Samhällsbyggnadsprocessen behöver utvecklas och bli smartare, öppnare och mer effektiv för ett ökat bostadsbyggande. En digitalisering av samhällsbyggnadsprocessen kan ge ett effektivare samarbete mellan kommun, fastighetsägare, byggherrar, medborgare, näringsliv och myndigheter.Vid bildande av tredimensionellt avgränsade fastigheter eller fastighetsutrymmen (3D-fastigheter) behöver gränsernas läge redovisas både verbalt och i kartor och ritningar, detsamma gäller berörda rättigheter. Det är idag ofta svårt att korrekt redovisa en 3D-volym med enbart dagens pappersritningar och även svårt att läsa en registerkarta i 2D med fastigheter och rättigheter beslutade i 3D. Beslutsunderlagen i fastighetsbildnings-processen behöver bli mer enhetliga och entydiga samt fastighetsinformationen behöver bli återanvändningsbar i hela samhällsbyggnadsprocessen.I detta projekt har vi studerat informationsbehovet i de olika tidpunkterna under fastighetsbildningsprocessen för 3D-fastigheter med fokus på vem som är ansvarig för att tillhandahålla informationsunderlag för att identifiera krav på utformning av 3D-modeller (t.ex BIM) och 3D-stöd för fastighetsbildning.Internationellt finns det ett stort intresse och många frågeställningar gällande samspelet mellan BIM och Fastighetsinformation; det är däremot ganska få fall som har identifierats där man har arbetat praktiskt med BIM i relation till redovisning av 3D-fastigheter.Projektethar även tittat på behov av visualisering och tillhandahållande av fastighetsinformation i 3D, hur informationen bör utformas för att kunna tolkas korrekt samt nyttjas vidare av andra aktörer i samhällsbyggnadsprocessen.Slutsatsen i projektetär att en framtida arbetsmodell där man i samband med myndighetsutövningen för fastighetsbildning samverkar med stöd av BIM och geografisk information i ärendehandläggningen kan ge stora effekter på både myndighetens effektivitet och i ärendeutövningen och för förståelsen av fastighetbildningsbeslutet hos samtliga intressenter i processen. För att det arbete som genomförts i denna utredning skall få genomslag i den dagliga verksamheten rekommenderar vibland annatatt de statliga och kommunala lantmäterimyndigheterna arbetar vidare med att utveckla arbetsprocessen och rekommendationerna för 3D-fastighetsbildning baserat på resultatet från detta projekt och redan i dagens modell efterfrågar att man i handläggningsprocessen kan arbeta BIM-baserat även om kommande beslutshandlingar under en övergångsperiod fortfarande kommer att vara baserade på ritningsbilagor i 2D.

The concept of 3D property has only existed a short period of time in Sweden, being introduced in 2004 and expanded in 2009 by the addition of condominium (apartment) ownership. It is therefore a rather new form of land management, and the demand for 3D property formation has not been as high as initially expected. There is however an increased interest in 3D property and ownership apartments today, also as being part of the nation’s geospatial infrastructure together with related 3D information for e.g. buildings, utility networks and other features. An effective management of 3D property is depending on, among other things, visualization, representation and storage of 3D real property data, such as legal boundaries and real property rights. There are at present a number of ongoing 3D development and research projects focusing on visualization and standardization of 3D cadastral boundaries. They are part of the national "Smart Built Environment" development and research program, which includes the use of BIM in the (future) 3D property formation process with focus on visualization of 3D real property and condominiums, and specification of requirements and evaluation of 3D digital real property information created and managed in the processes.

This paper presents the preliminary results of the working group on visualization of 3D boundaries in the project "Smart planning, construction and management processes throughout the life cycle". The aim is to test the results produced in the project "Information for planning, real property formation and building permission", working group "BIM for 3D property formation." The purpose of this working group is to set the requirements for and evaluate the test bed for 3D property information. The focus is on visualization of 3D property and ownership apartments. The proposed model for digitization and visualization of 3D property formation will be tested in a test bed environment. A pilot case from the Stockholm area is then used in the test bed to see how it could work in practice.

The expected outcome is recommendations for the exchange of documentation and other digital information in 3D processes, the visualization of legal boundaries for stakeholders, registration of legal 3D objects in the Swedish national real property register and how to communicate 3D models to right holders/stakeholders for 3D property and condominiums and the property market, as well as suggestions for a homogeneous, effective and digital flow of 3D information to be used by actors and other stakeholders in the property formation, planning and building processes.

