facilitators and inhibitors for the integration and use of foss4g in the geospatial science and technology arena

1. Rafael Moreno
Department of Geography
and Environmental Sciences
GIS in the Rockies 2016
Denver, CO September 21-22
Dave Murray
City of Westminster
Facilitators and Inhibitors
for the integration and use of
FOSS4G in the geospatial science
and technology arena

2. Presentation Organization
1.Presentation of some points regarding the
facilitators and inhibitors for the introduction
and use of FOSS4G.
2.Dave Murray presentation of specifics in a
city and county context.
3.Contributions and feedback from the
audience.

3. Several of the resources used in this presentation can be
found in:
• References at the end of these slides.
• Moreno-Sanchez, R. 2012. Free and Open Source Software
for Geospatial applications (FOSS4G): A mature alternative
in the geospatial technologies arena. Transactions in GIS
16(2): 81-88 http://geospatial.ucdenver.edu/foss4g/home-2
• Brovelli, M., M. Minghini, R. Moreno-Sanchez, and R.
Oliveira. Forthcoming. Free and Open Source Software for
Geospatial Applications (FOSS4G) to support Future Earth.
International Journal of Digital Earth
• 127 links to FOSS4G resources and samples of large
sophisticated applications.
• 92 references to literature.

4. Facilitators and Inhibitors
for the introduction and use of
FOSS4G
(Ideas based on work by: Giera and Brown 2004; Valimaki et al. 2005;
Woods and Guliani 2005; Moreno-Sanchez et al. 2007; Morgan and
Finnegan 2007; Viorres et al. 2007; Meeker 2008; Ellis and Van Belle 2009;
Hauge et al. 2010; and Nagy et al. 2010)
Referenced in:
Brovelli, M., M. Minghini, R. Moreno, and R. Oliveira. Forthcoming.
Free and Open Source Software for Geospatial Applications (FOSS4G) to support Future Earth. International
Journal of Digital Earth

5. Inhibitors
a) Lack of awareness of software existence, relevance, or
successful implementations in large, sophisticated,
mission-critical applications.
b) Shortage of technical knowledge needed to implement
and use FOSS4G.
c) Organization has a favorable arrangement with a
private/proprietary/closed-code vendor (e.g. discounts;
training or support).
d) Big/expensive prior investments in
private/proprietary/closed-code software infrastructure.
e) Staff (students?) resistance due to fear of being deskilled
if using FOSS4G instead of commercial packages.
f) Shortage of providers, expertise, and traditional support.

6. Inhibitors
g) Hidden costs (e.g. training and configuration; premium
professional support?; need to dedicate resources to
community participation).
h) Limited time GIS managers or faculty have to keep up
with developments in both arenas private/closed-source
software and FOSS4G.
i) Perception that FOSS4G “is not suitable for real,
sophisticated, mission-critical applications”.
j) Perception that there no technical support for the
software use and development.
k) Perception that “how good could it be if it is free”.
l) Misinterpretation of “free” Free = Freedom.

7. Inhibitors
m) For certain applications and contexts, legal, licensing,
and copyright issues are important and sometimes are
poorly understood. (see http://www.bswd.com/CNSV-1304-
Saper(IP-SIG).pdf)
n) Perception that FOSS/FOSS4G is less secure than
proprietary/closed software.
See following short resources:
https://www.sans.org/reading-room/whitepapers/awareness/security-
concerns-open-source-software-enterprise-requirements-1305
http://www.computerweekly.com/feature/Open-source-software-
security
http://www.zdnet.com/article/six-open-source-security-myths-
debunked-and-eight-real-challenges-to-consider/
7 reasons not to use FOSS http://www.cio.com/article/2378859/open-
source-tools/7-reasons-not-to-use-open-source-software.html

8. Payne, C. (2002). On the security of open source software.
Information systems journal, 12(1), 61-78.
Hoepman, J. H., & Jacobs, B. (2007). Increased security
through open source. Communications of the ACM, 50(1), 79-
83
Cowan, C. (2003). Software security for open-source
systems. IEEE Security and Privacy, 1(1), 38-45.
Von Krogh, G., & Von Hippel, E. (2003). Special issue on open
source software development. Research Policy, 32(7), 1149-
1157.

