Public access to government-held geographic information system (GIS) data is a topic of major concern for governments, users, individuals, and businesses. The governments and value-added developers, as the holders of the GIS data, realize the tremendous role they play in the way they structure and communicate such GIS data for public access. This paper focuses on the role that the governments play in providing public access to GIS data at a minimal cost of dissemination. It analyzes the First Amendment and the U.S. Copyright Act's underlying policies as they relate to the providing of public access to GIS data. This paper also highlights the shift in federal information policies with particular emphasis on the National Spatial Data Infrastructure.
This paper surveys some state experiences and initiatives in providing access to GIS data. Free public access to government-held GIS is exemplified by the experiences of the Iowa Department of Natural Resources, the Montana National Resource Information System, and the Montana State Library. State initiatives and experiments include the Montana Interagency GIS Technical Working Group and the Florida Comprehensive Land Information Program.
1. INTRODUCTION
Government information is a national resource that the public needs in order to function knowledgeably and hold the government accountable. Its access and use is a fundamental First Amendment right. Geographic information system (GIS) data, which holds and uses data describing specific places on the earth, is more descriptive and useful for geographic analyses and thematic map creation which are essential for governmental planning. Most of the literature in the GIS legal field has analyzed GIS data synonymously with government information without characterizing the uniqueness of GIS data. This paper will analyze the nature of GIS data and its role as a public good in terms of the First Amendment and the U.S. Copyright Act.
This paper highlights the shift in federal information policies with particular emphasis on the National Spatial Data Infrastructure. It also presents some state and local experiences in providing free access to GIS data such as the Iowa Department of Natural Resources, the Montana National Resource Information System, and the Montana State Library. Most literature in the GIS field has focused either on the federal or state and local levels with their policies and experiences. This paper integrates both federal and state level policies and experiences into a "seamless" network of collaborative partnerships between federal, state, local, private, and public entities to promote the formation of partnerships between producers, managers, and users of GIS data.
Finally, this paper notes some changes in the federal and state information dissemination policies. While federal agencies relied on the private sector in the 1980s to disseminate government data, in the 1990s these same agencies recognize the benefits of governments disseminating government data. While the local governments separately developed and acquired their GISs with their own data in the 1980s, there was a recognition in the 1990s by some states of the need for collaboration. Individuals and businesses recognized that budgetary constraints forced the governments in the 1990s to reevaluate the investments they made in the 1980s in their GIS programs. The trend of government dissemination policies may have turned from minimal cost of dissemination to cost recovery. It may also turn full cycle back to minimal cost of dissemination. The experiences of state initiatives and experiments that are presented include the Montana Interagency GIS Technical Working Group and the Florida Comprehensive Land Information Program.
2. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF GIS AND THE USEFUL FUNCTIONS OF GIS: SPATIALLY REFERENCED INFORMATION
In order to understand the value of GIS data and the importance of sharing resources to develop a GIS database, it is crucial to understand what GIS is. GIS is designed as a method to overlay and combine diverse kinds of data into a single map summarizing geographic, cultural, and scientific attributes. GIS, defined simplistically, is a computer system capable of holding and using data describing places on the earth's surface. GIS is an organized collection of computer hardware, software, data, personnel, and procedures designed to efficiently capture, store, update, manipulate, analyze, and display all forms of geographically referenced information. GIS performs geographic analyses and creates thematic maps. GIS employs a flexible and robust data structure based on topological relationships.[1]
GIS, by definition, should permit spatial operations on the data. Specifically, only GIS is able to answer spatial queries by using latitude and longitude data and other geographic information. GIS manages the links and relationships between data of different sets. First, the data set files are combined. Second, the computer performs arithmetic processes upon the combined data sets. Finally, analyses may be performed upon the combined data sets.
GISs are sometimes also referred to as "intelligent mapping" systems.[2] What makes GIS "intelligent" is that it can seamlessly integrate map or graphic data with attribute or tabular data. GIS stores the attribute or tabular data in an external database management system (DBMS); the map or graphic data resides in the GIS. GIS links the graphic data with the tabular data in various ways. They may be linked by exact matching or nonexact matching. Exact matching occurs when you have information in one computer file about many geographic features and additional information in another file about the same set of features.[3] The task of combining the computer files is achieved by using a key common to both files. The common key to both files is extracted and the two files are joined and stored in another file.
