Issues Regarding a National Land
Parcel Database
Peter Folger
Specialist in Energy and Natural Resources Policy
July 22, 2009
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
R40717
CRS Report for Congress
P
repared for Members and Committees of Congress
Issues Regarding a National Land Parcel Database
Summary
The federal government’s efforts to coordinate its geospatial activities, through the Federal
Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) and the development of the National Spatial Data
Infrastructure (NSDI), include a strong emphasis on land parcel data. Land parcel databases (or
cadastres) describe the rights, interests, and value of property. Ownership of land parcels is an
important part of the legal, financial, and real estate system of a society. The Bureau of Land
Management (BLM) is assigned the role of lead agency coordinating land parcel data for federal
lands, and is responsible for performing cadastral surveys on all federal and Indian lands.
According to BLM, “Cadastral surveys are the foundation for all land title records in the United
States and provide federal and tribal land managers with information necessary for the
management of their lands.”
Although BLM is steward of federal land parcel data and coordinator for cadastral data under
FGDC, a 2007 National Research Council (NRC) report found that a coordinated approach to
federally managed parcel data did not exist. Legislation that addresses some of the issues for
creating a national cadastre has been introduced in the 111th Congress (H.R. 1520, the Federal
Land Asset Inventory Reform Act of 2009). Similar bills were introduced in previous Congresses,
but were not enacted. In addition, the E-Government Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-347) contains
provisions that specifically address reducing data redundancy and promoting collaboration and
use of standards for government geographic information. If the E-Government Act was
reauthorized, it could also include language establishing a national cadastre. Coordinating all land
parcel data, the bulk of which is produced for local and regional needs on non-federal lands,
remains even more of a challenge.
Why a national land parcel database? The National Geospatial Advisory Committee (NGAC)
observed that the federal government’s land parcel data is missing an arrangement for acquiring
the detailed property-related data necessary to make decisions during times of emergency, such as
a natural disaster. In addition to emergency response to disasters, other perceived needs for a
national land parcel database include responding to the home mortgage foreclosure crisis, dealing
with wildfires, managing energy resources on federal lands, dealing with the effects of climate
change, and possibly more.
Both administrative and legislative options have been proposed to achieve the vision for a land
parcel database described in the 2007 NRC report: a distributed system of land parcel data housed
with the appropriate data stewards but accessible through a web-based interface. Some
recommend that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the Department of the Interior
take a stronger hand in enforcing the requirements of OMB Circular A-16 and Executive Order
12906, which created the FGDC and instigated efforts to create the NSDI. NGAC, for example,
also recommended establishing a Geographic Information Officer within each federal department
or agency, and establishing a geospatial leadership and coordination function in the Executive
Office of the President. The NRC recommended the creation of both a federal land parcel
coordinator and a national land parcel coordinator. The first would be responsible for federal
lands and property; the second would coordinate parcel data from all sources, both public and
private lands. A truly national land parcel cadastre would likely require strong partnerships
between the federal government and state and local governments.
Congressional Research Service
Issues Regarding a National Land Parcel Database
Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1
Why A National Land Parcel Database? ...................................................................................... 1
Current Status ....................................................................................................................... 2
Perceived Need ..................................................................................................................... 2
Natural Disasters............................................................................................................. 3
Home Mortgage Foreclosure Crisis ................................................................................. 3
Wildfires ......................................................................................................................... 4
Energy Resources............................................................................................................ 5
Climate Change .............................................................................................................. 6
Administrative and Legislative Options....................................................................................... 6
Administrative Options .........................................................................................................7
Legislative Options ............................................................................................................... 7
H.R. 1520, the Federal Land Asset Inventory Reform Act of 2009................................... 7
Sensitive Information ...................................................................................................... 8
Reauthorizing the E-Government Act .............................................................................. 8
NRC Recommendations for Integrated National Land Parcel Data .............................................. 9
Challenges and Concerns .......................................................................................................... 10
Contacts
Author Contact Information ...................................................................................................... 12
Congressional Research Service
Issues Regarding a National Land Parcel Database
Introduction
This report provides a summary of some of the issues regarding the creation of a national land
parcel database, or cadastre.1 The report identifies some of the perceived needs for a national
cadastre, legislative and administrative options that could lead to a national land parcel database,
and some of the challenges and concerns. The report also summarizes and briefly discusses
recommendations in a 2007 National Research Council (NRC) report that concluded “... a
national approach is necessary to provide a rational and accountable system of property records.”2
The NRC report described why a national approach is needed, identified challenges to creating a
national cadastre, and offered specific recommendations for achieving its vision: a distributed
system of land parcel data housed with the appropriate data stewards but accessible through a
web-based interface.3
Legislation that addresses some of the issues for creating a national cadastre has been introduced
in the 111th Congress: H.R. 1520, the Federal Land Asset Inventory Reform Act of 2009. Similar
bills were introduced in the 110th and 109th Congresses, but were not enacted.
