THRIVING ON OUR
CHANGING PLANET
A Decadal Strategy for Earth Observation from Space
Committee on the Decadal Survey for Earth Science and Applications from Space
Space Studies Board
Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences
A Consensus Study Report of
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, DC
www.nap.edu
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001
Support for this project was provided by Contracts NNH11CD57B/NNH15CO41D and NNH17CB02B/80HQTR17F0096 with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Contract WC133R-11-CQ-0048, TO#9 with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and Grant GP15AP00107 with the U.S. Geological Survey. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication and do not necessarily reflect the views of any organization or agency that provided support for the project.
International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-46757-5
International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-46757-8
Library of Congress Control Number: 2018941718
Digital Object Identifier: https://doi.org/10.17226/24938
Copies of this publication are available 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.
Copyright 2018 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America
Suggested citation: National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. Thriving on Our Changing Planet: A Decadal Strategy for Earth Observation from Space. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.17226/24938.
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president.
The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president.
The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.
Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org.
Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task.
Proceedings published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine chronicle the presentations and discussions at a workshop, symposium, or other event convened by the National Academies. The statements and opinions contained in proceedings are those of the participants and are not endorsed by other participants, the planning committee, or the National Academies.
For information about other products and activities of the National Academies, please visit www.nationalacademies.org/about/whatwedo.
COMMITTEE ON THE DECADAL SURVEY FOR EARTH SCIENCE AND APPLICATIONS FROM SPACE
WALEED ABDALATI, University of Colorado, Boulder, Co-Chair
WILLIAM B. GAIL, Global Weather Corporation, Co-Chair
ANTONIO J. BUSALACCHI, JR., NAE,1 University Corporation for Atmospheric Research, Co-Chair2
STEVEN J. BATTEL, NAE, Battel Engineering, Inc.
STACEY W. BOLAND, Jet Propulsion Laboratory
ROBERT D. BRAUN, NAE, University of Colorado
SHUYI S. CHEN, University of Washington
WILLIAM E. DIETRICH, NAS,3 University of California, Berkeley
SCOTT C. DONEY, University of Virginia
CHRISTOPHER B. FIELD, NAS, Stanford University
HELEN A. FRICKER, Scripps Institution of Oceanography
SARAH T. GILLE, Scripps Institution of Oceanography
DENNIS L. HARTMANN, NAS, University of Washington
DANIEL J. JACOB, Harvard University
ANTHONY C. JANETOS, Boston University
EVERETTE JOSEPH, University of Albany, State University of New York
MOLLY K. MACAULEY,4 Resources for the Future
JOYCE E. PENNER, University of Michigan
SOROOSH SOROOSHIAN, NAE, University of California, Irvine
GRAEME L. STEPHENS, NAE, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology
BYRON D. TAPLEY, NAE, University of Texas, Austin
W. STANLEY WILSON, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (retired)
Staff
ARTHUR CHARO, Senior Program Officer, Study Director
LAUREN EVERETT, Program Officer
CHARLES HARRIS, Research Associate (through August 2016)
MARCHEL HOLLE, Research Associate (from November 2016)
ANDREA REBHOLZ, Program Coordinator
MICHAEL H. MOLONEY, Director, Space Studies Board and Aeronautics and Space Engineering Board (until April 2018)
