nd 
ed 
ed 
on) 
ce 
/or 
ce 
nt, 
es 
nd 
he 
ity 
lity 
ont 
are 
on 
as 
an 
tic 
SS 
be 
nt 
for 
\at 
Xs 
he 
1S 
for 
he 
5.5 Economical framework: 
Beside the institutional and technical issues considered 
earlier, and in connection with these, justifying the 
development of a Geoinformation Utility is the economic 
component of the process. This is particularly important 
given the extent of the problem space in terms of status and 
number of organizations involved, range and spread of 
potential users, domains susceptible to be affected by its 
use, and geographic zone of influence. 
Decision making is in economic thinking a matter of costs 
and benefits, which assumes that in decision making we are 
guided by the perceived costs and benefits of our actions. 
However, research on the topic reveals that in practice it is 
rather difficult to apply the common technique of Cost- 
Benefit Analysis (CBA) to justify geoinformation projects, 
comparatively to other economic activity areas like industry, 
agriculture, or trading. In addition, the development of a 
Geoinformation Utility induces opportunity cost for the 
society, and association of public or social-oriented 
objectives with commercial objectives. 
A model combining the prediction and aspiration concepts 
for providing an economic shape to the problem of 
developing a Geoinformation Utility has been developed. 
The method is an extension of the CBA that takes into 
account the long-range characteristic of the Geoinformation 
Utility investment and provides, in addition to the content of 
the CBA asset, a way of integrating the eventual post 
horizon growth of the system. A decision model is provided 
using two decision rules based respectively on the present 
worth of the project, taking into account the cash flows 
during the post-horizon time, and the minimum growth rate 
of the return in the post-horizon time [A. Bassolé, 1995]. 
This proposal is made mainly because the problem to solve 
is a long-range investment problem, that in addition is to be 
considered as a public investment, despite the private 
sector involvement. Indeed, the main goal of the Utility is 
not purely commercial; it is also social in the sense that it 
aims at generating in the long run optimal use of 
geoinformation by avoiding redundant data collection 
throughout the country, thus leading to savings in both the 
public and the private sector, and also at reducing 
uncertainty in decision making. Its services, at maturity 
should reflect the character of public utility the same way 
telephone or electricity services do. As such, it is better 
treated as a long-range public investment. 
6. CONCLUSION 
The reported research efforts and implementation of the 
results in countries like Argentina, Burkina Faso and 
Colombia, to name but a few, have demonstrated that there 
is no single solution for the development and maintenance 
of a Geoinformation Utility, will it be at a national, regional 
or local decision making level. However, a generic approach 
to the problem can be considered as shortly outlined 
hereafter. 
Country's related socio-economic constraints are 
deterministic; combined with locally determined information 
needs and requirements (from a business management 
perspective), they permit to determine the Critical Success 
Factors for the development and maintenance of 
639 
Geoinformation Utility in the specific context; the 
challenges and the need for change. A subsequent 
analysis of the existing information supply (based upon 
eg. a S.W.O.T. analysis), of the information 
requirements, and of the Critical Success Factors in 
terms of activities to be undertaken, will lead to the 
definiton of a planning framework, including 
institutional, technical, and economical strategies, and 
the definition of priorities for development. This will in 
turn lead to a workplan for the development of a 
Geoinformation Utility [M. Radwan, 1995]. 
7. REFERENCES 
P.A. Addai, 1995; Selection of an optimum methodology for the 
development and maintenance of a Geoinformation Utility; ITC 
M.Sc. thesis. 
A. Al-Ansari, 1994; Guidelines to establish a National Land 
Information System for Bahrain; ITC M.Sc. thesis. 
M. Bangemann, 1994; Europe and the global information 
society; recommendations to the European Council. 
A. Bassolé, 1995; Towards the development of a National 
Geoinformation Infrastructure in Burkina Faso: the "Réseau 
d'information urbaine" as a strategic starting point; ITC M.Sc. 
thesis. 
Y. Bishr, 1996; A hierarchical spatial canonical data model; 
towards federating heterogeneous GlSs; XVIII ISPRS 
Congress, WG III/IV. 
|.F. El-Sharaky, 1994; The concurrent update for parcel based 
Land Information in distributed environment; ITC M.Sc. thesis. 
E. de J. Espinoza, 1995; Development of a federated database 
system in a distributed environment for environmental decision 
making at different scales; ITC M.Sc. thesis. 
S.Y. Juma, 1994; Incorporating institutional issues in the 
development of a Geographical Information System; ITC M.Sc. 
thesis. 
D. Musiega, 1996; Quality management for a geoinformation 
production organization; ITC M.Sc. thesis (under preparation) 
C.M. Paresi, M.M. Radwan, 1995; Development and 
maintenance of a Geoinformation Utility in a distributed 
environment; an analysis of influencing factors; AFRICAGIS 
1995, Abidjan, Ivory Coast. 
M.M. Radwan, 1995; Information System Design; Internal report 
on a consulting mission to IGAC, Bogota, Colombia, 1995; 
M.M. Radwan, Y. Bishr, 1995; Towards a multi scale Decision 
Support System for watershed management; AFRICAGIS 1995, 
Abidjan, Ivory Coast. 
M.M. Radwan, Y. Bishr, E. de J. Espinoza, T. Mabote, 1996; 
Federating heterogeneous databases in a multi-level Decision 
support System for watershed management; a client/server 
approach; XVIII ISPRS Congress, WG IV/6. 
M. Sarpoulaki, 1994; Quality assurance system for the 
geoinformation production programme of NCC of Iran; ITC 
M.Sc. thesis. 
International Archives of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing. Vol. XXXI, Part B4. Vienna 1996