Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page R1
National Spatial Data Infrastructure Partnership Programs: Rethinking the Focus National Spatial Data Infrastructure Partnership Programs RETHINKING THE FOCUS Mapping Science Committee Board on Earth Sciences and Resources Division on Earth and Life Studies National Research Council NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS Washington, D.C.
OCR for page R2
National Spatial Data Infrastructure Partnership Programs: Rethinking the Focus NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. Support for the activities of the Mapping Science Committee is provided by the National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NMA202-99-1-1018), the U.S. Geological Survey (99HQAG0193), the Federal Geographic Data Committee, the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (DTTS59-99-P-00257), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (56-DKNA-0-95106), and the Bureau of the Census (43-YA-BC-037424). Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as necessarily representing the views of the agencies that provided support for this project, or of the official policies, either expressed or implied, of the U.S. Government. International Standard Book Number (ISBN) 0-309-07645-5 Additional copies of this report are available from: National Academy Press 2101 Constitution Avenue, NW Box 285 Washington, DC 20055 800–624–6242 202–334–3313 (in the Washington Metropolitan Area) http://www.nap.edu Cover: Aerial photo courtesy of the U.S. Geological Survey. The image on the bottom of the page was dowloaded from PhotoDisc. Copyright 2001 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America
OCR for page R3
National Spatial Data Infrastructure Partnership Programs: Rethinking the Focus THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES National Academy of Sciences National Academy of Engineering Institute of Medicine National Research Council The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M.Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Wm. A.Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I.Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M.Alberts and Dr. Wm. A.Wulf are chairman and vice-chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.
OCR for page R4
National Spatial Data Infrastructure Partnership Programs: Rethinking the Focus MAPPING SCIENCE COMMITTEE DAVID J.COWEN, Chair, University of South Carolina, Columbia ANNETTE J.KRYGIEL, Vice Chair, Integro, Great Falls, Virginia ERIC A.ANDERSON, Des Moines, Iowa CLIFFORD A.BEHRENS, Telcordia Technologies, Morristown, New Jersey WILLIAM J.CRAIG, The University of Minnesota, Minneapolis MARK MONMONIER, Syracuse University JOEL L.MORRISON, Ohio State University, Columbus SHERYL G.OLIVER, Illinois Department of Natural Resources, Springfield HARLAN J.ONSRUD, University of Maine, Orono C.STEPHEN SMYTH, Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, Washington JAMES V.TARANIK, University of Nevada, Reno REX W.TRACY, BAE SYSTEMS, San Diego, California A.KEITH TURNER, Colorado School of Mines, Golden National Research Council Staff THOMAS M.USSELMAN, Study Director (until 2/2000) DAVID A.FEARY, Study Director (from 3/2000) JENNIFER T.ESTEP, Administrative Associate REBECCA E.SHAPACK, Research Assistant (until 3/2001) SHANNON L.RUDDY, Project Assistant (from 3/2001)
OCR for page R5
National Spatial Data Infrastructure Partnership Programs: Rethinking the Focus BOARD ON EARTH SCIENCES AND RESOURCES RAYMOND JEANLOZ, Chair, University of California, Berkeley JOHN J.AMORUSO, Amoruso Petroleum Company, Houston, Texas PAUL BARTON, JR., U.S. Geological Survey (emeritus), Reston, Virginia DAVID L.DILCHER, University of Florida, Gainesville BARBARA L.DUTROW, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge ADAM M.DZIEWONSKI, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts WILLIAM L.GRAF, Arizona State University, Tempe GEORGE M.HORNBERGER, University of Virginia, Charlottesville SUSAN KIEFFER, Kieffer and Woo, Inc., Palgrave, Ontario DIANNE R.NIELSON, Utah Department of Environmental Quality, Salt Lake City JONATHAN PRICE, Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology, Reno BILLIE L.TURNER II, Clark University, Worcester Massachusetts National Research Council Staff ANTHONY R.DE SOUZA, Director TAMARA L.DICKINSON, Senior Program Officer DAVID A.FEARY, Senior Program Officer ANNE M.LINN, Senior Program Officer PAUL M.CUTLER, Program Officer LISA M.VANDEMARK, Program Officer KRISTEN L.KRAPF, Research Associate KERI H.MOORE, Research Associate MONICA R.LIPSCOMB, Research Assistant JENNIFER T.ESTEP, Administrative Associate VERNA J.BOWEN, Administrative Assistant YVONNE FORSBERGH, Senior Project Assistant KAREN IMHOF, Senior Project Assistant SHANNON L.RUDDY, Project Assistant TERESIA K.WILMORE, Project Assistant WINFIELD SWANSON, Editor
OCR for page R6
National Spatial Data Infrastructure Partnership Programs: Rethinking the Focus This page in the original is blank.
