Issue 2 (200), article 1


Cybernetics and Computer Engineering, 2020, 2(200)

CHABANIUK V.S.,1,2 PhD (Phys.&Math.),
Senior Researcher of the Cartography Department,
Institute of Geography, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine,
Director of “Intelligence Systems-GEO” LLC,

Head of Production of “Intelligence systems-GEO” LLC,

1 Institute of Geography, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
44, Volodymyrsk str., 01030, Kyiv, Ukraine
2“Intelligence systems-GEO” LLC,
6/44, Mikilsko-Slobidska Str., 02002, Kyiv, Ukraine.


Introduction. The practical experience of creation, implementation and operation of geoinformation system (GIS) for territory management allows to identify their critically important properties. GIS with critical properties do not fit the conventional definition because they are more advanced systems. Special attention to critical properties helps to reduce the risks involved in the development and implementation of such GIS, as well as to increase the effectiveness of their use for territory management.

The purpose of the paper is to analyze the use of GIS developed by the authors for the management of large territories and to determine their main critical properties. Critical GIS properties are being sought to manage territories that: 1) repeat for all such GIS, 2) differentiate them from conventional GIS, 3) must be taken into account when creating new GIS.

Results. The critical properties that are mandatory also for modern GIS for territory management are as follow: 1) the availability of education-scientific, production and management components, 2) the availability of a relatively independent atlas solution, 3) the obligation to use portals, 4) the need to supplement the territory modeling of their metamodeling.

Conclusions. Abductive inferences after analyzing the practical experience of creation, implemention and operation of GIS for territory management allow to confirm the presence of critical properties of GIS.  Without any such property, we can speak about a corresponding critical shortcoming of the GIS project, and this project is likely to be a failure.

Keywords: geoinformation system, territory management, spatial data, abduction, critical property

Download full text!


1. URL: (Last accessed: 28.01.2020).

2. Svitlychny O.O., Plotnitsky S.V. Fundamentals of geoinformatics: Textbook. Sumy, 2006, 295 p. (in Ukrainian)

3. Kapralov E.G., Koshkarev A.V., Tikunov V.S. Fundamentals of geoinformatics. In 2 b. Textbook for stud. univ. M. Publishing Center “Academy”, 2004. Book 1. 352 p. Book 2. 400 p. (in Russian)

4. Star J., Estes J. Geographic Information Systems. An Introduction. Prentice Hall, 1990. 303 p.

5. URL:Геоинформационная_система (Last accessed: 25.01.2020)

6. URL:Геоінформаційна_система (Last accessed: 25.01. 2020)

7. Cowen David J. GIS versus CAD versus DBMS: What Are the Differences? Photo-grammetric Engineering and Remote Sensing. 1998, Vol. 54, No 11, pp. 1551–1555.

8. Rudenko L.G., Chabanyuk V.S. Foundations of the conception of the multigoal GIS of Ukraine. Ukrainian Geographical Journal. 1994, No 3, pp. 22–34. (in Ukrainian)

9. Miller Harvey J. The data avalanche is here. Shouldn’t we be digging? Journal of Regional Science. 2010, Vol. 50, No 1, pp. 181–201.

10. Sventek Yu.V. Theoretical and practical aspects of modern cartography. Editorial URSS. 1999, 76 p. (in Russian)

11. Rumbaugh James, Jacobson Ivar, Booch Grady. The Unified Modeling Language Reference Manual. Addison-Wesley, 2005, 2nd Ed. 721 p.

12. Karpinsky Yu.O., Lyashchenko A.A. Geographic information: the reference model is the first fundamental national standard, harmonized with international standards of ISO 19100 / Lviv. Modern achievements of geodetic science and production. Collection of scientific works of the Western Geodetic Society. Publishing House of Lviv Polytechnic National University. 2010, Issue I (19), pp. 198–203. (in Ukrainian)

13. Prister B.S., Tabatchnyi L.J., Chabanyuk V.S. Liquidation of the Chernobyl After-Effects and GIS. Proceedings. Canadian GIS Conference (6th – 10th of June, Ottawa). Ottawa, Canada, 1994, pp. 1025–1035.

14. Palko S., Glieca M., Dombrowski A. Geographic information systems for the Chernobyl makers in Ukraine. One decade after Chernobyl: consequences of the accident. International Conference (8th – 12th of Apr., Vienna). Vienna, Austria, 1996. Poster presentations, Vol. 2, pp. 107–113.

15. URL: (Last accessed: 26.01.2020)

16. Pretzsch G., Lhomme V., Selesnew A., Roloff R., Artmann A., Berberich G. The French-German Initiative for Chornobyl. Programme 1: Safety State of the Sarcophagus. GRS/IRSN – 3. 2005, ISBN 3-931995-83-6, 68 p.

17. Deville-Cavelin G., Biesold H., Brun-Yaba C., Artmann A. The French-German Initiative for Chornobyl. Programme 2: Study of the Radioecological Consequences. Synthesis Report. GRS/IRSN – 4.1, 2007, ISBN 3-931995-95-X. 104 p.

18.  Tirmarche M. The French-German Initiative for Chernobyl. Programme 3: Study of the Health Effects. GRS/IRSN – 5. 2006, ISBN 3-931995-85-2, 64 p.

19. Falkenberg E.D., Lindgreen P., Eds. Information System Concepts: An In-depth Analysis. Amsterdam, 1989. 357 p.

Received 10.03.2020