Podcast: WIll Virtual Alabama Scale to Virtual USA?
By Joe Francica and Adena Schutzberg
March 03, 2009
Classified Ads:
If you are still wondering which mobile GPS you should buy for your GIS data collection and mapping projects: Download our white paper to see how our MobileMapper 6 GPS beats the competition with better accuracy and lower price. Visit Magellan ProfessionalVirtual Alabama is that state's tool to share data for public safety across jurisdictions. Built on Google Earth Enterprise, it's become a model of how to integrate local data for widespread use. Now, federal Homeland Security officials are floating the idea of a regional effort for southern states to share data to respond to natural hazards. Our editors take a look at the success of the state effort and ponder the challenges of scaling it up.
 |
 |
 |
 |
|||
|
||||||
|
 |
 |
 |
|||
Show Notes
The deadline to register for the 2009 ESRI Developer Summit is March 13th.Don’t miss this opportunity to connect with ESRI staff and software developers from around the world March 23-26 in Palm Springs, California. For more information visit the registration website.
|
Your Comments Post a comment All comments provided in this section are those of the individual who has created the post. These are not the opinions of Directions Media, its editors, staff or owners unless otherwise noted. Directions Media retains the right to edit or delete any comments posted herein.
|
|
||||||
| IMHO, Virtual Alabama succeeded for a number of reasons: 1. A champion at the state level that truly 'got it' when it comes to the power of geospatial visualization and its ties to emergency response. 2. A champion at the state level who targeted an end-user community (Sheriffs)with the ability to 'force' the issue of data publishing. 3. The use of a tool that is familiar, simple to use, and performs very, very well. 4. The discussion between the data owner [city or county] and the data publisher [AL Dept of Homeland Security] was/is one-to-one, so negotiations are personal, direct, and the trust issues are worked out between people sitting across the table from each other. This is the crust of the biscuit right here, folks. 5. The focus began with imagery, and moved on to streets, parcel boundaries, features, etc. that could be worked out over time. 7. Did I mention an actively-engaged cabinet-level champion in the State government? Some comments related to the human-factors aspect of this success story: 1. Governor and cabinet-level resources in a State must commit to such projects in order for them to succeed in the long term. This includes the CIO as well as the homeland security and emergency management resources. Virtual AL succeeded because the highest levels of state gov't were pushing for it. Frankly, the active engagment should move wider across the heads of state departments than just the Homeland team. 2. Speaking softly while carrying a copy of the state budget can work very well at the local level. 3. This is hard work, and requires working through compromise agreements with people in organizations who sometimes need to be 'encouraged' to open their datasets. This is NOT an indictment of the geospatial community, I might add...oft-times the issues lie with legal, privacy, and the presumption a financial interest must be satisfied before product can be shared. It's complicated, and the only way to work it out is negotiate directly. 4. In a state like Alabama, where Intergraph makes its home, and virtually every county or city GIS program uses ESRI, the choice of Google was probably as much a politically-neutral choice as it was a vote for simple/easy/performance. For most folks in the non-geospatial community, there's something very attractive in being able to access 'real' data in a tool every 8th grader in the USA knows how to use. And likes. 5. One-to-one is perhaps the only way to successfully negotiate the rights and restrictions around data sharing. When the publisher speaks directly with the data owner, and there are NO degrees of separation between the two, then you can build a bridge of accountability and trust into the relationship. Local-to-Federal is a bridge too far. 6. Focus, focus, focus. Virtually every State-level geospatial leader (most in NSGIC, some not) has developed a core dataset on which they rely during times of extremes. Look for those products, and since nobody doesn't like seeing pixels, you may as well start there. IMHO, the places where Virtual Alabama has not yet succeeded: 1. Storing and holding a copy of the shared data in its original format for use by geospatial cadres with emergency response organizations...State/Federal, or otherwise. Emergency resources invariably use ESRI tools to run analytics on local products when disasters strike. FEMA is well-acquainted with the issue of 'hidden data' when something occurs. Pre-positioning source data in an accessible location is step one to serving your citizens. This is a MUCH larger issue than burning some globes, hwoever, and will require some ongoing and reasonable investment to accomplish...might as well get started before the next hurricane. Finally, some general observations, but ones I think are worth noting: Google Earth is the most proprietary of all geospatial formats. Yes, that's right, the most locked-up and proprietary. No, I'm not talking about KML...I'm referring to the host globe itself; the fused rasters onto which anyone can project a KML. KML is OPEN - a Google Earth globe is most decidedly NOT. But this is the absolutely stunning simplicity of the solution, actually. Open, ready access to a simple tool that allows you to "look but don't touch" to reference data, preserves the rights of the data owner, and enables you to publish thin references in an open format that lies over the top of the Earth. It's all so very Google, when you think about it. Once data are fused to the Google globe (which is, in fact, a rather tedious process the first time out as you create templates and data tiers) they are 'burned in' to the sphere. Fused data might as well be made from unobtainium, which also conveniently prevents illicit access and outsiders from downloading the core data. Fusing to the globe does NOT prevent sharing through visualization, which is a very, very powerful resource proven so well by Virtual Alabama. Since the essential issue in data sharing programs comes down to trust (or more properly, the near-complete lack thereof) the idea that data CANNOT be extracted from a Google globe preserves the trust negotiated between owner and publisher. As for those who decry the lack of analytical capability in Google Earth - that's bunk. Our eyes and brains are far more sophisticated analytical tools than such a statement acknowledges. Dots-on-a-map are HUGELY informative when placed in (geographic) context. Couple our own eyes and gray matter [thinking!] with a right-click-here-for-GeoProcessing-requests from GIS server, and you have a very, very powerful toolset. Here's hoping the Virtual Alabama model succeeds wildly, and widely. |
||||||
