Click for next page ( R2


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



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
BEYOND MAPPING MEETING NATIONAL NEEDS THROUGH ENHANCED GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SCIENCE Committee on Beyond Mapping: The Challenges of New Technologies in the Geographic Information Sciences The Mapping Science Committee Board on Earth Sciences and Resources Division on Earth and Life Studies

OCR for page R1
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20001 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Gov- erning Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engi- neering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for ap- propriate balance. This study was supported by the National Science Foundation, Award No. BCS- 0071916, U.S. Department of Defense/National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, Grant No. NMA202-99-1-1018, U.S. Department of Commerce/National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Task Order No. 56-DKNA-0-95110 (Contract No. 50-DKNA-6-90040), Department of Commerce/U.S. Bureau of the Census, Award No. 43-YA-BC-154410, and Department of the Interior/U.S. Geological Survey, Grant Nos. 01HQGR0198 and 03HQGR0066. Any opinions, findings, con- clusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project. International Standard Book Number 0-309-10226-X (Book) International Standard Book Number 0-309-66150-1 (PDF) Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, N.W., Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); Internet, http://www.nap.edu. Cover: The constellation of nodes seen in this image is a map of the Internet, where individuals, computers, and society intersect. The interactions between these three domains have propelled mapping science beyond its traditional boundaries. To- pology map 2005 The Regents of the University of California. All rights re- served. Permission to use, copy, modify, and distribute any part of this "IPv4 AS- level Internet Graph" for educational, research and nonprofit purposes, without fee, and without a written agreement, is hereby granted, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph appear in all or near all copies. Composite illustration and design by Van Nguyen, National Academies Press. Copyright 2006 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America

OCR for page R1
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 govern- ment 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 mem- bers, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advis- ing 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. 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 gov- ernment. 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 engineer- ing communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. Wm. A. Wulf are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. www.national-academies.org

OCR for page R1

OCR for page R1
COMMITTEE ON BEYOND MAPPING: THE CHALLENGES OF NEW TECHNOLOGIES IN THE GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SCIENCES JOEL L. MORRISON, Chair, The Ohio State University, Columbus JOHN S. ADAMS, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis SARAH W. BEDNARZ, Texas A&M University, College Station MAX J. EGENHOFER, University of Maine, Orono MARK N. GAHEGAN, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park HENRY L. GARIE (member until January 2003), New Jersey Office of Information Technology, Trenton, N.J. MICHAEL F. GOODCHILD, University of California, Santa Barbara KATHLEEN O'NEILL GREEN, Space Imaging Solutions, Thornton, Colorado (retired) MICHAEL TAIT, Environmental Systems Research Institute, Redlands, California NANCY TOSTA, Ross & Associates Environmental Consulting Ltd., Seattle, Washington DAVID UNWIN, Birkbeck College, University of London, U.K. National Research Council Staff RONALD F. ABLER, Senior Scientist ANTHONY R. DE SOUZA, Director, Board on Earth Sciences and Resources PAUL M. CUTLER, Study Director (until January 2005) KRISTEN CAMPBELL, Study Director (April 2002October 2004) CAETLIN M. OFIESH, Research Associate AMANDA M. ROBERTS, Senior Program Assistant JARED P. ENO, Program Assistant v

OCR for page R1
MAPPING SCIENCE COMMITTEE KEITH C. CLARKE, Chair, University of California, Santa Barbara ISABEL F. CRUZ, University of Illinois, Chicago ROBERT P. DENARO, NAVTEQ Corporation, Chicago, Illinois SHOREH ELHAMI, Delaware County Auditor's Office, Ohio DAVID R. FLETCHER, GPC Inc., Running Springs, New Mexico JIM GERINGER, ESRI, Wheatland, Wyoming JOHN R. JENSEN, University of South Carolina, Columbia MARY L. LARSGAARD, University of California, Santa Barbara NINA S. N. LAM, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge DAVID R. MAIDMENT, The University of Texas, Austin ROBERT B. MCMASTER, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis SHASHI SHEKHAR, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis NANCY TOSTA, Ross & Associates Environmental Consulting Ltd., Seattle, Washington National Research Council Staff ANN G. FRAZIER, Program Officer AMANDA M. ROBERTS, Senior Program Assistant vi

