Towards a policy framework for integrating space technology applications for sustainable development on the information superhighway

4. Earth observation in the information superhighway era:
moving towards a new order

Earth observation from space provides valuable information on the world’s natural resources and environment, at a variety of spatial and temporal scales not possible with other forms of monitoring. As we enter the twenty-first century, when the concern for global well-being is complicated by issues such as ozone depletion, deforestation, land degradation, inadequate access to fresh water, decreasing biodiversity, environmental pollution and global warming, the relevance of Earth observation from space has become more pertinent (Jasentuliyana, 1999). The increasing number of satellite missions catering to the data needs of global environment monitoring and natural resources management stands testimony to this concern. With increasing concern for global warming and related issues, and with the recent revelation that 2001 was one of the hottest years in the past century, global interest in remote sensing satellites and the information provided by them has increased. The recent entry of high-resolution, commercial remote sensing systems has added yet another dimension. There are many possible applications from these high-resolution images, ranging from large-scale mapping and facility management to the monitoring of drug trafficking and narcotics production, not to speak of the strategic military applications. Satellite images have started revealing information to the users hitherto not available to them. That development makes the advent of these satellite systems both important in itself and a sign of a larger trend now sweeping the world: growing transparency. It is becoming more and more difficult to hide information, and Governments and corporations across the world are obliged to give true and accurate information to citizens, whether it pertains to environmental pollution or to government records. Globalization greatly increases the demand for information, so that as technology makes such information more obtainable, transparency will become the ineluctable wave of the future. With the demand for and value of real-time Earth observation data increasing and with the appropriate hardware and software in place, the data and information services on the information superhighway, passing through the Internet and the World Wide Web, have already captured the imagination of the users. With satellite communications providing the necessary “conduit” for the information superhighway and the Earth observation and navigation satellites providing the “content”, the future holds even more promise for the users. However, as is always the case, not everyone benefits and not all the uses of the resulting information are benign (Florini and Dehqanzada, 1999). Policy makers around the world have to match the aspirations of the civil society with appropriate regulatory frameworks to ensure that genuine users obtain the required information, while national sovereignty is protected.

4.1 Regulations and policy considerations

Essentially, Earth observation from space is internationally regulated by the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and other celestial Bodies of 1967, the United Nations resolution 41/65 on principles relating to remote sensing of the Earth from outer space of 3 December 1986, and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) resolution 40 adopted in 1995. The Treaty stipulates that outer space shall be free for exploration and use by all States without discrimination of any kind, on the basis of equality and in accordance with international law. While the Treaty implicitly allows for non-governmental space activities, it does not carry any provision for specific space uses. The United Nations Principles are not legally binding, but they do have great moral and political support and a nascent legal validity through the so-called “soft law” status. The Principles do not address military-related remote sensing or say anything about the role of the private sector. WMO resolution 40 is based on international agreement among WMO member States, and its scope is limited to weather and climate.

The United Nations Principles are wide in scope and, owing to their public nature, are directed mainly towards Governments. Principles IV, XII and XIV address the key issues in Earth observations, covering the freedom and sovereignty of nations, the conditions of access to Earth observation data by a “sensed State”, and the control of private Earth observation data companies by their national Governments. The Principles confine their applicability to “the sensing of the Earth’s surface from outer space… for the purpose of improving natural resources management, land use and the protection of the environment” (Principle I). It states that “such activities shall not be conducted in a manner detrimental to the legitimate rights and interests of the sensed State” (Principle IV). The resolution, through Principle XII, grants the sensed State the right to have access, under certain conditions, to data and analysed information concerning its territory.

Non-discriminatory access is the firm basis of the United Nations Principles and is also implicit in the free and unrestricted access principle in WMO resolution 40. While the United Nations Principles deal with Earth observations, that is, non-meteorological remote sensing applications having substantial commercial potential, the WMO resolution covers primarily meteorological data with a clearly public interest. This dichotomy is reflected in the United Nations Principles focusing on prior consent versus freedom of remote sensing, while the WMO resolution is concerned with the free availability of meteorological data. Similar sentiments on non-discriminatory access are expressed by many international agencies such as the International Council of Scientific Unions (ICSU) and the World Data Centre System. However, the absence of a clear definition of what exactly is meant by non-discriminatory access, apart from broadly meaning treating similar users in the same way, has resulted in vague definitions and uncertainty in the interpretation of many data policies. Yet another statement explicitly contained within the United Nations Principles and WMO resolution 40 is the benefit that accrues to the less developed countries through capacity-building. However, in practice, capacity-building has not been fully understood and hence, not fully implemented (Harris, 2001). The United Nations Principles broadly reflect the international policy objectives pursued through the Landsat programme, and codified by the Landsat Act of 1984. It may therefore be said that the United Nations Principles, as they evolved at that time, addressed the prevailing practices of Governments, allowing what the leading, space policy-setting powers deemed generally permissible in their narrow definition of remote sensing (von Kries, 2000). No effort has been made in the past 15 years to revisit the provisions of the United Nations Principles, even though vast, global changes have occurred in the meantime.

