THE STATUS OFTOPOGRAPHIC
MAPPING IN
THE WORLDA UNGGIM - ISPRSPROJECT2012 - 2015

Contents
Abstract ...................................................................................................................................... 1
1

Origins of the Project ......................................................................................................... 1

2

The UNGGIM-ISPRS Project ............................................................................................ 6

3

The Questionnaire .............................................................................................................. 64

Content of the Database ..................................................................................................... 7

5

Mapping Contributions by Private Industry ..................................................................... 29
5.1

Google .................................................................................................................... 29

5.1.1

Google Earth ...................................................................................................... 30

5.1.2

Google Maps ...................................................................................................... 30

5.1.3

Google Street Map ............................................................................................. 30

5.1.4

Google Ground Truth ......................................................................................... 31

5.2

Microsoft Bingmaps............................................................................................... 32

5.3

Yandex ................................................................................................................... 33

5.4

HERE ..................................................................................................................... 33

5.5

TomTom ................................................................................................................ 34

6

Mapping by Military Organizations ................................................................................. 34

7

Other Mapping Efforts ..................................................................................................... 34

8

Summary of Results ......................................................................................................... 35

9

Future Activities ............................................................................................................... 35

10 References ........................................................................................................................ 35
Appendix I

Original Questionnaire ................................................................................... 36

Appendix II

Maps from Reports ......................................................................................... 39

Appendix III

Maps from the Internet ................................................................................... 49

Appendix IV

Maps from Staatsbibliothek Berlin ................................................................. 54

THE STATUS OF TOPOGRAPHIC MAPPING IN THE WORLDA UNGGIM - ISPRS PROJECT 2012 - 2015

G. Konecny*, U. Breitkopf*, A. Radtke*, K. Lee*** Institute of Photogrammetry and GeoInformation, Leibniz University Hannover, Germany** Eastview Geospatial, Minneapolis, MN, USA

Abstract
In December 2011 UNGGIM initiated a cooperative project with ISPRS to resume the former
UN Secretariat studies on the status of topographic mapping in the world conducted between
1968 and 1986. After the design of a questionnaire with 27 questions, the UNGGIM
Secretariat sent the questionnaires to the UN member states. 115 replies were received fromthe 193 member states and regions thereof. Regarding the global data coverage and age theUN questionnaire survey was supplemented by data from the Eastview database. For each of
the 27 questions an interactive viewer was programmed permitting the analysis of the results.
The authoritative data coverage at the various scale ranges has greatly increased between
1986 and 2012. Now a 30% 1:25 000 map data coverage and a 75% 1:50 000 map data
coverage has been completed. Nevertheless there is still an updating problem as date for somecountries are 10 to 30 years old. Private Industry with Google, Microsoft and Navigation
system providers have undertaken huge efforts to supplement authoritative mapping. For
critical areas on the globe MGCP committed to military mapping at 1:50 000. ISPRS has
decided to make such surveys a sustainable issue by establishing a working group.

1

Origins of the ProjectIn 1986 the Department of Technical Cooperation for Development of the United Nations
Secretariat has completed the last survey on the „Status of World Topographic and Cadastral
Mapping“. The results of the survey were published by the United Nations, New York 1990
in World Cartography, Vol. XIX. The text was submitted by the UN Secretariat as document
E/CONF 78/BP7 in 1986 prepared by A.J. Brandenberger and S.K. Ghosh of the Faculty ofForestry and Geodesy at Laval University, Quebec, Canada. It referred to previous surveys
submitted by the Department of Technical Cooperation for Development of the United
Nations Secretariat in 1968 published in World Cartography XIV and in 1974 and 1980
published in World Cartography XVII.

1

The paper published in World Cartography XIX in 1990 summarized the progress made in
topographic mapping across the globe between 1968 and 1980 in 4 scale categories:
range I;
range II;
range III;
range IV;

scales between 1:1000 and 1: 31 680
scales between 1:40 000 and 1:75 000
scales between 1:100 000 and 1:126 720
scales between 1:140 000 and 1:253 440

These ranges represent the more recently standardized scales:
range I;
range II;
range III;
range IV;

scale 1:25 000
scale 1:50 000
scale 1:100 000
scale 1:250 000

While scale in the age of digital cartography has changed the meaning, the scale ranges
nevertheless maintain their significance with respect to the resolution of mappable details.
The 1986 survey covered the following number of countries or territories:
Africa53 countries
North America
24 countries
South America
12 countries
Europe39 countries
Asia
40 countries
USSR
1 country
Oceania
11 countries
Antarctica was not included in the survey.

