REPORT OF WORKING GROUP 2
Issues Relating to Cadastral Infrastructure
[This report covers activities undertaken during the first and second Permanent
Committee meetings by Working Group 2 and a brief introduction about the
WG]
REPORT FROM WORKING GROUP 2
CADASTRAL ISSUES (Meeting of 2nd February 1997)
This meeting was attended by representatives from New Zealand (Chair),
Australia, Philippines, Guam, Malaysia, Singapore and Japan.
The report and action plan of Working Group 2 was reviewed and the progress
with key issues and actions summarised. A number of other issues that
contributed to Working Group objectives and further initiatives for the
Permanent Committee to consider were identified.
1.
Noted that the Bogor Declaration on cadastral issues identified and summarised the
policy issues and principles and set out key strategies that individual jurisdictions could
consider applying to meet their own priorities and situations.
2.
Noted that a number of cost benefit studies had been carried out to support cadastral
developments. The Permanent Committee should seek opportunities to consolidate and
share this information and experience, so as to enable jurisdictions to develop appropriate
cost benefit analyses.
3.
Noted that the issue of integrating a state or nation's cadastral framework (or DCDB) into
the national spatial data infrastructure (and particularly integrating it with the topographic
dataset) is arguably the major limitation in establishing a GIS infrastructure in member
states. Working Group 2 recommends the meeting endorse the need for the UNRCC to
examine these technical and institutional issues, through workshops, seminars or
conferences concerned with integrating cadastral and topographic data.
4.
Noted the initiatives reported by some of the countries at the Working Group meeting to
achieve a greater integration of GIS activities by providing an authoritative spatial
reference framework, typically geodetic, cadastral, place names and topographic,
supported by standards for data exchange.
5.
On the current action to develop a process to collect and index status reports from
individual jurisdictions on cadastral activities, the Working Group noted the opportunity to
record responses in the Permanent Committee's Internet homepage to facilitate access by
member countries.
Accordingly it is recommended that the Permanent Committee utilise the
homepage site developed by AUSLIG to record members' responses to
the questionnaire. It was agreed that the chair of the Working Group
would discuss this further with AUSLIG.
It was also agreed that if possible the Penang/Singapore FIG meeting be
utilised to finalise the questionnaire format. It was further noted that FIG
has also developed a questionnaire on certain cadastral issues, and that
links should be established between these datasets. The chair of Working
Group 2 is to liaise with the chair of FIG commission 7.
6.
On the action plan item to develop models for cadastral systems (as already circulated for
comments) members were encouraged to see this item as a guide line for their own
application as well as to provide comments to the chair of the Working Group.
Professor Williamson drew the Working Group's attention to a
comprehensive report by the Economic Commission for Europe on Land
Administration Studies. Reference is ISBN 92-1-1166446 available from
the UN.
Reference was also made to the International Cadastral Reference Centre
(hosted by the Dutch government cadastral survey agency), which
provided access to a comprehensive index on papers and information
related to cadastral issues. Copies of papers are provided free of charge.
7.
The Working Group agreed to recommend to the Permanent Committee that it endorse
the UN/FIG meeting to be held in Bathurst, NSW Australia, 18-21 October 1999. It was
noted that this meeting would be addressing issues on right, restriction and
responsibilities in land and associated cadastral reform issues. These were identified as an
issue for the Working Group's longer term work plan.
ISSUES RELATING TO CADASTRAL INFRASTRUCTURE
INTRODUCTION
1. This Working Group was formed at the inaugural meeting of the Permanent
Committee, in Kuala Lumpur 1995 under the chairmanship of Mr. Tony Bevin,
Surveyor General (New Zealand).
2. This Working Group was formed in recognition of the growing importance of
cadastral systems to the sustainable growth and development of societies and
communities. There is also a recognition and appreciation that cadastral
systems need to be appropriate and responsive to the individual requirements
and culture of the communities and nations they serve and that no one model
will meet all needs.
3. The agreed role of the Working Group is:
To assist the Executive Board and Permanent Committee to determine
principles and options for the development of jurisdictional cadastral
infrastructure and cadastral management systems.
ACTIVITIES - FIRST PC MEETING
4. At the first meeting the Working Group (Kuala Lumpur 1995) it was reaffirmed
that a GIS infrastructure requires a Digital Cadastral Data Base (DCDB), which
must be able to be spatially related to other core spatial data base sets. In
order to achieve this relationship, these core spatial data bases must be based
on a common national control network and georeference system.
5. The essential requirements of a DCDB were identified, in summary as:

