Logic Modeling for NSDI Implementation Plan

A Case Study in Indonesia

Tandang Yuliadi Dwi Putra and Ryosuke Shibasaki

Civil Engineering Department, University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan

Keywords: National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI), Logic Model, Strategic, Implementation.

Abstract: The importance of sharing and reusing geographic information for national development programs has led

many countries establishing National Spatial Data Infrastructures (NSDIs). Indonesia is one of the early

adopters of NSDI which begun the initiative in the 1990’s. Some achievements have been made; nevertheless,

there are also constraints of NSDI implementation identified by the stakeholders. Considering recent

improvement in geospatial technology that has changed the landscape of NSDI into more user-driven location

services, NSDI coordinator needs to compose a comprehensive framework that integrates requirements and

detailed activities as the realization of strategies. This paper presents a strategic planning using logic model,

incorporating components of the NSDI in Indonesia including policy, institutional arrangements, technology,

standards and human resource issues. A logic model visualizes systematic programs and connecting related

activities with the projected outcomes. The model started with the identification of requirements through in-

depth interviews and documents study to provide insight for NSDI implementation. Subsequently, it

determines intended impact and outcomes, analyses activities, defines expected outputs from NSDI initiative

and identify the resources for the operation. Our proposed model can be useful for the implementation of

NSDI particularly for countries that do not have strategic management yet or are considering improving it.

1 INTRODUCTION

Realizing benefits of sharing and reusing geographic

information for supporting national development

programs has led many countries establishing

National Spatial Data Infrastructures (NSDIs) for the

past 25 years. Basically, NSDI is a framework of

technology, standards, policy and collaboration of

different institutions to provide access, exchange and

utilization of spatial data at the national level

(Rajabifard et al., 2003). From the initial aims to

reduce data duplication and improve access to

geospatial data, NSDI applications nowadays have

played significant role in the decision making process.

Examples can be found in the area of cadastral

services (Borzacchiello and Craglia, 2013), disaster

risk management (Molina and Bayarri, 2011) and

urban planning (Poorazizi et al., 2015).

Despite of its potential benefit in supporting

national development programs, scholars have found

that NSDI implementation has several obstacles.

Crompvoets and Bregt (2007) and Van Oort et al.

(2009) identify a declining trend of national geoportal

─ key product of an NSDI ─ due to the fact its

functionalities do not meet the expectations of the

geospatial community. In addition, although NSDI

initiatives mostly originated from the government

agency, not all of decision makers share the same

awareness. This lead to the lack of cooperation and

sharing information with other institutions (Janne &

Lorkhamyong, 2015). Another problem is related to

the insufficient funding for the implementation and

maintenance of an NSDI (Ayanlade et al., 2008).

The difficulties recognized above shows that

successful implementation of an NSDI depends on

not only from technical aspect but also financial and

institutional efforts. NSDI development also involves

dynamic negotiations and arrangements between

different actors, which considered as the complexity

of SDI initiatives (De Man, 2006). Therefore, in order

to overcome these problems NSDI coordinator

requires a comprehensive framework for its

implementation that incorporates requirements and

detailed activities as the realization of strategies. This

paper presents a strategic planning using logic models

for each component of NSDI including policy,

institutional arrangements, technology, standard and

human resource issues, with a case study in Indonesia.

Yuliadi Dwi Putra, T. and Shibasaki, R.

Logic Modeling for NSDI Implementation Plan.

DOI: 10.5220/0006755502470254

In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Geographical Information Systems Theor y, Applications and Management (GISTAM 2018), pages 247-254

ISBN: 978-989-758-294-3

247

The paper starts with an overview of NSDI

development in Indonesia and describes

chronological milestones that have been achieved. A

brief literature review of the logic models then

presented in the next section. Subsequently, the

proposed methodology to develop program logic

models for NSDI implementation is explained.

