Editing Interoperability (section)

== Government ==

=== eGovernment ===
Speaking from an [[e-government]] perspective, interoperability refers to the collaboration ability of cross-border services for citizens, businesses and public administrations. Exchanging data can be a challenge due to language barriers, different specifications of formats, varieties of categorizations and other hindrances.

If data is interpreted differently, collaboration is limited, takes longer and is inefficient. For instance, if a citizen of country A wants to purchase land in country B, the person will be asked to submit the proper address data. Address data in both countries include full name details, street name and number as well as a [[postal code]]. The order of the address details might vary. In the same language, it is not an obstacle to order the provided address data; but across language barriers, it becomes difficult. If the language uses a different [[writing system]] it is almost impossible if no translation tools are available.

=== Flood risk management ===
Interoperability is used by researchers in the context of urban [[flood risk management]].<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Vercruysse|first1=Kim|last2=Dawson|first2=David A.|last3=Wright|first3=Nigel|title=Interoperability: A conceptual framework to bridge the gap between multifunctional and multisystem urban flood management|journal=Journal of Flood Risk Management|language=en|pages=e12535|doi=10.1111/jfr3.12535|issn=1753-318X|year=2019|volume=12|issue=S2 |doi-access=free|bibcode=2019JFRM...12E2535V }}</ref>&nbsp; Cities and urban areas worldwide are expanding, which creates complex spaces with many interactions between the environment, infrastructure and people. &nbsp;To address this complexity and manage water in urban areas appropriately, a [[system of systems]] approach to water and [[flood control]] is necessary. In this context, interoperability is important to facilitate system-of-systems thinking,&nbsp;and is defined as: "the ability of any water management system to redirect water and make use of other system(s) to maintain or enhance its performance function during water exceedance events."<ref>{{citation |title=Achieving Urban Flood Resilience in an Uncertain Future  |year=2019 |doi=10.3390/w11051082|doi-access=free |last1=Fenner |first1=Richard |last2=o'Donnell |first2=Emily |last3=Ahilan |first3=Sangaralingam |last4=Dawson |first4=David |last5=Kapetas |first5=Leon |last6=Krivtsov |first6=Vladimir |last7=Ncube |first7=Sikhululekile |last8=Vercruysse |first8=Kim |journal=Water |volume=11 |issue=5 |page=1082 |hdl=10871/37244 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> By assessing the complex properties of urban infrastructure systems, particularly the interoperability between the [[drainage]] systems and other urban systems (e.g. infrastructure such as transport), it could be possible to expand the capacity of the overall system to manage flood water towards achieving improved urban flood resilience.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.urbanfloodresilience.ac.uk/|title=Urban Flood Resilience|website=www.urbanfloodresilience.ac.uk|language=en-GB|access-date=2019-05-15}}</ref>

===Military forces===
{{anchor| Military}}
''Force interoperability'' is defined in NATO as the ability of the forces of two or more nations to train, exercise and operate effectively together in the execution of assigned missions and tasks. Additionally NATO defines interoperability more generally as the ability to act together coherently, effectively and efficiently to achieve Allied tactical, operational and strategic objectives.<ref>[http://nso.nato.int/nso/zPublic/ap/aap6/AAP-6.pdf NATO Glossary of Terms and Definitions, NATO AAP-06]{{dead link|date=April 2017 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref>

At the strategic level, interoperability is an enabler for coalition building. It facilitates meaningful contributions by coalition partners. At this level, interoperability issues center on harmonizing world views, strategies, doctrines, and force structures. Interoperability is an element of coalition willingness to work together over the long term to achieve and maintain shared interests against common threats. Interoperability at the operational and tactical levels is where strategic interoperability and technological interoperability come together to help allies shape the environment, manage crises, and win wars. The benefits of interoperability at the operational and tactical levels generally derive from the interchangeability of force elements and units. ''Technological interoperability'' reflects the interfaces between organizations and systems. It focuses on communications and computers but also involves the technical capabilities of systems and the resulting mission compatibility between the systems and data of coalition partners. At the technological level, the benefits of interoperability come primarily from their impacts at the operational and tactical levels in terms of enhancing flexibility.<ref>Interoperability: A continuing Challenge in Coalition Air Operations - Chapter 2 "A broad Definition of Interoperability", by Myron Hura, Gary McLeod, James Schneider and others, RAND Monograph Report, 2000, [http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1235/MR1235.chap2.pdf] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131019111733/http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monograph_reports/MR1235/MR1235.chap2.pdf|date=2013-10-19}}</ref>
 
