Skip to main content
Log in

Managing Troubled Data: Coastal Data Partnerships Smooth Data Integration

  • Published:
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Understanding the ecology, condition, and changes of coastal areas requires data from many sources. Broad-scale and long-term ecological questions, such as global climate change, biodiversity, and cumulative impacts of human activities, must be addressed with databases that integrate data from several different research and monitoring programs. Various barriers, including widely differing data formats, codes, directories, systems, and metadata used by individual programs, make such integration troublesome. Coastal data partnerships, by helping overcome technical, social, and organizational barriers, can lead to a better understanding of environmental issues, and may enable better management decisions. Characteristics of successful data partnerships include a common need for shared data, strong collaborative leadership, committed partners willing to invest in the partnership, and clear agreements on data standards and data policy. Emerging data and metadata standards that become widely accepted are crucial. New information technology is making it easier to exchange and integrate data. Data partnerships allow us to create broader databases than would be possible for any one organization to create by itself.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Baker, K.S., Benson, B.J., Henshaw, D.L, Blodgett, D., Porter J.H. and Stafford, S.G.: 2000, ‘Evolution of a Multisite Network Information System: The LTER Information Management Paradigm’, BioScience 50, 963–978.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bisby, F.A.: 2000, ‘The Quiet Revolution: Biodiversity Informatics and the Internet’. Science 289, 2309–2312.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boesch, D.F., Schubel, J.R., Bernstein, B.B., Eichbaum, W.M., Garber, W., Hirsch, A., Holland, A.F., Johnson, K.S., O'Connor, D.J., Speer, L. and Wiersma, G.B.: 1990, Managing Troubled Waters: The Role of Marine Environmental Monitoring, Committee on a Systems Assessment of Marine Environmental Monitoring, National Research Council. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA. 125 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bradley, M.P., Brown, B.S., Hale, S.S., Kutz, F.W., Landy, R.B., Shedlock, R., Mangold, R., Morris, A., Galloway, W., Rosen, J.S., Pepino, R. and Wiersma, B.: 2000, ‘Summary of the MAIA Working Conference’, Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 63, 15–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Briggs, J.M. and Su, H.: 1994, ‘Development and Refinement of the Konza Prairie LTER Research Information Management Program’, in: Michener, W.K, Brunt, J.W. and Stafford, S.G (eds), Environmental Information Management and Analysis: Ecosystem to Global Scales, Taylor & Francis, London pp. 87–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brunt, J.W.: 1998, ‘The LTER Network Information System: A Framework for Ecological Information Management’, in: Aguirre-Bravo, C. and. Franco, C.R (eds), North American Science Symposium: Toward a Unified Framework for Inventorying and Monitoring Forest Ecosystem Resources, 2–6 Nov 1998, Guadalajara, Mexico, Proceedings RMRS-P-12US, Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, CO, pp. 435–440.

    Google Scholar 

  • CAS [Chemical Abstracts Service]: 2001, CAS Web site, [http://www.cas.org].

  • CBP [Chesapeake Bay Program]: 2001, CBP Web site, [http://www.chesapeakebay.net].

  • CENR [Committee on Environment and Natural Resources]: 1997, Integrating the Nation's Environmental Monitoring and Research Networks and Programs: A Proposed Framework, CENR, National Science and Technology Council, Washington, DC, USA. 102 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chrislip, D.D. and Larson, C.E.: 1994, Collaborative Leadership, Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco, CA, USA. 192 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colwell, R.: 1998, ‘Balancing the Biocomplexity of the Planet's Living Systems: A Twenty-first Century Task for Science’, BioScience 48, 786–787.

    Google Scholar 

  • DODS [Distributed Oceanographic Data System]: 2001, DODS Web site, [http:// www.unidata.ucar.edu/packages/dods].

  • Edwards, J.L., Lane, M.A and Nielsen, E.S.: 2000, ‘Interoperability of Biodiversity Databases: Biodiversity Information on Every Desktop’, Science 289, 2312–2314.

    Google Scholar 

  • EMAP [Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program]: 2001, EMAP Web site, [http:// www.epa.gov/emap].

  • Farrey, P.M., Mooney-Seuss, M.L. and Tausig, H.C. (eds.): 1999, Out of the Fog: Furthering the Establishment of an Electronic Environmental Information Exchange for the Gulf of Maine, New England Aquarium, Aquatic Forum Series, Report 99–1, Boston, MA, USA.

  • FGDC [Federal Geographic Data Committee]: 2001, FGDC Web site, [http://www.fgdc.gov].

  • FGDC [Federal Geographic Data Committee]: 1998, Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata, version 2.0, FGDC-STD-001–1998, Washington, DC, USA.

  • Franklin, J.F., Bledsoe, C.S. and Callahan, J.T.: 1990, ‘Contributions of the Long-term Ecological Research Program’, BioScience 40, 509–523.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friel, C.A.: 1994, ‘Nautical Information as a Component of a Marine Geographic Information System’, Chapter 5 in: Charting a Course into the Digital Era, National Research Council, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., pp. 37–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • GMNET [Gulf of Mexico Aquatic Mortality Network]: 2001, GMNET Web site, [http://pelican.gmpo.gov].