For more information on geospatial information generally, see CRS Report R40625, Geospatial
Information and Geographic Information Systems (GIS): Current Issues and Future Challenges.
Why A National Land Parcel Database?
Geospatial information, including land parcel data,4 is increasingly produced by private sector
and other non-federal government sources. Consequently, the federal government’s role has
shifted from producing geospatial data to coordinating efforts, facilitating partnerships, and
managing the vast amounts of geospatial information.5 According to the National Geospatial
Advisory Committee (NGAC),6 the shift in geospatial data production from the federal
government to the private sector and state and local governments has created an “... urgent need
to reexamine the relationships between data providers and users to establish a fair and equitable
geospatial data marketplace that serves the full range of applications.”7 As an example, NGAC
noted that the Census Bureau had to develop a duplicate version of street centerlines in
preparation for the 2010 Census because it could not take advantage of the existing commercial
data.8 Further, “critical information about the use, value and ownership of property is needed by
1 Cadastre is the map of ownership and boundaries of land parcels.
2 National Research Council, National Land Parcel Data: A Vision for the Future, Washington, DC, 2007, p. 113.
Hereafter referred to as NRC, National Land Parcel Data.
3 Ibid.
4 Land parcel databases describe the rights, interests, and value of property. The legal boundaries of land parcels are
defined in the deed to a property, and are confirmed by survey measurements. Ownership of land parcels is an
important part of the legal, financial, and real estate system of a society. See NRC, National Land Parcel Data,
Introduction.
5 The National Geospatial Advisory Committee, The Changing Geospatial Landscape, January 2009, p. 12. Hereafter
referred to as NGAC, 2009.
6 Its members include federal, state, and local government representatives, private sector representatives, and
academics.
7 NGAC, 2009, p. 12.
8 This duplication in effort was a result, in part, of prohibitions on disclosing or publishing private information that
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
1
Issues Regarding a National Land Parcel Database
FEMA, the Forest Service, and HUD, for emergency preparedness or response in times of
hurricanes or wildfires—or even to monitor the current foreclosure problems.”9
Current Status
The federal government’s efforts to coordinate its geospatial activities, through the Federal
Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) and the development of the National Spatial Data
Infrastructure (NSDI), include a strong emphasis on land parcel data. For example, the cadastral
data theme is one of the seven fundamental data themes of the NSDI framework. Within the
FGDC, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM, in the Department of the Interior) is assigned the
role of lead agency coordinating land parcel data for federal lands. According to BLM, it is
responsible for performing cadastral surveys on all federal and Indian lands: “Cadastral surveys
are the foundation for all land title records in the United States and provide federal and tribal land
managers with information necessary for the management of their lands.”10
Despite the BLM role as steward of federal land parcel data and coordinator for cadastral data
under FGDC, NRC found that a coordinated approach to federally managed parcel data did not
exist. The National Integrated Land System (NILS) 11—a joint project between BLM and the U.S.
Forest Service (USFS, in the Department of Agriculture)—is the closest thing to a coordinated
program “... but it remains much more of a set of technologies than a source of parcel data.”12
Coordinating all land parcel data, the bulk of which is produced for local and regional needs,
remains even more of a challenge.
Perceived Need
The National Geospatial Advisory Committee (NGAC) was formed in early 2008 to provide
advice and recommendations to the FGDC on management of federal geospatial programs.
NGAC observed that the federal government’s need for land parcel data is missing an
arrangement for acquiring the detailed property-related data necessary to make decisions during
times of emergency. In addition to emergency response related to natural disasters, other
perceived needs for a national land parcel database at the federal level include responding to the
home mortgage foreclosure crisis, dealing with wildland fires, and managing extractive energy
resources on federal lands.13 Other aspects of natural resources management on federal lands
could be included as well, such as monitoring the effects of climate change, and the efficacy of
measures taken to mitigate or adapt to such effects.
