Geospatial Solutions Market size was valued at USD 282.75 Billion in 2024 and is projected to reach USD 650.14 Billion by 2032, growing at a CAGR of 12.10% during the forecast period 2026-2032.Geospatial Solutions Market: Definition/ OverviewGeospatial solutions are applications and technologies that use spatial data to address geography, location, and Earth's surface problems. They use tools like GIS, remote sensing, GPS, satellite imagery analysis, and spatial modelling. These solutions enable informed decision-making, resource allocation optimization, asset management, environmental monitoring, infrastructure planning, and addressing challenges in sectors like urban planning, agriculture, transportation, disaster management, and natural resource management. They empower users to harness spatial information for better understanding and decision-making in various contexts.Geospatial solutions are technologies and methodologies used to analyze and visualize spatial data, ranging from urban planning to agriculture. They use GIS, remote sensing, and GNSS to gather, process, and interpret data. These solutions help users make informed decisions, solve complex problems, optimize resource allocation, and enhance situational awareness. They are crucial in addressing challenges and unlocking opportunities in today's interconnected world, such as mapping land use patterns, monitoring ecosystem changes, and real-time asset tracking.

Abstract

The dataset was derived by the Bioregional Assessment Programme from multiple source datasets. The source datasets are identified in the Lineage field in this metadata statement. The processes undertaken to produce this derived dataset are described in the History field in this metadata statement.

This database is an initial Asset database for the Central West subregion on 29 April 2015. This dataset contains the spatial and non-spatial (attribute) components of the Central West subregion Asset List as one .mdb files, which is readable as an MS Access database and a personal geodatabase. Under the BA program, a spatial assets database is developed for each defined bioregional assessment project. The spatial elements that underpin the identification of water dependent assets are identified in the first instance by regional NRM organisations (via the WAIT tool) and supplemented with additional elements from national and state/territory government datasets. All reports received associated with the WAIT process for Central West are included in the zip file as part of this dataset. Elements are initially included in the preliminary assets database if they are partly or wholly within the subregion's preliminary assessment extent (Materiality Test 1, M1). Elements are then grouped into assets which are evaluated by project teams to determine whether they meet the second Materiality Test (M2). Assets meeting both Materiality Tests comprise the water dependent asset list. Descriptions of the assets identified in the Central West subregion are found in the "AssetList" table of the database. In this version of the database only M1 has been assessed. Assets are the spatial features used by project teams to model scenarios under the BA program. Detailed attribution does not exist at the asset level. Asset attribution includes only the core set of BA-derived attributes reflecting the BA classification hierarchy, as described in Appendix A of "CEN_asset_database_doc_20150429.doc ", located in the zip file as part of this dataset. The "Element_to_Asset" table contains the relationships and identifies the elements that were grouped to create each asset. Detailed information describing the database structure and content can be found in the document "CEN_asset_database_doc_20150429.doc" located in the zip file. Some of the source data used in the compilation of this dataset is restricted.

Dataset History

This is initial asset database.

The Bioregional Assessments methodology (Barrett et al., 2013) defines a water-dependent asset as a spatially distinct, geo-referenced entity contained within a bioregion with characteristics having a defined cultural indigenous, economic or environmental value, and that can be linked directly or indirectly to a dependency on water quantity and/or quality.

Under the BA program, a spatial assets database is developed for each defined bioregional assessment project. The spatial elements that underpin the identification of water dependent assets are identified in the first instance by regional NRM organisations (via the WAIT tool) and supplemented with additional elements from national and state/territory government datasets. Elements are initially included in database if they are partly or wholly within the subregion's preliminary assessment extent (Materiality Test 1, M1). Elements are then grouped into assets which are evaluated by project teams to determine whether they meet materiality test 2 (M2) - assets considered to be water dependent.

Elements may be represented by a single, discrete spatial unit (polygon, line or point), or a number of spatial units occurring at more than one location (multipart polygons/lines or multipoints). Spatial features representing elements are not clipped to the preliminary assessment extent - features that extend beyond the boundary of the assessment extent have been included in full. To assist with an assessment of the relative importance of elements, area statements have been included as an attribute of the spatial data. Detailed attribute tables contain descriptions of the geographic features at the element level. Tables are organised by data source and can be joined to the spatial data on the "ElementID" field

Elements are grouped into Assets, which are the objects used by project teams to model scenarios under the BA program. Detailed attribution does not exist at the asset level. Asset attribution includes only the core set of BA-derived attributes reflecting the BA classification hierarchy.

The "Element_to_asset" table contains the relationships and identifies the elements that were grouped to create each asset.

Following delivery of the first pass asset list, project teams make a determination as to whether an asset (comprised of one or more elements) is water dependent, as assessed against the materiality tests detailed in the BA Methodology. These decisions are provided to ERIN by the project team leader and incorporated into the Assetlist table in the Asset database. The Asset database is then re-registered into the BA repository.

The Asset database dataset (which is registered to the BA repository) contains separate spatial and non-spatial databases.

Non-spatial (tabular data) is provided in an ESRI personal geodatabase (.mdb - doubling as a MS Access database) to store, query, and manage non-spatial data. This database can be accessed using either MS Access or ESRI GIS products. Non-spatial data has been provided in the Access database to simplify the querying process for BA project teams. Source datasets are highly variable and have different attributes, so separate tables are maintained in the Access database to enable the querying of thematic source layers.

Spatial data is provided as an ESRI file geodatabase (.gdb), and can only be used in an ESRI GIS environment. Spatial data is represented as a series of spatial feature classes (point, line and polygon layers). Non-spatial attribution can be joined from the Access database using the AID and ElementID fields, which are common to both the spatial and non-spatial datasets. Spatial layers containing all the point, line and polygon - derived elements and assets have been created to simplify management of the Elementlist and Assetlist tables, which list all the elements and assets, regardless of the spatial data geometry type. i.e. the total number of features in the combined spatial layers (points, lines, polygons) for assets (and elements) is equal to the total number of non-spatial records of all the individual data sources.

Dataset Citation

Department of the Environment (2013) Asset database for the Central West subregion on 29 April 2015. Bioregional Assessment Derived Dataset. Viewed 08 February 2017, http://data.bioregionalassessments.gov.au/dataset/5c3f9a56-7a48-4c26-a617-a186c2de5bf7.

Dataset Ancestors

• Derived From Macquarie Marshes Vegetation 1991-2008 VIS_ID 3920

• Derived From NSW Office of Water GW licence extract linked to spatial locations NIC v2 (28 February 2014)

• Derived From NSW Office of Water Surface Water Entitlements Locations v1_Oct2013

• Derived From Travelling Stock Route Conservation Values

• Derived From NSW Wetlands

• Derived From Communities of National Environmental Significance Database - RESTRICTED - Metadata only

• Derived From National Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems (GDE) Atlas

• Derived From Birds Australia - Important Bird Areas (IBA) 2009

• Derived From Environmental Asset Database - Commonwealth Environmental Water Office

• Derived From NSW Office of Water Surface Water Offtakes - NIC v1 20131024

• Derived From National Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems (GDE) Atlas (including WA)

• Derived From Species Profile and Threats Database (SPRAT) - Australia - Species of National Environmental Significance Database (BA subset - RESTRICTED - Metadata only)

• Derived From Ramsar Wetlands of Australia

• Derived From Native Vegetation Management (NVM) - Manage Benefits

• Derived From Key Environmental Assets - KEA - of the Murray Darling Basin

• Derived From National Heritage List Spatial Database (NHL) (v2.1)

• Derived From Climate Change Corridors (Dry Habitat) for North East NSW

• Derived From Great Artesian Basin and Laura Basin groundwater recharge areas

• Derived From NSW Office of Water combined geodatabase of regulated rivers and water sharing plan regions

• Derived From [New South Wales NSW Regional CMA Water Asset

Recreation asset dataset describes assets related to recreation sites or trails (such as toilets, viewing platforms, picnic shelters etc) within State Forest. This dataset provides valuable information to promote these assets for public use as well as assisting staff in their management of these assets. All recreation assets within State Forest have been captured and recorded with a Trimble Pro XR GPS and are actively promoted to the public and maintained by the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning. Recreation Asset dataset endeavors to describe recreation assets within State Forest. This dataset will assist staff in their management roles and facilitate promotion to the public. All recreation facilities within State Forest have been captured and recorded with a Trimble Pro XR GPS. All facilities are actively promoted to the public and maintained by the Department of Sustainability and Environment. This dataset has been created as part of the Recreation Facilities Database project. Initial data collection commenced in December 2004 and will be completed in August 2005. New facilities will be added periodically to the dataset as required.

