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
The Global Ocean Observing System: Users, Benefits, and Priorities THE GLOBAL OCEAN OBSERVING SYSTEM USERS, BENEFITS, AND PRIORITIES Committee on the Global Ocean Observing System Ocean Studies Board Commission on Geosciences, Environment, and Resources National Research Council NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS Washington, D.C. 1997
OCR for page R2
The Global Ocean Observing System: Users, Benefits, and Priorities NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20418 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 competencies and with regard for appropriate balance. This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors according to procedures approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. This report and the committee were supported by a contract with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and a grant from the National Science Foundation. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the sponsors. Cover art was created by Jennifer Swerda. Ms. Swerda has studied fine arts for a number of years at several institutions, most notably the Corcoran School of Art in Washington, D.C. A native Washingtonian, she resides in Silver Spring, Md. International Standard Book Number 0-309-056595-0 Additional copies of this report are available from: National Academy Press 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Box 285 Washington, DC 20055 800-624-6242 202-334-3313 (in the Washington Metropolitan Area) Copyright 1997 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America.
OCR for page R3
The Global Ocean Observing System: Users, Benefits, and Priorities COMMITTEE ON THE GLOBAL OCEAN OBSERVING SYSTEM WORTH D. NOWLIN (Chairman), Texas A&M University, College Station JERRY ASPLAND, California Maritime Academy, Vallejo KENNETH BRINK Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Massachusetts PAUL EPSTEIN, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts JOHN FLIPSE, Independent Consultant, Georgetown, South Carolina DAVID KEELEY, Maine Coastal Program, Augusta THOMAS POWELL, University of California, Berkeley PETER RHINES, University of Washington, Seattle BRIAN ROTHSCHILD, University of Massachusetts, Dartmouth DOUGLAS WALLACE, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Uptown, New York ROBERT WELLER, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Massachusetts HERBERT WINDOM, Skidaway Institute of Oceanography, Savannah, Georgia Staff DAN WALKER, Study Director JENNIFER SWERDA, Project Assistant
OCR for page R4
The Global Ocean Observing System: Users, Benefits, and Priorities OCEAN STUDIES BOARD KENNETH BRINK (Chairman), Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Massachusetts ALICE ALLDREDGE, University of California, Santa Barbara DAVID BRADLEY, Pennsylvania State University, State College WILLIAM CURRY, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Massachusetts ELLEN DRUFFEL, University of California, Irvine RANA FINE, University of Miami, Florida CARL FRIEHE, University of California, Irvine ROBERT GAGOSIAN, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Massachusetts SUSAN HANNA, Oregon State University, Corvallis JOHN HOBBIE, Marine Biological Laboratory, Woods Hole, Massachusetts EILEEN HOFMANN, Old Dominion University, Norfolk, Virginia JOHN KNAUSS, University of Rhode Island, Narragansett ROBERT KNOX, University of California, San Diego RAY KRONE, University of California, Davis LOUIS LANZEROTTI, Bell Laboratories, Lucent Technologies, Murray Hill, New Jersey JOHN MAGNUSON, University of Wisconsin, Madison WILLIAM MERRELL, The H. John Heinz III Center for Science, Economics and the Environment, Washington, D.C. B. GREGORY MITCHELL, University of California, San Diego NEIL OPDYKE, University of Florida, Gainesville MICHAEL ORBACH, Duke University Marine Laboratory, Beaufort, North Carolina TERRANCE QUINN, University of Alaska, Juneau C. BARRY RALEIGH, University of Hawaii, Honolulu JAMES RAY, Shell Oil Company, Houston, Texas GEORGE SOMERO, Stanford University, Pacific Grove, California PAUL STOFFA, University of Texas, Austin Staff MORGAN GOPNIK, Acting Director M. ELIZABETH CLARKE, Associate Director EDWARD R. URBAN, JR., Program Officer DAN WALKER, Program Officer JOAN ZEISER, Administrative Associate LORA TAYLOR, Senior Project Assistant JENNIFER SWERDA, Project Assistant
OCR for page R5
The Global Ocean Observing System: Users, Benefits, and Priorities COMMISSION ON GEOSCIENCES, ENVIRONMENT, AND RESOURCES GEORGE M. HORNBERGER (Chairman), University of Virginia, Charlottesville PATRICK R. ATKINS, Aluminum Company of America, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania JAMES P. BRUCE, Canadian Climate Program Board, Ottawa, Ontario WILLIAM L. FISHER, University of Texas, Austin JERRY F. FRANKLIN, University of Washington, Seattle THOMAS E. GRAEDEL, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut DEBRA KNOPMAN, Progressive Foundation, Washington, D.C. KAI N. LEE, Williams College, Williamstown, Massachusetts PERRY L. MCCARTY, Stanford University, California JUDITH E. MCDOWELL, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Massachusetts RICHARD A. MESERVE, Covington & Burling, Washington, D.C. S. GEORGE PHILANDER, Princeton University, New Jersey RAYMOND A. PRICE, Queen's University at Kingston, Ontario THOMAS C. SCHELLING, University of Maryland, College Park ELLEN SILBERGELD, University of Maryland Medical School, Baltimore VICTORIA J. TSCHINKEL, Landers and Parsons, Tallahassee, Florida E-AN ZEN, University of Maryland, College Park Staff STEPHEN RATTIEN, Executive Director STEPHEN D. PARKER, Associate Executive Director MORGAN GOPNIK, Assistant Executive Director GREGORY SYMMES, Reports Officer JAMES MALLORY, Administrative Officer SANDI FITZPATRICK, Administrative Associate MARQUITA SMITH, Administrative Assistant/Technology Analyst
OCR for page R6
The Global Ocean Observing System: Users, Benefits, and Priorities 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 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. William 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 Alberts and Dr. William A. Wulf are chairman and vice-chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.