===Public safety===
Because first responders need to be able to communicate during wide-scale emergencies, interoperability is an important issue for [[law enforcement]], [[fire fighting]], [[emergency medical services]], and other public health and safety departments. It has been a major area of investment and research over the last 12 years.<ref>Allen, D. K., Karanasios, S., & Norman, A. (2013). Information sharing and interoperability: the case of major incident management. European Journal of Information Systems, 10.1057/ejis.2013.8.</ref><ref>Baldini, G. (2010). Report of the workshop on "Interoperable communications for Safety and Security". Ispra: European Commission, Joint Research Centre (JRC), Institute for the Protection and Security of the Citizen.</ref> Widely disparate and incompatible hardware impedes the exchange of information between agencies.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.firerescue1.com/fire-products/communications/interoperability/articles/424190-Interoperability-system-bridges-communications-gap/|title=Interoperability system bridges communications gap|newspaper=FireRescue1|access-date=2017-01-25|archive-date=2017-02-02|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170202042549/https://www.firerescue1.com/fire-products/communications/interoperability/articles/424190-Interoperability-system-bridges-communications-gap/|url-status=dead}}</ref> Agencies' information systems such as computer-aided dispatch systems and records management systems functioned largely in isolation, in so-called ''information islands''. Agencies tried to bridge this isolation with inefficient, stop-gap methods while large agencies began implementing limited interoperable systems. These approaches were inadequate and, in the US, the lack of interoperability in the public safety realm become evident during the [[9/11 attacks]]<ref>{{cite web|last=Grier|first=Robin|title=Interoperability Solutions|url=http://www.catcomtec.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=19&Itemid=34|work=Interoperability|publisher=Catalyst Communications|access-date=28 May 2011}}</ref> on the Pentagon and World Trade Center structures. Further evidence of a lack of interoperability surfaced when agencies tackled the aftermath of [[Hurricane Katrina]].

In contrast to the overall national picture, some states, including Utah, have already made great strides forward. The [[Utah Highway Patrol]] and other departments in Utah have created a statewide [[data sharing]] network.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.fatpot.com/ |title=FATPOT Technologies |access-date=2019-09-08 |archive-date=2018-07-10 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180710230842/https://www.fatpot.com/ |url-status=bot: unknown }}</ref>

The Commonwealth of Virginia is one of the leading states in the United States in improving interoperability. The Interoperability Coordinator leverages a regional structure to better allocate grant funding around the Commonwealth so that all areas have an opportunity to improve communications interoperability. Virginia's strategic plan for communications is updated yearly to include new initiatives for the Commonwealth&nbsp;– all projects and efforts are tied to this plan, which is aligned with the National Emergency Communications Plan, authored by the Department of Homeland Security's Office of Emergency Communications.

The State of Washington seeks to enhance interoperability statewide. The State Interoperability Executive Committee<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.siec.wa.gov|title=SIEC|access-date=12 August 2016}}</ref> (SIEC), established by the legislature in 2003, works to assist emergency responder agencies (police, fire, sheriff, medical, hazmat, etc.) at all levels of government (city, county, state, tribal, federal) to define interoperability for their local region. 
Washington recognizes that collaborating on system design and development for wireless radio systems enables emergency responder agencies to efficiently provide additional services, increase interoperability, and reduce long-term costs. This work saves the lives of emergency personnel and the citizens they serve.

The U.S. government is making an effort to overcome the nation's lack of public safety interoperability. The Department of Homeland Security's [[Office for Interoperability and Compatibility]] (OIC) is pursuing the SAFECOM<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.safecomprogram.gov/|title=SAFECOM - Homeland Security|access-date=12 August 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141221211800/http://www.safecomprogram.gov/|archive-date=2014-12-21|url-status=dead}}</ref> and [[CADIP]] and [[Project 25]] programs, which are designed to help agencies as they integrate their CAD and other IT systems.

The OIC launched CADIP in August 2007. This project will partner the OIC with agencies in several locations, including [[Silicon Valley]]. This program will use case studies to identify the best practices and challenges associated with linking CAD systems across jurisdictional boundaries. These lessons will create the tools and resources public safety agencies can use to build interoperable CAD systems and communicate across local, state, and federal boundaries.

=== As regulator for interoperability ===
Governance entities can increase interoperability through their legislative and executive powers. For instance, in 2021 the [[European Commission]], after commissioning two impact assessment studies and a [[technology analysis]] study, proposed the implementation of a [[standardization]] – for iterations of [[USB-C]] – of [[phone charger]] products, which may increase interoperability along with convergence and convenience for consumers while decreasing resource needs, redundancy and [[electronic waste]].<ref>{{cite news |title=Apple opposes EU plans to make common charger port for all devices |url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/23/apple-opposes-eu-plans-to-make-common-charger-port-for-all-devices |access-date=19 October 2021 |work=The Guardian |date=23 September 2021 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Peltier |first1=Elian |title=In a setback for Apple, the European Union seeks a common charger for all phones. |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/23/business/european-union-apple-charging-port.html |access-date=19 October 2021 |work=The New York Times |date=23 September 2021}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=One common charging solution for all |url=https://ec.europa.eu/growth/sectors/electrical-engineering/red-directive/common-charger_en |website=Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs - European Commission |access-date=19 October 2021 |language=en |date=5 July 2016}}</ref>