When the Department of Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation (DPME) launched its Geospatial Information Management Strategy (GIMS) on 19 September 2025, the room filled with policymakers, academics, and geospatial practitioners from the public and private sectors carried a charge of anticipation and hope. This was the largest gathering of the geospatial industry in South Africa post the COVID–19 pandemic. For decades, South Africa has built frameworks, passed legislation, and invested in data – but the same refrain was echoed at the launch – we know what needs to be done, so why are development projects still being built on top of sewer lines, in floodplains, and near petrol pipelines? Emphasizing that South Africa has a wealth of geospatial information and systems, but they are still not being used as effectively for decision-making in South Africa.
Minister Maropene Ramokgopa, Minister in the Presidency, described GIMS as a decisive step toward building a spatially intelligent state that places people and communities at the centre of development. She stressed that South Africa can no longer plan in abstract reports or disconnected spreadsheets, but must ground decisions in credible, location-specific evidence. She stated that GIMS integrates existing frameworks, including the NDP, Medium-Term Development Plan, National Spatial Development Framework, and District Development Model, into a unified system where plans, budgets, and outcomes can be tracked spatially and transparently.
The Strategy intends to enable the government to identify gaps, target resources, and monitor impact at the level of districts and communities, while embracing new technologies like big data and satellite imagery to act with foresight and precision. Minister Ramokgopa emphasized that success depends on partnerships across government, academia, the private sector, and civil society, calling on all stakeholders to contribute data and expertise. She framed it not as the end of a process but the beginning of a journey toward evidence-based governance, improved accountability, and a more people-centred state.
From Data To Decisions – Using Geospatial Intelligence To Drive Accountability And Smarter Development
The GIM Strategy is meant to change South Africa’s development trajectory. It is not “just another document,” but a call to weave geospatial intelligence into every decision government makes – from where to build schools and clinics, to how to prepare for floods, to ensuring that billions of rands in public investment are spent in the right places. A panel of GIS Experts was brought together to discuss how geospatial information could maximize sustainable development in South Africa. The Panel brought together five distinguished voices, each with more than 25 years of experience, to reflect South Africa’s geospatial journey and future needs. Stuart Martin from ESRI South Africa and representing the private sector, is a veteran in geo-information sciences with more than 30 years of experience in delivering geospatial solutions.
Dr. Gina Weir-Smith is the former head of Geospatial Analytics at the Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC) and a leading researcher in poverty mapping, unemployment, and spatial modelling. Craig Schwabe, the director of Geospatial Services at GeoScope, with over 30 years shaping national geospatial strategies and researching the development of geospatial frameworks. Dr. Pali Lehohla, the former Statistician-General of South Africa, has led international statistical bodies, including the UN Statistics Commission. Mimi Chauke, the director of the National Spatial Information Framework (NSIF) at the Department of Land Reform and Rural Development, and former chair of the UN-GGIM Africa Committee of Experts, made up the panel.
Stuart Martin, in his opening remarks, set the tone – GIS has evolved from being project-based and map-centric to becoming a geo-enabled environment. Maps are no longer the end-product; they are the interface into a system that reveals patterns, relationships, and context hidden in data. But for this shift to stick, he argued, spatial literacy must extend beyond GIS units in government departments and private companies. Program managers, CFOs, planners, and councilors need to think geographically. “We must teach decision-makers how to read and use data,” Martin said, “because only then can they solve societal problems like food insecurity, unemployment, and infrastructure gaps.”
Dr Gina Weir-Smith emphasized that geospatial data must be made visible, actionable, and directed to strategic decision-makers, both to demonstrate impact – such as whether schools or water projects are correctly located – and to hold leaders accountable for delivering on development goals. She argued that geospatial work cannot be effective if it remains in silos or hidden behind technical barriers. Dashboards, she suggested, should be more than static repositories; they should actively push information to decision-makers at the right level of authority, ensuring that senior officials, not only junior staff, see and act on the data.
She highlighted the risk that, without storytelling and a clear demonstration of value, even high-quality geospatial information will go unused. Dr Weir-Smith said, “building spatial literacy across government is as much about mindset and persistence as it is about technology”. She urged the geospatial community to persistently engage decision-makers by telling data-driven stories, using evidence to track real impact and accountability, and ensuring that projects like schools, water systems, and employment initiatives are planned and delivered in the right places to serve communities effectively.
South Africa’s Geospatial Future – Transformation, Custodianship, Capacity and Spatial Literacy – Cornerstones of Development
Craig Schwabe reminded the audience that South Africa is not starting from scratch. The Spatial Data Infrastructure Act, the Committee for Spatial Information (CSI), and the National Spatial Information Framework (NSIF) are already in place. These frameworks give the country a legal and institutional backbone to govern its geospatial assets. What matters now, he argued, is ensuring custodianship and metadata compliance so that datasets are discoverable, interoperable, and continuously maintained.
Yet gaps remain. Many government departments either deny custodianship of data or fail to capture metadata – the basic information that makes datasets findable, interoperable, and usable. Without metadata, integration stalls, and automation is impossible. “Custodianship must be obligatory,” Schwabe stressed. “Every dataset needs a named owner, a maintenance plan, and captured metadata.” He said South Africa can not ignore the transformative power of AI in the geospatial Industry to provide secure access across all government datasets using natural language models to enable access by all government officials, the private sector, and citizens alike. Already, it is being used to generate fine-scale population estimates, income, and service-access datasets for South Africa.
