1 / 11

Dataset Review

Dataset Review. Date: 21 September 2004. Objectives. To provide background to why this activity was initiated To state how we intend to meet the requirements To report progress Way forward. Why?. To review the purpose, appropriateness, and quality

newman
Download Presentation

Dataset Review

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Dataset Review Date: 21 September 2004

  2. Objectives • To provide background to why this activity was initiated • To state how we intend to meet the requirements • To report progress • Way forward

  3. Why? • To review • the purpose, • appropriateness, and • quality of socio-economic data sets currently in use in public planning for use in the Department. • To determine present and future needs of various Directorates within the Department • To ensure that the proposed DWAF systems (PesIMS) (PosIMS) are in no way duplication of work in other departments or institutions. • Ascertain how existing information could potentially be obtained and linked in a standardized and meaningful way into DWAF Management Systems.

  4. How and what ? • Information obtained through Internet searches • Identified and established contacts in various Departments • Bilateral interviews arranged with various institutions • A “capturing form” was developed with which we are populating with the information • Fields based on the requirements as provided by the SABS Metadata Standard - National Spatial Information Framework (NSIF) • The value and relevance would be assessed in collaboration with user requirements as established by the directorates in DWAF • Potential gaps and integration would be assessed based on strengths and limitations of the data set, including an assessment of methodology.

  5. How ? • A minimum data set requirement would be established as a result of the interrogating process • Recommendations for utilization.

  6. Where are we ? Interviewed

  7. Where are we ? Interviewed

  8. Where in the process are we? • Currently in the process of capturing fields – a list is available as attachment in your documentation. Summary: • Still interviewing listed institutions • Started populating the fields • Will continue consultation process within and outside DWAF

  9. Preliminary Finding • No duplication evident so far • Institutions concentrate on specific sector information • -IDEA-data – more specific to housing • -PIMMS-data - IDP and MIG • The 2001 census data not integrated in any of the reviewed systems • The intended PES and POS-systems would differ in the following way: • PesIMS would host data specific to water management • Data would be aggregated to water management areas • Water consumption units • The intended PosIMS would be utilizing time-series data to update scenario’s relevant to water planning and management. • The latter function does not exist in any of the reviewed systems

  10. Way forward • To continue with: • the interviewing process • populating the capture form • the data assessment, and eventually • Consultation with stakeholders in DWAF • Census data would need to be integrated, aligned and adjusted for boundary differences.

  11. Thank you Sample table slide

More Related