U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Circular 1281

Geography for a Changing World

A Science Strategy for the Geographic Research

of the U.S. Geological Survey, 2005-2015
On The Cover

The challenges for society and environment that are created through human use of land and water resources are exemplified in this 

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) image developed for Florida Everglades restoration (Jones and others, 2003). Created from a winter 2000 

Landsat image, patterns within this single view strikingly illustrate human transformation of the land surface for agriculture, commerce, 

flood prevention, water use, and biological resource conservation. Specifically, the image shows a portion of southeast Florida where the 

urban coastal area interfaces with the rural interior. The image shows an area extending along the Atlantic Ocean coast from Lake Worth 

on the north (top) to Pompano Beach on the south. The eastern portion of the image shows the dense urban development common along 

the southeast Florida coast that requires water control infrastructure for flood control and water supply. The lineations crossing the image 

diagonally are canals and drains. The three segmented dark areas are water conservation areas retaining some of their natural surface 

configuration. Light streaks in the conservation areas are tree islands rising above surrounding wetland vegetation and open water. The 

checkered area on the west (left) side of the image is the Everglades Agricultural Area. 

What drives such human modification of land surfaces? At what rate do changes occur? How do these modifications affect other 

environmental processes or alter society’s vulnerability to natural hazards such as drought or floods? What tools are needed to answer these 

questions and most appropriately communicate our understanding to those who guide resource decisionmaking? The USGS geography 

science strategy presented in this document provides the foundation for addressing these important societal questions.
Geography for a Changing World

A Science Strategy for the Geographic Research of the

U.S. Geological Survey, 2005-2015

By Gerard McMahon, Susan P. Benjamin, Keith Clarke, John E. Findley, Robert N. 

Fisher, William L. Graf, Linda C. Gundersen, John W. Jones, Thomas R. Loveland, 

Keven S. Roth, E. Lynn Usery, and Nathan J. Wood

Circular 1281

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Department of the Interior

Gale A. Norton, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

Charles G. Groat, Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2005

For sale by U.S. Geological Survey, Information Services

Box 25286, Denver Federal Center

Denver, CO 80225

For more information about the USGS and its products:

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/

Any use of trade, product, or firm names in this publication is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply 

endorsement by the U.S. Government.

Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to 

reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report.

Suggested citation:

McMahon, Gerard, and others, 2005, Geography for a Changing World – A Science Strategy for the Geographic 

Research of the U.S. Geological Survey, 2005-2015, Sioux Falls, SD: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1281, 76 pages

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

McMahon, Gerard...[and others],

Geography for a Changing World –

A Science Strategy for the Geographic Research of the U.S. Geological Survey, 2005-2015

U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1281

ISBN: 0-607-97179-7
v

Preface

In early 2004, the Associate Director (Barbara J. Ryan) and Acting Chief Scientist (Mark L. 

DeMulder) for Geography at the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) established a Geography Science Planning Team (SPT) composed of scientists representing all USGS disciplines and the 

geography academic community. They charged the SPT with creating “a succinct strategy to 

define, organize, manage, and grow the scientific activities of the Geography Discipline over 

the next 10 years (2005-2015), within the broad outlines of the USGS Strategic Plan.” The SPT’s 

primary objective was to develop a strategy for USGS geography science activities over the next 

10 years by analyzing the strategic context provided by regional, national, and global scientific 

issues and needs, identifying focused research opportunities associated with these issues, and 

evaluating the implications of these opportunities for geographic science at USGS. 

In developing this science strategy, the SPT reviewed the USGS Strategic Plan, other USGS discipline plans, and recent external reviews by the National Research Council. The SPT also examined science and strategic plans of other Federal agencies and of national and international 

earth science organizations. Through a series of panel discussions, the SPT heard from more 

than 175 people, including scientists and managers from the USGS and the U.S. Department 

of the Interior; representatives of other Federal and State agencies; industry leaders; university 

faculty; and professional societies. These meetings (convened in Reston, Va., Sacramento, Calif., 

Sioux Falls, S. Dak., Rolla, Mo., and Denver, Colo.) provided SPT members with perspectives on 

the opportunities and potential science priorities during the next 10 years. 

The input provided the foundation for defining 9 interrelated science goals and 6 operational 

objectives. By undertaking the scientifically challenging and vital research activities outlined in 

this science plan, the USGS will attend to the Nation’s most pressing science issues that are 

consistent with the USGS mission and that are likely to benefit from the unique perspective and 

methods of the field of geography. 

The SPT extends sincere thanks to the many contributors to this strategic planning process. 

This science plan has been reviewed extensively by colleagues in the earth science community, 

both within and outside the USGS, and has benefited greatly from these reviews. As a result of 

our participation in this effort, we have a much greater awareness of and appreciation for the 

diverse scientific programs, capabilities, and the enormous dedication of USGS geographers. 

We look forward to the consideration and implementation of this science plan.

The Science Planning Team for the Geography Discipline of the U.S. Geological Survey 

Gerard McMahon, Water Resources Discipline (Chair), Raleigh, N.C.

Susan P. Benjamin, Geography Discipline, Menlo Park, Calif.

Keith Clarke, University of California, Santa Barbara, Calif.

John E. Findley, Geography Discipline, Reston, Va.

Robert N. Fisher, Biology Discipline, San Diego, Calif.

William L. Graf, University of South Carolina, Columbia, S.C.

Linda C. Gundersen, Geology Discipline, Reston, Va.

John W. Jones, Geography Discipline, Reston, Va.

Thomas R. Loveland, Geography Discipline, Sioux Falls, S. Dak.

Keven S. Roth, Geography Discipline, Reston, Va.

E. Lynn Usery, Geography Discipline, Rolla, Mo.

Nathan J. Wood, Geography Discipline, Portland, Oreg.
vi 

Contents

Preface ........................................................................................................................................................... v

Executive Summary..................................................................................................................................... ix

Acknowledgements................................................................................................................................... xvi

List of Acronyms ...................................................................................................................................... xviii

Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 1

Geographic Research and the USGS Mission......................................................................................... 6

Goal 1: Characterize and quantify land surface status and trends to provide 

a framework for understanding change patterns and processes from 

local to global scales ................................................................................................................................... 9

Goal 2: Identify local, regional, national, and global drivers of land change to

forecast plausible land change scenarios over the next 20-50 years.................................................... 13

Goal 3: Understand past, present, and future environmental consequences

of land change to support better management of their effect on people,

environment, economy, and resources .................................................................................................. 15

Goal 4: Improve the scientific basis for vulnerability and risk assessment, 

mitigation, response, and recovery related to the human and environmental

dynamics of land change .......................................................................................................................... 18

Goal 5. Develop credible and accessible geographic research, tools, and

methods to support decisionmaking related to the human and environmental

consequences of land change ................................................................................................................... 23

Goal 6: Develop and test hypotheses about the use of geographic regions to 

understand the human and environmental dynamics of land change .............................................. 27

Goal 7: Observe the Earth at all scales using remote sensing to understand the 

human and environmental dynamics of land change........................................................................... 31

Goal 8: Provide timely, intelligent access to new and archived USGS geographic 

data needed to conduct science and support policy decisions......................................................... 37

Goal 9: Develop innovative methods of modeling and information synthesis, 

fusion, and visualization to improve our ability to explore geographic data 

and create new knowledge ...................................................................................................................... 41

Operational Objectives .............................................................................................................................. 44

Next Steps.................................................................................................................................................... 48

References Cited ........................................................................................................................................ 49

Glossary........................................................................................................................................................ 52
vii

Sidebars

I-1. USGS Geography research rramework, 2005-2015......................................................................... 2

I-2 Key science plan terms......................................................................................................................... 3

I-3 Current and potential science partners for geography at USGS................................................... 7

1.1 Establishing a land change science center of excellence........................................................... 10

1.2 Establishing science-driven land status and trends characterization ....................................... 11

1.3 Developing the land-use and land-cover history of North America ........................................... 12

2.1 Establishing capabilities for driving forces and land change projection................................... 15

3.1 Assessing the environmental consequences of land change ..................................................... 17

3.2 Developing a comprehensive capability to assess the effects and

feedback between land change and environmental responses ................................................. 17

4.1 Establishing a vulnerability and resilience science center of excellence................................. 19

4.2 Improving the Nation’s ability to mitigate, respond to, and 

recover from hazards.......................................................................................................................... 21

5.1 Improving the use of USGS science in decisionmaking ............................................................... 25

6.1 Improving the development, evaluation, use, and understanding

of ecological region frameworks...................................................................................................... 29

6.2 Developing regional databases......................................................................................................... 30

7.1 Custodian of the Nation’s global Earth observations .................................................................... 32

7.2 Expanding the use of remote sensing for Earth observation ....................................................... 33 

7.3 Improving access and use of USGS remote sensing archives.................................................... 34

7.4 Monitoring the changing Earth using remote sensing .................................................................. 35 

8.1 Establishing a GIScience center of excellence.............................................................................. 38

8.2 Improving access to geospatial data ............................................................................................... 39

8.3 High priority data for The National Map .......................................................................................... 40

9.1 Using geographic data to create new knowledge......................................................................... 43

Highlights

1. Connecting Our Past and Revitalizing Our Future ............................................................................... 5

2. Monitoring the Cycle of Land-Cover Change..................................................................................... 12

3. Land-Use Change and the Carbon Cycle............................................................................................ 17

4. Supporting Fire Response Needs for the Nation............................................................................... 22

5. Developing Indicators to Support Famine Prevention Efforts......................................................... 26

6. Choosing an Ecological Region Framework to Guide Global Change Investigations ................. 30

7. Applications of Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) Technology................................................ 35

8. Map-Projection Software for Global Raster Data sets .................................................................... 43 
viii 

Figures 

1: Coupled framework for assessing land change, vulnerability, and resilience...................... 4

2: Changing land-cover near Lakeland, Florida............................................................................. 12

3: GeoMAC Wildfire Viewer.............................................................................................................. 22

4. Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI) used in FEWS NET activities .................. 26

5: World Wildlife Fund ecoregions: 35° N transect ...................................................................... 30

6a: Elevation and imagery fusion of LIDAR point cloud.................................................................. 35

6b: Vegetation LIDAR point cloud ...................................................................................................... 36

6c: Three dimensional virtual city from LIDAR................................................................................. 36

7a. Global land cover projected with commercial GIS software.................................................. 43

7b. Global land cover projected with USGS maping software...................................................... 44
ix

Executive Summary

This report presents a science strategy for the geographic research of the U.S. Geological Survey 

(USGS) for the years 2005-2015. The common thread running through the vision, mission, and 

science goals presented in the plan is that USGS geographers will provide national leadership 

to understand coupled human-environmental systems in the face of land change and will deliver 

pertinent information to decisionmakers on the vulnerability and resilience of these systems. 

We define land change science as the study of the human and environment dynamics that give 

rise to changed land use, cover, and surface form. 

A number of realities shape the strategic context of this plan:

• The Department of Interior Strategic Plan focuses on meeting society’s resource needs and 

sustaining the Nation’s life support systems, underscoring the importance of characterizing 

and understanding coupled human-environmental systems.

• In redefining its mission in the mid-1990s, the USGS envisions itself as an integrated natural 

science and information agency. The USGS will assume a national leadership role in the 

use of science to develop knowledge about the web of relations that couple biophysical and 

human systems and translate this knowledge into unbiased, reliable information that meets 

important societal information needs.

• The following trends will influence USGS geography-oriented science activities over the 

next decade. Most of the emerging earth science issues that the USGS will address are 

geographic phenomena. A growing international concern for aligning society’s development 

activities with environmental limits has led to an articulation of a science agenda associated 

with global environmental change, vulnerability, and resilience. Earth science investigations have evolved toward the study of very large areas, and the resulting huge volumes of 

data are challenging to manage and understand. Finally, scientists and the public face the 

challenge of gaining intelligent insights about geographic and environmental processes from 

these data, with the ultimate goal of guiding resource-management decisions.

The first four science goals in the plan support understanding the human and environmental 

dynamics of land change. Each science goal has an associated set of strategic actions to 

achieve the goal. These goals and actions are consistent with national science priorities and 

the Department of Interior and USGS missions, take advantage of existing expertise, and lead 

to the strengthening of critical geographic research capacities that do not exist in other USGS 

disciplines.

Goal 1: Characterize and quantify land surface status and trends to 

provide a framework for understanding change patterns and processes 

from local to global scales. 

• Strategic Action 1.1: Establish a center of excellence focusing on land change science.
x 

• Strategic Action 1.2: Expand global capabilities to map and measure land cover and landcover change at multiple scales that are locally relevant yet globally consistent. 

• Strategic Action 1.3: Determine how much of the annual national and global land changes 

result from natural and human influences. 

• Strategic Action 1.4: Establish an operational global ecosystem monitoring system that 

continuously measures and characterizes the current status of ecosystem goods and services 

to estimate and explain deviations from normal conditions. 

• Strategic Action 1.5: Establish a consistent, repeatable methodology that identifies the 

changes in the topographic form of the Nation at appropriate intervals. 

