vol. 13, no. 1 earth ystem onitor - national oceanic · pdf filee vol. 13, no. 1 september...

U.S. DEPARTMENTOF COMMERCE

National Oceanicand AtmosphericAdministration

Vol. 13, No. 1 ● September 2002

EARTH SYSTEM MONITOR

A guide toNOAA's data and

informationservices

INSIDE

3News briefs

8NOAA’s National

Severe StormsLaboratory

10Partnerships,knowledge,

innovation andleadership

14Coral Reef

Information System(CORIS) web site

released

15Data products and

services

NOAA’s multi-sensor fire detectionprogram using environmental satellites

DEP

ARTMENT OF COMMERC

E

★ ★

UN

ITEDSTATES OF AMER

ICA

Donna McNamara, George Stephens, andMark RuminiskiOffice of Satellite Data Processing and DistributionSatellite Services DivisionNOAA/NESDIS

An important new capability reaches operational status

— continued on page 2

▲ Figure 1. This image of fires was made by NOAA’s Operational Significant Events Imagery programusing AVHRR data from NOAA-15 on August 15, 2002. Fires appear as bright white. A great deal of smokecan be seen emanating from these fires in Oregon and California. (Image created by Jason Taylor)

Biomass burning has tremendous impact onthe Earth’s ecosystems and climate, for it drasti-cally alters the landscape and biologic structure,and emits large amounts of greenhouse gasesand aerosol particles. Smoke aerosols may inter-act with cloud droplets and alter considerablythe earth’s radiation budget. Remote sensing isthe most efficient and economical means ofmonitoring fires over large areas on a routinebasis, despite that it suffers from various limita-tions. Satellite observations can provide timelyinformation on both fire development and firedamage following fire. Remote sensing of firesalso has the potential to help authorities make

decisions regarding fire fighting and reducing theimpact of fires on the population.

Natural boreal and temperate forest, brush,and grassland ecosystems evolved and adaptedwith wildland fire (or wildfires) as an agent ofecological change. Human development has al-tered many natural landscapes and placed peoplein direct contact with wildfires at the so-calledwildland-urban interface. Wildfires cause loss ofhuman life and personal property, economicupsets, and disturbances in regional and globalatmospheric composition and chemistry, andclimate. Fire managers wish to respond appropri-ately to best protect and preserve the resources atrisk. According to the National Interagency FireCenter in Boise Idaho (http://www.nifc.gov/information.html), so far this year over 6 millionacres have burned in the U.S. due to wildfires.The cost to fight these fires this year will be wellover one and a half billion dollars.

2 September 2002EARTH SYSTEM MONITOR

EARTH SYSTEM MONITOR

The Earth System Monitor (ISSN 1068-2678) is published quarterly by the NOAAEnvironmental Information Services office.Past issues are available online at http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/General/NODCPubs/

Questions, comments, or suggestionsfor articles, as well as requests forsubscriptions and changes of address,should be directed to the Editor,Roger Torstenson.

The mailing address for the Earth SystemMonitor is:

National Oceanographic Data CenterNOAA/NESDIS E/OC1SSMC3, 4th Floor1315 East-West HighwaySilver Spring, MD 20910-3282

EDITORR. Torstenson

Telephone: 301-713-3281 ext.107Fax: 301-713-3302

E-mail: [email protected]

DISCLAIMERMention in the Earth System Monitor ofcommercial companies or commercialproducts does not constitute an endorse-ment or recommendation by the NationalOceanic and Atmospheric Administrationor the U.S. Department of Commerce.Use for publicity or advertising purposes ofinformation published in the Earth SystemMonitor concerning proprietary productsor the tests of such products is notauthorized.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCEDonald Evans, Secretary

National Oceanic andAtmospheric Administration

Conrad C. Lautenbacher, Jr.,Under Secretary and Administrator

NA

TIO

NA

LO

CEA

NICAND ATMOSPHERIC

ADMIN

IST

RA

TIO

N

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMER

CE

Fire detection program, from page 1

Donna McNamaraOffice of Satellite Data Processing andDistributionSatellite Services Division5200 Auth Road, Rm 510Camp Springs, Maryland 20746E-mail: [email protected] — continued on page 4

BackgroundThe capability to detect fires from

space using environmental satellites haslong been appreciated, and investiga-tions at National Environmental Satel-lite, Data and Information Service(NESDIS) have been conducted for overtwenty years. Matson and Dozier (1981)demonstrated the ability to detect andcharacterize sub-pixel resolution fires.Matson et al. (1984) correlated satellitederived hot spots with confirmedground observations, and Matson et al.(1987) presented a summary of satellitedetection capabilities. Satellite imagesof fires and smoke have been producedroutinely within the Satellite ServicesDivision (SSD) since then to demon-strate detection capabilities.

In the Summer and Autumn of1997, concern over pollution caused bysmoke from extensive wildfires in Indo-nesia prompted requests from UnitedNations aid organizations for routineimagery of fire and smoke in the area,and for a period of several months, thiswas accomplished. Also in 1997, thevolume of special requests for fire imag-ery prompted SSD to propose theimplementation of an operational pro-gram, wherein contract personnelwould routinely process satellite imag-ery of many environmentally signifi-cant occurrences, including fires, undergovernment supervision. The proposalwas funded, and the Operational Sig-nificant Events Imagery (OSEI) programcommenced in early 1998. Since then,fire managers at federal and state agen-cies have often used OSEI images in firedetection and monitoring.

The Spring of 1998 saw wildfiresburning out of control across largetracts of Florida, Mexico and other partsof Central America. Many of the firesacross Central America were started inorder to clear agricultural areas butquickly burned out of control. The re-sultant large smoke plumes brought apall to a large section of the U.S. that

extended from Texas to the Mid-Atlan-tic states. The Florida fires caused con-siderable damage, destroying a numberof homes and closing portions of Inter-state highways.

In response to this emergency, SSDbegan producing a regular analysis ofsmoke plumes and fire hotspots overthe Gulf Coast states, Mexico, CentralAmerica and the Gulf of Mexico duringthe 1998 fire season. This was initiatedon an ad hoc basis but plans werequickly drawn up to initiate a smokeand fire analysis that would incorporateall of North America. However, itwould take a few years to realize thisgoal due to hardware, software andstaffing constraints. The product thatdid emerge was a regional graphic thatwas made available to users via theInternet. It was produced manuallytwice per day and could cover eitherthe same regional area twice or twoseparate areas, depending on the firesituation.

This smoke and fire product reliedheavily on satellite imagery fromNOAA’s Geostationary OperationalEnvironmental Satellite (GOES) series.This platform allows for at least half-hourly detection of these hazards overthe U.S. The frequent temporal updatesallow for detection of fairly short livedfires (up to a couple of hours) as well asfires that have intermittent cloud coverover them. The primary satellite bandsthat are employed are in the visiblewavelengths for smoke detection and3.9 microns for sensing fires. The reso-lution for GOES is 1km at satellitesubpoint for the visible channel and4 km at subpoint for the 3.9 micronchannel (and all other thermal bands).However, resolution gradually decreasesas zenith angle increases such that theeffective resolution over large parts ofthe US is actually 5 or 6 km.