• recweb

This record is for Approval for Access product AfA345. This is a bundle of all AIMS Asset Types into a single download.

The Environment Agency's (EA) defence information is the only comprehensive and up-to-date dataset in England that shows flood defences currently owned, managed or inspected by the EA.

Flood defences can be structures, buildings or parts of buildings. Typically these are earth banks, stone and concrete walls, or sheet-piling that is used to prevent or control the extent of flooding.

A defence is any asset that provides flood defence or coastal protection functions. This includes both man-made and natural defences. Natural defences may include man-made elements to make them more effective or protect them from erosion. Normally a number of assets will be used together to manage the risk in a particular area, working in combination within a risk management system.

PLEASE NOTE: This data is updated daily. This is a large dataset and depending on the chosen download format, it may take 7-8 minutes to download the full national dataset. Attribution statement: © Environment Agency copyright and/or database right 2020. All rights reserved.

The NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) Assets Geodatabase is directly related to the Assets Maintenance System (AMS) which runs under SAP and contains similar fields, values and business rules. The Assets Geodatabase is the vehicle in which spatial assets are initially captured, edited and stored so that the features have coordinates and can be viewed spatially. The data is collected across the entire NSW National Parks Estate and includes some off-park features for fire management, access and mapping purposes. The spatial feature data is manually synchronised with the AMS. The two systems run side by side and are linked by an ID field. AMS is also set up to be used by other Department Planning, Industry & Environment (DPIE) groups eg. Botanic Gardens and Parklands and previously Marine Parks.

This product is part of the Landscape Change Monitoring System (LCMS) data suite. It shows LCMS modeled Land Cover classes for each year. See additional information about Land Cover in the Entity_and_Attribute_Information or Fields section below.LCMS is a remote sensing-based system for mapping and monitoring landscape change across the United States. Its objective is to develop a consistent approach using the latest technology and advancements in change detection to produce a "best available" map of landscape change. Because no algorithm performs best in all situations, LCMS uses an ensemble of models as predictors, which improves map accuracy across a range of ecosystems and change processes (Healey et al., 2018). The resulting suite of LCMS Change, Land Cover, and Land Use maps offer a holistic depiction of landscape change across the United States over the past four decades.Predictor layers for the LCMS model include outputs from the LandTrendr and CCDC change detection algorithms and terrain information. These components are all accessed and processed using Google Earth Engine (Gorelick et al., 2017). To produce annual composites, the cFmask (Zhu and Woodcock, 2012), cloudScore, Cloud Score + (Pasquarella et al., 2023), and TDOM (Chastain et al., 2019) cloud and cloud shadow masking methods are applied to Landsat Tier 1 and Sentinel 2a and 2b Level-1C top of atmosphere reflectance data. The annual medoid is then computed to summarize each year into a single composite. The composite time series is temporally segmented using LandTrendr (Kennedy et al., 2010; Kennedy et al., 2018; Cohen et al., 2018). All cloud and cloud shadow free values are also temporally segmented using the CCDC algorithm (Zhu and Woodcock, 2014). LandTrendr, CCDC and terrain predictors can be used as independent predictor variables in a Random Forest (Breiman, 2001) model. LandTrendr predictor variables include fitted values, pair-wise differences, segment duration, change magnitude, and slope. CCDC predictor variables include CCDC sine and cosine coefficients (first 3 harmonics), fitted values, and pairwise differences from the Julian Day of each pixel used in the annual composites and LandTrendr. Terrain predictor variables include elevation, slope, sine of aspect, cosine of aspect, and topographic position indices (Weiss, 2001) from the USGS 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) (U.S. Geological Survey, 2019). Reference data are collected using TimeSync, a web-based tool that helps analysts visualize and interpret the Landsat data record from 1984-present (Cohen et al., 2010).Outputs fall into three categories: Change, Land Cover, and Land Use. At its foundation, Change maps areas of Disturbance, Vegetation Successional Growth, and Stable landscape. More detailed levels of Change products are available and are intended to address needs centered around monitoring causes and types of variations in vegetation cover, water extent, or snow/ice extent that may or may not result in a transition of land cover and/or land use. Change, Land Cover, and Land Use are predicted for each year of the time series and serve as the foundational products for LCMS. This record was taken from the USDA Enterprise Data Inventory that feeds into the https://data.gov catalog. Data for this record includes the following resources: ISO-19139 metadata ArcGIS Hub Dataset ArcGIS GeoService For complete information, please visit https://data.gov.

Abstract

The dataset was derived by the Bioregional Assessment Programme from multiple source datasets. The source datasets are identified in the Lineage field in this metadata statement. The processes undertaken to produce this derived dataset are described in the History field in this metadata statement.

The Gloucester Asset database v7.1 supersedes the previous version of the GLO Asset database. This 7.1 version of GLO asset database (Asset database for the Gloucester subregion on 28 May 2015, 5815842e-d271-4f73-9d1a-d15c90571330)

The Gloucester Asset database v7 has been updated to include the Receptor data from Gloucester assessment team. The relevant tables of ReceptorList, tbl_Receptors_GDE, tbl_Receptors_SW, tbl_Receptors_GW and tbl_Receptors_SW_Catchment_Ref_Only and the spatial data of GM_GLO_ReceptorList_pt were added to this version. The location of Receptor is from GDA 94 datum.

The Asset database is registered to the BA repository as an ESRI personal goedatabase (.mdb - doubling as a MS Access database) that can store, query, and manage non-spatial data while the spatial data is in a separated file geodatabase joined by AID/Element ID. Under the BA program, a spatial assets database is developed for each defined bioregional assessment project. The spatial elements that underpin the identification of water dependent assets are identified in the first instance by regional NRM organisations (via the WAIT tool) and supplemented with additional elements from national and state/territory government datasets. All reports received associated with the WAIT process for Gloucester are included in the zip file as part of this dataset. Elements are initially included in the preliminary assets database if they are partly or wholly within the subregion's preliminary assessment extent (Materiality Test 1, M1). Elements are then grouped into assets which are evaluated by project teams to determine whether they meet the second Materiality Test (M2). Assets meeting both Materiality Tests comprise the water dependent asset list. Descriptions of the assets identified in the Gloucester subregion are found in the "AssetList" table of the database. In this version of the database only M1 has been assessed. Assets are the spatial features used by project teams to model scenarios under the BA program. Detailed attribution does not exist at the asset level. Asset attribution includes only the core set of BA-derived attributes reflecting the BA classification hierarchy, as described in Appendix A of "GLO_asset_database_doc_20150821.doc ", located in the zip file as part of this dataset. The "Element_to_Asset" table contains the relationships and identifies the elements that were grouped to create each asset. Detailed information describing the database structure and content can be found in the document "GLO_asset_database_doc_0150821.doc" located in the zip file. Some of the source data used in the compilation of this dataset is restricted.

Dataset History

VersionID Date Notes

1.0 17/03/2014 Initial database

1.01 19/03/2014 Update classification using latest one

2.0 23/05/2014 Update asset area for some assets

3.0 9/07/2014 Updated to include new assets and elements identified by community.

