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