The 3.9 micron channel is pre-ferred for fire detection over the 10.7micron window IR channel used formany other meteorological applicationsdue to its sensitivity to high tempera-tures at the subpixel level. This differ-ence in sensitivity can be illustrated bycomparing the response in the twowavelengths to a 500K fire which occu-pies varying amounts of a pixel sceneand inserting it into a background

3September 2002 EARTH SYSTEM MONITOR

News briefsNOAA to support internationalstudy on commercial space policy

NOAA’s Commercial Remote SensingLicensing Team will support a new studybeing conducted by the Organization ofEconomic Cooperation and Development(OECD), entitled ”The Commercializationof Space: Long-term Prospects and Impli-cations.” The study will address a numberof commercialization issues which gov-ernments must address in the comingyears, to ensure the further commercialdevelopment of the space sector andrealize its socio-economic potential. Mostnotably, the OECD study will attempt todetermine the best roles for the privateand public sectors in space, and recom-mend rules for space’s further commercialdevelopment. NOAA expects the OECDstudy to provide useful information onthe further development of the commer-cial remote sensing industry, and recom-mendations to facilitate a more uniforminternational business.

U.S. - Russia cooperative NATOgrant

A grant was awarded by the NorthAtlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) to aNOAA research scientist to develop acooperative program with Russian Acad-emy of Sciences’ institutions. The pro-gram, entitled ”Data Base of CatastrophicDroughts in Russia from NOAA/AVHRRData,” was selected for funding in orderto stimulate research and applications ofearly detection and large-area assess-ments of catastrophic droughts, environ-mental disasters which have beenaffecting Russian agriculture, forestry, andeconomy every 3-4 years.

This year is an example of such anintensive and long drought in centralRussia, which caused enormous forestfires, including ignition of peat bogs, avery rare phenomenon, and a reductionof agricultural production. NOAA has metwith the Institute of Geography andHydrometeorological Center, in Moscow,to discuss the availability of in situ data forvalidation purposes. Other activities inRussia have included a visit to the Centerfor the International Environmental Coop-eration (INENCO), in St. Petersburg, todiscuss submission of a proposal for theCooperative Research and DevelopmentFund (CRDF), as well as the World Cli-mate Forum, planned for next year inRussia.

Cooperative effort to compilecoastal seafloor characteristics

Representatives of the University ofColorado’s Institute for Arctic and AlpineResearch (INSTAAR), the U.S. GeologicalSurvey (USGS), and NOAA’s NationalGeophysical Data Center (NGDC) metJune 25-26 at NGDC and INSTAAR inBoulder, Colorado to discuss cooperationon the compilation of seafloor characteris-tics for U.S. coastal areas. INSTAAR’sDr. Chris Jenkins authored the”dbSEABED” data mining software, whichis the basis of the ”usSEABED” coopera-tive project.

NGDC is supplying data for theproject, will operate a data tracking sys-tem, and will archive data sets gatheredand processed into the project. INSTAARmaintains and operates the data miningsoftware, will process global data sets,and produce global and custom map-pings. The USGS will process data fromU.S. coastal areas in the ”usSEABED”project and produce and distribute U.S.regional syntheses and interpretiveproducts. The three groups are workingtogether closely to ensure efficient pro-duction and provision of on-line and off-line data products and mappings. Thesedata and products will have significantvalue for studies of benthic habitat,coastal environment, and offshoremineral resources.

GPS services to grow at NGDCGordon Adams, of the National Geo-

detic Survey (NGS) in Silver Spring, MD,recently visited NGDC to discuss the NGS”Initiative to Sustain UninterruptedOperation of the National ContinuouslyOperated Stations (CORS).” These GlobalPositioning System (GPS) data have alarge user base (~1000 requests per day),including many internal NOAA custom-ers. Their needs included atmosphericmoisture, ionospheric content and navi-gational parameters which are all con-tained in the GPS signal. The economicvalue for these data is estimated at$72 million. In a collaborative effortbetween NGDC and NOS’s National Geo-detic Survey, plans are proceeding on thephased implementation of an activemirror site, which is much more than abackup site — providing duplicates of allthe data collection, data processing, anddata distribution activities.

Multinational project for MarineSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR)

NOAA is exploring the possibility ofparticipation in the Marine SAR Analysisand Interpretation System (MARSAIS)effort. This is a multinational projectsponsored by the European Union withthe goal of producing a compehensivecoastal ocean monitoring and predictionsystem using SAR and other remote sens-ing data. Applications being developed aspart of MARSAIS include ocean wavespectra, oil spill detection, ship detection,wind field retrieval, internal wave mea-surements, and surface current fronts andeddies monitoring. Actions to be pursuedas a result of this meeting include writinga draft plan of action for NOAA participa-tion in this effort.

Solar explosion sends cosmic raysto Earth

NOAA’s National Geophysical DataCenter (NGDC) reports that the Sun fea-tured another magnetically-complex ac-tive region in August. The presence wasfelt on Earth with numerous spaceweather events, the most extraordinary ofwhich was a high-energy particle releaseduring an X-level solar flare that set offcosmic ray monitors on Earth. This is the64th recording of a cosmic ray GroundLevel Event (GLE) since records began in1942. A 13% increase in cosmic rays wasseen at the South Pole station, and 6%increases at mid-latitude stations.

DMSP nighttime images featuredDefense Meteorological Satellite Pro-

gram (DMSP) nighttime images, fromNOAA’s National Geophysical Data Cen-ter (NGDC) of fires in Africa and heavily litfishing boats in the Sea of Japan, werepublished by the New York Times onAugust 20. The NGDC images, producedto coincide with the start of the WorldSummit on Sustainable Development(WSSD), were featured under the heading”Managing Planet Earth: An Abundanceof Warnings,” along with satellite imagesfrom LANDSAT, NASA’s AdvancedSpaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflec-tion Radiometer (ASTER), and NASA’sTotal Ozone Mapping Spectrometer(TOMS).


Fire detection program, from page 2ground temperature of 300K. Thetwo wavelengths return the sametemperatures at 100% and 0% cov-erage of the fire within the pixel.However, a maximum temperaturedifference of 55K between the twochannels is obtained when the fireoccupies 20% of the pixel. See, e.g.:http://www.cira.colostate.edu/ramm/goes39/tempresp.htm.

