Model of minimum and scalable functionalities for a provincial geoportal based on the evaluation of institutional geoportals linked to territorial planning
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The availability of institutional geoportals does not guarantee sufficient capabilities to support land-use planning, due to gaps in spatial analysis, interoperability, and decision support. The objective was to propose a model of minimum and scalable functionalities for a provincial geoportal, based on an evaluation of platforms linked to Cotopaxi, Ecuador. A quantitative, non-experimental, cross-sectional, and evaluative study was conducted using a matrix of 33 indicators applied to four geoportals and a Likert-scale survey of technical staff (314 valid responses); descriptive statistics and Spearman’s correlations were used. Three platforms exhibited low functional maturity, and none reached the high level. Spatial analysis revealed widespread limitations; the association between spatial analysis and decision support was the strongest among the tested hypotheses (rho = 0.549; p < 0.001). A comparison of the two sources revealed discrepancies between perceptions and technical performance, particularly regarding decision support, although they evaluated different units. It is concluded that the proposed model, organized into minimum, intermediate, and advanced levels, provides a framework for progressive improvements across five functional dimensions, with institutional governance as a cross-cutting theme, and requires pilot validation.
Downloads
Article Details
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
References
Ahmad, M., Ali, A., Nawaz, M., Sattar, F., & Hussain, H. (2025). National spatial data infrastructure as a catalyst for good governance and policy improvements in Pakistan. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 14(9), Artículo 324. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi14090324
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587
Goodchild, M. F. (2007). Citizens as sensors: The world of volunteered geography. GeoJournal, 69(4), 211–221. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10708-007-9111-y
Izdebski, W., Zwirowicz-Rutkowska, A., & Nowak da Costa, J. (2021). Open data in spatial data infrastructure: The practices and experiences of Poland. International Journal of Digital Earth, 14(11), 1547–1560. https://doi.org/10.1080/17538947.2021.1952323
Kim, M., Gwak, I., & Koh, J. (2019). The strategies of advanced local spatial data infrastructure for Seoul Metropolitan Government. International Journal of Urban Sciences, 23(3), 352–368. https://doi.org/10.1080/12265934.2018.1458639
Król, K. (2024). Retrospective analysis of municipal geoportal usability in the context of the evolution of online data presentation techniques. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 13(9), Artículo 307. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi13090307
Król, K., & Sroka, W. (2023). Internet in the middle of nowhere: Performance of geoportals in rural areas according to Core Web Vitals. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 12(12), Artículo 484. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi12120484
Król, K., Zdonek, D., & Sroka, W. (2024). Functionality assessment checklist for evaluating geoportals useful in planning sustainable tourism. Sustainability, 16(12), Artículo 5242. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16125242
Krügel, F., Mäs, S., Hindorf, P., & Buthmann, E. (2024). An online multicriteria—spatial decision support system for public services planning. Applied Sciences, 14(4), Artículo 1526. https://doi.org/10.3390/app14041526
López Sandoval, M. F. (2015). El sistema de planificación y el ordenamiento territorial para Buen Vivir en el Ecuador. GEOUSP Espaço e Tempo (Online), 19(2), 297–312. https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.2179-0892.geousp.2015.102802
Manna, P., Agrillo, A., Bancheri, M., Di Leginio, M., Ferraro, G., Langella, G., Mileti, F. A., Riitano, N., & Munafò, M. (2024). A geospatial decision support system for supporting the assessment of land degradation in Europe. Land, 13(1), Artículo 89. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13010089
Masser, I. (Ed.). (2019). Geographic information systems to spatial data infrastructures: A global perspective. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429505904