Condominium is one of the prevalent forms of three-dimensional (3D) property rights (Paulsson, 2007, p. 32). The condominium concept common to a number of jurisdictions consists of three elements: (a) individual ownership of an apartment, (b) co-ownership (joint ownership) of the land and the common parts of the building, and (c) membership of an incorporated or unincorporated owners' association (van der Merwe, 2015, p. 5). The ownership shares of condominium unit owners in the common property are here referred to as co-ownership shares; yet, alternative terms include ownership fraction, condominium share, participation quota, share value, and unit entitlement. The co-ownership share determines the proportional contribution to the common expenses and the share of common profits, as well as the voting power of each condominium unit owner in the administration of the condominium. The most common approaches to the determination of the co-ownership shares are based on equality, relative size or relative value of each condominium unit, or a combination of such (van der Merwe, 1994, p. 57-58). The literature presents detailed descriptions and comparative analysis related to condominium systems in different jurisdictions (e.g. van der Merwe, 2016; 2015; Paulsson, 2007; EUI, 2005; UNECE, 2005); however, the technical and procedural aspects related to the allotment of co-ownership shares still need to be further investigated. This paper aims to compare methods and procedures applied for the allotment of co-ownership shares of condominium systems in the following seven jurisdictions; Denmark, Germany, South Africa, Sweden, Switzerland, the Netherlands, and Turkey. Also, international geographic information standards (i.e. ISO LADM, OGC LandInfra/InfraGML) are analyzed to assess the extent to which they facilitate allocation of co-ownership shares. The main purpose is to clarify the legal provisions and methodologies related to the determination of co-ownership shares in national condominium systems and bring new insights to countries, which are trying to revise their national provisions for fairer implementations.

Condominium is one of the prevalent forms of three- dimensional (3D) property rights (Paulsson, 2007, p. 32). The condominium concept common to a number of jurisdictions consists of three elements: (a) individual ownership of an apartment, (b) co-ownership (joint ownership) of the land and the common parts of the building, and (c) membership of an incorporated or unincorporated owners' association (van der Merwe, 2015, p. 5). The ownership shares of condominium unit owners in the common property are here referred to as co-ownership shares; yet, alternative terms include ownership fraction, condominium share, participation quota, share value, and unit entitlement. The co-ownership share determines the proportional contribution to the common expenses and the share of common profits, as well as the voting power of each condominium unit owner in the administration of the condominium. The most common approaches to the determination of the co-ownership shares are based on equality, relative size or relative value of each condominium unit, or a combination of such (van der Merwe, 1994, p. 57-58). The literature presents detailed descriptions and comparative analysis related to condominium systems in different jurisdictions (e.g. van der Merwe, 2016; 2015; Paulsson, 2007; EUI, 2005; UNECE, 2005); however, the technical and procedural aspects related to the allotment of co-ownership shares still need to be further investigated. This paper aims to compare methods and procedures applied for the allotment of co-ownership shares of condominium systems in the following seven jurisdictions; Denmark, Germany, South Africa, Sweden, Switzerland, the Netherlands, and Turkey. Also, international geographic information standards are analyzed to assess the extent to which they facilitate allocation of co-ownership shares. The main purpose is to clarify the legal provisions and methodologies related to the determination of co-ownership shares in national condominium systems and bring new insights to countries, which are trying to revise their national provisions for fairer implementations.

This article continues a research on the feasibility of BIM for 3D cadastre in unified building models, presented in . It describes problems and solutions concerning interaction between BIM and the registration and visualisation of legal 3D property information. BIM and legal 3D property are two seemingly different domains, and there is a lack of BIM-3D property research in relation to technical and registration issues. The article therefore focuses on possibilities and difficulties of addressing legal interests (i.e. rights, restrictions and responsibilities) in land. A Swedish case study is used to describe the use of 3D property formation and registration in Sweden, and how it might be possible to achieve a more integrated, standard based registration of legal boundaries and physical buildings. The results emphasize how BIM and 3D property domains can interact to serve the needs for effective information handling by e.g. importing 3D cadastral boundaries into BIM as basis for decision-making or to use BIM as input in the 3D cadastral formation process.