• Strategic Action 1.6: Develop and implement a strategy that leads to a clearer understanding of the characteristics and changes in the urban environment. 

• Strategic Action 1.7: Develop spatially explicit reconstructions of the land use and land 

cover of the North American landscape to provide the context and baseline for future 

resource management and public policy.

Goal 2: Identify local, regional, national, and global drivers of land 

change to forecast plausible land change scenarios over the next 20-50 

years.

• Strategic Action 2.1: Establish an ongoing capability of assessing the social, economic, 

political, technological, and environmental influences on land change.

• Strategic Action 2.2: Conduct studies on the geographic variability of the types of 

responses associated with specific drivers (such as globalization, new technology, and policies) on land change and determine how those responses operate at different scales.

• Strategic Action 2.3: Validate the theoretical basis of land-use change by using data from 

landscape-dynamics research. 

• Strategic Action 2.4: The USGS researchers will partner with the scientists outside of 

USGS in developing land change simulation models. 

Goal 3: Understand past, present, and future environmental 

consequences of land change to support better management of their 

effect on people, environment, economy, and resources.

• Strategic Action 3.1: Conduct research on the consequences of land change on climate, 

water, carbon cycle, ecosystems, invasive species, and societal concerns.
xi

• Strategic Action 3.2: Conduct research on specific consequences of land-use and landcover patterns and changes for environmental health and public safety issues, particularly at 

the boundaries between developed and wildland areas.

• Strategic Action 3.3: Conduct research leading to improved capabilities to assess wildfire 

conditions, predict wildfire potential, prioritize treatment areas, and monitor effectiveness of 

fire treatments to support risk-reduction efforts in the urban-natural landscape interface.

• Strategic Action 3.4: Conduct research on the feedbacks between land change and environmental systems and resources.

Goal 4. Improve the scientific basis for vulnerability and risk 

assessment, mitigation, response, and recovery related to the human and 

environmental dynamics of land change. 

• Strategic Action 4.1: Establish a center of excellence focusing on vulnerability and resilience science and the integration of science with decisionmaking.

• Strategic Action 4.2: Investigate effects of land-use and land-cover change, such as urbanization and resource use, on creating hazards and human-environment system vulnerability.

• Strategic Action 4.3: Improve research capacity to model vulnerability and resilience to 

natural and anthropogenic hazards.

• Strategic Action 4.4: Improve understanding of the influences of societal perceptions, policies, and land-use practices on societal vulnerability and resilience.

• Strategic Action 4.5: Develop and implement a monitoring program that provides perspectives at multiple scales of vulnerability and resilience to adverse land change. 

• Strategic Action 4.6: Develop and apply innovative geographic and economic methods to 

assess the effects of proposed scenarios for hazard mitigation strategies and risk management.

• Strategic Action 4.7: Provide innovative geographic methods and techniques to help secure 

the safety of the Nation in emergency response and recovery efforts.

Accomplishing these first four science goals will require a sustained investment in the geography-related core competencies of the USGS: integration of natural and social science (transmitting science results to decisionmakers and the public in forms that are useful for promoting 

the welfare of the Nation); regional geography (applying the concepts and tools of geography 

to understand processes and interactions characteristic of regions); remote sensing (comprehensive monitoring of the Earth at multiple resolutions); and GIScience (geographic information 

systems, data management techniques, visualization, remote sensing, and spatial statistics and 

modeling). The last five science goals in the science plan address these core competencies.
xii 

Goal 5. Develop credible and accessible geographic research, tools, 

and methods to support decisionmaking related to the human and 

environmental consequences of land change.

• Strategic Action 5.1: Establish a science and decisionmaking focus within the vulnerability 

and resilience science center of excellence.

• Strategic Action 5.2: Improve our understanding of the motivations and processes used by 

decisionmakers to manage and adapt to land change. 

• Strategic Action 5.3: Develop innovative and effective mechanisms for identifying needs 

and opportunities for science to support decisionmaking.

• Strategic Action 5.4: Develop a national toolbox of metrics, indicators, models, and 

decision support systems that characterize the environmental, social, and economic consequences of land change.

• Strategic Action 5.5: Conduct multidisciplinary case studies to support environmental policy 

analysis and hazard risk-reduction efforts.

• Strategic Action 5.6: Develop and apply methods for examining the value, format, and 

transfer of knowledge for societal decisionmaking and policy analysis.

Goal 6: Develop and test hypotheses about the use of geographic regions 

to understand the human and environmental dynamics of land change.

• Strategic Action 6.1: Include a regional geography emphasis within the land change science center of excellence. 

• Strategic Action 6.2: Take a leadership role in working with the USEPA, States, and other 

Federal agencies in completing the USEPA Level IV Ecoregion framework. 

• Strategic Action 6.3: Provide ongoing assistance to scientists in the USGS and DOI in the 

development and use of regional frameworks. 

• Strategic Action 6.4: Conduct research to answer questions associated with four priority 

issues related to regional frameworks: regional identity, regional boundaries, hierarchical 

relations, and regional ecosystem functioning. 

• Strategic Action 6.5: Use a hierarchical local-regional-national-global approach to improve 

understanding of the phenomena and processes that cause land change. 

• Strategic Action 6.6: Articulate a set of scaling rules for describing the mechanisms of land 

change that can be used for generalizing local study findings to larger scales.

• Strategic Action 6.7: Establish regional data observatories and archives in conjunction with USGS programs, the NSF Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) Network, 
xiii

National Ecological Observatory Network (NEON), the National Acid Precipitation 

Program, NOAA, NASA, and other organizations that collect earth-science and 

biological data. 

Goal 7. Observe the Earth at all scales using remote sensing to 

understand the human and environmental dynamics of land change.

• Strategic Action 7.1: Survey the requirements of the DOI, USGS, other government agencies, and the international remote sensing community for environmental data and monitoring, 

and define the remote sensing capabilities needed for current and future applications.

• Strategic Action 7.2: Investigate new technologies for Earth observation and define the 

specifications for the remote sensing capabilities needed to meet current and future Earth 

observation and monitoring requirements. 

• Strategic Action 7.3: Undertake an aggressive role in the development and continuation of 

the Nation’s participation in the Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS).

• Strategic Action 7.4: Consolidate and convert the Nation’s vast and dispersed historical 

aerial photography into an electronically accessible USGS remote sensing archive in a format 

that enables studies of the Earth’s land-cover/land-use history. 

• Strategic Action 7.5: Develop a plan for the preservation of USGS remote sensing archive 

data that ensures the long-term availability of those data to support science investigations.

• Strategic Action 7.6: Conduct research on advanced data access and mining capabilities 

that leads to robust use of the USGS remote sensing archive for the purpose of gaining 

knowledge about the Earth’s dynamic history at multiple scales and temporal periods. 

• Strategic Action 7.7: Conduct research that leads to the calibration of all appropriate USGS 

remote sensing assets.

• Strategic Action 7.8: Define and test protocols for determining the uncertainty, accuracy, 

and precision of products derived from USGS remotely sensed data. 

• Strategic Action 7.9: Define the analytical methods needed to make better use of data 

from current and future remote sensing instruments for accurate measuring and mapping of 

landscape properties, including land-cover status, ecosystem services, and surface form.

• Strategic Action 7.10: Establish training and outreach activities that provide technical 

advice and support needed to incorporate USGS remote sensing capabilities into the DOI and 

USGS programs and projects. 
xiv 

Goal 8: Provide timely, intelligent access to new and archived USGS 

geographic data needed to conduct science and support policy decisions.

• Strategic Action 8.1: Establish a GIScience center of excellence.

• Strategic Action 8.2: Improve understanding of The National Map user needs, both inside 

and outside of the USGS. 

• Strategic Action 8.3: Address research questions on the topic of geographic representation, 

including data model issues associated with multiple resolution data and data integration 

and fusion, uncertainty representation, and human cognition of the dimensions of geographic 

phenomena in a computer environment.

• Strategic Action 8.4: Research and develop design and symbolization specifications and 

innovative methods that support The National Map viewer and other geographic data displays on a large variety of display devices. 

• Strategic Action 8.5: Research and develop automated methods for generalization to support multiple-scale display and delivery of The National Map and other USGS geographic 

data. 

• Strategic Action 8.6: Build a critical mass of USGS scientists familiar with and able to 

exploit new developments in spatial data mining and knowledge discovery in supporting The 

National Map and other large spatial databases. 

• Strategic Action 8.7: Develop specifications and analytical methods and tools for use in 

producing widely used, high-priority data layers for The National Map.

Goal 9: Develop innovative methods of modeling and information 

synthesis, fusion, and visualization to improve our ability to explore 

geographic data and create new knowledge.

• Strategic Action 9.1: Address research questions on the topic of information synthesis and 

fusion.

• Strategic Action 9.2: Address research questions on the topic of map and geographic 

database projections.

• Strategic Action 9.3: Address research questions on the topic of geographic visualization.

• Strategic Action 9.4: Research and develop methods and techniques in modeling and geostatistics to exploit geographic data.

During the next 10 years, the focus of USGS geography activities will change from an emphasis 

on production-oriented cartographic excellence to an emphasis on research as a full partner in 

USGS science efforts. The transition to a research and science emphasis will require a transformation of the USGS geography culture. Key objectives of this transformation include vigorous 
xv

leadership, research-oriented science management, effective communication, focused growth in 

the addition of researchers, an effective annual science planning process, and the use of education to increase the understanding and use of geography to serve the USGS and DOI missions. 

Six operational objectives will stimulate progress in attaining the science goals and provide 

benchmarks for evaluating progress in the transformation of the geography culture at USGS.

• Objective 1 – Greatly enhance the leadership on behalf of research-based geography at 

USGS. 

• Objective 2 – Increase the number of experienced, competent geography science managers 

that are excited about and committed to managing scientists on behalf of the science plan 

priorities. 

• Objective 3 – Communicate and highlight the competencies of USGS geographers, identify 

the science needs of potential collaborators, and establish ongoing relationships with the 

geographic research community outside of the USGS. 

• Objective 4 – Develop and implement a USGS geography workforce plan that supports a 

critical mass of geography researchers able to sustain a high level of excellence in research 

and applications on behalf of the priorities identified in the geography science plan.

• Objective 5 – Develop a more efficient, focused process to guide the annual science 

planning. 

• Objective 6 – Expand geographic awareness of scientists at the USGS and DOI.

This plan charges the USGS with developing sound scientific approaches that will support 

assessments of land change and its human-environmental consequences, create innovative 

GIScience tools and methods for the entire USGS, and enhance the benefits of USGS science for 

decisionmaking. The science described in this plan addresses large, compelling challenges. The 

successful accomplishment of the plan requires engaging multiple disciplines in the physical, 

biological, and social sciences, considering the entire land area of a large Nation, and recognizing that the Nation’s changing landscape must be considered in a global context.
xvi 

Lee Allison (Kansas Geological Survey)

David Applegate (USGS)

Kwabena Asante (SAIC/USGS)

Dan Ashe (FWS)

Thomas Baerwald (NSF)

Bryan Bailey (USGS)

Lee Barkow (BLM)

Jill Baron (USGS)

Bart Bartlein (University of Oregon)

William Battaglin (USGS)

Richard Bernknopf (USGS)

Kenneth Boyko (USGS)

Clint Brown (ESRI)

Nina Burkardt (USGS)

Ray Byrnes (USGS)

Rex Cammack (SMSU)

Dan Carr (George Mason University)

Michael Carr (USGS)

Thomas Casadevall (USGS)

Pete Chirico (USGS)

Pam Clemmer (BLM)

Thomas Cuffney (USGS)

Anthony De Souza (NRC)

Lee DeCola (USGS)

Mark Demulder (USGS)

John Dennis (NPS)

Laura Dinitz (USGS)

Michael Domaratz (USGS)

Roger Downs (Pennsylvania State Univ.)

Paul Dresler (USGS)

Mark Drummond (USGS)

Elizabeth Duffie (USGS)

John Dwyer (SAIC/USGS)

Jeffrey Eidenshink (USGS)

Keith Elliott (USGS)

Max Ethridge (USGS)

Mark Feller (USGS)

Jay Feuquay (USGS)

Michael Finn (USGS)

Carol Finn (USGS)

James Flaherty (USGS)

Eugene Fosnight (SAIC/USGS)

Janet Franklin (SDSU)

Anne Frondorf (USGS)

Sven Fuhrmann (Pennsylvania State Univ.)

Kevin Gallo (NOAA)

Martha Garcia (USGS)

Leonard Gaydos (USGS)

Robert Gilliom (USGS)

Keith Good (MMS)

Elizabeth Graffy (USGS)

Rhea Graham (Pueblo of Sandia)

David Greenlee (USGS)

Susan Greenlee (USGS)

Chip Groat (USGS)

John Gross (NPS)

Glenn Guntenspergen (USGS)

Diansheng Guo (Pennsylvania State Univ.)

