Condominium is one of the prevalent forms of three- dimensional (3D) property rights (Paulsson, 2007, p. 32). The condominium concept common to a number of jurisdictions consists of three elements: (a) individual ownership of an apartment, (b) co-ownership (joint ownership) of the land and the common parts of the building, and (c) membership of an incorporated or unincorporated owners' association (van der Merwe, 2015, p. 5). The ownership shares of condominium unit owners in the common property are here referred to as co-ownership shares; yet, alternative terms include ownership fraction, condominium share, participation quota, share value, and unit entitlement. The co-ownership share determines the proportional contribution to the common expenses and the share of common profits, as well as the voting power of each condominium unit owner in the administration of the condominium. The most common approaches to the determination of the co-ownership shares are based on equality, relative size or relative value of each condominium unit, or a combination of such (van der Merwe, 1994, p. 57-58). The literature presents detailed descriptions and comparative analysis related to condominium systems in different jurisdictions (e.g. van der Merwe, 2016; 2015; Paulsson, 2007; EUI, 2005; UNECE, 2005); however, the technical and procedural aspects related to the allotment of co-ownership shares still need to be further investigated. This paper aims to compare methods and procedures applied for the allotment of co-ownership shares of condominium systems in the following seven jurisdictions; Denmark, Germany, South Africa, Sweden, Switzerland, the Netherlands, and Turkey. Also, international geographic information standards (i.e. ISO LADM, OGC LandInfra/InfraGML) are analyzed to assess the extent to which they facilitate allocation of co-ownership shares. The main purpose is to clarify the legal provisions and methodologies related to the determination of co-ownership shares in national condominium systems and bring new insights to countries, which are trying to revise their national provisions for fairer implementations.@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