Cape Peninsula National Park
Environmental Information System
Review of EIS Implementation and Development
Summary | ||
Acknowledgements | ||
1. | Introduction | |
1.1 | Background | |
1.2 | Project status | |
1.3 | Information system set-up under IT transfer considerations (with 'Lessons learned') | |
2. | Review: Findings and Conclusions | |
2.1 | Objectives orientation | |
2.2 | User identification and orientation | |
2.3 | System architecture | |
2.4 | Standardization | |
2.5 | Database | |
2.6 | Application | |
2.7 | User interface | |
2.8 | Output | |
2.9 | Documentation | |
2.10 | Monitoring of data flow and assurance of data quality | |
2.11 | Procedural data flow | |
3. | Further Development: Observations and Recommendations | |
3.1 | Management adjustment | |
3.2 | Capacity building | |
3.3 | PR and marketing | |
3.4 | Change of activities | |
3.5 | EIS diffusion phases | |
Annexes | ||
A1 | Proposal for user interface | |
A2 | Glossary | |
A3 | Consultant mission report | |
A4 | Itinerary | |
A5 | Nationalpark Berchtesgaden | |
A6 | Themes, goals and objectives of the IEMS | |
A7 | Bibliography |
A consultancy was defined to review the current implementation and development of the EIS, which is being set up to support the Cape Peninsula National Park with their management tasks. In his mission the Consultant stressed on the appropriate technology application and establishing a system based rather on user-orientation than technology-driven. The design of the system is already in an advanced stage and makes good progress. The Consultant selected eleven activities for recommendations. While data compilation is handled professionally, the development of application modules (software development) including user interfaces still needs considerable input. For the system architecture, it seems to be adequate to upgrade to a higher technology level only, when technology advances and available skill allow so.
|
Last update: April 2000