4 territories
13 territories
3 territories
4 territories
3 territories
0 territories
17 territories

Source of the data obtained by the surveys were completed questionnaires, sent by the UN
Secretariat to the UN member countries, plus additional surveys made directly by Laval
University for UN member countries not having answered the questionnaires, for non-UN
member countries and for territories under foreign administration. The result of the survey
was for each region and for the different scale ranges:
AfricaNorth America
South America
EuropeAsia
USSR
Oceania2

range I
2.3%
41.3%
9.7%
92.5%
16.0%
>5%
13.3%

range II
29.7%
68.2%
29.0%
93.8%
62.7%
>60%
15.6%

range III
20.6%
8.0%
44.2%
81.3%
65.4%
100%
36.1%

range IV
86.8%
92.8%
50.4%
95.7%
92.0%
100%
99.8%

The areas covered by the survey were:range I
75.8%
90.7%
100%
98.0%
87.8%
100%
94.1%

AfricaNorth America
South America
EuropeAsia
USSR
Oceania

range II
100%
100%
100%
90.2%
90.9%
100%
94.5%

range III
100%
100%
100%
97.25%
87.6%
100%
94.3%

range IV
100%
99.5%
100%
96.7%
90.2%
100%
99.9%

World summary:range I
90.1%
17.9%
13.3%
11.6%
7.7%

area of survey 1986
1986 map coverage
1980 map coverage
1974 map coverage
1968 map coverage

range II
97.4%
49.3%
42.2%
35.0%
23.4%

range III
97.0%
46.4%
42.2%
40.5%
38.2%

range IV
97.75%
87.5%
80.0%
80.5%
81.0%

Since the last survey in 1986 considerable progress has been made in data coverage:
range I
33,5%

2012 map coverage

range II
81.4%

range III
67.5%

range IV
98.4%

Map coverage
100,0%+0,49%
90,0%80,0%+1,02%
81,0%

85,6%
80,5%

81,4%

80,0%

70,0%

+1,28%

60,0%+0,87%

50,0%
40,0%

10,0%

67,5%

+1,07% 48,1%+0,28%
42,2%+0,38% 40,5%+0,51% 45,0%
42,2%
38,2%
+1,20%

30,0%
20,0%

98,4%

+0,67%+0,65%+0,28%

7,7% 11,6%
0,0%
1968

1974

13,3%
1980

Range II(≈1:50,000)
Range III(≈1:100,000)

35,0%+1,93%
23,4%

Range I(≈1:25,000 or
greater)

33,5%

Range IV(≈1:250,000)+0,51%
16,1%

1986

1992

1998

2004

2010

Year

Chart 1: Percentages of total world area covered in each scale category, 1968-1974-1980-1986-2012
3

35

30

25

20

15

10

5

0
II
III
IV
37,6%
62,3%
99,9%

Area
(106 km²)

I
4,7%

Africa

I
II
III
IV
46,8%
34,9%
80%
95,1%
North America

Europe

I
II
III
IV
98,1%
99,5%
99,6%
100%

Area for which no data are available
Area covered by topographic mapping

I
II
III
IV
10,5%
92,3%
86,4%
93,5%
South America

Asia

I
II
III
IV
18,8%
76,6%
94%
99,2%

Chart 2: Area covered by topographic mapping on four scale ranges, by geographical region, 2012

I
II
III
IV
25,9%
96%
47%
99,8%

Australia andOceania4

While the surveys presented in 1986 did not concentrate on map revision on a global basis,
they nevertheless derived an update rate for the four scale ranges:
range I
range II
range III
range IV
update rate 1986
3.2%
1.8%
2.7%
3.6%
This points to the fact, that in 1986 the maps at the scale relevant to national planning
operations 1:50 000 were hopelessly out of date.
45,0
40,0
35,0
30,0
25,0
20,0
15,0
10,0
5,0
0,0

GlobalAfricaAsia

EuropeNorth
AmericaSouth
America

22,8Australia
andOceania
22,4Range I

22,4

24,2

13,8

35,4

9,8

Range II

26,3

35,1

27,2

16,5

17,1

26,3

34,7

Range III

31,2

36,3

35,3

29,0

21,1

29,2

30,1

Range IV

37,0

43,7

38,0

30,4

21,8

44,0

31,5

Chart 3: Average map age in years counting from 2012

Other aspects of the surveys conducted in 1980 were directed toward the existence of geodetic
networks and their density. In 1980 there existed 3.67 M horizontal and 3.16 M verticalcontrol monuments on the globe, but again their density varied from 2.66 km2 per horizontal
control monument and 3.61 km2 per vertical control monument in Europe to 232 km2 in
Africa with an average of 42.5 km2 per horizontal control monument to 46.4 km2 per verticalcontrol monument.
Today the GNSS technology makes control point densities irrelevant, except for the case,when old map data need to be referenced to a global datum.
In 1980 the national mapping agencies possessed 12 120 theodolites, 5790 precise leveling
instruments and 1914 EDM devices, 162 airplanes for aerial photography, 267 aerial survey
cameras and 3120 photogrammetric stereo plotting instruments. Disregarded in that survey
are instruments owned by companies mapping for governments under contract.
Again, the availability of geodetic instrumentation is not of essence to judge progress any
more. The attempts of 1980 to determine the existing manpower of the national mapping
agencies for each region were based on few countries only (e.g. Algeria and Nigeria for
Africa, the USGS in the USA, the Surveys and Mapping Branch in Canada, the IGN France inEurope). These data were used to extrapolate the requirements in other countries with theattempt to develop a budget of global expenditures, yielding a global sum of US$ 868 million,at that time 0.010% of the gross national product, while the global surveying and mapping
activities at that time were estimated to be between 8 to 9 billion US$ per year. A program for5increasing the expenditures to 0.02% of the GNP was recommended in the report to meet theneed for lacking mapping coverage and lacking map updates.
The financing of geospatial information is a very complex issue. To track progress these tasks
should now be transferred to another UNGGIM Working GroupThe rather inaccurate and inconclusive results of 1986 may have discouraged the UN
Secretariat in continuing the past surveys due to lack of a budget for this purpose.