(...continued)
identifies an individual or business, per Title 13 of the U.S. Code.
9 NGAC, 2009, p. 12.
10 U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Cadastral Survey Program, at http://www.blm.gov/
wo/st/en/prog/more/cadastralsurvey/program_description.html.
11 See http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/more/nils.html.
12 NRC, National Land Parcel Data, p. 3.
13 Telephone conversation with Nancy von Meyer, vice president, Fairview Industries, Pendleton, SC, July 20, 2009.
Congressional Research Service
2
Issues Regarding a National Land Parcel Database
Natural Disasters
Disasters are often cited as a compelling reason to establish a national land parcel database:
“Land-parcel data, one of the framework themes, are essential in managing disasters and in
assessing damage, along with building footprints and the locations of infrastructure (power,
telecommunications, water, sewage, and steam-heating networks).”14 The attacks of September
11, 2001, and hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2005, underscored for many the need for rapid
access to land ownership data to help guide emergency response, especially when a disaster
crosses multiple jurisdictions or extends beyond the boundaries of a community and the
immediate knowledge of local responders. The land parcel data useful to emergency responders
may exist, but may also be difficult to access:
Data on the ownership of land parcels, or cadastral data, provide a particular and in some
ways extreme example of the problems that currently pervade the use of geospatial data in
emergency management. Vast amounts of such data exist, but they are distributed among
tens of thousands of local governments, many of which have not invested in digital systems
and instead maintain their land-parcel data in paper form. As with many other data types, it is
not so much the existence of data that is the problem, as it is the issues associated with rapid
access.15
Several NRC reports noted that a national partnership for assembling land parcel data would
provide major benefits for managing federal assistance to local programs, many of which are
associated with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).16 According to
the NRC, parcel-level data would help HUD meet its strategic goals, such as increasing home
ownership opportunities, promoting affordable housing, and ensuring equal opportunities in
housing. NRC further contended that “the existence of national land parcel data would provide
HUD with data it needs for effective management of grants and would have avoided the critical
time wasted gathering parcel data piecemeal in the wake of these recent hurricanes.”17
Home Mortgage Foreclosure Crisis
In addition to natural disasters, land parcel data are being used for responding to the housing
market collapse that began in 2008. The FGDC Cadastral Subcommittee noted that parcel data
provide added value to the mortgage and property information collected by the federal
government under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA).18 HMDA was enacted in 1975
to assist government regulators and the private sector with the monitoring of anti-discriminatory
practices.19 According to the FGDC Cadastral Subcommittee
While HMDA data provide a snapshot in time of a mortgage transaction, local government
parcel data provide current information at the individual parcel level that allows other
information such as utility shutoffs, code violations and undelivered mail to be tied to a
14 National Research Council, Successful Response Starts With a Map, Washington, DC, 2005, p. 38.
15 NRC, Successful Response Starts With a Map, p. 90.
16 These include National Research Council, GIS for Housing and Urban Development, Washington, DC, 2003; and
National Research Council, Procedures and Standards for a Multipurpose Cadastre, Washington, DC, 1983.
17 NRC, National Land Parcel Data, p. 47.
18 P.L. 94-200, 12 U.S.C. §§ 2801-2809.
19 For more information, see CRS Report RL34720, Reporting Issues Under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, by
Darryl E. Getter.
Congressional Research Service
3
Issues Regarding a National Land Parcel Database
common unit, the parcel. Parcel data make it possible to relate disparate data together to get a
complete picture of individual mortgage and housing conditions. Parcel data also provide the
connection to local governments, which can provide community context and engage those
most affected by mortgage crisis events.20
The Cadastral Subcommittee likened the distressed housing market to a contagious disease,
tending to affect some communities while leaving others intact. By adding parcel data to existing
information available under the authority of HMDA, data analyses could identify “hot spots” in a
pending foreclosure crisis, and possibly even provide sufficient information for a national early
warning system for financially distressed housing and mortgage markets.21
In one case, GIS and land parcel data were used to identify and analyze the extent of home
foreclosures, and to use the results of that analysis to apply for Community Development Block
Grants (CDBG) to convert foreclosed properties into low-income housing.22 It could be asserted
that these types of land parcel data, made available to federal agencies such as HUD, could also
be used to track the effects of programs like CDBG to ameliorate the foreclosure crisis. This type
of use of land parcel data arguably underscores a need for a national land parcel database to track
the effectiveness of federal agency programs in national efforts, such as coping with the home
foreclosure crisis.