___________________
1 Member, National Academy of Engineering.
2 Resigned from the committee on May 5, 2016.
3 Member, National Academy of Sciences.
4 Dr. Macauley passed away on July 8, 2016.
PANEL ON GLOBAL HYDROLOGICAL CYCLES AND WATER RESOURCES
ANA P. BARROS, Duke University, Co-Chair
JEFF DOZIER, University of California, Santa Barbara, Co-Chair
NEWSHA AJAMI, Stanford University
JOHN D. BOLTEN, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center
DARA ENTEKHABI, NAE,1 Massachusetts Institute of Technology
GRAHAM E. FOGG, University of California, Davis
EFI FOUFOULA-GEORGIOU, NAE, University of California, Irvine
DAVID C. GOODRICH, U.S. Department of Agriculture
TERRI S. HOGUE, Colorado School of Mines
JEFFREY S. KARGEL, University of Arizona
CHRISTIAN D. KUMMEROW, Colorado State University
VENKAT LAKSHMI, University of South Carolina
ANDREA RINALDO,2 NAS3/NAE, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
EDWIN WELLES, Deltares-USA
ERIC F. WOOD, NAE, Princeton University
ARTHUR CHARO, Senior Program Officer, Study Director
ED DUNNE, Program Officer (through July 2017)
LAUREN EVERETT, Program Officer (from July 2017)
TAMARA DAWSON, Program Coordinator
PANEL ON WEATHER AND AIR QUALITY: MINUTES TO SUBSEASONAL
STEVEN A. ACKERMAN, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Co-Chair
NANCY L. BAKER, Naval Research Laboratory, Co-Chair
PHILIP E. ARDANUY, INNOVIM, LLC
ELIZABETH A. BARNES, Colorado State University
STANLEY G. BENJAMIN, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
MARK A. BOURASSA, Florida State University
BRYAN N. DUNCAN, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center
CHARLES E. KOLB, NAE, Aerodyne Research, Inc.
YING-HWA KUO,4 University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
W. PAUL MENZEL, University of Wisconsin, Madison
MARIA A. PIRONE, Harris Corporation
ARMISTEAD G. RUSSELL, Georgia Institute of Technology
JULIE O. THOMAS, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego
DUANE E. WALISER, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology
XUBIN ZENG, University of Arizona
___________________
1 Member, National Academy of Engineering.
2 Resigned from the panel on June 6, 2017.
3 Member, National Academy of Sciences.
4 Resigned from the panel on September 14, 2016.
ARTHUR CHARO, Senior Program Officer, Study Director
SANDRA GRAHAM, Senior Program Officer
ANDREA REBHOLZ, Program Associate
PANEL ON MARINE AND TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS AND NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
COMPTON J. TUCKER, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, Co-Chair
JAMES A. YODER, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Co-Chair
GREGORY P. ASNER, NAS, Carnegie Institution for Science
FRANCISCO CHAVEZ, Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute
INEZ Y. FUNG, NAS, University of California, Berkeley
SCOTT GOETZ, Northern Arizona University
PATRICK N. HALPIN, Duke University
ERIC HOCHBERG, Bermuda Institute of Ocean Sciences
CHRISTIAN J. JOHANNSEN, Purdue University
RAPHAEL M. KUDELA, University of California, Santa Cruz
GREGORY W. McCARTY, U.S. Department of Agriculture
LINDA O. MEARNS, National Center for Atmospheric Research
LESLEY E. OTT, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center
MARY JANE PERRY, University of Maine
DAVID A. SIEGEL, University of California, Santa Barbara
DAVID L. SKOLE, Michigan State University
SUSAN L. USTIN, University of California, Davis
CARA WILSON, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
ARTHUR CHARO, Senior Program Officer, Study Director
CONSTANCE KARRAS, Program Officer
PAYTON KULINA, Senior Program Assistant (through September 2016)
JAMES HEISS, Postdoctoral Fellow
ALEXANDRA C. PHILLIPS, Senior Program Assistant (from September 2016)
PANEL ON CLIMATE VARIABILITY AND CHANGE: SEASONAL TO CENTENNIAL
CAROL ANNE CLAYSON, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Co-Chair
VENKATACHALAM RAMASWAMY, NOAA GFDL, Co-Chair
ARLYN E. ANDREWS, NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory
ENRIQUE CURCHITSER, Rutgers University
LEE-LUENG FU, NAE, Jet Propulsion Laboratory
GUIDO GROSSE, Alfred-Wegener-Institute for Polar and Marine Research
RANDAL D. KOSTER, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center