While the high temporal fre-quency of the GOES satellites allowsfor detection of many fires, the4 km pixel resolution limits the sizeand intensity of fires that can bedetected. While some small, butintense fires can saturate the 4 kmpixel, the fires cannot be accuratelypositioned within the pixel. GOESmisses small fires (which may growinto quite large fires if left un-checked) that are not burning veryhot compared to the surroundingground temperature. In order toaugment the GOES capabilities,NOAA’s Polar Environmental Opera-tional Satellites (POES) are also em-ployed. They also have visible and3.9 micron channels, both at 1.1 kmresolution. The finer resolution al-lows for earlier detection of smallfires, and shows finer location anddetail of the fires. However, the im-agery is available only once in 12hours per satellite at mid latitudes.With 2 to 3 polar orbiting satellitesavailable, these platforms provide astrategic complement to the geosta-tionary satellites.

The primary data source usedfor the smoke analysis is high reso-lution visible imagery from theGOES spacecraft, since smoke isnormally not observed in the GOESthermal bands due to the particlesize. The imagery is viewed in ani-mation, typically using hourly data.However, owing to the spectral re-flectance properties of smoke par-ticles, smoke plumes are most easilyobserved when there is a low sunangle (in the morning, just aftersunrise and in the evening just be-fore sunset).

▲ Figures 2 a, b. Fires as seen by GOES; (a) hotspots appear as dark spots on the 4 mi-cron imagery, and smoke is clearly visible in (b) from large fires in Idaho and Montana onAugust 8, 2000.


The Hazard Mapping System (HMS)The initial fire and smoke product

was phased out in June 2002. To ex-pand the product to a national level, itbecame necessary to rely on the com-puter to do some of the work. The cur-rent system, the HMS, is an interactiveprocessing system that allows trainedsatellite analysts to manually integratedata from various automated fire detec-tion algorithms with imagery from geo-stationary and polar orbiting satellites.The result is a quality-controlled dis-play of the locations of fires and majorsmoke plumes in the 50 United States.The software was developed by govern-ment and contractor personnel usingthe Interactive Development Language(IDL) to build the interface. While thehuman eye remains critical, variousautomated detection algorithms havebeen developed which can identify hotspots in the satellite imagery. Thisspeeds the process of searching for po-tential fires.

The Wildfire Automated BiomassBurning Algorithm (WF-ABBA) productwas developed by Elaine Prins (NOAA/NESDIS/ORA) in collaboration with theCooperative Institute for Meteorologi-cal Satellite Studies (CIMSS) at the Uni-versity of Wisconsin.This product,which became operational within SSDin August 2002, is the workhorse of theHMS, providing coverage over NorthAmerica every half hour. The GOESWF-ABBA is an extension of the ABBAresearch effort primarily focused onbiomass burning in S. America. It is acontextual multi-spectral (primarily 3.9and 10.7 micron) algorithm which usesdynamic local thresholds derived fromthe GOES satellite imagery and ancil-lary databases to locate fire pixels andprovides identification of fires and esti-mates of the sub-pixel area and meantemperature of the fires (Prins andMenzel, 1992; Prins et al, 1998; 2001).The ABBA website is: http://cimss.ssec.wisc.edu/goes/burn/abba.html.

SSD receives Moderate ResolutionImaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS)data and fire products from NOAA'sMODIS Near Real Time Processing Sys-tem, run by it's sister division -- theInformation Processing Division. TheMODIS instrument flies onboard the

NASA TERRA polar orbiting satellite.The team hopes to soon have MODISdata from the recently launched AQUAsatellite as well. The MODIS instrumentprovides 36 discrete spectral channelswith resolution ranging from 1/4 to1 km. This data source has proven to bean important asset in operational firedetection. The fire algorithm (Kaufmanet al, 1998) was developed by the MO-DIS Fire and Thermal Anomalies team,Chris Justice principle investigator.

The Fire Identification, Mappingand Monitoring Algorithm (FIMMA)product is an automated algorithm todetect fires from Advanced Very HighResolution Radiometer (AVHRR) datafrom the NOAA polar-orbiting satellites.The FIMMA product was originally de-veloped by Ivan Csiszar while he was amember of the Cooperative Institute forResearch in the Atmosphere, working atthe NOAA/NESDIS Office of Researchand Applications (ORA) in CampSprings, Maryland. The latest version ofFIMMA uses geo-corrected High Resolu-tion Picture Transmission (HRPT)AVHRR data over the US (includingAlaska and Hawaii) received from theNOAA/NESDIS CoastWatch group anduses the SeaSpace Terascan software tocorrect for known AVHRR navigationerrors. FIMMA can be run for any passwhich has 3.7 micron measurements.The algorithm is described by Li (2000),modified with the addition of a slightlysimpler method for nighttime fire de-tection. It uses AVHRR channels 2 (.9micron), 3b (3.7 micron), 4 (10.8 mi-cron) and 5 (12 micron). This is basi-cally a threshold algorithm, withadditional checks added in attempt tominimize false detects. This product isstill considered experimental by NOAAand algorithm refinement continues.

SSD is also experimenting with theuse of nighttime visible data from theDefense Meteorological Satellite Pro-gram/Operational Linescan System(DMSP/OLS). These data are receivedvia the National Geophysical Data Cen-ter, which also provided the algorithmand interactive processing software(Chris Elvidge team leader). The satel-lite image is compared to an image ofstable lights. Ideally, differences are dueto wildfires. This process is not fully

automated. Manual cloud masking andediting for false detects is required.Currently the ability to produce thisproduct operationally, as part of theHMS suite, is under evaluation.

These automated detection algo-rithms, in general do a very good job ofidentifying potential fires, but falsedetects can be a problem. Think abouthow hot the beach can get on a sum-mer day. A large area of heated groundcan saturate the 3.9 micron sensor,making it impossible to discriminatefires that may be contained within thearea. The current GOES satellites werenot designed with fire detection inmind, but future GOES satellites arebeing designed and built to have ahigher 3.9 micron saturation tempera-ture because of this. The automatedalgorithms run round the clock, beinginitiated as soon as data are available.These data are released publicly as soonas possible, for those users who haveneed for immediate detects and canaccept a higher rate of false detects. At2 pm Eastern time, the fire shift begins.The analyst prepares a preliminaryproduct as the fires begin to developthat day. This preliminary analysis maybe updated as the day unfolds. Then,before the shift ends at midnight, theanalyst puts out a final analysis, whichwill contain essentially all the majorfires for that calendar day.

