Abstract
Earth Observation (EO) services are complicated due to the number of EO satellite platforms. According to the Committee on Earth Observation Satellites (CEOS), there are over sixty EO satellite missions operating, and more than ninety missions planned within the next fifteen years.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
See http://www.ceos.org (last accessed: 25 June 2009).
- 2.
CEOS evolved out of scientific collaboration among national space agencies in Europe, France, India, Japan, and the United States that took place through several Multilateral Meetings on Remote Sensing held in 1980 and 1982, and through Coordination on Land Observation Satellites and Coordination on Ocean Remote Sensing Satellites. See “Minutes of the Committee on Earth Observations Satellites,” 24–25 September 1984.
The membership of CEOS includes national space agencies and space-based research organizations of Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Europe, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, Russia, Sweden, Ukraine, United Kingdom, and the United States; Belgium, Canada, New Zealand, and Norway are observers; and the Economic and Social Commission of Asia and Pacific, Food and Agricultural Organization, Global Climate Observing System, Global Ocean Observing System, Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission, International Council of Scientific Unions, International Geosphere-Biosphere Program, United Nations Environmental Program, United Nations Office of Outer Space Affairs, World Climate Program, and World Meteorological Organization are affiliates.
- 3.
G8 states include the U.S., France, United Kingdom, Japan, Italy, Canada, Russia, and Germany, along with the European Commission. At the G8 summit of 2003, a number of actions plans were established. The G8 action plan on Science and Technology for Sustainable Development called for the strengthening of international cooperation on global observation. It is this action plan that led to the establishment of GEO. The action called for the following: (1) developing close coordination of our respective global observation strategies for the next ten years; (2) identifying new observations to minimize data gaps; (3) building on existing work to produce reliable data products on atmosphere, land, fresh water, oceans, and ecosystems; (4) improving the world-wide reporting and archiving of these data and fill observational gaps of coverage in existing systems; (5) advancing interoperability with reciprocal data-sharing; and (6) developing an implementation plan to achieve these objectives.
- 4.
The goal of USGCRP is to provide for the development and coordination of a comprehensive and integrated United States research program, which will assist the nation and the world, to understand, assess, predict, and respond to human-induced and natural processes of global change. This program recognizes that scientific knowledge of the Earth system is crucial to informed decision-making on environmental issues related to management of the Earth’s biosphere. See United States Global Change Research Act of 1990, Public Law 101–606, United States Congress; and Our Changing Planet: The FY 1999 US Global Change Research Program, A Report by the Subcommittee on Global Change Research, Committee on Environmental and Natural Resources of the National Science and Technology Council, Executive Office of the President.
- 5.
Eligar Sadeh, “Harmonization of Earth Observation Data: Global Change and Collective Action Conflict,” Astropolitics 3:2 (2005). This need for harmonization is reinforced by the results of a survey conducted by the author. The participants in the survey “strongly agreed” or “agreed” that there is a need for harmonization of EO data services. The respondents to the survey on the harmonization of Earth observation data included: James Acker, Contractor Scientist, Earth Sciences, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, United States; Robert J. Andres, Associate Professor, Department of Space Studies, University of North Dakota, United States; Edward Ashford, Ashford Aerospace Consulting, United States; Ofer Beeri, Earth System Science and Policy, Upper Midwest Aerospace Consortium, University of North Dakota, United States; Pawan K. Bhartia, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, United States; Grant Bruce, Hatfield Consultants, Canada; Peter Colohan, Secretariat, Group on Earth Observations; John Faundeen, United States Geological Survey, EROS Data Center, United States; Stephen B. Johnson, Associate Professor, Department of Space Studies, University of North Dakota, United States; Stanislav Klimov, Professor, Space Research Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, Russia; Oleksandr Kolodyazhnyy, Head of Department, Space Research Institute, Ukraine; Ivan Petiteville, Engineer, European Space Agency; Bruce Wielicki, Senior Scientist, Atmospheric Sciences, NASA Langley Research Center, United States; Xiaoyang Zhang, Department of Geography, Center for Remote Sensing, Boston University, United States.
- 6.
CEOS Resolution on Principles of Satellite Data Provision in Support of Operational Environmental Use for the Public Benefit, 1994.
- 7.
