444
R. Canessa and C. P. Keller
data management including the evaluation of database
accuracy
The importance of data was re-inforced by twenty-five percent of respondents who
identified effective communication of information and results as a critical success
factor for coastal management. ‘Effective’ was characterised as “understandable”,
“easy to read” and “consistent”. In most cases maps were identified as the most
effective and efficient format by which to convey information and results, such as
defining areas of conflict, delineating proposed alternatives and presenting information
to the general public.
As was discussed earlier, the primary role for GIS in coastal management that
was most often mentioned in Phase I was inventory. Inventory functions of GIS
mentioned included storing and displaying an integrated inventory, and to a lesser
degree facilitating information sharing. The role of GIS in these capacities was raised
repeatedly during other parts of the questionnaire.
For example, inventory
characteristics of GIS were identified as strengths of GIS related to analysis and
decision making.
The main strength of GIS with respect to managing and maintaining a coastal
inventory identified by Phase I respondents is the ability to integrate a variety of data
sets into common information base (Fig. 2). The geographical context was seen to
provide a common denominator for disparate data sets. A single source and multilayered organisation was regarded as important to facilitate the accessibility and
efficiency of storing and retrieving large volumes of data.
It has already been established that the compilation of a comprehensive
database which accounts for the broad range of resources and users in the coastal
environment is an important requirement for coastal management. The contents and
taxonomy of such an inventory are well covered in the literature particularly with
respect to biological and physical resources (see for example, Harper et al, 1993; Hale,
1991; Ricketts, 1991). Of interest to note is the importance placed on law, institution
and policy by questionnaire respondents. This supports the commonly held view that
the governance framework comprising numerous agencies and dispersed legislation
presents a major impediment to integrated coastal management. Nevertheless, these
elements are rarely incorporated in a coastal management inventory.
By far the most often-mentioned weakness of GIS with respect to managing
and maintaining an inventory of coastal data was the cost involved in acquiring and
inputting the data. As with weaknesses of its analytical use, the expertise and training
required also applied to its inventory use. On the one hand, some respondents noted
that data stored in GIS were easier to update than data stored on paper maps. On the
other hand, it was also noted that the requirement to continually update the data was a
weakness of GIS in terms of the time, cost and effort involved in maintaining a current
database. In addition, incompatibility among GIS systems, data formats and data
exchange procedures hindered the acquisition of an inventory.
R. Canessa and C. P. Keller
data management including the evaluation of database
accuracy
The importance of data was re-inforced by twenty-five percent of respondents who
identified effective communication of information and results as a critical success
factor for coastal management. ‘Effective’ was characterised as “understandable”,
“easy to read” and “consistent”. In most cases maps were identified as the most
effective and efficient format by which to convey information and results, such as
defining areas of conflict, delineating proposed alternatives and presenting information
to the general public.
As was discussed earlier, the primary role for GIS in coastal management that
was most often mentioned in Phase I was inventory. Inventory functions of GIS
mentioned included storing and displaying an integrated inventory, and to a lesser
degree facilitating information sharing. The role of GIS in these capacities was raised
repeatedly during other parts of the questionnaire.
For example, inventory
characteristics of GIS were identified as strengths of GIS related to analysis and
decision making.
The main strength of GIS with respect to managing and maintaining a coastal
inventory identified by Phase I respondents is the ability to integrate a variety of data
sets into common information base (Fig. 2). The geographical context was seen to
provide a common denominator for disparate data sets. A single source and multilayered organisation was regarded as important to facilitate the accessibility and
efficiency of storing and retrieving large volumes of data.
It has already been established that the compilation of a comprehensive
database which accounts for the broad range of resources and users in the coastal
environment is an important requirement for coastal management. The contents and
taxonomy of such an inventory are well covered in the literature particularly with
respect to biological and physical resources (see for example, Harper et al, 1993; Hale,
1991; Ricketts, 1991). Of interest to note is the importance placed on law, institution
and policy by questionnaire respondents. This supports the commonly held view that
the governance framework comprising numerous agencies and dispersed legislation
presents a major impediment to integrated coastal management. Nevertheless, these
elements are rarely incorporated in a coastal management inventory.
By far the most often-mentioned weakness of GIS with respect to managing
and maintaining an inventory of coastal data was the cost involved in acquiring and
inputting the data. As with weaknesses of its analytical use, the expertise and training
required also applied to its inventory use. On the one hand, some respondents noted
that data stored in GIS were easier to update than data stored on paper maps. On the
other hand, it was also noted that the requirement to continually update the data was a
weakness of GIS in terms of the time, cost and effort involved in maintaining a current
database. In addition, incompatibility among GIS systems, data formats and data
exchange procedures hindered the acquisition of an inventory.