ABSTRACT
Added to these are the recent developments in the U.K., which have a particular impact on the management of GI:
Finally, a review of our nine case studies reveals a number of recurring messages that, if followed, would improve the prospects of GIM development within other local authorities. Although success in many of these authorities has depended on a strong corporate approach backed by an agreed upon corporate GI strategy and associated funding, there are other successful examples that have adopted a grassroots or departmental approach to GIS development. Whichever approach is adopted, they all have cost-effective and explicit visions of what they want to achieve and can usually identify high-profile showcase projects or flagship applications. Of the other recurring positive drivers and success factors, the most important are:
The case studies demonstrate that a number of practical benefits flow from harnessing these positive drivers and success factors, including better quality map production, improved performance and communications, staff savings, and closer collaboration. So why, when there are all these positive factors, is there still a long way to go to achieve the full potential of GIS in U.K. local government? A look at the problems sections in each of the case studies gives part of the answer. These highlight the difficulties created by:
We will pick up these points again in Section 18.6, but first we asked Professor Michael Batty of the Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis (CASA), University College, London, to help us assess the future for computer-based methods in local government. The next four sections are contributed by Michael and reflect his specialism in urban planning as well as his international experience. Although many of his comments focus upon urban planning, they are generally applicable to local government as a whole.
