The World Geospatial Industry Council wants to restore trust in decision-grade data in the modern, AI-influenced world.
The move from measured data to AI-generated inference is bringing with it a need to restore transparency, governance and trust in decision-grade geospatial data, says the World Geospatial Industry Council (WGIC).
That’s according to the WGIC’s newly issued report, Data to Decisions – Rebuilding Trust in Decision-Grade Geospatial Data.
The WGIC says the sector is moving from “measurement-based trust to model-based trust — a paradigm where data is increasingly inferred, synthesised, and generated at scale by AI systems whose inner workings are difficult to inspect”.
While the new approach holds the promise of unlocking a lot of value, like anything to do with AI it comes with a whole suite of potential problems — “silent errors, untraceable lineage, and blurred accountability when critical decisions fail,” according to the WGIC.
The WGIC says that trust needs to be “rebuilt” across four foundations:
- Provenance
- Governance
- Metadata, and
- Accountability
But that’s not enough. That rebuilt trust must be put into practice through the application of standards, federated architectures and governance-ready geospatial foundation models.
“Machine learning and generative AI, paired with the exponential growth of location intelligence, have tested our confidence in spatial data. This report tackles those questions head-on, challenging existing assumptions,” said John Renard, Founder of Airedale Advisory and Chair of the WGIC Data Committee.
“Drawing on broad industry consensus and practical expertise, it offers concrete recommendations to strengthen practice and guide decision-makers through an increasingly complex landscape.”
Six properties of decision-grade data
The report points out that the AI challenges facing the geospatial sector are not unique — every other industry sector exposed to AI (and surely that’s all of them), also has the same concerns.
“But the impact may be more consequential for geospatial data, given decades of established practice that must now be retrofitted,” the report says.
The WGIC defines decision-grade data as “Geospatial data that is demonstrably fit for a specified decision, with traceable origins, documented transformations, appropriate accuracy and currency, communicated uncertainty, lawful usage rights, and identifiable accountability. Fitness is always relative to the decision, use case, jurisdiction, timeframe, and consequence level.”
Regarding the four foundational elements described earlier, the report expands them into six connected properties of decision-grade data:
- Source and capture;
- Integrity and authenticity;
- Provenance and lineage;
- Quality and uncertainty;
- Rights and governance, and
- Fitness for decision.
It also recommends three priority actions:
- Embed provenance and machine-readable metadata now;
- Convene an industry-wide governance umbrella; and
- Define contractual liability across the data chain.
It breaks that down further into activities that must be taken over certain timespans, and by whom. For instance:
- Actions needed now to develop good practice: For example, provenance tracking and implementation of metadata standards such as GeoDCAT. Who should act? Data producers, providers, deployers and legal teams.
- Over the next 1 to 2 years: Examples include implementing cryptographic hashing and trusted timestamping, as well as contractual frameworks that define responsibility. Who should act? Platform operators and industry and legal teams.
- Over the next 2 to 3 years: Implement federated architectures and an industry-wide governance umbrella. Who should act? Governments, platform providers and the WGIC.
“The geospatial and EO industry’s next phase of growth will be defined by whether data is decision-grade,” said Aaron Addison, Executive Director of WGIC.
“The data chain spans from sensor to model to decision. A vulnerability anywhere along this chain propagates downstream, requiring a comprehensive response across the entire ecosystem.
“This report gives our members and the broader industry a shared reference point at a moment when regulation and AI capability are moving at breakneck speed. It is an invitation to build a trusted future together.”
Related reading:
