THE UGANDA SPATIAL DATA INFRASTRUCTURE FRAMEWORK

1
THE UGANDA SPATIAL DATA INFRASTRUCTURE FRAMEWORK

• Karatunga Ali Mohammed
• Karamoja Data Centre
• Office of the Prime Minister
• Kampala Uganda

SDI Ad-Hoc Experts Group Meeting, (3-7 Feb. 2002
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia)
2
Introduction

• The Government of Uganda is currently
  implementing
• a number of Programmes all geared towards
  achieving the objective of poverty eradication

• these programmes include among others
• Poverty eradication Action Plan (PEAP)
• Plan for Modernization of Agriculture (PMA)
• The Decentralization Programme
• Universal Primary Education (UPE)
• Promotion of Private Sector investment
• Good Governance
• Environmental Management
• Disarmament Programme
• The Road Sector Development Programme (RSDP)

3

• Most of these programmes are a result of
  policies based on ad-hoc and inadequate
  information.
• Though the National Constitution recognizes the
  right to information, there is no national policy
  addressing the role of geo-spatial information in
  the nations sustainable development process.

4
SDI Policy GuidelineUganda shall have the
spatial data infrastructure needed to support its
economic growth, its social and environmental
interests, backed by national standards,
guidelines, and policies on access to data and
information.
5
This presentation gives an overview of current
initiatives towards the establishment of a Uganda
Spatial Data Infrastructure (USDI). Emphasis is
placed on the following aspects of the SDI
framework

• Existing GIS activities or initiatives
• Institutional Framework/National Coordination
• Core/Fundamental Datasets
• Mandates
• Data Exchange Mechanisms
• Policy and Memoranda for sharing data
• Obstacles SDI implementation in Uganda

6
Institutional Categories and Existing GIS
Initiatives

• Core Institutions (These are sectors that fall
  within the governments Priority Programme Areas
  (PPA)
• - Education
• - Water
• - Health
• - Works Transport and Communication
• - Agriculture
• Supporting (These have functions and mandates to
  provide information that are essential to the
  functions of the core organizations).
• - Ministry of Finance, Planning and
  Economic Development
• - Uganda Bureau of Statistics (UBOS)
• - Department of Land and Surveys
• - National Biomass Study, Forest
  Department
• - Ministry of Local Government
• - Karamoja Data Centre, Office of the
  Prime Minister

7
Peripheral Institutions(These do not have a
direct impact on the operations of the main focus
institutions but deliver premises to the central
policy and are essential users in the SDI
environment).

• The National Environment Management Authority
  (NEMA)
• - Coordinates the Environment
  Information Network (EIN)
• - A data standards committee
  was set up by the network to address issues of
  exchange of
• data, software
  compatibility, coding and classification systems,
  and general information
• quality control among the
  institutions participating in the network.

• Makerere University
• Offers GIS Course Units in 6 different
  Disciplines
• - Surveying
• - Environment
• - Forestry
• - Urban Planning
• - Geography
• - Agricultural Engineering

8
Institutional Framework/National Coordination

• Use of GIS in Uganda can be characterized
  as user or
• project driven and not due to any
  government policy.

• There is no central body concerned with
  implementation
• or mandated to co-ordinate of SDI
  activities.

• A GIS Task Force was established by Ministry
  of Finance,
• Planning and Economic Development in 2000,
  but has for long
• been non-functional.

• The involvement of the Ministry of Finance in
  SDI initiatives
• is a sign of government commitment
  towards SDI initiatives.

9
Short-term recommendations of the World Bank
Funded Study on Establishment of a Uganda SDI

• Establishment of SDI sub committees
  on         - Standardisation.         -
  Co-financing.         - GIS Education.
• Establishment of a Permanent Spatial Data
  Infrastructure Co-ordination Unit.
• Defining mandates and ownership of the
  core/fundamental datasets.
• Launching activities for initial conformance
  and data exchange operations.
• Initiating a feasibility study on Land
  Administration.
• Ensuring that all future public and private
  sector projects conform to the Rules and
• Conditions of Ugandan Spatial Data
  Infrastructure
• Adopting the Principle of Free Exchange of Key
  Spatial Data Sets within the
• Government Institutions.

10
Core/Fundamental Datasets

• There are no defined datasets to be considered of
  common interest or part of a common
  infrastructure.
• Some of the executed donor projects have
  established data of common interest, and thus
  initiated an informal infrastructure.
• The National Biomass Study Project. In addition
  to the Landcover dataset, the project developed
  a digital database of six additional layers, and
  has since established itself as a major source of
  basic geo-spatial data layers.
• The major problem is the maintenance and updating
  of these data since they do not fall within the
  sphere the NBS activities, and as a result the
  layers have deteriorated with time.
• There is no defined set of aggregated data for
  national planning

11
Mandates

• The Institutional Mandates for Data Ownership,
  Acquisition, Maintenance are not in line with the
  present situation.

• The mandates are partly out of date, and partly
  in conflict with current technological
• advancement.

• Some overlapping of responsibilities exists
  between Land and Surveys and UBOS
• in the area of administrative mapping. This
  creates a potential ground for conflict of
• interests between the two institutions

• Since the NBS has established itself as a major
  source of basic geo-spatial data
• layers, Several institutions have adopted the
  Biomass Project datasets and started
• their own updating process.

• This has lead to double work and problems with
  future updating.

12

To overcome the problem of duplication and
inconsistencies in the core dataset, the
World Bank funded study made the following
recommendations and were adopted by the GIS
Task Force

• The ownership and thus the responsibilities for
  each dataset should be clearly defined.

• For each dataset there should be only one
  owner/custodian.

• The principle shall be that each dataset shall
  be owned by the
• organization that has the mandate to decide
  on changes and use
• of the dataset.