2

The UNGGIM-ISPRS Project

The United Nations Regional Cartographic Conferences (UNRCC) for the Americas and for
Asia and the Pacific nevertheless continued to recommend to the Secretariat to continue thestudies on the global status of mapping. One of these resolutions of the UNRRCC for theAmericas in 2009 gave the mandate to the Secretariat for a new survey.
This happened at the time, when UNGGIM (United Nations Global Geospatial Information
Management) was created as a new structure.
ISPRS approached the director of UNGGIM in 2011 to start a joint project on the survey ofthe status of topographic geospatial information,•

because the issue is of global interest•

because new technologies, such as GNSS (GPS, GLONASS), digital aerial mapping,high resolution satellites for mapping, digital photogrammetry and GIS have takenover as new mapping methodologies•

because large private organizations such as the navigation industry (HERE, TomTom),
Google Earth and Microsoft Bingmaps have entered the mapping effort, which waspreviously the domain of the national mapping agencies.

The project was approved in December 2011 by Dr. Paul Cheung, director of UNGGIM atthat time, who nominated Dr. Amor Laaribi as UNGGIM contact, and by Chen Jun, Presidentof ISPRS, who nominated Prof. Gottfried Konecny of Leibniz University Hannover as ISPRS
contact.
In January 2012 a questionnaire to the UN member states was designed, mutually discussed,translated to French, Russian and Spanish and mailed to the contacts of the UNGGIM
Secretariat in the UN member states. Ms. Vilma Frani of the UNGGIM Secretariat sent the
replies to Leibniz University Hannover, where they were placed in a database designed by
Uwe Breitkopf for further analysis.

3

The Questionnaire

The jointly designed questionnaire consists of five parts including 27 Questions:





6

PART A: Background Information
PART B: National Topographic Mapping Coverage
PART C: National Imagery Acquisition
PART D: National Surveying and Cadastral Coverage
PART E: Organization

See Appendix I for the original questionnaire.
Until June 2015 altogether 115 responses have been received from 193 UN member states orregions thereof. In addition, there are 51 non-UN member countries and territories, which arealso covered by map data. These map data for 244 UN member states and regions weregenerated in UN member states, but these have in general no direct responsibility for mappingthese territories.
Fig. 1 shows the 115 states or regions from where replies have been received, which haveanswered the UNGGIM-ISPRS questionnaire.
Answers were almost complete from Europe (with the exception of Belarus), they weresatisfactory from the Americas (with the exception of Argentina) and in Oceania. In Asia
India, Pakistan, Myanmar, Kazakhstan, some Central Asian countries and Indonesia did notparticipate in the survey. In Africa about half the countries did not share their information.
Nevertheless the response by 115 member states and regions thereof from 193 UN Member
States is considered a success by the UN.

Fig. 1: 115 countries have replied the Questionnaire until June 2015

4

Content of the Database

While not all of the 27 questions need to be answered globally, this is, however, important forquestions 1 and 2, since they characterize the global data coverage at the different scale
ranges and their age of the data.
To assess the global status of map coverage the Eastview database is a fundamental
component to answer these questions. Dr. Kent Lee, CEO of Eastview has kindly agreed tomake the missing data available from their database.
7

The map sources at Eastview include locally produced (e.g. by national mapping agencies) as
well as military map series, see Appendix II-13 and 14 as an example.
Besides Eastview other sources were analyzed to fill the gaps in the study and estimate global
coverage. These include UN reports accompanying the questionnaires, internet portals fornational mapping data, the cartographic database of the German State library of Berlin basedin part on the Geokatalog of the map vendor ILH Stuttgart and others see Appendix II to IV
for examples.
Regarding question 1 Fig. 2 to Fig. 5 show the global coverage in the scale ranges 1: 25 000
or greater, 1: 50 000, 1: 100 000 and 1: 250 000.
Europe, the Russian Federation, Turkey, Japan and the continental USA are well represented
in the 1:25 000 scale range, as well as the Western part of China. In the remainder of theworld that scale range only covers a small part of the countries.
The scale range 1:50 000 and larger, on the other hand covers the continents of Europe, North
America, Asia and the Arab world, most of South America and New Zealand. Australia andAlgeria are covered to about 40% to 60% and Mongolia to about 30%. Only in the desert
areas of the Africa and South America the coverage is less than 15%.
Australia and Papua-Niugini are fully covered by 1:100 000 maps, as well as Latin America.
With few exceptions the land areas of the globe are covered at the 1:250 000 scale range withthe exception of Greenland with 45% and Antarctica with 4%.

