Weihe Guan
ABSTRACT
Construction and Land Management Department (CALM) is one of
the nine departments in South Florida Water Management District, an
environmental management agency in charge of flood control, water
supply, water quality protection and wetland conservation in south
Florida.
Five years after the District adopted ArcInfo as the main GIS
software, CALM took the lead in completing a detailed departmental
level GIS development plan, including an economic evaluation on the
benefit and cost of further implementing GIS applications to the
department's day-to-day work, ranging from surveying and mapping,
real estate acquisition, right of way permitting, to management
planning, operation and monitoring for environmentally sensitive
land.
This study demonstrates the potentials of an ArcInfo-ARCVIEW
based GIS system in environmental land management, the procedures
to turn a "
need list" to a realistic implementation plan, and
the approaches to evaluate the economic impacts of such
implementation.
1. INTRODUCTION
A 15-member GIS Planning Committee was established in the
summer of 1994 to develop a departmental GIS plan that would guide
the department during the next one to three years. By the end of
1994, the "
PLAN FOR LAND MANAGEMENT" was completed (Guan,
1994).
The plan was aimed at enhancing GIS support to daily
operations by taking advantage of the technology; establishing
departmental GIS priorities; determining the hardware, software,
data conversion, programming and training needs for implementing
GIS applications; and enhancing coordination of GIS projects among
divisions within the department and with other departments in the
District.
The committee started by conducting an intensive survey on GIS
facilities, data and application status and needs in every
participating division and unit. As a result of the survey, the
members identified many potential GIS application cases and
supporting data creation or conversion work. They further examined
the relative importance of these work; determined their priority;
summarized the overall needs in hardware, software, personnel and
training; conducted benefit-cost analysis for implementation; and
provided recommendations on the related implementation issues.
This planning process has been a learning exercise to all
committee members. Much information exchange happened during the
committee meetings and the survey and planning interviews. Due to
the constant on-going development of GIS, both in the participating
divisions and the District at large, the GIS plan becomes a
"living" document. It is to be updated as GIS is being implemented
through the planned phases.
This paper is a brief summary of the planning process and the
hundred-page-long plan document.
2. OVERVIEW OF CURRENT GIS APPLICATION STATUS
2.1. GIS Data
Land Management attribute data is mostly maintained in the
ORACLE database called LAMIS. Almost every item in the database is
related to some geographic features. GIS is highly applicable to
the Land Management database.
The District classified primary coverages (public land, right
of way, topo quads) are stored in a public-accessible central
location (usr/pcovs/); Divisions have their own working space for
data storage in the UNIX system. ELVIS, a SPARC SS670 computer, is
the current server for Land Management. There are sub-directories
for AutoCAD data, ArcInfo data, other application files, and user
home directories on ELVIS.
2.2. GIS Applications
Presently there are several user interface applications
developed, such as the one for Right of Way reference background
display for permit input, the one for "Save Our Rivers" land
management information query at field stations; the one for Land
Stewardship population query and statistical report for recreation
analysis, and the one for Real Estate land acquisition query. More
such user interface is in demand for a large number of various
application projects.
2.3. Facilities
Presently, most GIS applications are on UNIX workstations
using the District's floating licenses for ArcInfo(ver.7) and
ARCVIEW(ver.2). Through PC-NFS, PCs with adequate graphic card and
X-Window emulator are able to function as a workstation terminal
and run all the UNIX supported software, including ArcInfo and
ARCVIEW in the floating license pool.
3. ANALYSIS OF GIS APPLICATION POTENTIALS
According to the GIS future application list presented by each
division, the committee identified a total of 45 potential
application cases. These ranged from coverage creation, data
conversion, on-line input, graphic query and display, mapping,
spatial analysis and modeling. Most of them are to be designed with
a menu-driven user interface.
Table 1. Summary of Potential GIS Application Cases by Division
_________________________________________________________________
Application Survey Real Right Land Staff Total
Category & Estate of Steward-
Mapping Way ship
_________________________________________________________________
Data Processing
Creating coverage 10 10
Input 2 2 4
Editing 1 1
Conversion 1 1
_________________________________________________________________
Graphic Output
Query & Display 4 2 3 9
Mapping 1 2 3
_________________________________________________________________
Spatial Modeling
Planning 10 10
Monitoring 3 3
Analysis 2 2
Evaluation 1 1
_________________________________________________________________
Sub-Total 13 4 4 18 6 45
_________________________________________________________________
4. IMPLEMENTATION NEEDS
To implement the identified potential GIS applications, the
department needs to expend in hardware, software, contracts for
data conversion, and staff time for database maintenance, user
interface program development and training.