OCR for page R1
BOARD ON EARTH SCIENCES AND RESOURCES GEORGE M. HORNBERGER, Chair, University of Virginia, Charlottesville M. LEE ALLISON, Arizona Geological Survey, Tucson STEVEN R. BOHLEN, Joint Oceanographic Institutions, Washington, D.C. DAVID J. COWEN, University of South Carolina, Columbia KATHERINE H. FREEMAN, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park RHEA L. GRAHAM, Pueblo of Sandia, Bernalillo, New Mexico ROBYN HANNIGAN, Arkansas State University, State University V. RAMA MURTHY, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque RAYMOND A. PRICE, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario BARBARA A. ROMANOWICZ, University of California, Berkeley JOAQUIN RUIZ, University of Arizona, Tucson MARK SCHAEFER, Global Environment and Technology Foundation, Arlington, Virginia RUSSELL E. STANDS-OVER-BULL, American Resources, Pryor, Montana BILLIE L. TURNER II, Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts STEPHEN G. WELLS, Desert Research Institute, Reno, Nevada THOMAS J. WILBANKS, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee National Research Council Staff ANTHONY R. DE SOUZA, Director ELIZABETH EIDE, Senior Program Officer DAVID A. FEARY, Senior Program Officer ANNE M. LINN, Senior Program Officer ANN G. FRAZIER, Program Officer SAMMANTHA L. MAGSINO, Program Officer RONALD F. ABLER, Senior Scientist VERNA J. BOWEN, Administrative and Financial Associate JENNIFER T. ESTEP, Financial Associate KRISTEN B. DALY, Research Associate CAETLIN M. OFIESH, Research Associate AMANDA M. ROBERTS, Senior Program Assistant JARED P. ENO, Program Assistant NICK ROGERS, Program Assistant vii

OCR for page R1

OCR for page R1
Acknowledgments T his report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council's Re- port 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 respon- siveness 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 review of this report: Barbara P. Buttenfield, University of Colorado, Boulder William J. Craig, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis John R. Jensen, University of South Carolina, Columbia Xavier R. Lopez, Oracle Corporation, Nashua, New Hampshire Judy M. Olson, Michigan State University, East Lansing James R. Plasker, American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, Bethesda, Maryland Joseph Wood, University of Southern Maine, Gorham Although the reviewers listed above have provided many construc- tive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the con- clusions or recommendations, nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Marc ix

OCR for page R1
x ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Armstrong, University of Iowa, Iowa City. Appointed by the National Research Council, he was responsible for making certain that an indepen- dent examination of the report was carried out in accordance with institu- tional procedures and that all review comments were carefully consid- ered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution. We would like to thank David DiBiase for his white paper, "The U.S. Geospatial Education Infrastructure: Specifying, Developing, and Assur- ing Competence in the Geospatial Technology Workforce," which was submitted to the committee on June 5, 2005.

OCR for page R1
Preface C an you imagine formulating new methods and a coordinated training program for fighting forest fires while battling a raging forest fire? I can think of no better analogy to introduce this re- port. The mapping technologies that underlie this study are constantly and rapidly changing, and it is impossible for one person to keep abreast of all changes that are taking place. The playing field today is radically different from the playing field when this study was proposed in 2000. That the sponsoring agencies1 requested such a study is not surprising, as each is, in its own way, in the middle of a forest fire in its own govern- ment department. They are to be commended for the wisdom to rise far enough above the conflagrations to realize that they needed advice and new directions. Pulling together a group of dedicated individuals to attempt to an- swer the questions posed by the agencies was easy because of the current critical interest in the subject matter. But bringing together busy people, with their understanding of the part of the problem with which they were familiar, and asking for concurrence in a relatively short period of time and with few meetings, was about as easy as containing a forest fire when the wind constantly shifts directions and freshens and subsides at irregu- lar intervals. The subcommittee held three meetings and a workshop 1The Census Bureau, the Federal Geographic Data Committee, the National Geospatial- Intelligence Agency (formerly the National Imagery and Mapping Agency), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the National Science Foundation, and the U.S. Geological Survey. xi