Nonexact matching occurs when some types of information are collected in more detail or more frequently than other types of information.[4] If the smaller data set fits exactly within the larger data set, then the smaller areas may be grouped together until they cover the same area as the larger area. This process of grouping the data sets until they perform an exact match is called hierarchical matching.
When the boundaries of the smaller areas do not match the boundaries of the larger areas, then the two data sets need to be combined to create a new layer containing the characteristics of both data sets. This overlaying process, which is like laying one map over another and noting the combinations of both maps, is called fuzzy matching.[5]
The geographic location data are the key for any GIS data: the coordinates of spatial features form the integrating tie that brings all spatially referenced information together. These coordinates relate all types of spatial features that may exist on a multitude of different layers. By doing so, relationships are developed among the attribute data associated with those coordinates. As digital databases of spatial features are used, the quality and integrity of information becomes more important, sophisticated, and interesting.
The Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc. (ESRI) ARC/INFO data model is a hybrid georelational data model based on a cartographic database.[6] A topological data structure stores the data in a collection of coverages. Coverages are basic units of vector data storage and can represent several types of geographic features.[7] Some of the abstract geographic features are represented by points, lines, and areas. These are quantified into independently defined coverages. For example, a select set of related geographic features such as streams, forest stands or roads are each represented by one layer or coverage. Simple features or single coverages may be combined rapidly and flexibly into a complex set of features that is able to represent the real-world complexities.
ESRI's concept of GIS processing is that the spatial component of a GIS database is best supported in distributed computing environments such as UNIX workstations on local area networks.[8] The distributed computing environment is less expensive and more adaptable. Computer power and data access reside where the user works. The GIS database is shared within the user's organization. Its physical location may be moved according to the needs of the organization. The GIS data are distributed where the server is located and where the data can be assessed. Nodes on the network are where departmental data can be maintained. The data center is where a database which is shared by several departments, can be maintained. Compute and file servers will often reside at the data center to perform important support functions such as data backup and network monitoring. The network provides access to data, no matter where the data reside. A logon to any computer on the network can potentially reach any other point on the network, subject to system access controls.[9]
3. THE FIRST AMENDMENT AND ITS IMPACT ON ACCESS TO GOVERNMENT-HELD GIS DATA AND RESTRICTIONS ON THE COPYRIGHT OF GOVERNMENT-HELD GIS DATA
3.1 First Amendment and Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Rights of Public Access to Government-Held GIS Data
The U.S. Constitution in the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." The First Amendment has been recognized as "continuing a fundamental personal right of conscience and expression."[10] The First Amendment also is viewed as "the repository of... self-governing powers."[11] In order to exercise these fundamental rights of conscience, expression, and self-governing, the citizens must have the right to know the government's workings, policies, and administration. James Madison in his discussion of the First Amendment stated, "The right of freely examining public characters and measures, and of free communication thereon, is the only effectual guardian of every other right...."[12]
The First Amendment can be characterized as establishing a strong basis for the government to consider its citizens' rights to access the government's public records and information. Affording citizens the right to know of their government's workings, policies, and administration is most conveniently accomplished by giving the citizens access to the government's data and information. The press has traditionally been designated as the citizens' surrogate to obtain information about their government. Thomas Jefferson said that because the informed "opinion of the people" is the basis of government[13] he would prefer "newspapers without government" over "government without newspapers."[14] The press acts as the watchdog for the public by reporting on the public officials and their actions. Such openness of the government would hopefully make them responsive and accountable to the public through the press. In this modern age characterized by the ease of computer access to government data, especially GIS data, the right of access should reside with the citizens, in addition to their surrogate, the press. Meaningful GIS data can make a significant impact on the decisions to be made by state and local governments. The citizens' access to such meaningful GIS data will inform them and equip them to exercise their fundamental personal right of conscience and expression concerning the workings, policies, and administration of their government.
