USGEO Strategic Assessment Group Process
Kathy Fontaine, US/NASA
ST-09-01 Kick-off Meeting
Brussels, Belgium
July 29- 30, 2009
1
Agenda
•
•
•
•
•
2
Background on Why, How, and What
Assessment Methodology
General Conclusions
Highlights of Recommendations
Applicability to ST-09-01
Strategic Assessment Group Background
• September 2007: Strategic Assessment Group (SAG) formed
• Charge:
– To deliver a strategic portfolio
• of high priority national Earth observation investment
recommendations
– for existing and future capabilities
– affecting Societal Benefit Areas
3
• to inform decision-makers,
• to improve decisions regarding national investments in
Earth observations
• February 2008: Established SBA Teams
• March 2008: Conducted 2-day workshop to review
observational requirements for all 9 SBAs
SBA Teams
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Disaster
Weather
Oceans
Climate
Agriculture
Human Health
Ecology
Water
Energy
Strategic Assessment Group Background (cont.)
• June 2008: SAG writing team assembled
• Initial framework - SAG document should:
– Provide an integrated picture of national Earth observation
priorities
– Serve to focus near-term decision-making at the highest levels
of our government
5
– Consider measurements from all types of platforms: spacebased, land and sea-based, airborne, subsurface, observations
collected by humans, etc.
– Address continuity of current measurements as well as the need
for new measurements
– Extend across all Agencies and scientific disciplines
– Highlight investments that will maximize total societal benefit
– Be of readable length (<20 pages)
Observational Needs / Critical Measurements
Hundreds
Step 1:
Gather
Identification and assessment of key observations
Drawn from national and international experts and documents
Interagency
Review and
Feedback
Assessment
Methodology
6
Measurements having benefits across multiple SBAs
OR
Deemed critical to an individual SBA
Measurement particularly at risk-current or looming gap
OR
Measurement not yet being
made but great promise
for dramatic gains
or a scientific
breakthrough
Step 2: Filter
Step 3: Filter Some More
Recommendations
A few Near-Term Threats
and Potential Breakthroughs
General Conclusions
• The process adds a crosscutting perspective that compliments
the individual agency processes
– Roughly equal numbers of measurements facing gaps and
presenting potential major breakthroughs
– Substantial fractions of both space-based and in situ
measurements were identified
7
• Methodology chosen was tractable, enabling a focus from 100s
of critical observations down to 10s of issues
• Must be an ongoing periodic assessment because societal
issues, measurement threats, and breakthrough opportunities
evolve
• Process can be a source for development of US positions on
future GEO work plans
Highlights
• Recommended measurements span the nine USGEO Societal
Benefit Areas
• Of the recommendations that came out of the process
– Roughly equal numbers of measurements facing gaps and
presenting significant opportunities
– Substantial balance of both space-based and in situ
measurements were identified
• Reinforced the need for diversity of measurements to achieve
scientific understanding
– Ground truth / calibration
– Course and fine-scale resolution
8
Applicability to ST-09-01
• Process parallels needs for Output 3
– Would require review of the Work Plan as well as
elements including but not limited to
• Existing science and/or technology plans
• Output of US-09-01a
• Review process needs to be determined
– Panel only or Panel then STC and/or Plenary or…?
• [whatever else…]
9