Fig. 2: Map coverage at scale 1:25 000 or greater

8Fig. 3: Map coverage at scale 1:50 000

Fig. 4: Map coverage at scale 1:100 000

9Fig. 5: Map coverage at scale 1:250 000

With only 59% of the UN member states having answered the questionnaire, other sources
had to be utilized to assess the global coverage. Chart 4 and Fig. 6 to Fig. 9 give the source ofthe Meta data information for Fig. 2 to Fig. 5.
Concentrating on the globally important scale range 1:50 000 only 22% of the relevant
information stems from the questionnaires received. 5.4% are added from country reports to
UNGGIM, 2.9% from Internet portals. 12% of the metadata came from Eastview, 19.1% fromthe State Library Berlin plus 5.8% from other sources and 17.4% on what has previously been
compiled by Laval University in the 1986 study, totaling 91% of the information.
241 samples
100,00%80,00%

Questionnaire

40,00%

18,3%
3,3%
3,3%
4,1%
13,3%
3,3%
2,1%

20,00%

32,4%

60,00%

22,0%
5,4%
2,9%
8,7%
3,3%
19,1%
2,5%
3,3%
17,4%

14,9%
2,9%
3,3%
4,1%
13,7%
5,0%
0,4%
22,0%

0,00%
Range I
1:25.000or greater
no data:
19,9%

19,5%
2,5%
15,8%

37,8%
5,0%
0,8%
7,5%

Range II
1:50.000

Range III
1:100.000

Range IV
1:250.000

15,4%

32,4%

9,5%

Chart 4: Data source for coverage per scale category
10

Questionnaire addition or country
reportInternet-Portal for national mapping
data
Locally produced maps available at
EVG
Military maps available at EVG
Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin
Ibero-American Institute
Other source
Data from mid-1986 study by Laval
University, Quebec, CanadaFig. 6: Source of Meta information for map coverage in range I - 1:25,000

Fig. 7: Source of Meta information for map coverage in range II - 1:50,000

11Fig. 8: Source of Meta information for map coverage in range III - 1:100,000

Fig. 9: Source of Meta information for map coverage in range IV - 1:250,000

12Fig. 10 to Fig. 13 shows the equivalent data to Fig. 2 to Fig. 5 for the year 1986, depicting thehuge progress made through technology from 1986 to 2012. Also Fig. 14 highlights thechange in map coverage between 1986 and 2012.

Fig. 10: Map coverage 1986 at scale 1:25 000 or greater

Fig. 11: Map coverage 1986 at scale 1:50 000

13Fig. 12: Map coverage 1986 at scale 1:100 000

Fig. 13: Map coverage 1986 at scale 1:250 000

14Fig. 14: Change in map coverage between 1986 and 2012 for range II - 1:50,000

This answers question 2 at least in part.
The change map in Fig. 14 indicates where the most relevant changes have occurred between
1986 and 2012: most significantly in Latin America, in Sub-Saharan Africa, but also in China,
Mexico, Iran and Turkey, as well as to a somewhat lesser degree in the Russian Federation, inAustralia and in Canada.
The other 25 questions characterize the general global infrastructure for provision of map
data. Fig. 15 to Fig. 39 give answers to the most relevant questions from 3 to 27 in the listed
categories. They are summarized as follows:
1) Restricted access to data: While there are no restrictions in the Americas, in Europe, inmost of Africa and in Oceania, restrictions to the data for the public exist in the
Russian Federation and in most parts of Asia (e.g. China, Iran, Saudi Arabia). See Fig.
15.
2) Sale of data versus free of charge availability of data: In the Americas data are
generally free of charge. They are sold to the public or to governmental users in
Europe, Africa, Asia and Australia. See Fig. 16.
3) With the exception of most parts of Europe, South Africa, Iran, Saudi Arabia mostother countries use satellite imagery for national data updating. See Fig. 19.
4) Crowd sourcing is only introduced in the USA, France, Spain, Poland and Finland.
Fig. 20.
5) While mapping in the Russian Federation, in China, in Mexico and in France is done
in-house by the national mapping agencies, in the USA, Canada Brazil, South Africa,
15

Australia, Japan and Iran mapping is also done by outsourcing or exclusively byoutsourcing, like in Saudi Arabia and Namibia. See Fig. 21.
6) Almost all countries use ortho imaging as additional source to supplement mapping.
See Fig. 26.
7) Interest in 3D mapping is prevalent in Europe, China, the Russian Federation,
Australia and Brazil, while in North America, Scandinavia and South Africa
governmental mapping agencies have no direct interest see Fig. 27.
8) National cadastral coverage is lacking in the Americas and in Saudi Arabia. See Fig.
28.
9) With the exception of Great Britain all national mapping agencies are funded bygovernment. See Fig. 33.
10) Few countries have answered budgetary details. But for those, which answered, thefunding per area is highest in Britain, France, the Scandinavian countries and in Japan.
See Fig. 34.
11) The number of mapping staff per area is highest in China, Japan, Europe, Mexico and
Kenya. See Fig. 35.
12) The delivery of map data via web services is practiced in North America, in most ofEurope, in China and in South Africa. See Fig. 37.