The 5-year implementation plan for the CEOS WGISS, which was approved in 2004, states the strategy to maximize the practical impact of its activities in terms of harmonization between the systems and user services relating to the satellite missions of its CEOS members. CEOS Working Group on Information Systems and Services 5-Year Plan (prepared by WGISS Members, 1 October 2006). http://wgiss.ceos.org/documents/WGISS%205-Year%20Plan%20V11a%20060915.doc (last accessed: 25 June 2009).
- 8.
Gregory W. Withee, D. Brent Smith, and Michael B. Hales, “Multilateral Cooperation in Earth Observation: Current Thrusts of the Committee on Earth Observation Satellites and the Integrated Global Observing Strategy, and the Formation of the Ad-Hoc Group on Earth Observation,” paper presented at the 54th International Astronautical Congress, International Astronautical Federation, Bremen, Germany, 29 September–3 October 2003.
- 9.
http://www.ceos.org (last accessed: 25 June 2009).
- 10.
The Integrated Global Observing Strategy (IGOS) Partnership Process (5 May 2004). http://www.igospartners.org/docs/IGOS-P%20Process%20Paper%205%20May%2004_F.doc (last accessed: 25 June 2009).
- 11.
“Integrated Global Observing Strategy (IGOS) into the New Millennium,” IGOS Partnership Forum, UNISPACE III Conference, Vienna, Austria, 21 July 1999.
- 12.
Terms of Reference for the ad-hoc Group on Earth Observation (GEO), Annex 3, 2 August 2003. http://ocean-partners.org/attachments/243_GEO-WashSummannexes.pdf (last accessed: 25 June 2009).
- 13.
http://www.earthobservations.org (last accessed: 20 June 2009). See From Observation to Action – Achieving Comprehensive, Coordinated, and Sustained Earth Observations for the Benefit of Humankind, Framework for a 10-Year Implementation Plan, Earth Observation Summit II, 25 April 2004. http://www.mext.go.jp/english/kaihatu/earth/pdf/framworkdocument.pdf (last accessed: 25 June 2009).
- 14.
Policy Statements on Data Management for Global Change Research, United States Global Change Research Program, 1991. Also, see http://www.gcrio.org/DifHolding/GCRIO085.html (last accessed: 20 June 2009).
- 15.
Principles Relating to Remote Sensing of the Earth from Outer Space, Adopted 3 December 1986, United Nations.
- 16.
Article XII, Principles Relating to Remote Sensing of the Earth from Outer Space.
- 17.
Land Remote Sensing Policy Act of 1992, Public Law 102-555.
- 18.
Article XII, Principles Relating to Remote Sensing of the Earth from Outer Space.
- 19.
Land Remote Sensing Commercialization Act of 1984, Public Law 98–365.
- 20.
Personal correspondence with Jon Christopherson, Principal Engineer, Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), United States Geological Survey (USGS), Earth Resources Observation Systems (EROS) Data Center, 22 September 2003; and Jon Christopherson, LDCM, Landsat Data Continuity Mission, Department of Space Studies Colloquium, University of North Dakota, 22 September 2003.
- 21.
Personal correspondence with Robert J. Andres, Associate Professor, Department of Space Studies, University of North Dakota, United States, 10 November 2005.
- 22.
http://edc.usgs.gov/ (last accessed: 25 June 2009).
- 23.
Rosenquist, Ake, Anthony K. Milne, and Reiner Zimmermann, “Systematic Data Acquisitions – A Prerequisite for Meaningful Biophysical Parameter Retrieval,” IEEE Transactions on Geosciences and Remote Sensing, 41: 7, July 2003.
- 24.
Land Remote Sensing Policy Act of 1992, Public Law 102–555, United States Congress; and Policy Statements on Data Management for Global Change Research, United States Global Change Research Program, 1991.
- 25.
National Research Council, Global Environmental Change: Research Pathways for the Next Decade (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1999).
- 26.
http://www-v0ims.gsfc.nasa.gov/v0ims/DAACS.html (last accessed: 25 June 2009).
- 27.
National Research Council, Assessment of the Usefulness and Availability of NASA’s Earth and Space Science Mission Data (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 2002).
- 28.
National Research Council, Review of NASA’s Distributed Active Archive Centers (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1998).