There are a number of limitationsto the current analysis process:• There is no way to discriminatebetween wildfires and control burns;one can only assume based on durationthat the longer-lived hotspots are morelikely to be wildfires.• The 3.9 micron imagery can notsee through clouds, other than thincirrus. Multiple looks with differentsensors throughout the day help catchfires if there are any breaks in theclouds.• Small fires, those not burning veryhot and those burning below a thickcanopy of overgrowth, may go undetec-ted. This manifests itself at times whenwe are able to see smoke plumes but noassociated hotspot.• Smoke is harder to detect in stan-dard visible imagery during the middle



of the day with a high sun angle oragainst a surface with a high albedo.• Fires, especially in the western U.S.,often are masked by a hot backgroundduring the afternoon in the summer.This is due to the high surface tempera-tures and reflectivity (due to surface soiltype) which causes the GOES-10 sensorto saturate. This problem is not as acutewith GOES-8 due to the higher satura-tion temperature (335K), versus 322Kfor GOES-10, of the 3.9 micron chan-nel.

The primary data delivery mecha-nism for the smoke and fire product is anew Geographic Information System(GIS) webpage (Figure 3; http://nhis7.wwb.noaa.gov/website/SSDFire/viewer.htm, soon to be replaced with

http://www.wildfires.noaa.gov). Whenusers first go to the page they see thelatest HMS product, but have the capa-bility to overlay the WF-ABBA, FIMMAand MODIS fire detects. They can alsozoom down to the county level to get acloser look of the fires.

Users who want to download thedata can get the data directly from ananonymous file transfer protocol (FTP)site or via the web interface (Figure 4;http://gp16.wwb.noaa.gov/FIRE/fire.html).Data can be downloaded in ASCII text,graphic or GIS formats.

What does the future hold for thefire program? More ancillary informa-tion, such as fire scars, vegetation indi-ces, and fire potential are likely to beavailable via the web-GIS fire page. Us-ers are also interested in better access to

fire imagery in geospatial formats. Fu-ture satellites and sensors [such as Vis-ible Infrared Imager/Radiometer Suite(VIIRS), which will replace AVHRR onPOES spacecraft later this decade] willhave more channels and better resolu-tion, making fire detection more reli-able. As the automated algorithmsimprove, and the human role becomeseasier, the program can extend beyongthe U.S., perhaps globally.

AcknowledgementsRob Fennimore and Marlene Patterson(NESDIS/OSDPD/SSD/IPB), Bruce Ramsay,Elaine Prins and Chris Schmidt (NESDIS/ORA),Levin Lauritson (NESDIS/OSDPD), Tim Kasheta,Yi Song, Brian Dyke and Jason Taylor (RS Infor-mation Systems, Inc.), Tom Callsen (IMSG,Inc.), Chris Elvidge and Ruth Hobson (NGDC).

Fire detection program, from page 5

▲ Figure 3. The Web Geographic Information System (GIS) interface is a new way to distribute fire products to NOAA’s traditionalcustomers, as well as to reach a new set of customers, such as the land management agencies. Users can zoom down to the countylevel to see the fire and smoke in greater detail, can see detailed information about each detect, and can overlay other information tohelp with their analysis. (Site designed by Tom Callsen and Marlene Patterson)


ReferencesKaufman, Y. J., Justice, C. O., Flynn, L. P.,

Kendall, J. D., Prins, E. M,, Giglio, L.,Ward, D. E., Menzel, P., & Setzer, A. W.(1998). Potential global fire monitoringfrom EOS-MODIS. Journal of GeophysicalResearch, 103, 31955, 32215-32238.

Li, Z., S. Nadon, J. Cihlar, 2000, Satellite detection of Canadian boreal forest fires: Development and application of an algorithm,Int. J. Rem. Sens., 21, 3057-3069.

Matson, M. and J. Dozier, 1981. Identificationof subresolution high temperature sourcesusing a thermal IR sensor, Photogram.Eng. Remote Sensing, 47:1311.

Matson, M., S.R. Schneider, A. Aldridge, B.Satchel, 1984. Fire Detection Using theNOAA Series Satellites, NOAA-NESSTechnical Report 7, (NOAA, WashingtonDC, 1984).

Matson, M., G. Stephens and J. Robinson,1987. Fire detection using data from theNOAA-N satellites. Int. J. Remote Sensing.8:961.

Prins E. M., and W. P. Menzel, 1992: Geostationary satellite detection of biomassburning in South America, Int. J. RemoteSens., 13, 2,783-2,799.

Prins, E. M., J. M. Feltz, W. P. Menzel, and D. E.Ward, 1998: An overview of GOES-8diurnal fire and smoke results for SCAR-Band the 1995 fire season in SouthAmerica, Jour. of Geo. Res., 103, D24, pp.31,821-31,836.

Prins, E., J. Schmetz, L. Flynn, D. Hillger, J.Feltz, 2001: Overview of current andfuture diurnal active fire monitoring usinga suite of international geostationarysatellites, In Global and Regional WildfireMonitoring: Current Status and FuturePlans, SPB Academic Publishing, TheHague, Netherlands, pp. 145-170. ■

▲ Figure 4. The fire products can also be downloaded in a variety of formats using FTP via a web interface. (Site designed byBrian Dyke)


NOAA’s National Severe Storms Laboratory

Keli Pirtle Tarp, APRNOAA Weather PartnersNational Severe Storms Laboratory

Studying devastating storms from the heart of "tornado alley"

The National Oceanic and Atmo-spheric Administration’s National Se-vere Storms Laboratory leads the way ininvestigations of all aspects of severeand hazardous weather. Headquarteredin Norman, Oklahoma, with staff inColorado, Nevada, Washington, Utahand Wisconsin, the people of NSSL, inclose partnership with the NationalWeather Service, are dedicated to im-proving the lead time and accuracy ofsevere weather warnings and forecastsin order to save lives and reduce prop-erty damage.

Severe weather research conductedat NSSL has led to substantial improve-ments in severe and hazardous weatherforecasting, resulting in increased warn-ing lead times to the public. NSSL sci-entists are exploring new ways toimprove our understanding ofthe causes of severe weather,and ways to use weather infor-mation to assist NationalWeather Service forecasters, aswell as federal, university andprivate sector partners.

Recent accomplishmentsIn the past few years, sci-

entists from NSSL have com-pleted several field experi-ments. During spring andsummer 2002, meteorologicalresearchers from around theworld gathered in Normanand the Oklahoma panhandleto track the nearly invisibleswaths of moisture that fuelsevere thunderstorms andheavy rain across the southernGreat Plains from Texas toKansas. NSSL researchers ledan armada of 30 weather-techvehicles that measured tem-perature, humidity, wind and

other variables in the lower atmo-sphere. Scientists hope the data theygathered will be the key to better pre-dictions of when and where thunder-storms will form and how intense theywill be.

Two additional experiments stud-ied severe and hazardous weather.IPEX, the Intermountain PrecipitationExperiment, was designed to improveforecasts of winter weather, especiallyin the high population growth areas ofthe western United States. STEPS, theSevere Thunderstorm Electrificationand Precipitation Study, focused anumber of data gathering tools onthunderstorms in the high plains tobetter understand how rain and light-ning are formed. The knowledge gainedthrough these field programs will leadto better forecasts of deadly weatherphenomenon including tornadoes,lightning, hail, flash floods, heavysnow, ice and freezing rain.

