Geographic Information System (GIS) : A Science or a Technology

Geographic Information System (GIS) : A Science or a Technology

Fesowola O. V. Akintoye  mnis, rs, Member SCGIS, MSc GIS & Environment
Email: fesowola@glogeomaticsnigeria.com.

 

INTRODUCTION

Geographic Information System (GIS) was an object of technology, designed and adapted for the management of Canada’s vast land resources. According to Tomlinson el tal. (1976) cited in Goodchild (1992) : the developers were driven by the appalling primitive hardware capabilities in 1965; they further stated that the Canadian Geographic Information System (CGIS) was an application in search of technology and this was the motivation that produced the first GIS.

It is therefore not surprising to discover that technology, a subset of science is still the major motivation of GIS. This motivation over the years have been a contribution from many fields of theory and knowledge, people and organizations leading to the expansion of the original focus of the first GIS.

Many arguments and discourse arose as a result of the need to redefine GIS, considering its various leanings on existing earth related fields; their tools and methods.

The issues about GIS today has gone beyond that of problem solving, it requires attention to core issues that are responsible for the growth and advancement of the discipline.

There is a need to get the befitting definition for GIS; to consider the present content and focus of the discipline; to identify the major components of GIS and their validity; to define the extent of the interplay between technology and science within the context of GIS, and to review and define the fundamental issues arising from the uses and application of GIS within the social context.

This essay, focus on the attempt to define GIS and review the validity of the GIS components, reviewing their development impact on the discipline.

Definition Of GIS: The General Debate

The discipline of GISystem (GIS) is a dynamic field of study that have raised a lot of questions as to its meaning, content and goal.

A GIS is an information system that is referenced to the earth. According to Worboys and Duckham ( 2004), and Laurini and Thompson (1991) as compared to a GIS, an information System; it is a group of connected entities and activities which interact for a common purpose. A GIS in contrast is therefore an information system that uses geographically referenced spatial and aspatial data through operations that supports spatial analysis.

The main purpose of GIS is for decision making. Chrisman (2002) stated that there are a dozen definitions for the term GIS and that each developed from a different perspective or disciplinary origin. For example, Worboys and duckham ( 2004) in defining GIS stated that a GIS is a Computer-Based-Information system that enables capture, modelling, storage, retrieval, sharing, manipulation, analysis and presentation of geographically referenced data, while Pickles (1995) in his perspective of GIS, concluded that various definitions also reflected the various positions of the writers. This position was further strengthened by Laurini and Thompson (1991) in their paper that Geomatics be adopted as the umbrella body of the field of study of GIS. Meanwhile, Geomatics have been defined in recent past to be the study of the mathematics of the earth, a role that have been played for centuries by Land Surveyors and Geodesists. 

Cowen (1988) cited in Chrisman (1999), also in an attempt to throw light into the theme of the various definitions that have been stated; reviewed the principles of definitions, giving four approaches conventionally given to a definition: they include process-oriented, application, toolbox, and database approaches. However, a lot of opinions have been raised to say that all Cowens approach only pointed to the fact that GIS is a tool and that it has not considered the other components of GIS which are driving the discipline beyond problem solving.

The field of GIS according to Longley et al. (2005) is defined by association as a science, a technology; a discipline and an applied problem solving methodology and that the intents of GIS has developed over time into a technology that is attracting scientific research and drawing resources from the black box. The system is no longer an appropriate word and therefore the need to look further. Goodchild (1992). 

In looking beyond the system, it is important to consider the contributions of the various components of the disciplne. Especially the roles played by technology, organizations and the body of knowledge in expanding the frontiers of GIS.

It is also of necessity to define the discipline just as Chrisman (1999) stated that definitions can attempt to encapsulate whole bodies of knowledge, ... it has become necessary to have an holistic view of the subject of GIS. In support of this position,  Chrisman, (1999) further stated that, ... definitions must be written as self-contained units, because they will be quoted and reused without the prior paragraph of explanation.

