PAUL M. MAUGHANComsat General Corporation
Washington, DC 20024
A Role for Private Enterprise inRemote Sensing from Space?*Private enterprise should have responsibility for dataacquisition and data management.
INTRODUCTION
R ECENT TECHNICAL, institutional, andeconomic events have produced a criti
cal decision time fi-ame for the Landsat remote sensing system. In particular, the roleof government versus private initiative isbeing seriously debated. Uppermost in theminds of companies who have followed thedevelopment of Landsat remote sensing as apossible business venture is the question: Isthere a role for private enterprise in remotesensing fi'om space?
Any role private enterprise would assumein remote sensing fi-om space would primm'ily be related to the ultimate profitability ofthe involvement. There is, however, a"benefit-to-mankind" overtone to remotesensing of natural resources which privateenterprise acknowledges and will want toaccommodate in any business plans.
In order for significant profit to be realizedby private enterprise from remote sensingfrom space, an earth-observing satellite system must evolve from experimentation and
ABSTRACT: In order for significant profit to be realized by privateenterprise from remote sensing from space, an earth-observatorysystem must evolve from an experimental to an operational mode. Anumber of technical, legal-institutional, and economic factors impact the rate and effectiveness of the transition. The impetus forchange appears to be intimately tied to the investment and involvement of private enterprise. Throughout the transition, institutionalresponsibility for various parts of the system should move from thefederal government to private enterprise. In an operational mode,private enterprise should have responsibility for data acquisition(including the space segment whe're appropriate) and data management (except permanent archiving) with a shared responsibility fordata analysis.
Whereas the terms "remote sensing £i'omspace" and "Landsat remote sensing" areoften used interchangeably, it is important tonote that the former term as used in thispaper refers not only to the Landsat series ofsatellites and related ground facilities but includes other earth-observing multispectralsatellite systems such as certain oceanic andmeteorological satellite systems.
* Presented at the Annual Meeting of theAmerican Association for the Advancement of Science, Denver, Colorado, February 25, 1977.
research to an operational mode. In the following paragraphs, the question of privateenterprise's palt in effecting an operationalremote sensing system and the potential profit and benefits to be realized from such arole will be examined.
FUTURE OF LANDSAT REMOTE SENSING
In a remote sensing system as sophisticated as Landsat, many factors impact itsprogression from an experimental to an operational mode. These can be conveniently
PHOTOGRAMMETRIC ENGINEERING AND REMOTE SENSING,
Vo!. 44, No.2, February 1978, pp. 171-175.171
172 PHOTOGRAMMETRIC ENGINEERING & REMOTE SE SI G, 1978
grouped into (I) technical factors, (2) legal!institutional factors, and (3) economic factors.
Figure 1 lists possibly the most visible andinteresting factors affecting the future ofLandsat. This list is not intended to beexhaustive, but rather indicative of the complexity and interrelation of the decisions andevents required to bring it into an operational mode. For illustrative purposes, one ofthe factors in each group will be discussed,although no one factor operates independently.
TECHNICAL FACTOR: MATURITY OF REMOTE
SENSING APPLICATIONS
Useful and beneficial remote sensing applications of Landsat data appear to be theterms most often used in justifying the requirements for an operational Landsat. Useful and beneficial remote sensing applications imply a celtain data demand which hasbeen variously translated into cost-benefitnumbers. This is essential and appropriate ifthe system under scrutiny is intended onlyas a government-subsidized program and theterms of reference are for the general welfareand good of the people, but few intelligentbusiness invesbllent decisions are based onsuch considerations.
Private enterprise is most interested in thematurity of a remote sensing application, defined as an application requiring repetitiveremote sensing data and sufficient user needand willingness to pay for the data. In theserather stringent terms, there are presently
only a few remote sensing applications ableto meet the test of maturity.
There appear to be a number of remotesensing applications that today partiallymeet such a maturity test, for example, daminventorying by assessing surface water distribution. This is an ideal use of Landsat 1.and 2 multispectral scanner (MSS) data that,when combined with selected surfaceparameters, yields highly accurate inventorytabulations. This remote sensing applicationfails the maturity test by (1) not demanding arepetitive data supply, and (2) being sponsored bv a user who is largelv unwilling topay for the services. The latter situation is indicative of a lack of marketing of thetechnology in order to generate a user recognition of the cost effectiveness of the service. In other words, the application may betechnically mature and have a correspondingneed, but due to inadequate technologytransfer relative to the applications possibility, a user will neither understand nor bewilling to pay for the service.