9. Wheatley (2004) provides examples that help dispel the
following myths: http://www.cio.com/article/2439780/open-
source-tools/open-source--the-myths-of-open-source.html
• “The principal attraction is its no-cost”
• “The savings are not real”
• “There is no tech support”
• “It is not for mission-critical applications”
• “FOSS is not ready for the desktop”
• “It can’t be that good if it is free”
• “It is difficult to learn”
• “It is only for programmer/developers”
• “ There are no learning materials or books about
them”.

10. Facilitators
a) Availability of FOSS4G-literate personnel.
b) Top administration support for FOSS4G.
c) Existence of a committed FOSS4G in-house champion(s).
d) Limited financial resources ensure FOSS4G consideration.
e) FOSS4G can help bridge countries’ and organizations’
“cross-border” technological and budgetary disparities and
facilitate cooperation.
f) Tight collaborations with professionals in the private and
public sectors developing and using FOSS4G cutting-edge
applications.

11. Facilitators
g) Research, development and service activities that might be
limited by license agreements or cost.
g) Distribution of in-house developments or research results
and technologies to partners and end users that don’t have
access to private/closed-code software.
h) Research or systems development that benefits or requires
access to source code.
g) Emphasizing to students (and administration) the
importance of not being unidimensional (one set of
software), being adaptive and a quick learner.
h) Emphasizing the importance of exposure to other software
and systems to highlight principles and education over
training.

12. References on FOSS/FOSS4G in Higher Education:
van Rooij, S. W. (2009). Adopting open-source software applications in US
higher education: A cross-disciplinary review of the literature. Review of
Educational Research, 79(2), 682-7
http://www.unomaha.edu/lms/documents/adopting_opensource_AERA.pdf
Birchall, A. J., & Hopkinson, A. (2007). Open source software in higher
education. http://eprints.mdx.ac.uk/6305/1/birchall_hopkinson_OSS.pdf
Abel, R. (2006). Best practices in open source in higher education study: The
state of open source software.
http://www.citeulike.org/group/2518/article/791631
Williams van Rooij, S. (2007). Perceptions of open source versus commercial
software: Is higher education still on the fence?. Journal of Research on
Technology in Education, 39(4), 433-453
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ768886.pdf
van Rooij, S. W. (2007). Open Source software in US higher education: Reality
or illusion?. Education and Information Technologies, 12(4), 191-209.
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.15.8829&rep=rep1&
type=pdf

13. References FOSS/FOSS4G in Higher Education…..
Liu, C. (2005, May). Enriching software engineering courses with service-
learning projects and the open-source approach. In Proceedings of the 27th
international conference on Software engineering (pp. 613-614). ACM.
http://flosshub.org/sites/flosshub.org/files/42.pdf
Courant, P. N., & Griffiths, R. J. (2006). Software and collaboration in higher
education: A study of open source software. New York: Ithaca. Retrieved
January, 30, 2009.
http://www.campussource.de/opensource/docs/OOSS_Report.pdf
Von Krogh, G., Spaeth, S., & Lakhani, K. R. (2003). Community, joining, and
specialization in open source software innovation: a case study. Research Policy,
32(7), 1217-1241. http://flosshub.org/system/files/rp-
vonkroghspaethlakhani.pdf
Daniel, J., West, P., D'Antoni, S., & Uvalić-Trumbić, S. (2006). eLearning and
Free Open Source Software: the Key to Global Mass Higher Education
http://dspace.col.org/bitstream/handle/11599/1428/2006_Daniel_eLearning_O
pen_Source_Transcript.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y