Therefore, the suggestion in Goodchild (1992) for a deeper scrutiny of the intent of GIS, ...has shown that the definition might have to be analyzed as a political statement based on the interdisciplinary approach; and that it has become necessary to break the subject of GIS into relationally operating components for a better understanding of the subject.  

In agreement, Longley el tal. (2005) suggested that the subject of Geographic Information Systems be viewed critically from three perspectives. The first perspective is to see GIS as the main tool, then look at issues bothering on scientific inputs and bodies of knowledge as its sciences while the third on the fundamental issues that bothers on uses and applications. Longley et al.’s view have been accepted over time by other writers as of necessity.

GIS IS A TOOL

Taking the position of GIS as a tool is to take the information system as a problem solving tool laying the precepts of line processes and operations starting from the data collection tools all through the data manipulation and spatial analysis stages to data presentation. According to Chrisman (1999), this approach is a recursive attempt at defining GIS because a system tool is being defined by other subsystems arranged in linear sequence.

GIS is said to be an application led technology (tool) that is fast providing a gateway

to science. As a tool, it facilitates analysis, and continues to evolve rapidly especially with the varying range of opportunities offered by internet technology. Consequently GIS makes some analytical operations simpler, Chrisman (2002) .

Chrisman further stated that the most common understanding of GIS emphasizes that it is a tool but that no tool is neutral within the context of its social and historical changing needs. It is therefore glaring that its purpose as a tool is based on its ability to solve problems. The scientific inputs as well as the understanding of the fundamental issues are clearly not considered by this school of thought.

GIS IS TOOL MAKING

Another school believes GIS itself is making the tools through the disciplines contributing to its operations and efficiency. The technology input to GIS has been of great debate as revealed above. Fundamental issues raised are whether the various inputs of the technology components and borrowed ideas from the bodies of scientific knowledge is qualified to be assessed and accepted as  GIS. Wright et al. (1997)  in throwing light into the debate stated that for tool makers, the tool is inseparable from the substantive problem, ie.,  “doing GIS” implies involvement in the development of the tools itself.

The truth of the matter is that this school believes that the developers of GIS tools have background in other fields cannot but influence the definition; and therefore the definition of GIS can not be complete without the contributions of the tool makers because the GIS discipline is based on academic, social and economic evolutions within the context of science.

GIS IS A SCIENCE

It is evident that science has greatly enhanced the capability of GIS as a field of study, taking it beyond mare collection and assembling of data, usage of software and hardware and running information systems that at times have not been supported and tested by proven scientific theories.

Geographic Information Science (GIScience) according to  Longley el tal. (2005) is viewed as anchored by three concepts- the individual, the computer, and the society. He further stated that GIScience is at the center of the three concepts with emphasis on research and development. He revealed that GIScience is the body of knowledge that GISystems implement and exploit. The question then is should the level of scientific input into GISystems (GIS) be taken as enough attributes of being considered as a science. 

According to Chrisman (1999), the ‘science factor is an attempt to reorient the energy created by the messy confluence of tool, practice, and competing disciplines. The position of Chrisman is that the issue of GIS as a science amounts to changing the subject by shifting attention towards the core concepts, away from their particular implementation. Chrisman concluded that the attempt to change the subject seems to be motivated by a search for intellectual high ground, rather than an attempt to build a more coherent connection between the world of practice and the research community. Therefore the science is the system. Gold (2006). However, while taking a middle position, Wright et al. (1997)  gave the following as necessary conditions for a science to emerge out of a technology.

[1] the driving technology must be of sufficient significance.

[2] the issues raised by its development and use must be sufficiently challenging

[3] interest in and support for research on those issues must be inadequate in the existing disciplines.

[4] there must be sufficient commonality among the issues to create a substantial synergy.

The conditions above is giving a new theme to the debate on whether GIS is a technology that can be elevated to the place of science at the academy and that it will require a critical analysis of which of the conditions do not support GIS as a science; only condition [3] is not met by GIS as the issues of inadequate interest and support for research from existing disciplines have not become an issue yet.

