ADVANCING
STRATEGIC SCIENCE
A Spatial Data Infrastructure Roadmap
for the U.S. Geological Survey
Committee on Spatial Data Enabling USGS
Strategic Science in the 21st Century
Mapping Science Committee
Board on Earth Sciences and Resources
Division on Earth and Life Studies
NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL
OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, D.C.
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001
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.
This study was supported by Award No. 08HQ4G0145 between the National Academy of Sciences and the U.S. Geological Survey. The opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute their endorsement by the U.S. government.
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-26457-0
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-26457-X
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 2010921862
Additional copies of this report are available for sale from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Keck 360, Washington, DC 20001; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313; http://www.nap.edu/.
Cover: Cover design by Anne Rogers. Image courtesy of Michael Hitoshi/Stone/Getty Images.
Copyright 2012 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America.
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES
Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine
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. Ralph J. Cicerone 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. Charles M. Vest 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. Harvey V. Fineberg 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. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council.
COMMITTEE ON SPATIAL DATA ENABLING USGS STRATEGIC SCIENCE IN THE 21ST CENTURY
ROBERT DENARO (Chair), Nokia Corporation, Chicago, Illinois
GEORGE BRIMHALL, University of California, Berkeley, California
ROBERT CHEN, Columbia University, Palisades, New York
ANDREA DONNELLAN, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, California
MICHAEL EMCH, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, North Carolina
IAN JACKSON, British Geological Survey, Keyworth, Nottingham
JOHN KELMELIS, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania
XAVIER LOPEZ, Oracle Corporation, Nashua, New Hampshire
DENNIS OJIMA, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado
BRIDGET SCANLON, The University of Texas, Austin, Texas
National Research Council Staff
MARK D. LANGE, Study Director
PEGGY TSAI, Program Officer
NICHOLAS D. ROGERS, Financial and Research Associate
JASON R. ORTEGO, Research Associate (until June 2012)
ERIC J. EDKIN, Senior Program Assistant (from September, 2010)
TONYA FONG YEE, Senior Program Assistant (until September, 2010)
NORMAN GROSSBLATT, Senior Editor
MAPPING SCIENCE COMMITTEE
DAVID R. MAIDMENT (Chair),The University of Texas, Austin, Texas
LUC E. ANSELIN, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona
CECILIA R. ARAGON, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California
BUDHENDRA L. BHADURI, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee
SUSAN CARSON LAMBERT, EarthWorks, LLC, Frankfort, Kentucky
LEWIS A. LAPINE, South Carolina Geodetic Survey, Columbia, South Carolina
CAROLYN J. MERRY, Ohio State University, Columbus
JAYANT SHARMA, Oracle Spatial, Nashua, New Hampshire
DANIEL Z. SUI, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
MICHAEL F. WORBOYS, University of Maine, Orono, Maine
MAY YUAN, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma
National Research Council Staff
ANNE M. LINN, Senior Program Officer
ERIC J. EDKIN, Senior Program Assistant
BOARD ON EARTH SCIENCES AND RESOURCES
CORALE BRIERLEY (Chair), Brierley Consultancy, LLC, Denver, Colorado
WILLIAM E. DIETRICH, University of California, Berkeley
WILLIAM L. GRAF, University of South Carolina, Calcott
RUSSELL J. HEMLEY, Carnegie Institution of Washington, Washington, DC
MURRAY W. HITZMAN, Colorado School of Mines, Golden
EDWARD KAVAZANJIAN, JR., Arizona State University, Tempe
DAVID R. MAIDMENT,The University of Texas, Austin, Texas
ROBERT McMASTER, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis
M. MEGHAN MILLER, UNAVCO, Inc., Boulder, Colorado
ISABEL P. MONTAÑEZ, University of California, Davis
CLAUDIA INÉS MORA, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico
BRIJ M. MOUDGIL, University of Florida, Gainesville
CLAYTON R. NICHOLS, Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (retired), Sandpoint
HENRY N. POLLACK, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
DAVID T. SANDWELL, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, La Jolla, California
PETER M. SHEARER, University of California, San Diego
REGINAL SPILLER, Allied Energy, Houston, Texas
TERRY C. WALLACE, JR., Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico
National Research Council Staff
ANTHONY R. DE SOUZA, Director (until April 2012)
ELIZABETH A. EIDE, Director (from April 2012)
ANNE M. LINN, Senior Program Officer
SAMMANTHA L. MAGSINO, Senior Program Officer
MARK D. LANGE, Program Officer
NICHOLAS D. ROGERS, Financial and Research Associate
COURTNEY GIBBS, Program Associate
ERIC J. EDKIN, Senior Program Assistant
CHANDA IJAMES, Program Assistant
Preface
This report summarizes the findings and recommendations of the Committee on Spatial Data Enabling USGS Strategic Science in the 21st Century. The National Research Council (NRC) has published several reports that have helped to guide the development of the spatial data infrastructure (SDI) both in the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and nationally (1993, 1994, 1995, 2001, 2003, 2007). Those reports envisioned an SDI for the USGS and the nation and suggested the research needed to achieve that vision. Over the last decade, the USGS has conducted breakthrough research that has overcome some of the challenges associated with implementing a large SDI. This report is intended to ground those efforts by providing a practical roadmap to full implementation of an SDI to enable the USGS to conduct strategic science.
