 354 land registry offices and the 315 cadastral offices. Land administration policies in France were first developed during the Napoleonic time. Historical, political and social context: The French cadastral law has been in play since 1807; the 1807 15th Sept, cadastre Act. From this context, French nationals are aware of the land administration laws. The system is exhaustive, permanent, descriptive, and evaluative; the cadastre reflects the civil status of both built and undeveloped property. Land tenure and legal aspects: there is basis of registration which the Registration of Deeds across the country except in Bas Rhin, Haut Rhin, and Moselle where a German type handbook system is used. There is also Object of Recording which is the Deed of transfer, easement, servitude or charge (Vandenbroucke and Biliouris, 2010). Financial and economic aspects: land valuation is basically the responsibility of the Ministry of Economic Affairs through Land Offices. Accordingly, land taxation and property valuation are highly complicated in France. Management level Aspects Strategic aspects: The Land Administration system information is held at the Ministry of Finance that has its own application and networks. In general, cadastral data and land registry data maintenance is decentralized to the land cadastre offices (Jacoby et al., 2012). The system has a strategy that will ensure digitization of all these records across all cadastres. Cadastral maps are to be available in digital vector format (Litwin and Rossa 2011). Institutional and organizational aspects: the system has well developed institutions with defined responsibilities (Jacoby et al., 2012). For instance, the Land Registry Offices, the Cadastral Offices, and Municipalities provide excellent services to the users of the system. Human resource and personnel aspect: the system use government based staff together with private players. In this regard, the system is equally involved in educating and training the land personnel including surveyors, lawyers, valuation officers, and tax managers (Salge, 2013). Cadastral and land administration principles: The current cadastral system is designed to be exhaustive, permanent, descriptive, and evaluative inventory of the landed property and thus reflects the civil status of built and un-built property (Steudler and Williamson 2002). The main objectives for the cadastral system are fiscal, legal and property related, and technical. The cadastre in this case represents agents, property tax canters, regional data processing centers, photographic workshops, Cadastre National Documentation Services, and Ecole Nationale du Cadastre (Vandenbroucke and Biliouris, 2010). Operational Level aspects Aspects affecting users: the system has been developed to help user have access to the cadastral documents whereby anybody can consult these information as well as obtain copies of the same at the cadastre offices. Similarly, a copy of cadastral registers is also available at town halls (Vandenbroucke and Biliouris, 2010). More important, users have access to mass information on microfiches as well as magnetic disks. Aspects affecting the products and services: the country has revised its land administration policy that demands revision of the cadastre that will allow redrawing the renewed cadastral plans that had initially become hard to use (Salge, 2013). This is particularly due to the fact that the country has undergone large-scale urban development (Jacoby et al., 2012). The new plans are based on photogrammetric surveys with acknowledgement of limits in the presence of owners. External Factors Aspects Capacity building, education – the SDI is still new in France and it is continuously been developed (Salge, 2013). It means the government and other stakeholders provide the employees with appropriate resources including intellectual support to ensure the technology operates effectively. Technological supply – France is a developed country and understands the importance of technology in fulfilling land policy and land related requirements. The government with the help of an array of stakeholders reviews available technology and benchmark these resources with other regions to ensure the best resources are acquired (Vandenbroucke and Biliouris, 2010). Professional association aspects – in the France SDI, the following are important stakeholders: the National Geographic Institute, BRGM, Ministry of Environment, Energy and Sustainable Development, CNIG, and local authorities. Review Process Aspects Review process – the French government and local authority benchmark and determines functions to be accomplished within a specified period (Salge, 2013). The stakeholders utilizes these predetermined strategies is reviewing whether they have achieved what was planned and whether the process was followed conclusively (Steudler and Williamson 2013). User satisfaction – users have mechanisms and means to report any issue associated with land (Salge, 2013). In those circumstances that they are not satisfied, they have mechanisms to report their concerns; for example, any complain should be addressed to a superior person within the concerned department. Vision and reforms – The French government continues to benchmark and collect information from different stakeholders, which is issued to formulate strategies and set the vision for SDI (Jacoby et al., 2012). In addition, the information obtained is used to formulate areas reforms are required (Salge, 2013). Conclusion In conclusion, Spatial Data Infrastructure is important in addressing and managing land. It creates a single point where information on land can be centralized and easily accessible across different regions. Australia and France understand the importance of SDI and have instituted numerous strategies to ensure the strategy and approaches become successful. In reviewing the accomplishments of Australia and France, Steudler’s Land Administration Systems Evaluation Framework is used to understand how each country has approached Spatial Data Infrastructure. References Gensel, J, Josselin, D and Vandenbroucke, D 2012, Bridging the Geographic Information Sciences: International AGILE'2012 Conference, Avignon (France), April, 24-27, 2012, Paris, Springer Science & Business Media Harris, R and Browning, R 2013, Global Monitoring: The Challenges of Access to Data, London, Routledge Publishers ICSM. 2014, Australian Spatial Data Infrastructure (ASDI). Retrieved on 14th August 2014 from http://www.icsm.gov.au/asdi/ Jacoby, S, Smith, J, Ting, L and Williamson, I 2012, Developing a Common Spatial Data Infrastructure between state and Local Government – An Australian case study. Retrieved on 14th August 2014 from http://csdila.ie.unimelb.edu.au/publication/journals/Developing_Common_SDI_Bw_state_andLocalGov.pdf Litwin, L and Rossa, M 2011, Geoinformation Metadata in INSPIRE and SDI: Understanding, London, Springer Science & Business Media. Nijkamp, P, Baycan, T and Girard, L 2012, Sustainable City and Creativity: Promoting Creative Urban Initiatives, New York, Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. Salge, F 2013, Sub-national Spatial Data Infrastructures and COPERNICUS: how the regional level in France could be instrumental to stimulate the use of COPERNICUS land service by local governments. Retrieved on 15th August 2014 from http://www.hunagi.hu/G/pub/EU/FS.pdf Steudler, D 2004, A Framework for the Evaluation of Land Administration Systems. Department of Geomatics: The University of Melbourne. Retrieved on 14th August 2014 from http://www.csdila.unimelb.edu.au/publication/theses/DanialS_PhD_Thesis.pdf Steudler, D and Williamson, I 2002, A Framework for Benchmarking Land Administration Systems. Retrieved on 14th August 2014 from https://www.fig.net/pub/fig_2002/TS7-1/TS7_1_steudler_williamson.pdf Steudler, D and Williamson, I 2013, Evaluation of national land administration system in Switzerland. Retrieved on 14th August 2014 from http://www.ie.unimelb.edu.au/research/SDI_research/publications/files/Evaluation%20of%20National%20Land%20Admin%20System%20Switzer%28SurvRev04%29.pdf Vandenbroucke, D and Biliouris, D 2010, Spatial Data Infrastructures in France: State of Play 2010. Retrieved on 16th August 2014 from http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/reports/stateofplay2010/rcr09FRv94.pdf Read More