We are all aware of the complex issues and challenges con-fronting the relatively new technology of GIS. Considerable changes in both our expectations and GIS's capabilities have taken place since it's birth in the late 1960s. Let me share with you a brief history and a probable future of this maturing field.
      GIS has grown up and is about to face the utilitarian user who lacks the sentimental attachment of the earlier GIS zealots. The excitement of "developing technology for technology's self" is rapidly being domesticated and put to practical use. However, to more fully understand the modern GIS, we have to follow the king's advice in Alice in Wonderland- "begin at the beginning and go on until you come to the end; then stop." Contrary to my academic background, I will attempt to heed this advice well within our allotted time.

HISTORICAL OVERVIEW
Information has always been the cornerstone of effective decisions. Resource and environmental information are particularly complex as they require two descriptors- where is what. For hundreds of years the link between the two descriptors has been the traditional, manually drafted map. Its historical use was for navigation through unfamiliar terrain and seas, with emphasis on the accurate location of physical features.
      More recently, analysis of mapped data for decision-making has become an important part of resource planning. This new perspective marks a turning point in the use of maps- from one emphasizing physical description of geographic space, to one of interpreting mapped data, and finally, to spatially characterizing and communicating management decisions. This movement from "where is what" to "so what" has set the stage for entirely new concepts in planning and management. Resource and environmental endeavors are inherently spatial. The use of manual, map analysis techniques was popularized in the late 1960s through Ian McHarg's book "Design With Nature." A 1973 regulatory guide for wetland subdivision in the state of Maine describes the process as"...The water systems map, vegetation map, soils map, and noise/visual impact map are placed over each other, taking care to see that the features of each map overlay one another exactly. ...The entire bundle is then placed over a strong light source, such as a window. ...Certain areas on the property will show through lighter than other areas. These lighter areas represent those portions of the property which have fewer restrictions on them. ...A tracing of the outlines of the light areas is then made. ..."
      The coining of the term geographic information systems in the late 60s codifies this movement from maps as images to mapped data. Keep in mind, information is GIS's middle name. Of course, there have been other, more descriptive definitions of GIS- such as "Gee It's Stupid," or "Guessing Is Simpler," or, my personal favorite, "Guaranteed Income Stream."
      Since the 1960s, the decision-making process has become increasingly quantitative and mathematical models have become commonplace. Prior to the computerized map, most spatial analysis concepts were limited in their practical implementation. The computer has provided the means for both efficient handling of voluminous data and spatial analysis capabilities. From this perspective, all geographic information systems are rooted in the digital nature of the computerized map. Don Cook made this point with his rhetorical question, "What problems do paper maps solve? ... decoration and fire starting."

COMPUTER MAPPING (in the beginning)
The early 1970s saw computer mapping automate the cartographic process. The points, lines and areas defining geographic features on a map are represented as an organized set of X,Y coordinates. These data form input to a pen plotter which can rapidly redraw the connections at a variety of scales and projections. The map image, itself, is the focus of this processing. In one sense, you can say GIS is "based on LAT/LONG... Look At That (LAT) and Lots Of Neat Graphics (LONG)."
      But that's an unfair understatement. The pioneering work during this period established many of the underlying concepts and procedures of modern GIS technology. An obvious advantage of computer mapping is the ability to change a portion of a map and quickly redraft the entire area. Revisions to resource maps which would normally take weeks, such as a forest fire update, can be done in a few hours. The less obvious advantage is the radical change in the format of mapped data- from analog inked lines on paper, to digital values stored on disk. However, the most lasting implication of computer mapping is the realization that "it comes with some assembly required." Before you can map, you must assemble a deluge of digital data on your disk.

SPATIAL DATA MANAGEMENT (the early years)
The early 1980s exploited the change in format and computer environment of mapped data. Spatial database management systems were developed that linked computer mapping techniques with traditional database capabilities. For example, a user is able to point at any location on a map and instantly retrieve information about that location. Alternatively, a user can specify a set of conditions, such as a specific forest and soil combination, and direct the result of the geographic search to be displayed as a map... "sort of a database with a picture waiting to happen."
      The demand for this spatially and thematically linked data focused attention on data issues. The result was a integrated processing environment for a wide variety of mapped data. In resource applications, it allows remotely sensed imagery, digital elevation, roads and vegetation maps to co-exist in the same computing environment. In a more real context, it sets the stage for spatial data, itself, to be fully integrated with standard office automation and electronic communication systems. The vendors' show in conjunction with this conference attests to the friendliness and integration levels modern GIS has achieved.
      Increasing demands for mapped data focused attention on data availability, accuracy and standards. Hardware vendors continued to improve digitizing equipment, with manual digitizing tablets giving way to automated scanners at many GIS sites. A new industry for map encoding and database design emerged, as well as a marketplace for the sales of digital map products. Regional, national and international organizations began addressing the necessary standards for digital maps to insure compatibility among systems. This era saw GIS database development move from project costing to equity investment justification- the ultimate form of recognition from the all-powerful auditor types.

