From the Publisher
By Roland Mangold

GeoTechnologies or Y2K - Beneficial or Boondoggle?

OK - I'll admit holding my breath since last issue's editorial when I predicted that Y2K would pass with little or no effect. Organizations who have invested heavily in Y2K mitigation procedures are revealing they weathered the potential disaster because of their foresight and proactive measures. We'll never really know the effectiveness of the purported mitigating measures because no one will admit to having wasted potentially millions of dollars. But then, insurance premiums could be considered wasted if the policy is never executed.
      The great thing about the GeoTechnologies is that they are making real world contributions preventing, mitigating, averting and recovering from disasters every day. As I mentioned last issue, this is becoming a fundamental theme for this industry and the benefits are identifiable - unlike the Y2K boondoggle.
      This issue of EOM includes another excellent example of how the GeoTechnologies can benefit the disaster business. "Louisiana Parish Reduces Flood Potential with GIS Modeling," by Kevin Corbley shows how the West Jefferson Levee District turned to GIS and other GeoTechnologies to fully assess flood danger and to generate a graphical illustration for state and federal agencies, showing them what might happen if a storm were to hit the parish head on. The GIS models made such a persuasive case that the parish received more than $40 million to make improvements they had sought for the last 15 years. An estimated 250,000 people will be protected once the work is completed and the system will continue to benefit the parish with use in every day operations and in emergency situations and monitoring.
      Another article by the prolific Kevin Corbley, "Canadian Firm Provides Turnkey Solution for Indonesian Coastline Mapping Project" illustrates an interesting project on many fronts. One is the sheer size of the area being mapped, second is how large remote sensing and mapping projects are changing, and third is that remote sensing companies can no longer simply provide data but must provide a turnkey solution.
      Also, we are pleased to provide a thought provoking article by Kas Ebrahim, president of Landata Airborne Systems. He argues that if we can move toward "Viewing Geospatial Database Acquisition as an Investment," that it will free-up significant financing, force data standardization, and ultimately putting GIS into the mainstream computer market.
      This is an interesting model, one which should be examined by the National Spatial Data Infrastructure initiative, as well as all organizations considering developing their geospatial database. Mr. Ebrahim's article makes note of the need for standardization. But, more importantly he suggests an economic model which should be considered by organizations looking at the financial aspects of the development of their geospatial data and land base. The biggest hurdle that Mr. Ebrahim and NSDI face is the omnipresent "not invented here" attitude which exists within the geospatial community. However, this is a situation which will rectify itself over time with the efforts of the NSDI , other organizations such as the Open GIS Consortium, and industry professionals like Kas Ebrahim working towards a movement of interoperability and standardization.
      Arguably, the lack of interoperability and standardization in the geospatial industry could be costing more money and problems than potentially could have been created by Y2K. Maybe we need to start using similar scare tactics that the Y2K consultants were able to effect which virtually consumed our society leading up to the new year. If the GeoTechnologies could get a fraction of the investment that was sunk into Y2K - the benefits to society would be far greater.

Cheers!

Roland Mangold
Publisher, EOM
E-mail: [email protected]

Back