2 NSDI IMPLEMENTATION IN

INDONESIA

Indonesia was considered as one of the eleven

countries who adopt the first generation of NSDI

(Masser, 1999). The NSDI development was initiated

in 1991 by a first group meeting called SIGNas

(Sistem Informasi Geografis Nasional/National

Geographic Information System) Forum among

different government agencies with the agenda to

identify the availability of Geographic Information

System (GIS) data and avoid data duplication

(Lilywati and Gularso, 2000). The National

Coordinating Agency for Surveying and Mapping

(Bakosurtanal) organized the meeting and continued

in the next few years by discussing various related

topics. One of them is the introduction of National

Geodatabase, which was discussed in the third

meeting in 1997 (Matindas et al., 2004).

The formal declaration of NSDI was defined in

the National Coordination Meeting of Survey and

Mapping in 2000 with the term “Infrastruktur Data

Spasial Nasional” (IDSN). The objective is to provide

good quality, easily accessed and integrated spatial

data for national development (Bakosurtanal, 2008).

Since then, efforts and activities to develop NSDI

have been conducted. The milestones of NSDI

development in Indonesia described in term of legal,

organizational aspect and technical issue is presented

in Figure 1.

Enactment of the Geospatial Information Law in

2011 is the main foundation of NSDI development in

Indonesia. One of the law’s goals is to ensure the

availability of, and access to, accountable geospatial

information. In order to achieve this, geospatial

information infrastructure needs to be established

which incorporates five pillars: policy, institutional

arrangements, technology, standards, and human

resources. With the enactment of this law,

Bakosurtanal was also transformed into Badan

Informasi Geospasial (BIG) as the national agency

organizing geospatial information. As part of the

application of Geospatial Information Law, the

Indonesian government initiated the ‘One Map Policy’

in 2015 and publish a presidential decree on the next

year to accelerate its implementation. One Map

Policy aims to tackle overlapping thematic maps

among institutions so there shall only one base map

to be used as reference by other government agencies

(Tim Percepatan Kebijakan Satu Peta, 2017).

In the organizational aspect, NSDI Secretariat was

established two years after the declaration as a

working body to plan and manage all NSDI meetings,

agreements, and recommendations (Matindas et al.,

2004). The members are representatives from

government institutions, and universities. To date, the

secretariat is chaired by the Deputy of Geospatial

Information Infrastructure from BIG.

Institutional arrangement of Indonesia NSDI is

defined by the Presidential Decree No. 27/2014,

which replaced the previous one issued in 2007, about

the National Geospatial Information Network.

Figure 1: Chronological milestones of NSDI development in Indonesia.

GISTAM 2018 - 4th International Conference on Geographical Information Systems Theory, Applications and Management

248

According to the decree, the actors for geospatial

information sharing are called network nodes (Simpul

Jaringan), which are classified into central and local

network nodes. Central network nodes include

ministries and national government agencies while

local network nodes consist of provincial, municipal,

and district governments. Each node has

responsibility in the collection, maintenance, update,

exchange and dissemination of specific geospatial

data. These nodes have their own clearinghouse unit

and should connect to the national geoportal.

After the year 2000, the implementation of NSDI

has undergone some changes in the technical aspects.

A Clearinghouse, typical evidence of the first

generation of SDI, was developed in 2004 as a

continuation of metadata development. Federal

Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) standard was

adopted and metadata servers were connected in a

distributed network to display information about the

digital maps (Puntodewo and Nataprawira, 2007).

The national geoportal, namely Ina-Geoportal

(http://tanahair.indonesia.go.id), was launched in

October 2011. The portal facilitates geospatial data

access and sharing between government institutions.

It utilizes web services – the main technological

indicator of the second SDI generation – to retrieve

maps provided by data providers and re-use it to

create thematic data services. Data center was also

settled since 2013 to support the operational of Ina-

Geoportal (BIG, 2014). Moreover, the increase use of

smartphones has triggered the development of mobile

version of Ina-Geoportal in 2015 (BIG, 2015a).

In term of standards, the Geospatial Information

Law defines standards for five aspects of geospatial

information: geospatial data acquisition, information

processing, storage and security, information

distribution, and information usage. These standards

can be in the form of national standards (Standar

Nasional Indonesia/SNI) or technical specifications.

