New Technology for a New Century
International Conference
FIG Working Week 2001
Seoul, Korea 6–11 May 2001
Plenary Session - Visions on Surveying
SURVEYING AND POLITICS - A RELATIONSHIP OF MUTUAL BENEFIT
Do we still fashion our own future?
by Prof. Holger Magel, Vice President of FIG, Germany
In his keynote address to the XX FIG Congress in Melbourne 1994 Dr
Peter Ellyard pointed out that surveyors are “having less and less
influence on the shape of (their) future” and predicted that the
surveying profession will continue to decline in significance if things
continue as they are (cited by Foster, 1999).
The waning importance of a profession can most easily be seen in the
interest shown by young people: according to this criterion the surveying
profession is experiencing a serious crisis in Western Europe
(Netherlands, Switzerland, Germany and Austria). In Central and Eastern
Europe on the other hand the profession is still enjoying a ‘boom’ - both
as a result and as a reflection of great activity in construction and
reconstruction. In Western Europe the continuing reduction in the number
of students increasingly endangers the traditional and renowned university
centres and study courses for surveying, at the least the number of
teaching chairs in surveying is endangered. The reasons for this are still
being explored - is the growing competition or ‘blurring’ with other
disciplines, study courses and professions (e.g. in the field of
geo-information), is the continuing low level of recruitment in the public
sector or are the excessively narrow professional fields of surveyors in
private practice the cause? Were we sleeping when opportunities arose in
new markets such as town and country planning (e.g. EU structural
development programmes) or in real estate and land management? It was
significant that in the two previous international congresses in Germany -
rural 21 and urban 21 - only a handful of surveyors were represented. Do
we lack that ‘clear vision’ of our profession for which Peter Ellyard
appealed in Melbourne and which would be fascinating for our society, for
the economy, and for the current generation of students? FIG President
Bob Foster at the InterGEO 1999 in Hanover expressed himself as
follows on this point (loc. cit.): “We devote little effort to self
promotion, assuming that the value of our work will speak for itself”.
And: As a result of technological change in our previous professional
field “We must broaden the scope of our activities. Where for example
planning, valuation and management of land are not considered ‘surveying’,
associations in those countries should seek to include them. It will not
be easy. Legislation, educational systems and institutional arrangements
must be addressed. Political considerations may play a role”.
In my view it is less a case of ‘may play’ than of ‘play’.
Political considerations play a role ...
At the present time education centres for surveying, professional
associations and administrative authorities are working almost feverishly
on ‘clear visions’ and self promotion, in other words on image and
publicity campaigns, which are intended to reach society, industry and
young people. It now becomes in part painfully obvious how big the divide
is between surveying experts on the one hand and politics and society on
the other. The latter are needed now more urgently then ever e.g. to
consolidate or to expand new fields of professional activities, to provide
a firm legal basis for new surveying products (e.g. GIS reference data) or
to regulate a sensible relationship between the public and private
surveying professions, to give financial support to commercial activities
in other countries or to new academic facilities, etc., quite apart from
the help which is always necessary and which they can provide and the
expert understanding which they can contribute when the need or otherwise
of university reforms is being assessed. A big paradox presents itself
here: on the one hand, as a result of political changes or global
campaigns or actual crisis management, there is a growing demand for the
services provided by surveyors and they are highly valued in international
relations and institutions, and on the other hand many ‘traditional’
surveyors have difficulty in making contacts with politics and
politicians. Is it simply chance or is it significant that e.g. almost no
surveyors are represented or play a substantial role in German federal and
state Parliaments?! How will we then succeed in conducting the necessary
‘lobbying’, now indispensable in democratic societies, for sensible
university training, for the abolition of professional or market
structures which are obsolete or biased towards one side only, for the
tremendously important political decision on the use of surveying
reference systems for the booming GIS markets etc.? It still appears to be
often the case - and this is above all widespread in university and
academic circles - that politics and political activity, and particularly
contact with politicians, are regarded as being somewhat disreputable and
at the least are little loved. I believe that this attitude is wrong and
damages our profession and professional prospects. I should prefer to make
an appeal that we should all - and not only the ‘functionaries’ of our
profession - depending of course on individual possibilities - continually
seek to have contact with political life and with politicians as
representatives of our society and to convince them of our indispensable
services to society. It is only through continual contact and by
establishing interest and personal involvement on the part of our
political contacts that we can be successful; that means that we must
invite politicians to attend our national and international congresses and
give them the opportunity to speak and to take part in discussions. This
will enable them to become acquainted with our concerns and with our
profession. It is of no use whatsoever when we continually assure each
other at our meetings of our importance. It is other people, the decision
takers in politics, industry and society, who have to be aware of this. In
one country it will be the surveyors employed in the public sector who
find it easier to influence politicians, in another it will be the
surveyors in the private sector and in private practice who have easier
access to politics. Other contacts with politicians should also be
systematically be developed, e.g. by inviting them to university
conferences and in reverse by the attendance of surveyors at political
congresses on future development etc. In this way we can make it clear to
those engaged in political life that we can make, both nationally and
internationally, a major contribution to the physical and social
development of states on the way to a better fairness and a higher quality
of life. We are concerned here either with tasks of reconstruction (e.g.
