Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
i Resolving Conflicts Arising from the Privatization of Environmental Data Committee on Geophysical and Environmental Data Board on Earth Sciences and Resources Division on Earth and Life Studies National Research Council NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS Washington, D.C.
ii 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 the federal agencies of the U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) under Contract No. 50-DKNA-7-90052. The opinions, findings, conclusions, and recommendations expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the view of NOAA, USGCRP, or any of its sub-agencies. International Standard Book Number 0-309-07583-1 Additional copies of this report are available from: National Academy Press 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Box 285 Washington, DC 20055 800â624â6242 202â334â3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area) http://www.nap.edu Cover: Banyan tree representing the parts of environmental information systems: an extensive root system that draws data from many sources; a trunk in which information is synthesized into core information products; multiple branches that distribute and enhance the core products into value- added products; and leaves, which represent different uses of information products of the tree. As with Banyan trees, roots, trunk, and branches are interconnected with one another and with other information system trees. Illustration courtesy of Van Nguyen, National Academy Press. Copyright 2001 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America
iii 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 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 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. 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. 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 Academyâs 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 M. Alberts and Dr. Wm. A. Wulf are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council. www.national-academies.org
iv COMMITTEE ON GEOPHYSICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL DATA J.BERNARD MINSTER, Chair, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, La Jolla FRANCIS P.BRETHERTON, University of Wisconsin, Madison (Chair through 2000) DAVID H.BROMWICH, Ohio State University, Columbus MARY ANNE CARROLL, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor JEFF DOZIER, University of California, Santa Barbara DAVID M.GLOVER, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, Massachusetts GEORGE H.LEAVESLEY, U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, Colorado MARK J.McCABE, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta JOHN M.MELACK, University of California, Santa Barbara JOYCE E.PENNER, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor (through 2000) ROY RADNER, New York University, New York CYNTHIA E.ROSENZWEIG, NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, New York, New York (through 1999) WILLIAM F.RUDDIMAN, University of Virginia, Charlottesville ROBERT J.SERAFIN, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado CARL WUNSCH, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge (through 2000) National Research Council Staff ANNE M.LINN, Senior Program Officer JENNIFER T.ESTEP, Administrative Associate SHANNON L.RUDDY, Project Assistant
v BOARD ON EARTH SCIENCES AND RESOURCES RAYMOND JEANLOZ, Chair, University of California, Berkeley JOHN J.AMORUSO, Amoruso Petroleum Company, Houston, Texas PAUL B.BARTON, JR., U.S. Geological Survey (emeritus), Reston, Virginia DAVID L.DILCHER, University of Florida, Gainesville BARBARA L.DUTROW, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge ADAM M.DZIEWONSKI, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts WILLIAM L.GRAF, Arizona State University, Tempe GEORGE M.HORNBERGER, University of Virginia, Charlottesville SUSAN W.KIEFFER, S.W.Kieffer Science Consulting, Inc., Bolton, Ontario, Canada DIANNE R.NIELSON, Utah Department of Environmental Quality, Salt Lake City JONATHAN G.PRICE, Nevada Bureau of Mines & Geology, Reno BILLIE L.TURNER II, Clark University, Worcester, Massachusetts National Research Council Staff ANTHONY R.DE SOUZA, Director TAMARA L.DICKINSON, Senior Program Officer DAVID A.FEARY, Senior Program Officer ANNE M.LINN, Senior Program Officer PAUL M.CUTLER, Program Officer LISA M.VANDEMARK, Program Officer KRISTEN L.KRAPF, Research Associate KERI H.MOORE, Research Associate MONICA R.LIPSCOMB, Research Assistant JENNIFER T.ESTEP, Administrative Associate VERNA J.BOWEN, Administrative Assistant YVONNE P.FORSBERGH, Senior Project Assistant KAREN L.IMHOF, Senior Project Assistant SHANNON L.RUDDY, Project Assistant TERESIA K.WELMORE, Project Assistant WINFIELD SWANSON, Editor
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS vii Acknowledgments This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the NRC's Report 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 responsiveness 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: Steven T.Berry, Yale University Robert F.Brammer, The Analytical Sciences Corporation Otis B.Brown Jr., University of Miami Inez Y.Fung, University of California, Berkeley Thomas M.Holm, U.S. Geological Survey, EROS Data Center John A.Knauss, University of Rhode Island, and Scripps Institution of Oceanography Harlan J.Onsrud, University of Maine Carol A.Wessman, University of Colorado, Boulder 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 Freeman Gilbert and William L.Chameides, appointed by the National Research Council, who were responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS viii carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.