In addition to the First Amendment right of the public to know the workings, policies, and administration of its government, there is a statutory right of public access to government-held information. The federal government's records are accessible to the public through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA).[15] The guiding principle of FOIA as stated in the Senate Report of the bill for FOIA is that of "a general philosophy of full agency disclosure."[16] The Supreme Court interpreted FOIA stating, "(t)he basic purpose of the FOIA is to ensure an informed citizenry, vital to the functioning of a democratic society, needed to check against corruption and to hold the governors accountable to the governed."[17]
Under FOIA there are nine categories of government records which may be exempted from disclosure: (1) those relating to national security (granting broad discretion to the president to establish classification criteria), (2) agency rules and practices, (3) statutory exemptions (such as tax returns and census records), (4) confidential business information (such as financial data and trade secrets that might cause competitive harm), (5) interagency or intraagency memoranda (working documents historically exempted by the common law), (6) personnel or medical files (that "would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy"), (7) law enforcement investigations, (8) banking reports, and (9) information (maps) about oil and gas wells.[18]
All records not specifically exempted by FOIA must be made "promptly available to any person."[19] It does not matter what medium the record is in or whether the records are computerized: all records must be made available under the FOIA. The Computer Security Act of 1987 prohibits agencies from withholding computerized records from the public if the records would be available under the FOIA as paper documents.[20]
The First Amendment and the FOIA have established models for state constitutions and state open records statutes to provide public access to government-held data or information. Since there is no distinction made that would deny public access to government-held GIS data or information at the federal level, there should not be such a distinction at the state and local levels. Any government-held GIS data or information should be accessible for the citizens to exercise their fundamental personal right of conscience and expression concerning the workings, policies, and administration of their government.
3.2 First Amendment Restrictions on the Copyright of GIS Data
GIS data, by definition, involve both spatial features and spatial attributes, both maps and ideas or expressions. The copyright protection for the spatial attributes depends on whether they can be characterized as an idea or an expression. While an expression of a work may be copyrighted, ideas may not be protected by a copyright. The U.S. Copyright Act provides, "In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied, in such a work."[21]
The distinction between an idea and expression has its basis in the First Amendment of the Constitution, which guarantees the freedom of speech. The First Amendment's guarantee of free speech means that one may not be restricted from expressing ideas, even though such ideas are not the speaker's own. The freedom to share, adopt, and espouse ideas is a fundamental right of the First Amendment. GIS data also are "ideas" or "facts" that should be freely expressed under the First Amendment guarantee. Before one may arrange such GIS data as an expression, however, one needs the access to such GIS data. Once given such access, one needs the freedom to use such GIS data. GIS data, by nature, are very factual. GIS data only increase spatial conflict because they address facts, not values.[22] New facts, which are synonymous with ideas, create increased conflicts; tension is part of the democratic process which requires an informed citizenry to function properly.
3.3 Copyright Exception to Protection of the Federal Government's Works
The Copyright Act provides for exceptions to works produced by individuals employed by the government. It is recognized that the federal government is the primary producer and disseminator of data and information for public access, copying, dissemination, and publication. Accordingly, Section 105 of the 1976 Copyright Act provides that copyright protection is not available for any work of the United States Government. This includes all works prepared by an officer or employee of the United States Government as part of that person's official duties.
The Senate Report on the 1976 Copyright Act enunciated the reasons for not permitting copyright protection to works of the U.S. Government, yet allowing copyright protection for works written by an official or employee "at his own volition and outside his duties, even though the subject involves his Government work or his professional field":[23]
The argument against allowing copyright in this situation is that the public should not be required to pay a "double subsidy," and that it is inconsistent to prohibit copyright in works by government employees while permitting private copyrights in a growing body of works created by persons who are paid with government funds.[24]
On the one hand, there is the need to have the government works in the public domain, recognizing that the public has already paid for the government works in the form of taxes. On the other hand, the government recognizes that the "primary purpose of copyright is not to reward the author,[25] but is rather to secure 'the general benefits derived by the public from the labors of authors.'"[26]
The House Report on the Copyright Act of 1976 affirmed that "The effect of section 105 is intended to place all works of the United States Government, published or unpublished, in the public domain."[27] This is consistent with the practices of the federal government in providing unlimited, low-cost access to GIS data generated by its agencies. The underlying policy of the federal government is to treat its data as in the public domain and available for public access, copying, dissemination, and publication.
The state and local governments could learn from the federal copyright exception model and exclude their own governments from obtaining copyright protection for works done by their own officials or employees. This eliminates the payment of a "double subsidy" by their own citizens who request access to the government-held data. The availability of the government-held GIS data in the public domain also promotes the free discourse and expression of GIS data. Thus, one of the basic guarantees of the First Amendment, that of free speech and expression of facts and ideas, is realized.