BIG has initiated the development of national

standards since 2000 and had already produced 60

SNI (BIG, 2015b). BIG also developing technical

specification, which stipulated by a decree of the head

of BIG. For example, Indonesian Geospatial

Reference System description named SRGI2013.

Advancement of spatial technology and the

Internet have changed the landscape of NSDI. Harvey

et al. (2012) argued that future NSDI will be

influenced by the growing use of mobile computing

and crowdsourcing, thus lead to the need to integrate

various types of data. This means that the aims of an

NSDI may not only for sharing and integrating data

from static sources but also producing new

information and allowing a user to interact

dynamically with the data providers. Consequently,

NSDI implementation in Indonesia should consider

such condition and an inclusive strategic management

is required for its effective functioning.

3 LOGIC MODEL REVIEW

3.1 Definition of Logic Model

Logic model is one of the methods that can be used in

developing design, plan, and evaluation of a project.

It presents a systematic and visual way of the

connections between resources, planned activities

and its expected results (W. K. Kellogg Foundation,

2004). Logic model offers the strategic means to

critically review and improve project’s

implementation. Additionally, logic model can

illustrate parts of or whole systems and clarify

complex relationships among them.

3.2 Benefits

Knowlton and Phillips (2013) identify several

benefits of using logic models as follows:

• Develop common understanding among

stakeholders;

• Document and emphasize explicit outcomes;

• Recognize important variables for the

evaluation purpose.

3.3 Types and Components of Logic

Model

Logic model can be distinguished into two types:

theory of change and program (Knowlton and Phillips,

2013). The difference between them is on the level of

detail and use, although both represent the same logic.

A theory of change logic model presents

conceptual view of how the project will “do and get”.

It simply displays the big picture of the project using

limited information. A basic theory of change logic

model consists of two elements: strategies and results

as illustrated in Figure 2. Strategies reflect a choice of

optimal actions to achieve intended results.

Figure 2: Theory of change model (Adopted from

Knowlton and Phillips, 2013).

Logic Modeling for NSDI Implementation Plan

249

Figure 3: A basic program logic model (Adopted from W. K. Kellogg Foundation, 2004).

A program logic model describes a more detailed

map of the project from start to finish. Strategies are

broken down into resources, activities, and outputs

whereas results reflect the sequence of outcomes over

time through impact. It displays the elements that are

most critical in establishing and operating a project.

Key components of a program logic model is

presented in Figure 3 and explained as follows:

Resources or inputs are something that available

or needed to conduct activities. They can include

financial, human, or organizational aspect.

Activities specify the particular actions that will be

delivered as project implementation. Generally, they

are related to deliberate events, tools, process or

technology.

Outputs are the direct products of project

activities. They are usually quantified and described

in targets, level of functioning or type of services to

be achieved by the project.

Outcomes define what kind of changes expected

to happen as a result of the project. Some examples

are specific changes in awareness, knowledge or

behavior. Outcomes may be divided based on time

periods into short, intermediate, and long term.

Impact is the ultimate change arising in

organization, community or system. Sometimes it

reflects the intended project’s vision or goal.

The rational of logic models follows “if-then”

statements, which connect all parts of the project.

From left to right it can be read, “If we have the

following resources, then we can deliver these

activities. If we accomplish the planned activities,

then we can produce intended outputs. If we have

these outputs, then certain changes will be happened

in organization or community,” and so on.

The purpose of this study is to provide

comprehensive strategic directions and action plans

for NSDI coordinator, hence a program logic model

is used.

4 DEVELOPING NSDI LOGIC

MODEL

4.1 Problems and Requirements

Identification

The practical development of a program logic model

generally starts with one or more information

discovery process such as interviews, observations or

documents study (Knowlton and Phillips, 2013).

NSDI stakeholders’ point of view is necessary to be

captured for understanding more about its current

implementation. Stakeholders might influence the

effective functioning of NSDI or affected by it. This

research identifies problems of NSDI implementation

and requirements of future NSDI from the

perspectives of government institutions, private

sectors, and academia.

Semi-structured interviews were conducted in

June and August 2017 for data collection. The

familiarity of the authors with the NSDI initiative in

Indonesia helped them to find appropriate individuals

that have experience, knowledge, and role in its

implementation. Overall, there were 18 participants

of the interviews, in which eight of them represents

government agencies, seven are working at private

companies, and the rest are from academic

institutions. They included SDI coordinators at

ministries and local governments, a key technical

NSDI manager, a representative from data providers,

a director of GIS department, a web mapping solution

provider, and an SDI research coordinator. The three

main questions asked to them are “What are the

problems and challenges of NSDI implementation?”,

“What kind of data and services should be provided

by NSDI?”, and “How is your expectation for future

NSDI?”.

A wide variety of problems occurred in NSDI

implementation were mentioned in our interviews.

The most frequent answer is the lack of human

resources that have capability in GIS field. This

shortfall is recognized mainly by government

institutions where employee rotation often occurs.

The number of staff who have ability to manage

geospatial information and operate geospatial server

to publish map services is also limited. The second

major problem is low participation of the NSDI

GISTAM 2018 - 4th International Conference on Geographical Information Systems Theory, Applications and Management

250

network nodes, thus resulting a small number of

datasets accessible in Ina-Geoportal. According to the

interviewee, low participation may caused by the lack

of awareness of NSDI benefits or there is a reluctance

to share geospatial data. Other difficulties identified

by the respondents are include large-scale dataset

availability, geoportal Issue, financial aspect and

Information and Communication Technology (ICT)

infrastructure. Table 1 summarizes the problems

stated by interviewees from Public (Pu), Private (Pr)

and Academic (Ac) institutions, together with the

number of times they were stated.

Table 1: Problems of NSDI implementation and the number

of times stated by different type of institutions.

Problems of NSDI

Type of Institutions

Sum

Pu Pr Ac

Lack of skilled human

resources

5 3 2 10

Low participation from

the NSDI network nodes

3 1 1 5

Insufficient large-scale

maps

1 1 2 4

Limited functionality

and reliability of the

Ina-Geoportal

1 2 1 4

Low spatial data quality 1 2 1 4

Limited Internet and

ICT infrastructure

2 2 - 4

Absence of operational

guidance

1 2 - 3

Limited funding 1 1 - 2

Low adoption of GIS

technology

1 1 - 2

Lack of standards

implementation

- 2 - 2

Most interviewees stated that they require large-

scale fundamental datasets to be provided by NSDI.

Its availability will be important as the base map to

generate other thematic datasets such as urban

planning and public utility management. Meanwhile,

the majority of respondents from business sector need

socio-economic data that represents population

distribution and other commercial information.

Although the data can be obtained at Central Bureau

of Statistics, it will be more useful if the data is in the

form of geospatial services and can be integrated with

other applications. Some of the respondents also

considered Real-time data from weather or

environmental sensors is essential particularly to

support early warning system. Other data or service

requirements for future NSDI implementation are

presented in the Table 2.

Table 2: Data/services required by different type of

institutions and the number of times stated.

Required data/services

Type of Institutions

Sum

Pu Pr Ac

Large-scale fundamental

datasets

6 2 1 9

Socio-economic data - 4 - 4

Real-time weather and

environment data

2 1 1 4

Point of Interest (POI) data - 2 1 3

Disaster risk information 1 1 1 3

Land parcels 1 - 1 2

Spatial planning 1 1 - 2

Different expectations of future NSDI were

expressed by the interviewees. In general, they expect

to have more geospatial data and applications. They

believe NSDI should be able to provide good quality

spatial data in term of resolution and completeness as

the basis for added-value information creation. Some

of the respondents consider future application of

NSDI will be integrated with different types of data

to support geospatial analytics, which is important for

Table 3: Expectations of future NSDI from users’ point of

view.