4.0 29/08/2014 updated assets and elements from WSP

5.0 4/09/2014 Table AssetDecisions is added to record decision making process and decisions about M2 are also added in table asset list

6.0 8/04/2015 195/9 Groundwater economic point elements/assets were added in while 81/7 Groundwater economic point elements/assets were turned off

7.0 27/05/2015 The receptor data ( tables: ReceptorList, tbl_Receptors_GDE, tbl_Receptors_GW, tbl_Receptors_SW and tbl_Receptors_SW_Catchment_Ref_Only; and spatial data:

              GM_GLO_ReceptorList_pt) is added

7.1 21/08/2015 (1) Delete (a) line 26 from tab "Description" and (b) column E from tab "Receptor register" about "Depth" parameters in BA-NSB-GLO-140-ReceptorRegister-v20150821.xlsx

              (2) Delete field of "Depth" from table "ReceptorList" in GLO_asset_database_20150821.mdb

              (3) Add two fields of "InRegister" and "Registered Date" to table "ReceptorList" in GLO_asset_database_20150821.mdb for the consistency with other subregions in the future"

Dataset Citation

Bioregional Assessment Programme (2014) Asset database for the Gloucester subregion on 21 August 2015. Bioregional Assessment Derived Dataset. Viewed 18 July 2018, http://data.bioregionalassessments.gov.au/dataset/0811c5c0-ddd3-41ac-9328-9fd321fd6124.

Dataset Ancestors

• Derived From Standard Instrument Local Environmental Plan (LEP) - Heritage (HER) (NSW)

• Derived From NSW Office of Water GW licence extract linked to spatial locations - GLO v5 UID elements 27032014

• Derived From NSW Office of Water GW licence extract linked to spatial locations GLOv4 UID 14032014

• Derived From Communities of National Environmental Significance Database - RESTRICTED - Metadata only

• Derived From National Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems (GDE) Atlas

• Derived From Asset database for the Gloucester subregion on 12 September 2014

• Derived From National Groundwater Information System (NGIS) v1.1

• Derived From Groundwater Entitlement Data GLO NSW Office of Water 20150320 PersRemoved

• Derived From Geofabric Surface Cartography - V2.1

• Derived From Groundwater Entitlement Data Gloucester - NSW Office of Water 20150320

• Derived From Collaborative Australian Protected Areas Database (CAPAD) 2010 - External Restricted

• Derived From National Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems (GDE) Atlas (including WA)

• Derived From Species Profile and Threats Database (SPRAT) - Australia - Species of National Environmental Significance Database (BA subset - RESTRICTED - Metadata only)

• Derived From Asset database for the Gloucester subregion on 28 May 2015

• Derived From NSW Office of Water GW licence extract linked to spatial locations GLOv3 12032014

• Derived From National Heritage List Spatial Database (NHL) (v2.1)

• Derived From Asset database for the Gloucester subregion on 8 April 2015

• Derived From Gloucester - Additional assets from local councils

• Derived From NSW Office of Water combined geodatabase of regulated rivers and water sharing plan regions

• Derived From Asset database for the Gloucester subregion on 29 August 2014

• Derived From New South Wales NSW Regional CMA Water Asset Information WAIT tool databases, RESTRICTED Includes ALL Reports

• Derived From Groundwater Economic Assets GLO 20150326

• Derived From NSW Office of Water Groundwater Licence Extract Gloucester - Oct 2013

• Derived From New South Wales NSW - Regional - CMA - Water Asset Information Tool - WAIT - databases

• Derived From Freshwater Fish Biodiversity Hotspots

• Derived From NSW Office of Water Groundwater licence extract linked to spatial locations GLOv2 19022014

• Derived From Australia - Species of National Environmental Significance Database

• Derived From Australia, Register of the National Estate (RNE) - Spatial Database (RNESDB) Internal

• Derived From NSW Office of Water Groundwater Entitlements Spatial Locations

• Derived From Directory of Important Wetlands in Australia (DIWA) Spatial Database (Public)

• Derived From Collaborative Australian Protected Areas Database (CAPAD) 2010 (Not current release)

Note: This LCMS CONUS Cause of Change image service has been deprecated. It has been replaced by the LCMS CONUS Annual Change image service, which provides updated and consolidated change data.Please refer to the new service here: https://usfs.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=085626ec50324e5e9ad6323c050ac84dThis product is part of the Landscape Change Monitoring System (LCMS) data suite. It shows LCMS change attribution classes for each year. See additional information about change in the Entity_and_Attribute_Information or Fields section below.LCMS is a remote sensing-based system for mapping and monitoring landscape change across the United States. Its objective is to develop a consistent approach using the latest technology and advancements in change detection to produce a "best available" map of landscape change. Because no algorithm performs best in all situations, LCMS uses an ensemble of models as predictors, which improves map accuracy across a range of ecosystems and change processes (Healey et al., 2018). The resulting suite of LCMS change, land cover, and land use maps offer a holistic depiction of landscape change across the United States over the past four decades.Predictor layers for the LCMS model include outputs from the LandTrendr and CCDC change detection algorithms and terrain information. These components are all accessed and processed using Google Earth Engine (Gorelick et al., 2017). To produce annual composites, the cFmask (Zhu and Woodcock, 2012), cloudScore, and TDOM (Chastain et al., 2019) cloud and cloud shadow masking methods are applied to Landsat Tier 1 and Sentinel 2a and 2b Level-1C top of atmosphere reflectance data. The annual medoid is then computed to summarize each year into a single composite. The composite time series is temporally segmented using LandTrendr (Kennedy et al., 2010; Kennedy et al., 2018; Cohen et al., 2018). All cloud and cloud shadow free values are also temporally segmented using the CCDC algorithm (Zhu and Woodcock, 2014). LandTrendr, CCDC and terrain predictors can be used as independent predictor variables in a Random Forest (Breiman, 2001) model. LandTrendr predictor variables include fitted values, pair-wise differences, segment duration, change magnitude, and slope. CCDC predictor variables include CCDC sine and cosine coefficients (first 3 harmonics), fitted values, and pairwise differences from the Julian Day of each pixel used in the annual composites and LandTrendr. Terrain predictor variables include elevation, slope, sine of aspect, cosine of aspect, and topographic position indices (Weiss, 2001) from the USGS 3D Elevation Program (3DEP) (U.S. Geological Survey, 2019). Reference data are collected using TimeSync, a web-based tool that helps analysts visualize and interpret the Landsat data record from 1984-present (Cohen et al., 2010).Outputs fall into three categories: change, land cover, and land use. Change relates specifically to vegetation cover and includes slow loss (not included for PRUSVI), fast loss (which also includes hydrologic changes such as inundation or desiccation), and gain. These values are predicted for each year of the time series and serve as the foundational products for LCMS. References: Breiman, L. (2001). Random Forests. In Machine Learning (Vol. 45, pp. 5-32). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010933404324Chastain, R., Housman, I., Goldstein, J., Finco, M., and Tenneson, K. (2019). Empirical cross sensor comparison of Sentinel-2A and 2B MSI, Landsat-8 OLI, and Landsat-7 ETM top of atmosphere spectral characteristics over the conterminous United States. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 221, pp. 274-285). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2018.11.012Cohen, W. B., Yang, Z., and Kennedy, R. (2010). Detecting trends in forest disturbance and recovery using yearly Landsat time series: 2. TimeSync - Tools for calibration and validation. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 114, Issue 12, pp. 2911-2924). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2010.07.010Cohen, W. B., Yang, Z., Healey, S. P., Kennedy, R. E., and Gorelick, N. (2018). A LandTrendr multispectral ensemble for forest disturbance detection. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 205, pp. 131-140). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2017.11.015Foga, S., Scaramuzza, P.L., Guo, S., Zhu, Z., Dilley, R.D., Beckmann, T., Schmidt, G.L., Dwyer, J.L., Hughes, M.J., Laue, B. (2017). Cloud detection algorithm comparison and validation for operational Landsat data products. Remote Sensing of Environment, 194, 379-390. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2017.03.026Gorelick, N., Hancher, M., Dixon, M., Ilyushchenko, S., Thau, D., and Moore, R. (2017). Google Earth Engine: Planetary-scale geospatial analysis for everyone. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 202, pp. 18-27). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2017.06.031Healey, S. P., Cohen, W. B., Yang, Z., Kenneth Brewer, C., Brooks, E. B., Gorelick, N., Hernandez, A. J., Huang, C., Joseph Hughes, M., Kennedy, R. E., Loveland, T. R., Moisen, G. G., Schroeder, T. A., Stehman, S. V., Vogelmann, J. E., Woodcock, C. E., Yang, L., and Zhu, Z. (2018). Mapping forest change using stacked generalization: An ensemble approach. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 204, pp. 717-728). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2017.09.029Kennedy, R. E., Yang, Z., and Cohen, W. B. (2010). Detecting trends in forest disturbance and recovery using yearly Landsat time series: 1. LandTrendr - Temporal segmentation algorithms. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 114, Issue 12, pp. 2897-2910). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2010.07.008Kennedy, R., Yang, Z., Gorelick, N., Braaten, J., Cavalcante, L., Cohen, W., and Healey, S. (2018). Implementation of the LandTrendr Algorithm on Google Earth Engine. In Remote Sensing (Vol. 10, Issue 5, p. 691). https://doi.org/10.3390/rs10050691Olofsson, P., Foody, G. M., Herold, M., Stehman, S. V., Woodcock, C. E., and Wulder, M. A. (2014). Good practices for estimating area and assessing accuracy of land change. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 148, pp. 42-57). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2014.02.015Pedregosa, F., Varoquaux, G., Gramfort, A., Michel, V., Thirion, B., Grisel, O., Blondel, M., Prettenhofer, P., Weiss, R., Dubourg, V., Vanderplas, J., Passos, A., Cournapeau, D., Brucher, M., Perrot, M. and Duchesnay, E. (2011). Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python. In Journal of Machine Learning Research (Vol. 12, pp. 2825-2830).Pengra, B. W., Stehman, S. V., Horton, J. A., Dockter, D. J., Schroeder, T. A., Yang, Z., Cohen, W. B., Healey, S. P., and Loveland, T. R. (2020). Quality control and assessment of interpreter consistency of annual land cover reference data in an operational national monitoring program. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 238, p. 111261). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2019.111261U.S. Geological Survey. (2019). USGS 3D Elevation Program Digital Elevation Model, accessed August 2022 at https://developers.google.com/earth-engine/datasets/catalog/USGS_3DEP_10mWeiss, A.D. (2001). Topographic position and landforms analysis Poster Presentation, ESRI Users Conference, San Diego, CAZhu, Z., and Woodcock, C. E. (2012). Object-based cloud and cloud shadow detection in Landsat imagery. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 118, pp. 83-94). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2011.10.028Zhu, Z., and Woodcock, C. E. (2014). Continuous change detection and classification of land cover using all available Landsat data. In Remote Sensing of Environment (Vol. 144, pp. 152-171). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2014.01.011This record was taken from the USDA Enterprise Data Inventory that feeds into the https://data.gov catalog. Data for this record includes the following resources: ISO-19139 metadata ArcGIS Hub Dataset ArcGIS GeoService For complete information, please visit https://data.gov.

