AUTHORS:

Todd Bacastow

Joy Drohan

TITLE: PaMAGIC: A Recipe for Revolution in Pennsylvania

ABSTRACT

The integration of functional activities within various levels of government is touted as a major benefit of the "GIS Revolution." But this benefit has hardly been realized in Pennsylvania, and the prospects for the future looked poor--until the Pennsylvania Mapping and Geographic Information Consortium (PaMAGIC) formed. This partnership of government, business, and academia recently assumed the lead in getting stakeholders with disparate missions, needs, and priorities to plan and coordinate the state's geospatial activities. PaMAGIC owes much of its success this past year to the use of Electronic Meeting System (EMS) technology, which allows the exchange of ideas and information among large groups of stakeholders. EMS gave more than 200 participants the opportunity to offer their suggestions and priorities quickly, anonymously, and on equal footing with others. PaMAGIC exists today and is well on its way to success because of EMS. EMS technology provided a productive environment for change and helped bring the benefits of the GIS Revolution to Pennsylvania.

INTRODUCTION

We hear a lot of talk about how the GIS Revolution will allow us to integrate activities such as the sharing parcel databases with emergency service providers. Many people in Pennsylvania government and business acknowledge that the hundreds of governmental entities with redundant spatial information processing capabilities could benefit substantially from GIS integration. And yet, across the state, the overall level of cooperation and integration we would hope to see courtesy of the GIS Revolution has been far less than revolutionary. This lack of progress resulted not from a lack of mid-level management or resources. Leadership at the state agency level previously attempted a coordination effort that failed because of inter-agency rivalries and the lack of grassroots support. Recently, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) and the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PADOT), both major GIS users , identified the spatial technology coordination issue as a significant problem requiring attention.

In an odd twist, the proud traditions of independence upon which our nation was built contribute to this halting progress. Like the revolutionaries who seized power from the British in 1776, many Pennsylvanians distrust a strong central authority. The fear that individual needs will be ignored has fostered fragmented government and a high degree of independence in Pennsylvania's 2500 governmental entities. This fiercely self-reliant perspective has influenced GIS coordination efforts in several ways:

• The state's leaders shy away from concentrating technology coordination powers in government because of bureaucratic sluggishness in adapting to change. Furthermore, members of the legislature clearly object to the allocation of additional authority in state government.
• Many people in the Pennsylvania state legislature believe that the coordination of spatial technologies is a marginal activity requiring excessive inter-agency consensus. Therefore, GIS coordination is grouped into the "too difficult to solve" category.
• Most political leaders do not understand the technology. One political figure said, "How can you expect us to understand this when we just learned to use fax machines?"

Despite these discouraging perspectives, planners, environmental managers, and policy makers acknowledge that they need GIS to improve the efficiency of decision making. PADEP began searching for a way to balance these cultural and technological needs because the need to dovetail their GIS activities with planners and environmental managers in local government. PADEP could not lead the coordination effort because of the biases against governmental involvement, but PADEP was willing to anonymously work through a group of like-minded intermediaries. The challenge came in encouraging many stakeholders with diverse missions, needs, and priorities to modify their efforts for the benefit of the Commonwealth. To compound the problem, just getting various groups to openly discuss the problem was near impossible because of fears that the more powerful groups would dominate.

A RECIPE FOR REVOLUTION

The May 1996 Pennsylvania State GIS Conference was a turning point when a small group representing local government, academia, and business issued a call for action. Individuals from the Susquehanna Economic Development Associates - Council of Governments, Penn State University, and Rettew Associates began the process of building a coordinating body. Before an initial planning meeting, these "conspirators" agreed on several guidelines for the process:

• The formation process must strive to meet statewide needs and not cater to the wishes of any one group.
• Direct participation of the stakeholders is essential throughout the effort.
• The process must positively affect the way people think of and use information technology.
• The formation process must include all possibilities of spatial technology utilization.
• The coordination effort must complement existing governmental, business, and educational activities.
• A new approach was necessary because simply having a large meeting would accomplish nothing.

