709

�$�����������������������������������%�"��������

Koray VelibeyogluIzmir Institute of Technology, Turkey

Copyright © 2006, Idea Group Inc., distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI is prohibited.

INTRODUCTION

Since the end of 1980s, different sectors have imple-mented geographical information systems (GIS) in Tur-key. A study on GIS market in Turkey indicates thatmunicipalities are the primary customers (Gülersoy &Yigiter, 1999). One of the earliest GIS projects in Turkeybegan with the production of digital maps covering theboundaries of Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality in 1987.Since 1994, a rapid development process has occurredwith the widespread diffusion of GIS especially in univer-sities and large public sector organizations respectively.However, the early city-wide municipal GIS projects wereinitiated only after 1996 (Ucuzal, 1999). In recent years, amajor change has occurred in the context of GIS projectsfrom small-scale infrastructure projects to city-wide mu-nicipal GIS projects for three reasons:

1. After the devastating earthquake in Marmara re-gion in 1999, people suffered from the lack ofvitally important information, because such infor-mation never existed or was never kept in a sys-tematic way. The importance of accumulation anddistribution of up-to-date and accurate data amongcity-wide organizations was recognized (Tecim,2001);

2. Rapid development of Internet in Turkey in recentyears encouraged the communication efforts withinand among the organizations, and among peopleand organizations, and this triggered the need forinter-organizational GIS (Karas, 2001);

3. Initiatives supporting e-municipality and e-gov-ernment, and transition from government to gov-ernance raised the importance of transparency,communication, and public accountability (Tüzün& Sezer, 2002). In this sense, the concept of“urban information system” (UIS) began to bepopular in the context of local governments. At thetime of publication, UIS was used as an umbrellaterm encapsulating all the efforts for an informa-tion system—whether GIS or LIS—or informationtechnologies like the Internet within an integratedsystem that is supposed to be performed in mu-nicipal operations in order to support organiza-tional rationality.

Although so-called urban information systems werebeing marketed by vendors as the panacea for all prob-lems, the implementation of large-scale information sys-tems generally ended up with failure because informationsystems (IS) require large changes in the organization’sexisting structure. In the Turkish case, no municipalityhas been able to complete establishing a city-wide urbaninformation system so far. Ankara, Istanbul, and Bursa arethe cities, where implementation processes are still under-way (Celik, 2002). Therefore, there needs to be casestudies to address implementation problems of UIS and toevaluate the reasons behind the failures.

In this article, the emphasis will be given upon orga-nizational and political aspects of UIS implementationthat is critical for the success and failure of such systems.For this purpose, the approach adopted rests on theassumption that “the success or failure of IS projects isdependent on the degree of mismatch between the con-ceptions of these systems and the organizational realitiesinto which it is introduced” (Heeks, 1999). In the rest of thearticle, based on Heeks’s argument, the assessment ofthese gaps is evidenced in the case of Turkish metropoli-tan municipalities, and further evaluations are made guid-ing further projects and studies.

ORGANIZATIONAL CONTEXT OFINFORMATION SYSTEMS

Information systems today play a vital role in businesses,governments, and other organizations. Because they areso closely tied to organizations, it is necessary to closelyunderstand the nature of organizational realities. Publicsector organizations like municipalities are the singlelargest collector, user, holder and producer of informa-tion. The work of these organizations is thus very infor-mation-intensive.

Municipalities are responsible for providing the basicurban services (i.e., infrastructure development, fire de-partment operations, garbage collection, planning ser-vices, etc.) to the public that requires collecting accurateinformation about environment and efficient use of thisdata to perform municipal tasks. The capability for plann-ing, programming and decision making in the municipali-

710

Urban Information Systems in Turkish Local Governments

ties is largely dependent on the collecting, storing, pre-serving and managing of the spatial information. Munici-palities collect and manage both spatial data (i.e., districtplan, base maps and cadastre maps) and non-spatial data(i.e., water-system revenues, environmental taxation andbuilding permissions) in their operations. Almost 80% oftotal data exploited by municipalities are “spatial data”.Thanks to advancing technology municipalities are in-creasingly using geographic information systems (GIS),management information systems (MIS), and the Internetto carry out municipal tasks and services more efficiently.By combining many of the municipal services into anurban information system, the aim is to obtain serviceunity, reduce service costs and increase revenues.

Information systems differ from information technolo-gies in that they involve people and their actions. Further,they incorporate a set of rational structures, processesand even culture and strategies for the operation (Campbell& McGrath, 2003). Thus, changes in the organizationalcontext are required for information systems to operaterationally.

Considerable declines in the price of information tech-nologies and the increased capacities of technologicalinnovations in supporting municipal tasks and serviceshave increased the implementation of urban informationsystems (UIS) in Turkish municipalities. Although con-siderable resources were allocated for UIS projects, agreat many “implementation failures” are experienced dueto the lack of required interest during the implementationprocess. Despite the promise of supporting the organiza-tional rationality, the aim of many UIS projects is to getprestige. Municipalities tend to favor large, complex UISprojects supported by generous funding. But the con-tinually changing political context brings an end to theprojects started because of prestige, but not supportedby organizational rationality.

In this context, Heeks’s ITPOSMO model, based onconception-reality gap assessment, allows a suitableframework to reveal the mismatch between the concept ofhard-rational design of information systems and softpolitical realities of organizations.

ITPOSMO DIMENSIONS OFINFORMATION SYSTEM

Richard Heeks’s (1999) model of conception-reality gapassessment is an effective technique, which helps toilluminate the causes of an implementation outcome inorganizations (Kouroubali, 2002). According to Heeks,there are conception-reality gaps in implementation pro-cess of urban information systems. Successful adoptiondepends on the size of these gaps: “the larger the gap, thegreater the risk of failure” (Heeks, 1999, p. 59). After a

review of a number of case studies, he concludes thatgaps between conceptions and reality can be classifiedinto seven categories summarized by the I-T-P-O-S-M-Oacronym:

• Information: Provided by the system versus actualinformation needs, and the extent to which theorganization can access the information.

• Technology: Technological capacity required forparticipation and actual technology capacity oftarget organizations.

• Process: Technology features in relation to existingprocesses.

• Objectives and values: In accordance with the ob-jectives and values incorporated in the system inrelation to objectives and values of users.

• Staffing and skills: How well the system fits withhuman capability requirements.

• Management and structures: How well the systemfits within existing organizational structures.

• Other resources: How available resources such astime and money match with required ones (Heeks,2001).

Heeks’s model of conception-reality gap based onITPOSMO dimensions has a great value for the followingcase study section for three reasons:

1. Conception-reality gap assessment is derived fromworld-wide examples of IS implementations particu-larly from the public sector organizations and thoseof many developing countries;

2. ITPOSMO model has the value to being able toexamine the reasons why the introduction of infor-mation system projects in similar organizationalsettings results in a various degrees of success orfailure;

3. A knowledge base consisting of ITPOSMO dimen-sions creates opportunities to share and communi-cate the reasons of success and failure of differentcases systematically.

Further clarifications on the pros and cons of thetechnique are discussed by Heeks elsewhere (Heeks,2003).

BURSA URBAN INFORMATIONSYSTEM (BUIS)

As mentioned in the previous section, efforts to imple-ment Urban Information Systems (UIS) in Turkish munici-palities are in infant stages so there is value in carefullydocumenting implementation process. The Bursa Urban

711

Urban Information Systems in Turkish Local Governments

�Information System (BUIS) was selected for study forthree specific reasons:

1. the relatively longer experience of urban informa-tion systems (since 1996) in this situation createsa greater chance to observe changes through timebased on ITPOSMO dimensions;

2. the availability of more financial resources, andmunicipality’s ready acceptance of the wider imple-mentation of various technological systems;

3. the funding obtained through an international dona-tion-loan, professional consultancy and feasibilitystudy provided a significant impetus for a detailedinvestigation.

Development of BUIS Project

With automotive and major textile plants, and foodstuffindustry, Bursa is one of the prime industrial centers inTurkey. With its current population of 1.6 million, the cityis the fifth largest in Turkey. In 1987, Bursa was granted thestatus of a “metropolitan municipality”, encompassingthree district municipalities under its jurisdiction.