Fig. 15: Question 3. Restricted access or limited circulation to maps and/or data

16

Fig. 16: Question 4. Maps and/or digital data sold to the public or data free of charge

Fig. 17: Question 5. Cycle of map and data revision by complete mapping, i.e. revision of a national series ormapping of changed features17

Fig. 18: Question 6. Methods of national data revision and map updating

Fig. 19: Question 6. Use of satellite imagery for national data revision and map updating18

Fig. 20: Question 6. Use of crowd sourcing for national data revision and map updating

Fig. 21: Question 7. Mapping and map updating done in-house or by outsourcing

19Fig. 22: Question 8: National aerial photography acquisition program

Fig. 23: Question 8. Using digital and/or analogue photogrammetry20

Fig. 24: Question 9: National satellite imagery acquisition program

Fig. 25: Question 10. Acquiring and/or using other imagery types (such as LiDAR, RADAR, etc.)21

Fig. 26: Question 12. Production of orthophotos and orthophotomaps

Fig. 27: Question 14. Production or intention to produce, 3D urban and rural landscape models and/or productvisualization
22

Fig. 28: Question 16. National coverage of cadastral maps and/or data available

Fig. 29: Question 16. National Mapping Agency (NMA) responsible for surveying and/or land titles and cadastre

23

Fig. 30: Question 18. Cadastral maps based on geodetic control

Fig. 31: Question 19. Property boundaries monumented in the field24

Fig. 32: Question 20. Update transaction of property maps and/or data

Fig. 33: Question 22. National topographic mapping, imagery acquisition, surveying and cadastral programs
funded by your national Government25

Fig. 34: Question 23. Annual mapping budget of the National Mapping Organization converted to million US$
per square kilometer of the country area

M-US$
45,00

41,45

Africa (10 samples)

40,00
Asia (10 samples)
35,00

30,69

30,00

25,96

Australia and Oceania (1sample)Europe (19 samples)

25,00
20,00

North America (5 samples)

15,35

15,00

5,00

South America (2 samples)

8,77

10,00
3,74

Global (47 samples)
1,35

Chart 5: Question 23. Average annual budget 2012 per continental region converted to million-US$

26

Fig. 35: Question 24. Number of mapping staff in the Organization as hundreds of square kilometers of country
area per person

Fig. 36: Question 25. Regulatory or institutional arrangements mandating the organization to fulfil its role as thelead mapping agency

27

Fig. 37: Question 26. Delivery of different map and data products via web services

Fig. 38: Question 27. Methods of archival for the national data sets

28

Fig. 39: Question 27. Using servers/databases as method of archival for the national data sets

5

Mapping Contributions by Private Industry

As has been demonstrated, official and authoritative mapping by governments provides areliable geospatial infrastructure, which is used for many public and private applications, butwhich is costly, difficult and slow to maintain. For that reason private enterprises havesucceeded to launch several initiatives to provide faster update solutions in areas, which
require fast update solutions. These are based on different cost and accuracy models for
specific applications, which require fast updates. These applications do not replace official
authoritative cartography, but they supplement it, as all such efforts utilize official
cartographic products as a base to start their value added operations.

5.1 Google
Google´s prime aim is to provide a location based information system for uses of the public.
What the general user wants is quick orientation about how to locate a specific object, such asa landmark, a store, a restaurant or a service provider and how to drive to it.
Geometric accuracy within the context of the neighborhood topography is of lesser
importance than the addressability and the access by roads or pathways. In general, businessadvertising provides for the revenue to establish and to maintain the system.
Google Inc. operates by different projects, of which the following are the most important fromthe cartographic point of view.

29

5.1.1 Google Earth
Existing orthophotography coverage with ground sample distances between 0.1m and 0.5m aswell as high resolution satellite imagery coverage with ground sample distances (GSD)
between 0.5m to 2m and beyond provide the geometric background image information, which
can be interpreted by the user with respect to the searched objects, such as buildings, roads,
vegetation, water surfaces. While ortho images have a high geometric accuracy related to
ground features commensurate with the GSD, this is not so for building tops and tree tops.
Geometric accuracy even deteriorates more for high resolution satellite imagery, since most ofthese images have been acquired with inclinations with respect to the vertical, unless stereo
imaging permitted the generation of ortho imagery. The coverage is global for all land areas.
Nevertheless, despite some of these shortcomings with respect to official cartography, Google
Earth can easily satisfy the geolocation demands for the uses Google Earth has been designed
for.