Schwabe also raised two urgent challenges – the exclusion of GIS graduates from professional registration under the South African Geomatics Council (SAGC), which leaves municipalities understaffed, and the risk of falling behind in AI adoption, where integration of geospatial data with intelligent systems could vastly improve decision-making and public access to geospatial data. He emphasised – the path forward is clear, government must invest in frameworks, open professional pathways for young geospatial practitioners, and harness transformative technologies like AI to make spatial information securely accessible to both officials and the public.
Dr Pali Lehohla’s through-line was blunt and practical – South Africa must become spatially literate at every tier of the state, because planning without geospatial evidence produces predictable failures. He argued that classic, one-size-fits-all analysis (like simple regressions) misses how outcomes vary across space. He called instead for the use of more sophisticated spatial methods – hot-spot analysis and geographically weighted models- to guide siting of schools, clinics, police stations, and infrastructure. He requested DPME to use its planning mandate to orchestrate standards and foresight by relevant government departments to model scenarios, quantify economic benefits, and publish impact, not inputs.
Two enabling fixes topped Dr Lehohla’s list: 1) restore addresses as democratic infrastructure (millions of households still lack usable addresses) and 2) enforce metadata and custodianship so automation and integration are possible. He also warned on data sovereignty – “whose data and whose tools is it anyway?” – urging public stewardship of citizen data and resilient platform choices. Finally, he tied it together with a focus on capacity – invest in NSIF/CSI and municipal teams, align universities and professional pathways, and hold leaders accountable so evidence – not expediency – drives decisions.
Mimi Chauke drove home the urgency of fixing capacity gaps at the local municipality level. She described how municipalities continue to approve projects without geospatial due diligence – leading to schools being located in the sea, pipelines missing from maps, and housing being built on floodplains. For her, the crisis is rooted in the absence of functional GIS units. For example, in the North West province, only three municipalities out of 18 have operational geospatial teams.
She argued that unless local governments have the competence, resources, and leadership support to institutionalise GIS, strategies like GIMS will remain unimplementable. Mimi also linked this to the accreditation bottleneck, warning that young, previously disadvantaged graduates are being shut out of the profession just when municipalities most need their skills. Finally, she pressed for accountability – an asset register for geospatial data, stronger auditing by the Auditor-General of government department compliance, and consequences for departments or municipalities that fail to provide project coordinates or geospatial data for public projects.
Broadening The Geospatial Impact Through Localization, Building Skills & Low-Code Platforms
Panellists and members of academia called for urgent reform – universities must be supported to align their curricula, and alternative pathways for GIS professionals must be created without diluting standards. “We cannot afford to leave young talent on the sidelines,” Craig Schwabe argued.
Several voices stressed that the success of GIMS depends on localisation. While the CSI and NSIF can provide national standards, the actual work of mapping, updating, and applying data happens at provincial and municipal levels. Examples were already emerging – the Eastern Cape’s Office of the Premier has started work on a provincial GIM strategy, and the North West is following suit. The CSI is also partnering with universities to drive research, modelling, and policy innovation. The message was clear – national frameworks must empower local execution.
Even with the best geospatial data, it is of no value if it never reaches decision-makers. Several panelists urged for push mechanisms – alerts and dashboards that send decision-makers real-time warnings. For example, if a water project stalls, the relevant official should get a notification. If a school site is outside service norms, it should raise a red flag before the tender is awarded.
Low-code and mobile tools were also highlighted as ways to extend geospatial insight beyond specialists. “Not everyone should be a GIS analyst,” one panelist noted, “but everyone should be able to use location-based insights safely and correctly.” Most GIS platforms now offer low-code tools enabling non-specialists to create spatial products, a shift Stuart Martin confirmed as “a fact” that broadens access to location intelligence beyond GIS professionals.
Beyond Data – Ethical Leadership and Accountability Is a Must
Technical frameworks are only half the story. The other half is ethical leadership. Several audience members raised the uncomfortable truth – if leaders ignore evidence for political or personal gain, the best data in the world won’t prevent disasters. “Evidence-based decision-making is not just a technical matter,” Dr. Lehohla warned. “It is a cultural and ethical one. Without accountability, we will still have schools built in the wrong places.” The GIM Strategy, therefore, must be backed by visible consequences when standards are bypassed.
The panel converged on a practical to-do list:
- Name custodians for all fundamental datasets.
- Enforce metadata capture and publish compliance dashboards.
- Fix SAGC accreditation pathways for GIS graduates.
- Fund and resource municipal GIS units.
- Standardise decision-making guidelines for the location of government services
- Push alerts to officials when thresholds are reached.
- Adopt low-code GIS tools for non-specialists.
- Build sovereign hosting options to reduce cloud dependency.
- Accelerate the national address system.
- Measure and publish impact outcomes, not just inputs or outputs.
The launch closed on a sober and hopeful note. South Africa is rich with geospatial data and has world-class experts. What is missing is consistent application, accountability, and a sense of urgency. If the CSI and DPME lean into their mandates – naming custodians, tracking compliance, and publishing impact – and if governments, universities, private sector partners, and the CSI and DPME pull in the same direction, the GIM Strategy will ensure that geospatial data and systems can be meaningfully used to maximize South Africa’s sustainable development. Both panelists and audience members concluded: “No more talk – what we need are more geospatial applications, more metadata, more accountability, and more South Africans who can see their lives improving,
Watch the video – video quality is poor, but it tells the story……..