Bursa Metropolitan Municipality wanted to use UIS forthe planning and management of this rapidly flourishingcity. With such a motivation, they began BUIS project witha GIS feasibility study conducted by U.S.-based firm“Psomas and Associates” between 1994-1996. Funding forthe feasibility study was through “Trade and Develop-ment Agency” (TDA), an arm of the United States Depart-ment of State. The study had four major steps: needsassessment, study tour, pilot project and feasibility study/implementation plan (Henstridge, 1999). Meanwhile, aninternational fund provided Bursa Metropolitan Munici-pality with a loan from the World Bank for the planning,reconstructing, improving and managing the water andsewerage system of the city. After the completion offeasibility study, Intergraph won the bidding to designand to begin implementing Phase-1 of the project in 1996.In order to provide an interactive system management,Intergraph established a branch in Bursa for the implemen-tation process. Permanent staff members from the Metro-politan municipality and district municipalities of Bursawere assigned for the control of the implementation pro-cess from 1996 to 1998. Aside from Intergraph, threedifferent companies that specialize in different categoriesof data collection and processing signed a contract withinthe same period. Since 1999, BUIS had been fully operatedby local “urban information system division”, which wasresponsible for operating the system, supporting otherdepartments in the organization, and coordinating inter-organizational data sharing among respected local organi-zations.

ITPOSMO Dimensions of BUIS

Based on the results of field study, interviews, andcorresponding materials, Richard Heeks’s ITPOSMOmodel was examined for BUIS.

Information

As a rapidly urbanizing metropolitan region, Bursa isundergoing tremendous infrastructure expansion withassociated land titling, land registration and environ-mental projects. In the implementation phase-1 (1996-1998), the information needs of BUIS were projected andfour different firms were commissioned to produce spa-tial data (i.e., base maps, cadastre maps, etc.) and at-tribute data (i.e., building details, household data) throughsurveys and digitization of maps. Then, an inter-organi-zational network was established. Covering three metro-politan-district municipalities in Bursa, The Cadastreand Title Deed Office, Turkish Telecom, Bursa NaturalGas Company, the BUIS implementation succeeded inthe coordination of data management (BUIS, 2003). Italso provided a software application developed for 182“muhtars” (selected headmen of the villages), connect-ing them to the main system by wide-area network.

The conception-reality gaps for were as follows:

1. there was an absolute need for accurate and up-to-date data in the heart of all information systems.There were some serious problems in the currencyof the data that threatened the sustainability of theproject: e.g., since the international funding op-tions were not available after 1999 the heavy costsof information maintenance (46% of total BUISexpenditures) became more prone to the politicalchoices of decision-makers;

2. there were serious inefficiencies in the provisionof attribute data by respected local bodies: e.g.,muhtars were expected to update the databaseonce in a week. In reality, only 20% of them suc-ceeded in operating properly (Erarslan, 1997); and

3. information systems require a clear informationmanagement strategy to fulfill the organizationalneeds and objectives rationally. Yet, the fact thatthe needs assessments could not be completed byeach municipal unit, meant that features of theinformation systems largely fail to address to theneeds and objectives of the organization.

Technology

The hardware and associated GIS software was providedin the implementation phase of the project with the

712

Urban Information Systems in Turkish Local Governments

support of international donors. Both software and hard-ware are currently operational to perform municipal tasksand services. There is also a fiber-optic network connec-tion between all municipal divisions and correspondingdistrict municipalities.

The conception-reality gap was relatively low for thetechnology dimension but some issues still need to beimproved. These include the coordination of municipaltasks and inter-organizational communication betweenlocal bodies, and better provision of municipal serviceswhich were the major aims of the BUIS. The telecommuni-cations infrastructure in Turkey, however, is somewhatlimited, therefore there some problems occurred in theprovision of Web-based services. There was not a fullyestablished network system in and between local publicsector organizations and this made the sharing of datamore challenging.

Processes

As proposed in the feasibility study, “Urban InformationSystem Division” was founded under the Directorate ofPublic Works to support functioning of municipal ser-vices, in-house production and maintenance of informa-tion. Many municipal units adjusted their working pro-cesses according to BUIS. For example, citizens’ demandfor fixing and maintaining of infrastructure system viatelephone service was converted into a “task sheet” bylocal system operator and transmitted to maintenancecrews working in the field.

Conception-reality gap was also low for this dimen-sion. Yet, the absence of office automation reduced theopportunity of fully integrated work process that BUISmay have offered.

Objectives and Values

The feasibility report assumed objectives of greater effi-ciency through increased revenue generated from prop-erty tax collection, effective provision of utility services,control of urban development, and delivery of emergencyhealth, safety and police services with BUIS project.