NSSL continues to be a pioneer inthe development of weather radar. Thelab is presently researching the use ofdual polarization radar to improve pre-cipitation measurements and hail iden-tification. This proposed upgrade to thecurrent NEXRAD Doppler radar hard-ware will provide more informationabout precipitation in clouds to betterdistinguish between rain, ice, hail andmixtures. Such information will helpforecasters provide better warnings forflash floods, the number one severeweather threat to human life.

NSSL is committed to incorporat-ing cutting-edge scientific understand-ing of severe weather signatures inradar data into tools designed to helpNational Weather Service forecastersmake better and faster warning deci-sions. The latest tool, NSSL’s WarningDecision Support System II, includesautomated algorithm detection toolsfor the NEXRAD Doppler radar to iden-


NOAA Weather PartnersNational Severe Storms Laboratory1313 Halley CircleNorman, Oklahoma 73069E-mail: [email protected]

tify rotation in storms preceding torna-does, likelihood and size of hail, as wellas simply identifying and trackingstorms. This information is presentedin an easy-to-use display includingtables, graphs and data interrogationtools. Several of these tools have al-ready been integrated into the NationalWeather Service’s systems and havecontributed to improved warning leadtimes with fewer false alarms.

What’s next for NSSL?Phased array radar

NSSL researchers will soon beginadapting state-of-the-art radar technol-ogy currently deployed on Navy shipsfor use in spotting severe weather.Phased array radar reduces the scan ordata collection time from five or sixminutes to only one minute, poten-tially extending the average lead timefor tornado warnings well beyond thecurrent average of 11 minutes. Whencombined with other technology beingdeveloped at NSSL, warning lead timesmay be extended even farther.

Significant work is required toadapt current phased array radar mili-tary technology to civilian use forweather applications. This process hasproven successful before, when NSSLresearchers took surplus military Dop-pler radar components and developedwhat became the WSR88D radar. Thedeployment of a system of NEXRADradars across the United States was acornerstone of the modernization ofthe National Weather Service. Mostimportantly, it has helped forecastersprovide better forecasts and warnings,saving countless lives.

The phased array radar project willbegin a new era in NSSL’s leadership inthe research and development of futuregenerations of weather radar. However,the NSSL is not working alone. All as-pects of the initiative will be carried outin a partnership among several federal,

private, state and academic partners,including NOAA’s Forecast SystemsLaboratory and National Weather Ser-vice, U.S. Navy, Federal Aviation Ad-ministration, Lockheed Martin and theUniversity of Oklahoma.

National Weather CenterNSSL has a unique opportunity to

combine facilities with the NationalWeather Service and several key univer-sity weather organizations also focusedon severe weather research. Planning isunderway for the proposed NationalWeather Center, a new $60 millionfacility that will become the premiersevere weather research and forecastingcomplex in the world. The new build-ing will increase collaboration andcommunication for the weather re-searchers and forecasters engaged incomplimentary efforts toward betterforecasts and warnings of severe andhazardous weather.

Improving the state of the scienceNSSL has also begun working on

ways to improve short-term weatherforecasting computer models for the

National Weather Service, basic tornadoresearch to understand how tornadoesform, and real-time delivery of radardata to the meteorological communityand interested partners. In addition,NSSL researchers continue to strive foran improved understanding of torna-does and other severe weather by creat-ing new tools such as mobile Dopplerradars employing the latest technolo-gies and by deploying radio controlledaircraft carrying weather instrumentsinto and around storms.

Research partnershipsNSSL has a research partnership

with the Cooperative Institute for Me-soscale Meteorological Studies(CIMMS), a cooperative institute be-tween NOAA and the University ofOklahoma. Additionally, NSSL conductscollaborative research with the U.S.Navy, Air Force, Department of Trans-portation, Federal Aviation Administra-tion, and several large and smallcorporations. NSSL is a $15 millionlaboratory ($6 million in NOAA base),that supports approximately 50 federalemployees and 92 university employ-ees. ■


Partnerships, knowledge, innovation and leadership

The NOAA Program Review recom-

mends that NOAA carry out futuremissions “innovatively in partnershipwith other nations, other Federal, stateand local agencies, the private sectorand academia”. It also recommendsestablishing and improving manycross-agency and cross-line office ini-tiatives and relationships (NOAA Pro-gram Review Team, 2002). Theserecommendations make it clear thatpartnerships are going to play an im-portant role in the new NOAA onmany levels.

Many aspects of partnerships com-bine to make their management muchmore difficult than management of therelatively simple projects that we spendmost of our time on. The situation isfurther complicated by the fact thatachieving the goals of the ProgramReview requires considerable innova-tion. Understanding innovation andmanaging projects that depend on it

for success present significant chal-lenges that once again are outside ofour general experience.

All of these factors indicate thatunderstanding innovation is on thecritical path to success for the newNOAA. Fortunately, there is a rich litera-ture on this topic. This literature in-cludes discussions of many types ofinnovation and approaches to manag-ing them. The differentiation betweencomponent and architectural innova-tion described by Henderson and Clark(1990) seems very relevant to NOAA asdoes the discussion of sustaining anddisruptive innovation by Christensen(1997). This paper outlines those con-cepts and speculates about their rela-tionship to NOAA with the hope ofinitiating a dialog and maybe helpingcreate successful partnerships.

Data systems and knowledge orinnovation types

Data systems are made up of com-ponents and connections betweenthem, (architecture in Figure 1). It is

clear that developing successful systemsrequires knowledge about the compo-nents, termed “component knowl-edge”, and knowledge about theconnections, termed “architecturalknowledge”. Henderson and Clark(1990) point out that these types ofknowledge are developed and managedquite differently in most organizations.Component knowledge is generallyresident in individuals or groups. Thereare many such experts, or “gurus” inany software environment. In manycases they are the principal developersof a particular component and they arethe people that others seek out whenproblems occur with that particularcomponent.

Understanding how componentsare connected is architectural knowl-edge. Architectural knowledge is in-creasingly important as we buildsystems by connecting objects and classlibraries, as in object oriented program-ming approaches, or commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) tools. It develops quitedifferently than component knowledge.In systems where the architecture is

Dr. Ted HabermannNational Geophysical Data CenterNOAA/NESDIS

Challenges of integrated data systems

▲ Figure 1. Data systems are made up of components connected by architecture. Note the similarity to an organizational chart.


stable, this knowledge tends to becomeembedded in the practices and proce-dures of the organization and even inthe structure of the organization itself.Note the similarity of Figure 1 to anorganizational chart. One could easilyassociate groups of components withgroups of people and the architecturewith the organizational structure. Orga-nizations build knowledge and capabil-ity around recurrent tasks. Architec-tures of those tasks that work well be-come part of standard operating proce-dure. The architecture becomesembedded in the “the way we’ve alwaysdone it” and practices are based ontradition rather than knowledge aboutwhy those traditions came to exist inthe first place.

