QGIS & ArcGIS vs IDA
Why generic GIS tools fall short for professional tree management — and what the alternative is.
Many municipalities use QGIS or ArcGIS for their tree management. Understandably: these GIS platforms are powerful for spatial analysis and map visualization. But tree management requires more than points on a map. It demands specialized workflows for inspections, maintenance, risk analysis, and project management.
IDA is purpose-built for tree management. Where GIS tools stop at data storage and visualization, IDA offers a complete platform with built-in VTA inspections, work orders, contractor portal, and automated risk analysis. In this article, we explain the differences.
The limitations of GIS for tree management
GIS platforms like QGIS and ArcGIS are designed as universal geographic information systems. They excel at map production, spatial analysis, and combining different data layers. But that very generality becomes a limitation when you deploy them for a specific domain like tree management.
A tree inspection in GIS requires manual configuration of forms, validations, and workflows. There is no built-in concept of a VTA inspection, a safety class, or a maintenance project. Every municipality has to build and maintain this themselves — leading to inconsistent practices, error-prone processes, and high maintenance overhead.
What IDA does differently
IDA is not a GIS replacement, but a specialized platform that solves the shortcomings of generic GIS tools for tree management. It offers domain expertise that is built in by default.
Tree-specific data models
Built-in fields for tree species, condition, safety class, crown projection, and more — no manual configuration needed.
VTA inspection workflows
Complete VTA inspection forms with automatic calculations, frequency tracking, and documentation.
Project management & planning
Plan maintenance work, create work orders, and track progress — directly from the tree data.
Permits & contractor portal
External contractor portal for work orders without sharing the full dataset. Handle felling permits digitally.
What only IDA offers
Full feature comparison
When to choose which?
The choice between GIS and IDA depends on your primary need. Both tools have their place in the municipal landscape.
Choose GIS when you primarily need tree data for spatial analyses: overlay with utilities, tree impact analyses for construction projects, or integration with other geographic datasets. GIS is ideal as an analysis tool.
Choose IDA when you manage trees daily: conducting inspections, planning maintenance, directing contractors, handling permits, and reporting to management. IDA is built for operational tree management.
Most municipalities use both: IDA as the daily management system and GIS for spatial analyses. IDA exports to Shapefile and GeoPackage, allowing you to seamlessly use tree data in your existing GIS environment.
Integration with existing GIS environment
IDA doesn't replace your GIS environment — it strengthens it. All tree data in IDA can be exported to standard GIS formats and imported into QGIS or ArcGIS for spatial analyses.
The integration works in both directions: import existing tree data from GIS into IDA during initial setup, and export current tree data back to GIS when you need a spatial analysis. This way you combine the best of both worlds.
See the difference for yourself
Experience how IDA makes tree management easier than with generic GIS tools. Schedule a demo and view your own tree data in a system purpose-built for tree management.
Free consultation • View your own data • Compare objectively