Menegon, S., Fadini, A., Perini, L., Sarretta, A., Depellegrin, D., De Maio, E., Farella, G., Landini, M., Fava, C., Ferrarin, C., Ghezzo, M., Manea, E., Porporato, E. M. D., Pastres, R., Sedioli, O., Politikos, D. V., Maina, I., Kavadas, S., Matarrese, R., & Barbanti, A. (2023). A geoportal of data and tools for supporting maritime spatial planning in the Adriatic-Ionian Region. Environmental Modelling & Software, 160, Artículo 105585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2022.105585
Michalik, A., & Zwirowicz-Rutkowska, A. (2023). A geoportal supporting spatial planning in Poland: Concept and pilot version. Geomatics and Environmental Engineering, 17(2), 5–30. https://doi.org/10.7494/geom.2023.17.2.5
Mulder, A. E., Wiersma, M. G., & van Loenen, B. (2020). Status of national open spatial data infrastructures: A comparison across continents. International Journal of Spatial Data Infrastructures Research, 15, 56–87. https://doi.org/10.2902/1725-0463.2020.15.art3
Nogueras-Iso, J., Lacasta, J., Ureña-Cámara, M. A., & Ariza-López, F. J. (2021). Quality of metadata in open data portals. IEEE Access, 9, 60364–60382. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3073455
Ogryzek, M., Tarantino, E., & Rząsa, K. (2020). Infrastructure of the spatial information in the European Community (INSPIRE) based on examples of Italy and Poland. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 9(12), Artículo 755. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi9120755
Palacios Orejuela, I. F., & Carpio Barco, E. D. (2021). Sistema de información local, una herramienta para la planificación territorial de los gobiernos autónomos descentralizados municipales del Ecuador. Revista Geoespacial, 18(2), 1–17. https://journal.espe.edu.ec/ojs/index.php/revista-geoespacial/article/view/2214
Quarati, A., De Martino, M., & Rosim, S. (2021). Geospatial open data usage and metadata quality. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 10(1), Artículo 30. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi10010030
Secretaría Nacional de Planificación. (2023). Guía para la formulación/actualización de planes de desarrollo y ordenamiento territorial: Proceso 2023–2027. https://www.planificacion.gob.ec/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/PDOT-ACUERDO-Nro.-SNP-SNP-2023-0049-A.pdf
Silva, P. de L. e, Santos, A. de P. dos, & Lisboa Filho, J. (2025). HEUA-SDI: Usability assessment of spatial data infrastructures. Transactions in GIS, 29(1), Artículo e13297. https://doi.org/10.1111/tgis.13297
Sjoukema, J.-W., Bregt, A. K., & Crompvoets, J. (2020). Understanding governance dynamics: The governing system of spatial data infrastructures. International Journal of Spatial Data Infrastructures Research, 15, 1–35. https://doi.org/10.2902/1725-0463.2020.15.art1
Sjoukema, J.-W., Samia, J., Bregt, A. K., & Crompvoets, J. (2022). The governance of INSPIRE: Evaluating and exploring governance scenarios for the European spatial data infrastructure. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 11(2), Artículo 141. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi11020141
Sofianopoulos, S., Faka, A., & Chalkias, C. (2025). SDI-enabled smart governance: A review (2015–2025) of IoT, AI and geospatial technologies—applications and challenges. Land, 14(7), Artículo 1399. https://doi.org/10.3390/land14071399
Superintendencia de Ordenamiento Territorial, Uso y Gestión del Suelo. (2025, 16 de mayo). GEOSOT: La nueva plataforma de la SOT al servicio de la ciudadanía. https://www.sot.gob.ec/2025/05/16/geosot-una-nueva-plataforma-al-servicio-de-la-ciudadnia/
Trystuła, A., Dudzińska, M., & Źróbek, R. (2020). Evaluation of the completeness of spatial data infrastructure in the context of cadastral data sharing. Land, 9(8), Artículo 272. https://doi.org/10.3390/land9080272
Wetzel, S., Mäs, S., Bernard, L., Vorobevskii, I., & Kronenberg, R. (2024). Spatial data infrastructure components to provide regional climate information services. Climate Services, 34, Artículo 100473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cliser.2024.100473
Zhang, W., Jiang, H., Shao, Q., & Shao, T. (2022). Construction of the evaluation model of open government data platform: From the perspective of citizens’ sustainable use. Sustainability, 14(3), Artículo 1415. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14031415