| 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 |