  • Grassle, J.F.: 2000, ‘The Ocean Biogeographic Information System (OBIS): An On-line, Worldwide Atlas for Accessing, Modeling and Mapping Marine Biological Data in a Multidimensional Geographic Context’, Oceanography 13, 5–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hale, S. S.: 1999, ‘How to Manage Data Badly (Part 1)’, Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America 80(4), 265–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hale, S.S., Bahner, L.H. and Paul, J.F.: 2000, ‘Finding Common Ground in Managing Data Used for Regional Environmental Assessments’, Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 63, 143–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hale, S., Rosen, J., Scott, D., Paul, J. and Hughes, M.: 1999, EMAP Information Management Plan: 1998–2001, EPA/620/R-99/001, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Research Triangle Park, NC, 164 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ingersoll, R.C., Seastedt, T.R and Hartman, M.: 1997, ‘A Model Information Management System for Ecological Research’, BioScience 47, 310–316.

    Google Scholar 

  • ITIS [Integrated Taxonomic Information System]: 2001, ITIS Web site, [http://www.itis.usda.gov].

  • Jackson, L.E. and Gant, M.P.: 1998, ‘An Interactive, Spatial Inventory of Environmental Data in the Mid-Atlantic Region’, Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 51, 325–329.

    Google Scholar 

  • LabNet: 2001, LabNet Web site, [http://www.mbl.edu/labs/NAML/labnet].

  • MAIA [Mid-Atlantic Integrated Assessment]: 2001. MAIA Web site, [http://www.epa.gov/maia].

  • Malakoff, D.: 2000. ‘Grants Kick Off Ambitious Count of All Ocean Life’, Science 288, 1575–1576.

    Google Scholar 

  • McLaughlin, R.L., Carl, L.M., Middel, T., Ross, M., Noakes, D.L.G., Hayes, D.B. and Baylis, J.R.: 2001, ‘Potentials and Pitfalls of Integrating Data from Diverse Sources: Lessons from a Historical Database of Great Lakes Stream Fishes’, Fisheries 26, 14–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michener, W.K.: 2000a, ‘Research Design: Translating Ideas to Data’, in: Ecological Data: Design, Management and Processing, Michener, W.K. and Brunt, J.W. (eds), Blackwell Science, Oxford, Great Britain, pp. 1–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michener, W.K.: 2000b, ‘Ecological Knowledge and Future Data Challenges’, in: Ecological Data: Design, Management and Processing, Michener, W.K. and Brunt, J.W. (eds), Blackwell Science, Oxford, Great Britain, pp. 162–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michener, W.K., Brunt, J.W, Helly, J., Kirchner, T.B. and Stafford, S.G.: 1997, ‘Non-geospatial Metadata for the Ecological Sciences’, Ecological Applications 7, 330–342.

    Google Scholar 

  • NBII [National Biological Information Infrastructure]: 2001, NBII Web site, [http://www.nbii.gov].

  • NEMI [National Environmental Monitoring Initiative]: 2001, NEMI Web site, [http://www.epa.gov/ monitor].

  • NJDEP [New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection]: 2001, NJDEP Web site, [http:// www.state.nj.us/dep].

  • NRC [National Research Council]: 1995, Finding the Forest in the Trees: The Challenge of Combining Diverse Environmental Data, NRC, National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA. 129 pp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pennisi, E.: 2000. ‘Taxonomic Revival’, Science 289, 2306–2308.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, J.H. and Callahan, J.T.: 1994, ‘Circumventing a Dilemma: Historical Approaches to Data Sharing in Ecological Research’, in: Environmental Information Management and Analysis: Ecosystem to Global Scales, Michener, W.K., Brunt, J.W and Stafford, S.G. (eds), Taylor and Francis, Ltd., London, pp. 193–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • SCCWRP [Southern California Coastal Water Research Project]: 2001, SCCWRP Web site, [http:// www.sccwrp.org].

  • Scurlock, J.M.O., Olson, R.J., McCord, R.A. and Michener, W.K.: In press, ‘Data Banks: Archiving Ecological Data and Information’, in: Encyclopedia of Global Environmental Change, John Wiley & Sons, New York.

  • STORET: 2001, STORET web site, [http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/STORET].

  • USGCRP [U.S. Global Change Research Program]: 1998, Data Management for Global Change Research. Policy Statements for the National Assessment Program, July 1998. National Science Foundation, Washington, DC, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • USGLOBEC [U. S. Global Ocean Ecosystems Dynamics]: 1994, U. S. GLOBEC Data Policy, Report No. 10. Woods Hole, MA, [http://globec.whoi.edu].

  • USGS [U. S. Geological Survey]: 2001a, ‘Data Elements for Reporting Water Quality Results of Chemical and Microbiological Analytes’, Federal Register 66(52), 15273–15275.

    Google Scholar 

  • USGS [U. S. Geological Survey]: 2001b, Migratory bird research Web site, [http://www.mbrpwrc. usgs.gov].

  • Vieglais, D., Wiley, E.O., Robins, C.R. and Peterson, A.T.: 2000, ‘Harnessing Museum Resources for the Census of Marine Life: The FISHNET project’, Oceanography 13, 10–13.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hale, S.S., Miglarese, A.H., Bradley, M.P. et al. Managing Troubled Data: Coastal Data Partnerships Smooth Data Integration. Environ Monit Assess 81, 133–148 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021372923589

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021372923589

Navigation