Wildfires
The FGDC Cadastral Subcommittee formed a Wildland Fire Project Team, at the request of the
National Interagency Fire Center, together with representatives from BLM, USFS, and the U.S.
Geological Survey, state representatives, and others to prepare for the 2007 fire season.23 The goal
was to identify contacts for parcel data in priority counties throughout the West, and acquire and
have as much parcel data as possible pre-deployed to support analyses of and responses to
wildfires. The project was also intended to foster coordination between the cadastral community
and the wildland fire community to identify the cadastral data needs to support planning for,
response to, and mitigation of wildfires.
According to a 2007 report by the Cadastral Subcommittee, “... structures located within the
wildland-urban interface comprise a very substantial portion of values commonly threatened by
wildland fires. GIS parcel data from local and state government provide effective and accurate
means to identify and map general structure locations with associated values.”24 These data are
used to provide rapid analyses and wildfire suppression strategies by quantifying the significant
resource values most threatened by a fire.
20 Federal Geographic Data Committee Cadastral Subcommittee Mortgage Study Team, “Land Parcel Data for the
Mortgage Crisis: Results of the Stakeholders Meeting,” June 30, 2009, p. 4, at http://www.nationalcad.org/data/
documents/Land_parcel_data_for_the_mortgage_crisis_-_stakeholders_meeting_findings.pdf.
21 Ibid., p. 6.
22 Government Technology, GIS Maps Track Foreclosures in California and Kansas, April 29, 2009, at
http://www.govtech.com/gt/649520.
23 FGDC Cadastral Subcommittee, “Briefing Paper: Pre-Deploying Parcel Data for Managing Wildland Fires,” at
http://www.nationalcad.org/data/documents/RavarBrief.pdf.
24 FGDC Cadastral Subcommittee, “Parcels and Wildland Fire, 2007 Report,” January 2008, Preface, at
http://www.nationalcad.org/data/documents/Parcels%20and%20Wildland%20Fire%202007%20final%20report.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
4
Issues Regarding a National Land Parcel Database
Following the very active 2007 fire season, the Cadastral Subcommittee observed that to increase
the efficiency and sustainability of the effort, several changes were needed:
• increasing state-level participation and involvement to help build a single state
contact for parcel information;
• merging the point-of-contact information with the 50-States Initiative25 into a
single data and point of contact resource;
• expanding the use of pre-deployed parcel data to support other aspects of
emergency response and reduce duplicative parcel inventory efforts; and
• obtaining federal assistance to work with states that work with counties to
complete and standardize parcel data systems.26
The wildland fire project may represent an example of how making land parcel data available,
from the local and state level through the federal level, could serve multiple stakeholders who
benefit from access to the data. Whether this example can be expanded to all states susceptible to
wildfires, or to the entire country in a multihazard approach, remains an open question.
Energy Resources
The FGDC Cadastral Subcommittee identified a need for accurate survey boundaries and land
ownership information (i.e., land parcel information) for management of the life cycle of energy
development from prospect to production to remediation.27 For western states, where much of the
nation’s onshore energy production occurs, the Public Land Survey System (PLSS) is the primary
cadastral framework, supported by BLM’s Cadastral Survey Program and represented in a digital
format by the Geographic Coordinate Data Base (GCDB).28 The Cadastral Subcommittee
proposed a set of elements comprising an “energy core” set of information that could be provided
by land parcel data producers in energy production areas—referenced to the cadastral framework
of the GCDB—and could lend efficiency and accuracy at each stage of energy production
activities: application, permit, monitoring, and reclamation activities. As with other applications,
such as wildfire support, the Cadastral Subcommittee underscored the need to embrace and apply
consistent cadastral framework standards to parcel data.29
In western states, energy resources are commonly exploited on a variety of lands: federally
managed surface and subsurface lands; state, county, tribal, or privately owned lands; and split
estates where the surface lands may be privately owned but the minerals are federally managed
(or vice-versa). The Cadastral Subcommittee observed that “in all of these cases it is essential to
build a seamless presentation of surface and subsurface ownership to correctly manage and
exploit energy resources.”30 It might be argued that similar needs arise for other parts of the
25 For more information about the 50-States Initiative, see NSGIC, at http://www.nsgic.org/hottopics/fifty_states.cfm.
26 FGDC Cadastral Subcommittee, “Parcels and Wildland Fire,” January 2008, p. 3.
27 FGDC Cadastral Subcommittee—Energy Workgroup, “The Energy Community and Cadastral Data,” May 2006, at
http://www.nationalcad.org/data/documents/The_Cadastral_NSDI_and_the_Energy_Community.pdf.
