Intensifying and increasingly complex physical developments under, on, and above ground, as well as the speed and accessibility of digital innovation, is resulting in growing interest in public sector investment in 3D geo-information. In Europe, a consortium of 11 public mapping agencies (PMAs) recently undertook a cost-benefit analysis for pursuing adoption of 3D geo-information. However, broader public management literature has shown that while economic value is vital for justifying public investment, it is not the only driving factor and that the creation of public value is crucially and equally significant as it conveys social and political legitimacy. Using a public value perspective, this paper aims to re-examine the data collected by the consortium of PMAs. Content analysis of the qualitative data provides strong examples of how 3D geo-information may potentially manifest as different types of public value across a broad public of stakeholders as well as providing evidence that such innovation would likely be politically as well as operationally viable. Nonetheless, the lack of a clear obvious need for 3D geo-information that responds to a specific societal challenge may pose an impediment to successful innovation.@en

During the past decade, hundreds of research papers have been published on the challenge of registering multi-level properties in land administration and cadastral registrations. In addition, many pilots have been carried out to show potential solutions. However, fundamental and standardised solutions for 3D cadastre are still rare. In this article we analyse the reasons for few 3D cadastre solutions in practice and we propose a 3D cadastre definition framework that can distinguish between different levels of 3D cadastre implementation depending on a specific context. Based on a level of detail logic, it supports an incremental pathway for the implementation of 3D cadastre solutions. We list the scope of the framework and finish with conclusions and future work.@en

The effective development and implementation of spatial data infrastructures (SDIs) requires governance in order to avoid gaps, duplications, contradictions and missed opportunities in the implementation of different SDI components. Appropriate governance instruments should be established to coordinate the activities and contributions of different stakeholders. This article reviews the governance of national SDIs in Europe before, during and after the adoption of the European INSPIRE Directive, which aimed to establish an infrastructure for spatial information in the European community. The analysis is based on a governance instruments approach as introduced by public administration researchers to analyse coordination and governance in the public sector. The study shows that the instruments-based approach is a useful tool for analysing governance in the context of SDIs and contributes to a better understanding of SDI governance. Evidence was found for the adoption and use of each of six sets of governance instruments in the governance of national SDIs in Europe: collective decision-making structures, strategic management, allocation of tasks and responsibilities, creation of markets, inter-organizational culture and knowledge management, and regulation and formalization of the infrastructure.@en

A significant number of studies has been carried out to establish 3D cadastre solutions to improve the registration of multi-level property. Since the inception of research on 3D cadastres (about 20 years ago), the world around us has changed significantly and this also partly changes the context regarding 3D cadastre: technology (e.g. visualisation of 3D information), acquisition techniques and BIM data availability, and policy and organisational structures. This paper aims to explore the implications of these changes on 3D cadastre research with a view to discussing considerations for a contemporary 3D cadastre for our times. The paper draws on social and technical trends, challenges, and gaps around 3D cadastre practices from three jurisdictions: the Australian state of Victoria, the Netherlands, and Singapore. The cases have been selected as examples of well-functioning and highly trusted cadastres and land registries committed to innovation in this area, and whose practitioners and researchers are leading the research in this domain. This set provides a breadth of insight that informs our discussion. However, we acknowledge the limitations of the findings as the research undertaken in these jurisdictions is not complicated by other issues with registration or cadastres as they may occur in other countries.@en