The Spatial Location Services market is experiencing robust growth, driven by increasing adoption of location-based technologies across diverse sectors. The market, estimated at $15 billion in 2025, is projected to expand significantly over the next decade, fueled by a Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 12%. This growth is primarily attributed to several key factors. Firstly, the proliferation of smart devices and the ubiquitous nature of mobile internet connectivity are creating a massive demand for precise and reliable location information. Secondly, the rising need for enhanced navigation, asset tracking, and location-based analytics across various industries, including logistics, transportation, retail, and public safety, is propelling market expansion. The integration of spatial location services with other technologies, such as AI and IoT, further amplifies its utility and market potential. The market is segmented by application (commercial, municipal, military, and others) and by type (indoor and outdoor positioning), with commercial applications currently dominating the market share. Competition is fierce, with both established tech giants and specialized startups vying for market leadership. Key players are continuously innovating to improve the accuracy, speed, and affordability of their services, leading to a dynamic and rapidly evolving market landscape. Looking ahead, several trends will shape the future of the spatial location services market. The increasing demand for real-time location tracking, the development of more sophisticated indoor positioning technologies, and the adoption of 5G networks will all contribute to market growth. However, challenges remain, such as data privacy concerns, the need for accurate and consistent data across various platforms, and the high cost of implementing advanced location technologies in certain sectors. Addressing these challenges will be crucial for unlocking the full potential of the spatial location services market. Regions like North America and Europe currently hold the largest market share, driven by high technology adoption and robust infrastructure. However, rapidly developing economies in Asia-Pacific are poised for significant growth in the coming years, presenting attractive opportunities for market expansion. The market's trajectory suggests a bright outlook for innovative companies able to navigate the technological and regulatory landscape.

Abstract

The dataset was derived by the Bioregional Assessment Programme from multiple source datasets. The source datasets are identified in the Lineage field in this metadata statement. The processes undertaken to produce this derived dataset are described in the History field in this metadata statement.

Hunter Asset Database v2.2 supersedes previous versions of the Hunter Asset database (Asset database for the Hunter subregion on 27 August 2015, 9e1c414c-1752-4bd8-83ff-c137b7d9f9ce).

This dataset contains the Asset database (.mdb), a Geodatabase version for GIS mapping purposes (.gdb), the Water Dependent Asset Register spreadsheet, a data dictionary document, and a folder (NRM_DOC) containing documentation associated with the WAIT process as outlined below.

The Asset database is registered to the BA repository as an ESRI personal goedatabase (.mdb - doubling as a MS Access database) that can store, query, and manage non-spatial data while the spatial data is in a separate file geodatabase joined by AID/ElementID.

Under the BA program, a spatial assets database is developed for each defined bioregional assessment project. The spatial elements that underpin the identification of water dependent assets are identified in the first instance by regional NRM organisations (via the WAIT tool) and supplemented with additional elements from national and state/territory government datasets. A report on the WAIT process for the Hunter is included in the zip file as part of this dataset.

Elements are initially included in the preliminary assets database if they are partly or wholly within the subregion's preliminary assessment extent (Materiality Test 1, M1). Elements are then grouped into assets which are evaluated by project teams to determine whether they meet the second Materiality Test (M2). Assets meeting both Materiality Tests comprise the water dependent asset list. Descriptions of the assets identified in the Hunter subregion are found in the "AssetList" table of the database.

Assets are the spatial features used by project teams to model scenarios under the BA program. Detailed attribution does not exist at the asset level. Asset attribution includes only the core set of BA-derived attributes reflecting the BA classification hierarchy, as described in Appendix A of " HUN_asset_database_doc_20150908.doc", located in this filet.

The "Element_to_Asset" table contains the relationships and identifies the elements that were grouped to create each asset.

Detailed information describing the database structure and content can be found in the document " HUN_asset_database_doc_20150908.doc" located in this file.

Some of the source data used in the compilation of this dataset is restricted.

Dataset History

VersionID Date_ Notes

1 29/08/2014 Initial database.

1.1 16/09/2014 Update the classification for seven identical assets from Gloucester subregion

1.2 28/01/2015 Added in NSW GDEs from Hunter - Central Rivers GDE mapping from NSW DPI (50 635 polygons).

1.3 12/02/2015 New AIDs assiged to NSW GDE assets (Existing AID + 20000) to avoid duplication of AIDs assigned in other databases.

1.4 16/06/2015 "(1) Add 20 additional datasets required by HUN assessment project team after HUN community workshop

(2) Turn off previous GW point assets (AIDs from 7717-7810 inclusive)

(3) Turn off new GW point asset (AID: 0)

(4) Assets (AIDs: 8023-8026) are duplicated to 4 assets (AID: 4747,4745,4744,4743 respectively) in NAM subregion . Their AID, Asset Name, Group, SubGroup, Depth, Source, ListDate and Geometry are using values from that NAM assets.

(5) Asset (AID 8595) is duplicated to 1 asset ( AID 57) in GLO subregion . Its AID, Asset Name, Group, SubGroup, Depth, Source, ListDate and Geometry are using values from that GLO assets.

(6) 39 assets (AID from 2969 to 5040) are from NAM Asset database and their attributes were updated to use the latest attributes from NAM asset database

(7)The databases, especially spatial database, were changed such as duplicated attributes fields in spatial data were removed and only ID field is kept. The user needs to join the Table Assetlist or Elementlist to the spatial data"

2 20/07/2015 "(1) Updated 131 new GW point assets with previous AID and some of them may include different element number due to the change of 77 FTypes requested by Hunter assessment project team

(2) Added 104 EPBC assets, which were assessed and excluded by ERIN

(3) Merged 30 Darling Hardyhead assets to one (asset AID 60140) and deleted another 29

(4) Turned off 5 assets from community workshop (60358 - 60362) as they are duplicated to 5 assets from 104 EPBC excluded assets

(5) Updated M2 test results

(6)Asset Names (AID: 4743 and 4747) were changed as requested by Hunter assessment project team (4 lower cases to 4 upper case only). Those two assets are from Namoi asset database and their asset names may not match with original names in Namoi asset database.