4.2 Emerging scenario: Quo vadis?

The remote sensing world has changed considerably in the last 15 years, with as many as seven countries (China, France, India, Israel, Japan, the Russian Federation and the United States) possessing the capability to build their own remote sensing satellites, not to mention the regional capability by agencies such as the European Space Agency (ESA) and many private commercial operators such as Space Imaging, DigitalGlobe (until recently Earthwatch), OrbView, and Radarsat International. With more and more players entering the field, and with many private operators looking for commercial return from remote sensing, the time is not far off when Earth observation will also become a market commodity, as has happened in communications. This commercialization perspective on remote sensing was introduced in remote sensing for the first time in 1984, when the United States allowed a private company, namely EOSAT, to distribute Landsat images. Data accessibility has also been spurred by deliberate commercialization policies, first enacted by the United States, allowing for the distribution of high-resolution data and later, opening the archives of formerly classified remote sensing data. Meanwhile, the advances in digital technology in the form of more user-friendly software, vast computing power enabling the integration of digital data from a satellite with image processing, digital photogrammetry, geographic information systems, and the Global Positioning System on a workstation, all linked to the Internet and the World Wide Web, have online data access and analysis possible. Technology advances and easing of controls have significantly reduced the distinction between the civilian and military technologies. The realization is dawning that the dual-use notion cannot itself be related to the nature of specific technology, but depends on the circumstances of employment and the prevailing policy assessment (von Kries, 2000).

Since the 1986 United Nations resolution is not exhaustive in nature and has not been revisited since its enactment, perceptions of the Earth observation policy scenario vary widely. Different policies are being followed by different players, while only the United States, the dominant space power, has enacted pertinent legislation. Remote sensing policies of the United States, since the enactment of the Landsat Act of 1984, have been aiming to strike a balance between national security imperatives and domestic scientific and commercial interests. The inclination to provide a competitive edge to American commercial interests in the global market has brought about a significant change with regard to non-discriminatory data access, a cornerstone of the United States space policy. While the Landsat Act upheld the unconditional requirement for non-discriminatory data distribution, ensuring that private remote sensing companies could not make their data proprietary, the Remote Sensing Policy Act of 1992 made a distinction between public and privately funded systems, obliging commercial operators to make only raw data available to the Governments of the sensed States and no longer to all potential users on the same terms. Surprisingly, there has not been a significant reaction internationally, either from the sensed States or from the sensing States, the latter probably adopting a similar stance in favour of their own domestic satellite ventures (von Kries, 2000). Currently, the United Nations Principles do not give the right to the sensed State to have access to information about who has asked for the images or for what purpose. However, with the advent of high-resolution commercial satellites by private commercial operators, encouraged by the 1992 United States policy that permitted the development and deployment of high-resolution satellites as well as the international sale of the acquired data, the sensed countries have started feeling an acute sense of vulnerability and consider this provision to be rather lackadaisical when it comes to protection of sovereignty. In the days to come, it is likely that this issue will assume more prominence. The line distinguishing acceptable and unacceptable private remote sensing systems is yet to be drawn. The potential conflicts between commerce and intelligence could further result in the revision of United States policy even as it evaluates the impact of foreign competition on United States security and economic interests (Gupta, 1994).

Meanwhile, in the absence of appropriate international legal guidelines, commercial operators remain subject to national security supervision, where there are wide variations in perception. However, with more and more high-resolution satellites appearing in the commercial domain, and with data easily available, the restrictions and constraints are bound to disappear in time. This technology-driven policy scenario is a recent phenomenon, owing to the availability of many commercial high-resolution satellites such as IKONOS (with 1-metre resolution), from Space Imaging, and QuickBird-2 (with 0.61-metre resolution), from DigitalGlobe, appearing in the commercial market. The availability of the high-resolution digital images on the web has also made it difficult for countries to implement protective measures effectively.

Globally, there are many environmental NGOs – as well as groups working on security and arms control such as the Verification Technology and Information Centre in London and the Federation of American Scientists in Washington, D.C. – which have used these high-resolution images and published them widely. While it provides non-governmental groups with the ability to gather and analyse information independently of Governments, thus serving as an important source of power for the civil society, the concerned Governments and corporations feel vulnerable.

Hence, it can be seen that commercial remote sensing is emerging as a distinct sector, separate from the public and the military sector, and seem to be setting its own market-oriented rules. While this broadly follows the edicts of the Treaty regarding free enterprise and competitive market development, there is a difference if one sees it strictly through the United Nations Principles doctrine, where commercial and military observation activities are not covered. Three distinct sectors thus seem to be emerging in the remote sensing horizon:
(a) The military sector, not amenable to any international rule-making;
(b) The public sector, dictated by the non-discriminatory access edicts of United Nations Principles and the WMO resolution;
(c) The commercial sector, dictated by the international dimensions of private law, mainly related to copyright and patent protection.