An operational Landsat remote sensingsystem, in order to be financially viable, requires a basic set of technically mature applications with the related repetitive datarequirements and user comprehension. Thisbasic set appears to be evolving into the discipline areas of agricultural production,water resources management, land-useplanning and management, and geologicalexploration and mineral resources management. Each application is at a different pointin its maturation with the earliest area expected to fully mature in the early 1980s.
LANDSAT -\
EXPERIMENTV
~LANPSAT~ OPERATIONAL
TECHNICAL FACTORS LEGAL/INSTITUTIONAL FACTORS ECONOMIC FACTORS
MATURITY OF REMOTE SENSINGWHITE HOUSE PRIORITY TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER/
APPLICATIONS TECHNOLOGY DIFFUSION
MUl fl·SOURCE ENVIRONMENTALCONGRESSIONAL ACTION LANDSAT 0 FUNDING
DATA INTEGRATION
DIGITAL PROCESSING EARTH RESOURCE OBSERVATORYEROS FUNDING
TECHNIQUES SATElLITE (EROS) MANDATE
THEMATIC MAPPER NASA·OFFICE OF APPLICATIONS NASA fUNDINGDEVELOPMENT MANDATE
SPACE SHUTTlE SCHEDULE DOMESTIC/INTERNATIONAL PRIVATE INVESTMENTREGULATION
TELEMETRY & DATA RELAYPRIVATE INITIATIVE MARKET STIMULATIONSATELLITE SYSTEM SCHEDULE
MASTER DATA PROCESSOR· FOREIGN AGREEMENTS FOREIGN INVESTMENTEROS DIGITAL SYSTEM SCHEDULE
MASS DATA STORAGE·UNITED NATIONS ACTION USER DEMAND
RETRIEVAL TECHNOLOGY
FIG. 1. Factors affecting the future of the Landsat system.
A ROLE FOR PRIVATE E TERPRISE IN REMOTE SE SING 173
LEGAUINSTITUTIONAL FACTOR: WHITE HOUSE
PRIORITIES
A new President is largely an unknown inconsideration of an operational Landsat remote sensing system. President Carter'smost direct influence will likely be throughfiscal year 1978 and future budgets in support of a Landsat-D satellite and relatedground facilities. There are good reasons tobelieve that President Carter will f~1Vor remote sensing from space and encourage theevolution of the Landsat remote sensing system from the present experimental throughthe transitional mode. Among those reasonsare:
• President Carter has shown an appreciationfor natural resources management and environmental problems in a number of hiscampaign speeches as well as in severalstatements to the American Institute forAeronautics and Astronautics.
• He has demonstrated in Georgia as Governor that a Regional Planning Structure forLand Planners is not only a feasible butalso a workable approach. Data requirements for regional planning are directly related to a Landsat remote sensing system.
At the present time, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is consideringthe Landsat-D for FY 1978 funding. AboutOctober 1977, a decision will be reachedwhether or not to go ahead with Landsat-D.It is widely known that OMB is looking for atangible expression by private enterprise before agreeing to the funding of Landsat-D. Ifthis is the case, industry must move rapidlyto make known that there is a need for program continuity.
ECONOMIC FACTOR: TECHNOLOGY
TRANSFER/TECHNOLOGY DIFFUSION
Technology transfer anclJor technology diffusion are the terms used to describe theprocess of moving developed technologyinto the market place. The degree of sophistication and the actual or perceived userneed for the technology are factors which detennine the rate of transfer or diffusion.
NASA has traditionally been the center forpublic space technology research and development. It is within their charter to insure that technology is made available to theprivate sector; thus, NASA has establishedtechnology transfer offices to facilitate thisactivity. At the same time, NASA has fundedprincipal investigators, established Applications Systems Verification Tests (ASVT), setup regional applications programs administered by field centers (e.g., working with Intralab), and provided limited training
programs to push developed Landsattechnology to the user.
