The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences. Vol. XXXVII. Part B4. Beijing 2008 
NSDI-SDPD highlights that with such a partnership model 
much benefit is revealed when updating. Since data are updated 
during daily business of organizations, they are updated most 
frequently. Therefore, the users are assured of using up-to-date 
datasets in an SDI environment. In addition, these data 
producers develop most detailed spatial data with high quality 
based on their business requirements. Another benefit of using 
NSDI's datasets lies in the fact that these commonly used 
datasets enable the users to easily share other spatial data with 
other users. 
Dynamic 
Figure 1: Iran SDI General Model (Mansourian and Valadan, 
2008) 
Regarding the coordinating body, the Spatial Planning Council 
(SPC), whose chair is the Vice President (in management and 
planning) and its members are vice ministers (from Iranian 
ministries), is assigned as the supreme decision-making body 
for Iran NSDI. National Center for Spatial Planning (NCSP), in 
Iranian Management and Planning Organization (MPO), is also 
the secretary and coordinator of NSDI in Iran (MPO, 2005). 
3. INTRODUCTION 
Due to the several valuable spatial data activities which had 
been individually conducted by national mapping agencies, 
ministries, and national organizations, NCSP decided to make a 
comprehensive study with respect to spatial data, as the initial 
step for developing Iran NSDI. The study aimed at: 
investigating the experiences of different countries involving in 
development of SDI, assessing current status of Iran from an 
SDI perspective, development of NSDI Strategic Plan for Iran, 
development of NSDI conceptual model for Iran, and 
development of NSDI action plan. 
3.1 Investigating the Experiences of Different Countries 
Involving in Development of SDI 
At this stage, the SDI activities of nine countries were 
investigated and documented. The study included developed 
conceptual models, challenges and problems, past and current 
activities, recommendations for SDI development, SDI 
assessment factors, influencing partnership factors, etc. In 
addition, different concepts, theories and models relevant to 
strategic planning, SDI, GIS, collaboration models, Information 
Communication Technology (ICT) and organizational behavior 
were reviewed. As a result of such a study, different factors 
affecting development of SDI and should be considered for the 
assessment (next stage) were identified. 
3.2 Assessing Current Status of Iran from an SDI 
perspective 
The research continued through assessing 'current status of the 
country with respect to spatial data from an SDI perspective' as 
well as 'current environmental situations that can affect the 
development of NSDI'. 
Thirty ministries and national organizations that were relevant 
to spatial data (producer, value-adder, or user) were assessed 
with respect to spatial data, from an SDI perspective. An 
integrated questionnaire survey, inspection and interview 
approach was adopted for assessing current status. Although the 
questionnaire satisfied all information required for the 
assessment (from different technical, technological, social, 
institutional, political and financial), the inspection and 
interview could provide the authors with better understanding 
of the current situation. To do the assessment, 140 meetings 
(each of which lasted more than half a day) were held with 
different departments of all ministries and national 
organizations that may be the producer, value-adder or user of 
spatial data. Furthermore, user requirement analysis with 
respect to national base spatial datasets was conducted. 
In addition, all laws and approvals that were relevant to creation 
of national base maps, establishment of national databases, ICT 
development, spatial planning, human resource capacity 
building, etc. affecting development of NSDI were gathered and 
studied. Moreover, the experiences, outcomes and structures of 
various councils and committees in the country whose activities 
were similar or relevant to the SDI topic were investigated. 
Current environment of the country was also explored from 
political, economical and cultural perspectives. 
Two fundamental models were adopted as a base for the 
assessment: ‘the basic organizational behavior model’ (Robbins, 
et al., 1994) and ‘status of spatial data with respect to access’ 
(Mansourian, 2004). The basic organizational behavior model 
has the advantage of simplifying an organization by breaking it 
into individual, group and organizational levels, but still related 
to each other. Such breaking, simplifies organizational 
assessment that can be conducted in each level individually but 
still having their relationship. Organizational behavior also 
describes organizational variables with respect to each level of 
an organization which provides an appropriate framework for 
the assessment process in this project. The variables that were 
identified and utilized were: 
• Individual level: motivation, value, skill, skill-to-fit, and 
perception; 
• Group level: regulations, available standards and 
specifications, technology, resources, structure, culture, and 
relationships; and 
• Organizational level: regulations, political situation, 
technology, culture, willingness, resources (particularly 
financial resources), and current relevant activities. 
Regarding ‘status of spatial data with respect to access’ in the 
context of decision-making, user’s required spatial datasets may 
have any of the four statuses including availability, accessibility, 
applicability and usability with regard to access to data as 
below. Availability, accessibility and applicability are data 
functions that are essential to the three functional components 
of decision-making -intelligence/problem formulation, design 
and choice (identified by Simon (1960) and still the basis of 
modem decision process theory and decision science as cited by