Skip to content
GEOSAT
Back to blog
Open GIS
Open GIS2026-09-23GEOSAT6 min read

Hypothetical scenario: a municipality’s GIS migration

A fictional organization, illustrative scope and a five-year calculation you can reproduce.

Editorial review: 2026-09-23

QGISPostGISGeoServerArcGISOpen GIS

Fictional exercise. This is not a GeoSAT delivery, client, testimonial or observed saving. “Example Sierra Municipality” is an invented organization. Its people, workflow and financial figures are educational assumptions, not an identifiable municipality or a quotation. The proposed tests below have not been performed for this fictional organization.

The exercise asks a specific question: could a municipality move portable desktop and publication tasks to QGIS, PostGIS and GeoServer while keeping a specialized ArcGIS process, and recover its transition cost within five years?

Assumed workflow and migration boundary

Eight hypothetical analysts maintain an infrastructure inventory, query administrative layers and prepare maps for other departments. A specialist process remains on ArcGIS. The proposed architecture uses QGIS for portable desktop work, PostGIS for the shared inventory and GeoServer for read-only WMS/WFS publication, with the service behavior defined in its WFS documentation.

The example assumes no automatic cadastral compliance, replacement of a utility network, or replication of an entire enterprise portal. Identity, backup and incident support still need an operating design. A department that previously edited records through a web form would need that form evaluated separately; a WMS map cannot replace it.

TaskProposed future behaviorEvidence needed before relying on it
Inventory editingQGIS writes authorized attributes in PostGISConstraints, permissions and concurrent-edit tests
Departmental consultationRead-only map and feature queriesClient compatibility, identifiers and refresh checks
Monthly cartographyQGIS layout with agreed symbols and labelsComparison with a reference PDF at required scale
Specialized processRemains in the supported Esri environmentExplicit data interface and retained license
RecoverySeparate operator restores data and configurationTimed recovery with reconciled records

The database has one authoritative editing path. Public publication uses only permitted attributes. These are design requirements, not capabilities proven by the financial calculation.

Invented budget in COP millions

The current and future scenarios use the same scope, five-year horizon and tax basis. There is no inflation, discount rate or exchange-rate conversion.

CategoryCurrent annualFuture annual
Current or retained licenses7015
Infrastructure1515
External support1510
Internal labor allocation2010
Total12050

The assumed transition is 90: migration and integration 55, training 15 and coexistence 20. Retained licenses are already in future annual cost. Temporary coexistence is in transition; it must not be charged a second time for the same period.

The largest staffing assumption is that the annual internal allocation falls from 20 to 10. This is a modeled reduction in work allocated to the service. If the people remain employed at the same pay, it is released capacity rather than an immediate payroll saving. A real business case would present cash and capacity separately.

Reproduce the result

Code example
Five-year current cost = 5 × 120 = 600
Five-year alternative = 90 + 5 × 50 = 340
Modeled net reduction = 600 − 340 = 260
Reduction percentage = 260 / 600 × 100 = 43.33%
Simple payback = 12 × 90 / (120 − 50) = 15.43 months

At the end of year one, cumulative savings are still negative: 120 − (90 + 50) = −20. At the end of year two, they reach 240 − (90 + 100) = 50. Simple payback assumes even recurring savings; real license renewals can change the cash-flow timing.

These results follow from the invented inputs. They do not establish the cost of migrating a Colombian municipality, nor a percentage GeoSAT can guarantee.

Proposed pilot: make the assumptions observable

Start with an authorized inventory subset, a reference layout and the real consuming application. Use synthetic data from the lab to rehearse protocols before accessing municipal material.

  1. Compare identifier sets, field types, nulls, geometry validity and CRS before and after conversion.
  2. Edit an allowed attribute as an ordinary analyst and attempt a forbidden change with the same role. Confirm the actual database and service permissions.
  3. Publish the read-only layer, query it in the departmental client, and check that private columns are absent.
  4. Produce the monthly layout and compare extent, scale, labels, legend and any required area calculation.
  5. Have another operator restore the dataset and configuration into a disposable environment.
  6. Measure training time, routine support and the effort required to repeat the monthly task.

A failed permission test or lost relationship blocks the assumed workflow even when the map looks correct. Higher support effort changes the cost model even when every functional test passes.

Sensitivity and the decision boundary

Changed assumptionFive-year alternativeModeled net reductionInterpretation
Base future annual 50; transition 90340260Positive under the stated assumptions
Internal allocation stays 20; future annual 60390210Less benefit; no presumed labor reduction
Future support/retained costs raise annual total to 80490110Payback increases to 27 months
Future annual 102; transition 906000No five-year cost advantage

All values are COP millions. If both future annual cost and transition rise by 20%, the alternative becomes 108 + 5 × 60 = 408, leaving 192 of modeled reduction. If a renewal is missed, calculate the actual additional payment; do not hide it inside a broad contingency percentage.

The fictional team should proceed only if the pilot supports the workflow and the revised cost assumptions remain acceptable. It should narrow the first batch when a specialist dependency dominates effort. It should postpone or retain the current system if the operator or recovery requirements cannot be met.

Replace assumptions with your own evidence

Use invoices for removable and retained spending, measured pilot hours for adaptations, and a documented operating estimate for support. Keep the proposed layout and editing tasks in the scope so the lower-cost option delivers the required service.

Compare this positive example with the fictional utility that does not save over five years. The cost methodology and phased migration plan explain how to turn the arithmetic into a project decision without treating a fictional exercise as commercial evidence.

Related articles