SONIA KREIDENWEIS, Colorado State University
EMILIO F. MORAN, NAS, Michigan State University
CORA E. RANDALL, University of Colorado, Boulder
PHILIP J. RASCH, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
ERIC J. RIGNOT, NAS, University of California, Irvine
CHRISTOPHER RUF, University of Michigan
ROSS J. SALAWITCH, University of Maryland
AMY K. SNOVER, University of Washington
JULIENNE C. STROEVE, University of Colorado, Boulder
BRUCE A. WIELICKI, NASA Langley Research Center
GARY W. YOHE, Wesleyan University
ARTHUR CHARO, Senior Program Officer, Study Director
LAUREN EVERETT, Program Officer
ERIN MARKOVICH, Senior Program Assistant
PANEL ON EARTH SURFACE AND INTERIOR: DYNAMICS AND HAZARDS
DOUGLAS W. BURBANK, NAS, University of California, Santa Barbara, Co-Chair
DAVID T. SANDWELL, NAS, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, Co-Chair
ROBIN E. BELL, Columbia University
EMILY E. BRODSKY, University of California, Santa Cruz
DONALD P. CHAMBERS, University of South Florida, St. Petersburg
LUCY FLESCH, Purdue University
GEORGE E. HILLEY, Stanford University
KRISTINE M. LARSON, University of Colorado, Boulder
STEFAN MAUS, University of Colorado, Boulder
MICHAEL S. RAMSEY, University of Pittsburgh
JEANNE SAUBER, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center
KHALID A. SOOFI, ConocoPhillips
HOWARD A. ZEBKER, Stanford University
ARTHUR CHARO, Senior Program Officer, Study Director
ANNE LINN, Scholar
ERIC EDKIN, Senior Program Assistant
SPACE STUDIES BOARD
FIONA HARRISON, NAS,1 California Institute of Technology, Chair
ROBERT D. BRAUN, NAE,2 University of Colorado, Boulder, Vice Chair
DAVID N. SPERGEL, NAS, Princeton University and Center for Computational Astrophysics at the Simons Foundation, Vice Chair
JAMES G. ANDERSON, NAS, Harvard University
JEFF M. BINGHAM, Consultant
JAY C. BUCKEY, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth College
MARY LYNNE DITTMAR, Dittmar Associates
JOSEPH FULLER, JR., Futron Corporation
THOMAS R. GAVIN, California Institute of Technology
SARAH GIBSON, National Center for Atmospheric Research
WESLEY T. HUNTRESS, Carnegie Institution of Washington
ANTHONY C. JANETOS, Boston University
CHRYSSA KOUVELIOTOU, NAS, George Washington University
DENNIS P. LETTENMAIER, NAE, University of California, Los Angeles
ROSALY M. LOPES, Jet Propulsion Laboratory
DAVID J. McCOMAS, Princeton University
LARRY PAXTON, Johns Hopkins University, Applied Physics Laboratory
SAUL PERLMUTTER, NAS, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
ELIOT QUATAERT, University of California, Berkeley
BARBARA SHERWOOD LOLLAR, University of Toronto
HARLAN E. SPENCE, University of New Hampshire
MARK H. THIEMENS, NAS, University of California, San Diego
MEENAKSHI WADHWA, Arizona State University
Staff
MICHAEL H. MOLONEY, Director (through April 2018)
RICHARD ROWBERG, Acting Director (from April to July 2018)
CARMELA J. CHAMBERLAIN, Administrative Coordinator
TANJA PILZAK, Manager, Program Operations
CELESTE A. NAYLOR, Information Management Associate
MARGARET KNEMEYER, Financial Officer
SU LIU, Financial Assistant
___________________
1 Member, National Academy of Sciences.
2 Member, National Academy of Engineering.
This page intentionally left blank.
Preface
This report is the final product of the 2017-2027 decadal survey1 for Earth science and applications from space (“ESAS 2017”), the second decadal survey in Earth science and applications from space carried out by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The survey effort began in earnest in late 2015 with the appointment of the steering committee to conduct the study and the appointment of its supporting study panels. As shown in the statement of task (reprinted in Appendix E), the study’s overarching task is to generate “recommendations for the environmental monitoring and Earth science and applications communities for an integrated and sustainable approach to the conduct of the U.S. government’s civilian space-based Earth-system science programs.” As discussed in Chapter 1 of this report, the interpretation of this charge resulted in recommendations that would, within known constraints such as anticipated budgets, advance Earth system science and deliver critical information to support a broad range of national economic and societal needs.