(7)One NSW WSP asset (AID: 60814) was added in as requested by Hunter assessment project team. The process method (without considering 1:M relation) for this asset is not robust and is different to other NSW WSP assets. It should NOT use for other subregions.

(8) Queries of Find_All_Used_Assets and Find_All_WD_Assets in the asset database can be used to extract all used assts and all water dependant assts"

2.1 27/08/2015 "(1) There are following six assets (in Hun subregion), which is same as 6 assets in GIP subregion. Their AID, Asset Name, Group, SubGroup, Depth, Source and ListDate are using values from GIP assets. You will not see AIDs from AID_from_HUN in whole HUN asset datable and spreadsheet anymore and you only can see AIDs from AID_from_GIP ( Actually (a) AID 11636 is GIP got from MBC (B) only AID, Asset Name and ListDate are different and changed)

(2) For BA-NSB-HUN-130-WaterDependentAssetRegister-AssetList-V20150827.xlsx, (a) Extracted long ( >255 characters) WD rationale for 19 assets (AIDs: 8682,9065,9073,9087,9088,9100,9102,9103,60000,60001,60792,60793,60801,60713,60739,60751,60764,60774,60812 ) in tab "Water-dependent asset register" and 37 assets (AIDs: 5040,8651,8677,8682,8650,8686,8687,8718,8762,9094,9065,9067,9073,9077,9081,9086,9087,9088,9100,9102,9103,60000,60001,60739,60742,60751,60713,60764,60771,60774,60792,60793,60798,60801,60809,60811,60812) in tab "Asset list" in 1.30 Excel file (b) recreated draft BA-NSB-HUN-130-WaterDependentAssetRegister-AssetList-V20150827.xlsx

(3) Modified queries (Find_All_Asset_List and Find_Waterdependent_asset_register) for (2)(a)"

Hunter Asset Database v2.2 supersedes previous versions of the Hunter Asset database. In this V2.2 database, we:

(1) Updated M2 results from the internal review for 386 Socio-cultural assets

(2)Updated the class to Ecological/Vegetation/Habitat (potential species distribution) for assets/elements from sources of WAIT_ALA_ERIN, NSW_TSEC, NSW_DPI_Fisheries_DarlingHardyhead as requested by HUN project team.

Hunter Asset Database v2.1, whcih is also useful, supersedes previous versions of the Hunter Asset database. In this V2.1 database:

(1) There are following six assets (in Hun subregion), which is same as 6 assets in GIP subregion. Their AID, Asset Name, Group, SubGroup, Depth, Source and ListDate are using values from GIP assets. You will not see AIDs from AID_from_HUN in whole HUN asset datable and spreadsheet anymore and you only can see AIDs from AID_from_GIP ( Actually (a) AID 11636 is GIP got from MBC (B) only AID, Asset Name and ListDate are different and changed)

AID_from_HUN AID_from_GIP

60715 11636

60752 12791

60753 12807

60759 12731

60763 12774

60770 12748

(2) For BA-NSB-HUN-130-WaterDependentAssetRegister-AssetList-V20150827.xlsx, (a) Extracted long ( >255 characters) WD rationale for 19 assets (AIDs: 8682,9065,9073,9087,9088,9100,9102,9103,60000,60001,60792,60793,60801,60713,60739,60751,60764,60774,60812 ) in tab "Water-dependent asset register" and 37 assets (AIDs: 5040,8651,8677,8682,8650,8686,8687,8718,8762,9094,9065,9067,9073,9077,9081,9086,9087,9088,9100,9102,9103,60000,60001,60739,60742,60751,60713,60764,60771,60774,60792,60793,60798,60801,60809,60811,60812) in tab "Asset list" in 1.30 Excel file (b) recreated draft BA-NSB-HUN-130-WaterDependentAssetRegister-AssetList-V20150827.xlsx

(3) Modified queries (Find_All_Asset_List and Find_Waterdependent_asset_register) for (2)(a)

2.2 8/09/2015 "(1) Updated M2 results from the internal review for 386 Sociocultural assets

(2)Updated the class to Ecological/Vegetation/Habitat (potential species distribution) for assets/elements from sources of WAIT_ALA_ERIN, NSW_TSEC, NSW_DPI_Fisheries_DarlingHardyhead"

Dataset Citation

Bioregional Assessment Programme (2015) Asset database for the Hunter subregion on 08 September 2015. Bioregional Assessment Derived Dataset. Viewed 09 May 2017, http://data.bioregionalassessments.gov.au/dataset/536032d3-b022-4459-b9c5-aaa6c3bb362e.

Dataset Ancestors

• Derived From NSW Office of Water Surface Water Entitlements Locations v1_Oct2013

• Derived From Travelling Stock Route Conservation Values

• Derived From NSW Wetlands

• Derived From Climate Change Corridors Coastal North East NSW

• Derived From Communities of National Environmental Significance Database - RESTRICTED - Metadata only

• Derived From Climate Change Corridors for Nandewar and New England Tablelands

• Derived From [National Groundwater Dependent

Spatial Mapping Software Market Outlook

As per our latest research, the global spatial mapping software market size in 2024 stands at USD 7.2 billion, with a robust compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 13.7% projected through 2033. By the end of 2033, the market is forecasted to reach a valuation of USD 22.1 billion. This impressive growth trajectory is primarily driven by the increasing adoption of location-based services, the proliferation of smart city initiatives, and the rising demand for geospatial analytics across various industries. The market is experiencing significant momentum as organizations seek advanced solutions for spatial data visualization, real-time mapping, and efficient resource management, thereby fueling the expansion of spatial mapping software globally.

The rapid digital transformation across industries is a major growth factor for the spatial mapping software market. As businesses and governments increasingly rely on data-driven decision-making, the ability to visualize, analyze, and interpret spatial data has become essential. Urbanization and the expansion of smart cities are creating a surge in demand for mapping solutions that enable planners and administrators to optimize infrastructure, manage assets, and monitor environmental impact. Furthermore, the integration of spatial mapping software with emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence, Internet of Things (IoT), and 5G networks is enhancing the precision and real-time capabilities of these platforms. This convergence is paving the way for innovative applications in areas such as autonomous vehicles, disaster response, and precision agriculture, further propelling market growth.

Another significant driver for the spatial mapping software market is the growing need for efficient asset management and risk mitigation. Organizations across sectors such as utilities, transportation, and defense are leveraging spatial mapping software to monitor and manage critical assets, detect anomalies, and ensure operational continuity. The ability to overlay real-time data on geographic maps provides unparalleled situational awareness, enabling quick and informed decision-making. Additionally, advancements in cloud computing have democratized access to sophisticated mapping tools, allowing even small and medium enterprises to benefit from spatial analytics without substantial infrastructure investments. The trend towards remote work and distributed operations post-pandemic has also accelerated the adoption of cloud-based mapping solutions, making spatial mapping an integral part of modern enterprise workflows.

Environmental monitoring and disaster management represent pivotal growth avenues for the spatial mapping software market. Climate change, urban sprawl, and natural disasters necessitate advanced solutions for tracking environmental changes, predicting hazards, and coordinating emergency responses. Spatial mapping software is being utilized to model flood zones, monitor deforestation, and track pollution, providing governments and organizations with actionable insights for sustainable development and disaster resilience. The increasing frequency and intensity of natural disasters globally have heightened the importance of real-time geospatial intelligence, driving investments in mapping technologies. As environmental regulations become stricter and public awareness grows, the demand for spatial mapping solutions in environmental monitoring is expected to remain strong throughout the forecast period.