Some of the system objectives mentioned earlier wereachieved. On the other hand, there were some problemsincreasing the size of this gap:

1. an urban information system is a costly investmentand may only be profitable in the long run. It re-quires a strong political and individual commitmentto fulfill the objectives of the organization. In thisrespect, such factors as the international consult-ants, project contractors leaving at the end of thephase-1 of the project with the expiration of theircontracts, international donors withdrawing their

support, and the mayor, the founder of the BUIS, notbeing re-elected, reduced the chance of wide spreadadoption of the system;

2. In terms of values, there was a “communicationsgap” between politicians and BUIS administratorsin the determination of current and future needs ofBUIS.

Staffing and Skills

Feasibility study paid great attention to training of thestaff for the successful system implementation. In thiscontext, consultants provided a comprehensive trainingprogram included hardware, software, and training ofsystem administrators, chief managers and system opera-tors.

Staffing and skill gap was not important for the BUIS.Sufficient attention was given to continuous training ofthe staff in information technology. But innovative use ofsoftware packages and reinventing them for specific op-erations remained relatively small. This was largely be-cause of the problem of public sector employment policythat neither computer skills nor individual productivitywas encouraged and rewarded by the administrative sys-tem.

Management System and Structures

The design of BUIS proposed strategy to develop anappropriate structure aiming to increase the effectivenessof the organization and its service to its clients or public.

Since BUIS had a city-wide basis, some obstacles wereencountered in the sharing and production of the dataoriginating from the country’s legal and administrativesystem:

1. the majority of applications in the GIS marketwere insufficient to fully perform the responsi-bilities and coordination role of MetropolitanMunicipalities to the digital environment (BUIS,2003);

2. there was an ongoing challenge between localbodies of central administration and MetropolitanMunicipality in the sharing of information. Asvital source of BUIS, for instance, cadastre mapswere not available free of charge for Municipalorganizations; and

3. there was also a conflict between MetropolitanMunicipality and associated district municipalitiesin conjunction with their political stances. In somecases, district municipalities may establish com-pletely different software packages or operatingsystems that interrupt the city-wide coordinationefforts and cause economic loss due to the incom-

713

Urban Information Systems in Turkish Local Governments

�patible data production and exchange. BUIS sufferslargely from these issues and the gap was higher forthis dimension.

Other Resources

For the BUIS case, donor-aid made the money available forthe feasibility studies and phase-1 of the project. The timeschedule for training and implementation of basic fea-tures of the system worked for the first stage as envisagedin feasibility study. Also, some revenues were gainedthrough the marketing of spatial data and digital mapsprepared by the BUIS staff (BUIS, 2003).

But significant budget cut-offs were experienced inthe second phase due to the lack of political support andwider economic recession in the country. Therefore, theconception-reality gap was gradually increased.

CONCLUSION

The result of the study indicates that several ITPOSMOdimensions namely “information”, “objectives and val-ues”, and “management structures and systems” seemcritical and may lead to “sustainability failure” for BUIS.Broadly, 15 years of GIS experience in Turkish Municipali-ties confirms that urban information system (UIS) imple-mentation was neither based on a well-designed informa-tion management strategy nor utilized in long-run due tothe ever-changing political context. A UIS generally in-corporates a significant set of rational structures, pro-cess, culture, professional strategies and involvement.For this reason, almost all of the implementations realizedthat failure to complete the pre-requisite conditions andcareful management of implementation process may facefailure (Pick, 2004).

There is no recipe for success that might be advisedto other institutions. But, freezing some ITPOSMO dimen-sions, getting them smaller and simpler and finding solu-tions by bringing them closer to organizational realitiesmay open the way leading to a more successful implemen-tation (Heeks, 1999). In this sense, the approach of incre-mentalism can be applied to avoid over-ambitious UISprojects, which carry high risks of failure. This approachrecommends organizations to concentrate on limitedapplications, which directly meet perceived organiza-tional needs. Such an approach is less vulnerable toorganizational and environmental changes and politicalinstability which are very important in developing coun-try context.

Studies in GIS implementation problems especially indeveloping countries should become a priority issue(Ramasubramanian, 1999). Yet, currently few studies fo-cusing on the institutional dimension of the technology

are demonstrated in recorded case studies. In the researchpyramid of GIS studies (Obermeyer & Pinto, 1994), insti-tutional issues should be given more attention. As aresult, the evidence obtained from Heeks’s ITPOSMOmodel could be suitably extended and updated. Thisstudy will hopefully lead to further studies which addressthe soft organizational realities (cultural, structural, po-litical, people factors) of urban information systems.