- 29.
National Research Council, Assessment of the Usefulness and Availability of NASA’s Earth and Space Science Mission Data (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 2002).
- 30.
Personal correspondence with Pawan K. Bhartia, NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, United States, 10 November 2005.
- 31.
Guidelines on Standard Formats and Data Description Languages Version 1.0, Working Group on Information Systems and Service Data Group, CEOS.WGISS.DS.TN01, 1998.
- 32.
Raymond Harris, Earth Observation Data Policy (New York, N.Y.: John Willey & Sons, 1997).
- 33.
The Land Remote Sensing Laws and Policies of National Governments: A Global Survey, National Center for Remote Sensing, Air, and Space Law, College of Law, University of Mississippi. http://www.spacelaw.olemiss.edu/publications/noaa.pdf (last accessed: 25 June 2009). Some scientists may want to buy commercial data for a scientific purpose, and some commercial companies may want to buy scientific data for commercial purposes, thus mixing the categories, regardless of the platform.
- 34.
Commercial Space Act of 1998, Public Law 105–303.
- 35.
Earth remote sensed data sets have the potential to engender sovereignty transparency and the “unbundling of territoriality.” For a further discussion on this unbundling concept and international relations, see John G. Ruggie, “Territoriality and Beyond: Problematizing Modernity in International Relations,” International Organization 47: 1 (1993).
- 36.
Michael R. Hoversten, U.S. National Security and Government Regulation of Commercial Remote Sensing from Outer Space, Air Force Law Review 50 (Winter 2001).
- 37.
Attempting to clarify when shutter control might occur, the memorandum of understanding states: “conditions should be imposed for the smallest area and for the shortest period necessary to protect national security [defense and intelligence], international obligations, or foreign policy concerns at issue. Alternatives to prohibitions on collection and/or distribution shall be considered, such as delaying the transmission or distribution of data, restricting the field of view of the system, encryption of the data if available, or other means to control the use of the data.” U.S. President, National Science and Technology Council, Fact Sheet: Regarding the Memorandum of Understanding Concerning the Licensing of Private Remote Sensing Satellite Systems (1 November 2001).
- 38.
Orbimage acquired Space Imaging and the company was named GeoEye.
- 39.
Since the Land Remote Sensing Policy Act of 1992, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration issued licenses to a number of companies. Current licensees include: AstroVision (AVStar); Ball Aerospace (SAR); DigitalGlobe (EarlyBird-1 , QuickBird-1, QuickBird-II follow-on , M-5 , WorldView); EchoStar (EchoStar-11); GeoEye (OrbView-2, OrbView-3, IKONOS, IKONOS Block II, IKONOS Block II Add-On, GeoEye-1); Northrop Grumman (Continuum); and Technica (EaglEye). http://www.licensing.noaa.gov/licensees.html (last accessed: 25 June 2009).
- 40.
NOAA issued interim final rules on 31 July 2000. For the final rule that became effective on 25 May 2006, see http://www.nesdis.noaa.gov/CRSCMP/REGS%20MAY%202006.pdf (last accessed: 25 June 2009).
- 41.
There are other important issues that the Regulation and Licensing of Commercial Remote Sensing in the U.S. deals with that are not within the focus of this chapter. Two important issues worth mentioning are the obligations for a debris mitigation plan and export controls on the commercial availability of data.
- 42.
National Defense Authorization Act of 2005, Public Law 108–375.
- 43.
Data as a public good is the rule versus the exception, particularly in the case of low-spatial resolution EO systems. However, this is not the case per se with private high-resolution EO systems where the “controlled access” view is an emerging trend. The Land Remote Sensing Laws and Policies of National Governments: A Global Survey, The National Center for Remote Sensing, Air, and Space Law, College of Law, University of Mississippi. http://www.spacelaw.olemiss.edu/publications/noaa.pdf (last accessed: 25 June 2009).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2010 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Sadeh, E. (2010). Politics and Regulation of Earth Observation Services in the United States. In: Jakhu, R. (eds) National Regulation of Space Activities. Space Regulations Library Series, vol 5. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9008-9_19
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9008-9_19
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-9007-2
Online ISBN: 978-90-481-9008-9
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawLaw and Criminology (R0)