The ongoing digitalization of public administration and increasedautomation of legal decision-making bears promise to benefit citizens,businesses and other stakeholders through simpler and more efficient civilprocesses, and thus has great impact on the urban planning and buildingprocess. However, automation of decision-making that is directed orconstrained by normative systems such as laws, regulations and policies,requires a detailed and accurate representation of these concepts andtheir constituent parts, and the domain to which they are applied. Thispaper combines two perspectives on formalisation and classification oflegal relations within the urban planning and building domain. In a crossdisciplinaryfashion, the paper analyses and describes a small part of thisdomain at a higher level of abstraction and formalization using two differentanalysis instruments. Using these tools, we perform structural and conceptualas well as logical analyses of two specific snapshots of a fictitious propertysubdivision case in Sweden, focusing on the legal relations between differententities and parties involved in the specific situations. The structural analysisuses the Land Administration Domain Model ISO 19152:2012 standardformalism, and the logical analysis is based on the notion of atomic types oflegal relations. The paper discusses some of the strengths and weaknesses ofthe two tools regarding the formal representation of rights, restrictions andresponsibilities of different parties in the land administration domain, as wellas how the tools relate to each other and how they can be aligned. This papertakes one step towards a deeper understanding of the domain, and identifyareas for future research that may provide better conditions for efficient andtransparent use of geospatial information, and automation of the propertysubdivision process and other related civil processes.

The paper focuses onapproaches to the registration of real property rights in the case of underground or subway tunnels in different EU countries: Austria, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Croatia, Greece, Poland, Slovenia, and Sweden. The Authors made analysis of the current way of registration of rights to subway tunnels in the chosen countries, including its effectiveness in ensuring appropriate property rights to construct and exploit tunnels. A special attention was given to limitations related to the lack of the possibility to vertically divide the space, i.e. to divide the space into layers, and to refer the ownership right to the layers. Benefits which might be achieved by the introduction of a 3D real property cadastre were pointed out. The analysis of available data concerning the geometry of subway tunnels in particular countries was presented. The authors tried to answer the question whether the accessible data concerning the geometry of subway tunnels allows to generate a 3D geospatial model of a constructed object, and to specify the space which should be determined as a 3D parcel in the 3D real property cadastre, for the purpose of registering property rights for the object (the tunnel).

The concepts of three-dimensional (3D) real property have been the subject of increased interest in land use management and research since the late ‘90s. Literature provides various examples of extensive research towards 3D Cadastres as well as those that are already implementing 3D cadastral systems. However, in most countries the legal aspects of 3D real property and its incorporation into 3D cadastral systems have not been so rigorously examined. This paper compares and discusses 3D property concepts in 15 cadastral jurisdictions, based on the authors’ national experience, covering Europe, North and Latin America, Middle East and Australia. Each of the legal system in these cadastral jurisdiction are based on different origins of Civil Law, including German, Napoleonic and Scandinavian Civil Law, which can prove useful to research in other Civil Law jurisdictions interested in introducing 3D cadastral systems. These jurisdictionsare at different stages of introducing and implementing a 3D cadastral system. This contributes to the detection of the 3D real property concepts that apply as well as deficiencies that prohibit introduction of 3D cadastral systems, while highlighting challenges that may have not yet surfaced in individual jurisdictions. This paper aims to present the different legal concepts regarding 3D real property in the examined countries, focusing on the characteristic features of cadastral objects described as 3D within each country’s legal and cadastral framework. The analysis of the case studies revealed that the countries are on different stages of 3D Cadastral implementation, starting from countries with operational 3D cadastral systems, to others where there is yet no interest in introducing a 3D cadastral system. This paper presents the nature of 3D cadastral objects in each country, as well as differences in the regulatory framework regarding definition, description and registration. The paper continues the legal workshop discussions of the 4th International Workshop on 3D Cadastres in Dubai 2014 by analysing the legal concepts of 3D cadastres in the above-mentioned countries. The outcome is an overview and discussion of existing concepts of 3D property describing their similarities and differences in use, focusing on the legal framework of 3D cadastres. The article concludes by presenting a possible way forward and identifies what further research is needed which can be used to draft national and international research proposals and form legislative amendments towards introduction of national 3D cadastral systems.