___________________
NOTE: This report is the edited and corrected version of the prepublication report released to the public on January 5, 2018. Along with customary editorial changes, the decadal survey committee has taken this opportunity to provide clarifications to the report, including the following of particular note:
- To better explain opportunities to address the underlying science of the seven Targeted Observables (TOs) that could not be allocated to a flight opportunity of the recommended program, the committee has added a table (Table 3.8) that summarizes options to address unallocated TOs within the recommended program.
- Footnote “b” to Table 3.2, footnote 7 from the Climate Panel (Chapter 9), and footnote 2 from the Earth Surface and Interior Panel (Chapter 10) now address the differing scientific objectives of the panels with respect to monitoring decadal changes in sea level, which result in different measurement requirements for the same observable.
- The caption to Figure 3.1 has been expanded to provide greater insight into the considerations that informed the prioritizations of the objectives and observables.
- TO-3, formerly “Aquatic Biogeochemistry,” has been relabeled more accurately as “Aquatic-Coastal Biogeochemistry.”
1 Decadal surveys are notable in their ability to sample thoroughly the research interests, aspirations, and needs of a scientific community. Through a rigorous process, a primary survey committee and thematic panels of community members construct a prioritized program of science goals and objectives and define an executable strategy for achieving them. These reports play a critical role in defining the nation’s agenda in that science area for the following 10 years—and often beyond. See National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2015, The Space Science Decadal Surveys: Lessons Learned and Best Practices, Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, https://doi.org/10.17226/21788.
The inaugural decadal survey2 in this scientific domain, published in 2007, organized its work around the overarching theme of Earth system science for societal benefit. Perhaps its most notable achievement was that the various communities that constitute Earth science, which span a set of diverse disciplinary boundaries and had no tradition of coming together, were able to reach consensus on decadal research priorities. The resulting integrated program proved highly beneficial both to the sponsoring agencies and to a nation whose needs for the information and data products derived from agency programs were accelerating rapidly.3
ESAS 2017 was sponsored by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)—federal agencies with responsibilities for the planning and execution of civilian programs of Earth observations from space. Internally, the survey effort at the National Academies was led by the Space Studies Board with the close collaboration and cooperation of the staff and volunteers at the Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate, the Board on Earth Sciences and Resources, the Ocean Studies Board, the Polar Research Board, and the Water Sciences and Technology Board.
The survey was carried out by an appointed steering committee, which was solely responsible for this final report, including all findings and recommendations, and five appointed interdisciplinary study panels. In addition, the steering committee was informed by several informal working groups, some focusing on specific elements of the task statement and others focusing on cross-disciplinary topics (e.g., technology and innovation) and “integrating themes” (e.g., the carbon, water, and energy cycles). This structure—one of several considered—allowed for a rich and comprehensive study process by approaching the topics in the statement of task from multiple vantage points.
Designated “liaisons”—from the steering committee to each of the panels and from each panel to each of the other four panels—helped to avoid the stovepiping of information. In addition, steering committee liaisons attended panel meetings, and panel liaisons had the opportunity to attend other panel meetings. Panels met three times during the course of the study; at two of these meetings, joint sessions with a concurrently held steering committee meeting took place. The steering committee held seven in-person meetings during the course of the study. Between meetings, both the steering committee and the panels held numerous virtual meetings via WebEx. Further information on the decadal survey’s organization is available at http://www.nas.edu/esas2017.
Much of the initial work of the decadal survey took place within the study panels. Their focus areas/themes were chosen so that together they spanned the major components of the Earth system. The panel organization, which was devised and confirmed by the steering committee early in the survey process, was also informed by community input received in the first request for information (RFI;4 see Appendix D).
___________________
2 See National Research Council, 2007, Earth Science and Applications from Space: National Imperatives for the Next Decade and Beyond, Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, https://doi.org/10.17226/11820. For a review of the successes and shortcomings of the survey, see National Research Council, 2012, Earth Science and Applications from Space: A Midterm Assessment of NASA’s Implementation of the Decadal Survey, Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, https://doi.org/10.17226/13405.