5.1.2 Google Maps
Google Maps is a product usually derived, wherever possible, from authoritative cartography.
It has been designed to supplement Google Earth with a cartographic output containing place
names, road names and building addresses. It serves the ideal function of superimposing
images with line graphics. Even though Google Maps may be derived from authoritative
cartography, the feature content is much less elaborate and reduced to the intended
geolocation function. The 3 models for creating Google Maps are shown in Fig. 40: a) relying
on authoritative data in North America, Europe, Australia as "Google Ground Truth", b) Map
Maker outsourced, leaving the initiative of mapping using Google Earth to other companies(Africa, Middle East, India) and c) "Video Rental" model offering Google Earth imagery toother countries for mapping use (Russia, China).

Fig. 40: Google Maps

5.1.3 Google Street Map
Google Street Map has been developed as a tool to image buildings and streets with street
furniture along urban roadways. This is done by vehicle based cameras, located by GNSS
30

signals. In some communities the imaging of building facades has met resistance by somemembers of the population, which did not wish to show them to the public on the web.
Nevertheless Google has pursued street mapping for the sole reason to update the Google
Maps content as an internal operation.
In this manner Google Street Map has proved to be an effective tool to quickly update theGoogle Maps content for buildings and roads. The update of these features can generally bedone much faster than by the regular update intervals for authoritative mapping without areporting system in operation and without a multitude of fast survey options, rather than by acentralized mapping procedure. For coverage see Fig. 41.

Fig. 41: Google Street Map Coverage

5.1.4 Google Ground Truth
In the attempt not only to update the map content, but also to maintain a high level ofgeometric accuracy, the Google Ground Truth project has been launched for a number ofcountries in North America, Europe, Australia and South Africa, in which authoritative
cartography has been merged with the results of high tech operations, such as Google Street
Map, see Fig. 42.

Fig. 42: Google Ground Truth
31

As Google regards the progress of these projects as a confidential matter, it is not possible to
make a more detailed account of the progress made.

5.2 Microsoft Bingmaps
Microsoft considered Google to be their strongest competitor, while Bingmaps has the same
objectives as the Google efforts. Therefore care has been taken to achieve a higher resolution
and a more accurate geometry than Google Earth.
This was possible by limiting the area of interest to the continental USA and to Western
Europe, where there were no flight restrictions. Furthermore, the imagery used for Bingmaps
consisted solely of digital aerial imagery flown by the company owned Vexcel Ultracam
cameras.
The coverage of the countryside for the USA and for Western Europe was completed at 30cm
GSD, and the urban areas were imaged at 15cm GSD. Whether the originally foreseen
updates of every 3 years can be achieved as planned, is still an open issue. See Fig. 43(a,b,c,d).
There has been a recent announcement that Microsoft turned over Bing Maps technology to
UBER.
a

b

c

d

Fig. 43: a,b,c,d Bingmaps
32

5.3 Yandex
Another approach has been undertaken by Yandex in the Russian Federation, which was also
applied in Turkey by the company Yandex.
Yandex has procured high resolution satellite imagery from Digital Globe for the entire
territory of the Russian Federation at 0.5m GSD and at 1m GSD. The objects of interest werebuilding blocks, single buildings, roads, creeks. They could be identified and mapped fromthe images. The geocoding of the mapped information was done by accuracy augmented
GNSS code receivers with 2 to 3m accuracy on the ground. In this way Yandex succeeded togenerate digital maps for about 300 urban conglomerations in Russia and Turkey.
Yandex, like international car navigation system suppliers, was also interested in car trafficrouting, providing real time traffic congestion options for the agglomeration of Moscow.

5.4 HERE
When the Finish company Nokia bought Navteq, the global car navigation system efforts
were continued by the subsidiary HERE.
HERE makes car navigation systems based on their own maps for 196 countries of the world,
116 countries of which have voice guided navigation and 44 countries of which with live
traffic services.
Of interest are roads and points of interest. This also includes unidirectional restrictions oftraffic flows.
In Europe 15% of the map´s content is updated every year, modifying or adding 1.1M km ofroads, creating 700 000 new points of interest and adding 600 000 speed cameras.
In the Russian Federation 800 000 km of roads change after 6 months, and so do 120 000
street names, 22 000 turn restrictions, 3400 one way streets, 38 000 speed limits and 8700
directional street signs. See Fig. 44:

Fig. 44: HERE (formerly Navteq, left) and TomTom (right) Global Coverage335.5 TomTom
TomTom has a road navigation coverage for 118 countries extending over North America,
Brazil, Argentina, Europe, the Russian Federation, India, Indonesia, Thailand, Australia, New
Zealand, West and South Africa (see Fig. 44).

6

Mapping by Military Organizations

Like it happened during the cold war period, when the US and the USSR militaryorganizations considered it their goal to conduct mapping operations in what they considered
to be crisis areas, this practice was recently revived by about 30 nations from Europe, North
America, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Rep. of Korea and South Africa, when theylaunched the Multinational Geospatial Co-Production Program MGCP. The goal of thisprogram is to generate up-to-date 1:50 000 digital maps for potential crisis areas of the globe
in Asia, Africa, the Middle East, the West Indies and the Pacific Ocean. Benefitting from thisactivity is the UN cartographic section, which utilizes these maps to create information forcrisis mitigation.