28 For more information on the BLM program, see http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/more/gcdb.html.
29 FGDC Cadastral Subcommittee—Energy Workgroup, “The Energy Community and Cadastral Data,” May 2006, p.
14.
30 Ibid., p. 9.
Congressional Research Service
5
Issues Regarding a National Land Parcel Database
country, such as parts of Pennsylvania, New York, and West Virginia, where exploration and
development of potentially huge natural gas deposits in black shales is occurring. Also, if
Congress enacts climate change legislation, such as a cap-and-trade system, deployment of
capture, transportation, and underground storage of carbon dioxide from industrial facilities could
rapidly expand across the nation. Efficient management of surface and subsurface lands and
resources for carbon dioxide capture and storage may also benefit from the type of seamless
presentation of land parcel data recommended by the Cadastral Subcommittee.
Climate Change
In addition to its potential application to carbon dioxide capture, transportation, and storage
mentioned above, a national land parcel system could have other benefits related to mitigating
climate change. Legislation intended to deal with anthropogenic climate change, such as under a
cap-and-trade program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, passed the House on June 26, 2009
(H.R. 2454), and the Senate is expected to take up legislation of a similar scope. If enacted, the
legislation would have far-reaching effects on the U.S. energy and economic infrastructure, with
the goal of reducing the impact of climate change on the nation’s farmlands, forests, rivers and
streams, coastlines, and ecosystems, as well as human health and well-being. It could be argued
that measuring the effectiveness of the emissions-reduction program would depend, in part, on a
precise understanding of the ecosystem, agricultural, forest, coastline, and other boundaries that
are anticipated to change in response to climate change. Land parcel data potentially could be
useful for such types of analyses.
Administrative and Legislative Options
Executive Order 12906 and OMB Circular A-16 created the FGDC and instigated efforts to create
the NSDI, which includes cadastral data as one of the seven fundamental themes. The FGDC
designated BLM as the steward for the federal land parcel data and the coordinator of cadastral
data generally, and BLM sponsors the FGDC Subcommittee for Cadastral Data. The Cadastral
Subcommittee has made significant progress in the establishment of standards and coordination
of cadastral data, according to the NRC.31 Some contend that data standards and specifications are
no longer an issue or a barrier to implementation of a national land parcel database.32 In addition
to administrative imperatives contained within EO 12906 and Circular A-16, legislation such as
the E-Government Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-347) contains provisions that specifically address
reducing data redundancy and promoting collaboration and use of standards for government
geographic information.33 Despite nearly 20 years of effort at coordinating geospatial information
and land parcel data, however, the NRC observed:
... one could conclude that the United States has a comprehensive approach to parcel data.
However, a detailed analysis of the situation suggests the opposite.... It is difficult to
ascertain the status of parcel data within the various federal agencies, and it appears that
none of the federal land management agencies have a comprehensive and complete parcel
data set for the lands they manage.... There is also evidence that many federal agencies that
do not manage lands are acknowledging that they need parcel data to fulfill their missions
31 NRC, National Land Parcel Data, p. 69.
32 Telephone conversation with Nancy von Meyer, vice president, Fairview Industries, Pendleton, SC, July 20, 2009.
33 44 C.F.R. § 3501 note.
Congressional Research Service
6
Issues Regarding a National Land Parcel Database
and, in the absence of a national means to access the data nationwide, are creating data sets
to meet their particular needs, often without coordination with other federal agencies that
may have needs for the same or similar data.34
Administrative Options
OMB revised Circular A-16 in 2002 and added the Deputy Director of Management, OMB, as
vice-chair of the FGDC to serve with the Secretary of the Interior. The revised leadership
structure is seen, in part, as an attempt to improve the coordination and oversight of the
participating agencies by giving OMB a defined role. Some argue, however, that OMB could take
a stronger role in FGDC through more active enforcement. Thus, an administrative option for
enforcing a national land parcel database, at least for the federal lands, is to enforce Circular A-16
more rigorously. This would likely mean that OMB would take a true oversight and coordination
role and enforce compliance with A-16 through its power to affect the budgets of the participating
departments and agencies. The National Geospatial Advisory Committee (NGAC) recommended
this action, and further recommended that the Administration establish a Geographic Information
Officer within each department or agency with responsibility under FGDC.35 NGAC also
recommended the establishment of a geospatial leadership and coordination function in the
Executive Office of the President, which would elevate the profile of the geospatial enterprise
within the Administration and presumably signal a higher priority for coordinating geospatial
activities in the federal government.