The federal government is not precluded from receiving and holding copyrights transferred to it by assignment, bequest, or otherwise under Section 105 of the 1976 Copyright Act. The significant "otherwise" situation is where U.S. Government works are distributed or made available abroad, outside of its territorial boundaries. In such a situation, the legislators intended to retain U.S. copyright protection abroad. The House Report on the Copyright Act of 1976 noted:
The prohibition on copyright protection for United States Government works is not intended to have any effect on protection of these works abroad. Works of the governments of most other countries are copyrighted. There are no valid policy reasons for denying such protection to United States Government works in foreign countries, or for precluding the Government from making licenses for the use of its work abroad.[28]
The free discourse and expression of U.S. citizens has some territorial limitations. Where the access or availability of federal works is extended beyond the U.S. boundaries, the U.S. Government is not willing to waive its copyright protection for its own works. Ostensibly, this means that the First Amendment guarantees of free speech and expression of facts and ideas do not extend outside of the United States' boundaries when the copyright of federal government works is threatened. This caveat should be noted only to the extent that the promotion of access to government-held GIS data, which have been defined as facts, is circumscribed by the boundaries of the United States.
4. FEDERAL INFORMATION POLICIES AND PRACTICES--MODELS FOR STATE INFORMATION POLICIES
Agencies in all levels of government are experiencing significant and indeed, in some cases, severe budgetary constraints that are forcing these agencies to evaluate many existing services. This evaluation, referred to by the Clinton Administration as "reinventing government," has become the focus of intense activity on federal, state, and local levels with the end goal of increasing overall efficiency and productivity of government. The federal government has taken the lead in this endeavor through the efforts of Vice-President Gore and the National Performance Review (NPR).[29] Through targeted activities across government, the NPR provides a framework and philosophy for agencies to more effectively and efficiently fulfill their missions and perform the tasks of government, thus better serving the public.
Another key concept is the construction of an advanced National Information Infrastructure (NII), "a seamless web of communications networks, computers, databases, and consumer electronics that will put vast amounts of information at users' fingertips."[30] Underlying the NII and other Clinton-Gore Administration initiatives is the principle that encouraging and, indeed, promoting public access to government information at no fee or minimal cost is in the interests of both the government and the public. The private sector is already developing and deploying the NII; but the government must take action to "complement and enhance the efforts of the private sector and assure the growth of an information infrastructure available to all Americans at reasonable cost."[31]
At the federal level, the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) is an example of an effort seeking "to promote optimal use of geospatial data through more efficient data management and cost-effective data production," and "to do a better job producing data cooperatively and making data of any geographic areas accessible."[32] Inherent in this approach is an appreciation that to be successful the NSDI must be a collaborative process among federal, state, local, private, and public entities, and that benefits to the nation result from partnerships among producers, managers, and users of data and information.
This federal perspective is based, in part, on federal information policy promulgated by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in the June 25, 1993, revision of OMB Circular A- 130, "Management of Federal Information Resources." The revision constituted a major shift in federal information policy with regard to access to government information and how agencies should collect, maintain, and disseminate their information products. The change in federal information dissemination practices is particularly noteworthy. Whereas, under the Reagan and Bush Administrations, OMB policy called for agencies to rely upon the private sector as the primary means to disseminate government information, today there is recognition that "the nation can benefit from government information disseminated both by federal agencies and by diverse nonfederal parties including state and local government agencies, educational and other not- for- profit institutions, and for- profit organizations."[33] OMB's guidance is based on several factors including the following:
* Government information is a national resource.
* Government information provides the public with knowledge of the government's activities--thus being essential to an informed citizenry and the providing of government accountability.
* Government information is created, managed, disseminated, and utilized as a routine function in support of government operations.[34]
Circular A-130 includes guidance on federal information pricing practices. The circular sets forth a system of tiers of access to government via agencies and other providers, each with a differing cost structure or approach.
In the first tier, agencies are instructed to make government information available at charges no higher than the cost of dissemination. The OMB recognizes:
The economic benefit to society is maximized when government information is publicly disseminated at the cost of dissemination. Absent statutory requirements to the contrary, the general standard for user charges for government information dissemination products should be to recover no more than the cost of dissemination.[35]
In connection with information dissemination products that are already available and determined by the agency to be releasable, such "charges would be limited to reasonable direct reproduction costs alone."[36] The cost of dissemination may generally be defined as "the sum of all costs specifically associated with preparing a product for dissemination and actually disseminating it to the public."[37] This does not include costs associated with the agency's preparation of "an information product for its own internal use."[38]
In addition, the circular provides an exemption to the marginal cost of dissemination or first tier of access, "where the agency plans to establish user charges at less than cost of dissemination because of a determination that higher charges would constitute a significant barrier to properly performing the agency's functions."[39]
The second tier or approach to government information is available via the Federal Depository Library Program. The program is a partnership between over 1,400 libraries and the federal government and "provide(s) a mechanism for wide distribution of government information that guarantees basic availability to the public."[40] Participating libraries provide the public with no-fee access to government information.