The integration of Spatial Mapping Processor technology is revolutionizing the capabilities of spatial mapping software. This advanced processor enhances the speed and accuracy of data processing, allowing for more detailed and real-time analysis of spatial data. By leveraging the power of spatial mapping processors, organizations can achieve higher precision in mapping applications, which is crucial for sectors such as autonomous vehicles and smart city planning. The processor's ability to handle complex algorithms efficiently is enabling new levels of innovation in geospatial analytics, providing users with deeper insights and improved decision-making capabilities. As the demand for high-performance mapping solutions grows, the role of spatial mapping processors in driving technological advancements cannot be overstated.

<

Abstract

This data set holds the publicly-available version of the database of water-dependent assets that was compiled for the bioregional assessment (BA) of the Central West subregion as part of the Bioregional Assessment Technical Programme. Though all life is dependent on water, for the purposes of a bioregional assessment, a water-dependent asset is an asset potentially impacted by changes in the groundwater and/or surface water regime due to coal resource development. The water must be other than local rainfall. Examples include wetlands, rivers, bores and groundwater dependent ecosystems.

The dataset was derived by the Bioregional Assessment Programme. This dataset was derived from multiple datasets including Natural Resource Management regions, and Australian and state and territory government databases. You can find a link to the parent datasets in the Lineage Field in this metadata statement. The History Field in this metadata statement describes how this dataset was derived. A single asset is represented spatially in the asset database by single or multiple spatial features (point, line or polygon). Individual points, lines or polygons are termed elements.

This dataset contains the unrestricted publicly-available components of spatial and non-spatial (attribute) data of the (restricted) Asset database for the Central West subregion on 16 February 2016 (8ac1d434-7697-4a8f-9908-814e8daf4604). The database is provided primarily as an ESRI File geodatabase (.gdb), which is able to be opened in readily available open source software such as QGIS. Other formats include the Microsoft Access database (.mdb in ESRI Personal Geodatabase format), industry-standard ESRI Shapefiles and tab-delimited text files of all the attribute tables.

The restricted version of the Central West Asset database has a total count of 104808 Elements and 1036 Assets. In the public version of the Asset Central West database 57717 spatial Element features (~55%) have been removed from the Element List and Element Layer(s) and 124spatial Assets (~12%) have been removed from the spatial Asset Layer(s)

The elements/assets removed from the restricted Asset Database are from the following data sources:

1) Environmental Asset Database - Commonwealth Environmental Water Office - RESTRICTED (Metadata only) (29fd1654-8aa1-4cb3-b65e-0b37698ac9a6)

2) Key Environmental Assets - KEA - of the Murray Darling Basin RESTRICTED (Metadata only)( 9948195e-3d3b-49dc-96d2-ea7765297308)

3) Australia, Register of the National Estate (RNE) - Spatial Database (RNESDB) (Internal 878f6780-be97-469b-8517-54bd12a407d0)

4)Species Profile and Threats Database (SPRAT) - RESTRICTED - Metadata only) (7276dd93-cc8c-4c01-8df0-cef743c72112)

5) Communities of National Environmental Significance Database - RESTRICTED - Metadata only (c01c4693-0a51-4dbc-bbbd-7a07952aa5f6)

These important assets are included in the bioregional assessment, but are unable to be publicly distributed by the Bioregional Assessment Programme due to restrictions in their licensing conditions. Please note that many of these data sets are available directly from their custodian. For more precise details please see the associated explanatory Data Dictionary document enclosed with this dataset.

Dataset History

The public version of the asset database retains all of the unrestricted components of the Asset database for the Central West subregion on 16 February 2016 - any material that is unable to be published or redistributed to a third party by the BA Programme has been removed from the database. The data presented corresponds to the assets published Central West subregion product 1.3: Description of the water-dependent asset register and asset list for the Central West subregion on 16 February 2016, and the associated Water-dependent asset register and asset list for the Central West subregion on 16 February 2016.

Individual spatial features or elements are initially included in database if they are partly or wholly within the subregion's preliminary assessment extent (Materiality Test 1, M1). In accordance to BA submethodology M02: Compiling water-dependent assets, individual spatial elements are then grouped into assets which are evaluated by project teams to determine whether they meet materiality test 2 (M2), which are assets that are considered to be water dependent.

Following delivery of the first pass asset list, project teams make a determination as to whether an asset (comprised of one or more elements) is water dependent, as assessed against the materiality tests detailed in the BA Methodology. These decisions are provided to ERIN by the assessment team and incorporated into the AssetList table in the Asset database.

Development of the Asset Register from the Asset database:

Decisions for M0 (fit for BA purpose), M1 (PAE) and M2 (water dependent) determine which assets are included in the "asset list" and "water-dependent asset register" which are published as Product 1.3.

The rule sets are applied as follows:

M0 M1 M2 Result

No n/a n/a Asset is not included in the asset list or the water-dependent asset register

(≠ No) No n/a Asset is not included in the asset list or the water-dependent asset register

(≠ No) Yes No Asset included in published asset list but not in water dependent asset register

(≠ No) Yes Yes Asset included in both asset list and water-dependent asset register

Assessment teams are then able to use the database to assign receptors and impact variables to water-dependent assets and the development of a receptor register as detailed in BA submethodology M03: Assigning receptors to water-dependent assets and the receptor register is then incorporated into the asset database.

At this stage of its development, the Asset database for the Central West subregion on 16 February 2016, which this document describes, does not contain receptor information.

Dataset Citation

Bioregional Assessment Programme (2013) Asset database for the Central West subregion on 16 February 2016 Public. Bioregional Assessment Derived Dataset. Viewed 08 February 2017, http://data.bioregionalassessments.gov.au/dataset/546107ad-27b0-4432-b17e-8876e7c9769d.

Dataset Ancestors

• Derived From Macquarie Marshes Vegetation 1991-2008 VIS_ID 3920

• Derived From NSW Office of Water GW licence extract linked to spatial locations NIC v2 (28 February 2014)

• Derived From NSW Office of Water Surface Water Entitlements Locations v1_Oct2013

• Derived From Travelling Stock Route Conservation Values

• Derived From NSW Wetlands

• Derived From Communities of National Environmental Significance Database - RESTRICTED - Metadata only

• Derived From Asset database for the Central West subregion on 29 April 2015

• Derived From National Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems (GDE) Atlas

• Derived From Birds Australia - Important Bird Areas (IBA) 2009

• Derived From Spatial Threatened Species and Communities (TESC) NSW 20131129

• Derived From Species Profile and Threats Database (SPRAT) - Australia - Species of National Environmental Significance Database (BA subset - RESTRICTED - Metadata only)

• Derived From NSW Office of Water Surface Water Offtakes - NIC v1 20131024

• Derived From National Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems (GDE) Atlas (including WA)

• Derived From Environmental Asset Database - Commonwealth Environmental Water Office

• Derived From Asset database for the Central West subregion on 21 August 2015

• Derived From Ramsar Wetlands of Australia

• Derived From Native Vegetation Management (NVM) - Manage Benefits

• Derived From Key Environmental Assets - KEA - of the Murray Darling Basin

• Derived From National Heritage List Spatial Database (NHL) (v2.1)

• Derived From Climate Change Corridors (Dry Habitat) for North East NSW

• Derived From Great Artesian Basin and Laura Basin groundwater recharge areas

• Derived From NSW Office of Water combined geodatabase of regulated rivers and water sharing plan regions

• Derived From New South Wales NSW Regional CMA Water Asset Information WAIT tool databases, RESTRICTED Includes ALL Reports

• Derived From [New South Wales NSW - Regional - CMA - Water Asset Information Tool - WAIT -

Spatial Database Market Outlook

According to our latest research, the global spatial database market size reached USD 2.94 billion in 2024, driven by the exponential growth in geospatial data generation and the increasing adoption of location-based services across industries. The market is projected to grow at a robust CAGR of 12.1% from 2025 to 2033, reaching a forecasted value of USD 8.23 billion by 2033. This impressive growth trajectory is primarily fueled by advancements in spatial analytics, the proliferation of IoT devices, and the rising demand for real-time geographic information systems (GIS) in both public and private sectors.