4.1. Hardware Needs
Divisions with large number of PC-based GIS users need a
workstation as the local host to support the PC users running GIS
programs. Laptop portable PCs and GPS data logger are needed for
the field crews to collect, convert and update GIS data on site.
4.2. Software Needs
Most of the GIS software is provided by the District as
floating license through the network. Connected with PC-NFS, the
PC-users need to install XoftWare, a UNIX window environment
emulator, to login to a UNIX workstation and run ArcInfo or
ARCVIEW through the network.
4.3. Data Conversion and Maintenance Needs
Data conversion is of critical importance to the
implementation of GIS applications. In most divisions and units.
Conversion of data from non-GIS format into GIS format requires
extensive effort and a commitment of time and money. Such
conversion is a one-time effort. The longer the waiting, the more
costly it will be.
4.4. User Interface Development Needs
More menu-driven user interface needs to be developed for data
sets maintenance and other day-to-day work. This include the AML
customized ArcInfo applications and AVENUE customized ARCVIEW
applications. Such user interface is in demand for a large number
of various application projects in all divisions.
4.5. Training Needs
Most GIS users already have Introduction to ArcInfo training.
Introduction to ARCVIEW will be the most needed training course to
new users for implementing GIS applications. For the current GIS
users, specific training on ARCEDIT and ARCPLOT are needed, where
ARCEDIT is for those who are responsible for data entry and
database updating, and ARCPLOT is for those who are producing maps.
Survey and Mapping Division requires specific training in
ARC-COGO (Coordinate Geometry Program) and GIS data conversion.
Land Stewardship Division needs advanced training in GIS Modeling.
It also needs to train several staff on GPS operation and data
processing.
5. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPLEMENTATION
5.1. Recommendations on Implementation Phases
The committee recommends a two-phase implementation strategy.
Phase I is to implement all the identified potential application
cases that have a significant, measurable economic benefit. It is
to be completed in three years. Phase II is to implement additional
application cases that have a clear intangible benefit but a longer
measurable economic recovery period based on current estimation. As
the GIS technology develops, the measurable benefit in the future
may increase as the hardware and software costs decrease. Moreover,
when more and more other agencies such as county governments adopt
GIS technology, it will be less costly to collect GIS compatible
data. It is suggested that the department conduct a follow-up
economic evaluation three years later before Phase II starts.
5.2. Recommendations on Related Issues
5.2.1. In-house verses contract projects
Contract projects are recommended for bringing back-log data
input work to current, and for converting large amount of data from
paper format to digital format. Routine update and maintenance of
the data sets are recommended to be done in-house. GIS user
interface program development work is recommended to be done at the
District. Training is to be coordinated with the District GIS
training plan. Some introductory level training is recommended to
be done at the District within the department level.
5.2.2. Distributed verses centralized implementation system
The committee recommended a divisional level distributed GIS
system, which is similar to the District-wide distributed GIS
system concept. It requires each division to be responsible for
data entry, maintenance, manipulation, query and processing through
user interface, and map/report output for the division's needs.
Survey and Mapping Division is to be responsible for preparing and
maintaining survey quality coverages, design and develop GIS user
interface, and produce publication quality maps.
Compared with a centralized GIS system, the distributed system
has several advantages, including optimal prioritization, better
understanding of the data and applications, and timely update of
the database. A distributed system will need a strong department-
level GIS technical support team to provide the expertise, and to
assist the GIS personnel in the divisional level, and to coordinate
efforts among divisions through various communication channels.
It is also recommended that a departmental level GIS technical
support team be formed to help solve end users' problems; and a GIS
coordinator committee, to coordinate the database management,
application development, and map/report generating efforts among
divisions and units.
5.2.3. Division based GIS data/service centers
The committee recommended that in each division (except Survey
and Mapping), one or two staff members be assigned responsibility
for GIS database maintenance. They will be the only ones given
write access to the parts of the database that they are responsible
for. They will receive more training than ordinary end users, and
may instruct other users on how to access the database.
For divisions with limited computer resources, such as the
Real Estate Division, a centrally located workstation (Preferably
SPARC 10) with output device (printer and/or plotter) will serve as
a local server to the PCs running ARCVIEW applications through
XoftWare. More experienced users may also use the workstation
directly to run ArcInfo applications, if needed.
