No abstract

Cities establish and maintain Land Administration Systems (LAS) to manage information about the land and urban space. Recognizing the importance of the urban space for sustainable development, information from spatial planning will affect land administration and vice versa. Therefore, every aspect that influences land use, both from spatial planning and land administration should be identified, documented, and standardized as they contain legally binding rules for governments and citizens. The Land Administration Domain Model (LADM), ISO standard 19152:2012, offers guidelines to ensure interoperability in the representation of Rights, Restrictions, and Responsibilities (RRRs). LADM is also capable of standardizing multi-dimensional representation, including the temporal capability for documenting and visualizing all legal aspects of land use or space. This paper discusses how to construct interoperable information between the spatial plan and land administration. We present the standardization of spatial planning information and land administration as subsets of land-related information. The paper proposes the development of a spatial planning package within the existing LADM standard.

Most urban planning monitoring activities were designed to monitor implementation of aggregated sectors from different initiatives into practical and measurable indicators. Today, cities utilize spatial information in monitoring and evaluating urban planning implementation for not only national or local goals but also for the 2030 Agenda of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Modern cities adopt Participatory Geographic Information System (PGIS) initiative for their urban planning monitoring. Cities provide spatial information and online tools for citizens to participate. However, the selection of spatial information services for participants is made from producers' perception and often disregards requirements from the regulation, functionalities, and broader user's perception. By providing appropriate spatial information, the quality of participatory urban monitoring can be improved. This study presents a method for selecting appropriate spatial information for urban planning monitoring. It considers regulation, urban planning, and spatial science theories, as well as citizens' requirements, to support participatory urban planning monitoring as a way to ensure the success of providing near real-time urban information to planners and decision-makers.use changes need to be monitored, well-reported, documented, and analyzed using spatial information. By placing spatial information at the core monitoring system, land use change can be produced and shared by stakeholders to assess sustainable development.Participatory mapping facilitates citizens in contributing their knowledge to the city government in the form of spatial information. In facilitating participatory mapping, many cities established a 'top-down' GIS system to support their decision-making [8]. Many of these 'top-down' GIS applications were established based on spatial data producers' perspective and introduced only a limited type of dataset for participants. These systems were mainly developed based on the expert's view and, in many cases, marginalized Local Spatial Knowledge (LSK) [9]. Sieber [10] also reported that the 'top-down' approach grows skepticism among participants. The potential role of citizens is, for example, underestimated. By giving access to spatial information services, citizens will be able to enhance their knowledge in locating a phenomenon [11] by filling in the information gaps with better quality for urban planning processes [12]. The rapid advancement of Geographic Information and Communication Technology (Geo-ICT) and open spatial information services enables citizens and non-government institutions to fill these gaps left open by government data [13].It is important to allow stakeholders to participate in defining the data specifications for participatory activities. Stakeholders in participatory urban planning monitoring should be given more responsibilities to not only access but also to determine the type and specification of spatial information and technologies for improving their LSK, as well as to comply with regulati...

No abstract