In NOAA, many legacy systemshave been described as “stovepipes”

because of the difficulties experiencedwhen one attempts to add new data orcapabilities to them. In these cases,architectural knowledge is tied up inthe same experts that hold componentknowledge. In fact, the componentsand the connections may not be de-fined anywhere except in the code.Incomplete documentation can manytimes exacerbate the problems associ-ated with distributing that knowledgethrough the enterprise.

Extending these concepts fromknowledge to innovation is straightfor-ward. Component innovation (or incre-mental innovation) involves improve-ments made to the components of thesystem. This is illustrated in Figure 2 bythe components increasing in size andchanging color. Improving the perfor-mance of a particular software tool (i.e.

a satellite data reader) is a componentinnovation as is evolving code so that itfunctions in a new operating system.Improving the functionality of existinglarge systems that must work togethermight even be considered componentinnovation in the context of a newNOAA. These innovations are the stuffof the everyday experiences of manydevelopers and managers. We under-stand the concept of component inno-vation because we do it everyday.

Architectural innovation involvesconnecting existing components innew ways (Figure 2). The core designconcept behind each component – andthe associated scientific and engineer-ing knowledge – remains the same,although a small amount of compo-nent innovation may be required tomake the new connections work. Add-


▲ Figure 2. Types of innovation.


ing the capability to read a new dataformat to an existing software tool is anarchitectural innovation. It creates anew connection between existing codeand existing data. Modifying a webvisualization tool to support multipleback-end data access systems is anotherarchitectural change.

It is important to note that compo-nents that can function well in mul-tiple architectures are different thanthose that work in stovepipes. The in-ternal workings of architectural compo-nents are generally hidden from viewand the external interfaces must be welldocumented and tested. In many casesthose interfaces are implemented using

standards such as XML in order to sim-plify the programming and documenta-tion process.

Architectural innovation andorganizational change

A recurring “mantra” of many part-nership projects is that they will notreinvent anything; instead “best ofbreed” components will be identifiedand combined in new ways. This man-tra clearly identifies such partnershipsas architectural innovation. In fact, ifthe mantra were strictly followed, inno-vations related to many of theseprojects would be completely architec-tural. This may have profound implica-tions for the management of these

projects and for their eventual successor failure. Henderson and Clark (1990)describe the difficulties of architecturalinnovation in established firms:An established organization setting

out to build new architecturalknowledge must change its orienta-tion from one of refinement withina stable architecture to one ofactive search for new solutionswithin a constantly changing con-text. As long as the dominantdesign remains stable, an organiza-tion can segment and specialize itsknowledge and rely on standardoperating procedures to design anddevelop products. Architecturalinnovation, in contrast, places a

Partnerships, from page 11

▲ Figure 3. Partnerships and customers.


premium on exploration in designand the assimilation of new know-ledge. Many organizations encoun-ter difficulties in their attempts tomake this type of transition. Newentrants, with smaller commit-ments to older ways of learningabout the environment and orga-nizing their knowledge, often findit easier to build the organizationalflexibility that abandoning oldarchitectural knowledge and build-ing new requires.Christensen (1997) describes sus-

taining and disruptive innovations. Hisconcepts are similar to, but not synony-mous with Henderson and Clark’s. InChristensen’s case the critical differen-tiator is the customer that the innova-tion serves. Sustaining innovation isaimed at improving products for tradi-tional customers (outside arrows inFigure 3), whereas disruptive innova-tions target unknown (and many timeunknowable) customers. Componentinnovation tends to be sustaining andarchitectural innovation may be disrup-tive. The World Wide Web and newpartnerships both bring new customersto established NOAA programs (Figure3). These are, therefore, disruptive in-novations.

The challenge in managing thesedisruptive innovations is intimatelyrelated to the infusion of new custom-ers. Employees many times have long-term relationships with their existinginternal and external customers andthe perceived needs of those customersdrive their everyday work decisions.Convincing a work force to make deci-sions that serve the needs of new andpotentially unknown customers is adifficult management and leadershipchallenge.

Christensen’s discussion of organi-zational capabilities and disabilitiesbecomes relevant here. Organizationalcapabilities are different than the capa-bilities of individuals within the organi-

zation. Moreover, an organizationalcapability to do one thing can becomea disability to do another. These capa-bilities are determined by resources,processes, and values. Resources, i.e.people, hardware, and time, are themost visible factors contributing tocapabilities. Processes are the patternsof interaction, coordination, communi-cation, and decision-making throughwhich organizations accomplish tasksand create value. Values are the criteriaby which decisions about priorities aremade at all levels in the organization.Having the organizational capability toaccomplish goals depends on all threeof these factors:Managers who face the need to

change or innovate, therefore, needto do more than assign the rightresources to the problem. Theyneed to be sure that the organiza-tion in which those resources willbe working is itself capable of suc-ceeding, and in making that assess-ment, managers must scrutinizewhether the organization’s pro-cesses and values fit the problem...When the organizations capa-bilities reside primarily in itspeople, changing to address newproblems is relatively simple. Butwhen the capabilities have come toreside in processes and values andespecially when they have becomeembedded in culture, change canbecome extraordinarily difficult.

The “embedding” that Christensendescribes is very similar to the develop-ment of architectural knowledge in theHenderson and Clark model. Regardlessof what you call them, both of theseprocesses contribute significantly tomaking architectural or disruptive in-novation so difficult.

This interpretation clearly suggeststhat architectural innovation involves amuch more significant element of orga-nizational change than componentinnovation. Many experts suggest thatorganizational change requires moreleadership than management (Kotter,1990). In this context that suggests thatsuccessful architectural innovation re-quires more leadership and that com-ponent innovation requires moremanagement. It also suggests that ar-chitectural innovation requires a sig-

nificantly different approach to organi-zational learning than componentinnovation.

Management and leadershipManagement and leadership are

many times discussed together andmany times thought to coexist in upperlevels of organizations; however, con-siderable insight may be gained by dif-ferentiating between them. Kotter(1990) discusses the differences be-tween management and leadership insome detail:Leadership is different than manage-

ment, but not for the reasonsmost people think. Leadership isn’tmystical or mysterious. It has noth-ing to do with having “charisma”or other exotic personality traits. Itis not the province of a chosen few.Nor is leadership better than man-agement or a replacement for it.Rather, leadership and management are two distinctive andcomplementary systems of action.Each has its own function andcharacteristic activities. Both arenecessary for success in an increas-ingly complex and volatile businessenvironment.

Management is about coping withcomplexity… Without good man-agement, complex enterprises tendto become chaotic in ways thatthreaten their very existence. Goodmanagement brings a degree oforder and consistency to keydimensions like quality and profit-ability of products. Leadership, bycontrast, is about coping withchange…Major changes are moreand more necessary to survive andcompete effectively in this newenvironment. More change alwaysdemands more leadership.

