Tag Archive | NRC

Podcast: Future U.S. Workforce for GEOINT

This got geoint? podcast features the recently published report on the “Future U.S. Workforce for Geospatial Intelligence,” released this week by the National Academy of Sciences. Dr. Keith C. Clarke of the University of California, Santa Barbara, chair of the Committee on the Future U.S. Workforce for Geospatial Intelligence, joins us to discuss the main findings in the report, including why and how it was conducted, key trends emerging in the industry, current and anticipated expertise gaps, and current training programs.

To listen to the podcast, click Podcast: Future U.S. Workforce for GEOINT. To download a copy of the PDF report, click here.

Advertisements

New NRC Report: Future U.S. Workforce for Geospatial Intelligence

Mapping Sciences Committee, National Research Council Preview Report Release, Jan 2013

Authors:
Committee on the Future U.S. Workforce for Geospatial Intelligence; Board on Earth Sciences and Resources; Board on Higher Education and Workforce; Division on Earth and Life Studies; National Research Council

Abstract: We live in a changing world with multiple and evolving threats to national security, including terrorism, asymmetrical warfare (conflicts between agents with different military powers or tactics), and social unrest. Visually depicting and assessing these threats using imagery and other geographically-referenced information is the mission of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA). As the nature of the threat evolves, so do the tools, knowledge, and skills needed to respond. The challenge for NGA is to maintain a workforce that can deal with evolving threats to national security, ongoing scientific and technological advances, and changing skills and expectations of workers.

Future U.S. Workforce for Geospatial Intelligence assesses the supply of expertise in 10 geospatial intelligence (GEOINT) fields, including 5 traditional areas (geodesy and geophysics, photogrammetry, remote sensing, cartographic science, and geographic information systems and geospatial analysis) and 5 emerging areas that could improve geospatial intelligence (GEOINT fusion, crowdsourcing, human geography, visual analytics, and forecasting). The report also identifies gaps in expertise relative to NGA’s needs and suggests ways to ensure an adequate supply of geospatial intelligence expertise over the next 20 years.

To download a PDF copy of the report, visit Future U.S. Workforce for Geospatial Intelligence.

Earth-observation satellites: Something to watch over us

by Economist, May 12, 2012

ON APRIL 8th Envisat, Europe’s largest Earth-observing satellite, unexpectedly stopped talking to its users on the Earth below. Since then those users have been frantically trying to re-establish contact. They rely on Envisat’s radars and other sensors for a wide range of measurements, from the temperature of the oceans to the chemistry of the stratosphere. Scientists have used it to gauge ocean conditions for shipping and to investigate earthquakes; its data have been the basis of thousands of scientific papers.

For full text of the article, visit Earth-observation satellites: Something to watch over us | The Economist.

Weather, Climate Forecasts Imperiled as Programs Cut

by Andrew Freedman, Climate Central, May 8, 2012

A “near-perfect storm” of factors has contributed to a rapid decline in America’s Earth observation capabilities, as long-running satellite missions end and new ones struggle to get off the ground, according to a new report from the National Research Council (NRC). If recent trends continue, there could be major ramifications in the form of less accurate weather and climate forecasts, as well as blind spots in monitoring a wide range of natural hazards. … During just the next eight years, U.S. Earth observation capabilities are likely to decline to roughly 25 percent of current levels, Hartmann said.

For full text of the article, visit Weather, Climate Forecasts Imperiled as Programs Cut | Climate Central.

Presentations from National Academies’ Symposium on International Scientific Data Sharing

The headquarters of the National Academies in ...

