- Email: [email protected]
CEOS — an example of fruitful international cooperation
~
Pergamon
ActaAstronaunca Vol. 48. No. 5-12, pp 793-797. 2001 ~,' 2001 International Astronauttcal Federation Pubhshed by Else~ier Soence Ltd Primed m Great Britain Pll: S0094-5765(01)00017-0 0094-5765/01 $- see front matter
www.else~ ier.com/Iocate/actaastro
CEOS - AN EXAMPLE OF FRUITFUL INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION
Marcio N. Barbosa, CEOS Chairman and
Jos6 Luiz B. Aguirre INPE Sio Jos~ dos Campos BRASIL
Abstract
reasons I'm here today. At this Congress, I have the honor of combining my role as CEOS Chairman with a couple of other equally gratifying roles: that of Chairman of the IAF Local Organizing Committee and that of Director of a Brazilian Institution which has been a participant to IAF and to CEOS from very early days: INPE, the National Institute of Space Research. This last role, in fact, stands behind the other two and it is a happy coincidence that I am able to welcome you to my country in all three of these capacities.
This paper reviews the evolution of CEOS (Committee on Earth Observations Satellites) fi'om the early 'days, where participating agencies were primarily concerned with compatibility issues and space programs were chiefly technologydriven, up to the present, where complementarity of satellite programs and fulfillment o f final user needs are the main goals being pursued. It also analyzes the favorable conditions that allowed continuity and evolution of the efforts carded by the Committee, in both the technical and the administrative areas, and granted the results achieved so far.
I will not extend myself too much on this introduction as I believe many of you have already some familiarity with CEOS and with INPE. Anyhow, for the sake of those who may be hearing these names for the first time, I will make a very, short portrait of these two organizations.
Finally, it addresses the expectations of the Committee about the cooperation and interaction with other international bodies, with national governments and with the private sector, with the final aim of maximizing the benefits that Earth Observations can provide for Science and for the well-being of humanity, in particular the people of less-favored regions of the Earth. © 2001 I n t e r n a t i o n a l A s t r o n a u t i c a l
INPE was started in 1966 as a research institution devoted to pursue the knowledge and know-how associated with space science and technology. This was a rather new field at that time, but perceived by the vision of its founders as a very promising one to foster progress and human well-being for developing countries like Brazil. Today, INPE is the builder of the first Brazilian satellites and has been for over thirty years the major Remote Sensing institution in the country. International cooperation has always been a key factor in all INPE activities.
F e d e r a t i o n . P u b l i s h e d by E l s e v i e r S c i e n c e Ltd.
l~ltroduction It has become an IAF tradition in recent years to have the current Chairman of CEOS to make the introductory address at the Earth Observations Symposium. That's one of the
CEOS, the Committee on Earth Observation Satellites. was founded in 1984 as the result 793
51st L4F Congre~
794
of a recommendation of the 1982 Economic Summit of Industrialized Nations. This recommendation was born of the recognition that space programs being launched in an increasing number of countries could only benefit from an international coordination effort across its several ongoing and proposed missions involving Earth Observations. I quote the three primary CEOS objectives, which are listed in the 1999 CEOS Consolidated Report: 1. to optimize benefits of spaceborne Earth observations flarough cooperation of its participants in mission planning and in development of compatible data products, formats, services, applications and policies; 2. to serve as a focal point for international coordination of spacerelated Earth Observation activities; and 3. to exchange policy and technical information to encourage complementarity and compatibility of observation and data exchange systems.
but no sanctions of any sort are considered for those who don't, for any reason. Another modus operandi would certainly scare away countries and space agencies faced with an understandable fear that some recommendations might not fit their conveniences or possibilities. The favorable circumstance was determined by the fact that, in 1984, most existing space agencies involved with Earth Observations were participants to an international group known as "Lands-Wog". The actual acronym was LGSOWG, which stands for Landsat Ground Station Operators Working Group. It is still active, and approaching its silver anniversary.
The birth of CEOS was blessed with a wise choice of operating philosophy and a specially favorable circumstance.
"Lands-Wog" was quite a unique group. It was not created as a result of any governmental or otherwise political decision. Its origin can be mapped to purely technical and operational reasons. Organizations devoted worldwide to receive and process data from the first civilian Earth Observation satellite series wanted to learn from each other about image calibration and correction, exchange views about product standardization, and, perhaps the main drive, complain to NASA, the satellite operator at the time, about things that appeared not to work as advertised or manuals that were not informative enough. On the other side of the fence but sitting at the same table, NASA was eager for feedback from a vet3' bright community about the virtues and shortcomings of Landsat. A legacy of that era was a series of successive, increasingly complete, accurate and useful, versions of the Landsat Data Users Handbook. Some people in this room may have had the privilege of contributing to it.
The wisdom lied in the characterization of CEOS as a "best efforts" organization. This means that participants are expected to implement the recommendations of the Committee to the best of their possibilities,
When CEOS was created, most of the people that gathered around the table were already, so to speak, old friends. This avoided the intrinsic inefficiency that undermines artificially created bodies whose
CEOS counts today with the participation of more than 40 space agencies and other national and international organizations, and is recognized as the main international forum for the coordination of Earth Observation satellite programs.
A Good Start
51st IAF Congresg
members are expected to cooperate but are held back by a limited trust in one another. Also, lessons learned with the LGSOWG structure and procedures were quite useful in the process of defining and implementing CEOS' technical and administrative terms of reference. In short, it was a real good start.
It must be said that at the time CEOS was founded, the Earth Observations user community was quite different from the one we see today. Very little of the sensor design for the missions then active, had had an actual drive from the end user side put into it. There was already a word for this in the articles and discussions that began popping up in the early eighties: Earth Observation missions were blamed as too technolo~,v-driven. This meant that their designers, working in close cooperation with high-level scientists, were primarily concerned with pushing forward the current mechanical, electronic and optical limits of the sensors they could build. To a great extent, end users were left to discover by themselves how they could effectively employ the data and products derived from those missions. v
_
Of course, in the ERTS-I days (ERTS, for Earth Resources Technology Satellite, was the original name of the Landsat series, and the ones under 40 among you may have never heard of it), back in the early seventies, users worldwide were taken by the euphoria of having, for the first time. space imagery to play with and discover applications for. With the availability of i 00-nautical-mile square pictures never before viewed, very large geological features, not evident in airborne photography, began to be unveiled in man)' areas o f the Earth. With regular, repetitive coverage, monitoring of large agricultural. forest and urban areas became possible.
795
Spectral analysis of digital data opened the way to automatic ground cove/ classification. All this was too new and too good to prompt for criticism. Remote Sensing was even termed at that time, in the words of an outspoken INPE scientist, as having "'sex appeal". (This scientist, our good friend Dr. Roberto da Cunha, which several of you may have met, unfortunately passed away a few years ago, but left an indelible mark at INPE, where he served as Remote Sensing Coordinator and lately as Institutional Relations Coordinator. INPE's Visitor Center was named after this very special person.) As this frertz3' slowly cooled down and Remote Sensing became increasingly a part of users' day-to-day work, the shortcomings of the existing Earth Observations missions for some actual needs and applications began to surface. A growing sense that new missions should take into account such needs and eliminate to the extent possible the existing shortcomings coined the term "'user-driven" mission. CEOS carried its work in synchronism with this evolution. Its technical working groups gradually changed scope from product formats to information systems and services, and from raw sensor calibration and validation to the adequacy of sensors to applications. Beginning in 1990, user organizations were admitted to CEOS as Associates, to involve more effectively the mission usefulness component into the discussions. Mission complementarity and comprehensiveness slowly walked into scene as chief concerns. In 1997, a major move in the international scenario with relation to satellite Earth Observations. was the creation of the IGOS Partnership. IGOS stands for Integrated Global Observing Strategy. an international initiative that recognizes mission integration and a global scope as key factors for the
796
5/st IAF Conett'~.~
achievement of Earth Observation space missions that yield a really satisfactory. outcome as a whole. CEOS is one of the IGOS Partners, a special one since from it should come the contribution of suitable space missions to attain the IGOS objectives. The others are existing organizations devoted to the funding, management and carrying of international studies and programs aimed at a broad spectrum of scientific and human issues that can benefit from spaceborne Earth Observation data. The best way to be more specific is to list some of these organizations: Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) International Council for Science (ICSU) International Geosphere/Biosphere Program (IGBP) Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) United Nations Environment Program {UNEP) World Climate Research Program (WCRP) World Meteorological Organization (WMO). This is not a complete list but conveys an idea of the Pannersifip constituency. CEOS meets with the IGOS Partners twice a year since creation ol the Partnership and. despite the earl 3 stage of the discussions, some concrete conclusions have already surfaced from this "nteraction: for instance, the importance of in situ observations to complement space observations and the need to involve organizations with experience in these actMties. The Partnership has chosen a thematic approach to converge to~ards adequate procedures and meaningful recommendations. The Themes proposed as pathfinders include
scientific ones such as Ocean processes and Carbon cycles as well as managerial ones like Natural Disaster monitoring and mitigation.
Current Activities The CEOS Chair rotates annually among the Members, and administrative support is provided by a permanent Secretariat staffed by NOAA/NASA in the U.S., ESA in Europe and STA/NASDA in Japan. CEOS has no budget of its own; Members and Associates contribute all activities and cover their own expenses according to their possibilities, well within the Committee's "'best efforts" philosophy. Technical CEOS work is currently carried by two standing Working Groups (the Working Group on Information Systems and Services - WGISS - and the Working Group on Calibration and Validation WGCV} and Subgroups and Task Teams under their oversight. A third group, the Strategic Implementation Team (SIT) was established at the 1996 Plenai3, to develop a strategy for the implementation of the IGOS space component. The charter of SIT, still an adhoc group, was successively reinstated at the three Plenaries that followed its creation, and it may become a permanent group at the 2000 Plenary. At the. 1999 Plenary, two other ad-hoc groups were created to address issues of mounting interest among the CEOS communiB.': a Working Group on Earth Observation Education and Training (WGEdu) and a Working Group on Disaster Management Support (DMSG). CEOS is thereby attempting to find ways and channels by which Earth Observations can benefit people in a shorter term, In November, these two groups shall report to
51st 1.4F Congress
797
the Plenary on the achieved results during this year and bring recommendations on the way ahead. We are very eager towards receiving and discussing their inputs.
players from both sectors. It is expected that visions are exchanged and cooperation possibilities outlined to identify the next steps to be taken.
The figure below illustrates the current CEOS structure, with which the relations among its several constituents can be more easily captured.
The IGOS effort is surely bound to require much work and yield important results for years to come. CEOS' initiatives on Earth Observation education and disaster
CEOS Structure
CEOS Plenary
A dashed line indicates a "'close coordination" link.
/
I
SIT WGISS
I
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
f
I
Secretariat
1
wGcv
The W~ly of the Future Lately, CEOS has undertaken efforts to invoh'e still another segment in the discussions on Earth Observations: the private sector. Satellite business was almost strictly a government business for man)' years, but recently an increasing number of companies have set toot on development and operation of EO satellite systems. It is not clear yet how the interaction between space agencies, users organizations and commercial entrepreneurs can be best organized, but it is evident that private industry and services will play an increasingly important role in the Earth Observations scenario. As a side meeting in this Congress, a CEOS/Industr) Roundtable will happen with the participation of major
o.so
WG-Edu
]
mitigation projects are faced with high expectation. CEOS expects to continue contributing to the process of achieving an extended cooperation scheme by which all players, including end users and communities whose life quality can be somehow improved with the use of Earth Observation data, can profit from enhanced systems complementarity, reduced costs and more effective and reliable data sources. This vision has the final aim of maximizing the benefits that satellite Earth Observations can provide towards a greater knowledge of our Earth, better living conditions for people, mainly in less-favored regions, and a safe future for our children.