Section 8a (6) of Circular A-130 entitled "Avoiding Improperly Restrictive Practices" addresses the need that agencies "take care that their behavior does not inappropriately constrain public access to government information."[41] In particular, the circular opposes establishing "restrictions or regulations, including the charging of fees or royalties, on the reuse, resale, or redissemination of federal information dissemination products by the public."[42]
These and other sections of the circular encourage federal agencies to pursue dissemination programs that actively promote public access to government information and remove possible barriers to effective access to federal information resources. For example, where an agency uses a private contractor to accomplish dissemination of government information, they should not permit the contractor to "impose restrictions that undercut the agency's discharge of its information dissemination responsibilities."[43] The agency should contractually define the contractor's responsibilities so that it behaves as if it were the agency. Furthermore, if the contractor provides "on-line access to a database," but refuses to "sell copies of the database itself," then the agency may be "improperly restrictive because it precludes the possibility of another firm making the same service available to the public at a lower price."[44] The underlying principle is that "if an agency is willing to provide public access to a database, the agency should be willing to sell copies of the database itself."[45]
Federal information policies recognize that more benefits result from making information resources widely available at cost of dissemination or at no fee versus instituting cost recovery mechanisms, which place economic barriers in the way of the accountability of government, innovation, and research and development efforts. Some of the benefits of the public access at a minimal cost of dissemination include:
* More effective and efficient use of resources
* Sharing of information resources between agencies and user
* Reducing the duplication of efforts
* Promotion of education, learning and research
* Promotion of the public's "right to know"
* Elimination of duplication of charges to the citizens
* Stimulation of innovation[46]
The experiences on the federal level, as exemplified by the policy guidance in Circular A-130, provide a useful model for state and local governments to emulate in implementing information programs.
The change in federal policy reflected several trends. First was the rapid growth in the use of information technologies by agencies and users. The second couples this rapid growth with the increasing dependency of data to assist in the management and operations of government programs in cooperation with the private and not-for-profit sectors. Third was the recognition that accurate and reliable information from all levels of government was necessary to address the many challenges facing society. Fourth, tackling these pressing problems required new and innovative commitments to programs that focused on access to government data and information.
Initiatives such as NSDI and, more broadly, the National Information Infrastructure (NII) are based on these and other factors and represent a fundamental shift in how government manages federal information resources. A critical element of the NSDI is that the initiative has integrated numerous and diverse goals; goals that in other settings (as discussed in Section 5--Public Access to State Governments' Information and, most recently, those in many state government information policy debates) oftentimes are seen as competing instead of complementary goals. The NSDI provides a framework where they are indeed, complementary of other activities.
Within the overall NSDI framework, there are four key activities. The first activity relates to standards--identification of needed standards and their concomitant development. The second area concerns "producing a framework of basic digital geospatial data from which other data can be derived or to which other data might be registered."[47] Creating and producing national digital thematic data sets and the establishment of a National Geospatial Data Clearinghouse are the remaining two activities. This latter effort, building on other activities, particularly in the standards arena, utilitizes the NII and network-based programs to facilitate access to, and the sharing of, information resources.
The principles that guide federal information policy and initiatives, such as the NSDI, are equally applicable on the state and local levels. Indeed, to be successful, the NSDI recognizes that partnerships with state and local entities are required. It is not difficult to appreciate the value to users of accessing consistent, credible data at all levels of government, not just at the national level and with little, if any, cost.
A number of states have instituted programs that complement the federal activities and many are actively collaborating with the Federal Geographic Data Committee, or FGDC, and the NSDI initiative. Examples of states that have instituted such programs are discussed in Section 5--Public Access to State Governments' Information below, including Iowa, Montana, and Florida.