With no international regime on the horizon and with more and more private commercial operators entering the global remote sensing business market with their own viable business models, has remote sensing become a freely traded commodity, individually owned and globally sold? Does it mean that the debate on remote sensing space law is over? Is the shaping of sectoral remote sensing regimes the actual challenge?

In the meantime, even as the commercial operators from the United States, such as Space Imaging and DigitalGlobe, have put their commercial high-resolution satellites in orbit, the Government of the United States has retained the right to exercise “shutter control” over these commercial satellites by ordering them turned off or by barring dissemination of the images. In addition to the shutter control, the United States bars these commercial satellites from imaging Israel at resolutions better than 2 metres. These issues are at variance with the three-decade-old Treaty, which stipulates that outer space shall be free for exploration and use by all States without discrimination of any kind (Iannotta, 1999). Yet another variation of this policy of stopping the dissemination of high-resolution images to interested users was seen during the recent conflict in Afghanistan, after the attacks on 11 September 2001, when the United States struck a deal with Space Imaging reserving exclusive rights to all the IKONOS imagery over Afghanistan. Effectively, the United States ensured that adversaries did not obtain images of the region, while the commercial operators did not suffer in terms of revenue. This model is different from the “shutter control” concept, and may not succeed in future when many operators enter the field.

Ultimately, such a policy means that, though the ownership may be with the commercial operator, the Government controls the satellite, exemplifying the fact that whoever “controls” the satellite controls the images. Does it imply that every country should have its own satellite? Still, it is generally less expensive to buy the images collected by someone else’s satellite, and such an arrangement probably makes financial sense for a country that does not need access to the spacecraft all the time. Extending the above arguments further, even buying a satellite might not give the owner the expected control over the satellite. Under United States export policy, any foreign country or organization in the market for an American-built imaging satellite must sign a Government-to-Government agreement with the United States designed to protect the national security and foreign policy interests of both nations (Ferster, 2001). Buying a satellite from anyone else also may not be as easy as signing the above-mentioned agreement, as the United States may still veto the purchase if the satellite contains any American-made parts. Does it mean that these decisions by the United States will erode the “open sky” policy advocated by the United Nations?

There are also concerns that equate the proliferation of high-resolution satellite imaging with the proliferation of weaponry, even as the dominant space powers allowed their commercial operators to forge ahead, in the absence of any agreed guidelines that address the security aspects of competition. Although satellite images, in themselves, are not weapons, they are invaluable for making weapons more usable (Gupta, 1994). A combination of the changing military and strategic environments, including the end of the Cold War, and the growth of the market for high-resolution images have amplified the role of commercial forces in policy-making. The regulatory mechanisms that have been in force since the 1960s have largely been addressing only the governmental and public sectors. While this process may contribute to transparency and confidence-building in some regions, it has the unfortunate potential for aggravating regional conflicts and international instability, changing the balance of power in regional conflict zones, sharpening existing asymmetries in military capabilities and making them harder to manage. Though not directly related to weapons, as in the case of other dual-use technologies, high-resolution images constitute a new type of dual-use technology by contributing to intelligence gathering, targeting and other military applications (Steinberg, 1998). Though the civilian satellite systems such as Landsat, SPOT and IRS, with relatively coarser resolutions, have also been used for some military applications, their utility was limited, as they did not fully meet the military’s requirements. The low spatial resolution, lack of stereoscopic coverage for producing three-dimensional mapping products, lack of precise positioning information and the long revisit periods were cited as the limitations. In contrast, the emerging high-resolution systems provide resolutions in the 1-3 metre range, enabling them to provide information close to that provided by dedicated military systems.

To meet the emerging situations, countries started reviewing their existing data policies and regulatory mechanisms. For example, India, while recognizing the importance of high-resolution images in developmental applications and the need to make the data available to the genuine users, recently enacted a Remote Sensing Data Policy by regulating the high-resolution data acquisition and dissemination only through the Government-owned National Remote Sensing Agency (NRSA) and defining appropriate steps and procedures to be followed by users both in the government and non-government sectors.

Table 4.1 Ground resolution requirements
for militarily significant targets (figures in metres)

Source: Steinberg, Gerald, 1998. Dual-use Aspects of Commercial High-resolution Imaging Satellites, Mid-East Security and Policy Studies, No. 37 (Begin-Sadat Centre for Strategic Studies, Bar-Ilan University, February 1998).

