AUC Geographica (Acta Universitatis Carolinae Geographica) is a scholarly academic journal continuously published since 1966 that publishes research in the broadly defined field of geography: physical geography, geo-ecology, regional, social, political and economic geography, regional development, cartography, geoinformatics, demography and geo-demography.
AUC Geographica also publishes articles that contribute to advances in geographic theory and methodology and address the questions of regional, socio-economic and population policy-making in Czechia.
Periodical twice yearly.
Release dates: June 30, December 31
All articles are licenced under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International licence (CC BY 4.0), have DOI and are indexed in CrossRef database.
AUC Geographica is covered by the following services: EBSCO, GeoBibline, SCOPUS, Ulrichsweb and Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ).
The journal has been covered in the SCOPUS database since 1975 – today
The journal has been selected for coverage in Clarivate Analytics products and services. Beginning with V. 52 (1) 2017, this publication will be indexed and abstracted in Emerging Sources Citation Index.
The journal has been indexed by the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education (MSHE) on the list of scientific journals recommended for authors to publish their articles. ICI World of Journals; Acta Universitatis Carolinae, Geographica.
Scopus Journal Metric
The journal is archived in Portico.
AUC GEOGRAPHICA, Vol 56 No 2 (2021), 182–194
Survey on economic considerations and decisions of key geodata providers and users in Czech public administration
Tomáš Řezník, Karel Charvát, Lukáš Herman, Milan Konečný
announced: 25. 08. 2021
This paper presents the results of an empirical economic data-based survey of the costs and revenues of geographical data and Web services across public administration in Czechia. The survey was composed of questionnaires and interviews. The data was collected from the 19 biggest public producers of geographical information and 25 organizations that use geographical information. The results focus on the economic consequences of data opening, splitting finances within public administration bodies, the prioritization of activities related to geographical information, licensing issues and life cycle planning etc. We also consider user opinions on the restrictions on the (re)use of geographical information of public administration, including open data.
keywords: economic survey; finances allocation; geospatial life cycle; spatial data infrastructure; open data
1. ANZLIC (2010a): The Spatial Information Council. Economic Assessment of Spatial Data Pricing and Access: Stage 1 Report: Principles, Issues and Alternative Models (online). Available from: https://www.crcsi.com.au/assets/Resources/ANZLIC-Economic-Study-Stage-1-Report.pdf (Accessed 6 November 2020).
2. ANZLIC (2010b): The Spatial Information Council. Economic Assessment of Spatial Data Pricing and Access: Stage 2 Report: Cost Benefit Analysis of Alternative Models (online). Available from: https://www.crcsi.com.au/assets/Resources/ANZLIC-Economic-Study-Stage-2-Report.pdf (Accessed 6 November 2020).
3. Berners-Lee, T. (2006): Linked Data (online). Available from: https://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/LinkedData.html (Accessed 2 November 2020).
4. Castelein, T. W., Bregt, A., Pluimers, Y. (2010): The economic value of the Dutch geoinformation sector. International Journal of Spatial Data Infrastructures Research 5, 58-76. CrossRef
5. Cetl, V., Roic, M., Mastelic Ivic, S. (2008): Cost-benefit analysis of the improvement of spatial data infrastructure - Case study Croatia. Geodetski Vestnik 52(3), 475-486.
6. Cetl, V., Nunes de Lima, V., Tomas, R., Lutz, M., D'Eugenio, J., Nagy, A., Robbrecht, J. (2017): Summary Report on Status of implementation of the INSPIRE Directive in EU, EUR 28930 EN. (online). Available from: https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/bitstream/JRC109035/jrc109035_jrc109035_jrc_inspire_eu_summaryreport_online.pdf (Accessed 23 February 2021).
7. Craglia, M., Pavanello, L., Smith, R. S. (2012): Are We There Yet? Assessing the Contribution of INSPIRE to EIA and SEA Studies. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management 14(1), 5-27. CrossRef
8. Craglia, M., Pogorzelska, K. (2020): The Economic Value of Digital Earth. In: Guo, M. et al., eds., Manual of Digital Earth. Singapore: Springer Nature, 623-643. CrossRef
9. Craglia, M., Roglia, E., Tomas, R. (2014): INSPIRE Public Consultation (online). Available from: http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/reports/consultations/INSPIRE_Public_Consultation_Report_final.pdf (Accessed 6 November 2020).
10. Crompvoets, J., Broucker, B. (2015): Geospatial Information Broker. A New Role of National Mapping Agencies. Micro, Macro & Mezzo Geoinformation 4, 1-10.
11. Crompvoets, J., de Man, E., Macharis, C. (2010): Value of Spatial Data: Networked Performance beyond Economic Rhetoric. International Journal of Spatial Data Infrastructures Research 5, 96-119. CrossRef
12. Coumans, F. (2018): The Search for the Economic Value of 3D Geoinformation (online). Available from: https://www.gim-international.com/content/article/the-search-for-the-economic-value-of-3d-geoinformation (Accessed 16 February 2021).
13. CZSO (2021): Inflation - Types, Definition, Tables (online). Available from: https://www.czso.cz/csu/czso/inflation_rate (Accessed 22 February 2021).
14. Deloitte (2018): The Socio Economic Impact of Open ELS. Final Report (online). Available from: https://openels.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Open_ELS_socio_economic_benefits_final_report_Website.pdf (Accessed 17 February 2021).
15. Dasgupta, A. (2013): Economic Value of Geospatial Data: The Great Enabler. (online). Available from: https://www.geospatialworld.net/article/economic-value-of-geospatial-data-the-great-enabler/ (Accessed 16 February 2021).