Fig. 45: MGCP Mapping Coverage

7

34

Other Mapping Efforts•

Open Street Map is the voluntary Crowd sourcing attempt to update map content by
the public. It has been enthusiastically promoted in most parts of the globe but it must
be integrated into authoritative mapping to guarantee quality control.

•

Scan Map by Eastview is a new commercial venture to integrative authoritative
mapping with population statistics.

8

Summary of Results•

115 UN Member countries have responded to the 2012-2015 UNGGIM-ISPRS
Survey. It has been shown, that nearly all reporting countries have modernized theirfacilities to adopt modern GNSS, digital imaging and GIS technology in theiroperations, which are still handicapped by lack of funding and staff shortages.

•

While in 1986 the world was basically covered by 1:250 000 maps, progress intechnology has now made it possible to state that topographic mapping of the globe at
1:50 000 scale, relevant to sustainable development, has been reached.

•

There are still gaps in providing updated information in developing countries. These
need to be closed with a goal of no data to be older than 5 years.

• New technologies, such as those used by Google and by Yandex could help to reachthis goal in priority areas.

9

Future Activities•

ISPRS has created working group IV-2 to accompany the UNGGIM-ISPRS project.

•This working group has successfully provided the needed discussion forum for the
task.

•

It will be the future goal of this group to assure that the data collection and analysis
will be sustainable by cooperating with UNGGIM and UN-GEO• A near goal will be the expansion of the work to include global land cover mapping as
a task.

10 References
1. UN Secretariat document E/CONF78/BP7 1986, prepared by A. J. Brandenberger &S.K. Ghosh, published in World Cartography XiX, 1990
2. UN Secretariat document E/CONF78/BP8 1986, prepared by G. Konecny, publishedin World Cartography XIX, 1990
3. Global Geospatial Information and High Resolution Global Land Cover/Land Use
Mapping. Proceedings of ISPRS WG IV/2 Workshop, April 2015, Novosibirsk
 The Global Status of Topographic Mapping, Gottfried Konecny, pp. 4 - 20
 The Global Status of Topographic Mapping: Technical Background, Uwe
Breitkopf, p. 21
 The Current Status of Mapping in the World - Spotlight on Pacific Islands,
John Trinder, pp. 22 - 32
 High Resolution Global Land Cover/Land Use Mapping. Current Status, Klaus
U. Komp, pp. 33 - 47
ISBN 978-80-01-05725-4
ISBN 978-5-87693-800-835Appendix I

36

Original Questionnaire

37

38

Appendix II

Maps from Reports

Appendix II-1: Bhutan - 1:50 000 map grid of Bhutan in black, 76 sheets and 1:25 000 map grid of
Bhutan in red, 8 sheets

Appendix II-2: Cameroun - 1:50 000 mapping, completed sheets in blue (left) and 1:200 000 mapping,completed sheets in blue (right)
39

Appendix II-3: Costa Rica - 1:50 000 mapping,completed sheets (left) and 1:5 000 cadastre maps;
completed sheets in green, not completed sheetsin brown (right)

Appendix II-4: Cote d’ Ivoire - 1:50 000 mapping;white: not available, yellow: in colour, grey: in black
and white
40

Appendix II-5: Ecuador - 1:25 000

Appendix II-8: El Salvador - 1:25 000
mapping (complete)

Appendix II-6: Egypt - 1:25 000 mapping ofagricultural areas (Nile Delta) as example

Appendix II-9: Ethiopia 1:50 000

Appendix II-7: Madagascar - 1:100 000 mapping,age of data: blue: 1-10 year old maps,
dark brown: 71 to 81 years old

Appendix II-10: Fiji land register

41

42

Appendix II-11: Finland - 1:50 000 Thematic
Maps of Finland and their age

Appendix II-12: Finland - 1:50 000 mapping,age of data between 2005 and 2012

Appendix II-13: Guatemala - 1-50 000

Appendix II-14: Italy - 1:25 000 and 1:50 000
mapping; age of data between 1965 and 2015

Appendix II-15: Mongolia - 1:200 000, paper
map production, 1990

Appendix II-16: Nepal - 1:25 000 and 1:50 000
Mapping of Nepal, 1969 - 2001

Appendix II-17: Mongolia - 1:1 000
mapping of Ulaanbaatar, 2010 - 2011

Appendix II-18: Philippines - 1:50 000 Mapping of thePhilippines, age of data: yellow: 1947 - 2007,
green: 2008 - 2011, violet and red: since 2012

Appendix II-19: Korea (South) - 1: 25 000

43Appendix II-20: South Africa 1:50 000 mapping

Appendix II-21: South Africa - 1:10 000
Orthophoto Maps completed 2012

Appendix II-22: Uruguay - Map grid for
1:50 000, 1:100 000 and 1:200 000

Appendix II-23: South Africa - Aerial photographic coverage, 2008 - 201244

Appendix II-24: United Kingdom - content ofmaster map, all updated within 6 months,
dark green: 1:1 250, medium green: 1:2 500,
light green 1:10 000