The committee was charged by the USGS to examine progress made in establishing spatial data infrastructures and the challenges faced by them in the context of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure. The committee examined the role that the USGS can play in continuing to ensure access to high-quality geospatial data and in supporting their use in scientific analyses and decision-making through an SDI construct. The committee was charged with three main tasks: identify existing knowledge and document lessons learned during previous efforts to develop SDIs and their support of scientific endeavors; develop a vision for optimizing an SDI to organize, integrate, access, and use scientific data; and create a roadmap to guide the USGS in accomplishing the vision within the scope of the USGS Science Strategy.
To address its charge, the committee examined SDI development in local, state, national, and international contexts and solicited advice from a variety of sources. Program managers and scientists in federal agencies, state organizations,
and academe provided programmatic information and user perspectives on future research directions. The committee also requested written feedback from leaders and data users in the geospatial community who generously provided guidance regarding what has and has not worked in SDI development; the major technical, organizational, cultural, policy, financial challenges still facing SDI development; and their own vision of an effective SDI at the USGS.
The committee was struck by the similarity of challenges faced by other organizations in developing their SDIs; the experiences cited in Chapter 3 on lessons learned are rich with examples of approaches that may be particularly valuable to the USGS. But a recurrent theme in nearly all the case studies was the crucial role of leadership in implementing an SDI. A strong, energetic, and inspirational leader with senior-level authority who stays with the program for the long term is the cornerstone of a successful program. The leader will be instrumental in executing the outside partnerships that are essential to the mission of the USGS and establishment of its SDI.
The names of respondents and other persons consulted by the committee are listed in Appendix B. Many of the conclusions and recommendations reached by the committee reflect ideas articulated in their thoughtful contributions; however, any errors or omissions are the responsibility of the committee, not of the external contributors. Finally, the committee expresses its gratitude to the NRC study director, Mark Lange, for his efforts in managing the committee and editing its report and to NRC staff Peggy Tsai, Jason Ortego, Eric Edkin, and Tonya Fong Yee, who assisted the committee extensively with Web site development, document tracking and assembly, and logistics.