Pergamon
ActaAstronaunca Vol. 48. No. 5-12, pp 793-797. 2001 ~,' 2001 International Astronauttcal Federation Pubhshed by Else~ier Soence Ltd Primed m Great Britain Pll: S0094-5765(01)00017-0 0094-5765/01 $- see front matter
www.else~ ier.com/Iocate/actaastro
CEOS - AN EXAMPLE OF FRUITFUL INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION
Marcio N. Barbosa, CEOS Chairman and
Jos6 Luiz B. Aguirre INPE Sio Jos~ dos Campos BRASIL
Abstract
reasons I'm here today. At this Congress, I have the honor of combining my role as CEOS Chairman with a couple of other equally gratifying roles: that of Chairman of the IAF Local Organizing Committee and that of Director of a Brazilian Institution which has been a participant to IAF and to CEOS from very early days: INPE, the National Institute of Space Research. This last role, in fact, stands behind the other two and it is a happy coincidence that I am able to welcome you to my country in all three of these capacities.
This paper reviews the evolution of CEOS (Committee on Earth Observations Satellites) fi'om the early 'days, where participating agencies were primarily concerned with compatibility issues and space programs were chiefly technologydriven, up to the present, where complementarity of satellite programs and fulfillment o f final user needs are the main goals being pursued. It also analyzes the favorable conditions that allowed continuity and evolution of the efforts carded by the Committee, in both the technical and the administrative areas, and granted the results achieved so far.
I will not extend myself too much on this introduction as I believe many of you have already some familiarity with CEOS and with INPE. Anyhow, for the sake of those who may be hearing these names for the first time, I will make a very, short portrait of these two organizations.
Finally, it addresses the expectations of the Committee about the cooperation and interaction with other international bodies, with national governments and with the private sector, with the final aim of maximizing the benefits that Earth Observations can provide for Science and for the well-being of humanity, in particular the people of less-favored regions of the Earth. © 2001 I n t e r n a t i o n a l A s t r o n a u t i c a l
INPE was started in 1966 as a research institution devoted to pursue the knowledge and know-how associated with space science and technology. This was a rather new field at that time, but perceived by the vision of its founders as a very promising one to foster progress and human well-being for developing countries like Brazil. Today, INPE is the builder of the first Brazilian satellites and has been for over thirty years the major Remote Sensing institution in the country. International cooperation has always been a key factor in all INPE activities.
F e d e r a t i o n . P u b l i s h e d by E l s e v i e r S c i e n c e Ltd.
l~ltroduction It has become an IAF tradition in recent years to have the current Chairman of CEOS to make the introductory address at the Earth Observations Symposium. That's one of the
CEOS, the Committee on Earth Observation Satellites. was founded in 1984 as the result 793
51st L4F Congre~
794
of a recommendation of the 1982 Economic Summit of Industrialized Nations. This recommendation was born of the recognition that space programs being launched in an increasing number of countries could only benefit from an international coordination effort across its several ongoing and proposed missions involving Earth Observations. I quote the three primary CEOS objectives, which are listed in the 1999 CEOS Consolidated Report: 1. to optimize benefits of spaceborne Earth observations flarough cooperation of its participants in mission planning and in development of compatible data products, formats, services, applications and policies; 2. to serve as a focal point for international coordination of spacerelated Earth Observation activities; and 3. to exchange policy and technical information to encourage complementarity and compatibility of observation and data exchange systems.
but no sanctions of any sort are considered for those who don't, for any reason. Another modus operandi would certainly scare away countries and space agencies faced with an understandable fear that some recommendations might not fit their conveniences or possibilities. The favorable circumstance was determined by the fact that, in 1984, most existing space agencies involved with Earth Observations were participants to an international group known as "Lands-Wog". The actual acronym was LGSOWG, which stands for Landsat Ground Station Operators Working Group. It is still active, and approaching its silver anniversary.
The birth of CEOS was blessed with a wise choice of operating philosophy and a specially favorable circumstance.