3 As inferred by the size of data archives and the number of data users and data retrievals. For example, see slide 18 in the presentation by Program Executive for Earth Science Data Systems, Earth Science Division (DK), Science Mission Directorate, NASA Headquarters, “NASA’s Earth Science Data Systems Program,” February 16, 2016, https://smd-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/science-blue/s3fs-public/atoms/files/5-Big_Data-Earth_Science-tagged.pdf. The growth in Landsat use is discussed in M.A. Wulder, J.C. White, T.R. Loveland, C.E. Woodcock, A.S. Belward, W.B. Cohen, E.A. Fosnight, J. Shaw, J.G. Masek, and D.P. Roy, 2016, The global Landsat archive: Status, consolidation, and direction, Remote Sensing of Environment 185:271-283. To manage its growing data archives, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has initiated a “Big Data Project” (see http://www.noaa.gov/big-data-project).
4 The first request for information (RFI) was issued in advance of the initiation of the survey and requested community input to help understand the role of space-based observations in addressing the key challenges and questions for Earth system science in the coming decade. By design, it did not ask the community for ideas on how to address an identified challenge or question. Building on the
Other considerations included the desire for a structure that was responsive to the agency missions and goals of the sponsors and consistent with the decadal survey statement of task.
The panels were responsible for receiving and analyzing community input; in particular, community responses to the survey-issued second RFI. Each panel included members whose collective expertise spanned the panel’s topical focus areas from science to applications. With input from the panels, the steering committee then developed proposed observing system priorities that integrated goals for understanding and monitoring the Earth system with those that emphasize the use of observations in a range of applied settings. The panels and their focus areas were as follows:5
- Global Hydrological Cycles and Water Resources
The movement, distribution, and availability of water and how these are changing over time. - Weather and Air Quality: Minutes to Subseasonal
Atmospheric dynamics, thermodynamics, chemistry, and their interactions at land and ocean interfaces. - Marine and Terrestrial Ecosystems and Natural Resource Management
Biogeochemical cycles, ecosystem functioning, biodiversity, and factors that influence health and ecosystem services. - Climate Variability and Change: Seasonal to Centennial
Forcings and feedbacks of the ocean, atmosphere, land, and cryosphere within the coupled climate system. - Earth Surface and Interior: Dynamics and Hazards
Core, mantle, lithosphere, and surface processes; system interactions; and the hazards they generate.
ESAS 2017 STATEMENT OF TASK
To address the elements of the ESAS 2017 statement of task, the steering committee (the “committee”) focused its work in the following four broad areas:
- Assessment of the past decade’s progress,
- Establishment of a vision and strategy for the future decade,
- Prioritization of science and applications targets and mapping these to an observing plan,
- Development of guidance on implementation of the plan specific to the requests made by
- NASA
- NOAA and USGS.
Within areas 2 and 3 of this list, the statement of task requests that priorities focus on science, applications, and observations, rather than the instruments and missions required to carry out those observations. In particular, the statement of task requests that the committee “recommend NASA research activities to advance Earth system science and applications by means of a set of prioritized strategic ‘science targets’
___________________
first RFI, the second RFI requested ideas for specific science and applications targets (i.e., objectives) that promised to substantially advance understanding in one or more of the Earth system science themes associated with the survey’s study panels.
5 Throughout this report, references to panels are also abbreviated as follows: Global Hydrological Cycles and Water Resources = “Hydrology” or “H”; Weather and Air Quality: Minutes to Subseasonal = “Weather” or “W”; Marine and Terrestrial Ecosystems and Natural Resource Management = “Ecosystems” or “E”; Climate Variability and Change: Seasonal to Centennial = “Climate” or “C”; and Earth Surface and Interior: Dynamics and Hazards = “Solid Earth” or “S.”
[expanded by the steering committee to be science and applications targets] for the space-based observation opportunities in the decade 2018-2027.” As described in more detail in Chapter 3, a “science target” is “a set of science objectives related by a common space-based observable.” The steering committee defined the observable associated with each science target as a “targeted observable.”