Image via Wikipedia

From Paul Uhlir, Director, Board on Research Data and Information, National Academy of Sciences:
Presentations from Symposium on International Scientific Data Sharing The Board of Research Data and Information (BRDI) at the U.S. National Academies co-sponsored a free, two-day symposium on April 18-19th in Washington, DC on international scientific data sharing, with focus on developing countries. The presentations from the event are available online. The symposium sought to address the following questions:
1. Why is the international sharing of publicly funded scientific data important, especially for development? What are some examples of past successes and what are the types of global research and applications problems that can be addressed with more complete access to government data collections and government-funded data sources?
2. What is the status of public data access internationally, particularly in developing countries?
3. What are the principal barriers and limits to sharing public data across borders?
4. What are the rights and responsibilities of scientists and research organizations with regard to providing and getting access to publicly funded scientific data? How can international scientific organizations, government agencies, and scientists improve sharing of publicly funded data to address global challenges, particularly in less economically developed countries, more successfully?

Measuring the Impacts of Federal Investments in Research and Development

Measuring the Impacts of Federal Investments in Research: A Workshop

Monday-Tuesday, April 18-19, 2011

20 F Street (NW) Conference Center

Washington, D.C. 20001

A committee formed under the auspices of the Board on Science, Technology, and Economic Policy (STEP) and Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy (COSEPUP) is holding a two-day workshop to identify analytical and data needs and opportunities in assessing the returns to federal research funding across a wide range of fields and government missions.   The meeting is targeted for:

  • Federal agency research evaluators
  • Congressional staff with research jurisdictions
  • Science funding advocates
  • Science of science policy scholars
  • Other academics

Questions to be discussed include:

What have we learned from previous efforts to measure the economic and noneconomic benefits of federal research investments?

What are the links between health research and health outcomes and costs?

Can we measure the impact of research on non-market values such as climate change mitigation, food security, environmental protection, and national security?

What progress has been made in constructing a long-term data infrastructure for measuring research impacts? Can approaches such as STAR Metrics be broadened to encompass different performers and funding mechanisms?

What methods and metrics are being used in Europe, Latin America, and elsewhere?

What metrics and data are needed to track career choices and career development of STEM graduates trained with research funds?

How might we assess the influence of research on formal (e.g., regulatory, judicial) and informal (e.g., consumer, patient) decision-making?

For more information and to register for the workshop, via Returns on Federal R&D.

NRC Disasters Roundtable: Using Lessons from Haiti and Chile to Reduce Global Risk

National Research Council Disasters Roundtable Workshop 32
Using Lessons from Haiti and Chile to Reduce Global Risk

March 1, 2011
The Venable Conference Center
575 – 7th Street, NW – The Capitol Room
Washington, DC, 20004

In 2010, Haiti and Chile experienced devastating earthquakes. The Haitian earthquake measured about 7.0 on the Richter Scale and led to more than 200,000 deaths, 1.5 million displaced Haitians, and more than $3 billion committed to Haiti’s recovery. The Chilean earthquake measured 8.8 on the Richter Scale, and led to about 500 deaths, 1.8 million affected Chileans, and about $13 million committed to Chile’s recovery. The differences and the similarities between the two earthquakes present researchers, practitioners, the US Government, and the international community with tremendous learning opportunities to reduce global and US domestic risk to natural hazards. The Disasters Roundtable is hosting a workshop, Using Lessons from Haiti and Chile to Reduce Global Risk, to identify, clarify, and find applications for the lessons from the earthquakes in Haiti and Chile. With contributions from Haitians, Chileans, and those from the US Government and international community, the Disasters Roundtable of the National Academies’ workshop aims to illustrate how both the expected and the unexpected outcomes and occurrences in these earthquakes can better prepare the USG and the international community for the next disaster. The workshop will focus on:

  1. the role of pre-existing conditions in the impact, response, and recovery of these earthquake events;
  2. what was learned from the expected and the unexpected outcomes of these earthquakes; and
  3. how to use lessons from Haiti and Chile to reduce disaster risk in the future.

Download the full Meeting Agenda (PDF)

Click here to register to attend the workshop at the Venable Conference Center in Washington, DC

Click here to register to participate in the video webcast of this workshop

 

%d bloggers like this: