Geospatial Strategy launch - revisiting some of the questions raised

So, 4 weeks on from the launch of the geospatial strategy, and having written a light-touch reflection on the event and the strategy I thought I’d now surface some of the questions and more broadly policy ambitions asked by the (virtual) audience on the Remo virtual platform (that will become more familiar I am sure) that day. A public service if you like.

(c) Remo

I’ve taken a somewhat liberal rather than literal view of the questions, hacking them into sub-themes or subject areas.  Of course, there are others but these are some of those that continue the conversation.

Geospatial data, in particular open geospatial data, opening up data and maintaining that data was a prominent area of interest and concern. With the new PSGA and the launch of the OS DataHub on 1st July the public sector has never had better access to OS data or greater opportunity to derive new insights.  At the same time are cash-strapped local authorities able to commit or divert resources to improving and/or maintaining their obligations to the open data agenda amongst all their other keener priorities?  The audience voiced concern about the sustainability of much of this open data and with it the confidence to build products and services and deliver value using those data sets without specific mandate, backed up by regulation or legislation and with oversight, governance, support, funding and enforcement.  Clarity over the direction of travel seems to be the request.

A strategy will always be measured by its impacts and context – licence changes for OS data for example do not happen in isolation - and with many attendees interested in commercial opportunities it is already evident that new products are feeding through into the commercial marketplace. In that context there was audience interest in having greater visibility of VOA, UKHO and the Coal Authority (OS, BGS via the NUAR programme, and HMLR have been prominent to date).

Unlocking underground asset data via the NUAR pilots has been attracting a lot of interest. The audience was quick to wonder where this leads, in relation to GC’s role and to other distributed data gathering activities. For example, who is going to “own” underground asset data, licence it, have access to it, through what means, at what cost, with what limitations and what does this mean for existing aggregators and service providers. Or, is there intent by extension, for GC to become an arbiter or even conduit to market for geospatial data however and wherever gathered in in all dimensions – in the air, underwater, from all manner of site surveys, whether for large scale BIM or your local bats. It seems unlikely today and the vision doesn’t point in that direction but the proposal to contract for a single centralised hub under the auspices of GC certainly animated an audience from the wider digital economy.  It is certainly an area where industry will seek clarity and that will be watched closely.

Questions relating to geospatial capability formed a second strand amongst attendees. This was mainly in relation to skills and training on the one hand and to the relative paucity of overt recognition given in the strategy to existing UK plc (as opposed to public sector) capacity and leadership in geospatial, earth observation and location data ethics on the other.

The audience expressed interest in how GC is or is proposing to work with DfES and others to embed location data and skills in the digital literacy agenda i.e. beyond “just” geography, in statistics, sciences, economics, computer science, and throughout primary, secondary, tertiary education and lifelong learning. I know this is a focal area for RGS, AGI, Nesta as well so I think what is being sought is some definition of what progress in this dimension looks like.

Which, interestingly, holds up a mirror to the success of UK plc in the wider geospatial domain, not least the many existing platforms feeding the location data economy and the facilities and capabilities of the space cluster at Harwell including the Satellite Applications Catapult. There was audience interest in effect, using editors rights, in the absence of acknowledgement of what the UK commercial geospatial sphere is already doing and capable of while at the same time the strategy riffs on UK’s global geospatial leadership. My sense is that the audience felt there remains a disconnect and that the challenge remains for GC to better embrace the wider UK geospatial ecosystem than it has to date.

Given the potentially time limited nature of any government created commission there was attendee interest in what might broadly be described as what does geospatial success look like and how can the wider ecosystem be part of it, to ensure continuity and sustainability in the long term. There was interest in GC sharing their stakeholder mapping and consultees to date to give others a chance to have their interests represented and map out the widest landscape. There was a question also about how GC assesses market failure and appropriate interventions – some perhaps looking again at where NUAR might lead in other sectors such as CAV.? There was a warm reception for the widening of scope to 9 sectors accompanied by interest as to how GC saw this being delivered, with what engagement model with industry, against what criteria and over what timeframes.

The devolved administrations went relatively unrecognised at a time when local data gathering, analysis and actionable insight in respect of health, waste and netzero amongst other issues are dominating local, national and global agendas. So, perhaps not surprising that there were questions requiring GC to address and/or provide greater clarity and granularity as to the intent and implications of the geospatial strategy in the devolved administrations. In this context there was also interest in the role GC, sitting as it does in Cabinet Office, can or will play in the wider debate around distributed release of ‘local’ data (sub)sets to support local decision making.

Much has been made of the £5.5-11bn in savings to come from adoption of the geospatial strategy and pursuit of the 21 unlocks. The strategy acknowledges that much of this is to come from savings in the public sector so the final big question is how does the Geospatial Commission aim to stimulate improved collaboration, silo reduction, greater sharing to achieve this and what is the role for the commercial sector in supporting that endeavour?

Doubtless others might couch the questions asked differently and for sure there are questions that went unasked - those are for another time!

Revisiting some of the launch questions aims to keep them in our collective consciousness. Our hope must be that the national geospatial strategy becomes a living evolving thing, feeding into and responding to emerging thinking for example in the forthcoming space and infrastructure strategies, in the national risk registers and preparedness efforts and in ongoing dialogue. After all, location data and spatial thinking are established components in achieving the critical insights that allow business and government to collaborate on the response to, plan effectively for and invest in a re-shaped world of work and mobility.