The center may have one designated individual, with adequate
training and computer equipment, process all GIS application
requests from the division. This will minimize the training and
computer equipment needs and improve the efficiency and accuracy of
the GIS application process. It may also be a transitional measure
until the division upgrades its computer systems and implements
overall computer and GIS training.
6. ECONOMIC EVALUATION
6.1. Benefit-Cost Analysis Assumptions
The economic evaluation was conducted on division/unit level.
All divisions followed the common analysis assumptions and used the
same value conversion standards in the benefit and cost
estimations.
6.1.1. Hardware cost
a. If the hardware is already approved in this year's budget,
it is considered as existing hardware and will not be calculated
into the cost of this GIS plan;
b. If the hardware will be partly used for GIS work, and
partly used for other computer work, its full price is calculated
into the "Total Cost", and the percentage for GIS use times its
full price is calculated into the "
Cost". These two numbers are
used in parallel when calculating the total initial cost and the
cost recover period.
6.1.2. Software cost
a. If the software is available through the network, as a
District-wide floating license, it is considered as existing
software and will not be calculated into the cost in this GIS plan;
b. If the software is already approved in this year's budget,
it is considered as existing hardware and will not be calculated
into the cost in this GIS plan.
6.1.3. Data cost
a. If the data exists in GIS format, there is no initial cost
for this GIS plan. The maintenance cost is calculated as part of
the "do the work with GIS" cost in the benefit analysis;
b. If the data exists in some non-GIS format, the initial cost
is to convert it into GIS format;
c. If the data does not exist and needs to be collected, the
cost of collecting data is estimated in two ways: one is to collect
it into GIS format, the other is to collect it into non-GIS format.
The difference of the two will be calculated into the cost (or
benefit) of GIS in this plan.
d. If the data conversion work is too much to be done at the
District in a reasonable period of time, the part that could not be
done at the agency will be considered as potential contract work,
at an average cost of $50/hour.
6.1.4. Development cost and training cost
The staff time spent on developing the programming codes,
implementing the GIS applications, and obtaining adequate training
for using the applications is calculated. The training is
coordinated by the District and the instructor's cost is not
calculated in this plan.
6.1.5. Measurable benefit
For each project, the staff time to do the work "with GIS" and
the staff time to do the same work "without GIS" are estimated.
"With GIS" means dong the work with the planned potential GIS
applications implemented as recommended; "without GIS" means doing
the work under current conditions without implementing any of the
potential GIS applications identified in this plan, use existing
GIS if possible, and use other means if no GIS is available. The
difference of the two is calculated as the benefit (or cost) of GIS
in this plan. The staff time in both "with and without GIS"
includes the database maintenance, new data entering as it is
available, data research, analysis, presentation, and generating
final reports and maps, as necessary.
6.1.6. Intangible benefit
Many of the GIS applications will benefit not only CALM but
other departments in the District; some will also benefit other
agencies and the general public. Although these benefits may be
measurable in those departments and agencies, this planning
committee does not have direct access to the information to present
such benefit in quantity. Only verbal descriptions are presented
regarding such benefits in this plan. This includes who are the
potential users, which application they may use, and on what
approximate frequency.
The intangible benefits considered in this plan are:
Timely response to the public
Better decision making
Avoidance of possible litigation
Comprehensive information presentation
Timely data update
Reduced data redundancy
Improved data accuracy
Improved data consistency
Improved data compatibility
Improved data accessibility
Enhanced data sharing
All amounts are stated in current (1994) dollars. No effects
from inflation and cost of capital have been included in this
economic analysis. All costs are planned to be spent within 3
years. Considering the price declining trend in computer hardware
and software, the actual expenditure in the future may be less than
what presented in this analysis. The measurable benefits are the
salary saved on District staff at 1994 salary standard. Assuming
the District salary is to fluctuate with inflation, the effect of
inflation on benefit calculation is therefore already reflected in
this analysis.
6.2. Benefit-Cost Analysis Results
The measurable benefits and costs were analyzed item-by-item
and division-by-division.The results are summarized in Table 2 and
3.