These different functions – coping withcomplexity and coping withchange – shape the characteristicactivities of management and lead-ership. Each system of action involves deciding what needs to bedone, creating networks of peopleand relationships that can accom-plish an agenda, and then trying toensure that those people actuallydo the job. But each accomplishesthese tasks in different ways.


Dr. Ted HabermannNational Geophysical Data CenterE/GC1NOAA/NESDIS325 BroadwayBoulder, Colorado 80305-3328E-mail: [email protected]


The Coral Reef Information SystemWeb site (CoRIS) is being officially re-leased at http://www.coris.noaa.gov/ as ofOctober 1, 2002. Designed to providethe public with a single point of accessfor coral reef data and information de-rived from NOAA programs andprojects, CoRIS supports NOAA’s activi-ties on the National Coral Reef Forceand NOAA’s implementation of theNational Action Plan to Conserve CoralReefs.

Corals are extremely ancient ani-mals that date back 400 million years,and over the last 25 million years theyhave evolved into modern reef-buildingforms. Coral reefs are one of the mostdiverse habitats in the world and areconsidered the largest structures onearth of biological origin that rival oldgrowth forests in their longevity. Reefscan be many hundreds of years old.Home and nursery for almost a millionfish and other species, reefs also pro-vide important protection for coastalcommunities from storms, wave dam-age and erosion.

The CoRIS site is organized into aseries of sections, with “DiscoverNOAA’s Data” being the centerpiece ofthe site. Here, CoRIS provides userswith two different ways to access some19,000 aerial photos, 400 preview navi-gational charts, tide stations, paleo-climatological studies, photo mosaics,coral reef monitoring, bleaching re-ports, and more information. The firstis Map Search which uses an applica-tion of ArcIMS that results in directaccess to many products. This searchengine is ideal for users who have anidea of what they are looking for ordesire a specific geographic area. Thereis also a Text Search engine that allowseasy examination of metadata records,which are detailed summaries of theactual data. This method is very effec-tive for users who want to learn moreabout the data, or have questions aboutspecific data offerings.

Another section, “About CoralReefs,” offers four essays that discusssome of the more important aspects ofcoral reefs: “What are Coral Reefs,” anessay on the general description of theindividual coral animal, “Coral ReefBiology,” which presents an overviewof the major reproductive, feeding,and competitive behaviors in manyspecies of corals, “Major Reef-buildingCoral Diseases,” providing a summaryof coral diseases, many of which haveincreased in frequency in the last 10years, and “Hazards to Coral Reefs,” anoverview of natural and anthropogenicfactors threatening many reef systems.

Other sections include:• “Professional Exchanges” thatpresent summaries of selected topicaldiscussions among experts that firstappeared on NOAA’s Coral Health andMonitoring Program (CHAMP) listserve.• The Library provides a series ofcollections, publications, Web sites andorganizations that focus on NOAA ma-terials and activities as well as selectedmaterials to NOAA.• NOAA’s Activities briefly describesNOAA’s efforts thus far to fulfill thegoals of the National Action Plan toConserve Coral Reefs, which was issuedby the U.S. Coral Reef Task Force inMarch 2000.• The Glossary furnishes definitionsfor hundreds of terms associated withcoral reef science and conservation.

This site is managed by the Na-tional Oceanic and Atmospheric Ad-ministration, U.S. Department ofCommerce. Materials posted on thissite are reviewed by professional staffprior to publishing. All material on thesite, including the multimedia gallery,resides in the public domain and can befreely distributed. The CoRIS team isresponsible for all text, images, andsearch engines on this site.

Among the NOAA offices and labsinvolved with the development ofCoRIS are the National Oceanographic

Data Center, the National Ocean Ser-vice, NOAA Central Library, the Atlan-tic Oceanographic and MeteorologicalLaboratory, the Paleoclimatology Pro-gram at the National Geophysical andNational Climatic Data Centers, theOffice of Oceanic and AtmosphericResearch, and the National MarineFisheries Service.

Prior to CoRIS, a seeker of NOAAcoral reef information faced a confusingarray of over 50 NOAA coral reef websites. CoRIS, backed by powerful searchengines, offers a web-enabled, GIS-en-hanced, state-of-the-art informationsystem utilizing a single web portal togain easy access to NOAA’s coral reefresources. By cataloging and indexingmetadata summarizing the actual dataholdings, CoRIS easily guides the userto the desired data and information.

Corals are now a cross-cuttingtheme throughout NOAA, and the re-cent “National Action Plan to Con-serve Coral Reefs” calls on NOAA andits Coral Reef Task Force partners toreduce or eliminate the most destruc-tive human-derived threats to coralreefs. The plan describes nine long-range, far-reaching strategies to addressthese threats:• Expand and strengthen the net-work of coral reef marine protectedareas (MPAs) and reserves;• Reduce the adverse impacts of ex-tractive uses such as overfishing;• Reduce habitat destruction;• Reduce pollution such as marinedebris;• Restore damaged reefs;• Reduce global threats to reefs;• Reduce impacts of internationaltrade of coral reef resources;• Improve interagency accountabilityand coordination; and• Create an informed public.

For more information contact:Doug Hamilton (NOAA/NESDIS/NODC) [email protected]. ■


Data productsand services

CONTACT POINTS

National Climatic Data Center(NCDC)

828-271-4800Fax: 828-271-4876

E-mail: Climate Services [email protected]

Satellite Services [email protected]

WWW: http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/

National Geophysical Data Center(NGDC)

303-497-6826Fax: 303-497-6513

E-mail: [email protected]: http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/

National Oceanographic Data Center(NODC)

301-713-3277Fax: 301-713-3302

E-mail: [email protected]: http://www.nodc.noaa.gov/

NOAAServer Data Directory301-713-0575

Fax: 301-713-0819E-mail: [email protected]

WWW: http://www.eis.noaa.gov/

NOAA Central LibraryReference Services:

301-713-2600Fax: 301-713-4599

E-mail: [email protected]: http://www.lib.noaa.gov/

New data on tree growth/climaterelationships

The NOAA Paleontology Program hasarchived new Alaskan tree-ring data usedby Lloyd and Fastie (2002) to analyzeclimate-growth relationships in the Borealforest. The research indicates that treegrowth in the Boreal forest of Alaska hasdeclined over the past 50 years, despitethe strong warming trend observed overthis time interval. The authors proposethat drought stress on trees is increasinglybecoming a factor limiting tree growth inthe rapidly warming Boreal forest zones.The data and research summary can beobtained on the NOAA PaleoclimatologyProgram website at: http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/pubs/lloyd2002/lloyd2002.html.Contact: NCDC