5. PUBLIC ACCESS TO STATE GOVERNMENTS' INFORMATION
5.1 The Iowa Department of Natural Resources Midwest Flooding Experience
State and local governments are beginning to realize their needs to coordinate the development, maintenance, and management of distributed database systems. In 1989 the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (DNR) began its development of a Natural Resources Geographic Information System (NRGIS) following the passage of its enabling statute, the 1987 Groundwater Protection Act. The NRGIS was developed to assess complex natural resource and environmental problems and to provide such information to the public. Initially the NRGIS focused on the issue of groundwater contamination and the development of the map product, Groundwater Vulnerability Regions of Iowa. But as the need for GIS expanded, the number of ARC coverages increased.
In the summer of 1993, as a result of the Midwest flooding, the demand for the Iowa NRGIS skyrocketed. To handle the requests efficiently, the Iowa DNR opened a guest account on their Novell LAN server. In March 1994, the guest account was made accessible to the public.[48]
The handling of user requests over the Internet saves administration time for the Iowa DNR. There is a reduction of duplication of efforts, and the Iowa DNR's resources are more effectively and efficiently used. Less time is spent on filling orders for GIS data, copying diskettes, and providing hard-copy data to its users. This permits more time for the development and maintenance of the NRGIS databases, thus stimulating innovation for their use of their databases. The public also benefits with an increased access to government reformation. More government accountability and public involvement results from the increased access to public GIS information.
The Iowa DNR has pioneered the policy of free access to State information resources via the Internet through its public site. The State is now in the process of developing, and will soon have available, a high-speed fiber optic network linking all Iowa schools, libraries, and government offices. Other state, local, and federal agencies should follow the Iowa DNR experience to share their GIS data and make it available over wide area networks. They could realize the benefits of the Iowa DNR experience: more effective and efficient use of resources; reduction of duplication of efforts; promotion of education, learning, and research; promotion of the public right to know; improved accountability of government to its citizens; and stimulation of innovation.
5.2 Montana National Resource Information System, the Montana State Library and the Montana Interagency GIS Technical Working Group
For several years, the Montana National Resource Information System (NRIS) has engaged in programs that support State- based and federal activities while instituting innovative public information access programs. NRIS' mission is to "provide[s] comprehensive access to information about Montana's natural resources to all Montanans through the acquisition, storage, retrieval, and dissemination of that information in a meaningful form."[49]
Of the nine NRIS 1993 goals, three are particularly pertinent. These include efforts to
* Manage a timely, cost- effective clearinghouse and referral service to link users with the best sources of information.
* Participate in the design and development of uniform, easily accessible, statewide databases for each of Montana's natural resources.
* Continue to improve NRIS services and access to information.[50]
It is useful to examine how each of these goals is implemented within the context of specific NRIS programs. The Natural Heritage Program--the State's inventory of biological resources--is "a collaborative effort between NRIS and federal, state, public, and private sectors." One example of cooperative activity is the direct accessibility of the program's database by U.S. Forest Service personnel. The database experienced a significant increase in usage, both by USFS personnel and others in State government. Access to accurate and current information is the goal of the program because it is the best way to preserve critical resources.
The Water Information System is a central point of contact within the State for water resources data and information. The system is routinely utilized by all sectors in efforts to both share data and to coordinate new and ongoing data collection activities.[51]
Finally, the geographic information system provides targeted services to a diverse range of users from the governmental, public, and private sectors. One effort, the Montana Interagency GIS Technical Working Group (TWG), coordinates GIS projects including data generation. One noteworthy example is a cooperative program to develop a State-wide ownership layer. The latter project "is an excellent example of government agencies cooperating to get the greatest benefit possible for their investments in information infrastructure."[52] The TWG, due to its establishing memorandum of understanding (MOU), has been able to provide agencies with the justification and framework for providing access to information that might otherwise be restricted. For example, there is a provision in the TWG MOU that commits agencies to share information. A State agency recently released GIS data that were created with State funds--data that the agency originally planned to sell. The TWG MOU was instrumental in making these information resources publicly available. In addition, the cooperative nature of the TWG has led the groundwork for Montana's active participation in the development of NSDI. The State agency is proceeding with a design project to develop a State version of the NSDI that fits directly into the national effort. The agency's project has now been funded by the FGDC. That funding and cooperation would not have been possible without the TWG, and the TWG would not be viable without the willingness of the parties to freely share data and resources.
5.3 Florida Experience: New Directions for a Comprehensive Land Information Program
Attempts to recover the costs of gathering and reproducing the data are provided for in some of the Open Records Statutes. Florida pioneered the way of cost recovery through its enactment of its Open Records Statute. Cost recovery for access, duplication, direct and indirect costs in materials and labor expended, and the nongeneration of records not already in existence are key features of Florida's Open Records Statute. The access to its GIS data and information has been curtailed by users unable or unwilling to pay for the cost recovery. Paradoxically, the very statutes that had as their purpose the access of the public to its government's records have been used to inhibit such access. The time-consuming process of making GIS data and information available has also inhibited the access thereof.
