Major reviews of URISA’s achievements and previews of its prospects were featured at the 1977 (15th anniversary) and 1992 (30th anniversary) conferences (Wellar, 1977; Wellar and Parr, 1992). The 1977 proceedings included 13 invited papers on the theme “Information System Inputs to Policies, Plans and Programs”, and 26 invited papers on key IS/IT issues and topics. In 1992, with “Making Connections” the conference theme, 14 papers were commissioned for a special proceedings volume, IS/GIS/LIS and Public Policies, Plans and Programs: Thirty Years in Perspective. In this paper several of the abiding issues, opportunities and challenges identified in the two previous reviews-previews are revisited, and several new bench-marking criteria are introduced. It is our contention that over the course of 40 years URISA and its members have played a central role in: shaping global and association IS/GIS/LIS networks; defining the G of GIS; expanding and harmonizing the IS family; providing substantive content and personnel for the information system industry; elaborating the connections that underlie information system innovation and adoption in government, business, academia and society at large; and, advancing IS/GIS/LIS research frontiers. The paper closes with the presentation of selected “Enterprise Principles”. The principles are derived from an inspection of prior URISA reviews-previews, and a keyword-based search of recent proceedings. It is anticipated that this topic will become central to future URISA discourse on curiosity-driven and client-driven research initiatives. Due to the large amount of review-preview documentation that is already available on URISA’s record, the approach in this paper is to emphasize graphics with a minimal amount of text. It is our impression that the graphics tend to “speak for themselves” in most cases.

1. Forty Years of Vision:
URISA in the 1960s, 70s, 80s, and 90s
Dr. Barry Wellar
Department of Geography
University of Ottawa
and
URISA President, 1977 – 1978
Slides for a Panel Session, URISA 2002
Annual Conference and Exposition,
October 26-30, Chicago, Illinios

2. Figure1. Building a Global IS/GIS/LIS/… Network
Russia Spain
Sweden
U.K.
Far East
U.N.
Africa
Hungary
U.S. France
South
URISA Canada
Amer.
Denmark
Australia
OECD Europe
Neth. Mexico
GDR Middle East

3. Figure 2. Expanding IS/GIS/LIS/… Association Linkages
ICMA
GFOA
NGA
ASCE
AURISA
UDMS
AGI
AAG URISA
APWA IAAO
GIS/LIS
SORSA AUTO-CARTO
ASPRS
ACSM
DFD
BURISA
AM/FM
AWWA
NSGIC
MFOA
TRB
APA
NWCAMA

4. Figure 3. Elaborating the “IS Family ”
Air Pollution Monitoring Financial Public Property
Assessing Fire Public Works
Audit Fiscal Real Estate
Auto-CAD Geographic Regional Development
Building Permits Housing Resource Management
Citizen Access Infrastructure Solid Waste
Community Development Land Storm Water
Decision Support Licensing Sustainable Development
Development Monitoring Management Tax
Ecologic Mapping Transportation
Economic Development Municipal Urban
Emergency Response Permitting Utilities
Engineering Planning Water/Wastewater
Environmental Assessment Police Watershed Planning
Environmental Monitoring Property Wetland Protection
Facilities Management Public Notification Zoning

5. Figure 4. The “G” In, Of, and About GIS
Contiguity Geomatic Near(ness) Route
Accessibility
Continent(al) Geometric Neighbour Scale
Adjacency
Coordinate/point Geopolitical Network Shape
Agglomerate
Core Georeference Node Site
Aggregate
Density Globe(al) Object Situation
Amalgamate
Diffusion Grid Orientation Space
Arc
Dimension Hinterland Parcel Sphere
Area/polygon
Disperse(ion) Home Path Spread
Association
Distance Interaction Pattern Strip
Attribute
Periphery Structure
Distribution Intrusion
Border
Perimeter Surface
Edge Layer
Boundary
Place System
Elevation Line
Buffer
Point Topography
Entity Link
Centrality
Pole(ar) Topology
Extrusion Local(ization)
Circle
Polygon(al) Urban
Flow(s) Location
Close(ness)
Position Vector
Function Map
Clump
Proximity Where
Geocode Migration
Cluster
Region Yonder
Geodetic Movement
Concentrate
Relation Zone
Geofactor Nation(al)
Connect

6. Figure 5. Making Connections
Information, Society and Science
Electeds, Staff and Citizens
Government, Business and Academe
Arts, Sciences, Humanities and Technologies
Scope, Scale and Functionality
Standards, Standards and Standards
Complexity, Utility and Reliability
Security, Efficiency and Democracy
Data, Information and Knowledge
Inputs, Throughputs and Outputs
Thinking, Knowing and Acting
Qualitative, Quantitative and Visualization
Procedures
Text, Numerics and Graphics
Exhortation and Demonstration
Higher-order Analysis and Synthesis
Curiosity-driven and Client-driven Research

7. Figure 6. Contributions to Information Industry
Associations, Organizations and Corporations
Programs and Exhibits
Workshops and Workbooks
Ideas and Actions
Human Resources and Technology
Expert Advice and Hands-on Involvement
Testing and Calibrating
Supporting and Promoting
Education and Training
Criticism and Encouragement