Type of

Institutions

Expectation

Local

government

• NSDI can handle and integrate in situ

data which is collected by sensor

networks

• NSDI should encourage creation of

location-based mobile applications

• NSDI should support the provision of

geospatial data

National

government

• Access to high-resolution spatial data will

be more easy and reliable

• Integrate various thematic maps and data

formats produced by network nodes

• The development of NSDI should be

sustainable, not a partial project

Private

sector

• NSDI should provide geo-services

applications for general user and

developer

• Improve the quality and reliability of

geospatial data

• Future NSDI should drive the

development of geospatial industry in

Indonesia

Academia

• NSDI should increase data coverage and

geo-services in remote area

• NSDI should promote value-added

creation of geospatial data that stimulate

innovation

• NSDI will increase the awareness of

decision makers

Logic Modeling for NSDI Implementation Plan

251

decision makers. Table 3 presents the detailed

expectations of future NSDI categorized by type of

institutions.

4.2 NSDI Logic Model

The identification of problems and requirements from

previous section gives significant insight for NSDI

implementation. Together with other evidences

collected from formal documents such as regulations,

annual reports, and BIG’s strategic plan, they are used

as key information sources of the NSDI logic model.

The creation of NSDI logic model begins by

determining the intended ultimate goal. Based on the

declaration of Indonesia NSDI in 2000, its objective

is to deliver good quality, easily accessed and

integrated spatial data to support national

development (Bakosurtanal, 2008). However, based

on the expectation of users, future NSDI should not

limited to only support governmental development

programs but also accessible to citizens and

businesses. They expect geospatial information

commonly available and can be consumed by handy

applications to fulfill their needs. This also complies

with one of the purposes of Geospatial Information

Law, which is to encourage geospatial information

usage in various aspects of community life. Therefore,

the proposed final impact is to achieve geospatially

enable society, a term introduced by Steudler and

Rajabifard (2012) to describe the desired condition.

The next step is to define outcomes of NSDI

implementation. We parsed the expected outcomes by

time increments into short, intermediate, and long

term. Short-term outcomes are planned to be realized

in 1 through 3 years, intermediate-term outcomes 4

through 6 years, and long-term outcomes in 7 through

10 years.

Short-term outcomes are related to changes in the

aspect of geospatial data quality, awareness of the

NSDI benefits, and knowledge of geospatial

information. The geospatial data quality here is also

including the completeness and coverage of the large-

scale maps that urgently required by stakeholders. If

data quality can be improved then the intermediate-

term outcome expected is the decision-making

process will be better. Additionally, increased

awareness will result in better participation from

network nodes and partnerships among stakeholders,

as well as increased knowledge produce improved

skill and technology adoption. If we accomplish these

three intermediate outcomes, then the change in

national development and geospatial industry

hopefully will be secured in the long term.

Subsequently, we have to identify all the activities

required to generate the outcomes. There are six main

strategies proposed: mapping activities, One Map

implementation, improving data access and sharing,

promoting geospatial community, capacity building

activities, and developing NSDI practices. Each of

these strategies will produce outputs that

collaboratively resulted in the model’s outcomes.

The purpose of mapping activities is to produce

large-scale topographic maps that most users required.

These basic maps then are used as the foundation of

developing thematic maps produced by a variety of

institutions. With One Map implementation,

problems in overlapping land status for instance, can

be tackled and the integrated thematic maps will

increase the quality of geospatial products. Moreover,

research outputs from the capacity building activities

may also support the improvement in terms of

accuracy of the products.

An enhanced geoportal platform is the main

output of improving data access and sharing activities.

It is expected to have more functionalities and support

marketplace for the private sector to stimulate

innovation. We also believe participation from group

of users that sharing similar interest in geospatial

information is need to be raised. Activities to promote

geospatial communities should be determined in

order to encourage them creating Location Based

Service (LBS) applications and participating in

adding Point of Interest (POI) database. This

initiative will require support from business sector

and academia. If the geoportal is running well and

provide useful applications, then the awareness of

geospatial information benefits will be increased for

decision-makers and general users as well.