SPATIAL ANALYSIS AND MODELING (contemporary times)
Concurrent with database development, attention was focused on analytical operations. The early GIS systems concentrated on automating our current mapping practices. If a resource manager had to overlay several maps on a light-table, an analogous procedure was developed within the GIS. Similarly, if repeated distance and bearing calculations were needed, the GIS was programmed with a mathematical solution. The result of this effort was GIS functionality that mimicked the manual procedures in our daily activities. The value of these systems was the savings gained by automating tedious and repetitive operations.
      By the mid-1980s a comprehensive theory of spatial analysis began to emerge. This theory, to many, is as uncomfortable as it is unfamiliar. It's sort of a Technical Oz..."you're hit with a tornado of new concepts, temporarily hallucinate and come back to yourself a short time later, wondering what on Earth all those crazy things meant."
      This "map-ematical" processing takes two forms- spatial statistics and spatial modeling. Spatial statistics has been used by geophysicists for many years in characterizing the geographic distribution, or pattern, of mapped data. The statistics describe the spatial variation in the data, rather than assuming a typical response is everywhere. For example, field measurements of snow depth can be made at several plots within a watershed. Traditionally, these data are analyzed for a single value (the average depth and standard deviation) to characterize the watershed. Spatial statistics, on the other hand, uses both the location and the measurements at the plots to generate a map of relative snow depth throughout the entire watershed.
      The full impact of this map-ematical treatment of maps is yet to be determined. The application of such concepts as spatial correlation, statistical filters, map uncertainty and error propagation await their translation from other fields.
      Spatial modeling, on the other hand, has a rapidly growing number of current resource applications. These procedures express a resource concern as a series of map analysis steps, leading to a "solution map." For example, forest managers can characterize timber supply by considering the relative skidding and log-hauling accessibility of harvesting parcels. Wildlife managers can consider such factors as proximity to roads and relative housing density to map human activity and incorporate this information into habitats. Landscape planners can assess the visual exposure of alternative sites for a facility to sensitive viewing locations, such as roads and scenic overlooks.
      Most of the traditional mathematical capabilities, plus an extensive set of advanced map processing operations, are available in modern GIS packages. You can add, subtract, multiply, divide, exponentiate, root, log, cosine, differentiate and even integrate maps. After all, maps in a GIS are just an organized set of numbers. However, with map-ematics, the spatial coincidence and juxtapositioning of values among and within maps create new operations, such as effective distance, optimal path routing, visual exposure density and landscape diversity, shape and pattern. To some, the fractal dimension and second derivative of a map actually have meaning. To others, General Halftrack in the Beetle Bailey comic strip summed it up: "There is only one problem with having all of this sophisticated equipment, we don't have anyone sophisticated enough to use it."
      That brings me to the Go Bang Condition. At one point in my grandfather's career he was a district ranger in the Forest Service, and Go Bang was his horse. He would ride throughout his district, and to hear him tell it, he knew every tree branch and blade of grass. Then the pickup truck arrived, and from then on the forester was removed from the forest with only a windshield vignette of the place. He knew when forestry died. My father was a consulting forester, who while he cursed his old Studebaker pickup, never entertained a romantic thought of steering a cantankerous beast through the woods. But, then again, he felt that those damn aerial photos kept the forester's head in the clouds. He knew when forestry died. So, what about this GIS thing? Is it just another layer of technology that further removes the manager from the space he or she manages? Where is it taking us? Will future generations simply envelop GIS as it moves on to the next technological confrontation? Will we ever really know when forestry dies?