GI STUDIES

A new wave of debates are beginning to come up concerning the social structures that bothers on the fundamental issues (societal, legal and corporate) of GIS uses and the varied applications. Longley el tal (2005) defined Geographic Information Studies as a systematic study of society’s use of geographic information, including its institutions, standards, and procedures. Forer and Unwin (1999) in another paper had earlier proposed Geographic Information Studies, also as a means to attend to the considerable social, legal and ethical issues. Solving problems require studies, understanding of core application issues and the system itself. Another question as to this debate is: Can GISystem be said to be about studies and results and the system be replaced with the word study?

BODY OF IDEAS

No discipline present theories in isolation, it must be related to similar thoughts in other disciplines as true. GIS has been said to be a multidisciplinary tool that evolved from the marriages of many disciplines. GIS theoretical framework are researched and produced by the body of ideas and their inputs have been agreed to be the major backbone and driving component. This component of GIS is responsible for the ideas that propel tool making and spatial operations. These fields of science and engineering includes mathematics, physics, geodesy, geography, electronics etc.

The software sub component of GIS is said to be supported by fields of knowledge like geomatics, data processing, databases, spatial analysis etc. These field of study provides scientific support for the software component while the software application support are from bodies of theory such as from agriculture, ecology etc. By their respective contributions, it is not uncommon to hear some of the disciplines laying claim to being the system or the major sub-component of this component. If this component provide support for the system, are they collectively and directly the problem solvers?

APPLICATION

GIS themes and usage are application driven. It has to do with the context and nature

of the problem to be solved. The problems that GIS solves are seen within the context of real life situations or those that are scientifically driven. Generally, applications are data, technology, method and people driven. What started in Canada as an environmental resource tool have traversed such fields as Geography, Archaeology, History, economics, administration,politics and governance, agriculture, medicine, engineering etc. It has also been adopted for analyzing the genome sequences of DNA in Medicine and studying the issues of outer space up to the study and analysis of activities on and around heavenly bodies (Longely el tal (2005), (Knowles (2008). The problems are solved at the application end of the system independent of the science and theories behind the system. You design and create your database, load your data, generate required knowledge and apply your result to decision supports. So what is GIS and who owns it?

CONCLUSION

The definition of GIS is taking a long time to be accurately presented based on the extent of its roots across several discipline, its continual appeal and adoption into new areas of research and development and the daily emerging technologies. We understand the The versatility of GIS in breaking down disciplinary barriers, adoption and re-inventing of old and existing technologies, emergence of new technologies and; creation of inter and multidisciplinary landscape for a better understanding of how our world works; and these are the reasons for the ambiguity of the various definitions that have been given in various essays and papers. There is no doubt that GIS is solving problems and that the rivalries of the past kept on coming up again. Technology has consistently change our focus and it is evident that our continual change in focus is the main reason for the consistent change in the subject. Chrisman (1999) cited in Goodchild (1999)  that as a result of growth in GIS research, our emphasis has changed, as more and more underlying GIS technical problems are emerging raising questions about the quality and accuracy of the tools (hardware, software and data models). These questions throw the pendulum around various disciplines giving occasional sensations and sentiments to what the actual definition should be. Chrisman in the same paper concluded that [1] GIS technology is producing radical changes... and it will take many years before the impact of existing technology is felt, let alone the impact of future developments. [2] the ongoing debate over the value of statistical software in teaching statistics has interesting implications for the same issue in GIS; because relationship between science and tools is stormy at times. [3] GIS are a tool for GIScience, which will in turn lead to the eventual improvement.

Goodchild (1999) in his submission, said that the  inability of GIS to meet the 3rd condition for elevation from technology to science in Wright et al. (1997) is because GIS is presently a technology with scientific leaning like the field of engineering; but yet to attain the standards of science at the academy. However, if technology can be taken as a level of science or the scientific leaning of the bodies of knowledge considered to confer the science status on GIS, then it will qualify as a science.

I am of the opinion that we are changing subject and being directed by technological advancements and availability of unending theories in the science black box and or the success in scientific research to beginning to create sub disciplines which are coherent part of the GIS. 

*This post is an extract from one of my M.Sc. class essays in MMU.