Capacity building activities can be related with

the human, technological, and institutional aspects.

As discovered in the previous subsection, it is

important to overcome insufficient skilled human

resources in GIS field. BIG has established

collaboration with 13 universities as the Center of

Spatial Data Infrastructure Development (Pusat

Pengembangan Infrastruktur Data Spasial/PPIDS)

(BIG, 2015a). However, the partnership should be

strengthened to produce not only qualified personnel

but also conduct valuable research in geospatial

information area. In addition, formulation of

competency standards are also required to guarantee

the quality of the workforce.

One of the problems identified in NSDI

implementation is the absence of operational

guidance. Local governments expect that best

practices of NSDI in terms of technical and

institutional issues are available. For example,

GISTAM 2018 - 4th International Conference on Geographical Information Systems Theory, Applications and Management

252

Figure 4: NSDI Logic Model.

practical guideline is needed in setting up a

clearinghouse and data sharing management with

other agencies. NSDI Practices activities aims to

provide such documents and assistance in order to

increase the knowledge of NSDI stakeholders.

The final step is to determine resources for the

effective NSDI operation. We distinguished seven

inputs including geospatial data, policy, funds,

institutional arrangements, technological facility,

standards, and human resources. In case of Indonesia,

most of them are already available because the NSDI

initiative has been started more than two decades ago.

For example, the basic policy for NSDI is described

in the Geospatial Information Law and further

arranged by government regulation or presidential

decree. Nevertheless, some efforts need to be

expanded particularly for geospatial data and funding.

The complete NSDI logic model is presented in

Figure 4. It visualize relationships between elements

in the road map from the planned strategies to the

intended results. This model can also promote

alignment and synergy in conducting activities

among NSDI stakeholders.

4.3 Detailed Activities and Outputs

The NSDI Logic Model describes an overview of the

strategic directions for NSDI implementation.

Nonetheless, it can be breakdown to provide a more

detailed view of the activities and intended outputs.

In Figure 5, we show the detail within the mapping

strategy. It consists of five key activities: GCP

measurement, Ortho-image processing, develop

Positioning Infrastructure, Geodatabase updating and

LIDAR processing. The target is to produce numerous

large-scale topographic maps which important for

generating thematic maps. Each activity has a

quantified output to be delivered. For example, number

of Ground Control Points (GCP) is the objective of the

GCP measurement that required for making ortho-

rectified satellite images. This closer picture of

operations can be helpful in creating the action plans.

Figure 5: Detailed mapping activities and their outputs.

Logic Modeling for NSDI Implementation Plan

253

5 CONCLUDING REMARKS

Indonesia has underway an evolution in developing

NSDI. Several milestones in term of legal settings,

institutional arrangements, standardization and

technological issues have been delivered. However, it

is evident from stakeholders’ perspective that

problems still occur particularly in providing skilled

workforces and abundant large-scale maps. Trends of

latest geospatial technology and users demand has

changed the NSDI ultimate goal into geospatial

information usage in various aspects of the general

public life. To realize this geospatially enabled

society, we propose the NSDI Logic Model as a

comprehensive and visible strategic direction.

Our work contributes to providing a scientific

management tool for implementing effective NSDI.

With this model, well-planned actions and their

expected results can be generated as well as

communicating a common understanding to NSDI

stakeholders. Future works will be to validate this

model with key players and determine outcome-based

indicators for the successful of NSDI implementation.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This research was supported by the Program for

Research and Innovation in Science and Technology

Project (RISET-Pro).

REFERENCES

Ayanlade, A., Orimoogunje, I. O. O., & Borisade, P. B.,

2008. Geospatial data infrastructure for sustainable

development in sub-Saharan countries. International

Journal of Digital Earth. Vol. 1:3, 247-258.

Bakosurtanal, 2008. Pedoman Penyelenggaraan

Infrastruktur Data Spasial Nasional.

BIG, 2014. Annual Report 2014.