16. DEWBERRY (2011): Final Report of the National Enhanced Elevation Assessment (revised 2012) (online). Fairfax, Va., Dewberry. Available from: http://www.dewberry.com/services/geospatial/national-enhanced-elevation-assessment (Accessed 5 November 2020).
17. Di Biase, D. (2021): Nature of Geographic Information (online). Available from: https://opentextbc.ca/natureofgeographicinformation/ (Accessed 18 February 2021).
18. Directive 2007/2/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 March 2007 establishing an Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community (INSPIRE) (online). Official Journal L 108, 0001-0014. Available from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2007:108:0001:0014:en:PDF (Accessed 10 November 2020).
19. European Commission (2017): INSPIRE Monitoring and Reporting (online). Available from: http://inspire.ec.europa.eu/index.cfm/pageid/182 (Accessed 3 November 2020).
20. Frank, A. U. (2001): The Surveying activities at the Austrian Federal Office for Metrology and Surveying: An Economic Analysis. Vienna: Austrian Federal Ministry of Economics & Labour.
21. FGDC (2010): Stages of the Geospatial Data Lifecycle pursuant to OMB Circular A-16. 2010. (online). Available from: https://www.fgdc.gov/policyandplanning/a-16/stages-of-geospatial-data-lifecycle-a16.pdf (Accessed 5 November 2020).
22. Genovese, E., Roche, S., Caron, C., Feick, R. (2010): The EcoGeo Cookbook for the assessment of Geographic Information value. International Journal of Spatial Data Infrastructures Research 5, 120-144. CrossRef
23. Gillespie, S. R., (2000): An Empirical Approach to Estimating GIS Benefits. Journal of the Urban and Regional Information Systems Association 12(1), 7-14.
24. Goodchild, M. F. (2003): The Nature and Value of Geographic Information. In: Duckham, M., Goodchild, M. F., Worboys, M. F., eds., Fundamentals of Geographic Information Science, London, UK: Taylor & Francis, 19-31.
25. Halsing, D., Theissen, K., Bernknopf, R. L. (2004): A Cost-Benefit Analysis of the National Map, U.S. Geological Survey, Circular No. 1271. (online). Available from: https://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/2004/1271/ (Accessed 10 November 2020).
26. Hošková-Mayerová, S., Talhofer, V., Hofmann, A., Kubíček, P. (2013): Spatial database quality and the potential uncertainty sources. In: Proto, A., Squillante, M., Kacprzyk, J., eds., Advanced Dynamic Modeling of Economic and Social Systems. Studies in Computational Intelligence 448. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer, 127-142. CrossRef
27. INSPIRE Knowledge Base (2021): Czechia - 2020: Country Fiche. (online). Available from: https://inspire.ec.europa.eu/country-fiche/czechia-2020-country-fiche (Accessed 22 February 2021).
28. Johnson, P. A., Sieber, R., Scassa, T., Stephens, M., Robinson, P. (2017): The Cost(s) of Geographical Open Data. Transactions in GIS 21(3), 434-445. CrossRef
29. Klinkenberg, B. (2003): The true cost of spatial data in Canada. The Canadian Geographer 47(1), 37-49. CrossRef
30. Krek, A., Frank, A. (2000): The Economic Value of Geo Information. Journal for Spatial Information and Decision Making, 13 (3), 10-12.
31. Kubátová, E. (2017): Aktuální stav implementace GeoInfoStrategie (online). Available from: https://www.isss.cz/archiv/2017/download/prezentace/mvcr_kubatova.pdf (Accessed 19 February 2021).
32. Lü, G., Batty, M., Strobl, J., Lin, H., Zhu, A.-X., Chen, M. (2019): Reflections and speculations on the progress in Geographic Information Systems (GIS): A geographic perspective. International Journal of Geographical Information Science 33(2), 346-367. CrossRef
33. National Research Council (2004): Licensing Geographic Data and Services. Washington, DC, USA: The National Academies Press.
34. Obermeyer, N. J. (2008): Cost-Benefit Analysis. In: Kemp, K. K., ed. Encyclopedia of Geographic Information Science, Los Angeles, USA: SAGE Publications, 52-54. CrossRef
35. OXERA (1999): The Economic Contribution of Ordnance Survey GB (online). Oxford Economic Research Associates, Oxford, United Kingdom. Available from: https://nsgic.memberclicks.net/assets/docs/Library/British_Ord_Survey_Economic_Paper.pdf (Accessed 4 November 2020).
36. Pashova, L, Bandrova, T. (2017.): A brief overview of current status of European spatial data infrastructures− relevant developments and perspectives for Bulgaria. Geo-Spatial Information Science 20(2), 97-108. CrossRef
37. Pick, J. (2005): Costs and Benefits of GIS in Business. In: Pick, J. B., ed., Geographic Information Systems in Business. Hershey, USA: Idea Group Publishing, 56-79. CrossRef
38. Řezník, T., Chudý, R., Mičietová, E. (2016): Normalized evaluation of the performance, capacity and availability of catalogue services: a pilot study based on INfrastruture for SPatial InfoRmation in Europe. International Journal of Digital Earth 9(4), 325-341. CrossRef
39. Řezník, T. (2013): Geographic information in the age of the INSPIRE Directive: Discovery, download and use for geographical information research. Geografie 118(1), 77-93. CrossRef
40. Toth, K., Smits, P. (2009): Cost-Benefit Considerations in Establishing Interoperability of the Data Component of Spatial Data Infrastructures. In: Proceeding of the 24th International Cartographic Conference, 15-21 November 209 Santiago De Chile.
Survey on economic considerations and decisions of key geodata providers and users in Czech public administration is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.