|
GEOTECHNOLOGY
AND SOCIETY
Homeland Security, Privacy, and Data Acquisition
Richard K. Grady
There are times when anyone might associate privacy
with security. For example, a fence around your property
might keep the neighbors from peering into your backyard.
However, a fence will not keep remote sensors from
peering into your backyard from space! When this happens,
has your privacy been invaded? It is all a matter of
perspective.
Independent of homeland security considerations,
the amount of information widely available on individuals
is remarkable. How many citizens have even noticed, for
example, that the boundary lines for their property might
be displayed on their community’s website, along with
the purchase price, appraised value, and ownership address
information? In many states, these data items are
considered open records, and are publicly accessible by
law.
The collection of most of the information about
individuals has nothing to do with homeland security, and
is driven by a mandate to provide service to citizens, or
by the commercial interests of the free enterprise system.
This has created its own set of problems, such as
increasing the risk of identity theft, and increasing the
amount of unwanted solicitation. How many times have you
been contacted at home by solicitors who know far too much
about you as an individual?
Welcome to the modern world!
From a local government perspective, much of what
is needed to improve homeland security is already needed
to improve the basic day-to-day delivery of services to
citizens. The need for data to ensure public safety did
not start with 9-11-01, and the same can be said about the
need for good information on utility networks and
transportation infrastructure.
To a certain degree, what did start on 9-11-01 was
enhanced recognition of how little geospatial data was
readily available in a useful and consistent format for
all of the geographic areas where it might be needed to
support emergency response, such as the 133 cities
identified as being most vulnerable to terrorist-caused
attacks by the Department of Defense (DoD) Joint Task
Force for Civil Support (JTF-CS). It was also recognized
that local first responders do not necessarily benefit
from volumes of remotely sensed data, which they are not
accustomed to processing, when and if provided by federal
agencies capable of image acquisition.
Starting Point
There are many reasons that came to light after
9-11-01 for these shortcomings, including lack of funding,
lack of standards, and lack of clear responsibility and
channels of communication. A good start was made on
potential standards for a common operational picture when
US Geological Survey (USGS) and the National
Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) collaborated on the
Homeland Security Infrastructure Program (HSIP) Tiger Team
Report, first released in September 2002, for official use
only. The HSIP layer list is a good starting point for
developing a consistent schema for geospatial data.
Nonetheless, it should be viewed in the context of other
efforts that have made similar attempts at developing
schemas for geospatial data, of which there are many.
More emphasis is needed on data exchange and
warehousing approaches, to leverage data from the many
schemas that are already being employed at the various
levels of government, and in different geographic regions.
Also, much more emphasis is needed on data quality, and in
determining acceptable levels of completeness and accuracy
for different data types, such as contact information and
precise building location (Figure 1). And, more use cases
are needed to help prioritize these efforts.
While most local communities recognize the value of
complete and accurate geospatial data, the range of
expertise and level of adoption varies widely. Inventories
of available data resources are lacking, and data sharing
agreements are often not in place. There is no single
national policy that all localities must adhere to when it
comes to geospatial data, and implementations are “all
over the map,” both literally and figuratively.
At the federal level, consistent and reliable data
is needed for many purposes, and the importance of
standards is understood. There are well-known exemplars,
such as the USGS topographic map series for the entire
nation. While this data is consistent and nationally
available, it does not provide the large-scale, up-to-date
local coverage that is needed by first responders for
emergencies at the local level. Relatively high resolution
imagery is also available, nationally, acquired by NGA
from commercial suppliers. While this is an excellent
resource, it is less useful than it could be if it is not
registered and integrated with planimetric, topographic,
and attribute data.
Business Intelligence
What the federal government ultimately needs
for homeland security in this context is large-scale data
that has traditionally been in the purview of local
government. And yet, the technical and financial
mechanisms for getting this data, and ensuring its
completeness and accuracy, are not in place for a
sustainable national program—neither are consistent data
sharing policies in place on a national basis.
There are a number of private sector suppliers of
geospatial data, and many consumers. The federal
government is realizing that where there is a business
imperative to keep data complete and accurate, the chances
of a better product are higher than from unfunded mandates
to local government. It is also the case that private
sector data suppliers often have better attribute
information on geospatial features than public sector
sources, due to the demand for business intelligence. This
same “intelligence,” if gathered by government
entities, might be considered an invasion of privacy.
Homeland security represents a unifying purpose for
getting the data, and the cooperation, that is needed to
support not only homeland security
itself, but good government in general. As with any
unifying purpose, there is the risk of spawning zealots
who go to extremes. As Americans, we seem to have built-in
radar for detecting over-zealous behavior, even as we may
occasionally exhibit such behavior, particularly where our
favorite sports team might be involved! This point is
raised, because the infringement of our privacy and
freedom sometimes is the result of over-zealous behavior
on the part of well-meaning individuals, and agencies.
It is our right as citizens, and perhaps our
responsibility as professionals engaged in earth
observation, to discuss the needs of society for homeland
security, and the impact on individual rights related to
acquiring geospatial intelligence. In a modern context,
this discussion should consider the same values that our
country’s founders built into the Constitution. If done
well, the result will enhance homeland security, good
government, and commerce in geospatial data and
technology.
About the Author
Rich Grady, President of Applied Geographics, Inc.
(AppGeo), in Boston, Massachusetts has spent more than 25
years designing and implementing Geographic Information
Systems, and served on the Federal Geographic Data
Committee (FGDC) Facilities Working Group, advocating
large-scale mapping standards. He is currently active on
the Homeland Infrastructure Foundation Level Data (HIFLD)
Working Group and data integration projects to support
homeland security.
Back
|