Table 2. Itemized Cost and Measurable Savings
_________________________________________________________________
Division Survey Real Right Land Staff Total
& Estate of Steward-
Mapping Way ship
_________________________________________________________________
Total Hardware 0 19504 55163 151586 34972 261225
Total Software 0 0 0 12000 0 12000
Data Conversion 113160 468000 161820 180000 491667 1414647
Implementation 11520 5500 512 20000 5120 42652
Training 8472 7392 6400 23800 800 46864
Total Cost 133152 500396 223895 387386 532559 1777388
Annual Saving 55183 168000 279678 1170000 100000 1772861
3-Year Saving 165549 420000 559356 3300000 250000 4694905
_________________________________________________________________
The estimated total cost for implementing the GIS applications
in all divisions in the planned three-year period is about 1.8
million dollars ($1,777,388). This includes the cost for six
workstations, five desktop PCs, seven laptop portable PCs, six 2gb
disks, two 8mm tape drives, one CDROM drive, three digitizer
tables, two scanners, one plotter, nine laser printers, six GPS
units, a screen projector and ten copies of XoftWare. It also
includes the cost for 51,079 hours of contracted data conversion
work at a $50 per hour rate, and the staff cost for in-house data
maintenance, program development and GIS training.
Most of the hardware and software are planned to be purchased
in the first year, while the data conversion contracts are split
into three years. Program development and GIS training are planned
to be completed by the end of the second year.
In all areas except Real Estate Division and the Map File
Room, the cumulative benefit recovers all expenditure within three
years of implementation. Land Stewardship Division is estimated to
realize a net benefit in the first year. The total cumulative net
benefit for the whole department is about half a million dollars
($506,894) in Year-One, over one million ($1,308,676) in Year-Two,
near three million ($2,917,517) in Year-Three, more than six
million ($6,323,239) in Year-Five, and about ten million dollars
($10,798,683) in Year-Nine.
Table 3. Cumulative Measurable Benefit and Cost
_________________________________________________________________
Year 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
_________________________________________________________________
SMD Cost 20 77 133 133 133 133 133 133 133
SMD Saving 55 110 166 221 276 331 386 441 497
RED Cost 32 500 500 500 500 500 500 500 500
RED Saving 84 252 420 588 756 924 1092 1260 1428
RWD Cost 149 186 224 224 224 224 224 224 224
RWD Saving 93 280 559 839 1119 1398 1678 1957 2237
LSD Cost 387 387 387 387 387 387 387 387 387
LSD Saving 1100 2200 3300 4400 5500 6016 6532 7048 7564
STD Cost 287 533 533 533 533 533 533 533 533
STD Saving 50 150 250 350 450 550 650 750 850
Total Cost 876 1683 1777 1777 1777 1777 1777 1777 1777
Total Saving 1382 2992 4695 6398 8101 9219 10338 11457 12576
Net Benefit 507 1309 2918 4620 6323 7442 8561 9680 10799
_________________________________________________________________
Note: All dollar values rounded to the nearest thousand.
_________________________________________________________________
7. CONCLUSIONS
GIS is a rapidly developing technology. Its application
scope has been explored and expanded constantly. Both the
District and the Land Management divisions, especially Survey and
Mapping Division, has already invested much into this new
technology and gained significant benefit from using it. The
District-wide GIS business case presented to the Governing Board
in 1990 (Brown, 1990), and the follow up evaluation, provided
strong evidence on the efficiency both in terms of economic gains
and quality of work performed with GIS.
To pursue a further implementation of a GIS system in the
Land Management divisions is consistent with the District's
technological development strategy, and an efficient way to take
full advantage of the technology that has already been adopted by
the District and the department.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The author wishes to thank Mr. Charles Rinaldi, Deputy
Department Director, Construction and Land Management Department,
South Florida Water Management District, for his support and
advice to this GIS planning project. Sincere thanks also go to
all the members of the Land Management GIS Planning Committee,
for their dedicated work in the planning process. They are: Ross
Adair, Eric Barkhurst, Bob Brown, Pam Dostal, Howard Ehmke, Paul
Ellis, Tia Heath, Lee Henderson, Butch Horn, Dennis Meierer, Ron
Metzger, Linda Ross, and Mia Van Horn.
REFERENCES
Brown, Robert, 1990, Geographic Information System Business Case.
South Florida Water Management District, West Palm Beach, FL.
Guan, Weihe, 1994, GIS Plan for Land Management. South Florida
Water Management District, West Palm Beach, FL.
Weihe Guan, Ph.D.
Senior Geographer
Construction and Land Management Department
South Florida Water Management District
P.O. Box 24680, #3301 Gun Club Road
West Palm Beach, Florida, 33416-4680
Telephone: (407) 687-6687
Fax: (407) 687-6436
E-mail: weihe.guan@sfwmd.gov