Perspectives on the evaluation of geo-ict for sustainable urban governance: Implications for e-government policy

URISA Journal

Volumn 25, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 19-28

  Navarra, Diego D ^a  

^a Berkeley Square House Berkeley Square ^*  (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84881536785     PISSN: 10458077     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Akingbade, A., D. D. Navarra, and Y. Georgiadou. 2009. A 10- year review and classification of the geographic information systems impact literature (1998-2008). Nordic Journal of Surveying and Real Estate Research 6: 81-113.
2. Bailey, K. D. 1994. Typologies and taxonomies: An introduction to classification techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
3. Basta, C., J. M. M. Neuvel, S. Zlatanova, and B. Ale. 2007. Riskmaps informing land-use planning processes: A survey on the Netherlands and the United Kingdom recent developments. Journal of Hazardous Materials 145 (1-2): 241-49.
4. Bianchi, C. 2010. Improving performance and fostering accountability in the public sector through system dynamics modelling: From an "external" to an "internal" perspective. Systems Research and Behavioral Science 27: 361-84.
5. Bruggeman, H., and J. Riecken. 2005. Reference data in the Internet-implementation of SDI services as part of egovernment. Eleventh EC-GI and GIS Workshop ESDI, Alghero.
6. Campagna, M., and G. Deplano. 2004. Evaluating geographic information provision within public administration Web sites. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 31: 21-37.
7. Carsjens, G. J., and A. Ligtenberg. 2007. A GIS-based support tool for sustainable spatial planning in metropolitan areas. Landscape and Urban Planning 80 (1-2): 72-83.
8. Ciborra, C., and D. D. Navarra. 2005. Good governance, development theory and aid policy: Risks and challenges of e-government in Jordan. Journal of Information Technology for International Development 11 (2).
9. Clapp, J. L., J. D. McLaughlin, J. G. Sullivan, and A. P. Vonderohe. 1989. Toward a method for the evaluation of multipurpose land information systems. Journal of the Urban and Regional Information Systems Association (URISA) 1: 39-45.
10. Coleman, D., and J. McLaughlin. 1997. Defining global geospatial data infrastructure (GGDI): Components, stakeholders and interfaces. Geomatica 52 (2): 129-43.
11. Crompvoets, J., E. de Man, and C. Macharis. 2010. Value of spatial data: Networked performance beyond economic rhetoric. International Journal of Spatial Data Infrastructures Research 5: 96-119.
12. de Jong, J., and M. Spaans. 2009. Trade-offs at a regional level in spatial planning: Two case studies as a source of inspiration. Land Use Policy 26: 368-79.
13. DeLone, W. H., and E. R. McLean. 1992. Information systems success: The quest for the dependent variable. Information Systems Research 3 (1): 60-95.
14. EUROGI. 2008. E-government and SDIs: Creating a powerful synergy in the interest of good governance. EUROGI Policy Statement.
15. FIG. 1995. Statement on the cadastre. Federation of Surveyors by Commission 7 (Cadastre and Land Management). Http://www.fig7.org.uk/.
16. FIG. 2009. Spatial information for sustainable management of urban areas. FIG Commission 3 Workshop, Mainz.
17. Georgiadou, Y. 2009. Using geoinformation: From market to a polis perspective. Inaugural Address, International Institute for Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation, Enschede.
18. Georgiadou, Y., O. Rodriguez-Pabón, and K. T. Lance. 2006. Spatial data infrastructure (SDI) and e-governance: A quest for appropriate evaluation approaches. Journal of the Urban and Regional Information Systems Association URISA) 18 (2): 43-55.
19. Georgiadou, Y., and J. Stoter, Eds. 2008. SDI for public governance- implications for evaluation research. A multiview framework to assess spatial data infrastructures. Wageningen, RGI, Wageningen University, and Department of Geomatics, University of Melbourne.
20. Georgiadou, Y., and J. Stoter. 2009. Studying the use of geoinformation in government-a conceptual framework. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems 34 (1): 70-78.
21. Homburg, V. 2008. Understanding e-government. London and New York: Routledge.
22. Huxhold, W. 1991. An introduction to urban geographic information systems. Oxford University Press.
23. Karikari, I., J. Stillwell, and S. Carver. 2005. The application of GIS in the lands sector of a developing country: Challenges facing land administrators in Ghana. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 19: 343-62.
24. Klecun, E., and T. Cornford. 2005. A critical approach to evaluation. European Journal of Information System 14: 229-43.
25. Koomen, E., and J. Groe. 2004. Evaluating future urbanization patterns in the Netherlands. Forth-fourth Congress of the European Regional Science Association, August 25 to 29, 2004, Porto, Portugal.
26. Koomen, E., J. Groen, J. Borsboom, and H. Scholten. 2002. Modelling the fragmentation of open space: A framework for assessing the impact of land use change on open space. Forty-second Congress of the European Regional Science Association, August 27 to 31, 2002, Dortmund, Germany.
