IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v97y2020ics0264837719322355.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Smart governance based on multipurpose territorial cadastre and geographic information system: An analysis of geoinformation, transparency and collaborative participation for Brazilian capitals

Author

Listed:
  • Silva, Andréa Oliveira da
  • Fernandes, Ricardo Augusto Souza

Abstract

In the information era, cities are connected by data networks and, therefore, solutions to urban problems have been supported by Information and Communication Technologies, which provide the interaction between government and citizens. Thus, information plays a crucial role in Smart Cities, enabling the smart governance, under the precepts of good governance, highlighting the participation and transparency. In addition, Geoinformation turns the Multipurpose Territorial Cadastre into a decision support informational source that is of great relevance in the context of Smart Governance. Based on this context, the present study investigates the geotechnology scenario applied by the governments of the Brazilian capitals, observing the availability of Multipurpose Territorial Cadastre on the Internet and considering the Geoinformation, Transparency and Collaborative participation aspects. In this sense, this paper proposes an exploratory research, with quantitative and qualitative analyzes. In the first stage, it was identified the cities that offer access to territorial information via the Internet, i.e., quantifying cities with active geoportals. Next, the second step qualifies the geoportals of cities according to their existence and access to certain information. The types of information selected for the survey, considered the evolution of the Cadastre, observing three aspects: (i) cadastral information; (ii) thematic information; and (iii) collaborative interface. The results showed that just over half of the capitals keep active geoportals and almost 1/3 of the capitals make available on the Internet a Multipurpose Territorial Cadastre. In terms of Transparency, it was noted that open access data is still lower than non-available or restricted access data. Moreover, the aspect of Collaborative participation is meaningless. Analyzing the results, it can be noted the need to improve both the availability of data and open access to information regarding the aspects of Multipurpose Territorial Cadastre in the geoportals, mainly the cadastral information. These actions could promote the transparency and collaborative participation that, consequently, will improve the effectiveness of smart governance in the Brazilian capitals.