The Department of Interior has likewise established Applications AssistanceBranches within the Earth Resources Observation Satellite (EROS) program to dealwith technology transfer.
The federal government has been reasonably successful within time and budget constraints in selling developed technology.Nevertheless, the use and demand today forLandsat data are highly fragmented and notwell developed.
It is generally believed that a muchbroader market and therefore greater Landsat data usage could be tapped with an aggressive market development program inconjunction with technology transfer!technology diffusion programs. Private enterprise has traditionally had the responsibility to conduct market and sales programsfor consumable technology products andservices, notwithstanding such efforts asNASA's Technology Utilization Program.But what is most needed here is an imaginative, aggressive market development program to bring out the dormant market forLandsat data which in turn would stimulatemore applications development, thus requiring more Landsat data. The stimulus, obviously, must come hom private enterprise.
PRIVATE ENTERPRISE VERSUS FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT ROLE
The impetus for moving a Landsat remotesensing system fi·om an experimental to anoperational mode appears to be intimatelytied to the investment and involvement ofprivate enterprise. The level of investmentand involvement by private enterprise willin turn have significant impact on the rate oftransition. This is not to say that governmentshould totally remove itself from the Landsatremote sensing program, because the success of operational implementation is stilldependent on a joint private/federal relationship.
This shared responsibility is particularlyimpoltant when the complexity. of the Landsat remote sensing system is examined. If aLandsat remote sensing system for convenience is considered to be comprised of threebasic parts: (1) data acquisition, (2) datamanagement, and (3) data analysis (Figure2), the institutional responsibility for various·pmts changes as the system moves from anexperimental to an operational mode.
Traditionally, private enterprise and thefederal government are each able to functionmore effectively and efficiently in celtain
174 PHOTOGRAMMETRIC ENGINEERING & REMOTE SENSING, 1978
// /G/
PHENOMENA 8> RESOURCEANALYZE MANAGER
DECISION
FIG. 2. Components of Landsat remote sensing system.
EXPERIMENTAL MODE
PRIVATE ENTERPRISE ROLE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ROLE
SATELLITE SENSING
TRANSITIONMOO~
OPERATIONALM~
The transfer of responsibility in the transition mode comes in the data managementpalt with private enterprise stepping into aprocessing and distribution role. This is arole to which private enterprise can bringcertain capabilities to bear that the federalgovernment cannot. For example, data product sales are directly related to the marketing of the products, which is traditionally acommercial function and one industry isgeared to perform. Nonetheless, the federalgovernment is in fact providing some marketing service with NASA's technologytransfer programs. The transfer of technology in this manner is useful and importantand should continue throughout the transition mode; however, industry should acceptthe prime responsibility for promoting andmarketing the data product.
Not so clear is the role private enterpriseshould have in direct reception of data fromgovernment resource-sensing satellites during the transition mode. It is a well established business practice that once a sale ismade the sale includes a commitment to deliver both in quality and in timeliness aspecified product. Without direct access tothe satellite data, private enterprise involvedin the data management role may find it impossible to satisfy normal product deliverycommitments. With the development, installation, and successful operation of advancedsatellite data processors as, for example, theMaster Data Processor (MDP) at NASA'sGoddard Space Flight Center, the scheduling problem may be less critical; having thefederal government continue to receive thedata directly and pass it rapidly through thesystem may be acceptable.
Very clear is the need for the federal government to retain responsibility for the spacesegment of the system through the transitionmode. Most commentators, both private andpublic, have determined that the marketdoes not exist today, and is not likely to existfor several years, that would justify the private investment in multispectral observatories.
In an operational mode, the principalchange would be the transfer of responsibil-
ANALYZE
ARCHIVE {MASTERl
GROUND RECEIVEPRE·PROCESSARCHIVE (SPECIAl!DISTRIBUTEANALYZE
PRIVATE ENTERPRISE ROLE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ROLE
SATElliTE SENSINGGROUND RECEIVEPRE·PROCESSARCHIVE (SPECIAL) ARCHIVE (MASTER)DISTRIBUTEANAL He ANAL VZE
PRIVATE ENTERPRISE ROLE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ROLE
SATELLITE SENSINGGROUND RECEIVEPAE·PROCESSARCHIVEDISTRIBUTE
ANAL VZE ANALYZE
roles. From one private entrepreneur's viewpoint in an evolving Landsat remote sensing system, these functions can be characterized as shown in Figure 3.