27. Lance, K. T., P. Y, Georgiadou, and A. Bregt. 2006. Understanding how and why practitioners evaluate SDI performance. International Journal of Spatial Data Infrastructures Research (IJSDIR) 1.
28. Lee, C. 1995. Assessing the value of conceptual modelling: A cost-benefit study. Department of Management Information Systems, Eller College of Management, University of Arizona. Tucson.
29. Longhorn, R., and M. Blakemore. 2008. Geographic information: Value, pricing, production and consumption. Boca Raton: CRC Press.
30. Lukasz, G., J. Crompvoets, and A. K. Bregt, Eds. 2008. Theoretical introduction to the multiview framework to assess SDIs. A multiview framework to assess spatial data infrastructures. Wageningen, RGI, Wageningen University, and Department of Geomatics, University of Melbourne.
31. Madanipour, A., A. Hull, and P. Healey. 2001. The governance of place. Ashgate.
32. Nairn, G. 2009. Spatially enabling society through e-government: A political imperative. GSD11 World Conference-Spatial Data Infrastructrue Convergence, Rotterdam.
33. Navarra, D., and T. Cornford. 2009. Globalization, networks and governance: Researching global ICT programmes. Government Information Quarterly 26 (1): 35-41.
34. Navarra, D. D. 2009. Managing geoinformation systems in the public sector. Enschede: ITC.
35. Navarra, D. D., and T. Cornford. 2007. The state, democracy and the limits of new public management: Exploring alternative models of e-government. Working Paper Series, Department of Management ISI Group, London School of Economics and Political Science.
36. NRC. 1993. Toward a coordinated spatial data infrastructure for the nation. Washington, DC.
37. NRC. 1994. Promoting the national spatial data infrastructure through partnerships. Washington, DC.
38. NRC. 2001. National spatial data infrastructure partnership programs: Rethinking the focus. Washington, DC.
39. NRC. 2002. Down to earth: Geographical information for sustainable development in Africa. Washington, DC.
40. NRC. 2007. National land parcel data: A vision for the future. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
41. Obermeyer, N. J. 1990. Bureaucratic factors in the adoption of GIS by public organizations: Preliminary evidence from public administrators and planners. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems 14: 261-71.
42. Obermeyer, N. J. 1994. Spatial conflicts in the Information Age. Journal of the Urban and Regional Information Systems Association (URISA): 1994 Annual Conference Proceedings, Washington, DC, August 8 to 11, 1994, Milwaukee, WI, 269-82.
43. Obermeyer, N. J., and J. K. Pinto. 1990. Managing geographic information systems. New York: The Guilford Press.
44. Obermeyer, N. J., and J. K. Pinto. 2008. Managing geographic information systems. New York: The Guilford Press.
45. Palmer, D., S. Fricskas, and B. Wehrmann. 2009. Towards improved land governance. Land Tenure Working Paper 11. Rome, FAO.
46. Riedijk, A., R. J. v. d. Velde, I. D. Pleizier, T. C. Hoogerwerf, R. J. A. v. Lammeren, et al. 2006. Virtual Netherlands. Geovisualizations for interactive spatial planning and decisionmaking: From wow to impact. Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Faculteit der Economische Wetenschappen en Bedrijfskunde, Afdeling Ruimtelijke Economie/Spatial Information Laboratory (SPINlab), Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
47. Roche, S., K. Sureau, and C. Caron. 2003. How to improve the social utility value of geographic information technologies for the French local governments? A Delphi study. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 30 (3): 429-47.
48. Rodriguez-Pabón, O. 2005. Cadre theorique pour l'evalutation des infrastructures d'information geospatiale. Department Des Sciences Geomatiques, Faculte' De Foresterie Et De Geomatique. Quebec, Universite Laval. Ph.D.
49. Rumbaugh, J., I. Jacobson, and G. Booch. 1999. The unified modeling language reference manual. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
50. Stevens, A. R., H. J. Onsrud, and M. Rao. 2005. Global spatial data infrastructure (GSDI): Encouraging SDI development internationally. ISPRS Workshop on Service and Application of Spatial Data Infrastructure XXXVI (4/W6). Hangtzou, China.
51. Stoessel, W. 2006. E-government and SDI in Bavaria, Germany. FIG Workshop on e-Governance, Knowledge Management and e-Learning, Budapest.
52. Thuladar, A. 2002. Developing a framework for cadastre and land registration system in land administration organization. FIG XXII International Congress, Washington, DC.
53. Tsou, M-H., and B. P. Buttenfield. 2002. A dynamic architecture for distributing geographic information services. Transactions in GIS 6: 355-81.
54. Van der Molen, P., and M. Wubbe. 2007. E-government and e-land administration as an example: The Netherlands. Sixth FIG Regional Conference: Coastal Areas and Land Administration, Building the Capacity. San Jose, Costa Rica.
55. Worthington, A. C., and B. E. Dollery. 2000. The debate on Australian federalism: Local government financial interrelationships with state and commonwealth governments. Australian Journal of Public Administration 59 (4): 12-22.
56. Zevenbergen, J. 2002. Systems of land registration: Aspects and effects. Netherlands Geodetic Commission (NCG). Delft, University of Delft. Ph.D.