Stephen Guptill (USGS)

Paul Hearn (USGS)

Dennis Helder (SDSU)

David Hester (USGS)

Robert Hijmans (Univ. of Calif., Berkeley)

Robert Hirsch (USGS)

Richard Hogan (USGS)

Rick Hooper (CUAHSI)

George Hornberger (University of Virginia)

Stephen Howard (USGS)

Michael Hutt (USGS)

Jeffrey Imes (USGS)

Robert Jacobson (USGS)

Kathleen Johnson (USGS)

Gregg Johnson (SAIC/USGS)

Carol Johnston (SDSU)

William Kaiser (USGS)

John Kelmelis (USGS)

David Kirtland (USGS)

Bob Klaver (SAIC/USGS)

Gary Krizanich (USGS)

Nicholas Lancaster (USGS)

John Landis (Univ. of Calif., Berkeley)

Arnold Landvoigt (NSA)

William Langer (USGS)

Matthew Larsen (USGS)

Acknowledgments

The Geography Science Planning Team has benefited from the advice of thoughtful colleagues 

throughout the planning effort and is grateful to recognize the assistance of:
xvii

Elizabeth Lile (USGS)

Xavier Lopex (Oracle)

Roberto Lugo (USGS)

Tom Lupo (CA Fish and Game)

Peter Lyttle (USGS)

David Mark (Univ. Buffalo)

Carl Markon (USGS)

Deborah Maxwell (USGS)

Lindsay McClelland (NPS)

Tim McGrath (Microsoft)

Jim Merchant (Univ. Nebraska)

Timothy Miller (USGS)

Carol Mladinich (USGS)

Laurence Moore (USGS)

Douglas Muchoney (USGS)

V. Rama Murthy (Univ. Minnesota)

Donna Myers (USGS)

Marilyn Myers (USGS)

Mark Naftzger (USGS)

Tom Owens (USGS)

Robin O’Malley (Heinz Center)

James Omernik (USGS/EPA)

Jean Parcher (USGS)

Monica Parisi (CA Fish and Game)

P. Patrick (USGS)

Jean Paulson (USGS)

Milan Pavich (USGS)

Ed Pfeifer (USGS)

Barbara Poore (USGS)

Curtis Price (USGS)

Raymond Price (Queen’s University)

Vivian Queija (USGS)

James Quick (USGS)

Jim Quinn (Univ. of Calif., Davis)

Sharyl Rabinovici (USGS)

Michael Ratcliffe (Census Bureau)

Bradley Reed (SAIC/USGS)

Douglas Richardson (AAG)

Kernell Ries (USGS)

Napthali Rishe (FIU)

Donna Roy (USGS)

David Sawyer (USGS)

Randy Schumann (USGS)

Gregory Schwarz (USGS)

Mike Scott (USGS/Univ. of Idaho)

Gabriel Senay (SAIC/USGS)

Terry Sexson (FWS)

Sarah Shafer (USGS)

Carl Shapiro (USGS)

Mark Shasby (USGS)

Karen Siderelis (USGS)

Benjamin Sleeter (USGS)

Terry Slocum (University of Kansas)

Greg Smith (NGA)

David Soller (USGS)

Jeffrey Spooner (USGS)

Steven Stanley (JHU)

Michael Starbuck (USGS)

Daniel Steinwand (SAIC/USGS)

Michael Stier (USGS)

David Stockwell (SDSC)

Thomas Stohlgren (USGS)

James Stone (BLM)

Sean Stone (USGS)

Michael Story (NPS)

Jim Sturdevant (USGS)

Charisse Sydoriak (BLM)

Gail Thelin (USGS)

Robert Thompson (USGS)

June Thormodsgard (USGS)

Larry Tieszen (USGS)

Alicia Torregrosa (USGS)

Billie Turner (Clark University)

Dalia Varanka (USGS)

James Verdin (USGS)

James Vogelmann (SAIC/USGS)

Bill Walker (USGS)

Cynthia Wallace (USGS)

Janice Ward (USGS)

Raymond Watts (USGS)

Suzanne Weedman (USGS)

Tom Wilbanks (ORNL)

Alexander Wood (USGS)

Connie Woodhouse (NOAA)

Zhi-Liang Zhu (USGS)

Richard Zirbes (USGS)

NRC Board of Earth Science and Resources
xviii

LIST OF ACRONYMS

AAG – Association of American Geographers

BLM – Bureau of Land Management

CEOS – Committee on Earth Observation 

Satellites

CRADA – Cooperative Research and 

Development Agreement

DEM – Digital Elevation Model

DHS – Department of Homeland Security

DOI – Department of the Interior

EDGE – Equipment Development Grade

EDC – Earth Resources Observation System 

(EROS) Data Center, USGS

ESD – Earth Surface Dynamics Program

FEMA – Federal Emergency Management 

Agency

FEWS NET – The Famine Early Warning 

Systems Network

FWS – U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

GEO – Group on Earth Observation

GeoMAC – Geospatial Multi-Agency 

Coordination

GEOSS – The Global Earth Observation 

System of Systems

GIMMS – Global Inventory Monitoring and 

Modeling Studies

GIO – Geographic Information Office

GIS – Geographic Information System

GPS – A Global Positioning System

GSC – Geography Science Council

IGOS – International Global Observation 

Strategy

IR – Infrared

NSDI – National Spatial Data Infrastructure

LIDAR – Light Detection and Ranging

LTER – Long-Term Ecological Research

MODIS – Moderate Resolution Imaging 

Spectroradiometer

MSS – Multispectral Scanner

NAS – National Academy of Sciences

NASA – National Aeronautics and Space 

Administration

NAWQA – National Water-Quality 

Assessment Program

NDVI – Normalized Difference Vegetation 

Index

NEON – National Environmental Observatory 

Network

NGA – National Geospatial-Intelligence 

Agency

NGPO – National Geospatial Programs Office

NHD – National Hydrography Dataset

NLCD – National Land-Cover Database

NOAA – National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration

NPS – National Park Service

NRC – National Research Council

NRS – National Refuge System

NSDI – National Spatial Data Infrastructure

NSF – National Science Foundation

RGE – Research Grade Evaluation

RSR – Research Scientist Record

SPT – Science Planning Team

TM – Thematic Mapper

UCGIS – University Consortium for 

Geographic Information Science

USAID – U.S. Agency for International 

Development

USDA – U.S. Department of Agriculture

USEPA – U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency

USGS – U.S. Geological Survey

WBD – Watershed Boundary Dataset

WWF – World Wildlife Fund

3-D – Three-Dimensional
Geography for a Changing World

A Science Strategy for the Geographic Research

of the U.S. Geological Survey, 2005-2015

By Gerard McMahon, Susan P. Benjamin, Keith Clarke, John E. Findley, Robert N. Fisher, William L. Graf, 

Linda C. Gundersen, John W. Jones, Thomas R. Loveland, Keven S. Roth, E. Lynn Usery, and Nathan J. Wood

Introduction

How will urban, suburban, and exurban 

development over the next 50 years affect 

biodiversity management throughout the National 

Refuge System?

Given that climate changes of the past 300 

years have occurred at the same time as rapid 

agricultural development, what are the relative 

effects of climate change compared to the human 

activities on regional, continental, and global 

landscapes?

How do humans affect the rates and spatial patterns 

of the spread of harmful, non-indigenous species 

and pathogens such as tamarisk, non-native fishes, 

and West Nile virus? 

How do different land-use patterns and regulatory 

scenarios potentially affect the risk of property 

losses in earthquake-prone areas?

What are the environmental and social changes 

arising from the multiple uses of Federal 

public lands, and how do these uses affect the 

sustainability of coupled human-environmental 

systems?

What are the ecosystem indicators of threats to 

the overall integrity of human and environmental 

systems?

Each of these questions falls within the scope of the U.S. 

Geological Survey (USGS), whose mission includes science 

leadership and excellence directed at describing and understanding the Earth; minimizing losses of life and property 

from natural disasters; managing water, biological, energy, 

and mineral resources; and enhancing the quality of life (U.S. 

Geological Survey, 2000). The questions also are inherently 

geographic, focusing on the evolving character of the Earthʼs 

surface, the ways in which natural and social phenomena and 

processes interact to create unique places, and on the influence 

that local places have on a broader temporal and spatial realm. 

Geographic variability and the spatial interaction of natural and social processes are fundamental characteristics of the 

world, and our understanding of the world is incomplete without careful analysis of this variability and interaction. Geographic research improves this understanding by (1) providing 

a place-based perspective focused on understanding places, (2) 

considering flows of matter, energy, commodities, people, and 

ideas between places, (3) integrating knowledge from multiple 

disciplines or fields to understand the places and their interconnections, and (4) using unique geographic tools ranging 

from maps to spatial visualization and data mining tools. 

Geographic understanding is not defined by any single 

subject or discipline, such as the case for geology (the science 

of the earth), biology (the science of life), or hydrology (the 

science of water). Rather, geography is a science that defines 

itself by its approach, somewhat like history. History offers 

understanding of the world by examining the variation of 

phenomena through time. Geography offers understanding of 

the world by explaining variation across space. Geography 

is the science of place and space, an intellectual enterprise 

that emphasizes the interaction between nature and society by 

focusing on the characteristics of places or regions, the spatial 

connections between places, and the variation of social or natural phenomena across scales of analysis (National Research 

Council, 1997). Because of its particular world view, geography is a logical partner for geology, biology, and hydrology. 

As a discipline, geography often is integrative, combining the 

insights of other disciplines and facilitating their investigation 

with special analytical tools and perspectives. 
2 Geography for a Changing World 

Geography lies at the heart of the intellectual traditions 

that support the USGS mission as the Department of Interiorʼs 

(DOI) primary science agency. This science plan presents a 

vision for geographic research at the USGS during the decade 

2005-2015 by describing nine specific goals that contribute 

to the vision and mission of the USGS (see Sidebar I-1). For 

each science goal, the plan identifies a series of strategic 

actions and linkages and partners for achieving the actions and 

provides performance measures for judging progress. 

The common threads running through the vision, mission, and goals are that USGS geography researchers will 

provide national leadership to understand coupled humanenvironmental systems in the face of land change, and they 

will deliver pertinent information on the vulnerability and 

resilience of these systems to decisionmakers (see Sidebar I-2 

for definitions of key terms). Geographers will lead USGS 

research associated with the human and environmental dynamics of land change, regional geography, remote sensing, and 

GIScience (geographic information systems, data management techniques, visualization, and spatial statistics) needed to 

support land change research. Geography researchers also will 

provide leadership for cross-discipline integration of the many 

streams of USGS research, so that the knowledge developed 

about coupled human-environment systems provides a complete, functional view of the systems.

 For example, USGS biologists will benefit from forecasting models for land change that support assessments of future 

biodiversity prospects in wildlife refuges. GIScience will 

enhance the creation and implementation of The National Map

by focusing on fusing information from multiple scales and 

the use of interactive, dynamic visualization tools to examine 

multivariate geospatial data sets. USGS geologists who assess 

the spatial extent and probability of volcano hazards will see 

the value of their hazard assessment work extended by linking 

these assessments with an understanding of societal vulnerability, such as the potential property value loss arising from 

various land management scenarios. Finally, hydrologists will 

benefit from assessments of land change trends that influence 

streamflow and water quality. Collaboration with USGS biologists, geologists, and hydrologists, and with scientists from 

other DOI bureaus, university-based scientists, and scientists 

from national and international science organizations must be 

a hallmark of USGS geographic research activity in the next 

decade. 

The remainder of this chapter describes a framework for 

geographic research at the USGS. Subsequent chapters discuss strategic opportunities for USGS geographic research, the 

research framework for understanding the influence of land 

change on human-environmental systems, and science goals 

associated with core geographic competencies needed to support research on coupled human-environmental systems. The 

final chapter reviews operational objectives that will enhance 

the likelihood of success in the planʼs implementation.

Sidebar I-1: USGS geography research 

framework, 2005-2015

Vision: The USGS will lead the Nation in advancing 

geographic science by improving and expanding earth 

observation and by integrating natural and social science 

knowledge for more informed decisionmaking.

Mission 

1. Understand the human and environmental dynamics of 

land change.

2. Provide leadership in sustaining the Nationʼs core 

geography competencies: regional geography, the integration of natural and social sciences, and GIScience, 

including modeling and remote sensing of earth systems.

3. Develop and apply innovative methods to understand 

and improve linkages between science and decisionmaking. 

4. Establish creative and synergistic partnerships nationally and globally to create new knowledge, leverage 

resources, and support the geographic mission of the 

USGS.

USGS geographic science goals for the next 10 years

1. Characterize and quantify land surface status and trends 

to provide a framework for understanding change patterns and processes from local to global scales.

2. Identify local, regional, national, and global drivers of 

land change to forecast plausible land change scenarios 

over the next 20-50 years.

3. Understand past, present, and future environmental consequences of land change to support better 

management of their effect on people, environment, 

economy, and resources.

4. Improve the scientific basis for vulnerability and risk 

assessment, mitigation, response, and recovery related 

to the human and environmental dynamics of land 

change. 