13
Recommended Data Owners/Custodians

• Administrative Units Ministry of Local
  Government
• Protected Areas Forest Department/Uganda
  Wildlife Authority
• Hydrology (lakes rivers) Department of Land
  and Surveys
• Transport Infrastructure Ministry of Works,
  Transport and Communications
• Manmade Structures  Land and Surveys
• Topography (elevation) Land and Surveys
  Department
• Aerial photographs and satellite Imagery
  Department of Land and Surveys
• Land Cover (Land Use) Forest Department
• Water Points Directorate of Water Development
• Population Uganda Bureau of Statistics
• Health Data Ministry of Health
• Education Data Ministry of Education and
  Sports
• Land holdings/Parcels Department of Land and
  Surveys

14
Standards and Data Exchange Mechanisms

• There is no formal or common data exchange
  mechanism.
• Data exchanges are commonly done on
  institution-to-institution basis on demand by use
  of CD-ROMS or PC-PC cable connections and
  sometimes on floppies.
• The Uganda National Bureau of Standards (UNBS)
  has developed a number of standards which are for
  commercial goods and services but not for
  geographic information.
• The National Environment Management Authority
  (NEMA) has initiated some standardisation but
  there is lack of focus.
• Development of comprehensive geographic
  information standards is not a simple task and
  would require a lot of investment in time and
  human resources.
• Under the World Bank initiative, Preliminary Data
  Exchange Specification for Uganda were developed
  to
• - Promote the efficient and
  effective use of Basic digital geographical
  information,
• - Enable the integration,
  combination and interchange of datasets and to
  facilitate
• the national standard for
  geographic data exchange future development and
• implementation.

15

• Standards and Data Exchange Mechanisms (Cont.)
• It is to serve as one of the first steps in the
  range of measures and activities directed to the
  implementation of Spatial Data Infrastructure in
  Uganda
• These specifications were developed in accordance
  with the recommendations of Open GIS Consortium
  and are in harmony with ISO/TC211.
• This specification consists of three main parts
• - Establishment of basic
  principles of geographic data exchange,
• - Requirements for a transfer
  format
• - Prototype Feature Catalogue.
• The prototype Feature Catalogue is limited to the
  existing datasets that were digitized by the
  National Biomass Study Project from topographic
  maps of scale 150,000
• The specification is to cover, to some extent,
  the immediate needs in geographic information
  exchange, integration and its use.
• It is a subject to change and is open for further
  development, modification and improvement in
  accordance to the needs of the society.
• These specifications have not yet been adopted by
  any institution due to lack of a formal
  coordinating body.

16
Policy and Memoranda for Sharing Data

• There is no central policy or MoU for data
  access or exchange in the country
• however, some MOU exist among the various
  institutions.
• There is no national principle for pricing of
  data, but a practice of charging for
• datasets exists in some institutions
• The Biomass data are charged around US 20
  per layer of 150 000, a price
• considered high by the users.
• Under the World Bank assignment, an SDI
  decree was formulated stipulating
• that
• - Organisations should reach agreement
  on what fundamental datasets are
• required in the national interest,
• - To what standards they should be
  collected and maintained,
• - Which agencies should have
  custodianship of those data,
• - What the national priorities are for
  collection of those data.

17
Metadata Initiatives

• There exists some internal documentation
  describing the data in some institutions.
• However, there is no Metadata for national use.
• There is no formal Metadata distribution system.
• NEMA has developed a Metadata for its GIS
  datasets and is available at www.nemaug.org.
• The World Bank assignment also developed a
  Metadata for the institutions considered relevant
  in the establishment of the Uganda Spatial Data
  Infrastructure,
• Developed using Active Server Pages (ASP)
  language to make it dynamic on the Web, and is
  hosted at www.blom.no/Uganda the consultants
  server.
• In order to develop a national metadata, The
  Standardisation Committee shall have the mandate
  to make a national profile for Metadata of ISO
  19115, or adopt any existing profile on Metadata.
• This Standardisation Committee shall identify the
  metadata elements required in Uganda, based on
  the core Metadata elements in ISO 19115.
• Every organisation that is an owner or a
  custodian of spatial data shall be responsible to
  organise Metadata for their data sets.
• The Metadata owner shall be responsible for the
  quality and the updating of Metadata and to
  disseminate the Metadata on Internet according to
  the rules and procedures set up by the
  Standardisation Committee.

18
Obstacles to SDI Implementation in Uganda

• The following have been identified as bottlenecks
  in the implementation of a
• National Spatial Data Infrastructure in Uganda.
• Lack of adequate capacity both at the Central and
  Local Government levels
• Lack of appropriate national policy and
  legislation on access to data or information
• Lack of a national driving force
• Absence of a Competent Authority to handle GIS
  initiatives
• Weak government institutions technically,
  politically and financially
• Undefined, overlapping and sometimes conflicting
  mandates
• Disjointed and scanty data providers lack of a
  one stop Information Centre
• Tendency to re-invent the wheel
• Job mobility
• Temporary and donor driven initiatives
• Empire building

19

• Obstacles to SDI Implementation (Cont)
• Lack of GIS awareness among planners and
  decision makers
• Lack of data integration
• Lack of focus
• Institutional laxity
• Lack of updating mechanism
• Lack of a sustainable financial mechanism
• Lack of private sector involvement

20
Conclusion

• The basic framework exists for the implementation
  of the Uganda Spatial Data Infrastructure
  however there is a general lack of awareness
  among planners and policy makers on the role of
  SDI as key to improving the efficiency of service
  delivery.
• Lack of a central SDI coordinating body will
  drive all SDI initiatives in the country to waste.

21
YOU ARE A VERY NICE AUDIENCE THANK YOU