One of the striking outcomes of the above discussions is a lack of coherence in policy formulation, even by a dominant power in remote sensing like the United States. The evolution of the land remote sensing policy of the United States seems to be typified by incoherence, sometimes even generating highly irrational, counterproductive outcomes when one views it from a wide perspective. Viewed from a microscopic angle, the observed sub-optimal outcomes could be simply due to a compartmentalized rationality rather than ineptitude or incompetence (Thomas, 1996). By attempting to simultaneously be an R and D programme for NASA, an operational programme for the users, a source of data for scientific investigations, and a commercially viable business venture, Landsat found it difficult to meet all goals. The existence of the open skies, national security rationale also affected the ability of the programme to achieve the goals associated with all the other rationales. The recent Landsat-7 data policy, which reverses the earlier commercialization policy and restores the scientific and R and D supremacy of Landsat data, albeit in the global change studies, reveals the continuing conflict in the policy situation.

It is clear that the propagation of remote sensing satellites with varying objectives, starting from the global concern for environmental integrity and sustainable development, to private commercial interests, to security considerations, has raised a host of pressing policy questions, often too challenging to enable national Governments to form a rational, consistent view. Who is regulating the satellites? Who should be, and how? When should a satellite image be treated as public good, to be provided (or controlled) by Governments, and is it a private good governed by profit motives only? Who gets to decide? (Florini and Dehqanzada, 1999).

These and a host of other questions raised elsewhere in this chapter essentially chart the road map for the policy makers as they handle the remote sensing data as part of the content convergence on the information superhighway, which adds yet another dimension to the policy scenario in Earth observation. That pertains to the question of transparency and open sharing of data on resources advocated by various National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) arrangements (see chapter 5) that have a broadband information superhighway as the backbone.

4.3 Data policy considerations on the information superhighway

Given the vast volumes of data generated by many existing and planned missions, it becomes necessary to ensure that the user community has effective, timely and affordable access to the data. It seems logical, therefore, to set up appropriate information systems through which the users can gain access. Several international initiatives are emerging for information distribution to users. This is where there is a need to understand the differing perspectives of various space agencies as well as the user community itself, with regard to a policy framework for handling these vast quantities of data. Owing to the fact that Earth observation from space has been in vogue for almost four decades now, with a strong user community at government, industry and academic levels making use of the data for public good causes, strategic applications, research studies and commercial purposes, there is obviously a diversity of opinions, partly because of differing national objectives and the state of space technology development and its absorption in different countries, and often complicated by the poorly developed and divided opinions among the users, with their specific capabilities and requirements.

There have been many attempts to study and capture these perspectives around the world, such as the recent study sponsored by the European Commission entitled Earth Observation Data Policy and Europe (EOPOLE, 2000). In the Asian and Pacific region, the concern for a viable information network has been articulated in many forums, including the pilot-scale feasibility study on an Earth Space Information Network for Asia and the Pacific organized by ESCAP (1996). The growth of the information superhighway throws up further challenges to these varying perspectives and policy scenarios, even as it provides an opportunity to seamlessly integrate the Earth observation data with other collateral data and make it available to the users in a timely and cost-effective manner.

When it comes to users, the very description and definition of a user has become complex, so that their demands for Earth observation data, and their perceptions of that data, vary accordingly. There are users as individuals, users as entities and users as customers. In the context of the United Nations Principles on Remote Sensing, a user may be considered a person or entity using remote sensing data for purposes in themselves totally unrelated to outer space, satellites or remote sensing. According to this definition, there is a distinction between the Earth observation data users who know and understand the source of their data and the downstream users who use information products and services that have no direct connection with the source of the data. Nonetheless, many users are still not fully aware of the capabilities of Earth observation. The reason could be due to the strong focus the space agencies attach to new space missions rather than to the end-applications, as well as the insufficient information base available on the evolution of observation-based pilot projects from their demonstration phase into the operational phase. Since the use of Earth observation data and the characteristics of the users are varied, the data and information suppliers are increasingly segmenting the markets, thus highlighting the need for the tailoring of data policy for these segmented markets (Harris, 1999).

The data policy approaches could also differ strongly with perceptions and objectives of the lead department handling the Earth observation within the countries, since the responsibility may be vested with departments having widely differing perspectives such as trade, transport, science and technology, and environment, and it is important to recognize these differences as one tries to understand the differing data policy frameworks and their implications while integrating with the information superhighway.

4.3.1 Data access

Access to affordable Earth observation data has always been a matter of concern, especially among the least developed countries. The United Nations resolution on Principles Relating to Remote Sensing of the Earth from Outer Space, while providing non-discriminatory access for the sensed State, is considered limited in scope; in addition, it lags behind on the level of technology, and further behind when comes to implementation. Access to Earth observation data by the less developed countries (the “have-nots”) is further subject to the political, strategic and military considerations of the developed countries that have access to the technology (the “haves”). This digital divide is a matter of deep concern. The need to improve and broaden the access to Earth observation data for the least developed countries cannot be overemphasized, in part because the need for research on climate and global change has sharpened in recent years with the observation that 2001 was the second-warmest year in the last 140 years, next only to 1998 (Jones, 2001). The integration of Earth observation data and non-Earth observation data, such as digital elevation models, soil information, road networks and the like, is vital for most of the applications, and this in turn demands a consistency and compatibility between the data policies for both types of data, so that the information products required for operational applications can be generated, particularly in the GIS context. This value addition calls for considerations such as metadata and appropriate documentation addressing all aspects of quality, accuracy, and reliability of data and information products – and strict adherence to standardization is a must.