Legislative Options
H.R. 1520, the Federal Land Asset Inventory Reform Act of 2009
On March 16, 2009, Representative Kind introduced H.R. 1520, the Federal Land Asset Inventory
Reform Act of 2009, which would require the Secretary of the Interior to develop a multipurpose
cadastre of federal “real property.” The legislation defines cadastre as an inventory, and defines
federal “real property” as land, buildings, crops, forests, or other resources still attached to or
within the land, improvements or fixtures permanently attached to the land, or structures on it.
The bill requires the Secretary to coordinate with the FGDC pursuant to OMB Circular A-16,
integrate the activities under the legislation with similar cadastral activities of state and local
governments, and participate in establishing standards and protocols that are necessary to ensure
interoperability of the geospatial information of the cadastre for all users. Similar legislation was
introduced in the Senate and House in the 110th Congress.36
The legislation includes a provision for a cost-sharing arrangement with states to include any non-
federal lands within a state in the cadastre (§2(b)). The cost-sharing agreement would presumably
provide an incentive for the states to share their land-parcel data—namely the federal government
would pay up to half the cost—although it is unclear whether the cost incentive alone is enough
to compel states to pay the remaining share for a cadastre focused on federal real property. The
34 NRC, National Land Parcel Data, p. 69.
35 The National Geospatial Advisory Committee, A National Geospatial Strategy: Recommendations for the 2008-2009
Presidential Transition Team, at http://www.fgdc.gov/ngac/ngac-transition-recommendations-10-16-08.pdf.
36 H.R. 5532 and S. 3043. Neither bill saw action in the 110th Congress.
Congressional Research Service
7
Issues Regarding a National Land Parcel Database
total cost to the federal government would likely depend, in part, on the degree of participation by
the states and the extent and status of their land parcel data. The overall cost of the bill is not
clear, but the legislation would require the Secretary to report on the total amount expended on
federal land parcel activity in FY2008, and to estimate the cost savings that would be achieved by
eliminating or consolidating duplicative real property inventories by creating the multipurpose
cadastre.
Sensitive Information
The National Geospatial Advisory Committee recommends revising “... restrictive statutory
language as it pertains to non-sensitive address data in Title 13 U.S. Code and to ‘geospatial’ data
in Section 1619 of the 2008 Farm Bill.”37 In Title 13, Congress delegates responsibility for
conducting the decennial Census to the Secretary of Commerce. The law contains provisions for
not disclosing or publishing private information that identifies an individual or business (Sections
9 and 214 of Title 13). The Census Bureau is forbidden to publish any private information—such
as names, addresses, or telephone numbers—that identifies an individual or business.38 If a
legislative proposal to amend portions of Title 13 was introduced to make geospatial data
collected by the Census Bureau more accessible (e.g., for use in a national land parcel database),
it could raise issues about the privacy of personal data collected by the federal government. The
NRC recommended that Congress and the Bureau of the Census explore various policy options
that would allow digital data on building addresses and geographical coordinates to be placed in
the public domain while maintaining important privacy protections. (See NRC recommendation
6, below.)
Section 1619 of the 2008 Farm Bill39 prohibits disclosure of geospatial information about
agricultural land or operations when the information is provided by an agricultural producer or
owner of agricultural land, and maintained by the Secretary of Agriculture. Certain exceptions,
contained in that section, apply to the prohibition. NGAC has taken the position that the statutory
language could be revised to enhance the value of the geospatial data, which could then be
included in a national land parcel database, while not compromising privacy.40 For example, the
boundaries of fields could be separable elements of a database, not tied to proprietary information
about program participation and payments. Boundary information, by itself, might be used for
land use planning, conservation, resource management, or possibly other types of applications.