One of the primary growth factors for the spatial database market is the surging demand for advanced geospatial analytics in urban planning and smart city initiatives. As cities across the globe embrace digital transformation, there is an increasing need for sophisticated spatial databases capable of handling complex, multi-dimensional datasets. These databases enable city planners and government agencies to analyze spatial relationships, optimize resource allocation, and improve decision-making processes. The integration of spatial databases with AI and machine learning algorithms further enhances their analytical capabilities, allowing for predictive modeling and real-time visualization of urban dynamics. This has accelerated the adoption of spatial database solutions in both developed and emerging economies, positioning the market for sustained growth over the next decade.

Another significant driver is the rapid expansion of IoT and connected devices, which generate vast volumes of location-based data requiring efficient management and analysis. Industries such as transportation, logistics, and utilities are leveraging spatial databases to track assets, optimize routes, and monitor infrastructure in real time. The ability to process and analyze geospatial data streams from sensors, vehicles, and mobile devices is critical for operational efficiency and risk mitigation. Moreover, the increasing use of spatial databases in environmental monitoring—such as tracking climate change, natural disasters, and resource management—underscores their importance in supporting sustainability initiatives. This trend is further amplified by the growing emphasis on data-driven decision-making across sectors, fueling the demand for scalable and high-performance spatial database solutions.

The adoption of cloud-based spatial database solutions is another pivotal factor contributing to market growth. Cloud deployment offers unparalleled scalability, flexibility, and cost-effectiveness, enabling organizations of all sizes to access and manage spatial data without significant upfront investments in infrastructure. The shift towards cloud-native architectures also facilitates seamless integration with other enterprise applications and data sources, enhancing interoperability and data sharing. This has led to a surge in demand for spatial database-as-a-service (DBaaS) offerings, particularly among small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and organizations with distributed operations. The ongoing advancements in cloud security and data privacy are further encouraging the migration of critical geospatial workloads to the cloud, accelerating the overall expansion of the spatial database market.

From a regional perspective, North America continues to dominate the spatial database market, accounting for the largest share in 2024, followed by Europe and Asia Pacific. The region's leadership is attributed to the presence of major technology players, a mature IT infrastructure, and significant investments in smart city and defense projects. However, Asia Pacific is emerging as the fastest-growing market, driven by rapid urbanization, government-led digitalization initiatives, and the increasing adoption of advanced GIS technologies in countries such as China, India, and Japan. The region's robust economic growth and expanding industrial base are expected to create substantial opportunities for spatial database vendors, making it a key focus area for future market expansion.

This dataset includes data related to the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Act 2015 and the new duties this places on local authorities. Part 5: Asset Transfer Requests: Provides community bodies with a right to request to purchase, lease, manage or use land and buildings belonging to local authorities. Local authorities are required to create and maintain a register of land which they will make available to the public. Part 8: Common Good Property: Places a statutory duty on local authorities to establish and maintain a register of all property held by them for the common good. It also requires local authorities to publish their proposals and consult community bodies before disposing of or changing the use of common good assets. Part 9: Allotments: It requires local authorities to take reasonable steps to provide allotments if waiting lists exceed certain trigger points and strengthens the protection for allotments. Provisions allow allotments to be 250 square metres in size or a different size that is to be agreed between the person requesting an allotment and the local authority. The Act also requires fair rents to be set and allows tenants to sell surplus produce grown on an allotment (other than with a view to making a profit). There is a requirement for local authorities to develop a food growing strategy for their area, including identifying land that may be used as allotment sites and identifying other areas of land that could be used by a community for the cultivation of vegetables, fruit, herbs or flowers. "UPRN", "address" and "type" are now MANDATORY fields for this dataset. The "type" field should follow the One Scotland Gazetteer (OSG) Classification conventions. See https://bit.ly/2Tm9W6x for more details. SG have provided useful guidance of what the register should contain and how it should be formatted (pages 21-23). See https://dtascommunityownership.org.uk/sites/default/files/Asset%20Transfer%20RA%20Guidance%20Notes.pdf

Abstract

[x[This dataset was superseded by GIP AssetList Database v1.3 20150212

GUID: e0a8bc96-e97b-44d4-858e-abbb06ddd87f

on 12/2/2015]x]

The dataset was derived by the Bioregional Assessment Programme from multiple source datasets. The source datasets are identified in the Lineage field in this metadata statement. The processes undertaken to produce this derived dataset are described in the History field in this metadata statement.

This dataset contains the spatial and non-spatial (attribute) components of the Gippsland bioregion Asset List as two .mdb files, which are readable as an MS Access database or as an ESRI Personal Geodatabase.

Under the BA program, a spatial assets database is developed for each defined bioregional assessment project. The spatial elements that underpin the identification of water dependent assets are identified in the first instance by regional NRM organisations (via the WAIT tool) and supplemented with additional elements from national and state/territory government datasets. All reports received associated with the WAIT process for Gippsland are included in the zip file as part of this dataset.

Elements are initially included in the preliminary assets database if they are partly or wholly within the bioregion's preliminary assessment extent (Materiality Test 1, M1). Elements are then grouped into assets which are evaluated by project teams to determine whether they meet the second Materiality Test (M2). Assets meeting both Materiality Tests comprise the water dependent asset list. Descriptions of the assets identified in the Gippsland bioregion are found in the "AssetList" table of the database. In this version of the database only M1 has been assessed.

Assets are the spatial features used by project teams to model scenarios under the BA program. Detailed attribution does not exist at the asset level. Asset attribution includes only the core set of BA-derived attributes reflecting the BA classification hierarchy, as described in Appendix A of "AssetList_database_GIP_v1p2_20150130.doc", located in the zip file as part of this dataset.

The "Element_to_Asset" table contains the relationships and identifies the elements that were grouped to create each asset.

Detailed information describing the database structure and content can be found in the document "AssetList_database_GIP_v1p2_20150130.doc" located in the zip file.

Some of the source data used in the compilation of this dataset is restricted.

Purpose

[x[*****THIS IS NOT THE CURRENT ASSET LIST*****

This dataset was superseded by GIP AssetList Database v1.3 20150212

GUID: e0a8bc96-e97b-44d4-858e-abbb06ddd87f

on 12/2/2015

THIS DATASET IS NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN ITS CURRENT FORM]x]

Dataset History

This dataset is an update of the previous version of the Gippsland asset list database: "Gippsland Asset List V1 20141210"; ID: 112883f7-1440-4912-8fc3-1daf63e802cb, which was updated with the inclusion of a number of additional datasets from the Victorian Department of the Environment and Primary Industries as identified in the "linkages" section and below.

Victorian Farm Dam Boundaries

https://data.bioregionalassessments.gov.au/datastore/dataset/311a47f9-206d-4601-aa7d-6739cfc06d61

Flood Extent 100 year extent West Gippsland Catchment Management Authority GIP v140701

https://data.bioregionalassessments.gov.au/dataset/2ff06a4f-fdd5-4a34-b29a-a49416e94f15

Irrigation District Department of Environment and Primary Industries GIP

https://data.bioregionalassessments.gov.au/datastore/dataset/880d9042-abe7-4669-be3a-e0fbe096b66a

Landscape priority areas (West)

West Gippsland Regional Catchment Strategy Landscape Priorities WGCMA GIP 201205

https://data.bioregionalassessments.gov.au/datastore/dataset/6c8c0a81-ba76-4a8a-b11a-1c943e744f00

Plantation Forests Public Land Management(PLM25) DEPI GIP 201410

https://data.bioregionalassessments.gov.au/datastore/dataset/495d0e4e-e8cd-4051-9623-98c03a4ecded

and additional data identifying "Vulnerable" species from the datasets:

Victorian Biodiversity Atlas flora - 1 minute grid summary

https://data.bioregionalassessments.gov.au/datastore/dataset/d40ac83b-f260-4c0b-841d-b639534a7b63

Victorian Biodiversity Atlas fauna - 1 minute grid summary

https://data.bioregionalassessments.gov.au/datastore/dataset/516f9eb1-ea59-46f7-84b1-90a113d6633d

A number of restricted datasets were used to compile this database. These are listed in the accompanying documentation and below:

• The Collaborative Australian Protected Areas Database (CAPAD) 2010

• Environmental Assets Database (Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder)

• Key Environmental Assets of the Murray-Darling Basin

• Communities of National Environmental Significance Database

• Species of National Environmental Significance

• Ramsar Wetlands of Australia 2011

Dataset Citation

Bioregional Assessment Programme (2015) GIP AssetList Database v1.2 20150130. Bioregional Assessment Derived Dataset. Viewed 07 February 2017, http://data.bioregionalassessments.gov.au/dataset/6f34129d-50a3-48f7-996c-7a6c9fa8a76a.