5. Develop credible and accessible geographic research, 

tools, and methods to support decisionmaking related 

to the human and environmental consequences of land 

change. 

6. Develop and test hypotheses about the use of geographic regions to understand the human and environmental dynamics of land change.

7. Observe the Earth at all scales using remote sensing to 

understand the human and environmental dynamics of 

land change.

8. Provide timely, intelligent access to new and archived 

USGS geographic data needed to conduct science and 

support policy decisions. 

9. Develop innovative methods of modeling and information synthesis, fusion, and visualization to improve 

our ability to explore geographic data and create new 

knowledge.
Geography for a Changing World 3

Sidebar I-2: Key science plan terms

Coupled Human-Environment System: This term refers to the interactions between human and environmental systems. 

It includes the study of the interrelations of people and biological-biophysical-biogeochemical processes, and how their 

modifications feed back to global environmental changes to affect the sustainability of the overall system. Coupled humanenvironment system research recognizes that the choices people make about land use depend on the complex interactions 

between demographic, socio-economic, institutional, physical, biogeochemical, and biological factors.

GIScience: Provides information about places on the Earthʼs surface, knowledge about where geographic features are 

located, and knowledge about what is at a particular location.

Hazard: An agent or process of land change that has the potential to harm individuals, societies, and natural resources. 

Natural or human-induced hazards can manifest themselves as sudden perturbations or slowly increasing stresses beyond the 

normal range of variability in a system.

Land Change: Land change science is the study of the human and environment dynamics that give rise to changed land use, 

cover, and surface form. This analysis includes understanding changes in land attributes (for example, type, magnitude, and 

location) and the effects of those changes on society, the environment, and resources.

Regional Geography: Provides a cross-cutting way of looking at processes and phenomena characteristic of a region, both 

in a vertical sense (integrating the understanding of physical, biological, social, and cultural processes at a single place) 

and horizontally (examining the interactions among these processes occurring between places, such as within a region or 

among regions).

Resilience: Ability of a system to mitigate or adapt to potential hazards, as well as respond and recover from effects after 

an event.

Vulnerability: Potential for loss or damage. The vulnerability of human-environment systems is defined not only by exposure to hazards (both perturbations and stressors) but also in the sensitivity and resilience of the system.

A geography research framework for the 

next decade

Over the next decade implementation of a USGS geographic research agenda will support a four-part mission to:

1) Understand the human and environmental dynamics of 

land change;

2) Provide leadership in sustaining the Nationʼs core geography competencies needed to understand land change 

dynamics–GIScience, remote sensing, regional geography, 

and the integration of natural and social sciences;

3) Develop and apply innovative methods to understand and 

improve linkages between science and decisionmaking; 

and

4) Establish creative and synergistic partnerships nationally 

and globally to create new knowledge, leverage resources, 

and support the geographic mission of the USGS.

The USGS geography mission is aligned with national 

science priorities that stress the importance of understanding 

land change and its consequences as part of a coupled humanenvironmental system (National Research Council, 1995; 

1997; 2001a; 2001b; 2002; 2003a; 2003b; Turner and others, 

2003; Rindfuss and others, 2004). By providing the basis for 

well-informed decisions about pressing societal issues in the 

coming decades, geographic research will support the overall USGS mission, particularly the emphasis on developing 

integrated knowledge and tools to support the science needs of 

decisionmakers and citizens. The proposed research activities 

also build on areas of current USGS geography expertise and, 

when the plan is completely implemented, it will place geographers in the mainstream of the USGS tradition of science 

excellence, leadership, and impact. 

Land change and human-environmental systems

The fundamental objective of USGS geographic research 

is to understand the dynamics of land change associated with 

biophysical systems (such as land-cover, climate, invasive 
4 Geography for a Changing World 

species, volcanoes) and human systems expressed as land 

use (science goals 1 and 2). This effort requires an understanding of change as part of a coupled human-environmental system (Turner and others, 2003; Rindfuss and others, 

2004). Research associated with this science goal occurs in a 

conceptual framework that links the occurrence, causes, and 

consequences of land change with human and environmental 

vulnerability and resilience in the face of change (science 

goals 3 and 4; fig. 1). 

Core competencies

Successful research efforts to understand the human and 

environmental dynamics of land change (science goals 1, 2, 3, 

and 4) require a high level of competency in selected aspects 

of geographyʼs intellectual traditions and methods. Important 

competencies include the integration of natural and social 

sciences to support decisionmaking (science goal 5), regional 

geography (science goal 6), earth observations using remote 

sensing (science goal 7), and the provision of geographic data, 

imagery, and knowledge derived from these data (science 

goals 8 and 9). 

Support decisionmaking about coupled humanenvironment systems

Information developed by USGS science activities has 

been used for 125 years to assist management decisions 

related to hazards, the environment, and natural resources. 

In the next century, policymakers and the general public will 

require multi-disciplinary, integrated information that sheds 

light on the operation of the general coupled human-environmental system, and particularly its land-change component.

Partnerships

As demands grow for objective, science-based knowledge 

about the rates, causes, and consequences of land change and 

budgets stagnate for most governmental and non-governmental science activities, the USGS will need to develop a sustainable research infrastructure that leverages limited resources 

to maximum effect. This infrastructure must, as a matter 

of routine, include procedures and relationships to enhance 

Figure 1: Coupled framework for assessing land change, vulnerablility, and resilience (adapted from Turner and others, 2003).
Geography for a Changing World 5

collaboration among scientists and stakeholders inside and 

outside the USGS. Collaboration must occur throughout the 

entire course of science investigation, from identification of 

underlying issues through the design and implementation of 

the science activities.

Realizing this research vision

USGS geography science activities during 2005-2015 

will focus on understanding coupled human-environmental 

systems in the face of land change and on providing information on the vulnerability and resilience of these systems to 

decisionmakers. These efforts will be supported by providing 

leadership in sustaining the Nationʼs core geography competencies in the integration of natural and social sciences, 

regional geography, remote sensing, and GIScience. By the 

end of this 10-year period, successful implementation of 

the plan will result in the recognition of USGS geographers 

as world leaders and valued science colleagues in the areas 

targeted by this plan. The remainder of this plan provides 

additional details about the science goals and associated strategic actions.

This research-oriented mission and the associated science 

goals and actions are intentionally ambitious, given that USGS 

geography activities for most of the last century have focused 

on data creation rather than research-based knowledge development. Implementation of this science plan is intended to 

bring geography into the mainstream of the USGS tradition of 

science excellence, leadership, and impact (National Research 

Council, 2002; Highlight 1). Growing the research culture 

needed to support this ambitious research mission will require 

leadership that focuses on these science goals with a passionate commitment to excellence. It also will require a critical 

mass of geography researchers that can build a tradition of 

geography research excellence and leadership.

Three centers of excellence will serve as the primary 

vehicles for developing a critical mass of researchers around 

the priority general research themes (land change science, 

vulnerability and resilience science, and GIScience including 

remote sensing). The centers will be primary engines in the 

growth of a geographic research culture at USGS, providing 

a focal point and sense of identity for researchers in these 

priority areas. Center scientists, working with other USGS 

scientists, will develop and implement a research agenda 

consistent with the overall priorities of the science plan. 

Important responsibilities of center scientists will include 

providing technical expertise to other USGS and DOI scientists, serving as contacts for questions related to the centerʼs 

subject area, and providing mentoring for young researchers. 

Scientists affiliated with these centers may work in different 

geographic locations, although it will be desirable that a core 

group of researchers be collocated. USGS scientists who are 

not directly affiliated with the centers but who have an active 

interest in the themes addressed by a center can expect center 

scientists to serve as an important part of their extended intellectual community. Centers will be staffed by focused new 

hires and current USGS scientists. All center scientists will be 

part of the USGS research grade evaluation (RGE) system.

The Geography Science Planning Team (SPT) recognizes 

that the number of centers is likely to evolve into a larger 

number over the 10-year planning period to accommodate the 

growth of research activities and staff. A logical evolution 

would include the development of separate centers focusing on 

vulnerability science, integration of science and decisionmaking, GIScience, and remote sensing.

Highlight 1: Connecting Our Past and Revitalizing Our Future

Research on coupled human-environmental systems in the face of land change represents a substantial philosophical and 

operational evolution in emphasis for USGS geographers from their course in recent decades. This evolution results in a set of 

responsibilities more in accord with the important role of geography in the scientific advances achieved in the early years of the 

USGS. Geographers were an integral part of the science accomplishments of USGS at the inception of the agency. The agency 

could not undertake investigations of the Nationʼs mineral, fuel, and water resources, for example, without accurate topographic 

maps to serve as a framework for data representation and analysis. Because of the importance of mapping, early USGS directors 

developed a powerful mapping operation, staffed with the Nationʼs best cartographers and financed by as much as one-half 

of the USGSʼs annual budget. Cartographers collaborated with scientists from other disciplines, particularly geologists, in 

employing expert judgment and the scientific method to synthesize data and observations from exploratory expeditions into 

maps. These maps integrated local and regional information useful to both scientists and the general public. The mapping of the 

Nation, an enormous enterprise that generated more than 55,000 topographic quadrangles worth more than a trillion dollars by 

the 1990s, provided a geographic foundation for scientific investigations of the USGS geology, biology, and water disciplines.

During the 20th century, while USGS geographers were building a foundation of data to serve science, USGS geologists, 

hydrologists, and biologists (inside and outside the USGS) were practicing science, pressing forward with question-driven 

research to investigate natural processes. Geographic research science dwindled in the USGS through the early decades of the 

20th century. In contrast, the quantitative research approaches developed in the field of geography during the 1950s became 

widely used outside the USGS, with emphasis on the spatial dimensions of natural and social processes and the connections 

between nature and society.
6 Geography for a Changing World 

When Arch Gerlach and James Anderson began building the USGSʼs remote sensing and land-cover analytic capabilities 

during the 1970s, geography was revived as a science partner in the USGS and served an important leadership role in these 

two areas. Despite the remote sensing and land-use/land-cover successes, however, geography as a discipline in the USGS is 

still not a full-fledged science partner with the other disciplines. While the agency has almost 1,000 practicing Ph.D. scientists 

in geology, hydrology, and biology, less than a score of Ph.D. geography researchers work at the USGS (National Research 

Council, 2002).

When the USGS was founded, geographers were full partners in basic and applied science activities associated with 

assessing the Nationʼs resources, participating in the western land survey, and in founding the Association of American 

Geographers and the Geological Society of America. Geography was an integral contributor to the intellectual spark that 

ignited great science achievements in the early years of the USGS. This strategic plan presents a new vision and describes how 

geographyʼs world view and core competencies can address strategic needs faced by the USGS over the next decade, as well 

as the importance of using these competencies in concert with partners inside and outside of the USGS. The focus on land 

change, hazards, vulnerability, and resilience represents an opportunity to recapture the intellectual spark and make an important 

contribution to the success of the USGS mission. 

Geographic research and the 

USGS mission

Geography provides a powerful world view; it is the science of space and place, distributions and patterns, networks, 

connections, and flows – all explored at a variety of temporal 

and spatial scales (National Research Council, 1997, 2002; 

Hanson, 2004). Geographers seek to understand the vertical 

characteristics (such as, the interactions of physical, biological, social, and cultural processes occurring in a place) that 

define a place as well as the horizontal connections between 

places. In this place-based framework, geographers focus 

on the relations and dependencies among the processes that 

define the identity of a place. 

Geographers also rely on the synthesis of information 

developed by the natural and social sciences to understand 

the interactions among economic, cultural, and biophysical processes that shape the identity and sustainability of a 

place. Geographic research in this vein is oriented toward 

understanding how human actions modify or transform the 

environment and, conversely, how changes in the biophysical environment affect humans. By understanding how land 

change and human welfare are interconnected and how the 

risks of adverse consequences are perceived by the public and 

by decisionmakers, geographers also can assess options to 

mitigate adverse environmental or societal effects arising from 

land change, including hazards. 

Geographers also depict, manage, represent, and analyze 

spatial data. Geographic research produces practical tools to 

monitor and represent spatial phenomena and relationships, 

facilitate access and use of these data, and create new knowledge from these spatial data. Remote sensing, for example, 

allows the observer to see the earth in ways that cannot be 

seen directly with the human eye, revealing patterns and connections among environmental systems that otherwise would 

be hidden. Other GIScience research supports traditional 

mapping activities related to managing, modeling, and representing geographic data, phenomena, and processes, as well 

as spatial statistics, geospatial visualization, and data mining, 

which are methods that are becoming essential for earth-science applications and research that focus on spatial patterns 

and distributions, networks, and diffusion and distance decay. 

Strategic issues and opportunities for USGS 

geographic sciences

Geographyʼs research and analytical capabilities are well 

suited to address strategic science issues faced by the USGS 

during 2005-2015. The four mission responsibilities defined 

in the DOI Strategic Plan (2003) provide a general strategic 

context for geographic research at USGS. The development and application of scientific knowledge should meet 

the resource needs of society (resource use, recreation) while 

sustaining the life support systems of the Nation (resource 

protection, serving communities). The characterization 

and understanding of the vulnerability and sustainability of 

coupled human-environmental systems are integral to addressing these DOI concerns. 

Following the redefinition of its mission in the mid1990s, the USGS envisions itself as an integrated natural 

science and information agency, assuming a national leadership role in using science to develop knowledge about the web 

of relations that couple biophysical and human systems and 

in translating this knowledge into unbiased, reliable information that meets important societal needs (National Research 

Council, 2002). Four trends will influence USGS geography-oriented science activities over the next decade. First, 

most, if not all, of the emerging earth science issues that the 

USGS will address must be studied as geographic phenomena, 

with location acting as a primary parameter associated with 

research and data (National Research Council, 1997). Second, a growing international concern for aligning societyʼs 

development activities with environmental limits has led to 

an articulation of a science agenda associated with global 

Highlight 1: (cont.)
Geography for a Changing World 7

environmental change, vulnerability, and resilience (Clark 

and Dickson, 2003). Third, earth-science investigations have 

evolved toward the study of very large areas (such as nations, 

continents, and the globe), and the resulting huge volumes of 

data are challenging to manage and understand. Finally, scientists and the public face the challenge of gaining intelligent 

insights about geographic and environmental processes from 

these data to guide resource-management decisions. 

Future directions for geography at the USGS 

Describing and understanding the relation between 

humans and the environment is a central focus of current 

monitoring, research, and applications at USGS (such as 

monitoring biodiversity and earthquake magnitude, assessing 

flood frequency and the recurrence of volcanic activity, and 

creating and testing hypotheses about the relation of land use 

and water quality). Many of these science activities rely on 

expertise and understanding from a single discipline. While 

this science often is conducted at a high level – representing 

national and international leadership – the outcomes of these 

many discipline-specific streams of research often are not 

blended to develop an integrated perspective on important 

societal concerns.

Multi-discipline integration has been a growing focus of 

USGS geographers over the last decade and will be a major 

focus for the next decade. In the next 10 years, USGS geographers will provide national leadership in understanding how 

coupled human-environmental systems respond to change. 

USGS geographers also will provide pertinent information on 

the vulnerability and resilience of these systems to decisionmakers. Additionally, USGS will assume national leadership 

in geographic core competencies in regional geography, the 

integration of natural and social sciences to support decisionmaking, and GIScience—including remote sensing. These 

emphases are responsive to national strategic opportunities, 

and they are consistent with the priorities for USGS science 

described in a series of reports by the National Research 

Council (National Research Council, 2001a; 2002; 2003b). 

Partners

The success of this science plan will require USGS geographers and managers to assume responsibility for identifying and incorporating partners in the planning and execution 

of science activities (Sidebar I-3). The greatest synergy will 

occur when there is a broad understanding of the objectives 

and scientific priorities of all disciplines in the USGS, necessitating initiative, communication skills, and good will among 

the participants. An important objective of this collaboration 

is to avoid duplication of efforts and redundant investments.

Sidebar I-3: Current and potential science 

partners for geography at the USGS

Other USGS disciplines. The U.S. Geological Survey 

Strategic Plan (2000) identified the need for the agency to 

integrate and coordinate scientific investigations, particularly at the planning and research-design stage. Geography 

researchers are poised to facilitate the integration of USGS 

scientific information and help provide scientific results to 

decisionmakers in a way that can be readily used. USGS 

geographers have an important role in providing accurate, 

current geospatial data, particularly associated with elevation, hydrography, and land cover, in a timely manner. The 

National Map will provide the Nation with a consistent 

geospatial framework for geographic knowledge, public 

access to high-quality geospatial data, and integrated information from multiple partners. Full implementation of The 

National Map requires extensive GIScience research. 

Other U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) Agencies. 

As the primary science agency in the DOI, the USGS has 

a special role in meeting the scientific needs of other DOI 

agencies – the National Park Service (NPS), the U.S. Fish 

and Wildlife Service (FWS), the Bureau of Land Management, the Bureau of Reclamation, the Bureau of Indian 

Affairs, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and 

Enforcement, and the Minerals Management Service – in 

managing Federal lands. The USGS provides objective scientific information and interpretation to these agencies and 

helps them in determining the types of monitoring required 

for gauging the success of resource-management policies. 

Among the management needs and issues of DOI landmanagement agencies are: understanding the mechanisms 

associated with the spread of invasive species and how to 

model the vulnerability of public lands to the introduction 

and spread of such organisms; forecasting the landscape 

conditions in areas adjoining Federal lands in the next 

50-100 years, particularly near parks and refuges; forecasting the ecological effects of land changes; accessing 

up-to-date geospatial data regarding roads, park boundaries, land cover, and vegetative cover, particularly in remote 

areas; accessing historical aerial photos and other historical 

records in a georeferenced format that allows analysis of 

historical data on ecological conditions; and continuously 

updating landscape characterizations in and around the 

Nationʼs national parks, monuments, and wildlife refuges. 

Other Federal Agencies. USGS geographers have numerous opportunities to collaborate with Federal agencies 

outside the DOI, particularly the National Aeronautics 

and Space Administration (NASA), National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Department of 

Energy, Department of Defense, U.S. Forest Service, 
8 Geography for a Changing World 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Federal Emergency Management Agency, and National Science Foundation. Interagency integrated science initiatives, including the Climate Change Science Program, also are important forums 

for USGS geographic science. The multidisciplinary approach to problem solving necessitates that this kind of collaboration 

be expanded. For example, NASAʼs Earth Science Enterprise provides another outstanding opportunity for exciting science 

collaboration.

State and Local Agencies. State and local agencies can play a vital role in enhancing the relevance of USGS science initiatives for regional decisionmaking processes. The USGS Geospatial Information Officeʼs (GIO) National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) partnership offices, which are usually collocated with other USGS discipline offices, can help ensure that 

USGS science objectives reflect an understanding of local and regional issues and that collaborative efforts reflect mutually 

beneficial objectives. Partnerships with local customers can enhance communication between USGS geographers and local 

parties and help in securing the best data for research needs. NSDI partnership offices can host local meetings on relevant 

science issues, keep channels of communication open between partners and the USGS, and pursue reimbursable agreements. 

To realize these benefits, communication and coordination between NSDI partnership staff and geography program coordinators must be strengthened.

Academia. USGS geographers do not have a strong tradition of successful collaboration with the academic community and 

must work to develop and expand such collaboration. Stronger ties can be established in several ways, including cooperatively funding graduate students, developing a strong postdoctoral hiring program, and providing support for temporary 

sabbatical appointments. To achieve USGS science goals, geographers will need access to cutting-edge research techniques 

and facilities that may not exist within the USGS. Simultaneously, academic geographers can gain a better appreciation for 

the educational needs of USGS employees. 

Private Sector. The USGS has fostered strong partnerships with the private sector through cooperative research and development agreements (CRADA) and other agreements in the production and distribution of maps. In order to serve the Nation 

better, the USGS must maintain this partnership, particularly in the full implementation of The National Map. Understanding 

the needs and goals of private-sector partners will ensure that collaboration is mutually beneficial. Opportunities for collaboration are particularly promising in the GIScience area. 

Professional Societies. USGS geographers must continue to improve their visibility and cooperate with a wide range of 

professional societies, such as the Association of American Geographers. As members of a broader earth science community, geographers must actively participate in professional meetings and in writing, reviewing, and editing scientific journal 

articles and books. Further, professional societies have made substantial investments in education and outreach, and the 

USGS can explore opportunities for greater collaboration in these areas. Large organizations, such as the Ecological Society 

of America, Geological Society of America, and the American Geophysical Union, represent new areas of opportunity for 

integrating the geographic perspective into the earth and biological sciences. Technical societies, such as the American Society of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing and the Cartographic and Geographic Information Society, also are important 

potential venues for USGS professional participation.

International Agencies and Institutions. Cooperative efforts with earth science agencies in other countries are essential 

given the present transition to a more global economy, the global nature of many earth science problems (such as climate 

variability), and the clear need for global monitoring. USGS leadership and participation in international characterizations of 

land cover and elevation can contribute to the development of national economic and security policies.

Sidebar I-3: Current and potential science partners for geography at the USGS (con’t)
Geography for a Changing World 9

Goal 1: Characterize and quantify land 

surface status and trends to provide a 

framework for understanding change 

patterns and processes from local to 

global scales.

In 2015, land-use and land-cover changes 

arising from human activities and 

variations in atmospheric, hydrologic, and 

biological systems provide many benefits 

and improve the quality of life for humans. 

Unfortunately, the changes also jeopardize 

the sustainability of many ecosystems, 

as well as the goods (such as food and 

construction materials) and services 

(such as cleaning and recycling water 

and essential nutrients) that ecosystems 

provide. The USGS Land Cover Institute 

routinely monitors and assesses landcover change at local to global scales and 

provides definitive information required by 

researchers and decisionmakers around the 

world to understand how the types, patterns, 

and changes in land cover affect valuable 

and endangered ecosystems. Geographers 

at the Land Cover Institute provide national 

and international leadership by defining, 

monitoring, and explaining the changes, 

as well as by providing aid in assessing 

management goals and objectives. The 

Institute makes the critical connection 

between data and the analysis that provides 

the added value of geographic explanation. 

The resulting information, developed using 

a “locally relevant and globally consistent” 

philosophy, allows resource managers to 

understand the changes, anticipate threats 

to resources and the environment, develop 

management strategies, and assess the 

effectiveness of their plans.

Land change is one of the critical science issues of the 

21st century and is perhaps the most important scientific issue 

rooted in the discipline of geography. Science agendas established by national (for example, National Research Council, 

2001a, 2001b; Climate Change Science Program, 2003) and 

international (for example, International Geosphere Biosphere 

Program, 1999) organizations have called for acceleration of 

land change research. Land change is a pivotal issue in the 

discipline of geography because it is a major force in modifying climate, ecosystem goods and services, economic welfare, 

and human health at multiple scales and is a major responder 

to climate change (Gutman and others, 2004). Land change 

directly affects water resources and their management, and 

alters the habitat for valued species. The foundation of land 

change studies are descriptions of the status and trends of land 

cover, land use, and surface form. Such data are essential if 

we are to understand almost any aspect of land change, including its causes and consequences. Documenting land surface 

status and trends involves monitoring and mapping to integrate 

information from personal observation, remote sensing, field 

inventories and surveys, and spatial models. Land change 

research also integrates regional geographic perspectives and 

insights from ecology, climatology, hydrology, geology, urban 

planning, and other disciplines.

Understanding land change issues also requires a 

perspective that spans local to global scales. Land change is 

perhaps the most noticeable form of global environmental 

change because it occurs locally. The effects of local land 

changes are cumulative and attain a global importance because 

of their outcomes in the global ecosystem (Turner and Meyer, 

1991). Improved information and understanding of local and 

global land attributes are essential to our ability to successfully 

mitigate and manage the effects of land change on human and 

environmental systems. 

Strategic Science Actions

The first step in land change science is to characterize the 

status and trends of key land attributes (such as type, condition, and patterns) that affect human-environment systems. 

Critical research questions about land status and trends 

include: 

• What are the current patterns and attributes of land use 

and land cover at national to global scales that affect 

the carbon cycle, atmospheric processes, and ecosystem structure and function?

• What are the regional, national, and global rates, patterns, and characteristics of contemporary land-use and 

land-cover change?

• Where are the current areas of land-use and land-cover 

change at national and global scales?

• Why do these changes occur in specific ways and in 

particular locations or regions?

To address goal 1 and answer these questions, USGS geographic research must be expanded by taking several strategic 

actions. These actions collectively will contribute to a USGS 

geographic monitoring infrastructure that provides the information needed by scientists, resource managers, and the public 

considering land change problems. 
10 Geography for a Changing World 

Sidebar 1.1: Establishing a land change 

science center of excellence

Linkages: 

A land change science center will be an interdisciplinary endeavor. The center will be founded with strong 

links to the land change research found across the USGS 

but also must connect with interagency activities in the 

Climate Change Science Program. Links with NASA on 

earth observation issues, USEPA on statistical indicators, 

and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) on a range 

of forestry and agricultural land topics are particularly 

important. Academic participation must be planned from 

the onset in order to ensure that the goals of the center 

reflect the best practices and capabilities of the land change 

science community. 

Performance Measures:

• A USGS land change center of excellence is established (within 1 year). 

• The center is staffed initially with 10 Ph.D. scientists with support staff (within 2 years) and 

expanded to 20 scientists (within 5 years). 

• An international symposium on land change science 

opportunities and challenges is held and used to 

form the science strategy for the center (within 2 

years).

• A land change science plan is prepared and 

approved by USGS (within 2 years).

• Partnerships with key Federal and academic organizations are formalized (within 2 years).

• A research strategy and implementation plan is prepared for developing comparable land-cover data 

for the period 1970 to the present (within 3 years).

• A strong focus on regional geography is included 

(see Goal 6 discussion).

Strategic Action 1.1:

Establish a center of excellence focusing on land change 

science

The research outlined here, as well as the research associated with goals 2, 3, and 6, requires a team of established 

researchers to develop plans, conduct critical studies, make 

national assessments, and synthesize regional and topical 

information. This group, organized within the framework of 

a center of excellence, will provide the leadership to establish 

real-time monitoring capabilities, working across the USGS 

to identify and capitalize on research opportunities. Research 

activities of the center also will benefit from the geographically distributed nature of the USGS, with its regional science 

centers, dispersed staff, and regional expertise. 

The USGS will receive high returns from a relatively 

modest investment. A center with a minimum of 10 geographic researchers can affect a far-reaching cultural transformation of geography in the USGS and provide the Bureau and 

its scientists with core intellectual resources related to land 

change. The center will promote research synergism, provide 

a focal point for collaborating with external scientists, and 

foster a culture of research excellence and high productivity.

Strategic Action 1.2:

Expand global capabilities to map and measure land 

cover and land-cover change at multiple scales that are 

locally relevant yet globally consistent. 

The USGS already has a substantial investment in largearea land characterization, with a capability to map the land 

use and cover of the Nation and to assemble the elevation data 

needed to understand changes in land surfaces. The USGS is 

an international leader in global land cover and elevation mapping, but has not invested adequate research resources in this 

topic to take advantage of the resulting products for knowledge-building research. To meet science goals, USGS geographers must develop a “locally relevant and globally consistent” program for characterizing land-cover change at multiple 

scales. This strategy must recognize the diverse requirements 

of land change applications and provide increasingly more 

accurate and detailed land attributes needed to address current 

and future applications. 

Strategic Action 1.3:

Determine how much of the annual national and global 

land changes result from natural and human influences.

Managing land change requires understanding the extent 

of natural variability and natural land disturbances resulting from wildfires, floods, and other natural events, as well 

as changes caused by human activity. In many cases, land 

changes result from combinations of natural and human 

influences, necessitating sophisticated analysis to understand 

the relative contributions of each causal mechanism. Understanding and explanation depend on research to document the 

full extent of natural and human disturbances at global and 

national levels. The required information is a product of an 

ongoing land monitoring strategy that provides the identification of types and trends of disturbances and that leads to 

meaningful land management policies.
Geography for a Changing World 11

Strategic Action 1.4:

Establish an operational global ecosystem monitoring 

system that continuously measures and characterizes 

the current status of ecosystem goods and services to 

estimate and explain deviations from normal conditions. 

The USGS must develop a multi-disciplinary suite of 

ecosystem health and productivity indicators that can be used 

to assess ecosystems throughout the Nation and globally. 

Resource managers must continually update management 

strategies to balance short-term, multiple uses of ecosystems 

with long-term sustainability goals. A global monitoring system will provide near real-time information enabling resource 

managers and resource-assessment experts to confidently 

make informed policy and management decisions. Global 

capability is a requirement because it is only at the global 

scale that ecosystem influences on climate become clear along 

with critical biological connections such as migration patterns, 

biodiversity threats, and invasive species effects. 

Strategic Action 1.5:

Establish a consistent, repeatable methodology that 

identifies the changes in the topographic form of the 

Nation at appropriate intervals. 

Periodic assessments of the changes in the Nationʼs 

topography and land cover every 5-10 years will employ 

advanced topographic mapping and monitoring methods. 

Understanding the characteristics of a changing surface form 

and the links between changing land use, land cover, and surface form is an important element of understanding the overall 

causes and consequences of land change.

Strategic Action 1.6:

Develop and implement a strategy that leads to a clearer 

understanding of the characteristics and changes in the 

urban environment. 

The urban and built-up landscape offers a particularly 

unique challenge to land change studies. An urban landchange monitoring program that places local and regional 

urban growth in a national perspective will give policymakers 

and planners a framework for clarifying and prioritizing the 

effects on economic development, environmental quality, and 

quality-of-life objectives. A strategy to combine sampling 

and mapping in a regional geographic framework will permit 

better understanding of the differences in land change issues 

by region, city size, and function, providing the basis for a full 

assessment of urban environmental issues.

Sidebar 1.2: Establishing science-driven land status and trends characterization

Linkages: 

USGS geographers have an outstanding track record in large-area land-cover analysis and topographic characterization. 

Improving the capabilities will require a strong research agenda that draws from remote sensing and GIScience goals (7, 8, 

and 9). Expanding this capability also will require partnerships with NASA and NOAA on earth observation technologies 

and strategies. Creation of useful science priorities depends on cooperation with the Climate Change Science Program LandUse and Land-Cover Change Interagency Working Group. The Federal Multi-Resolution Land Characterization consortium 

will play an important role in defining research and mapping objectives. Additional important cooperators include such programs as the Global Observation of Forest Cover/Global Observation of Landcover Dynamics and the United Nations Food 

and Agriculture Organization Global Land-Cover Facility.

Performance Measures: 

• A strategy for global land-cover mapping and change analysis is designed and tested (within 2 years) and operational 

(within 5 years).

• Annual assessments of the overall extent of land change, as well as a determination of the extent of natural compared 

to human-induced change, are made for the Nation (within 5 years) and the globe (within 10 years).

• Near-time assessments of indicators of key ecosystem goods and services are made for the Nation (within 3 years) 

and the globe (within 6 years).

• A strategy for measuring the extent of surface form change is designed and tested (within 2 years) and becomes 

operational (within 5 years).

• The requirements for an urban monitoring system are defined and a monitoring system is designed and tested (within 

2 years), and is followed by system implementation (within 5 years).
12 Geography for a Changing World 

Strategic Action 1.7:

Develop spatially explicit reconstructions of the land 

use and land cover of the North American landscape 

to provide the context and baseline for future resource 

management and public policy.

Changes that have occurred in the past provide the context 

for understanding contemporary and future land changes. 

Historical disturbances and settlement patterns directly affect 

current environmental processes. For example, carbon fluxes 

that affect atmospheric chemistry and the global carbon budget 

are literally rooted in the land management practices of the past 

that affected soil carbon accumulation, vegetation age structures, and total biomass. Reconstruction of the land-use and 

land-cover history of North America requires close cooperation 

between USGS geographers and scientists from other USGS 

disciplines. The history must span the periods from pre-settlement to the present and provide a geospatial representation of 

the evolution and effects of human settlement across the oncenatural landscape.

Sidebar 1.3: Developing the land-use and 

land-cover history of North America

Linkages: 

Experiences gained in the Land-Use History of North 

America initiative establish a starting point for creating a 

land-use and land-cover history of North America. The 

history from case studies and synoptic investigations will 

necessitate a broad consortium of partners, including those 

in the USGS with considerable biologic, geologic, and 

hydrologic expertise, and similar specialists from academia 

and non-governmental organizations. 

Performance Measures:

• A meeting of experts is used to establish objectives 

and scope for a land change history (within 1 year).

• A comprehensive and spatially explicit North 

America land-use and land-cover history is completed (within 6 years).

Highlight 2: Monitoring the Cycle of Land-Cover Change

The Landsat record is the longest continuous record of the globe in existence. Five Landsat images (fig. 2) covering a 10-

kilometer (km) by 10-km phosphate mining area near Lakeland, Florida illustrate the value and advantages of Landsat data for 

monitoring land change. From the vantage point of more than 700 km above the Earth, remote-sensing instruments onboard six 

Landsat satellites have provided a synoptic historical record of the cycle of land-cover changes taking place from 1973 to 2000. 

The five images offer false color renditions of the process of land change in which the original pastures and grasslands (shown 

in mottled red tones in the 1973 image) were converted to active phosphate mines (white areas in the 1979 image), water-filled 

mine pits (blue and black colors in the 1986 and 1992 images), and to reclaimed land (smooth pink colors in the 2000 image). 

During the 27-year period of observation, nearly 80 percent of the land in this area changed. Measurements and maps of 

change, essential elements for investigations of the causes and consequences of change, are possible because the USGS, working 

in concert with NASA, provides leadership and technical and scientific expertise for global Earth observation.

Figure 2: Changing land cover near Lakeland, Florida.

1973 1979 1986
Geography for a Changing World 13

1992 2000

Goal 2: Identify local, regional, national, 

and global drivers of land change 

to forecast plausible land change 

scenarios over the next 20-50 years.

By 2015, the USGS will use knowledge 

gained from studies of the historical and 

contemporary driving forces of land 

change to project possible changes 20 

to 50 years into the future. In 2015, the 

USGS will be the primary Federal agency 

providing insights into the Nationʼs future 

land change scenarios and the possible 

effects of those changes. Understanding the 

agents or driving forces that stimulate land 

change will provide the foundations of this 

predictive capability. This understanding 

of the drivers of change will come about 

because an expanded USGS capability 

to merge social and natural sciences will 

create new understanding of the connections 

between changes and their drivers. 

The USGS will provide decisionmakers 

with assessments of the likely outcomes of 

various policy options. More specifically, 

USGS research will provide decisionmakers 

with knowledge of the rates and types 

of land changes that can be expected 

given changes in specific drivers (such 

as technology, economics, policy, and 

legislation). In 10 years, USGS models for 

predicting land-use and land-cover changes 

will provide decisionmakers and scientists 

with objective projections given plausible 

scenarios of change at local, regional, and 

national scales. This predictive capability 

contributes directly to assessments of the 

potential consequences of future changes of 

the Nationʼs economy and environment.

Simulation models that generate realistic projections of 

change for future periods are critical tools for managing the 

consequences of land change. Models allow decisionmakers and resource managers to illuminate possible outcomes 

of land changes arising from specific proposed scenarios. 

Understanding the past, current, and future drivers of land-use 

and land-cover change makes predictions and evaluations of 

change possible. The interaction of economic, environmental, 

social, political, and technological forces at local to global 

scales shape land-management practices and patterns of land 

change. By associating historical land change patterns with 

the forces that stimulated that change, it is possible to create 

and validate theories about land change. By establishing an 

in-depth understanding of the relation between drivers and the 

characteristics of change, it also is possible to improve projections of land-use and land-cover change. Improved change 

projections will help minimize negative effects of change on 

the environment and resources, and maximize positive effects. 

Successful, useful studies of change drivers require the integration of various disciplines from the natural, physical, and 

social sciences.
14 Geography for a Changing World 

Strategic Science Actions

Research on driving forces and land change projection 

must consider a series of questions governing key theoretical 

and empirical issues, including:

• What are the primary historic and contemporary human 

drivers of land change and what will they be in the 

future? 

• What are the relations between changes in land use and 

land cover at different scales and in different regions?

• How do driving forces affect land change at different 

scales (for example, local, regional, and global)? 

• How could environmental, political, technological, 

demographic, and economic processes determine landcover over the next few decades?

• How, and to what extent, do extreme events (such as 

natural disasters, public health emergencies, and war) 

affect land change? What is the relative importance of 

extreme events in land change history?

• What are the geographic data requirements for predicting land-use and land-cover change and consequences 

at regional, national, and global scales?

Four strategic science actions will advance the USGS 

capability to apply an expanded understanding of the drivers 

of land change in models to project land use and land cover 20 

to 50 years into the future.

Strategic Action 2.1:

Establish an ongoing capability of assessing the social, 

economic, political, technological, and environmental 

influences on land change.

A partnership between USGS and academic institutions 

will outline a strategy to investigate driving forces for land 

change. In addition, the USGS must assemble the appropriate expertise needed to cooperatively conduct research on the 

socio-economic and political aspects of land change drivers. 

Because the drivers of land change usually are regional in their 

influence, a national USGS strategy must include regional 

implementation. 

Strategic Action 2.2:

Conduct studies on the geographic variability of the 

types of responses associated with specific drivers 

(such as globalization, new technology, and policies) on 

land change and determine how those responses operate at different scales.

The land change responses associated with specific drivers vary regionally and over time. Over time, the same drivers 

can have a shifting effect on land change. Understanding 

how specific groups of drivers affect land change in different 

regions of the United States is necessary for relevant projections of future land change over large areas. In addition, 

the USGS must conduct multiple-scale (for example, local, 

regional, national, and global) investigations of the consequences of change resulting from specific drivers such as land 

management practices, legislation, technology, and globalization. Multiple-scale research will determine how historical 

change, land-use theory, and resource capacity interact to 

affect future land change. 

Strategic Action 2.3:

Validate the theoretical basis of land-use change by 

using data from landscape-dynamics research. 

Reliance on empirical evidence alone has limited the conceptual basis for land change projections, a short-coming that 

the creation of a theoretical framework can alleviate. General 

theories from the social sciences, such as highest and best use, 

distance decay, and comparative advantage, can be integrated with an understanding of how geographic variations in 

climate, landforms, geology, soils, and other physical, chemical, and biological landscape characteristics affect land-use 

potential. A series of case studies and empirical assessments 

can provide test cases to develop and test integrated hypotheses about the interaction between cultural and biophysical 

landscape characteristics that produce land-use change. The 

development and validation of hypothesis-driven research 

will improve the theoretical basis for land-use and land-cover 

change predictions.