Reauthorizing the E-Government Act
Section 216 of P.L. 107-347, the E-Government Act of 2002, calls for facilitating the
development of common protocols for geographic information to promote collaboration and use
of standards and to reduce redundancy among federal agencies. Authorization for appropriations
under the act expired in FY2007. If the E-Government Act was reauthorized, Section 216 could
be expanded to include language for a national cadastre, as proposed in H.R. 1520, for
designating Executive Office of the President level leadership for all federal geospatial activities,
37 NGAC, 2009.
38 13 U.S.C. § 9 and §13. See also U.S. Census Bureau, at http://www.census.gov/privacy/data_protection/
federal_law.html.
39 P.L. 110-246.
40 Telephone conversation with Anne Miglarese, Chair, National Geospatial Advisory Committee, May 26, 2009.
Congressional Research Service
8
Issues Regarding a National Land Parcel Database
as recommended by NGAC, or for amending Title 13 of the U.S. Code to enable broader sharing
of address data and its inclusion in a national land parcel database.
NRC Recommendations for Integrated National
Land Parcel Data
The NRC made nine recommendations that it believes could lead to a coordinated and integrated
national approach to land parcel data, summarized and discussed briefly as follows:41
1. Creation of both a federal land parcel coordinator and a national land parcel
coordinator. The first would be responsible for federal lands and property; the
second would coordinate parcel data from all sources, both public and private.
NRC recognizes that BLM is one organizational choice to coordinate the federal
land parcel data, and it could serve both roles, but other agencies are also
candidates. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), for example, could
establish a national land parcel database as a homeland security issue. The
General Services Administration (GSA) already provides services for all federal
agencies. Likewise, the Census Bureau and HUD deal with property issues and
need land parcel data to fulfill their missions. NRC recommended that a panel be
established to recommend agency leadership. To date, no such panel has been
established.42
2. FGDC identification of the role of parcel data for the collection and maintenance
of other data themes in the overall geospatial infrastructure: buildings and
facilities, cultural resources, governmental units, and housing. NRC
recommended a systematic review of how these themes would be managed if an
integrated national parcel database existed.
3. Development by the federal land parcel coordinator of a single database for land
parcels managed by the federal government. This recommendation appears to call
for the federal government to house and maintain a single database of federal
property, as different from the national land parcel coordinator who would
coordinate land parcel data from all sources, which may be housed and
maintained in a variety of state, county, local, private, and other databases.
4. Development and oversight by the national land parcel coordinator of a land
parcel data business plan for the nation. NRC pointed to the lack of a coordinated
federal program for parcel data.
5. Establishment by the Office of the Special Trustee for Tribal lands of an Indian
Lands Parcel Coordinator to develop a land parcel database for Indian trust
parcels. NRC indicated that this could reduce redundancies and duplication of
effort in mapping Indian lands, among other issues related to trust lands.
41 NRC, National Land Parcel Data, chapter 7.
42 It should be noted NGAC recommended that immediate action be taken on this recommendation. See National
Geospatial Advisory Committee, Summary of Key Decisions/Recommendations from NGAC Meetings, April 2009, at
http://www.fgdc.gov/ngac/ngac-summary-key-recommendations-apr-09.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
9
Issues Regarding a National Land Parcel Database
6. Exploration by Congress and the Bureau of the Census of policy options,
including amending Title 13 of the U.S. Code, to allow its digital data on
building addresses and their geographic coordinates to be placed in the public
domain while maintaining privacy protections.
7. Adoption by the national land parcel coordinator of the 50-States Initiative43 and
require that each state formally establish a state parcel data coordinator. The 50-
States Initiative was proposed by the National States Geographic Information
Council to develop Statewide Spatial Data Infrastructures (SSDI) for each state.
The 50-States Initiative would potentially enable coordination between geospatial
data producers and consumers at all levels within the state, and allow the state to
share geospatial data with the national geospatial structure envisioned as the
NSDI.
8. Development by the national land parcel coordinator of a plan for an
intergovernmental funding program for the development and maintenance of
parcel data. NRC recognized that the plan must provide financial incentives to
local governments that produce and maintain the majority of the parcel data.
Additionally, NRC stated that the program would require new funding in addition
to existing funding for current federal programs that require parcel data.
9. Requirements that local and state governments make certain aspects of their
parcel data available in the public domain, as a prerequisite for participating in
federal geospatial programs.