To meet the guidelines outlined above the process was aided by Electronic Meeting Systems (EMS) technology. EMS supported and facilitated the equal exchange of ideas and information through networked personal computers. EMS gave participants an anonymous means of voting for options and submitting comments. A central computer then summarized stakeholders' opinions for display back to the group.

EMS functions used during the formation of Pennsylvania's GIS coordinating body included electronic surveys, brainstorming, prioritization, evaluation of ideas, group writing, and voting. These functions, with the assistance of a professional facilitator, defined and moved the fledgling organization through the following steps:

1. Brainstorming about members' needs and alternative ways of structuring the group.

2. Identifying the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative.

3. Developing a plan of action.

The initial organizational meeting was held at the May 1996 Pennsylvania State GIS Conference and included more than 100 people. A month later, more than 200 leaders from business, government, academia, and quasi-public organizations participated in the second meeting. Here, the focus was on gathering information and building consensus on how the coordinating body should be organized. Using EMS's electronic voting capability, stakeholders selected a name for their new group--the Pennsylvania Mapping and Geographic Information Consortium, or PaMAGIC.

A third meeting was held in August 1996, at which a working group of 40 volunteers developed PaMAGIC's structure. The working group, operating in small teams and using the information collected during the electronic brainstorming session, developed vision, mission, and goals statements as well. The working group reconvened for a final facilitated session in October to select an interim board of directors and outline PaMAGIC's bylaws.

Between October and December 1996, various members of the working group met to plan an interactive video "town meeting" held in January 1997. Here, the working group presented PaMAGIC's structure, vision, mission, and goals to the state's GIS users. Video downlinks allowed more than 600 people to attend the town meeting at ten remote sites throughout Pennsylvania. Governor Tom Ridge introduced the town meeting--an indication of growing statewide acceptance of PaMAGIC. The president of the State Association of Township Supervisors and leaders from business and academia were key speakers.

The PaMAGIC interim board of directors met several more times to complete the application for non-profit status and to develop a method of delivering services. Election of a new board occurred in May 1997. As Table 1 shows, the formation process alternated between activities to maintain grassroots support and smaller group efforts to formulate a plan for action and work out details.

Table 1: Timetable for PaMAGIC Formation

CONCLUSION

PaMAGIC has taken significant steps toward achieving the integrated environment that the GIS Revolution envisions. Specifically, PaMAGIC has:

• started actions to integrate the broad range of spatial technologies in Pennsylvania. PaMAGIC serves as a focal point for coordination between such groups as the state legislature, local governments, the State Association of Township Supervisors, private GIS consultants, and software and hardware vendors.
• provided a voice to the grassroots user through a structure biased toward individuals and not single entities. Members are elected to the PaMAGIC board on a regional basis or can volunteer to serve on various committees that routinely communicate with policy makers.
• improving the exchange of information. PaMAGIC supports efforts of the Pennsylvania Spatial Data Access (PASDA) system as a node on the National Spatial Data Infrastructure. PaMAGIC is also working with the Tri-Service CADD/GIS Center to develop a spatial data dictionary for the Commonwealth.

PaMAGIC's unique approach of using professional facilitators and EMS technology yielded results much faster than would have been possible otherwise. The approach encouraged a wide-ranging debate of options and prevented short-term expediency from dominating decisions. EMS ensured that the ideas and concerns of users in state and local government, business, and academia were duly considered. Although PaMAGIC's final structure may well have been identical without the benefits of EMS, the formation process would surely have taken much longer. EMS technology facilitated the development of an environment where change was acceptable and the benefits of the GIS Revolution could be realized in Pennsylvania.

Author Information:

Todd Bacastow
Senior Research Associate
Environmental Resources Research Institute
The Pennsylvania State University
128 Land and Water Research Building
University Park, PA 16802
814-863-0049 (voice); 814-865-3378 (FAX)
bacastow@gis.psu.edu

Joy Drohan
Editor
Environmental Resources Research Institute
The Pennsylvania State University
125 Land and Water Research Building
University Park, PA 16802
814-863-0037 (voice); 814-865-3378 (FAX)
jrr131@psu.edu