Strategic Action 2.4:

The USGS researchers will partner with scientists 

outside of USGS in developing land change simulation 

models. 

The need for improved simulation of future land cover 

and land use is being expressed with increasing frequency 

in the land change science community. The current status of 

land change projection models is evolving rapidly, but most 

research is at local scales either within a non-spatial, resourcebased econometric framework or in urban settings. Simulation 

models, on the other hand, must predict change over very large 

areas to be compatible with the scale of climatic, geologic, 

hydrologic, and economic drivers. Land change models must 

couple with other process models to incorporate feedback and 

with dynamic updating. Research must define coupling strategies that address the influences of ecosystem functioning, such 

as carbon, water, and energy cycling, on land change projections. Model validation will be a particularly challenging element of this research area. Simulation of past conditions will 

be a necessary strategy for testing the performance of models, 

placing more emphasis on the need to understand land-use 

and land-cover change in both historical and contemporary 

contexts.
Geography for a Changing World 15

Sidebar 2.1: Establishing capabilities for 

driving forces and land change projection

Linkages: 

The USGS needs substantial expertise and capacity to 

advance land change projection modeling. The USGS is 

uniquely qualified to address issues related to large-area 

projections. Developing the expertise and capability to 

use land change models will be done through partnerships 

with organizations that already are investing in simulation modeling. A first step is for the USGS to identify the 

leading land change modelers and establish collaborative 

relationships. Much of the science conducted in this area 

likely will be affiliated with the National Science Foundation (NSF), so the USGS must form academic alliances to 

enable close connections to NSF sponsored research.

Performance Measures:

• A research plan for driving forces and land change 

projection modeling is prepared that addresses the 

resources, staff capabilities, critical partnerships, 

and research priorities (within 1 year).

• Case studies are completed that identify the key 

drivers affecting regional land change and a synthesis of the geographic variability of the responses to 

the key drivers is completed (within 4 years).

• The theoretical basis of land change is validated 

within a regional context and the identification of 

regional variations of highest and best land uses 

and comparative advantages of different regions of 

the country is completed (within 5 years).

• A USGS land change projection model is developed, tested, and validated (within 5 years).

Goal 3: Understand past, present, and 

future environmental consequences 

of land change to support better 

management of their effect on people, 

environment, economy, and resources.

Throughout the 21st century, the continuing 

conversion of land cover and land use in 

the United States and throughout the world, 

along with the migration of labor, jobs, 

products, and resources associated with 

a global economy, will result in physical, 

biological, and social consequences at all 

scales. One consequence is the introduction 

of thousands of harmful plants, animals, 

and diseases to the United States from other 

countries, which create annual damages 

in excess of $138 billion. Tamarisk (salt 

cedar), West Nile Virus, and the snakehead 

fish are three notorious examples from a 

current list of more than 6,500 invasive 

species. Geographyʼs unique suite of 

analytical capabilities can address the 

dimensions of these invasions and contribute 

to the explanation of the dynamics of 

invasive species. 

A decade from now, the USGS Invasive 

Species Forecasting System will document, 

map, and predict harmful invasive species 

and serve as the primary tool used by 

land-management agencies, Tribes, 

State and local governments, and citizen 

volunteer groups for combating invasive 

species. USGS geographers and biologists 

will collaborate, using capabilities to 

monitor and assess land change at local 

and regional scales and understand the 

processes underlying the spread of invasive 

species and pathogens, to track the future 

distributions and abundance of harmful 

invaders and to aid in prevention, early 

detection and rapid response, inventory 

and monitoring, and restoration efforts. 

By integrating the physical and biological 

sciences with high resolution remote sensing 

and high performance computing in a 

geographic framework, USGS geographers 

will lead the Nationʼs efforts to locate and 

contain invasive species before they gain 

dominance and harm our economy and 

environment. 

The public is interested in understanding the consequences of land change for social and economic well-being, 

sustainability of resources, and preservation of environmental 

quality. Understanding the consequences of land change at 

multiple spatial and temporal scales is a fundamental goal of 

land change science. Such an understanding provides resource 

managers and decisionmakers with an objective basis for 
16 Geography for a Changing World 

formulating land-use and land-management decisions and 

practices to mitigate the undesirable aspects of land change.

Land changes have substantial effects on environmental, 

economic, and social welfare at all scales. For example, the 

water cycle depends heavily on vegetation, surface characteristics, and soil properties, while water resources development 

also influences water quantity and quality (Climate Change 

Science Program, 2003). Land-use and land-cover change, 

climate change, soil degradation, and other environmental 

changes interact to affect ecosystems and the services they 

provide. The ecosystem effect of these perturbations often is 

cumulative. 

Complex linkages and feedbacks between land change 

and environmental response further complicate understanding the consequences of land change. For example, changes 

in land attributes affecting greenhouse gas emissions, albedo, 

surface roughness, and other variables modify land-atmosphere interactions and therefore affect climate. Subsequent 

adjustments in climate may then lead to further accelerated 

changes in land cover and the ways lands are used. Although 

there is growing evidence of the circular relation between land 

change and climate variability, the understanding of the different scales of interactions, feedbacks, and consequences is only 

at an embryonic stage. 

Strategic Science Actions

The USGS has a long and distinguished research record 

related to research on physical and biological systems and 

processes. Future USGS research associated with this goal 

must combine the longstanding physical and biological sciences with geographical land change science. The research 

requires extensive interdisciplinary cooperation to address 

the consequences of land change at a variety of spatial and 

temporal scales. The research must provide answers to several 

questions, such as:

• How will different scenarios of future land change 

affect the productivity of public and private land, 

and what are the economic and environmental consequences of changes in land productivity? 

• How will land changes affect the form and functioning 

of ecosystems, including the ability to provide essential 

goods and services and levels of ecosystem biodiversity, and what are the ecological, economic, public 

health, and social costs of the changes?

• How does land change affect climate and, subsequently, how does climate change affect the way land 

is used?

Strategic Action 3.1:

Conduct research on the consequences of land change 

on climate, water, carbon cycle, ecosystems, invasive 

species, and societal concerns.

This research will explore the consequences of past, present, and future landscape patterns and types of land change. 

Understanding the mechanisms of change in both a historical and present-day context is necessary to understand future 

consequences of land change. The research also must include 

process-based investigations of local to regional studies and 

scaling strategies for estimating consequences over very large 

areas. Coupled models that link land change to priority environmental and social processes also will be needed to develop 

this understanding. Understanding the connections between 

land change and environmental and societal consequences of 

concern to DOI resource managers also is necessary. 

Strategic Action 3.2:

Conduct research on specific consequences of land-use 

and land-cover patterns and changes for environmental 

health and public safety issues, particularly at the boundaries between developed and wildland areas.

The consequences of land change are potentially more 

severe at the contact point between people and nature. Human 

activity can fragment habitat, contribute to water-quality degradation, provide pathways for invasive species, and serve as 

breeding grounds and transfer points for vector-borne disease 

hosts. It also creates critical zones where the risks of wildfire and other hazards are high and possibly life-threatening. 

Research on the causes and effects of land changes at interfaces is particularly important because of the special magnified risks and hazards in such zones (Fisher and Rahel, 2004).

Strategic Action 3.3:

Conduct research leading to improved capabilities to 

assess wildfire conditions, predict wildfire potential, 

prioritize treatment areas, and monitor effectiveness of 

fire treatments to support risk-reduction efforts in the 

urban-natural landscape interface.

Wildfires are serious threats to the public that pose substantial resource management challenges for lands administered by DOI and other government agencies. The complexity 

of wildfire issues calls for a special science effort to provide 

the data, knowledge, and management options for wildfire 

management. Effective science and management require an 

improved understanding of the influence of land change and 

natural ecosystem disturbance on wildfires and an improved 

capability to define risks and consequences of the fires. This 

research must explicitly account for feedback among wildfires, 

ecosystem changes, societal choices, and social welfare.
Geography for a Changing World 17

Strategic Action 3.4:

Conduct research on the feedbacks between land 

change and environmental systems and resources.

Land change alters environmental systems, which subsequently affects land use and land cover. Understanding the 

feedback between land change and climate, carbon fluxes, 

water quantity and quality, and societal resource allocation 

choices can lead to comprehensive coupled models of environmental behavior. Advanced understanding of the circular 

relation between land change, environment consequences, and 

human choices will provide decisionmakers and resource managers with better information on the ramifications of various 

policies and strategies.

Highlight 3: Land-Use Change and the Carbon Cycle

Carbon dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere plays 

an important role in regulating the Earthʼs climate. The 

continuing increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration 

has the potential of substantially altering the environment 

and affecting the economy at regional to global scales 

(Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2001). 

However, the pathways that regulate the change of CO2 

concentration in the atmosphere are not well understood 

or quantified. The National Academy of Sciences reported 

that “how land contributes, by locations and processes, to 

exchanges of carbon with the atmosphere is still highly 

uncertain” (National Academy of Sciences, 2001). One of the 

largest challenges in the study of local to global carbon cycles 

is to quantify the effects of land-use and land-cover change 

on CO2 exchange between the terrestrial biosphere and the 

atmosphere. The U.S. Carbon Cycle Science Plan identified 

the establishment of accurate estimates for the effects of 

historical and current land-use patterns and trends on the 

evolving carbon budget at local to continental scales as one of 

its five overarching goals. (Sarmiento and Wofsy, 1999). 

Sidebar 3.1: Assessing the environmental 

consequences of land change

Linkages: 

Because research into the consequences of land change is 

interdisciplinary, the USGS approach to the issue also must 

be interdisciplinary. Drawing on all of the core capabilities 

of geography, the research must be coordinated throughout the USGS and DOI and through interagency forums 

to other agencies including the Climate Change Science 

Program, North America Carbon Program, Joint Fire Science Program, and National Interagency Fire Center. The 

research requires a functioning partnership among USGS 

geography, geology, water, and biology researchers.

Performance Measures:

• USGS geographers, working with biologists, geologists, and water scientists from across the USGS, 

must identify research priorities and prepare a 

research plan (within 2 years).

• A national assessment of the contemporary effects 

of land change on regional carbon dynamics is 

completed (within 3 years).

• National assessments of the consequences of land 

change on ecosystem services, water quality, and 

climate variability are completed (within 10 years).

• Regional analyses of the threats of land change in 

the urban-wildland interface are conducted (within 

5 years).

• A systematic assessment of wildfire risks and consequences on DOI lands is made (within 6 years).

Sidebar 3.2: Developing a comprehensive 

capability to assess the effects and feedback 

between land change and environmental 

responses.

Linkages: 

The systematic modeling of land change and its consequences demands a research effort spanning all the USGS 

disciplines. This effort requires geographers to provide a 

spatial framework and the understanding of the humanenvironment issues, and the other USGS disciplines to contribute specialized knowledge about ecosystem operations. 

The effort also will require cooperative partnerships with 

scientists from academia and other Federal agencies such 

as the NSFʼs National Environmental Observatory Network (NEON) initiative, NOAA, and NASA. 

Performance Measures:

• USGS geographers, working with biologists, geologists, and water scientists from across the USGS, 

must identify research priorities and prepare a 

research plan (within 2 years).

• Define the feedback between land change and environmental responses and develop a series of models 

for assessing system feedback (within 4 years).
18 Geography for a Changing World 

Highlight 3 (cont.)

Many studies indicated that a substantial portion of 

the terrestrial carbon sink is related to present and historical 

land-use activities (Houghton and others, 1999; Caspersen 

and others, 2000). Historical land-use change has contributed 

about one-third of the increased CO2 concentration observed in 

the atmosphere globally (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate 

Change, 2000). In North America, land-cover and land-use 

change is a dominant driving force for the terrestrial carbon 

sink. The widespread reforestation that occurred since 1900 in 

the eastern United States has sequestered increasing amounts 

of carbon from the atmosphere (Wofsy and others, 1993; 

Houghton and others, 1999). The heavy use of fertilizers 

(Matthews, 1994) together with increased atmospheric 

nitrogen deposition (Schindler and Bayley, 1993; Holland and 

others, 1997) and improved tillage and crop rotation practices 

(Paul and others, 1997) also has led to increased storage of 

carbon in soils and biomass. 

Although the importance of land-use change on carbon 

dynamics is widely recognized, the effects of land-use 

change on the net exchange of carbon between the terrestrial 

biosphere and the atmosphere at regional to global scales are 

not well understood or quantified. One of the main reasons 

for these shortcomings is the lack of complete, consistent, 

and spatially explicit land-use change databases. The data 

needed to construct reliable land-use patterns and histories 

have temporal and spatial gaps over large parts of the world. 

Investigation of the rates, patterns, driving forces, and carbon 

consequences of historical and current land-use activities 

at local to global scales requires a major coordinated effort. 

Land-use histories that are spatially explicit and that extend 

as far back in time as possible are necessary to specify the 

current effects of past land-use disturbances.

become more disaster resilient – able to 

manage risks, respond effectively, and 

recover quickly from sudden or chronic 

hazards. 