Policy Issues

Implementation Processes

DCDB System Operation Technology

DCDB Data Base

Legal and Corporate Issues
6. Issues noted for consideration by countries in implementing a DCDB were:
(a) Cost/benefit analysis, which may vary considerably from country to country,
depending on such factors as land value, stages of development and
Government priorities.
(b) DCDB and Topographical Data Bases are separate databases, but need to
be spatially compatible, through a common reference frame.
(c) DCDB needs to be able to accommodate data of widely varying quality,
accuracy and sources.
DCDB data need to be able to be:

progressively refined and upgraded in response to user demand;

suitably "tagged" or identified in the DCDB as to accuracy and source;

subject to a policy of upgrade by connection to a geodetic framework.
(d) Public confidence in the survey system is a key issue. DCDB should be
regarded as an economic asset.
(e) Copyright ownership and access to data - in principle, access should be as
free as possible.
(f) Liability disclaimers or qualifications as to the reliability of the data.
(g) Cost of a DCDB can be spread by ensuring a multi-purpose approach, thus
it is important to identify user requirements.
It was noted that several of these issues would require careful consideration, to
take into account where individual jurisdictionsmay have different requirements
or policies.
7. A number of challenges for DCDB were identified, such as:

Cadastral reform

Technology and opportunity to re-engineer traditional processes

New or unexpected user demands

Education of users
8. A number of critical success factors for the development of cadastral survey
system, and hence the development of a DCDB, were identified as:

public confidence in land ownership and investment

security of tenure

clear and simple processes

readily accessible to appropriate users

low transaction costs

facilitates transactions and investment

provides up-to-date information at low cost

informs and supports other land administration and GIS applications

seen to facilitate sound land use decisions

educated user community

multi-purpose applications.
ACTIVITIES - SECOND PC MEETING
9. At the second meeting of the WG, held at the second meeting of the PC in
Sydney 1996, an action plan was developed, with the objectives of:
(a) Set up communications channels.
(b) Distribute forms to collect status reports and identify issues facing
jurisdictions.
(c) It was noted that Professor Don Grant (NSW, Australia) is preparing a paper
for FIG Commission 7 on privatisation and cost recovery of spatial data for
presentation at the Commission 7 workshop in Penang in May next year.
It was agreed:

that this provided a very useful forum for the Working Group to progress its action plan
in this regard; and

to arrange for information relating to cadastral aspects of this study be forwarded to the
chairman for referral to Professor Grant for inclusion in his report.
(d) Identify future actions arising from the Bogor Declaration and 'issue report', such as:

promotion and recognition of the need for cadastral mapping and/or DCDB;

preparation of a set of general principles which apply to cadastral reform; and

preparation of model guidelines for cadastral standards.
(e) It was noted that there will be several cadastral workshops and conferences
over the next few years which will provide valuable opportunities to progress the
work of the WG.
These are:

UN Regional Cartographic Conference Bangkok Feb 97

FIG Commission 7 Penang May 97

PC Meeting Iran 1998

FIG Commission 7 New Zealand 1999
10. A project identified for completion in 1996/97 was:

Status of Cadastral Systems

Reforms and Modernisation Issues

Key Agencies and Contracts
A sample guide was prepared (using New Zealand as an example) and
circulated to members, for discussion and finalisation at the 3rd PC held in
Bangkok 1997.
11. The Working Group also made the following recommendations to the PC:

approve the change of title and role for the Working Group as proposed in this report;

prepare a statement to the UNRCC on the importance of making use of the combined
services which can be provided by the public, academic and private sectors;

support the principle that when Permanent Committee meetings are being held, visits to
local technical organisations be arranged; and

accept the work plan prepared by the Working Group on Cadastral Infrastructure.
A J Bevin
Chairman