Because of real-time and near-real-time requirements, online access to Earth observation data has become very relevant, although off-line access continues to be of importance. With broadband connectivity becoming a reality, web access to Earth observation data is becoming the preferred mode of access in many applications. In the past, the problem used to be in handling a large volume of data sets of fixed sizes, making the transfer over the web a tedious process. With the capability of the user to define and select small polygonal regions, file sizes have become smaller and web data transfer has become easier (Harris, 2000). The Microsoft TerraServer initiative provides an interesting model of web access to Earth observation data (from the SPIN-2 satellite). Similar examples exist for Radarsat, SPOT and IRS data. However, considering the fact that only a relative few have access to the Internet, particularly in developing countries, and that they have limited data-handling capability, there is a long way to go before the online access of Earth observation data is made universally available to all. Hence, there is a need to attach high priority to appropriate policies that can ensure broadband access capability to the developing countries interested in accessing much-needed Earth observation data on a real-time or near-real-time basis for solving issues related to natural resources, the environment and disasters. ESCAP has a major role to play here to ensure greater uniformity of data policies in the region, keeping in mind the segmented markets at the user end.

4.3.2 Pricing policy

It is widely recognized that, ultimately, it is the value of Earth observation data that matters in the marketplace and in the overall goal of sustainable development – not just the pricing of data products. The cost and the resultant prices of data products constitute only a miniscule part of the overall cost to the user of the data. The market for data products is said to be around US$ 120 million in 2001, and it is expected to grow to around US$ 800 million by 2007. The projection for aerial photography is that it will grow from the current US$ 2.8 billion to around US$ 3.9 billion in 2007 (Wilson, 2002). However, with better-resolution images from commercial satellites competing fiercely with aerial photography, there will be a large-scale shift from aerial to satellite images in the coming years; of course, these figures vary from analyst to analyst and are based on different assumptions. But with the entry of commercial operators and the concern of national Governments to recover at least part of their investment, the size of the market is obviously the key to whether Earth observation will develop into a sustainable sector. There have always been suggestions from users that data pricing is a barrier to the Earth observation data use. However, this argument does not stand up to scrutiny, as data constitutes only part of the project cost, with most of the cost occurring in the form of staff, data processing, analysis and value addition. This price-value discussion is still unresolved, even as many categorie of value in other sectors, involving economic, social, security and humanitarian dimensions, have been identified and cost-benefit terms established. The institutional arrangements between countries also create challenges to data-pricing policies, and differing perceptions result in different approaches. While the perception in both the United States and Europe is that government information is a valuable resource, the approaches differ. The United States perceives that open exchange of scientific and technical government information fosters excellence in scientific research and effective use of funds, and accordingly the data-pricing policy is drawn (“cost of filling user request”, the COFUR principle). Europe looks for an explicit return on the investment made in creating the government information. The United States National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) provides all satellite and weather data at the cost of reproduction, regardless of the end use, on the grounds that the weather data systems are for the public good and paid for by the taxpayers, and that the marginal cost of adding additional users is just the cost of reproduction and transmission of data. On the other hand, the European Organization for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites (EUMETSAT) provides data free or at reproduction cost to operational and research users, but charges a fee to the commercial users on the premise that the data have economic value and that commercial users have not otherwise contributed directly to sustaining the satellite system. It is possible to regard Earth observation data as a public good, and this concept enables the exchange of valuable Earth observation data between countries during periods of natural disasters and assessing various environmental issues as defined in international protocols and conventions. At the same time, when it comes to in situ data, countries limit access to users on the pretext that they contain sensitive economic, social, strategic or political information (e.g. digital terrain models).

With the demand for Earth observation data services on the increase, there is increasing evidence of the growing interest in data access over Internet and the World Wide Web. However, Earth observation technology has yet to exploit the new opportunities provided by the Internet to create new business models. Earth observation data servers such as TerraServer and SatWeb are gaining popularity and there are many evolving business models. The advent of convergence technologies, integrating all digital Earth observation, navigation and communication, and aiming towards commercial applications on the broadband information superhighway, will bring about many opportunities and new services that can be exploited. As these new opportunities open up, the existing framework of legal, trade and societal regulations developed mainly for data access through the traditional media becomes less and less applicable to the new situation. With user-configured information extraction over the information superhighway, the emerging convergence technologies could alter the current understanding of data and information in its traditional legal sense, and regard them as services. The resultant implications for copyright, international trade and taxation law need to be understood. Countries should prepare themselves to meet the emerging situations as a challenge and not as a threat. This becomes all the more important as new optical and microwave sensor technologies for high-resolution imagery open up issues such as privacy, national security and liability, making the existing legislation and data rights established over decades obsolete. As with other e-commerce goods, the global character of the Earth observation business, including the managing, transfer, copying and trade of geographical information on the information superhighway, will subject it to many technical and legal issues. This globalization process may also eclipse many of the national data and trade policies.