REFERENCES

BUIS. (2003). Urban information system division’s an-nual report. Bursa: Bursa Metropolitan Municipality.

Campbell, B. R., & McGrath, G. M. (2003). The informationsystem within the organization: A case study. In J. Cano(Ed.), Critical reflections on information systems: A sys-tematic approach. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Inc.

Celik, K. (2002). Investigating and modeling of re-organiza-tion requirements in the municipalities for establishing thespatial urban information systems. Paper presented at theGeoSpatial World 2002 Conference, Atlanta, Georgia.

Erarslan, D. (1997). Technological changes and planningtrends in metropolitan Turkey: Integration of GIS meth-ods with particular reference to the case of Izmir. Unpub-lished Master Thesis, Middle East Technical University,Ankara.

Gülersoy, N. Z., & Yigiter, R. (1999). Evaluation of imple-mentation potentials of information technologies in theurban planning process. Paper presented at the 23rd

Proceedings of World Planning Day, Istanbul.

Heeks, R. (1999). Reducing the risk of information systemsfailure. In R. Heeks (Ed.), Reinventing government in theinformation age. London: Routledge.

Heeks, R. (2001). Understanding e-governance for devel-opment. Manchester: Institute for Development Policyand Management.

Heeks, R. (2003). Design-reality gap assessment: eGov riskassessment technique 2. Retrieved March, 2004, from http://www.e-devexchange.org/eGov/riskdrgap.htm

Henstridge, F. (1999). Turkey turns to U.S. experts in GIS.Professional Surveyor Magazine.

Karas, I. (2001, November 13th-14th). Internet and GIS.Paper presented at the GIS Days in Turkey, FatihUniversitesi, Istanbul.

Kouroubali, A. (2002). Structuration theory and concep-tion-reality gaps: Addressing cause and effect of imple-mentation outcomes in health care information systems.

714

Urban Information Systems in Turkish Local Governments

Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 35th HawaiiInternational Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii.

Obermeyer, N. J., & Pinto, J. K. (1994). Managing geo-graphic information systems. New York: The GuilfordPress.

Pick, J. (2004). Costs and benefits of GIS in business(Chapter IV). In J. Pick (Ed.), Geographic informationsystems in business. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing.

Ramasubramanian, L. (1999). GIS implementation in devel-oping countries: Learning from organisational theory andreflective practice. Transactions in GIS, 3(4), 359-380.

Tecim, V. (2001, November 13th-14th). A GIS basedgovernership information system. Paper presented at theGIS Days in Turkey, Fatih Universitesi, Istanbul.

Tüzün, G., & Sezer, S. (2002). National report Turkey,Chapter 5: Governance. Johannesburg: United NationsDevelopment Programme (UNDP) and the Ministry ofEnvironment.

Ucuzal, L. (1999). GIS: A discussion on information sys-tems and application development in central and localadministrations. Paper presented at the Urban Informa-tion Systems Applications in Local Governments,Trabzon, Turkey.

KEY TERMS

Communications Gap: Relates to that part of theknowledge gap which can be attributed to miscommuni-cations between the parties involved (i.e., IT designersunderstand technology but not the realities of gover-nance. Officials and politicians understand the realities ofgovernance but not the technology).

Geographic Information System (GIS): A GIS is acomputerized system for the collection, storage, manipu-lation, and output of information that is spatially refer-enced (Obermeyer & Pinto, 1994).

Land Information System (LIS): A GIS specially de-signed for use with land information. Land rights, owner-ship, boundaries, utility, land cover, and zoning data arecommon layers and attributes in a LIS.

Non-Spatial (attribute) Data: Data that relate to aspecific, precisely defined location. The data are oftenstatistical but may be text, images or multi-media. Theseare linked in the GIS to spatial data that define the location.

Spatial Data: Any information about the location andshape of, and relationships among, geographic features,usually stored as coordinates and topology.

Sustainability Failure: An initiative that succeedsinitially but then fails after a year or so.

Wide-Area Network (WAN): A computer networkthat spans a relatively large geographical area. Typically,a WAN consists of two or more Local-Area Networks(LANs). Computers connected to a WAN are often con-nected through public networks, such as the telephonesystem. They can also be connected through leased linesor satellites.