Dataset Ancestors

• Derived From Flood Extent 100 year extent West Gippsland Catchment Management Authority GIP v140701

• Derived From Surface Water Economic Entitlements GIP 20141219

• Derived From West Gippsland Regional Catchment Strategy Landscape Priorities WGCMA GIP 20121205

• Derived From Irrigation District Department of Environment and Primary Industries GIP

• Derived From Surface Water and Groundwater Entitlement Data with Volumes - DEPI Regs Cat6 Victoria 20141218

• Derived From Communities of National Environmental Significance Database - RESTRICTED - Metadata only

• Derived From National Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems (GDE) Atlas

• Derived From Victorian Water Supply Protection Areas

• Derived From National Groundwater Information System (NGIS) v1.1

• Derived From Birds Australia - Important Bird Areas (IBA) 2009

• Derived From Southern Rural Water SW Locations with BOM Regulations Category 6 Volumes Gippsland 20150430

• Derived From Gippsland Project boundary

• Derived From Victorian Groundwater Management Areas

• Derived From Plantation Forests Public Land Management(PLM25) DEPI GIP 201410

• Derived From National Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems (GDE) Atlas (including WA)

• Derived From Species Profile and Threats Database (SPRAT) - Australia - Species of National Environmental Significance Database (BA subset - RESTRICTED - Metadata only)

• Derived From Surface Water Entitlement Locations Gippsland Southern Rural Water 20141218

• Derived From Ramsar Wetlands of Australia

• Derived From National Groundwater Information System Victorian Extract (2014-03-21)

• Derived From GEODATA TOPO 250K Series 3

• Derived From Groundwater Licences Entitlement Volume To Bores Vic DEPI 20141021

• Derived From Groundwater Economic Elements Gippsland 20141120

• Derived From Commonwealth Heritage List Spatial Database (CHL)

• Derived From Potential Groundwater Dependent Ecosystems for West Gippsland Catchment Management Authority

• Derived From Victorian Biodiversity Atlas flora - 1 minute grid summary

• Derived From Unreg surface water licences DELWP Gippsland 20150301

• Derived From National Heritage List Spatial Database (NHL) (v2.1)

• Derived From Gippsland Basin bioregion Asset List v01 - 20141210

• Derived From Victorian Farm Dam Boundaries

• Derived From Gippsland Basin bioregion Preliminary Assessment Extent (PAE)

• Derived From Victoria Regional CMA - Water Asset Information Tool - WAIT databases

• Derived From [Australia - Species of National Environmental Significance

Snapshot img

Geospatial Analytics Market Size 2025-2029

The geospatial analytics market size is forecast to increase by USD 178.6 billion, at a CAGR of 21.4% between 2024 and 2029.

The market is experiencing significant growth, driven by the increasing adoption of geospatial analytics in sectors such as healthcare and insurance. This trend is fueled by the ability of geospatial analytics to provide valuable insights from location-based data, leading to improved operational efficiency and decision-making. Additionally, emerging methods in data collection and generation, including the use of drones and satellite imagery, are expanding the scope and potential of geospatial analytics. However, the market faces challenges, including data privacy and security concerns. With the vast amounts of sensitive location data being collected and analyzed, ensuring its protection is crucial for companies to maintain trust with their customers and avoid regulatory penalties. Navigating these challenges and capitalizing on the opportunities presented by the growing adoption of geospatial analytics requires a strategic approach from industry players. Companies must prioritize data security, invest in advanced analytics technologies, and collaborate with stakeholders to build trust and transparency. By addressing these challenges and leveraging the power of geospatial analytics, businesses can gain a competitive edge and unlock new opportunities in various industries.

What will be the Size of the Geospatial Analytics Market during the forecast period?

Explore in-depth regional segment analysis with market size data - historical 2019-2023 and forecasts 2025-2029 - in the full report.
Request Free SampleThe market continues to evolve, driven by the increasing demand for location-specific insights across various sectors. Urban planning relies on geospatial optimization and data enrichment to enhance city designs and improve infrastructure. Cloud-based geospatial solutions facilitate real-time data access, enabling location intelligence for public safety and resource management. Spatial data standards ensure interoperability among different systems, while geospatial software and data visualization tools provide valuable insights from satellite imagery and aerial photography. Geospatial services offer data integration, spatial data accuracy, and advanced analytics capabilities, including 3D visualization, route optimization, and data cleansing. Precision agriculture and environmental monitoring leverage geospatial data to optimize resource usage and monitor ecosystem health. Infrastructure management and real estate industries rely on geospatial data for asset tracking and market analysis. Spatial statistics and disaster management applications help mitigate risks and respond effectively to crises. Geospatial data management and quality remain critical as the volume and complexity of data grow. Geospatial modeling and interoperability enable seamless data sharing and collaboration. Sensor networks and geospatial data acquisition technologies expand the reach of geospatial analytics, while AI-powered geospatial analytics offer new opportunities for predictive analysis and automation. The ongoing development of geospatial technologies and applications underscores the market's continuous dynamism, providing valuable insights and solutions for businesses and organizations worldwide.

How is this Geospatial Analytics Industry segmented?

The geospatial analytics industry research report provides comprehensive data (region-wise segment analysis), with forecasts and estimates in 'USD billion' for the period 2025-2029, as well as historical data from 2019-2023 for the following segments. TechnologyGPSGISRemote sensingOthersEnd-userDefence and securityGovernmentEnvironmental monitoringMining and manufacturingOthersApplicationSurveyingMedicine and public safetyMilitary intelligenceDisaster risk reduction and managementOthersTypeSurface and field analyticsGeovisualizationNetwork and location analyticsOthersGeographyNorth AmericaUSCanadaEuropeFranceGermanyItalyUKAPACChinaIndiaJapanSouth AmericaBrazilRest of World (ROW)

By Technology Insights

The gps segment is estimated to witness significant growth during the forecast period.The market encompasses various applications and technologies, including geospatial optimization, data enrichment, location-based services (LBS), spatial data standards, public safety, geospatial software, resource management, location intelligence, geospatial data visualization, geospatial services, data integration, 3D visualization, satellite imagery, remote sensing, GIS platforms, spatial data infrastructure, aerial photography, route optimization, data cleansing, precision agriculture, spatial interpolation, geospatial databases, transportation planning, spatial data accuracy, spatial analysis, map projections, interactive maps, marketing analytics, data storytelling, geospati

The National Land Cover Database 2001 Land Cover 2011 Edition layer is produced through a cooperative project conducted by the Multi-Resolution Land Characteristics (MRLC) Consortium. The MRLC Consortium is a partnership of federal agencies (www.mrlc.gov), consisting of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. Department of Agriculture - Forest Service (USDA-FS), the National Park Service (NPS), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). One of the primary goals of the project is to generate a current, consistent, seamless, and accurate National Land Cover Database (NLCD) circa 2001 for the United States at medium spatial resolution. This land cover map and all documents pertaining to it are considered "provisional" until a formal accuracy assessment can be conducted. For a detailed definition and discussion on MRLC and the NLCD 2001 products, refer to Homer et al. (2004) and http://www.mrlc.gov/mrlc2k.asp. The NLCD 2001 is created by partitioning the U.S. into mapping zones. A total of 66 mapping zones were delineated within the conterminous U.S. based on ecoregion and geographical characteristics, edge matching features and the size requirement of Landsat mosaics. This update represents a seamless assembly of updated NLCD 2001 Land Cover (2011 Edition) for all 66 MRLC mapping zones. Questions about the NLCD the NLCD 2001 Land Cover 2011 Edition can be directed to the NLCD 2001 land cover mapping team at USGS EROS, Sioux Falls, SD (605) 594-6151 or mrlc@usgs.gov.

Assets of community value in Tunbridge Wells Borough