ESAS 2017: STRUCTURE AND KEY FEATURES OF THE REPORT
The structure and key features of this report reflect its rather detailed statement of task. In particular,
- As requested, the committee’s recommended strategy is one that will advance fundamental understanding of the Earth system and provide knowledge that can be applied in service to society.
- The report, per the statement of task, provides recommended approaches to facilitate the development of a robust, resilient, and appropriately balanced U.S. program of Earth observations from space.
- Responding to task elements specific to NASA, the report provides a prioritized list of top-level science and application “objectives,” with attention to gaps and opportunities in the program of record and the feasibility of measurement approaches. Task elements pertaining to NASA also include specific requests for an analysis of the balance between major program elements in the Earth Science Division (ESD) and, within its flight element, the balance among investments into the various program elements.
- Task elements pertaining specifically to NOAA and USGS focus on how to make existing and planned programs more effective with respect to their utility to users and their cost-effectiveness, including through technology innovation.
- Per the 2008 NASA Authorization Act,6 ESAS 2017 arranged for an independent Cost Assessment and Technical Evaluation (CATE)7 of the major candidate investments being considered for prioritization. This analysis was performed by the Aerospace Corporation, which also performed CATEs as part of recent National Academies decadal surveys in solar and space physics, planetary science, and astronomy and astrophysics (see Chapter 3 for details).
- To facilitate the development and implementation of its recommended program for NASA’s ESD, the ESAS 2017 committee assumed the availability of resources at the levels anticipated at the time the survey was initiated.8 It also provides “decision rules” to guide responses in the event of unexpected technical or budgetary problems.
- The ESAS 2017 steering committee and its study panels carefully considered opportunities to lower the cost of making research-quality Earth observations by leveraging advances in technology, international partnerships, and the capabilities emerging in the commercial sector. Attention was also given to the exploitation of “big data” for Earth science.
___________________
6 Section 1104 of the 2008 Act, “Directs the Administrator to enter into agreements periodically with the National Academies for decadal surveys to take stock of the status and opportunities for Earth and space science discipline fields and aeronautics research and to recommend priorities for research and programmatic areas over the next decade.” Further, the Act, “Requires that such agreements include independent estimates of life cycle costs and technical readiness of missions assessed in the surveys whenever possible.” See National Aeronautics and Space Administration Authorization Act of 2008, P.L. 110-422, Section 1104 (October 15, 2008).
7 See Appendix B, “Implementing the CATE Process,” in National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2015, The Space Science Decadal Surveys: Lessons Learned and Best Practices, Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, https://doi.org/10.17226/21788.
8 As explained in Chapter 3, NASA officials provided the survey with a budget history and indicated that large-scale changes to recent funding levels were not anticipated. Recommendations in the present report are based on the assumption that the then current budget would only grow with inflation.
- NASA, like all federal agencies, is faced with difficult choices among competing priorities for investment. Within the ESD, these choices include whether to invest in the continuation of one existing data stream over another or to develop a new measurement capability sought by the research community. In developing a recommended program that could be executed within the highly constrained budgets anticipated by NASA, the steering committee and panels also faced the difficult challenge of striking an appropriate balance between these competing demands. The transfer of responsibility from NOAA to NASA for several “continuity” measurements without budget increases commensurate with the new responsibility added to the challenge.9
- Survey deliberations benefited from a close read of several high-level guidance documents from the executive branch.10
Finally, this report would not have been possible without the assistance of the sponsoring agencies and colleagues in the research and applications community. The steering committee is grateful to leaders across NASA, NOAA, and USGS for their support of the survey effort; in particular, they provided the detailed programmatic information that the committee and panels required to understand the context for their prioritization. In addition, the decadal survey could not have been completed without the substantial and substantive work that colleagues put into the composition of white papers and participation in town hall meetings. These inputs were especially important to the work of the interdisciplinary panels whose outputs form the basis of the exciting science and applications that are the foundation of the survey’s recommended program. We would also like to acknowledge the assistance of the Aerospace Corporation, which provided an independent analysis of the cost and technical feasibility of options to realize survey science priorities.