The concepts of three-dimensional (3D) real property have been the subject of increased interest in land use management and research since the late ‘90s.Literature provides various examples of extensive research towards 3D Cadastres as well as those that are alreadyimplementing3D cadastral systems. However, in most countries the legal aspects of 3D real property and its incorporation into 3D cadastral systems have not been so rigorously examined.This paper compares and discusses 3D property concepts in 15 cadastral jurisdictions, based on the authors’ national experience, covering Europe, North and Latin America, Middle East and Australia. Each of the legal system in these cadastral jurisdiction arebased on different origins of Civil Law, including German, Napoleonic and Scandinavian Civil Law, which can prove useful to research in other Civil Law jurisdictions interested in introducing 3D cadastral systems. These jurisdictionsare atdifferent stages of introducing and implementing a 3D cadastral system.This contributesto the detection of the 3D real property concepts that apply as well as deficiencies that prohibit introduction of 3D cadastral systems,whilehighlighting challenges that may have not yet surfacedin individual jurisdictions. This paper aims to present the different legal concepts regarding 3D real property in the examined countries, focusing on the characteristic features of cadastral objects described as 3D within each country’s legal and cadastral framework. The analysis of the case studies revealed that the countries are on different stages of 3D Cadastralimplementation, starting from countries with operational 3D cadastral systems, to others where there is yet no interest in introducing a 3D cadastral system.This paper presents the nature of 3D cadastral objects in each country, as well as differences in the regulatory framework regarding definition, description and registration. The paper continues the legal workshop discussions of the 4th International Workshop on 3D Cadastres in Dubai 2014 by analysing the legal concepts of 3D cadastres in the above-mentioned countries. The outcome is an overview and discussion of existing concepts of 3D property describing their similarities and differences in use, focusing on the legal framework of 3D cadastres. The article concludes by presenting a possible way forward and identifies what further research is needed which can be used to draft national and international research proposals and form legislative amendments towards introduction of national 3D cadastral systems.

The concepts of three-dimensional (3D) real property have been the subject of increasedinterest in land use management and research since the late ‘90s while literatureprovides various examples of extensive research towards 3D Cadastres as well asalready implementing 3D cadastral systems. However, in most countries the legal aspectsof 3D real property and its incorporation into 3D cadastral systems have not beenso rigorously examined.This chapter compares and discusses 3D property concepts in fifteen selected countries,based on the authors’ national experience, covering Europe, North and LatinAmerica, Middle East and Australia.