Florida recently strengthened the right of access to its public records, elevating such right from a statutory right in its Public Records Law to a constitutional right in the 1992 election. This action emphasized that Florida realized the importance of the public's right of access over their need for cost recovery for the GIS public records provided. Most agencies in Florida developing GIS realized they cannot recover indirect costs, not to mention development costs of the GIS.[53]
At the same time, GIS is in demand among project participants (i.e., those agencies and organizations funding the initial GIS system) and primary users, yet as long as the distribution of GIS data is neither profitable nor an important source of revenue, those responsible for the distribution and provision of GIS data perceive such tasks to be in competition with their primary responsibilities. As a consequence, agencies are not marketing their GIS data.[54]
Fragmented, inconsistent data and incompatible formats have been the problem in Florida. Each city, county, or municipality and its multitude of departments established their own standards, data dictionaries, and data formats. Little coordination or communication and frequent duplication of data have been commonplace. Florida Urban and Regional Information Systems Association (URISA) members are attempting to rectify this archaic, costly, nonsystematic pattern of interagency, intercity, and generally fragmented noncooperation.
Florida URISA members are advocating the creation of a Comprehensive Land Information Program (CLIP) for the purpose of coordinating the collection, maintenance, and management of Florida's Land Information. The goal of such a CLIP is to work comprehensively across the State to increase the access and use of GIS data.[55] They are bringing together all the stakeholders and are working with key State officials, professionals, and vendors to build up a consensus among the multitude of interested parties. The most crucial step they have taken is to establish initial objectives for the Florida CLIP.
These are
1. Establish standards for Florida's land information.
2. Minimize duplication of data collection and maintenance efforts.
3. Collect, maintain, and provide all of the foundation elements of Florida's land information in automated format.
4. Maintain a data dictionary, updated annually, which includes a comprehensive listing of terminology and acronyms related to the Comprehensive Land Information Program.
5. Continuously assess the success of the program in meeting the land information needs within the State and fully utilize available technologies.[56]
This pattern of proactive standardization and centralization of a State-wide GIS database is admirable and should be emulated by other states. Good public access to GIS data is facilitated by good internal access to GIS data.[57]
6. CONCLUSION
GIS data plays a unique role as a public good in terms of the First Amendment and the U.S. Copyright Act. The uniqueness of GIS is that only GIS is able to answer spatial queries by using latitude and longitude data and other geographic information. GIS also manages the links and relationships between data of different sets to integrate all spatially referenced information together rapidly and flexibly into a complex set of features which is able to represent the real world complexities. The basic premise in the First Amendment is that the public has a "right to know" what its government is doing. Included in that right is the belief that the government is a depository for public data and information. The nature of GIS data is one that presents "facts" or "ideas." The implications are significant because the First Amendment guarantees the free exchange of "facts" or "ideas" for one to exercise one's right of free expression. Furthermore, the U.S. Copyright Act is careful to protect only the originality of authors as it relates to expression, not to the statement of "facts" or "ideas." Therefore, state and local governments need to reconsider their practices of routinely applying copyright protection for their GIS data.
Federal information policies present a model for the federal and state governments to collaborate in providing public access to GIS data. The benefits of such no-fee or minimal-cost of dissemination for government-held GIS data are the following: more effective and efficient use of resources; sharing of information resources between agencies and users which reduces duplication of efforts and promotes education, learning, and research; promotion of the public right to know and the accountability of government to its citizens; and the stimulation of innovation.
The federal and state agencies realize some economic benefits of providing access to GIS data at a minimal cost of dissemination. For the maintenance of their GIS databases, state and local governments should consider the experience of the Iowa DNR. The free access of its GIS data over the Internet saves administration time for the Iowa DNR. The time spent to fill orders for GIS data, copy diskettes, and provide hard-copy data to its users could be spent doing less routine time-consuming administrative tasks. This saved time could be better allocated for the development and maintenance of the Natural Resources Geographic Information System (NRGIS) database.