OCR for page R7
The Global Ocean Observing System: Users, Benefits, and Priorities PREFACE The first calls for coordinated observation of the world's oceans were raised nearly a decade ago. Since that time, the governments and scientists of the world have made some tentative steps toward developing a true global ocean observing system (commonly referred to as GOOS). The challenges to successful completion of a satisfactory observing system are numerous and complex. However, the value of such a system, if well designed, could be great. As stated in the 1992 report of the National Research Council's Ocean Studies Board, Oceanography in the Next Decade: Building New Partnerships, "Designing and deploying a GOOS will be among the most important and difficult tasks for physical oceanography and climate studies for the next decade." The overall scope of GOOS includes important nonphysical issues such as the health of the ocean and living marine resources. Thus, the successful implementation of GOOS could result in improvements in a number of areas (e.g., coastal hazard prediction and warnings, navigational systems, fish stock assessments, prediction of algal blooms in coastal regions, climate forecasts, health warnings). The present represents the efforts of the Ocean Studies Board's Committee on the Global Ocean Observing System to provide guidance and impetus to U.S. efforts toward implementing GOOS. With the assistance of the U.S. GOOS Project Office, the committee gathered information from numerous federal agencies involved in planning U.S. implementation of GOOS and solicited input from numerous nongovernmental entities. This, the resulting report, outlines the nature and status of international plans toward development of GOOS. With these international plans as a context, the report (1) discusses U.S. efforts to implement GOOS and recommends specific actions to be taken by the U.S. GOOS community, (2) provides detailed discussion of potential benefits of GOOS to a variety of users, and (3) discusses the importance of developing support for GOOS across the entire marine community. An effort as complex and important as GOOS represents a serious challenge for the ocean science community and for society as a whole. Every effort must be made to ensure that the goals are reasonable and the efforts well reasoned, because the costs of failing to meet this challenge would be enormous. Kenneth Brink, Chairman Ocean Studies Board
OCR for page R8
The Global Ocean Observing System: Users, Benefits, and Priorities This page in the original is blank.
OCR for page R9
The Global Ocean Observing System: Users, Benefits, and Priorities TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 1 INTRODUCTION 7 GOOS Objectives and Approach, 8 The GOOS Modules, 11 U.S. GOOS, 14 NRC Committee for the Global Ocean Observing System, 18 2 INTERNATIONAL GOOS 20 International Infrastructure, 20 Status of International Planning by Module, 21 Relationship of Research Programs to GOOS, 28 3 GOOS IN THE UNITED STATES 29 U.S. GOOS Infrastructure, 29 U.S. Plans for Implementation, 32 Education, 35 4 USERS AND BENEFITS OF GOOS 37 Examples of Potential GOOS Applications, 37 Cost-Benefit Studies, 54 5 DEVELOPING GOOS IN THE SPIRIT OF PARTNERSHIP 60 The Concept, 60 Examples, 61 6 PRIORITIES FOR U.S. GOOS ACTIVITIES 66 Priorities for Observations, 66 REFERENCES 68 APPENDIXES 73 A—Letter of Request, 75 B—Committee Roster, 77 C—Acronyms, 81
OCR for page R10
The Global Ocean Observing System: Users, Benefits, and Priorities This page in the original is blank.