"Lands-Wog" was quite a unique group. It was not created as a result of any governmental or otherwise political decision. Its origin can be mapped to purely technical and operational reasons. Organizations devoted worldwide to receive and process data from the first civilian Earth Observation satellite series wanted to learn from each other about image calibration and correction, exchange views about product standardization, and, perhaps the main drive, complain to NASA, the satellite operator at the time, about things that appeared not to work as advertised or manuals that were not informative enough. On the other side of the fence but sitting at the same table, NASA was eager for feedback from a vet3' bright community about the virtues and shortcomings of Landsat. A legacy of that era was a series of successive, increasingly complete, accurate and useful, versions of the Landsat Data Users Handbook. Some people in this room may have had the privilege of contributing to it.
The wisdom lied in the characterization of CEOS as a "best efforts" organization. This means that participants are expected to implement the recommendations of the Committee to the best of their possibilities,
When CEOS was created, most of the people that gathered around the table were already, so to speak, old friends. This avoided the intrinsic inefficiency that undermines artificially created bodies whose
CEOS counts today with the participation of more than 40 space agencies and other national and international organizations, and is recognized as the main international forum for the coordination of Earth Observation satellite programs.
A Good Start
51st IAF Congresg
members are expected to cooperate but are held back by a limited trust in one another. Also, lessons learned with the LGSOWG structure and procedures were quite useful in the process of defining and implementing CEOS' technical and administrative terms of reference. In short, it was a real good start.
It must be said that at the time CEOS was founded, the Earth Observations user community was quite different from the one we see today. Very little of the sensor design for the missions then active, had had an actual drive from the end user side put into it. There was already a word for this in the articles and discussions that began popping up in the early eighties: Earth Observation missions were blamed as too technolo~,v-driven. This meant that their designers, working in close cooperation with high-level scientists, were primarily concerned with pushing forward the current mechanical, electronic and optical limits of the sensors they could build. To a great extent, end users were left to discover by themselves how they could effectively employ the data and products derived from those missions. v
_
Of course, in the ERTS-I days (ERTS, for Earth Resources Technology Satellite, was the original name of the Landsat series, and the ones under 40 among you may have never heard of it), back in the early seventies, users worldwide were taken by the euphoria of having, for the first time. space imagery to play with and discover applications for. With the availability of i 00-nautical-mile square pictures never before viewed, very large geological features, not evident in airborne photography, began to be unveiled in man)' areas o f the Earth. With regular, repetitive coverage, monitoring of large agricultural. forest and urban areas became possible.
795
Spectral analysis of digital data opened the way to automatic ground cove/ classification. All this was too new and too good to prompt for criticism. Remote Sensing was even termed at that time, in the words of an outspoken INPE scientist, as having "'sex appeal". (This scientist, our good friend Dr. Roberto da Cunha, which several of you may have met, unfortunately passed away a few years ago, but left an indelible mark at INPE, where he served as Remote Sensing Coordinator and lately as Institutional Relations Coordinator. INPE's Visitor Center was named after this very special person.) As this frertz3' slowly cooled down and Remote Sensing became increasingly a part of users' day-to-day work, the shortcomings of the existing Earth Observations missions for some actual needs and applications began to surface. A growing sense that new missions should take into account such needs and eliminate to the extent possible the existing shortcomings coined the term "'user-driven" mission. CEOS carried its work in synchronism with this evolution. Its technical working groups gradually changed scope from product formats to information systems and services, and from raw sensor calibration and validation to the adequacy of sensors to applications. Beginning in 1990, user organizations were admitted to CEOS as Associates, to involve more effectively the mission usefulness component into the discussions. Mission complementarity and comprehensiveness slowly walked into scene as chief concerns. In 1997, a major move in the international scenario with relation to satellite Earth Observations. was the creation of the IGOS Partnership. IGOS stands for Integrated Global Observing Strategy. an international initiative that recognizes mission integration and a global scope as key factors for the
796
5/st IAF Conett'~.~
achievement of Earth Observation space missions that yield a really satisfactory. outcome as a whole. CEOS is one of the IGOS Partners, a special one since from it should come the contribution of suitable space missions to attain the IGOS objectives. The others are existing organizations devoted to the funding, management and carrying of international studies and programs aimed at a broad spectrum of scientific and human issues that can benefit from spaceborne Earth Observation data. The best way to be more specific is to list some of these organizations: Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) International Council for Science (ICSU) International Geosphere/Biosphere Program (IGBP) Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) United Nations Environment Program {UNEP) World Climate Research Program (WCRP) World Meteorological Organization (WMO). This is not a complete list but conveys an idea of the Pannersifip constituency. CEOS meets with the IGOS Partners twice a year since creation ol the Partnership and. despite the earl 3 stage of the discussions, some concrete conclusions have already surfaced from this "nteraction: for instance, the importance of in situ observations to complement space observations and the need to involve organizations with experience in these actMties. The Partnership has chosen a thematic approach to converge to~ards adequate procedures and meaningful recommendations. The Themes proposed as pathfinders include
scientific ones such as Ocean processes and Carbon cycles as well as managerial ones like Natural Disaster monitoring and mitigation.