Challenges and Concerns
Several challenges to a coordinated and integrated national approach to land parcel data have
been identified, such as confidentiality, cost, collaboration and data sharing, and incentives for
state and local governments to participate in a national cadastre. Of the range of potential
challenges and concerns, the NRC concluded,
... the financial and technical issues are minor compared to the organizational and political
ones. With thousands of counties or other governmental entities as potential producers of
parcel data, the organizational issues are complex. It is not a simple task to assemble parcel
data that span several counties or states. Overcoming organizational boundaries even among
federal agencies has been difficult, as evidenced by the fact that there is no single inventory
of federal lands.44
Several of the legislative and administrative options discussed above address organizational
challenges, as do several of the nine NRC recommendations. The NRC also identified political
challenges confronting a coordinated and integrated national approach to parcel data: “ ... the lack
of political will may be the most difficult hurdle of all.”45 NRC lists a range of political
challenges:
43 For more information about the 50-States Initiative, see NSGIC, at http://www.nsgic.org/hottopics/fifty_states.cfm.
44 NRC, National Land Parcel Data, p. 3.
45 Ibid., p. 108.
Congressional Research Service
10
Issues Regarding a National Land Parcel Database
• Return on investment. Determining how to calculate the benefits and costs of
creating a national approach to parcel data is difficult. NRC stated that the real
benefits of a nationally integrated system accrue to groups larger than local
government agencies seeking improved tax compliance or improved local
government efficiency. NRC contended that a national system would result in
reduced fraud, fairer tax assessments, more effective emergency management and
response, improved economic development, and other benefits.
• Motivation at the local level. What does and could motivate local governments,
which manage land parcel systems for local needs, to participate in a national
program? According to the NRC, some local governments assume that a national
system could never be as accurate as their own data, and that they also fear
releasing information to the public domain that the local government paid for.
• Unfunded mandates. The NRC noted that local governments face many budget
restrictions, and some distrust the forced sharing of data with nothing tangible in
return.
• Private sector benefits. The NRC reported a widespread perception that many
private firms are harvesting data collected by local governments for commercial
gain, without any perceived benefits flowing back to the local government.
• Other local political realities. The NRC acknowledged that local political leaders
may struggle with approving budget requests for large technical projects, such as
county participation in a national effort to create an integrated land parcel
database, especially when the benefits to the local government are not clear.
Lastly, the NRC concluded that “With more than 3,000 counties, tribes, and other local
government entities as potential producers of parcel data, the organizational issues are
complex.”46
Some of these concerns have been echoed by the National States Geographic Information Council
(NSGIC); however, NSGIC also embraces the need for better coordination and for a national
spatial data infrastructure, which would include a national land parcel component. The states are
sensitive to imposing a federal program, however, and are more likely to work in partnership with
the federal government. NSGIC recommends its 50-States Initiative to meet the needs of the
states while also sharing land parcel data with the national program. The NRC also recommended
that a national land parcel coordinator adopt the 50-States Initiative.
The Western Governors’ Association (WGA) has also supported federal, state, tribal, and local
coordination of GIS activities and encouraged regional, state, and interstate data sharing.47
Further, WGA recognized that BLM is working with state and local governments to develop
current and standardized digital representations of the Public Land Survey System and parcel
data, and has referred to this collaboration as the Cadastral National Spatial Data Infrastructure
(Cadastral NSDI). The Western Governors called on Congress to provide the funding necessary
for BLM to complete, enhance, and maintain the Cadastral NSDI in coordination and partnership
46 NRC, National Land Parcel Data, p. 112.
47 Western Governors’ Association, Policy Resolution 09-8, “Collaborative Geographic Data is Part of the Nation’s
Critical Infrastructure,” at http://www.westgov.org/wga/policy/09/GIS.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
11
Issues Regarding a National Land Parcel Database
with state, tribal, and local governments.48 One estimate of funding to implement the WGA
recommendation is $350 million over three years, followed by a smaller amount in each
succeeding year to maintain and enhance a Cadastral NSDI.49
Author Contact Information
Peter Folger
Specialist in Energy and Natural Resources Policy
pfolger@crs.loc.gov, 7-1517
48 Western Governor’s Association, Policy Resolution 09-8, “Collaborative Geographic Data is Part of the Nation’s
Critical Infrastructure,” at http://www.westgov.org/wga/policy/09/GIS.pdf.
49 Telephone conversation with Nancy von Meyer, vice president, Fairview Industries, Pendleton, SC, July 20, 2009.
Congressional Research Service
12