In all three modes, experimental, transition, and operational, the analysis of the datais a shared responsibility involving not onlyprivate enterprise and federal government,but state and local governments, universities, and any group or individual wishingto use or apply the data. As the system becomes operational, more and more of thefederal government's data analysis maylikely be contracted to industry on a servicebasis since the constraints on manpower are,and will continue to be, severe in line elements of the federal government. This is acause/effect situation rather than a legitimatetransition of responsibility.
Likewise, in all three modes the federalgovernment will continue to have the responsibility to provide a master data archive.This does not preclude private enterprisefrom the establishment of special archives,possibly as early as in a transition mode, butthe federal government must insure the retention of a permanent data record.
FIG. 3. Private enterprise versus federal government roles in an evolving Landsat remote sensing system.
A ROLE FOR PRIVATE ENTERPRISE IN REMOTE SENSING 175
ity for the space segment to private enterprise. When in time this occurs is dependenton the maturity of the applications market,likely to occur in the 1980s. At that time, dedicated satellites could be developed andlaunched and operateJ by industry, not unlike the communications satellite with dataand information services available for all onnon-discriminatory access and economicterms.
It is impOltant to note that, beginning inthe operational mode time frame, NASAshould continue to purs ue an aggressiveearth resources research and developmentprogram comparable to the Nimbus satelliteprogram which supports the operationalNOAA weather satellites.
CONCLUSIONS
The question of whether or not there is aprofitable role for private enterprise in remote sensing from space has been paltiallyanswered in the positive. There are substantial arguments that show remote sensingfrom space will not achieve operationalstatus without industry involvement and investment. The question of whether that involvement and invesbllent will retUI11 a profit will depend on intelligent initiatives byprivate enterprise and a mature cooperation
between the private and public participants.At this point in the maturation of the
Landsat remote sensing system, the remotesensing community must guard against thepossibility of becoming entrapped in anAlphonse-and-Gaston dilemma. OMB sometimes indicates that without significant industry involvement and investment therewill not be a "guaranteed" future spacesegment. Private enterprise responds that,without government insuring the spacesegment through the next-generation satellites, there is insufficient market justificationfor significant investment. Congress emphatically indicates that there is inadequatemovement on the palt of both governmentand indushy toward an operational systemand introduces legislation suggesting the establishment of a "chosen entity."
It is in this critical crossroads decisiontime fi-ame that private enterprise initiativecould force the system into a transition modeby becoming involved and risking sufficientcapital to develop a future business in operational remote sensing from space. This action also would demonstrate private enterprise's belief that resource remote sensingdata is potentially beneficial to all mankindand should be made operationally availableat the earliest possible time.
Dr. George A. MaulNOAAlAOMLIS Rickenbacker CausewayMiami, FL 33149
Call for Papers
International Symposium onInteraction of Marine Geodesy and Ocean Dynamics
Miami/Virginia Key, FloridaOctober 10-12, 1978
The Symposium, sponsored by the Battelle Columbus Laboratories, the University ofMiami's Rosenstiel School of Marine and Atmospheric Science, the Atlantic Oceanographicand Meteorological Laboratories of NOAA, the International Association of Physical Sciences for the Oceans, the American Geophysical Union, the Marine Technology Society,and the International Association of Geodesy, will cover the following topics:
• Nonperiodic aspects of ocean positioning: geoid, tsunamis, sea floor spreading, plate tectonics,etc.
• Dynamic aspects of ocean positioning-I: long period and quasi-geostrophic period (more than48 hours).
• Dynamic aspects of ocean positioning-II: tidal/inertial period and sea swell period (less than 48hours).
• Metrologylinstrumentation.• Applications: ocean surveys/mapping, navigation.• Workshop on ocean tides.
Those wishing to present papers should send an abstract, not exceeding 250 words, byMarch 24, 1978, to