OUTLINE OF THE REPORT
This report is organized in two parts, as follows; shown in bold is the major theme of each chapter:
PART I—Report of the Steering Committee. The full steering committee report.
Chapter 1. A Vision for the Decade.
Chapter 2. A Decadal Strategy. This chapter reviews progress over the past decade, assesses emerging scientific and societal needs, and builds from that foundation to identify a strategic framework for the next decade.
Chapter 3. A Prioritized Program for Science, Applications, and Observations. This chapter describes the process used by the committee to identify and prioritize observational needs, and presents the recommended strategy to provide a robust and balanced U.S. program of Earth observations from space that is consistent with agency-provided budget expectations.
Chapter 4. Agency Programmatic Context. This chapter addresses some of the key agency-specific issues identified as being important programmatically in the implementation of the recommended program.
Chapter 5. Conclusion.
___________________
9 The present survey benefited from the analysis framework presented in National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, 2015, Continuity of NASA Earth Observations from Space: A Value Framework, Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, https://doi.org/10.17226/21789.
10 These are discussed in Tim Stryker, Director, U.S. Group on Earth Observations Program, “National Civil Earth Observations Planning and Assessment,” presented at the ASPRS 2015 Annual Conference, May 7, 2015, https://calval.cr.usgs.gov/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/ASPRS-slides_Stryker_final.pdf.
PART II—Panel Inputs. Chapters contributed by the five study panels.
Chapter 6. Global Hydrological Cycles and Water Resources
Chapter 7. Weather and Air Quality: Minutes to Subseasonal
Chapter 8. Marine and Terrestrial Ecosystems and Natural Resource Management
Chapter 9. Climate Variability and Change: Seasonal to Centennial
Chapter 10. Earth Surface and Interior: Dynamics and Hazards
Acknowledgment of Reviewers
This Consensus Study Report was reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine in making each published report as sound as possible and to ensure that it meets the institutional standards for quality, 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 thank the following individuals for their review of this report:
___________________
1 Member, National Academy of Sciences.
Although the reviewers listed earlier provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations of this report nor did they see the final draft before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Charles F. Kennel, NAS, University of California, San Diego, and Thomas H. Vonder Haar, NAE, Colorado State University. They were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with the standards of the National Academies and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content rests entirely with the authoring committee and the National Academies.
___________________
2 Member, National Academy of Engineering.
IN MEMORY OF MOLLY MACAULEY
Molly Macauley, a member of the steering committee, passed away during the committee’s tenure in July 2016. Molly was a very special person, a true friend to many of us, and a tremendous colleague to all. Her contributions, from the perspective of an economist, impacted the entire field of Earth observation. Her clarity of thought strongly influenced the early directions of this committee; that clarity was deeply missed during the remainder of our work. Molly had an unparalleled talent for voicing unanticipated perspectives that redirected discussions and brought difficult issues into instant focus. She ensured that we stayed grounded in the reality of how our work directly and deeply impacts people’s lives. She drove us to quantify that value and communicate it clearly. Her loss will continue to be felt by our entire community for a long time.
Waleed Abdalati and Bill Gail
On Behalf of the Steering Committee, Panels, and Staff
This page intentionally left blank.
Contents
PART I: REPORT OF THE STEERING COMMITTEE
3 A PRIORITIZED PROGRAM FOR SCIENCE, APPLICATIONS, AND OBSERVATIONS
6 GLOBAL HYDROLOGICAL CYCLES AND WATER RESOURCES
7 WEATHER AND AIR QUALITY: MINUTES TO SUBSEASONAL
8 MARINE AND TERRESTRIAL ECOSYSTEMS AND NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
B Science and Applications Traceability Matrix
F Committee Members and Staff Biographies
___________________
1 Note that Appendixes A through G are not included in the print version of this report. They appear in the electronic version of the report, which is posted as a free PDF on the National Academies Press website at https://www.nap.edu/catalog/24938.