OCR for page R1
xii PREFACE within a relatively short period of time yet was vividly aware that the nature of the field had changed rapidly between meetings, just as a forest fire is likely to change from hour to hour depending upon weather and human intervention. Clearly North American industry and government took the lead in the rapid introduction of electronic technology into geographic infor- mation science. North American firms outstripped all competition in bringing useful software and world-leading hardware to the market. Gov- ernment agencies saw these events unfolding and knew that the develop- ments could help them perform their missions, but were unable to move as quickly as private industry. Government agencies at all levels (federal, state, and local) saw their roles transformed from serving as collectors and custodians of geographic information to becoming major users of geo- graphic information, a not inconsequential change in a period as short as 10 years in some agencies. Academia was the slowest sector to respond, and the resulting lack of adequately trained people to meet industry and government needs has quickly mushroomed. The existing GIS/GIScience workforce, even given the increasingly powerful hardware and software it employs, cannot meet increased demands for geographic information. In this report we try to summarize these changes during the past 30 years and to offer recommendations to quench some of the remaining hot spots in our forest fire. Although this report looks primarily to academia for long-term solutions, the challenge cannot be met by academia alone. New and innovative partnerships among industry, gov- ernment, nonprofits, and academia will be required for success. Thanks go to a group of dedicated individuals at the National Acad- emies for preparing this report. I thank all of the original subcommittee members for their input at the meetings, which were both exciting and intellectually challenging, and for their written output after the meetings. Each member directed energies at one or more of the hot spots uncovered in the Beyond Mapping fire. Paul Cutler with the help of Kristen Campbell shepherded the subcommittee under the tutelage of Anthony de Souza. Left with many disjointed pages of rough draft from the subcommittee members, Ronald Abler, with input from Paul Cutler and Anthony de Souza, stepped forward to create a meaningful, yet still smoldering manu- script. After further review and helpful input from David Cowen and Caetie Ofiesh, Ron Abler was able to finally establish control over our forest fire. His efforts and those of the others mentioned above are greatly appreciated. Joel L. Morrison Chair

OCR for page R1
Contents SUMMARY 1 1 GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SCIENCE TODAY AND TOMORROW 7 National Needs for GIS/GIScience Professionals, 11 Forces Driving the Need for GIS/GIScience Professionals, 12 2 EDUCATION AND CURRICULUM NEEDS IN GIS/GISCIENCE 27 GIS/GIScience Training and Education Needs, 27 New Curricular Challenges and Responses, 30 Assuring Quality in Education and Training, 38 Organizational Challenges, 39 3 GIS/GISCIENCE RESEARCH NEEDS 43 Practical and Theoretical Challenges, 43 GIS/GIScience and Society, 46 Research Infrastructure, 47 Executing Research Agendas, 49 4 RECOMMENDATIONS 55 5 AFTERWORD 59 REFERENCES 63 xiii

OCR for page R1
xiv CONTENTS APPENDIXES A Biographical Sketches of Committee Members and Staff 69 B Workshop Agenda and Participants 77 C Evolution of the Mapping Sciences 81 D Acronyms 99 LIST OF SIDEBARS S-1 Statement of Task, 2 S-2 The University Consortium for Geographic Information Science (UCGIS), 4 S-3 The Open Geospatial Consortium, 5 1-1 GIS and GIScience Definitions, 10 1-2 Geospatial One-Stop, 14 1-3 The Federal Geographic Data Committee, 22 1-4 Job Posting for a GIS-related Position, 23 1-5 University of Texas at Dallas Doctoral Program in GeoSpatial Information Technology, 25 2-1 Seven Levels of GIS Competence, 28 2-2 UCGIS Body of Knowledge Unit CF4: Elements of Geographic Information, 36 3-1 UCGIS Research Agenda, 51 3-2 NGA GIS/GIScience Research Priorities, 52 C-1 The Geospatial Enterprise Community of Practice, 91 LIST OF FIGURES 1-1 A Web-based GIS tool able to display property tax assessments, 16 1-2 A Web-based GIS tool showing residences of sex offenders, 17 1-3 A Web-based GIS tool able to perform real estate searches, 18 2-1 The three subdomains comprising the geographic information science and technology (GI S&T) domain, in relation to allied fields, 40

OCR for page R1
CONTENTS xv LIST OF TABLES 1-1 Projected Growth in Geospatial-related Occupations by U.S. Department of Labor 2000-2010, 12 2-1 Twelve Roles Played by Geospatial Technology Professionals as Identified by the Geospatial Workforce Development Center, 32 2-2 Thirty-nine Competences Required for Success in Geospatial Technology Professions as Identified by GWDC, 33 2-3 Knowledge Areas and Units from the UCGIS GI S&T Body of Knowledge 2006, 34 3-1 Proposed GIS/GIScience Research Agendas, 1988-2005, 50 C-1 Timeline of Selected Events in the History of the Mapping Sciences in the U.S., 94

OCR for page R1