Robert Denaro
Chair
References
NRC (National Research Council). 1993. Toward a Coordinated Spatial Data Infrastructure for the Nation. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
NRC 1994. Promoting the National Spatial Data Infrastructure Through Partnerships. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
NRC. 1995. A Data Foundation For The National Spatial Data Infrastructure. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
NRC. 2001. National Spatial Data Infrastructure Partnership Programs: Rethinking the Focus. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
NRC. 2003. Weaving a National Map: Review of the U.S. Geological Survey Concept of The National Map. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
NRC. 2007. A Research Agenda for Geographic Information Science at the United States Geological Survey Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Acknowledgments
This report has been reviewed in draft form by persons chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council’s Report Review Committee. The purpose of the 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 of objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the process. We thank the following for their review of this report:
Paul Birkel, The MITRE Corporation
Virginia H. Dale, Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Ruth Duerr, National Snow and Ice Data Center
John Moeller, JJ Moeller & Associates LLC
Jay B. Parrish, Pennsylvania State University
Cyrus Shahabi, University of Southern California
David G. Tarboton, Utah State University
Bastiaan van Loenen, Delft Technical University
Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse 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 William E. Easterling, Pennsylvania State University. Appointed by the National Research Council, he was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out
Contents
Defining a Spatial Data Infrastructure
Current Status of the USGS SDI: The National Map
The Challenge of an SDI for Science and Decision-making
3 KEY CHALLENGES AND LESSONS LEARNED
Organizations and Types of SDIs Examined
U.S. Geological Survey’s Spatial Data Infrastructure Initiatives
4 A VISION FOR OPTIMIZING THE USGS SPATIAL DATA INFRASTRUCTURE
Discover and Share for the Long Term
Enterprise Data Management for an SDI
Application Services to Engage and Support Scientific Questions
Abbreviations
AIP |
architecture implementation pilot |
API |
application programming interface |
BGS |
British Geological Survey |
BLM |
Bureau of Land Management |
CBP |
Containment Biology Program |
CEGIS |
Center of Excellence for Geographical Information Science |
CEO |
chief executive officer |
COP |
common operating picture |
CUAHSI |
Consortium of Universities for the Advancement of Hydrologic Science |
DAAC |
Data Analysis and Archiving Center |
DAMA |
Data Management Association |
DEM |
digital elevation model |
DOE |
Department of Energy |
DOI |
Department of the Interior |
DOQ |
digital orthophotograph quadrangle |
DRG |
digital raster graphic |
EPA |
Environmental Protection Agency |
EROS |
Earth Resources Observation Systems |
ET |
evapotranspiration |
EU |
European Union |
FEMA |
Federal Emergency Management Agency |
FGDC |
Federal Geographic Data Committee |
FLIR |
forward-looking infrared |
FWS |
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service |
GA |
Geoscience Australia |
GEO |
Group on Earth Observations |
GEOINT |
geospatial intelligence |
GeoSciML |
geoscience markup language |
GEOSS |
Global Earth Observation System of Systems |
GIS |
geographic information system |
GRACE |
Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment |
HHS |
Department of Health and Human Services |
HIS |
hydrologic information system |
ICT |
information and communications technology |
IFSAR |
interferometric synthetic aperture radar |
IFTN |
Imagery for the Nation |
INSPIRE |
Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community |
IPCC |
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change |
IT |
information technology |
IUGSCGI |
International Union of Geological Sciences Commission for the Management and Application of Geoscience Information |
LIDAR |
light detection and ranging |
LULC |
land use–land cover |
NASA |
National Aeronautics and Space Administration |
NAWQA |
National Water Quality Assessment Program |
NBII |
The National Biological Information Infrastructure |
NCAR |
National Center for Atmospheric Research |
NCGIS |
National Center for Geospatial Intelligence Standards |
NDCDB |
National Digital Cartographic Database |
NED |
National Elevation Dataset |
NEON |
National Ecological Observatory Network |
NGA |
National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency |
NHD |
National Hydrography Dataset |
NHDPlus |
National Hydrography Dataset Plus |
NOAA |
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration |
NPS |
National Park Service |
NSDI |
National Spatial Data Infrastructure |
NSF |
National Science Foundation |
NSG |
National Systems for Geospatial Intelligence |
ODM |
observations data model |
OGC |
Open Geospatial Consortium |
OMB |
Office of Management and Budget |
OWS |
open web services |
PAGER |
Prompt Assessment of Global Earthquakes for Response |
RGE |
research graded evaluation |
RMSE |
root mean square error |
SBA |
societal benefit areas |
SDI |
spatial data infrastructure |
TM |
Thematic Mapper |
TNM |
The National Map |
TNRIS |
Texas Natural Resources Information System |
UAVSAR |
unmanned air vehicle synthetic aperture radar |
UN |
United Nations |
UNSDI |
UN Spatial Data Infrastructure |
USDA |
U.S. Department of Agriculture |
USGS |
U.S. Geological Survey |