Гурван хэмжээст (3 D үл хөдлөх хөрөнгийн талаарх ойлголт, үзэл баримтлалууд 90 ээд онысүүл үеэс эхлэн газар зохион байгуулалтын баримт бичиг болон судалгааны бүтээлүүдэдтусах болсон билээ. Өнөө цагт бид 3 D кадастрын талаар хийгдсэн судалгаа, өргөн цархүрээтэй ойлголт, шилд эг туршлагуудыг олон ном, судалгааны бүтээлүүдээс харж болно.Хэдий тийм боловч ихэнх улс орнуудад 3 D үл хөдлөх хөрөнгийн эрх зүйн зохицуулалтуудыгнарийвчлан тодорхойлж 3 D кадастрын системийг эрхлэх асуудал одоо хүртэл нарийншийдэгдэ эгүй, судлагдаагүй хэвээр байна.Энэ бүлэгт Европ, Хойд болон Латин Америк, Ойрх Дорнод, Австралийн нийт 15 өөр эрхзүйн орчин дахь 3 D үл хөдлөх хөрөнгийн үзэл баримтлалыг зохиогчдын өөрсдийнх ньүндэсний туршлагад тулгуурлан харьцуулан авч үзсэн болно. Түүнчлэн Герман, Франц,Скандинав з эрэг өөр өөр ялгаатай иргэний эрх зүйн орчин дэх 3 D кадастрын системийнжишээг авч үзсэн нь эдгээр улстай ижил төрлийн эрх зүйн систем хөгжсөн бусад орнуудад3D кадастрын системийг нэвтрүүлэхэд тус нэмэр болох буй заа. Гэхдээ эдгээр жишээ, сайнтуршлагууд нь 3 D кадастрын системийг нэвтрүүлэх, хэрэгжүүлэх гэх мэт өөр өөр үе шатандявж байгааг анхаарна биз ээ. Энэ нь 3 D үл хөдлөх хөрөнгийн үзэл баримтлал, 3 D кадастрынсистемийг нэвтрүүлэхэд тулгамдаж буй асуудлуудыг тодорхойлоход хувь нэмэр оруулахынзэрэгцээ тухайн эрх зүйн орчинд хараахан бий болоогүй байгаа бэрхшээл, асуудлуудыгурьдчилж харахад илүү дөхөм болгож байна.Түүнчлэн та бүхэнд хүргэхийг зорьсон дараагийн асуудал бол тухайн улс бүрийн эрх зүйнорчин болон кадастрын систем дэх 3 D гэж тодорхойлсон кадастрын объектуудын онцлог,шинж чанаруудыг илүү тодотгон тайлбарлах юм. Мөн 3 D кадастрын системтэй улсорнуудаас э хлээд 3 D кадастрын системийг нэвтрүүлэх сонирхолгүй байгаа улс орнуудынжишээ, туршлагад дүн шинжилгээ хийж 3 D кадастрын объектын мөн чанар, үзэл баримтлал,бүртгэлийн зохицуулалтын тогтолцооны ялгааг харуулжээ. Тус бүтээлд дээр дурдсан улсорнуудын 3 D кад астрын эрх зүйн үзэл баримтлалд дүн шинжилгээ хийх замаар 2014 ондДубайд болсон 3 D кадастрын олон улсын 4 р хурлын эрх зүйн салбар хуралдааныхэлэлцүүлэгт хөндөгдсөн асуудлуудыг үргэлжлүүлсэн болно. Үүний үр дүнд 3 D үл хөдлөххөрөнгийн тухай одоо байгаа эрх зүйн тогтолцоо, үзэл баримтлал, ойлголтуудыг тоймложхөрөнгийн тухай одоо байгаа эрх зүйн тогтолцоо, үзэл баримтлал, ойлголтуудыг тоймлож тэдгээрийн ижил төстэй болон ялгаатай байдлыг тайлбарласан байна. Төгсгөлд нь цаашид тэдгээрийн ижил төстэй болон ялгаатай байдлыг тайлбарласан байна. Төгсгөлд нь цаашид хэрхэх арга замыг танилцуулж, тухайн улсын болон олон улсын хэмжээнд 3хэрхэх арга замыг танилцуулж, тухайн улсын болон олон улсын хэмжээнд 3D D кадастрын кадастрын систсистемийг нэвтрүүлэхэд хууль тогтоомжид нь ямар нэмэлт өөрчлөлт оруулах шаардлагатай емийг нэвтрүүлэхэд хууль тогтоомжид нь ямар нэмэлт өөрчлөлт оруулах шаардлагатай талаар судалгааны үндэслэл боловсруулах шаардлагыг тодорхойлжээ.талаар судалгааны үндэслэл боловсруулах шаардлагыг тодорхойлжээ.

The possibility of forming 3D property units has not existed for a long time in Sweden. The legislation was introduced in 2004 and in 2009 the addition of apartment ownership (condominium) was added. Even though the demand for 3D property formation has not been as high yet as initially expected, there seems to be an increased interest in and demand for it today. The use of 3D property creates a need for 3D registration and visualization of the property units, which can involve difficulties in e.g. representation and storage of 3D real property data, such as the legal boundaries and real property rights connected to the property.However, even if 3D digital information is used in the real property formation process the 3D properties are still registered using two–dimensional documentation. An ongoing study, which is a part of a project testing 3D data, see Andree et al. (2018a; 2018b) and Tarandi (2017), is focusing on visualization of 3D cadastral boundaries.This paper discusses problems and challenges concerning the conversion of 2D analogue cadastral boundary plans into 3D digital information and is based on experiences being gained in a research project on visualization of 3D property boundaries in Sweden, see Andree et al. (2018a; 2018b). A newly constructed sports– and event arena in Stockholm where 3D properties are involved is used as a case study in the project to illustrate the process and the problems related to it. Focus lies here on legal issues, although other aspects will be mentioned as well.The legal foundations for 3D property formation in Sweden are primarily the Swedish Land Code (SFS, 1970:944) and the Real Property Formation Act (SFS, 1970:988). The rights, restrictions and responsibilities, RRRs, are registered in the national Real Property Register, which also includes registration in the two–dimensional digital cadastral index map.A description of the process of forming 3D property is included in the paper regarding the documents and parties involved. In the present cadastral processes concerning new 3D property formation a CAD drawing containing 3D real property boundaries is often supplied by the developer/entrepreneur. However, the 3D cadastral representation and the documentation in the cadastral dossier is recorded in 2D (El–Mekawy, Paasch and Paulsson, 2014). The CAD file may – or may not - be archived for future use by the Cadastral authority. We therefore sometimes may have to interpret two–dimensional data and convert it to be used in a 3D environment, e.g. BIM. This paper illustrates and exemplifies with some experiences of interpreting the cadastral dossiers for presentation in a 3D digital environment.Current legislation has to be investigated and interpreted to be able to add or transform into using 3D models as part of cadastral decisions in Sweden. New regulations also may have to be introduced and analysed. In this paper some of the legal issues that need to be addressed are mentioned, however more work needs to be done in order to get answers to what changes may be needed regarding legislation on this matter.