The Montana National Resource Information System (NRIS) program also demonstrates a commitment and an appreciation for the value of sharing information resources among all types of users at minimal or no cost. Information resources generated through state projects are accessible to citizens at no fee through the state libraries. The coordinated approach to GIS and related activities significantly reduces duplication of effort while providing more effective access to needed data in a timely fashion. Users are assured of the quality of data, thus data are highly valued. All of these factors maximize the utilization of resources and are cost- effective. The reduced costs in, and availability of, the technologies, the savings that result from use of the Internet, and the increasing investments in the information infrastructure present new opportunities for governments to engage in innovative public access programs.
The Florida experience shows a shift in policy from individual agencies' cost recovery for their GIS data to the proactive standardization and centralization of a statewide GIS database for increased internal and public access to their GIS data. The realization by those responsible for the distribution and provision of their agencies' GIS data that the distribution of GIS data is neither profitable nor an important source of revenue has prompted these agencies not to market their GIS data since it is perceived as being in competition with their primary mission.
States need to realize the responsibilities they have to their citizenry in providing the most cost-effective and useful GIS data. There is the clear recognition that more benefits result to end users from making information resources widely available at a minimal cost of dissemination versus instituting cost recovery mechanisms that place economic barriers in the way of accountability of government, innovation, and research and development efforts. The experiences on the federal level, as exemplified by the policy guidance in Circular A-130, provide a useful model for state and local governments to emulate in implementing information programs.
7. AUTHORS' BIOGRAPHIES
7.1 Jack Dangermond
Jack Dangermond graduated with a B.S. from California Polytechnic College, Pomona; M.S. in Urban Planning from the Institute of Technology at the University of Minnesota; and M.S. in Landscape Architecture from the Graduate School of Design, Harvard University, where he worked in the Laboratory for Computer Graphics and Spatial Design. He is the founder and president of Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc. (ESRI), of Redlands, California, a firm which has been in the geographic information system (GIS) field since 1969. ESRI is now generally acknowledged as the technical and market leader in GIS software and custom turnkey systems, with an installed base of more than 7,000 ARC/INFO systems on workstations, minicomputers, and mainframes, and more than 5,500 such systems on personal computers worldwide. ARC/INFO users now number more than 35,000 and are represented on all continents. He has been the recipient of numerous fellowships, grants, and awards, including the Urban and Regional Information Systems Association Horwood Award "for outstanding contributions...to the information systems field," and the Association of American Geographers (AAG) Honorary Membership, presented to individuals who have made exemplary contributions to geography. He has served on various national advisory committees and boards including, for example, NASA's Science and Technology Advisory Committee. He continues to deliver keynote addresses at various meetings and conferences around the globe.
Jack has authored hundreds of papers dealing with GIS technology, which have been published in journals and conference reports, in such diverse fields as photogrammetry, computer science, planning, environmental science, and cartography.
Jack is recognized in both academia and industry as a leader of, and an authority on, the GIS field. With twenty-five years experience, he and his firm are pioneers in digital cartography and natural resources mapping.
7.2 Keene Matsunaga
Keene Matsunaga graduated with a B.A. in political science from the University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii; M.P.A. theory and practice from New York University, New York, New York; J.D. from Georgetown University Law Center, Washington, D.C.; Professional Designation in Government Contract Management from the University of California, Los Angeles. He is a Contract Specialist for Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc. (ESRI), of Redlands, California, a firm in the geographic information system (GIS) field. He has been the recipient of awards and scholarships, including the National Contract Management Association student essay award and a New York University partial scholarship.
Keene has drafted numerous agreements in his capacity as a law clerk for international law firms in New York City, Washington, D.C., and Los Angeles.
Keene has administered many multimillion dollar Department of Defense and NASA contracts in his capacity as a contracts administrator for eleven years with the Hughes Aircraft Company and TRW.
Keene has an extensive background in the history, politics, and legislative process of the U.S. Congress with experience as a congressional page, elevator operator, and tour guide/correspondent for a U.S. senator.
8. ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors acknowledge the significant contributions of Prudence S. Adler, Assistant Executive Director, Federal Relations and Information Policy, Association of Research Libraries, in researching, drafting, writing, reviewing, and polishing this paper. Her expertise in federal information policies has facilitated a thorough analysis of the federal and state practices in providing access to their GIS data. The authors acknowledge her writing contributions about the National Spatial Data Infrastructure included in Section 4 and the "Montana National Resource Information System, the Montana State Library and the Montana Interagency GIS Technical Working Group," included in Section 5.2.
9. REFERENCE NOTES