Current Activities The CEOS Chair rotates annually among the Members, and administrative support is provided by a permanent Secretariat staffed by NOAA/NASA in the U.S., ESA in Europe and STA/NASDA in Japan. CEOS has no budget of its own; Members and Associates contribute all activities and cover their own expenses according to their possibilities, well within the Committee's "'best efforts" philosophy. Technical CEOS work is currently carried by two standing Working Groups (the Working Group on Information Systems and Services - WGISS - and the Working Group on Calibration and Validation WGCV} and Subgroups and Task Teams under their oversight. A third group, the Strategic Implementation Team (SIT) was established at the 1996 Plenai3, to develop a strategy for the implementation of the IGOS space component. The charter of SIT, still an adhoc group, was successively reinstated at the three Plenaries that followed its creation, and it may become a permanent group at the 2000 Plenary. At the. 1999 Plenary, two other ad-hoc groups were created to address issues of mounting interest among the CEOS communiB.': a Working Group on Earth Observation Education and Training (WGEdu) and a Working Group on Disaster Management Support (DMSG). CEOS is thereby attempting to find ways and channels by which Earth Observations can benefit people in a shorter term, In November, these two groups shall report to
51st 1.4F Congress
797
the Plenary on the achieved results during this year and bring recommendations on the way ahead. We are very eager towards receiving and discussing their inputs.
players from both sectors. It is expected that visions are exchanged and cooperation possibilities outlined to identify the next steps to be taken.
The figure below illustrates the current CEOS structure, with which the relations among its several constituents can be more easily captured.
The IGOS effort is surely bound to require much work and yield important results for years to come. CEOS' initiatives on Earth Observation education and disaster
CEOS Structure
CEOS Plenary
A dashed line indicates a "'close coordination" link.
/
I
SIT WGISS
I
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
f
I
Secretariat
1
wGcv
The W~ly of the Future Lately, CEOS has undertaken efforts to invoh'e still another segment in the discussions on Earth Observations: the private sector. Satellite business was almost strictly a government business for man)' years, but recently an increasing number of companies have set toot on development and operation of EO satellite systems. It is not clear yet how the interaction between space agencies, users organizations and commercial entrepreneurs can be best organized, but it is evident that private industry and services will play an increasingly important role in the Earth Observations scenario. As a side meeting in this Congress, a CEOS/Industr) Roundtable will happen with the participation of major
o.so
WG-Edu
]
mitigation projects are faced with high expectation. CEOS expects to continue contributing to the process of achieving an extended cooperation scheme by which all players, including end users and communities whose life quality can be somehow improved with the use of Earth Observation data, can profit from enhanced systems complementarity, reduced costs and more effective and reliable data sources. This vision has the final aim of maximizing the benefits that satellite Earth Observations can provide towards a greater knowledge of our Earth, better living conditions for people, mainly in less-favored regions, and a safe future for our children.