This paper discusses problems and challenges concerning the process of conversion of 2D analogue cadastral boundary plans into 3D digital information and is based on experiences from a research project on visualization of 3D property boundaries in Sweden. An area next to a newly constructed sports– and event arena in Stockholm, where 3D properties are formed, is used as a case study in the project to illustrate the process and the problems related to it. Focus lies on legal issues, although other aspects are mentioned as well. The rights, restrictions and responsibilities (RRRs) are registered in the national Real Property Register, which also includes registration in the two–dimensional Digital Cadastral Index Map. 

A description of the process of forming 3D property is included in the paper regarding the documents and parties involved. The result of the study is that it is necessary to interpret two–dimensional cadastral data and textual descriptions in order for it to be used in a digital 3D environment, e.g. BIM.

The study shows that current legislation has to be investigated and interpreted in detail to be able to add or transform into using 3D models as part of cadastral decisions in Sweden. The current cadastral process is also analysed and suggestions for further development are provided.

To provide legal security in property rights/land tenure and support efficient land use planning, one needs a well-functioning system of land administration. In other words good land administration is the basis for sustainable land management and a stable and efficient land market.

Although property rights and procedures vary considerably between jurisdictions, the underlying data model to support land administration was found to be quite similar. Therefore, a decade ago, several of the authors of this paper initiated the process of coming to an international reference standard for land administration, the so-called Land Administration Domain Model (LADM). LADM is a framework for describing interest in land according to internationally agreed concepts and terminology and makes it possible to categorize interests in land (in specific jurisdiction) regardless of the origin in different legal systems. This not only enables the improvement and further development of national systems of land administration, but also supports international communication and exchange of data. In 2012 the LADM became an international standard, ISO 19152.

The LADM is based on “right”, “restriction” and “responsibility” (RRR) classes, which can apply to land, but also to buildings, network utilities, and 3D volumetric spatial units. Based on a number of earlier publications, such as (Paasch 2012), (Paasch et al 2013) and (Hespanha et al 2013), this paper explores the need and possible approaches to a more detailed classification of property rights, by either adding more subclasses for specific sets of RRRs, clustered after their legal or societal characteristics (e.g. common rights, latent rights, customary rights or informal rights as explored by (Paasch et al 2013)) or by the extension of code list values in LADM for a more refined classifications, or both. Options to ‘define’ code list values are: 1. describe with natural text, or 2. additionally encode an hierarchical structure to code list values, or 3. develop an ontology of the code list values, such as ownership, lease, etc. However, in all options it is non-trivial to define formally basic legal concepts such as ‘ownership’.

We will further investigate these aspects, including the decision when to add new classes and when to extend the code list values. In case of code list it will be further explored what is good approach to define the values.

The aim of this article is to investigate the possibilities to detect the conflicts between national interests and rights for sustainable land use. The analysis is based on a newly developed standardized terminological framework for classification of interests in land, the Legal Cadastral Domain Model. The model is used to classify conflicting rights in two Swedish mining areas, Kiruna and Bunge, in Kiruna the relocation of the city due to mining interests and in Bunge the ongoing conflict between mining interests and national nature preservation interests.

The study shows that it is relevant to use a standardized approach for getting an overview of and thus comparing the multi-facetted nature of private and public interests in land. For example, land use regulations, such as a zoning plan, often contain prohibitions and obligations for the property owner embedded in the same document and a mining concession may contain instructions for environmental protection activities. They are in the model classified as separate interests beneficial or limiting for the right holder. A detailed classification therefore provides an overview and can assist officials and decision makers in identifying and co-ordinating conflicting interests.