BIG, 2015a. Annual Report 2015.

BIG, 2015b. Katalog Standar Nasional Indonesia

Penyelenggaraan Informasi Geospasial.

Borzacchiello, M. T., Craglia, M., 2013. Estimating

benefits of Spatial Data Infrastructures: A case study on

e-Cadastres. Computers, Environment and Urban

Systems. Vol. 41(0): 276-288.

Crompvoets, J., Bregt, A., 2007. National spatial data

clearinghouses, 2000-2005. In Onsrud, H. (Ed.),

Research and theory in advancing spatial data

infrastructure, ESRI Press. Redlands, California.

De Man, W. H. E., 2006. Understanding SDI: Complexity

and Institutionalization. International Journal of

Geographical Information Science. Vol. 20(3): 329–

343.

Harvey F,. Iwaniak A., Coetzee S., Cooper, A. K., 2012.

SDI Past, Present and Future: A Review and Status

Assessment. In: Spatially Enabling Government,

Industry and Citizens: Research and Development

Perspectives, edited by A. Rajabifard and D. Coleman.

GSDI Association Press, Massachusetts, USA.

Janne, S., Lorkhamyong, K., 2015. Establishing

Sustainable NSDI: Combined Technical and

Institutional Approach. FIG Working Week. Sofia,

Bulgaria, 17-21 May 2015.

Knowlton, L. W., Phillips, C.C., 2013. The Logic Model

Guidebook, SAGE Publication, Inc. Thousand Oaks,

California, 2

Edition.

Lilywati, H. and S. K. Gularso (2000). SIGNas sebagai

Landasan Informasi Spasial untuk Menunjang

Manajemen Pembangunan. Komputasi dalam Sains

dan Teknologi Nuklir XI. Jakarta, BATAN: 15-37.

Masser, I., 1999. All shapes and sizes: the first generation

of national spatial data infrastructures. International

Journal of Geographical Information Science. Vol. 13.

pp. 67–84.

Matindas, R. W., Puntodewo and Purnawan, B., 2004.

Development of National Spatial Data Infrastructure in

Indonesia. Proceedings from FIG Working Week,

Athens, Greece, May 22-27, 2004.

Molina, M., Bayarri, S., 2011. A multinational SDI-based

system to facilitate disaster risk management in the

Andean Community. Computer Geoscience. Vol. 37,

1501–1510.

Poorazizi, M. Ebrahim, Steiniger, S., & Hunter, A.J.S.,

2015. A service-oriented architecture to enable

participatory planning: an e-planning platform.

International Journal of Geographical Information

Science. Vol. 29:7, 1081-1110.

Puntodewo and Nataprawira, R., 2007. Indonesian

Geospatial Data Clearinghouse. Proceedings of 3rd

FIG Regional Conference 2007, Jakarta, Indonesia,

October 3-7, 2007.

Rajabifard, A., Feeney, M., & Williamson, I. P., 2003.

‘Spatial Data Infrastructures: Concept, Natures and SDI

Hierarchy’, Chapter 2, Development of Spatial Data

Infrastructures: from Concept to Reality, ISBN 0-415-

30265-X, Taylor & Francis, U.K.

Steudler D., and Rajabifard A. (eds), 2012. Spatially

Enabled Society, International Federation of Surveyors,

FIG Publication no. 58.

Tim Percepatan Kebijakan Satu Peta, 2017. Laporan

Percepatan Pelaksanaan Kebijakan Satu Peta Semester

2/2016.

Van Oort, P. A. J., Kuyper, M. C., Bregt, A. K., &

Crompvoets, J., 2009. Geoportals: An Internet

Marketing Perspective. Data Science Journal. Vol. 8:

162-181.

W. K. Kellogg Foundation. (2004). Logic model

development guide. Retrieved From https://www.bttop.

org/sites/default/files/public/W.K.%20Kellogg%20Lo

gicModel.pdf

GISTAM 2018 - 4th International Conference on Geographical Information Systems Theory, Applications and Management

254