Appendix II-25: United Kingdom - Age of
Imagery Layer of Master Map, 2008 - 2012

Appendix II-26: Sri Lanka - 1:10 000
mapping, brown: completed

Appendix II-27: Sri Lanka - 1:50 000
mapping completed with year stated45

46

Appendix II-28: Sweden Mountain area map 1:100 000

Appendix II-29: Sweden - Age oforthophotos 1:10 000 (2007-2011)

Appendix II-30: Sweden Property map 1:5 000

Appendix II-31: Sweden Mapping 1:50 000

Appendix II-32: Tunisia - 1:25 000 mapping

Appendix II-33: Tunisia - 1:100 000

Appendix II-34: Tunisia - 1:50 000 mapping47

Appendix II-35: USA - Alaska
INSAR coverage

Appendix II-36: USA Lidar coverage

Appendix II-37: USA Topo updating of
24 000 year cycle
48Appendix III

Maps from the Internet

Appendix III-1: Brazil - Continuous
coverage of 1:250 000 database

Appendix III-2: Brazil - Updating of
1:250 000 from 2008 to 2011

Appendix III-3: Canada - GeoBase orthoimagery (2005-2010), accurancy between 10-60m
49Appendix III-4: Canada - Arctic coverage of 1:50 000 maps

Appendix III-5: Czech Republic - Cadastral coverage of the ZABAGED database 1:1 000
50Appendix III-6: Germany - Age of topo database 1:10 000 between 1year (dark green)and 9 years (red)Appendix III-7: Germany - Update cycle of 1:50 000 map sheets,brown: 1996 - 2003 to yellow 2002 - 200751

Appendix III-8: FYR Macedonia - 1:25 000 map coverage

Appendix III-9: New Zealand (North Island) 1:50 000 mapping
52

Appendix III-10: New Zealand (South Island) 1:50 000 mappingAppendix III-11: Democratic Republic of the Congo 1:50,000 (IGN), example for a locally
produced map series available at East View, screenshot geospatial.com

Appendix III-12: Somalia 1:100,000 (Soviet Military), example for a military map series
available at East View, screenshot geospatial.com

53

Appendix IV

Maps from Staatsbibliothek Berlin

Appendix IV-1: Belgium - 1:10 000 mapping

Appendix IV-2: Belize - 1:250 000 mapping
54

Appendix IV-3: Israel - 1:50 000 mappingAppendix IV-4: Brunei 1:10 000 mapping

Appendix IV-5: France - Reunion
1:25 000 mapping

Appendix IV-6: Cambodia 1:100 000 mapping

Appendix IV-7: Iceland 1985 1-25 000 mapping

Appendix IV-8: Colombia 1:100 000 mapping

Appendix IV-9: Denmark 1:25 000 mapping55

Appendix IV-10: Czech Republic - 1:10 000 mapping

Appendix IV-11: Japan - 1:25 000 mapping

56

Appendix IV-12: Greenland - 1:250 000 coastal
mappingAppendix IV-13: Georgia - 1:50 000 mapping

Appendix IV-14: Indonesia - 1:25 000 mapping of Java, Bali, Lombok and Timor
57

Appendix IV-17: Kazakhstan 1:50 000 mapping

Appendix IV-15: Thailand, 2006 1 - 50 000 mapping

Appendix IV-16: Yemen - 1:100 000
Mapping

Appendix IV-18: Iran 1:50 000 mapping

58

Appendix IV-19: Norway, Svalbard 1:250
000 mappingAppendix IV-20: Germany 1:50 000 mapping

Appendix IV-21: Portugal-Acores 1:25 000 mapping

Appendix IV-22: Solomon Islands 1:50 000 mapping

Appendix IV-23: Zimbabwe 1:25 000 mapping

Appendix IV-24: Ukraine 1:100 000 mapping

Appendix IV-25: Venezuela 1:100 000 mapping59

Appendix IV-26: Sudan 1:200 000 mapping

Appendix IV-27: Malaysia 1:25 000 mapping (Malacca)

Appendix IV-28: Malaysia 1:25 000 mapping (Sabah &Sarawak)60

Various project results can be viewed online as an interactive map at:
http://www.ipi.uni-hannover.de/StatusOfWorldMapping

Declaration regarding content of this publication:
The designations employed and the presentation of country or area names in this list do not
imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United
Nations as well as the ISPRS and the authors concerning the legal status of any country,
territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers orboundaries.
Moreover the map used for illustrations of project results (Fig. 1 - 39) is only for the purposeof reference and the boundaries are not authorized by any organizations.
The source of the map is: http://www.naturalearthdata.com

JOINT PROJECTUNGGIM - ISPRS 2012 - 2015
THE STATUS OF TOPOGRAPHIC MAPPING IN
THE WORLDFINAL REPORT AUGUST 2015
Authors:– G. Konecny– U. Breitkopf– A. Radtke– K. Lee
Leibniz Universität Hannover
Nienburger Str. 1
Hannover, 30167
GERMANY