This study discusses a proposed development of the ISO standard for land administration, the Land Administration Domain Model, LADM, ISO 19152. The extension focuses on expanding the standards terminology for classifying interests in land use. The proposed extension is based on the concept for classifying private and public rights, restrictions and responsibilities in the newly developed Legal Cadastral Domain Model, LCDM.

This article discusses terminological aspects concerning definitions of three-dimensional (3D) real property.

The authors have noticed that researchers from different countries, and even within the same country, use different terminology when describing 3D property. Neither have any general international definition of 3D property been encountered which is possible to use internationally to differentiate forms of 3D property. The aim of this article is to discuss terminological aspects of 3D property, resulting in a working definition of 3D property. The definition is tested and validated against other 3D property definitions encountered internationally.

The basic aspects of terminology in general and legal terminology in particular are studied as a foundation for discussions on forms of 3D property rights and 3D property terminology. Examples of various terms used internationally, in different countries and legal families, are presented, showing the variety and difficulties with standardising the terminology. The problem of existing inconsistent terminology used today is addressed by applying methods from the field of terminology within the 3D real property domain. An overview of 3D property and property rights and what characterizes each of them is also presented. Thereafter the terminological principles are applied on a survey of 3D property rights to create a working definition for 3D property.

Based on the validation, it can be concluded that the studied definitions all have shortcomings from a legal perspective, such as being too narrow or too wide, focusing on use rather than on object, or describing the physical object instead of the legally defined 3D object. This shows that it is difficult finding an accurate and internationally valid definition of 3D property. The authors believe that using unified terms and definitions will act towards a common understanding and thus further the establishment of a domain specific ontology within the field of 3D property.

This paper proposes a more detailed classification of the legal part of the Land Administration Domain Model (LADM), ISO 19152 (i.e. interests in land), than described in the current standard by further developing the LADM's 'right', 'restriction' and 'responsibility' (RRR) class and associated code lists. Besides the more obvious formal right descriptions, this paper also deals with informal rights' descriptions as introduced in the Social Tenure Domain Model (STDM) as a foundation for further LADM development. The authors base their research on the Legal Cadastral Domain Model, as developed by and described in the Ph.D. thesis of Paasch, which is used as a conceptual basis for adding an additional level to the LADM. Interests in land can be classified in this model as limiting or beneficial to real property ownership. The extended classification is further based on the paradigm that there are two major types of interest in land, privately agreed interests and regulations imposed by a public agency. The incorporation of a specialized classification of RRRs in the LADM is of value for more inclusion of social tenure in (inter-)national land administration registers. The LADM allows national profiles to be added to the standard, however, such profiles are relevant within a country. These profiles are needed in cases where detailed data of interests in land have to be exchanged internationally. International data exchange requires maintenance of code tables representing the different RRRs in use within countries. OICRF has announced an initiative in support to this.

This paper serves as the basis for discussions for the working session Legal framework 3D Cadastres, being one of the four working sessions at the 4th International Workshop on 3D Cadastres. The paper is intended to initiate discussions on the legal framework of 3D cadastres and aims at identifying the main topics concerning the legal aspects of 3D cadastre and further future research.

This paper proposes a more detailed classification of the legal part of the LADM, ISO 19152, (i.e. interests in land) than possible in the current standard (ISO, 2012) today and is an attempt to raise awareness of the possibilities to further develop the LADMs rightt, restrictionn and responsibilityy classes (RRR). The term landd is here used for land, water and air. The LADM does, in principle, already facilitate the modelling of e.g. informal and customary rights. However, there has, to the authorss knowledge, not yet been any approach that incorporates non-formal social tenure relationships, such as informal occupation, tenancy based on non-formal and informal rights and customary rights into the LADM. This paper uses the non-formal rights descriptions in the Social Tenure Domain Model (STDM) as an input to further develop the LADM.

