From
the Publisher
By
Roland Mangold
In the wake of the Great
Midwest Flood of 1993, the federal government formed the
multi-department, cross-discipline Interagency Floodplain
Management Task Force (IFMTF) in January 1994 to study and
identify the major causes and consequences of the
flooding.
John A. Kelmelis, Ph.D.,
chief of the science and applications branch of the USGS
is the director of the Scientific Assessment and Strategy
Team (SAST), a sub-group of the task force, which prepared
the floodplain management report. The report was presented
to the White House this spring, and we assigned J.D.
Wilson to write a three-part series of articles about the
task force, and its report. This issue of EOM features the
second of three parts (part one is in EOM April 1995, part
three will appear in EOM June 1995).
Wilson's article, on page
31 of this issue, outlines the report's proposal for a
combination of strategic and operational goals which are
to: reduce the vulnerability of the nation to the dangers
and damages that result from floods; preserve and enhance
the natural resources and functions of the floodplain;
streamline the floodplain management process; and
capitalize on technology to provide information required
to manage the floodplain.
The centerpiece of the task
force's herculean mission is a 240-giga-byte GIS database.
As a final piece in the program, Kelmelis notes that the
information they accumulate and synthesize must be readily
available for everyone who may need it, free of charge.
Housed at the EROS Data Center in Sioux Falls, S.D., the
SAST database is being established as a clearinghouse on
the Internet, and will serve as prototype for the Federal
Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) and will help promote the
National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI).
Along that vein, in the
spring 1995 edition of ESRI ARC News, Jack Dangermond,
president of ESRI and considered by many as the
"father of GIS," makes a plea for the open and
free access to government geographic data. He states,
"While there are many issues and points of view being
debated on the subject, it remains my personal point of
view that we should struggle earnestly to reinforce the
concept of citizen-owned government through free access to
publicly funded GIS data. It is my clear sense that GIS
will be used by literally millions of people by the end of
the decade. Government produced data will fuel and enable
GIS adoption." Also, in the same issue of ARC News,
on page 21, Keene Matsunaga, a lawyer for ESRI, writes an
article arguing for free access to government geographic
data based upon our First Amendment rights.
My initial response is to
applaud the outstanding work the USGS and other government
agencies are doing in relation to the IFMTF, and countless
other issues of national and regional importance. And, I
agree with Kelmelis, Dangermond, and Matsunaga that this
data and information should be accessible to everyone.
However, I disagree with the mechanism with which it is to
be distributed, and that the data should be free.
As we enter the Information
Age, there will indeed be millions of people using GIS by
the end of the century. My question is, do we really want
to establish a government bureaucracy to act as gatekeeper
and clearinghouse of geographic and spatial information?
The issue may seem
innocuous today: We just want to get this information to
those who want to, or can, use it. Certainly there are
volumes of valuable data within government vaults and
databases that can be of benefit to society. However, if
we give our government the charter for providing society
with its geographic and spatial information needs, where
do we draw the line? How will we keep them from suffering
the same ambitions of a Geomatics Canada, or other
national mapping agencies? What will keep them from
competing in the international and domestic marketplace
for mapping contracts, and providing value-added and
higher engineered products and services?
We need to look at getting
systems into place where the government can do the things
it does best, like the wonderful work the USGS and other
agencies are doing with the IFMTF, and let industry do
what it does best - which is market, provide value,
distribute, and sell information products and services. If
we act decisively now, we can avert setting up a
monolithic bureaucracy as the central clearinghouse of
geo-spatial information. It is much easier to avoid that
road now, than to have to undo it in the future as budgets
continue to decrease.
The real opportunities will
be in providing geographic and spatial information and
data that is relevant and beneficial to the information
consumer. Who should be in the best position to benefit
from these opportunities, government or industry? Just
think of the jobs, the business opportunities, and the
wealth that will be created and funneled back into the
economy if this embryonic information industry is allowed
to flourish in the fertile waters of a free enterprise
system.
And, what will be the role
of government in all of this? In reality, not much
different than it is now. It will continue to perform the
extraordinary tasks as outlined in the SAST report, and
them work with industry to facilitate the distribution of
the data. There should be a fee, or royalty, for the use
of government data. Also, government can act in a
regulatory capacity by setting standards: If a map,
geographic data or information product does not have the
USGS stamp of approval, then buyer beware!
This would ensure the
accuracy and integrity of the data and information. And,
it would also ensure that the flood of benefits of a
geographic information industry would flow to society by
the creation of an economically viable industry.
Cheers!

Roland Mangold
Back
|