Ice core atmospheric methanedata archived

The NOAA Paleoclimatology Programhas archived high-resolution methane(CH4) data from the Law Dome, Antarc-tica ice core. Published by Etheridge et al.in the Journal of Geophysical Research(1998), the data documents an approxi-mately 150% incrrease in atmosphericmethane since 1750. Methane is the sec-ond most important human-influencedgreenhouse gas after carbon dioxide, andthese data were included in the Intergov-ernmental Panel on Climate Change(IPCC) 2001 report. The data arre avail-able at: http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/paleo/icecore/antarctica/law/law.html.Contact: NGDC

Digital side-scan sonar dataNGDC has received a second ship-

ment of raw digital side-scan sonar datafrom the National Ocean Service (NOS).The first shipment is being archived andreviewed with SonarWeb Pro to visuallyinspect the data. The data are approxi-mately 190 gigabytes of sea floor imageryobtained during NOAA Ship Whiting’shydrographic survey operations onprojects in Virginia, Georgia, and PuertoRico. The second shipment contains seafloor imagery acquired during NOAA ShipRude’s hydrographic survey operations inDelaware and Chesapeake Bays. Anarchive is being established for thesedata, including the creation of access andretrieval capabilities.Contact: NGDC

First AIRS data distributed toNWP centers

NOAA’s NESDIS (National Environ-mental Satellite and Data InformationService) has processed and released asingle day of AIRS (Atmospheric InfraRedSounder) radiances to the NWP (Numeri-cal Weather Prediction) community in theU.S. and Europe for evaluation. AIRS is thefirst of a new generation of hyperspectralinfrared sounders and will significantlyimprove the accuracy of satellite-derivedatmospheric temperature and moisturesoundings.

Data from AIRS is expected to extendthe current range of reliable medium-termforecasts by several hours. Regular distri-bution of calibrated AIRS radiance datawill begin after the AIRS calibration teamhas completed its evaluation. AIRS waslaunched on NASA’s Aqua satellite onMay 4.Contact: ESDIM

Moored Upward Looking Sonar(ULS) for sea ice volume estimates

Moored ULS data provide informa-tion on sea ice draft from which both icethickness and volume can be inferred.Recent studies using submarine ULS datadistributed by the National Snow and IceData Center (NSIDC) suggest that arcticice is thinning; see http://nsidc.org/data/g01360.html.

The World Climate ResearchProgramme’s Arctic Climate SystemStudy (Climate and Cryosphere Project)hosted a meeting in Tromso, Norway, inearly July, to coordinate processing andarchival of data from moored instrumentsthat complement submarine data. About65 buoy years of data from Australian,Canadian, German, and U.S. researchgroups will be documented and distrib-uted by NOAA under the direction ofNSIDC.Contact: NGDC

Global Land Ice Measurementsfrom Space (GLIMS)

In July representatives of the USGS/Flagstaff GLIMS Coordination Center metwith NSIDC members of the GLIMS teamin Boulder. Discussions included the for-mat of the NASA-funded NSIDC GLIMSglacier data base, techniques for auto-matically analyzing glaciers in satelliteimagery, and aspects of incorporatingolder glacier data sets into the newframework. There are estimated to besome 160,000 glaciers worldwide;70,000 of these are represented in theNOAA-funded World Glacier Inventory(http://nsidc.org/data/g01130.html). TheGLIMS project and some 20 regionalcenters around the world are aiming todocument the current state of the world’sland ice. More information on the GLIMSproject is at http://www.glims.org/.Contact: NGDC

Congressional office uses winddata for transportation issue

The office of Massachusetts Con-gressman Michael Capuano requestedtwo years of daily average wind speedand direction data along with wind gustinformation. These files, which involved adispute involving the Boston-Logan air-port runway and wind speed frequency,were transferred electronically in PDFformat within hours of the request.Contact: NCDC


Address C

orrection Requested

OFFIC

IAL BU

SINESS

Penalty for Private Use $300

40U

.S. DEP

AR

TM

ENT

OF C

OM

MER

CE

Natio

nal O

ceanic an

d A

tmo

sph

eric Ad

min

istration

Publication Distribution Facility

1315 East-West H

ighway

Silver Spring, M

D 20910-3282

ATTN

: Earth System M

onitor

Partnerships, from page 13He goes on to describe the differentactions that characterize leadership andmanagement:

Leadership Management

Setting a direction

Aligning people

Planning and budgeting

Organizing and staffing

Motivating people Controlling and problem solving

Organizational Values Organizational Resources

OrganizationalProcesses

These differences can also be translatedinto the organizational capabilitiesmodel, with resources at the manage-ment end, values at the leadership endand processes in the middle. Chris-tensen would agree with Kotter thatprojects can not be successful withoutan effective combination of all thesethings, without a combination of man-agement and leadership.

ConclusionThe NOAA Program Review high-

lights the critical role of internal andexternal partnerships in the ”newNOAA.” These partnerships will involveconnecting existing systems in newways and reaching out to new custom-ers. These are well-known characteristicsof architectural and disruptive innova-tion. Achieving such innovations islikely to require significant elements oforganizational change; in fact, it islikely that these partnerships must beaddressed primarily as organizationalchange efforts if they are to be success-ful.

How might this be done? Severalideas emerge from this discussion. First,partnership plans must 1) consider howleadership and management can coordi-nate to accomplish goals, and 2) specifi-cally address processes and values alongwith resources. The leaders must becertain that the partnership values areclear to all participants. The partnershipmust be sold on the basis of those val-ues, so they must be explained usingmany communication channels and

demonstrated continually by consistentactions. It is critical that all layers ofmanagement understand those valuesso that their decisions and actions areconsistent with them.

Second, leaders must identify staffthat share the partnership values andare already making decisions consistentwith them. These people must be sup-ported with resources and visibility andthey must be recruited to develop newprocesses that support the partnership.More importantly, the leaders mustidentify mid-level managers and staffwhose decisions and actions are notsupporting the partnership values. Theirpoints of view must be understood anddealt with before they undermine thepartnership.

Making new partnerships work ischallenging in any established organiza-tion. Hopefully, the ideas discussed herewill contribute to understanding someof the challenges and achieving success.

ReferencesChristensen, Clayton M., The Innovator's

Dilemma, Harvard Business School Press,Cambridge, Mass., 1997.

Henderson, R.M. and Clark, K.B., ArchitecturalInnovation: The Reconfiguration of ExistingProduct Technologies and the Failure ofEstablished Firms, Admin. Sci. Quart., 35,9-30, 1990.

Kotter, J., What Leaders Really Do, Harvard Bus.Rev., May-June 1990.

NOAA Program Review Team, Program ReviewReport, http://node3.hpcc.noaa.gov/internal/, 2002. ■

vol. 13, no. 1 earth ystem onitor - national oceanic · pdf filee vol. 13, no. 1 september...

Documents