Advances in camera trap data management tools: Towards collaborative development and integration with GIS

Camera traps have become a widely used technique for conducting biological inventories, generating a large number of database records of great interest. The main aim of this paper is to describe a new free and open source software (FOSS), developed to facilitate the management of camera-trapped data which originated from a protected Mediterranean area (SE Spain). In the last decade, some other useful alternatives have been proposed, but ours focuses especially on a collaborative undertaking and on the importance of spatial information underpinning common camera trap studies. This FOSS application, namely, “Camera Trap Manager” (CTM), has been designed to expedite the processing of pictures on the .NET platform. CTM has a very intuitive user interface, automatic extraction of some image metadata (date, time, moon phase, location, temperature, atmospheric pressure, among others), analytical (Geographical Information Systems, statistics, charts, among others), and reporting capabilities (ESRI Shapefiles, Microsoft Excel Spreadsheets, PDF reports, among others). Using this application, we have achieved a very simple management, fast analysis, and a significant reduction of costs. While we were able to classify an average of 55 pictures per hour manually, CTM has made it possible to process over 1000 photographs per hour, consequently retrieving a greater amount of data.

The Impact of BIM on the Distribution of Cost and Return on Investment in UK Construction Projects

It has been widely documented that when Building Information Modelling (BIM) is used, there is a shift in effort to the design phase. Little investigation into the impact of this shift in effort has been done and how it impacts on costs. It can be difficult to justify the increased expenditure on BIM in a market that is heavily driven by costs. There are currently studies attempting to quantify the return on investment (ROI) for BIM for which these returns can be seen to balance out the shift in efforts and costs to the design phase. The studies however quantify the ROI based on the individual stakeholder’s investment without consideration for the impact that the use of BIM from their project partners may have on their own profitability. In this study, a questionnaire investigated opinions and experience of construction professionals, representing clients, consultants, designers and contractors, to determine fluctuations in costs by their magnitude and when they occur. These factors were examined more closely by interviewing senior members representing each of the stakeholder categories and comparing their experience in using BIM within environments where their project partners were also using BIM and when they were not. This determined the differences in how the use and the investment in BIM impacts on others and how costs are redistributed. This redistribution is not just through time but also between stakeholders and categories of costs. Some of these cost fluctuations and how the cost of BIM is currently financed are also highlighted in several case studies. The results show that the current distribution of costs set for traditional 2D delivery is hindering the potential success of BIM. There is also evidence that stakeholders who don’t use BIM may benefit financially from the BIM use of others and that collaborative BIM is significantly different to the use of ‘lonely’ BIM in terms of benefits and profitability.