The Land Administration Domain Model, LADM, passed on the 1st of November 2012 unanimously the final vote towards becoming an international standard, ISO 19152. Based on the standard this paper is a proposal for a more detailed classification of interests in land as modelled within LADM and an attempt to raise the awareness of the possibilities to further develop the LADM‟s rightt, restrictionn and responsibilityy (RRR) classes. The current standardised classification of RRRs in the LADM is restricted to a top-level classification of RRRs. In this paper the authors use the classification of interests in land described in the newly developed Legal Cadastral Domain Model, LCDM, to further develop the LADM. The LDM is based on comparative international legal investigations, including case studies from Portugal, Germany, the Netherlands, Ireland and Sweden.

3D property is an increasingly discussed and researched topic. Several conferences and workshops have contained contributions on this subject and there are often special sessions devoted to it at e.g. FIG conferences. There are also many articles, conference contributions, theses and other publications available that present and discuss 3D property from different aspects. However, many of these conferences and publications seem to focus on technical aspects of 3D property rather than on legal aspects. It even seems that more is written on technical issues and registration than on other equally important issues related to law, organisation, etc. which creates a certain imbalance within the field.The aim of this paper is to investigate the field of 3D property in research, as evidenced by conference papers and other publications, in order to find the distribution of areas of interest and specifically the occurrence of legal aspects. The intention is not to describe any particular 3D property issues or to present a complete survey, but to analyse trends within the field and to contribute to the methodology and structure of 3D research.A case-study was conducted by examining conference papers, journal articles and other publications in English on 3D property within the recent ten year period. The studied publications were placed in four different groups, illustrating different aspects of 3D property, namely legal, technical, registration and organisational issues. The classification was done after analysing the publications by their contents. The total number of studied publications is 105. The results indicate a rather even distribution between three of the four categories, except for organisational aspects, which are in minority. However, when looking from a legal perspective, the legal category is in minority with only 28 publications, in comparison with the total number of the publications in the other three categories, consisting of 77 publications.Thus, although there already exists a foundation of results from research and other works on the legal aspects of 3D property, the authors believe that more work is needed and that more and focused attention should be given to legal aspects of 3D property.

This article investigates and discusses 3D property research, as evidenced by conference papers and other publications written in English, to analyze the distribution of interest areas and the occurrence of legal aspects and trends within 3D property research occurring between 2001 and 2011. A total of 156 publications on 3D property were examined. The publications were classified in four different categories, which represent different aspects of 3D property: legal, technical, registration and organizational. More 3D property research has been conducted on technical aspects and registration than legal aspects. In the legal category, most studies addressed national legislation and the practical use of (national) legislation. The authors believe that further fundamental legal research on 3D property is needed. The quantity of research could be increased, for example, by promoting international discussion and increasing the number of comparative legal studies on 3D property rights. Additional and more focused attention should be given to international matters, such as comparative studies on the use of 3D property concepts, the development of (international) 3D property terminology and cooperation between 3D property unit owners.

Standardization reduces technical barriers to trade and foster dissemination of innovations. Within the domain of information technology, standardization enhances semantic interoperability of systems and services. In order to achieve the potential of standardization, IT solutions must be localized to adapt to local needs. To reduce localization costs, software developers, but also standards develop and adopt internationalization principles and best practices, cf. the W3C Internationalization (I18n) Activity, the ISO 639 Language Codes, which provides an example for code lists and code list management, and the coding of coordinate reference systems. For the domain of Land Administration, the localization issue extends from language names to the various organizations and institutions dealing with interests in land. Paasch et al (2013) propose code lists as a mean of internationalization by which the classes of the ISO 19152:2012 Land Administration Domain Model (LADM) may be related to the concerned jurisdiction. The issue of code lists has been addressed by the OGC as well, namely in terms of the document 17-050r1 Code List Manifesto by Paul Scarponcini. Motivations for the study include that various OGC standards have encoded enumerations and code lists differently, as realized during the development of the InfraGML standard, which regards land and civil engineering infrastructure facilities, and thus share part of its scope with LADM. Aiming at harmonization of standards within the domain of Land Administration, the present paper proposes a joint management of the code lists which are specified by ISO LADM and by OGC LandInfra / InfraGML, respectively. The FIG motivated the ISO standard LADM and moreover framed research on code lists. It seems therefore appropriate to join with this organization of surveying professionals, also to benefit from sharing of expertise and cost of the management activities. The paper the outlines the tasks of code list management by drawing on the mentioned Code List Manifesto and resuming research supporting code list management, e.g. terminological theory and semantic tools. The setup of a possible code list management system is discussed, and summarized in terms of a draft Memorandum of Understanding.