8. Figure 7. Contributions to Society/Science
Leading-edge Publications
Leading-edge Conference Programs
State-of-the-Field Reviews and Forecasts
Reality→Data→Information→Knowledge Transforms
IS/GIS/LIS Means of R→D→I→K Transforms
Systems Integration
IS/GIS/LIS/MIS/RIS/TIS/… Innovation and Adoption
Real-World Applications of IS/GIS/LIS/MIS/RIS/TIS/…
Decision Support Systems
Information as an Investment
Democratization of Data/Information Through
IS/GIS/LIS/PPIS/…
Mapping Cause-Effect Connections Through GIS
Performance Measurement Methodology
Better Governance

9. Figure 8. Advancing Research Frontiers
(If the research boat ain’t rockin’ it ain’t movin’.)
• Beyond Same Old Same Old to New and Different
• Beyond Data to Information and Knowledge
• Beyond Analysis to Synthesis
• Beyond Cataloguing to Hypothesizing and Theorizing
• Beyond Indicators to Indexes
• Beyond Description to Explanation and Prediction
• Beyond Events to Processes
• Beyond Incidents to Patterns
• Beyond Concepts to Operations
• Beyond Exploratory to Confirmatory
• Beyond “One-offs” to Generalizations

10. Figure 9. Specifying Enterprise Principles
for IS/GIS/LIS
• Management, Planning, Operations, IT and
Research Are Interdependent IS Functions
• Robust Performance Measurement of IT Systems
and Services is Based on Outputs
• Human Resources, Software, Hardware and
Peripherals Are Interrelated IS Components
• Technological Constraints Are Temporary, and
Institutional and Organizational Capacity-Building
Needs Are Eternal

11. Figure A. Indicative List of What Management
Wants to Do or Expects To Be Able To Do
As a Result of GIS Investments*
Divine the future
Propose new policies
Create new strategies
Discover new processes
Increase productivity
Increase market share
Increase revenues
Improve products/services
*This list is derived from government manuals, journal and proceedings articles, trade magazines, company reports and the
business sections of newspapers. As the alert reader will notice, some of the entries represent competing outcomes or even
polar opposites. Those entries are included to reflect the reality that management - both public and private - often employ
several agendas when specifying outcomes, and the means and consequences of achieving them.
Source: Wellar, B. “Assessing GIS Benefits: The Methodology Dimension”, GIS/LIS Proceedings, 1997

12. Figure B. Indicative List of What Management
Wants to Do or Expects To Be Able To Do
As a Result of GIS Investments*
Increase sales
Minimize liability
Minimize vulnerability
Minimize conflicts
Build capacity
Increase value-added
Increase volunteerism
Improve service delivery
Improve quality of life
*This list is derived from government manuals, journal and proceedings articles, trade magazines, company reports and the
business sections of newspapers. As the alert reader will notice, some of the entries represent competing outcomes or even
polar opposites. Those entries are included to reflect the reality that management - both public and private - often employ
several agendas when specifying outcomes, and the means and consequences of achieving them.
Source: Wellar, B. “Assessing GIS Benefits: The Methodology Dimension”, GIS/LIS Proceedings, 1997

13. Figure C. Indicative List of What Management
Wants to Do or Expects To Be Able To Do
As a Result of GIS Investments*
Ensure equitable distribution of costs/benefits
Cut/cover/recover costs
Diversify holdings/offerings
Support centralization/decentralization
Support concentration/deconcentration
*This list is derived from government manuals, journal and proceedings articles, trade magazines, company reports and
the business sections of newspapers. As the alert reader will notice, some of the entries represent competing outcomes or
even polar opposites. Those entries are included to reflect the reality that management - both public and private - often
empoly several agendas when specifying outcomes, and the means and consequences of achieving them.
Source: Wellar, B. “Assessing GIS Benefits: The Methodology Dimension”, GIS/LIS Proceedings, 1997

14. Figure D. Indicative List of What Management
Wants to Do or Expects To Be Able To Do
As a Result of GIS Investments*
Support intensification/sprawl
Expand market opportunities
Enhance networking/integration
Improve access/participation
Please voters/shareholders
Protect/sustain environment
Support downloading/off-loading
Protect privacy/security of files
*This list is derived from government manuals, journal and proceedings articles, trade magazines, company reports and the
business sections of newspapers. As the alert reader will notice, some of the entries represent competing outcomes or even
polar opposites. Those entries are included to reflect the reality that management - both public and private - often empoly
several agendas when specifying outcomes, and the means and consequences of achieving them.
Source: Wellar, B. “Assessing GIS Benefits: The Methodology Dimension”, GIS/LIS Proceedings, 1997

15. Figure E. Indicative List of What Management
Wants to Do or Expects To Be Able To Do
As a Result of GIS Investments*
Increase capability to engage in new/different
informational activities
Quantify/visualize cumulative spatial impacts
Provide real-time monitoring of spatial
patterns/change
Explain changes in input/output relationships
Produce robust syntheses of forces and implications
of spatial change
Justify decision-making processes, choices and
outcomes
*This list is derived from government manuals, journal and proceedings articles, trade magazines, company reports and the
business sections of newspapers. As the alert reader will notice, some of the entries represent competing outcomes or even
polar opposites. Those entries are included to reflect the reality that management - both public and private - often empoly
several agendas when specifying outcomes, and the means and consequences of achieving them.
Source: Wellar, B. “Assessing GIS Benefits: The Methodology Dimension”, GIS/LIS Proceedings, 1997