SPATIAL DIALOGUE (probable future)
Like the Phoenix, technology seems to rise from ashes of the uninitiated. Increasingly, it seems we are becoming a litigation society. Each resource decision is challenged, and as a result the Decision Impotency Syndrome is running rampant- "ready, aim, aim, aim, aim..." Effective decisions are rare indeed and the decision-making process, itself, has been infected with "paralysis through analysis" and a "data gridlock." In response to this malaise, the 1990s will build on the cognitive basis, as well as the data bases, of GIS technology.
      Resource information systems are at threshold that is pushing well beyond mapping, management, and even modeling, to spatial reasoning and dialogue. In the past, analysis models have focused on management options that are technically optimal- the scientific solution. Yet in reality, there is another set of perspectives that must be considered- the social solution. It is this final sieve of management alternatives that most often confounds resource decision-making. It uses elusive measures, such as human values, attitudes, beliefs, judgement, trust and understanding. These are not the usual quantitative measures amenable to computer algorithms and traditional decision-making models.
      The step from technically feasible to socially acceptable options is not so much increased scientific and econometric modeling, as it is communication. Basic to effective communication is involvement of interested parties throughout the decision-making process. This new participatory environment has two main elements- consensus building and conflict resolution.
      Consensus building involves technically-driven communication and occurs during the alternative formulation phase. It involves the resource specialist's translation of the various considerations raised by a decision team into a spatial model. Once completed, the model is executed under a wide variety of conditions and the differences in outcome are noted.
      From this perspective, a single map of a forest plan is not the objective. It is how maps change as the different scenarios are tried that becomes information. "What if avoidance of visual exposure is more important than avoidance of steep slopes in siting a new haul road? Where does the proposed route change, if at all?" Answers to these analytic queries focus attention on the effects of differing perspectives. Often, seemingly divergent philosophical views result in only slightly different map views. This realization, coupled with active involvement in the decision-making process, often lead to group consensus.
      However, if consensus is not obtained, conflict resolution is necessary. This approach extends the Grateful Dead's lyrics, "nobody is right, if everybody is wrong," by seeking an acceptable management action through the melding of different perspectives. The socially-driven communication occurs during the decision formulation phase. It involves the creation of a "conflicts map" which compares the outcomes from two or more competing uses. Each management parcel is assigned a numeric code describing the actual conflict over the location. A parcel might be identified as ideal for a wildlife preservation, a campground and a timber harvest. As these alternatives are mutually exclusive, a single use must be assigned. The assignment, however, involves a holistic perspective which simultaneously considers the assignments of all other locations in a project area.
      Traditional scientific approaches are rarely effective in addressing the holistic problem of conflict resolution. Even if a scientific solution is reached, it is viewed with suspicion by the layman. Modern resource information systems provide an alternative approach involving human rationalization and tradeoffs. This process involves statements like, "If you let me harvest this parcel, I will let you set aside that one as a wildlife preservation." The statement is followed by a persuasive argument and group discussion. The dialogue is far from a mathematical optimization, but often closer to an effective decision. It uses the information system to focus discussion away from broad philosophical positions, to a specific project area and its unique distribution of conditions and potential uses.

CRITICAL ISSUES (future challenges)
The technical hurdles surrounding GIS have been aggressively tackled. Digital databases are taking form, software sales are accelerating and most office automation packages are planning a "mapping button" in their next release. So what is the most pressing issue confronting GIS in the next millennium? Calvin, of the Calvin and Hobbes comic strip, puts it in perspective: "Why waste time learning, when ignorance is instantaneous?" Why should time be wasted in GIS training and education? It's just a tool, isn't it? The users can figure it out for themselves. They quickly grasped the operational concepts of the toaster, indoor plumbing, rapidograph pen and zip-a-tone. We have been mapping for thousands of years and it's second nature. GIS technology just automated it and made it easier... heck, you don't even have to wash the ink off your hands.
      Admittedly, this is a bit of an overstatement, but it does set the stage for GIS's largest hurdle- educating potential users on what GIS is (and isn't). In many respects, GIS technology is not mapping as usual. The rights, privileges and responsibilities of interacting with mapped variables are much more demanding than interactions with traditional maps and spatial records. At least as much attention (and ultimately, direct investment) should go into application development and personnel training as is given to hardware, software and database development. Like the automobile and indoor plumbing, GIS won't be an important technology until it fades into the fabric of society and is taken for granted. It must become second nature for both accessing information and translating it into decisions... much more attention needs to be focused beyond mapping to that of spatial reasoning, the "softer" side of GIS.

CONCLUSION
GIS technology is evolutionary, not revolutionary. It responds to contemporary needs as much as it responds to technical breakthroughs. Planning and management have always required information as their cornerstone. Early resource information systems relied on physical storage of data and manual processing. With the advent of the computer, most of these data and procedures were automated. As a result, the focus of these systems has been expanded from descriptive inventories to prescriptive analysis. In this transition, map analysis has become more quantitative. This wealth of new processing capabilities provides an opportunity to address complex issues in entirely new ways.
      It is clear that GIS technology has greatly changed our perspective of a map. It has moved map analysis from its historical role as a provider of input, to an active and vital ingredient in the "thruput" process of decision-making. Today's professional is challenged to understand this new environment and formulate innovative applications to meet our world's accelerating needs into the twenty-first century.

About the Author:
Joseph K. Berry is a leading consultant and educator in the application of GIS technology to natural resources and environmental planning. He is the author and co-developer of both commercial software (pMAP™) and instructional (aMAP™, tMAP™) map analysis packages. Since 1976, Dr. Berry has written more than 200 papers on "map-ematical modeling" and presented hundreds of workshops on GIS. He can be reached at 303-490-2155.

_____________________________________________________
This paper supports a Keynote Address for the 8th Annual Geographic Information Systems Conference, Towson State University, Towson, Maryland, USA, June 7-8, 1995. It is based on the Epilog to Beyond Mapping: Concepts, Algorithms, and Issues in GIS (Berry, 1993; GIS World Books). All figures were provided by Innovative GIS Solutions Inc., in Fort Collins, Colo. They were generated using ARC/INFO GIS software by ESRI and RapidARC application development software for ARC/INFO by Innovative GIS Solutions.

Back