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 7
1
Introduction
S
cience is increasingly driven by data. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
has developed several discipline-specific spatial data infrastructure (SDI)1
programs over the years and has begun developing a comprehensive SDI
through The National Map program. The 2007 USGS Science Strategy outlines
the immediate and future science directions at the Survey, and any future SDI will
need to be designed to serve these strategies. There are several technical chal-
lenges to developing a coherent SDI for any institution, but some of the largest
challenges may be organizational. Establishment of a coherent SDI in the USGS
to connect spatial data, metadata, tools, and a user community offers a potential
for great advances in how science is conducted at USGS and elsewhere.
STUDY SCOPE
The charge for the present study is to describe a vision for a USGS-wide
SDI and to create a roadmap for executing that vision (see Box S.1). It is not
within the scope of this study to design an SDI, create an exhaustive list of rec-
ommended datasets or recommend specific funding for SDI development. Those
activities will be the work of the USGS if it chooses to move forward with the
plan outlined in this report, and some of this work is already in progress through
the USGS Council on Data Integration and other agency initiatives.
It is important to note the distinction between an SDI at the USGS and
1A spatial data infrastructure (SDI) is a framework of spatial data, metadata, tools, and a user com-
munity that are interactively connected so that spatial data can be used in an efficient and flexible
way (Nebert, 2004).
7
OCR for page 8
8 ADVANCING STRATEGIC SCIENCE: A SPATIAL DATA INFRASTRUCTURE ROADMAP
the broader and more ambitious goal of a National Spatial Data Infrastructure
(NSDI).2 The NSDI is the work of the Federal Geographic Data Committee
(FGDC, 2011), and the USGS is an important contributor to this multi-partner
effort. The key design focus of the USGS SDI, and therefore the focus of the
present study, is to support science in the agency and to address key disciplines
of water, geology, biology, and geography. An important secondary goal is to
support science in other federal agencies, state, local, and tribal governments,
academe, and the private sector.
The USGS recently dissolved the organizational structure around the four
core disciplines of water, geology, biology, and geography and reorganized
around the strategic directions outlined in the landmark 2007 Science Strategy
(USGS, 2007). The reorganization is significant with respect to SDI development
because it establishes an Associate Directorship for Core Science Systems, which
includes the National Geospatial Program. Because the Science Strategy outlines
the future science directions for the agency, the present committee adopted the
six science directions in it--ecosystems, climate, energy and minerals, hazards,
environmental health, and water--as the focus of this report for optimizing an
SDI. Indeed, the members selected for the committee were identified to address
each of those directions.
The Science Strategy clearly defines a need for geospatial data to support
each of the science directions. In the opinion of this committee, an SDI is so
important for supporting the six directions that it probably deserved its own
chapter in the Science Strategy report as an underpinning to those six directions.
The committee hopes that this report can serve as the "missing chapter" of that
important document.
This report incorporates state-of-the-art SDI concepts for consideration by
the USGS. Our review of contemporary SDIs in use today in government, aca-
deme, and private industry provided the basis for adapting these concepts to the
needs of the USGS. Clearly, keeping an SDI relevant over time will require the
USGS to regularly review developments in SDI components.
There are not likely to be any surprises in the committee's definition of an
optimal vision for an SDI for the USGS. Much has been written and debated
publicly on the subject (e.g., NRC, 1993, 1995, 2001; Onsrund, 2007), and the
Survey has held recent workshops to review the concepts. A focus on execution
and defining a roadmap as called for in the third item of the Statement of Task
(Box S.1) is the USGS's primary need with regard to an SDI. Although it is
neither appropriate nor feasible for the committee to recommend changes in the
2Executive Order 12906, published in 1994 and amended in 2003, initiated the development of
a coordinated National Spatial Data Infrastructure and National Geospatial Data Clearinghouse and
called for the establishment of spatial data standards, partnerships for data acquisition, and a National
Digital Geospatial Data Framework.
OCR for page 9
INTRODUCTION 9
organizational structure of the USGS, some critical elements of a successful SDI
implementation pertain to the entire organization and are described in this report.
ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT
This report is organized according to the Statement of Task. Chapter 2 pro-
vides background on the Science Strategy and its dependence on geospatial data
and identifies the challenges for a successful SDI. Chapter 3 addresses Task 1,
lessons learned from SDI implementation in other organizations that the com-
mittee felt were pertinent to the USGS situation. Most of the information for the
chapter was drawn from briefings to the committee and a survey of key people
and organizations involved in SDI development and implementation. Chapter 4
addresses Task 2, outlining the committee's vision for optimizing an SDI for the
USGS and discussing key goals for desirable constituent elements of an SDI.
Finally, Chapter 5 addresses Task 3 with key recommendations on organizational
considerations and a general roadmap for SDI implementation. The committee
understands that execution is USGS's key need with respect to its SDI; Chapter
5, although brief, might be the most valuable contribution of this study.
References
Buxton, H.T., Griffin, D.W., and Pierce, B.S., eds., 2007, Earth Science and
Public Health: Proceedings of the Second National Conference on USGS
Health-Related Research, Reston, Virginia, February 27-March 1, 2007: U.S.
Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2008-5022, 47p. Acces-
sible at http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2008/5022/.
Cramer, B. and DeMulder, M., 2009. The National Map Science Workshop.
Lakewood, CO Sept. 2-3, U.S. Geological Survey.
Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC). 2011. National Spatial Data Infra-
structure. Available online at http://www.fgdc.gov/nsdi/nsdi.html (accessed
May 2, 2011).
Ginsberg, H.S., K. E. Hyland, R. Hu, T.J. Daniels, & R.C. Falco. 1998. Tick
population trends and forest type. Science 281:349-350.
Ginsberg, H.S., P.A. Buckley, M.G. Balmforth, E. Zhioua, S. Mitra, and F.G.
Buckley. 2005. Reservoir competence of native North American birds for the
Lyme disease spirochete, Borrelia burgdorferi. Journal of Medical Entomol-
ogy 42:445-449.
Goodchild, M.D. 2008. Geographic Information Science: The Grand Challenges,
in The Handbook of Geographical Information Science, J. P. Wilson and A.
S. Fotheringham eds., Blackwell: Oxford. p1-22.
Lubick, N. 2009. Ocean mercury on the increase: Rise may affect neurotoxin
levels in fish. Nature doi:10.1038/news.2009.218.
Nebert, D. (ed) 2004. Developing Spatial Data Infrastructures: The SDI Cook-
book. Global Spatial Data Infrastructure, 171p.
NRC (National Research Council). 1993. Toward a coordinated spatial data infra-
structure for the nation. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 192p.
OCR for page 10
10 ADVANCING STRATEGIC SCIENCE: A SPATIAL DATA INFRASTRUCTURE ROADMAP
NRC. 1995. A data foundation for the national spatial data infrastructure. Wash-
ington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 45p.
NRC, 2001. National Spatial Data Infrastructure partnership programs: rethinking
the focus, Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 94p.
NRC, 2003. Weaving a National Map: Review of the U.S. Geological Survey
Concept of The National Map, Washington, DC: National Academy Press,
140p.
NRC, 2004. Future Challenges for the U.S. Geological Survey's Minerals Re-
sources Program, Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 154p.
NRC, 2007. A Research Agenda for Geographic Information Science at the
United States Geological Survey, Washington, DC: National Academy Press,
156p.
NRC, 2009. Landscapes on the Edge: New Horizons for research in Earth Surface
Processes, Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 163p.
Onsrud, H. (ed) 2007. Research and Theory in Advancing Spatial Data Infrastruc-
ture Concepts, Redlands, CA: ESRI Press, 306p.
Sunderland, E.M., Krabbenhoft, D.P., Moreau, J.W., Strode, S.A., and Landing,
W.M. 2009. Mercury sources, distribution and bioavailability in the North
Pacific Ocean--Insights from data and models: Global Biogeochemical Cy-
cles, doi:10.1029/2008GB003425.
Sunderland, E. M. 2007. Mercury exposure from domestic and imported estuarine
and marine fish in the United States seafood market: Environmental Health
Perspectives, v. 115, no. 2, p. 235-242, doi:10.1289/ehp.9377.
USGS (U.S. Geological Survey). 2007. Facing tomorrow's challenges--U.S.
Geological Survey science in the decade 20072017/ U.S. Geological Survey
Circular 1309, 70p.
United Nations. 2008. United Nations Spatial Data Infrastructure Framework:
Interim Report January 2009 to December 2010, United Nations: New York,
36p.
