Cost-Benefit Considerations in Establishing Interoperability of the Data Component of Spatial Data Infrastructures

The cultural, historical, and economical aspects are fundamental when making spatial data sets available as a component of Spatial Data Infrastructures (SDIs). Besides of technical feasibility the arrangements on interoperability of spatial data sets and services should be based on careful analysis of the related costs and the benefits gained. The task must be carried out with utmost attention, being data the most sensible and costly part of spatial information systems and infrastructures. It is prudent to take appropriate measures throughout the specification process of harmonised data to avoid excessive costs; on the other hand it is necessary to make the benefits visible to improve the acceptance of the necessary measures. This paper proposes the multi-criteria-based Cost-Benefit Considerations instead of the classical Cost-Benefit Analysis for evaluating the impact of the data harmonisation process. Using the example of INSPIRE (Infrastructure for Spatial Information for Environment) it shows how cost-benefit aspects are considered at the different steps of data specification development. We conclude that such methodology yields balanced results in terms of objectives to be reached and the related costs. Introduction The challenges regarding the lack of availability, quality, organisation, accessibility, and sharing of spatial information are common to a large number of entities and activities and are experienced across the various levels of local, regional, national and global decision making. In order to solve these problems it is necessary to take measures of coordination between the users and providers of spatial information. Such coordination is manifested in Spatial Data Infrastructures (SDIs). The Directive 2007/2/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council adopted on 14 March 2007 aims at establishing an Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community (INSPIRE) for environmental policies, and for policies and activities that have an impact on the environment. INSPIRE defines a SDI as a system where metadata, spatial data sets and services, network services and technologies, agreements on sharing, access and use, coordination and monitoring mechanisms are established, operated or made available in an interoperable manner. Amongst these components spatial data has crucial role. In Geographic Information Systems data is considered to be the most resource-consuming part. Data collection can account for 60-80% of the total costs of setting up a system. Consequently, reusing data to be best possible extent is of prime economic interest in every SDI. INSPIRE does not require collection of new data; rather, it focuses on making available the existing ones through interoperability arrangements. Interoperability in INSPIRE means the possibility to combine spatial data and services from different sources across the European Community in a consistent way without involving specific efforts of humans or machines. It is important to note that “interoperability” is understood as providing access to spatial data sets through services, typically via Internet. Interoperability may be achieved either by changing (harmonising) the structure of existing data sets or by transforming them before they are made available as part of the INSPIRE infrastructure. This paper focuses at a less discussed, but rather important aspect of SDIs: how the potential costs and benefits related to data interoperability can be captured and considered during the period of establishing the infrastructure. It outlines a methodology suitable for INSPIRE, which equally considers issues of technology and the methodology offered by economic science. Methodologies for assessing costs and benefits in SDIs For public enterprises, Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) is an instrument for evaluating the feasibility or desirability of a given intervention in markets, which attempts to measure the efficiency of effectiveness of the intervention in achieving a stated public goal relative to the existing situation. The costs and benefits of the intervention are evaluated in terms of the public's willingness to pay for the actions required (benefits) or willingness to pay to avoid them (costs). In order to compare intervention alternatives, including remaining with the status quo situation, the expected costs and benefits are converted in comparable units, usually monetary values. Listing all the costs and benefits of an intervention or big project is quite difficult, which is the case of large infrastructure projects, where it becomes more complex to quantify them. It is usually possible to identify and quantitatively express the costs, but quantifying benefits is much more complex for the following reasons: Benefits are often gained in places other than where the costs occur, e.g. opening up new business or markets or boosting the value of existing ones. In many cases, benefits are not immediate and may accrue in different sectors of the economy not initially targeted by the intervention. Benefits are enjoyed by groups that do not create economic output directly connected to the intervention, e.g. increased security of citizens, improved quality of life, etc. The damage caused by failing to put in place the project or intervention may not be directly visible. It may be simply impossible to assign a monetary value to an expected benefit, for example, what is the value of a human life saved by an improvement in infrastructure or, similarly, the value of general improvement in quality of life for a community due to the intervention. These difficulties strongly manifest themselves in cases of infrastructure investments and interventions for environmental protection. The INSPIRE Directive lays down general rules aimed at the establishment of the Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community for the purpose of improving information availability, dissemination and use to aid in planning, implementing and monitoring environmental policies of the European Community and policies or activities which may have an environmental impact. In preparation of the INSPIRE Directive, an extended impact assessment has been carried out. Concerning the Implementing rules laying down technical arrangements for the interoperability and, where practicable, harmonisation of spatial data sets and services, the Directive requires that “feasibility and cost-benefit considerations shall be taken into account in the development of the implementing rules”. This is the reason why it has been decided to focus on Cost Benefit Considerations (CBC). CBC is akin to accepted Multi Criteria Analysis (MCA) methodologies, which are better suited to include qualitative as well as quantitative aspects in the decision making process regarding major market or organisational interventions. For proper consideration of cost and benefits related to interoperability of spatial services a methodology is needed that instead of trying to convert each cost-benefit aspect in comparable (monetary) units contains statements of where and how cost and benefits are likely to occur and gives recommendations on how to avoid or decrease costs with appropriate decisions and technical measures. Likewise, CBC analysis highlights the possible benefits and how to make them more visible to stakeholders and decision makers at all levels of government. Consequently CBC relating to INSPIRE data specifications development and implementation is not a single analysis task, but rather a chain of prudent and intuitive decisions by experts that are present throughout the specification process. Interoperability of Spatial Data Sets and Services in INSPIRE The technical measures and means necessary to reach the interoperability of spatial data sets and services within INSPIRE will be regulated through an implementing rule that sets legally binding .obligations for the Member States when they provide data belonging to the data themes listed in table 1.