PREFACE ix Preface The Earth's atmosphere, oceans, and biosphere form an integrated system that transcends national boundaries. To understand the elements of the system, the way they interact, and how they have changed with time, it is necessary to collect and analyze environmental data from all parts of the world. Consequently, over the past 100 years international programs for global change research and environmental monitoring have relied on policies guaranteeing full and open access to data (i.e., data and information are made available without restriction, on a non-discriminatory basis, for no more than the cost of reproduction). Such policies have facilitated significant scientific discoveries, as well as informed public policy. However, the commercialization of government agencies in Europe and Canada, coupled with the rise of the commercial remote sensing industry, is changing the nature of the environmental science enterprise. Commercialized government agencies and private-sector organizations typically sell and/or restrict environmental data, making it difficult to collect and exchange the information upon which society depends. This report, which was requested by the U.S. Global Change Research Program,1 identifies the issues and conflicts that arise from the different goals and objectives of the stakeholders in environmental informationâ 1The U.S. Global Change Research Program is a multi-agency program aimed at âproviding a sound scientific understanding of the human and natural forces that influence the Earth's climate systemâand thus provide a sound scientific basis for national and international decision making on global change issues.â Nine federal agencies formally participate in the program. See Subcommittee on Global Change Research, 2000, Our Changing Planet: The FY 2001 U.S. Global Change Research Program, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Washington, D.C., 74 pp.
PREFACE x scientists, private-sector organizations, government agencies, policy makers, and the general public. The charge to the committee was to examine the impact of commercialization policies (including database legislation) on established scientific practices, including data publication, use of data for multiple purposes, data sharing, and noncommercial research in the private sector. Particular emphasis will be placed on policies concerning global or regional environmental science, including atmospheric, oceanic, solid-earth, biospheric, and polar science. Examples of data restrictions encountered by scientists and scientific data centers will be used to illustrate (1) problems in obtaining, using, sharing, or publishing data and (2) solutions that have worked in the past. The Committee on Geophysical and Environmental Data has been concerned with national and international data policy for 34 years. This report builds on previous reports that examine the impact of proposed and existing data policies on the environmental science community.2 In gathering information for this report, the committee solicited input from intellectual property lawyers, private-sector organizations that collect environmental data or create value-added data products, econ-omists, federal government agencies and data centers, international science organizations, and the broader scientific community. Altogether, six meetings were held to gather information and analyze the results. Information was also gathered from the literature and World Wide Web sites. The information from Web sites provided in this report was correct, to the best of our knowledge, at the time of publication. It is important to remember, however, the rapidly changing content of the Internet. Resources that are free and publicly available one day may require a fee or restrict access the next, and the location of items may change as menus and home pages are reorganized. The committee acknowledges the following individuals who briefed the committee or provided other input: Prue Adler, Jon Band, Roger Barry, Bruce Bauer, Mary Case, Robert Chen, Donald Collins, John Curlander, William Draeger, Bolling Farmer, Wanda Ferrell, Michael Freilich, Lee Fu, Steven Goodman, Richard Greenfield, Allen Hittelman, 2For example, see NRC, 1995, On the Full and Open Exchange of Scientific Data. National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 21 pp.
PREFACE xi Thomas Holm, Peter Jaszi, Bruce Joseph, Thomas Kalvelage, Thomas Karl, Verne Kaupp, Steven Kempler, Joseph King, Herbert Kroehl, Michael Loughridge, Steve Maurer, Richard McGinnis, B.Greg Mitchell, Stephen Nelson, Kurt Schnebele, Suzanne Scotchmer, Mark Seeley, George Sharman, John Shaw, August Shumbera, Kurtis Thome, Shelby Tilford, Ferris Webster, Peter Weiss, Stanley Wilson, Robert Winokur, David Wolf, and James Yoder. Finally, the committee is deeply indebted to the staff of the National Research Council, notably Jenny Estep and Shannon Ruddy, for arranging the numerous meetings required to obtain the viewpoints of the communities involved in this study. We especially thank the study director, Anne Linn, for her steadfast support of committee activities, for her willpower to keep us âon targetâ and, ultimately, for taking charge of the main report production effort, leading the interminable succession of drafts to successful convergence. Francis Bretherton Bernard Minster Past Chair Current Chair
CONTENTS xiii Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 1 INTRODUCTION 7 A Changing World, 7 The Information Tree, 11 Organization of the Report, 13 2 STAKEHOLDER VIEWPOINTS 15 Scientist Views, 15 Private-Sector Views, 19 Government Agency Views, 23 Policy Maker Views, 25 General Public Views, 27 3 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS 29 The Environmental Information System Tree, 31 4 POLICY AND ECONOMIC FRAMEWORK FOR PUBLIC- 37 PURPOSE ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION SYSTEMS Data Policy, 37 Compatibility of Open Access With a Competitive Market, 40 Requirements of Public-Purpose Environmental Information 49 Trees, 5 WAR AND PEACE AMONG STAKEHOLDERS 53 Information Systems Created Purely for Public Purposes, 54 Information Systems and Public-Private Partnerships, 68 Overall Lessons Learned, 72 The Need for a Process of Negotiating Among Stakeholders, 73
CONTENTS xiv 6 RECONCILING THE VIEWS OF THE STAKEHOLDERS 75 Guidelines for Interactions Between Scientists and Private- 75 Sector Organizations, Guidelines for Interactions Between Government Agencies and 79 Private-Sector Organizations, APPENDIXES 89 A Scientific Practices 91 B Intellectual Property Rights to Data 95 C Acronyms 99