Last week I attended the 45th Annual Conference of the Urban and Regional Information Systems Association (URISA) in Washington D.C. at what locals call “The Hinckley Hilton” because John Hinckley shot President Reagan there in 1981. While that is long forgotten by many, URISA conferences preceded the shooting by 14 years, holding its first conference in 1967 in Garden City, NY after formation in 1966. About 600 attended the conference and discussed a range of pressing topics concerning what most of them call geographic information systems (GIS).

The practitioners who attended are in tough environments. They work mostly for state and local governments as providers and maintainers of services as well as information used to make many important decisions. Most are tasked with improving the availability of geospatial information and services yet have limited resources to do so. With the increasing need for emergency planning, for example, information demands come from many quarters. However, concerns abound about recipient misuse of geospatial information because of a lack of understanding of geospatial principles, data sources, and GIS technologies.

The stakeholder discussions focused on the importance of central regional repositories of geospatial and related information. Such repositories provide coverage for planning and many other activities. However, there are some show-stopper issues including data ownership, coordination between participating parties and the users of the repository, and lack of funding. Businesses would certainly benefit from the availability of such geospatial repositories and could help fund them, but the governments seem overwhelmed serving their constituents and dealing with other governmental entities. Businesses increasingly need geospatial data for their operations, and have valuable data to contribute to a central source. Therefore, businesses need to insert themselves as important participants, not just buyers of data and services.

The program committee pulled together a robust program of sessions covering all aspects of importance: applications, data, disaster & emergency response, K-12 education, management, partnerships and collaboration, professional development, and tools.

One new initiative is a focus on K-12 education. In my view, the lack of understanding of geographic concepts and technologies is leading to a significant underuse of both. Adults in key business positions lack basic knowledge necessary to apply the rich knowledge base of geography or GIS technologies to their business decisions. The focus on K-12 education means providing ways for teachers and administration to provide students with materials to engage them while not boring them. In addition, part of the challenge is educating the teachers, some of whom lack the basics. It’s an important and worthy effort, with several organizations offering help, including National Geographic, ESRI, and GIS4Kids.

One of the most fascinating sessions was a panel discussion of the New Haven Census Use Study, 1967. The study was groundbreaking for the combination of computer mapping, street address matching, and Census data. Several staffers in the study reunited to discuss lessons learned - Dorothy Bomberger, Matt Jaro, Don Cooke, Bill Maxfield, George Leland, Marv White, and Ed Hurle. Many of them went on to form or join companies that now provide us with street data used in GPS navigation systems, demographic data and systems used for marketing analyses (now owned by IBM, Tele Atlas, and Harte-Hanks). An important point was shared in the session – by the middle of the 1970s, 75 of the top 100 banks at the time were customers of Urban Data Processing, (founded by some of the study staffers) which focused on geographic analysis. It would be great to see a return of this early enthusiasm by businesses for geospatial analyses.

Despite the other larger forums for GIS professionals, URISA remains relevant. It offers a perspective of value and independence. While it should continue to strengthen ties with other related associations such as AAG and GITA, the voices of the GIS managers and others in the localities need to be heard in the process of deciding how society will use geospatial information into the future.