In order to handle the above issues, the policy framework in the information superhighway era should, therefore, address the need to give special consideration to trade and the exchange of geographical information via the new broadband communication channels. ESCAP could provide a forum for the Asian and Pacific countries to collate and consolidate the various ongoing global efforts on spatial data infrastructure and the resultant data and trade policies, even as some countries in the region, such as Australia, India, Japan and Malaysia, prepare their plans to organize their National Spatial Data Infrastructure and participate in the Global Spatial Data Infrastructure (GSDI).

4.3.3 Archival policy

Archiving and retrieval of the ever-increasing amount of Earth observation data have always posed an immense challenge to the data suppliers. Preserving the valuable data collected over time with enormous investment by many space agencies and national Governments calls for a viable financial and institutional arrangement to support and position the archival policy, not to mention a data and quality management service with improved search and access mechanisms. The associated issues are the decay of the archival media, such as tapes, and the ever-changing technologies, that can make the equipment and media obsolete in a very short time. Periodic transcription to a more stable medium is an essential requirement, but it is costly and time-consuming. The challenges of metadata and cataloguing, calibration and validation, storage, and migration to new technologies have been formidable, aside from the challenges posed by the different institutional approaches practised by the agencies (Harris and Olby, 2000).

The “public good” value of the Earth observation data increases with time, even beyond the mission life of the satellite, though the off-take of the archival products may be only a fraction of the total number of products acquired over the mission. The funding for long-term archival and data management has always been an issue. Yet another issue is the reluctance of the user to pay more for the archived data, though in actual practice it costs more; in fact, the user may expect to obtain it at a cheaper rate, since it is “old”. Ultimately the question of “who pays?” remains. Hence, positioning a viable, explicit archival policy with appropriate search and access mechanisms, as well as transcription arrangements with the necessary funding support, is the need of the hour. While archives have to be kept closer to expert organizations, involvement of the user community as an active partner in archive management, and with defined responsibility, has been suggested as one of the solutions to many practical problems facing archive management. The debate on archives is made more complex by the growth of private, commercial space agencies. The rationale for archives in the private sector domain is likely to be dominated more by commercial considerations and not by concern for the public good. Such commercial opportunities actually decrease with the age of Earth observation data, with a corresponding decrease in the interests of the private sector to preserve the data on a long-term basis.

With widely available IT tools and broadband connectivity and the increasing demand of the user community for quick access to good data as and when needed, there is a growing trend towards personal archives of Earth observation data at the user end, thus adding a new dimension to the archival scenario. However, the general lack of explicit archival policies, not only for Earth observation data but also for the corresponding collateral non-Earth observation data, poses greater challenges as one tries to exploit the full potential of the integrated data sets on the information superhighway.

4.3.4 Map policy considerations

Even as satellite capabilities in the spatial, spectral, temporal and radiometric domains have improved vastly with corresponding advances on the ground to process, analyse and extract the needed information – and, as discussed earlier, with ever-increasing convergence capability to deliver such information in a GIS platform to the users in a timely manner through the broadband connectivity networks, both terrestrial and space-based - the restrictive policies adopted by many countries make it difficult to access such information freely. When it comes to remote sensing data and information generated based on that data, countries have their own concerns, primarily based on security and economic surveillance considerations. There are many instances in the region in which restrictions are placed on topographic information (ESCAP, 1994). In many countries in the region, even official survey maps are restricted, while in others, quoting map coordinates in documents is illegal, and it is not uncommon to see countries placing severe restrictions on aerial photography and related products. With everything becoming digital, some countries have imposed restrictions on the digitization of large-scale topographic information and its transmission over networks, thus making the task of integrating the spatial information on a GIS platform impossible. While national Governments may have valid reasons not to compromise on security considerations, particularly in the light of increasing ethnic conflicts, terrorist attacks and other threats, restrictions on the availability of basic map information have a negative impact on the developmental exercises being undertaken in the countries themselves. Countries do realize that inadequate, inaccurate information, both topographic and thematic, is counterproductive to their development. The advent of high-resolution commercial remote sensing satellites has brought these contradictions more into focus. Many civilian applications, such as those in the essential infrastructure development sectors (highways, telecommunications, utility services, urban development and the like), including innocuous ones like city guide maps for tourists, are likely to be affected if the policy is not applied judiciously. With more and more countries vying for the National Spatial Data Infrastructure arrangements and the efforts to interlink them ultimately to form the Global Spatial Data Infrastructure, the map policy considerations – scale, coordinate system and datum aspects – will assume greater importance in the coming days.