OCR for page R7
National Spatial Data Infrastructure Partnership Programs: Rethinking the Focus Acknowledgment of Reviewers This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the NRC’s Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their reviews of this report: Richard J.Aspinall, Department of Earth Sciences, Montana State University, Bozeman Don F.Cooke, Geographic Data Technologies, Lebanon, New Hampshire Stephen D.DeGloria, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York Dennis B.Goreham, National States Geographic Information Council, Salt Lake City, Utah Matt Hoobler, Department of Agriculture, Cheyenne, Wyoming William E.Huxhold, School of Architecture and Urban Planning, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Kevin Kryzda, Information Systems Department, Martin County, Stuart, Florida Susan Lambert, Office of Geographic Information, Frankfort, Kentucky Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse
OCR for page R8
National Spatial Data Infrastructure Partnership Programs: Rethinking the Focus the conclusions or recommendations nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Frederick J.Doyle, U.S. Geological Survey (emeritus), appointed by the Division on Earth and Life Studies, who was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.
OCR for page R9
National Spatial Data Infrastructure Partnership Programs: Rethinking the Focus Preface The Mapping Science Committee serves as a focus for external advice to federal agencies on scientific and technical matters related to spatial data handling and analysis. One of the committee’s roles is to provide advice on the development of a robust national spatial data infrastructure for making informed decisions at all levels of government and throughout society in general. The concept of a National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) was first advanced by the Mapping Science Committee (MSC) in its 1993 report, Toward a Coordinated Spatial Data Infrastructure for the Nation (NRC, 1993). The next year, the committee addressed partnerships as an essential component of the NSDI (Promoting the National Spatial Data Infrastructure Through Partnerships; NRC, 1994). Since then, the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FDGC) has sponsored a series of annual competitions for grants to promote the NSDI. These grants have been used to stimulate the development of partnerships at a variety of levels (local, state, federal); to encourage the documentation of data according to national standards to facilitate their sharing; and to encourage the use of geospatial data in new applications. By 2000, these FGDC programs had provided support for NSDI development in 49 of the 50 states. Their objectives had varied substantially from year to year, and from program to program. As one of the advisory bodies responsible for originating the NSDI, the MSC identified the need for an assessment of progress to date, and for guidance on directions for the future. Was the NSDI developing according to plan, with FGDC partnership programs working to advance its goals, or was some degree of redirection appropriate? Accordingly, a study to address these questions was conducted by the MSC as one of its core activities in the latter half of 1999 and through 2000. This report is the outcome of that process. It is important to recognize that the committee focused on
OCR for page R10
National Spatial Data Infrastructure Partnership Programs: Rethinking the Focus the partnership programs promoted by the FGDC, and has not attempted a comprehensive analysis of all NSDI partnership activities. In addition to the present members of the MSC, I wish to acknowledge the input of former MSC members who contributed to earlier versions of the report—Brian Berry, Nick Chrisman, David Coleman, Hank Garie, Barry Glick, Karen Siderelis, and Lyna Wiggins. I would particularly like to acknowledge my predecessor as MSC chair, Mike Goodchild, who oversaw the conception of this report and made a major contribution to its content. David J.Cowen Chair, Mapping Science Committee
OCR for page R11
National Spatial Data Infrastructure Partnership Programs: Rethinking the Focus Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 1 NSDI AND PARTNERSHIPS 5 Goals of the NSDI, 5 Coordination and Leadership, 9 Components of the NSDI, 11 Data Standards, 11 National Geospatial Data Clearinghouse, 12 NSDI Framework, 13 Purpose of the Report, 15 2 REVIEW OF NSDI PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMS 17 NSDI Cooperative Agreements Program, 19 Framework Demonstration Projects Program, 23 “Don’t Duck Metadata”, 25 Community Demonstration Projects, 26 Community-Federal Information Partnerships, 29 Priming the Pump—the Federal Role in NSDI Partnership Initiation, 30 The Future Federal Role in Developing the NSDI, 35 3 FUTURE PARTNERSHIPS AND THE EVOLUTION OF NSDI ACTIVITIES 39 Framework Data Production, 40 Data Access, Use, and Other Framework Issues, 44 The Time Dimension: Data Update, Archiving, and Change Detection, 48 Privacy, the Private Sector, and Public Access Issues, 50 The GeoData Alliance—an Innovative Organizational Approach for Development of the NSDI, 53
OCR for page R12
National Spatial Data Infrastructure Partnership Programs: Rethinking the Focus 4 AN EXTENDED NATIONAL SPATIAL DATA INFRASTRUCTURE FRAMEWORK: THE ROLE OF OTHER ORGANIZATIONS 57 Arguments for an Extended Framework, 57 Definition of a City or County Extended Framework, 64 Definition of a State or Tribal Nation Extended Framework, 66 Summary of Spatial Data Themes, 68 Roles of Private Industry and Non-Profit Organizations, 70 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 73 REFERENCES 77 ACRONYMS 81