Suggested Citation

  • Silva, Andréa Oliveira da & Fernandes, Ricardo Augusto Souza, 2020. "Smart governance based on multipurpose territorial cadastre and geographic information system: An analysis of geoinformation, transparency and collaborative participation for Brazilian capitals," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:97:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719322355
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104752
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837719322355
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.104752?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gabriela Viale Pereira & Maria Alexandra Cunha & Thomas J. Lampoltshammer & Peter Parycek & Maurício Gregianin Testa, 2017. "Increasing collaboration and participation in smart city governance: a cross-case analysis of smart city initiatives," Information Technology for Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(3), pages 526-553, July.
    2. United Nations UN, 2015. "Transforming our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development," Working Papers id:7559, eSocialSciences.
    3. Klimach, Anna & Dawidowicz, Agnieszka & Źróbek, Ryszard, 2018. "The Polish land administration system supporting good governance," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 547-555.
    4. Vito Albino & Umberto Berardi & Rosa Maria Dangelico, 2015. "Smart Cities: Definitions, Dimensions, Performance, and Initiatives," Journal of Urban Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(1), pages 3-21, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Barbosa, Victor Alves & Nabout, João Carlos & Cunha, Hélida Ferreira da, 2023. "Spatial and temporal deforestation in the Brazilian Savanna: The discrepancy between observed and licensed deforestation in the state of Goiás," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 131(C).
    2. Ayazli, Ismail Ercument, 2024. "Investigating the interactions between spatiotemporal land use/land cover dynamics and private land ownership," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Franciely Velozo Aragão & Daiane Maria de Genaro Chiroli & Fernanda Cavicchioli Zola & Emanuely Velozo Aragão & Luis Henrique Nogueira Marinho & Ana Lidia Cascales Correa & João Carlos Colmenero, 2023. "Smart Cities Maturity Model—A Multicriteria Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-20, April.
    2. Kusumastuti, Ratih Dyah & Nurmala, N. & Rouli, Juliana & Herdiansyah, Herdis, 2022. "Analyzing the factors that influence the seeking and sharing of information on the smart city digital platform: Empirical evidence from Indonesia," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    3. Anassaya Chawviang & Supaporn Kiattisin, 2022. "Sustainable Development: Smart Co-Operative Management Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-25, March.
    4. Karimikia, Hadi & Bradshaw, Robert & Singh, Harminder & Ojo, Adegboyega & Donnellan, Brian & Guerin, Michael, 2022. "An emergent taxonomy of boundary spanning in the smart city context – The case of smart Dublin," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 185(C).
    5. Syed Asad Abbas Bokhari & Myeong Seunghwan, 2024. "How Do Institutional and Technological Innovations Influence the Smart City Governance? Focused on Stakeholder Satisfaction and Crime Rate," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(10), pages 1-21, May.
    6. Fernando Almeida, 2023. "Prospects of Cybersecurity in Smart Cities," Future Internet, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-21, August.
    7. Zhe Gao & Siqin Wang & Jiang Gu, 2020. "Public Participation in Smart-City Governance: A Qualitative Content Analysis of Public Comments in Urban China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-19, October.
    8. Mora, Luca & Gerli, Paolo & Ardito, Lorenzo & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio, 2023. "Smart city governance from an innovation management perspective: Theoretical framing, review of current practices, and future research agenda," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    9. Rajneesh Dwevedi & Vinoy Krishna & Aniket Kumar, 2018. "Environment and Big Data: Role in Smart Cities of India," Resources, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-10, October.
    10. Johannes Stübinger & Lucas Schneider, 2020. "Understanding Smart City—A Data-Driven Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-23, October.
    11. Fang‐Li Ruan & Liang Yan, 2022. "Challenges facing indicators to become a universal language for sustainable urban development," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(1), pages 41-57, February.
    12. Raquel Pérez‐delHoyo & Higinio Mora & José Manuel Nolasco‐Vidal & Rubén Abad‐Ortiz & Rafael A. Mollá‐Sirvent, 2021. "Addressing new challenges in smart urban planning using Information and Communication Technologies," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(3), pages 342-354, May.
    13. Paula Bajdor & Marta Starostka-Patyk, 2021. "Smart City: A Bibliometric Analysis of Conceptual Dimensions and Areas," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-28, July.
    14. Chiara Catalano & Mihaela Meslec & Jules Boileau & Riccardo Guarino & Isabella Aurich & Nathalie Baumann & Frédéric Chartier & Pascale Dalix & Sophie Deramond & Patrick Laube & Angela Ka Ki Lee & Pasc, 2021. "Smart Sustainable Cities of the New Millennium: Towards Design for Nature," Circular Economy and Sustainability, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 1053-1086, November.
    15. Hossein Azadi & Guy Robinson & Ali Akbar Barati & Imaneh Goli & Saghi Movahhed Moghaddam & Narges Siamian & Rando Värnik & Rong Tan & Kristina Janečková, 2023. "Smart Land Governance: Towards a Conceptual Framework," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-20, March.
    16. Paulina Schiappacasse & Bernhard Müller & Le Thuy Linh, 2019. "Towards Responsible Aggregate Mining in Vietnam," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-15, August.
    17. Pina Puntillo, 2023. "Circular economy business models: Towards achieving sustainable development goals in the waste management sector—Empirical evidence and theoretical implications," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(2), pages 941-954, March.
    18. Roblek Vasja & Meško Maja & Podbregar Iztok, 2021. "Mapping of the Emergence of Society 5.0: A Bibliometric Analysis," Organizacija, Sciendo, vol. 54(4), pages 293-305, December.
    19. R. Ebrahimi & S. Choobchian & H. Farhadian & I. Goli & E. Farmandeh & H. Azadi, 2022. "Investigating the effect of vocational education and training on rural women’s empowerment," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-11, December.
    20. Bárbara Galleli & Elder Semprebon & Joyce Aparecida Ramos dos Santos & Noah Emanuel Brito Teles & Mateus Santos de Freitas-Martins & Raquel Teodoro da Silva Onevetch, 2021. "Institutional Pressures, Sustainable Development Goals and COVID-19: How Are Organisations Engaging?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-21, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:97:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719322355. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.