4.4 Earth observation data on the World Wide Web

With the demand for real-time and near-real-time availability of Earth observation data increasing, and the time to market decreasing thanks to commercial pressures, services on the Internet and the web are becoming the order of the day. The creation of online libraries is speeding up distribution times, besides providing a shop window for the libraries themselves (Verlini, 2001). Because of the better availability of satellite-based Earth observation data, more and more data management systems have been built up. Electronic delivery of data to the end user, or retrieval on demand, is no more a thing of the future. Some online libraries are listed below (Liebig and Schrogl, 2000):

• Multi-mission User Information Service (MUIS) of ESA, where users can see and review acquired satellite data
• WMO satellite database
• CEOS Information Locator System (CILS), developed jointly by the German Aerospace Centre (DLR) and the Joint Research Centre of the European Commission
• NASA Earth Observation Data and Information System (EOSDIS), which manages all data from past and current Earth science satellites and field measurement programmes
• NOAA Environmental Services Data Directory
• Global Research Network System (GRNS) developed jointly by the National Space Development Agency (NASDA) (Japan), and the Science and Technology Agency (STA) (Japan), specifically for global data sets in hydrology, vegetation, desertification and oceanography
• SIRIUS metadata system for SPOT images, which provides quick-look data
• NRSA (India) web site providing IRS images for quick-look and browsing
• Lockheed Martin’s Intelligent Library System (ILS) for IKONOS

Even as the marketplace is buzzing with web sites announcing the arrival of electronic data transfer across the web, there is a need for users to know about the availability of specific data. The Committee on Earth Observation Satellites (CEOS) has developed a standard for catalogue interoperability which allows searches for specific data in catalogues around the world. CILS provides meta-information and links to various data sources to facilitate access. Similarly, at the European Commission, the Centre for Earth Observation project provides a “single shop shopping mall” for Earth observation Internet links, for web searches.

4.5 Towards an integrated data policy framework for Earth observation: evolution of the Integrated Global Observing Strategy and policy imperatives

The Integrated Global Observing Strategy (IGOS), one of the recent examples in which CEOS played a key role in bringing together major satellite-based and surface-based systems for global environmental observations of the atmosphere, oceans and land, is a strategic planning process that links research, long-term monitoring and operational programmes, as well as data producers and users in a framework that delivers maximum benefits and effectiveness. IGOS represents the convergence of several processes, which many international agencies, such as the Committee on Earth Observation Satellites, World Climate Research Programme, International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, International Oceanic Commission, International Council of Scientific Unions, United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, United Nations Environment Programme, World Meteorological Organization, Global Ocean Observing System, Global Climate Observing System and Global Terrestrial Observing System, have joined to form what is known as the IGOS Partnership (IGOSP). IGOS provides the framework that enables data suppliers to respond to user requirements. The major thrusts of IGOS include the following <www.igospartners.org>:

• Strengthening space-based and in situ linkages between satellite remote sensing and land/ocean-based observations
• Encouraging the transition from research to operational environmental observations within appropriate institutional structures
• Improving data policies and facilitating data access and exchange
• Stimulating better archiving of data to build long-term time series
• Increasing attention to harmonization, quality assurance and calibration/validation of data

Even as the IGOS Partnership and the Global Observing Systems Space Panel (GOSSP) identified specific initial themes, such as oceans, carbon cycle, atmospheric chemistry, water cycle, and geophysical hazards, which are being followed up by many interested international agencies, the data policy considerations assume significance as the exercise involves a wide range of participants with a set of agreed goals, requirements and a framework of obligations and expected benefits. As the exercise involves data providers, both space-based and in situ, and data users with diverse perspectives, it was considered important that an appropriate strategy be evolved that would provide for constant interaction among all the players. A workshop conducted in 1996 at the International Space University identified a number of possible scenarios, including the possibility of adopting a minimum policy framework that would provide a solid basis and extending it as needed with additional bilateral or multilateral agreements. More information can be found at the web site <www.isunet.edu/PDP_Forumexample_programs/data_policy.html>.