Kosovo), or of transformation (e.g. countries in transition), or finally
and generally with development tasks in developing countries.
Every surveyor knows or should know: his services are not politically
neutral or free of value judgments - his contribution e.g. to the
implementation of a sustainable development in the comprehensive sense of
RIO 1992 (including the theme of ‘Women’s Access to Land’) are formative
policy based on democratic values! Surveying services are naturally also
susceptible to political abuse - who is not aware of that! There are
enough examples of this. Surveyors must not therefore carry out their role
mechanically but should advise on policy openly, responsibly and on an
ethical basis, and should act in each case in the light of the actual
circumstances of the task and of the country concerned. It is only through
this critical dialogue between politics and surveying that a relationship
of mutual benefit will emerge. This demands from the surveyor that he is
not only a ‘homo technicus’ but is also a ‘homo politicus’. The
universities are called on to prepare students in this respect much more
than they have done hitherto.
The FIG shows us the way - catalogue of future tasks
There is no doubt about it: this political work which will be
indispensable in future must be carried out at the national level with
fresh energy every day by every one of us. It is however a great help that
the countries and member associations can rely on the FIG and can obtain
ideas and points of reference from its successful supra-national political
work. What the previous and present Bureaux have achieved in this sector
in recent years with their commissions, Task Forces, hosting member
association as well as with their FIG-UN Liaison Director Ian
Williamson is the best, because it is the clearest, example of the
fact that Surveying and Politics can become a relationship of mutual
benefit. By way of example can be mentioned the Bogor and Bathurst
Declaration, the Memoranda of Understandings (MoU) with UN authorities,
participation in global campaigns and much more. In this global (socio-)
political engagement our profession is challenged across its entire depth
and growing width in the sense of the Singapore vision of the FIG and
covered by the impressive variety of the themes of our 10 commissions.
Against this background I should like in future to see the following
policy for surveyors:
- Seeking, continuing or deepening the dialogue with national and
international politics and with institutions concerned with politics.
- Better understanding of, and possibly influence on, changes in
society and politics (Dale, 2000). For this we must also think and argue
‘more politically’ and sell our services better.
Dale: “Local professional bodies in particular need to target
politicians and the general public and explain to them why investment in
geomatics brings wealth.” (loc. cit. 2001)
- Obvious and serious involvement in and implementation of major
global and national political campaigns, e.g. by observing the
principles of urban governance, secure tenure or quite generally the
objectives of RIO, Istanbul II etc. in the exercise of our profession.
Ethics and morality are here an indispensable component of our
understanding and engagement!
The two FIG documents, FIG-AGENDA 21 and Women’s Access to Land, are a
very important contribution to building a better world.
- Extending university education to cover skills outside our
particular discipline and to provide a broad general overview. The
objective must be a well grounded specialised generalist. The FIG
commissions as well as member associations can be helpful here. FIG
academic membership and the FIG Foundation are becoming of increasing
importance for many member associations and their universities.
- Achieving a fair balance between all branches and facets of the
structure of the surveying profession (e.g. between the public and
private sectors in national and international engagements) by a
collegial consciousness that we are all in the same boat and by
objective information and by presentation of examples of best practice (Magel,
1999).
- Providing greater opportunities for further education and additional
qualifications for member associations as well as locally in the regions
and drawing attention to central opportunities(e.g. the new course for a
Master’s degree ‘Land Management and Land Tenure’ at the Technical
University of Munich). This is a major function of the FIG Surveying
Education Database.
These are my wishes - with them Bob Foster’s demands in Frankfurt in
1999 (loc. cit.) will perhaps also find fulfillments:
“We must embrace the whole spectrum of surveying in its broadest
definition and we must speak to the world with a single voice of clarity
and unity.”
It can gladly be asserted of Theo Bogaerts, at the culmination
of a successful academic and scientific career, that he devoted himself in
notable manner to the building of “a better and fairer world” - and he
also did this in the context of international FIG activities.
Literature
- FOSTER, B. (1999): 21st Century Challenges for the Surveying
Profession. ZfV 12/1999
- DALE, P. (2000): Surveying Engineering and Global Land Management.
ZfV 5/2000
- DALE, P (2001): Capacity Building in Geomatics. Geoinformatics April
2001
- MAGEL, H. (1999): Vermessungswesen vor neuen Herausforderungen -
Chance für den Freien Beruf? ZfV 4/1999
CONTACTS
Univ. Prof. Dr-Ing. Holger Magel
Vice President of FIG
Chair of Land Readjustment and Land Development
Technische Universität München
Institute of Geodesy, GIS and Land Management
Arcisstrasse 21
D-80290 München
GERMANY
Tel. + 49 89 289 22535
Fax + 49 89 289 23933
E-mail: magel@landentwicklung-muenchen.de
|
