The Global Centre for Risk and Innovation (GCRI)
Geospatial data on boundaries, addresses, land, buildings and infrastructure underpin government, markets and risk management. National spatial data infrastructures, standards, licensing and rules on privacy and security decide whether that data is available, trusted and reusable. This page sets out how geospatial information is governed, how maturity is assessed, and what evidence serves the mapping agencies and institutions responsible.
The interactive map needs JavaScript; the layer list and sources are below.
Layers 3
Earth observation, for this page
Keyboard, with the map focused
Hold Ctrl or ⌘ and scroll to zoom
Latest available
NASA GIBS / EOSDIS · ASTER GDEM (METI, NASA) · Blue Marble (NASA) · © OpenStreetMap contributors (ODbL) · Natural Earth
Loading the latest NASA imagery.
Drag to move. Ctrl or ⌘ and scroll, pinch or the buttons to zoom; hover for the values under the pointer; reset returns to the region.
For geospatial governance, in GCRI's spatial-intelligence reading, the map opens on true-colour imagery, night lights and land cover with true colour from NASA GIBS, framed on the Arctic; every other NASA layer, live feed and forecast waits in the layer list.Satellite and model products as NASA publishes them, each with its own date; indicators, not assessments of any place; claim ceiling INTEGRATED.
Layers and dates
Geospatial data governance is the set of institutions, standards, licences and rules that decide how location data are produced, maintained, shared and protected. Authoritative datasets need custodians, standards let data combine, licences shape reuse, and sensitive data require balancing openness against privacy and security.
The working screen behind this subject: its structure, terms and states. Names are placeholders and values illustrative.
Geospatial governance · Orbit shell 550 km · Week 23
| CJ-3383 | SAT-3 vs debris | 244 | 0.00040 | Monitor |
| CJ-8940 | SAT-1 vs SAT-x | 482 | 0.000009 | None |
| CJ-0105 | SAT-4 vs debris | 46 | 0.0007 | Manoeuvre |
Licensing, privacy and data quality. The dossier below sets out how the risk develops, what is measured, where the data come from, how it is modelled and who decides.
Someone must be responsible for each fundamental dataset, such as addresses or cadastres, keeping it current and correct.
Common reference frames, formats and catalogues let data from different agencies be overlaid and shared.
Open licences increase reuse; restrictive or unclear licences limit it, even for publicly funded data.
Detailed maps of infrastructure, people or protected sites raise privacy and security concerns that governance must weigh against openness.
Each term as this page uses it. Where a standard-setting body defines the term, the wording follows that body.
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| Geodetic reference frame | A coordinate system tied to the Earth that lets positions be measured consistently. |
| Data custodian | The organization responsible for maintaining an authoritative dataset and keeping it current. |
| Cadastre | An official register of land parcels, their boundaries and often ownership. |
Each indicator carries its unit, its cadence, the kind of source behind it and the evidence label a value would carry. No values are shown: a programme supplies them under its own authority.
| Indicator | Unit | Cadence | Source type | Label |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fundamental geospatial data themes available | count of themes | per assessment | UN-GGIM and national assessments | OFFICIAL |
| Geodetic reference frame adoption | status | per assessment | National geodetic agency records | OFFICIAL |
| Datasets with open licences | percent of national geospatial datasets | per assessment | Catalogue analysis | OBSERVED |
| Metadata compliance with standards | percent of datasets | per assessment | Catalogue analysis | OBSERVED |
| Address coverage | percent of dwellings with an official address | per assessment | Address registers | OFFICIAL |
| Cadastral coverage | percent of parcels registered | per assessment | Land administration records | OFFICIAL |
The topic as a computational graph: named sources feed the methods, an evidence review gates the outputs, and the decisions stay with the authorities that hold them.
Fig. 02Nodes carry their type, two metric rows and a state; connectors show what feeds what; dashed frames name the owners; the timeline is the cadence. Design of the pipeline, not a record of a run.
Named public datasets and institutional records, each with its licence class. Sources by agreement are used only under their terms and never republished.
| Source | What it gives | Licence class |
|---|---|---|
| UN-GGIM Integrated Geospatial Information Framework documents | Framework and implementation guide | Public, UN terms of use |
| UN-GGIM global fundamental geospatial data themes | Themes considered fundamental for national data | Public, UN terms of use |
| OGC standards | Interoperability standards for geospatial data and services | Public, OGC terms |
| National mapping agency catalogues | Available datasets and licences | Licence per agency |
| World Bank and FIG land administration studies | Cadastre and land registration status | Public, terms per publisher |
Space and Earth Observation prepares evidence. The decisions below are taken by the authorities named, under their own rules, and never by the platform.
| Who decides | The question | Evidence this page serves |
|---|---|---|
| National mapping and cadastral agencies | Which datasets to prioritise and how to publish them | Maturity reviews; gap analyses |
| Governments | How to fund and govern national geospatial information | Framework evidence |
| Security and privacy authorities | Which geospatial data need restrictions | Sensitive data evidence |
Specialists in geospatial governance work on questions of rights, rules and quality.
Commercial constellations now offer imagery at resolutions and revisit frequencies once limited to a few governments. Combining imagery with other data, such as mobile location or social media, can reveal patterns of individual behaviour. Licensing regimes, privacy law and data-protection rules were mostly written before these capabilities existed and vary between jurisdictions.
Quality is a governance question too. Products are reused far from their original purpose, often without their validation or licence conditions. Open data policies have greatly expanded use, but openness without documentation can spread errors. Communities whose lands are mapped may have their own views on how such data is used, overlapping with the principles of data sovereignty.
Comparing licensing, privacy and data law across jurisdictions. Rules change quickly and differ in practice from text.
Documenting source, processing and accuracy with geospatial information systems standards. Metadata is often incomplete.
Evaluating re-identification risk of imagery and derived data. Combined datasets create risks that single datasets do not.
Assessing fitness for purpose using statistical validation. Different uses need different standards.
The current service level is R0: information and enquiries. An enquiry receives a reference and names the next step; applications, payments, compute allocations and registrations open only when their team, terms and review capacity exist.