While framing the data policy towards meeting the goals of IGOS, policy makers should remember that data policies are not goals in themselves but are primarily framed to support wider use of data for many applications. Enhancing the data utility by providing all support, including value addition, improving access to needed data, and providing an assured and continued supply of data for long-term research as called for in such studies, are some of the essential steps in ensuring the successful implementation of IGOS itself. The workshop concluded that in developing an integrated data policy for Earth observation, the parties to the policy should do the following:

• Clarify the variety of data policies, their common objectives, and their differences
• Include all parties to the agreement in the framing of the data policy principles
• Consider the needs of all relevant users
• Clearly define the benefits and obligations of the parties
• Establish a common data policy strategy, make a minimum data policy framework available and support bilateral or multilateral agreements
• Consider responding to all global issues

In defining data policy, it is considered prudent to proceed by differentiation of application categories (e.g. research, public applications, or commercial) rather than by type of data. Progress in developing data policy will be smoother when it is done in the context of a non-confrontational framework where good will is rewarded. Data policy should have an international legal status and allow the data to be used for a variety of applications. Finally, data users have to respect the policy of data providers (e.g. copyright and licensing). When handling an international commitment involving many international agencies with varying mandates, it is imperative to be clear about the policy considerations.

As we move towards NSDIs and the GSDI, and as the number of players with different perspectives and mandates increases, the policy considerations will become more involved and complex unless they are addressed coherently and in a coordinated fashion. With Earth observation data moving into the very-high-resolution domain (and competing with the vast aerial photography market), with the global concern for a healthy planet Earth being expressed through various international conventions, protocols and treaties, and with calls for global partnerships such as IGOS, the challenges for policy makers are numerous. There is therefore a clear need for international agencies such as ESCAP to bring about awareness and understanding among the countries, so that they will be able to reap the most benefits from the technological advances taking place around the world.

4.6 Earth observation policy framework in the Asian and Pacific region

A number of countries in the Asian and Pacific region are actively involved in the field of remote sensing and Earth observation, and are closely associated with the RESAP programme in ESCAP. Notable among them are Australia, China, Japan, India, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Republic of Korea, Thailand and Viet Nam. China, India and Japan have their own remote sensing satellites.

A number of developments foreseen in the coming years are likely to make the integration of geospatial data into enterprise IT a reality – technological advances in transmitting geospatial data to mobile and handheld devices, declining relative costs of hardware and software, the focus among users on applications and ease of use, increasing interoperability, the Internet as a data delivery platform, and web-enabled GIS. Because the countries of the region have varying capacities in generation and handling of Earth observation data, they need a coordinated approach to effectively harmonize the ongoing activities related to data acquisition, archival and purging, not to mention some effective ways to make the database available to the countries in serious need. In addition, many value-added services integrating Earth observation data on a GIS platform for many projects, at both national and regional levels, are ongoing.

ESCAP, with its Intergovernmental Consultative Committee (ICC) network under RESAP and its extended outreach to various user communities in the region, could provide a suitable platform for coordinating these initiatives in the region in a fashion that could improve awareness about various related issues, such as the need to develop better standards, metadata capabilities and access tools, to help the region to fully exploit the existing data archives, as well as improve service policies in the region. A modest beginning could be to organize meetings at the regional working group level with a specific agenda to address the wide-ranging issues pertaining to data archives and associated data management. Even as ESCAP is working to meet the challenges arising out of the digital divide, using the new convergence technologies to integrate Earth observation data into the information superhighway, the experience of the Committee on Earth Observation Satellites in IGOS and other international initiatives could serve as a model for how an informal gathering of professionals could accomplish a great deal in a focused and coordinated fashion. Similarly, the experience of the International Charter on Space and Major Disaster (see chapter 6 for details) should also provide necessary insights into how to bring together a group of interested agencies with common global concerns on the same platform and carry out tasks with maximum ultimate impact.

With the ever-changing Earth observation technology scenario in satellites, sensors and data analysis techniques, and developments in the broadband connectivity scenario, as well as fast-changing user demands, there is a need to continuously assess and review the developments taking place not only in the region but also elsewhere in the world. ESCAP, with its unique position and established relationships with the major players in the region, in both space business and the user segment, is in a better position to coordinate the formulation of viable policies at the national and regional levels to cope with the scenario emerging from the integration of Earth observation data with collateral data on the information superhighway.

ESCAP could organize the region’s efforts along the following lines:

(a) Collate and review the existing Earth observation data policies in the region and elsewhere in the world, and then (i) document the impediments, if any, to the seamless integration of Earth observation data on the information superhighway, and (ii) suggest possible improvements and opportunities in the policy scenario, providing a distinct Asian and Pacific “flavour”, particularly taking note of the user demand in the least developed countries in the region;

(b) Further to the evolving scenario, ESCAP could organize a series of workshops bringing together various user groups and making them aware of the data policy issues prevailing around the globe;

(c) ESCAP could organize, as a part of the ongoing common denominator projects under RESAP, specific technology-proving experiments that would demonstrate the efficacy of integrating Earth observation data into the information superhighway along with collateral data. A few web-enabled GIS projects of common interest for the least developed countries could be taken up as demonstration projects under the framework of technical cooperation among developing countries (TCDC) and subregional and regional cooperation as part of this exercise;

(d) ESCAP could also organize research studies on the legal framework of Earth observation and its implications as it is integrated into other non-Earth observation data on the information superhighway and offer its services as part of e-commerce activities.