The USGS will lead the creation of a 

scientific basis for this transformation 

in collaboration with the Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS), the USEPA, 

and practitioners from the public and 

private sectors. The USGS will identify the 

effects of land-use and land-cover changes 

on creating or amplifying hazards in 

vulnerable systems. A national vulnerability 

and resilience monitoring program will 

identify at-risk areas for additional USGS 

research accompanied by focused risk 

reduction efforts by the DHS, USEPA, and 

State and local partners. The USGS will 

develop and apply innovative geographic 

methods to assess the effectiveness of 

mitigation strategies and risk management 

scenarios. The USGS will capitalize on 

its traditional strengths in GIScience and 

remote sensing to provide intelligent access 

to data, knowledge, and predictive models 

for response and recovery efforts. With an 

integrated hazard and vulnerability research 

program, the USGS will provide the Nation 

with a holistic understanding of the potential 

for disasters and improve its ability to 

reduce these risks. 

The first three USGS geography science goals focus 

on the occurrence, causes, and consequences of land change 

within coupled human–environment systems (fig. 1). Some 

agents or processes of land change within these systems 

have the potential to harm individuals, societies, and natural resources. These hazards manifest themselves as sudden 

perturbations or slowly increasing stresses beyond the normal 

range of variability in a system (Turner and others, 2003). 

Sudden perturbations include natural processes, such as 

floods, volcanic eruptions, fires, landslides, and hurricanes, 

and human activities, such as hazardous material spills and 

terrorist acts. Stresses emerge from complex human-environment linkages, where interactions create or exacerbate chronic 

hazards, such as droughts, invasive species, vector-borne 

diseases, nonpoint-source pollution, biodiversity loss, and 

climate change. Changing human land-use patterns have 

adverse effects on natural resource quality, and such changes 

increase the likelihood of certain hazards, such as floods and 

Goal 4. Improve the scientific basis 

for vulnerability and risk assessment, 

mitigation, response, and recovery 

related to the human and environmental 

dynamics of land change. 

In 2015, natural and anthropogenic 

hazards will continue to threaten our safety, 

economic well-being, and natural resources. 

Their effects will be greatly reduced because 

our Nation will have shifted from simply 

repairing damage after every disaster to 

identifying and reducing the potential for 

losses before the events. Our Nation will 
Geography for a Changing World 19

landslides. The changes also provide pathways for the introduction and spread of invasive species and carriers of vectordiseases. Anthropogenic and natural hazards pose substantial 

threats to lives, property, and resources, with estimated costs 

of more than $60 billion U.S. dollars to the global economy in 

2003 (Munich Re Group, 2003).

Comprehensive risk assessments to reduce future costs 

focus on the likelihood and potential damages of hazard 

events. The USGS has a strong history of science excellence 

and leadership in natural hazard assessment research. The 

USGS has conducted far less research, however, to describe 

and understand the potential for loss or damage. Exposure 

to hazards, along with the sensitivity and resilience of the 

human-environment system, define the systemsʼ vulnerability 

(Cutter and others, 2003; Turner and others, 2003). Research 

into vulnerability will create new understanding of loss and 

recovery from natural hazards and similar threats (Cutter, 

2003). Important research questions in the effort to understand risk and to minimize the loss of life and property from 

disasters include the following from Turner and others (2003): 

• Who and what are vulnerable to the multiple environmental and human changes underway, and where? 

• How are these changes and their consequences attenuated or amplified by different human and environmental conditions? 

• What can be done to reduce vulnerability to change? 

• How may more resilient and adaptive communities and 

societies be built? 

Reducing risks from natural and anthropogenic hazards is 

one of the critical issues of the 21st century. The Nation needs 

a clearer understanding of its vulnerability to hazards and of 

strategies for increasing resilience. Without this understanding, 

policymakers may emphasize post-disaster relief and recovery 

and, in doing so, set the stage for future catastrophic losses 

(Pelling, 2003). 

No Federal agency has a coordinated vulnerability and 

resilience research program, so the USGS has an opportunity 

to assume national leadership in this topical area. Geographyʼs long-standing intellectual tradition of studying the 

relation between society and the natural environment complements the Bureauʼs expertise at hazard assessment, offering a 

framework for an integrated physical, biological, and social 

understanding of hazards. 

Strategic Science Actions 

The National Research Council (National Research 

Council, 2002) challenged the USGS to develop vulnerability 

science through multidisciplinary, place-based approaches. 

In particular, the NRC recommended that USGS geographic 

researchers continue to exercise national leadership in applied 

hazards research to improve the Nationʼs explanatory, predictive, and response capabilities. The NRC concluded that this 

research could bridge the gap between science and policymaking and management. Realization of these possibilities will 

require commitment to seven high priority strategic actions. 

Strategic Action 4.1:

Establish a center of excellence focusing on vulnerability 

and resilience science and the integration of science 

with decisionmaking.

To conduct research outlined here, the USGS must 

greatly increase its social science and geographic research 

staff. As part of a national center of excellence, a distributed 

network of regional experts across the Nation will be needed 

to foster collaborations with practitioners, university investigators, and other Federal partners. The creation of a center 

of excellence focused on vulnerability and resilience science 

follows the recommendation of Cutter and others (2003). This 

center of vulnerability and resilience science also should lead 

the research associated with goal 5, integrating science and 

decisionmaking. The success of vulnerability and resilience 

science depends on linking science and decisionmaking, so it 

is logical that all these research activities be collected initially 

into a single center. As the USGS capability grows in this 

topical area over a period of several years, a separate center 

may emerge for science and decisionmaking.

Sidebar 4.1: Establishing a vulnerability and 

resilience science center of excellence

Linkages: 

A vulnerability and resilience science center of excellence 

should have a multidisciplinary and multi-agency perspective, involving USGS hazard assessment researchers and 

researchers from the DHS and the academic world. Other 

Federal partners include the U.S. Agency for International 

Development, the NOAA Coastal Services Center, the 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National 

Geospatial Agency, and the Department of Defense. Nonfederal partners include the Organization of American 

States and academic researchers with mutual research 

interests. Other partners include State, Tribal, and local 

agencies who are involved in hazard assessment. USGS 

researchers can add value to assessment information by the 

exploration of vulnerability and resilience. The productive 

outcome of this new knowledge will be effective mitigation strategies that employ the integration of social and 

natural sciences in a decisionmaking framework. 

Performance measures: 

• A USGS center of excellence is established 

focusing on vulnerability and resilience science 

(within 2 years).
20 Geography for a Changing World 

Sidebar 4.1 (cont.)

• The center is staffed initially with 10 Ph.D .scientists with support staff (within 2 years) and 

expanded to 20 scientists (within 5 years) with 

some researchers collocated with external agencies, 

partners, and universities.

• An international symposium is held to assess 

the state of vulnerability and resilience modeling research, potential indicators, and possible 

approaches for national monitoring (within 2 

years). 

• A bureau-wide symposium is held on the role of the 

USGS in vulnerability and sustainability science, 

as it relates to risk assessments and policy development (within 2 years). 

• Standards and metrics are developed for assessing 

vulnerability and resilience to hazards (within 5 

years). 

• Case studies are completed on the vulnerability 

of communities and regions to volcanoes, earthquakes, landslides, floods, drought, invasive species, and climate change (within 5 years). 

• A national monitoring program is developed to 

identify at-risk communities and regions (within 7 

years). 

• A social science research agenda is established for 

documenting the influence of perceptions and policies on vulnerability (within 2 years). 

• Case studies are completed on effects of land 

change on creating hazards and human-environment system vulnerability (within 3 years).

Strategic Action 4.2:

Investigate effects of land-use and land-cover change, 

such as urbanization and resource use, on creating hazards and human-environment system vulnerability. 

The Nation needs research to determine how our knowledge of land change can be used to model, predict, and mitigate the effects of natural and anthropogenic hazards. Locally 

oriented research will examine the relation between urban 

growth and system vulnerability, while regional and continental scale research will examine vulnerability arising from the 

effects of land change on processes such as drought, climate 

change, invasive species, and floods. The USGS must seek to 

gain a greater regional understanding of hazard interdependencies, predictive patterns, and cumulative effects (Subcommittee for Disaster Reduction, 2005). 

Strategic Action 4.3:

Improve research capacity to model vulnerability and 

resilience to natural and anthropogenic hazards. 

A national set of vulnerability assessment tools for 

researchers and practitioners is needed (Cutter and others, 

2003). Case studies on the vulnerability of communities, 

regions, and trade corridors will be conducted in collaboration 

with USGS hazard assessment researchers, with a focus on 

geological hazards (such as earthquakes, volcanoes, landslides), biological hazards (such as invasive species, vectorborne diseases, and threatened species), hydrological hazards 

(such as floods and drought), and other earth science hazards 

(such as climate change). Additional case studies will include 

participation in national and international pre- and post-disaster assessment efforts. The ultimate objective of the case 

studies is to generate integrated models with indicators that 

are applicable for multiple hazards and at multiple spatial and 

temporal scales. Simulations and visualizations will improve 

understanding of the impact trajectory of hazards on societal 

assets and ecosystem services. The USGS-led vulnerability 

research will contribute new methods for incorporating uncertainty into our national view of hazards and for communicating uncertainty to decisionmakers and the public. 

Understanding system resilience to hazards, defined by 

its ability to adjust to or mitigate threats, is critical to understanding the potential for adverse effects (Cardona, 2004). 

USGS resilience research will complement the managementoriented missions of the DHS and USEPA to protect public 

safety, societal assets, and environmental resources from 

hazards. Resilience research will focus on developing metrics 

that incorporate aspects of exposure, sensitivity, and adaptive capacity to natural and anthropogenic hazards at multiple 

scales.

Strategic Action 4.4:

Improve understanding of the influences of societal 

perceptions, policies, and land-use practices on societal 

vulnerability and resilience. 

Risk perceptions and policies are important factors in the 

success of risk reduction strategies (Frerks and Bender, 2004). 

Case studies addressing perceptions, policies, and strategies 

will include Native American communities, urban and rural 

comparisons, and international experiences. Policies and 

practices of interest include social structures, economic frameworks, institutional frameworks, and land-use philosophies. 

Additional research will link this knowledge with the development of risk reduction tools and applications. 
Geography for a Changing World 21

Strategic Action 4.5:

Develop and implement a monitoring program that provides perspectives at multiple scales of vulnerability and 

resilience to adverse land change. 

A national monitoring program will identify at-risk areas 

to prioritize additional USGS hazard and vulnerability assessment research and risk reduction efforts of the DHS, USEPA, 

and local partners. To support the development of a national 

monitoring program, the USGS will host an international symposium to assess the state of current research. 

Strategic Action 4.6:

Develop and apply innovative geographic and economic 

methods to assess the effects of proposed scenarios for 

hazard mitigation strategies and risk management. 

Decisionmakers face major informational and financial 

challenges in their efforts to develop and implement hazard 

mitigation programs that reduce potential losses, increase 

resilience, and retain community wealth. The USGS will 

address these challenges by expanding its social and economic 

research capabilities. The USGS will continue existing economic and geographic research, such as the Land-Use Portfolio Model (Bernknopf and others, 2001) and the Legal-Institutional Analysis Model (Lamb and others, 1993). Research 

products will assist managers in determining the effectiveness 

and feasibility of mitigation and risk management under a 

variety of scenarios. Additional research will include risk 

communication, societyʼs willingness to pay for mitigation 

strategies, methods for incorporating uncertainty, institutional factors of mitigation success, and the role of geospatial 

information in mitigation analyses. Research will also focus 

on techniques for distinguishing high-probability/low-consequence events from low-probability/high-consequence events 

for public policy decisionmaking (Cutter and others, 2003). 

Strategic Action 4.7:

Provide innovative geographic methods and techniques 

to help secure the safety of the Nation in emergency 

response and recovery efforts. 

The USGS will partner with DHS and the USEPA, as 

well as State and local emergency management offices, to 

provide geospatial support, such as integrated data platforms 

and geographic analysis, and predictive models for planning and implementing response and recovery strategies. The 

USGS will continue development of Geospatial Multi-Agency 

Coordination (GeoMAC; Highlight 4), as well as other models 

and decision-support tools that provide intelligent access to 

remotely sensed data, geospatial layers, loss-estimation models, and institutional frameworks for response efforts. An integrated portal that provides varying levels of practitioner access 

to USGS hazard and vulnerability and resilience data, models, 

and research is required to take full advantage of these science 

products. Researchers will examine potential parallels among 

various USGS hazard activities and the national response to 

potential terrorist attacks with the objective of improving all 

responses. Researchers will collocate with practitioners and 

Federal partners to better understand societal issues and needs. 

The USGS must ensure the use of generated data, models, 

and knowledge through the development of training materials, 

workshops, geographic information system (GIS)-based tools, 

and Internet-based applications.

Sidebar 4.2: Improving the Nation’s ability to mitigate, respond to, and recover from hazards 

Linkages: 

Partnerships with risk reduction practitioners and agencies will provide the USGS with opportunities to better understand 

issues and needs and with avenues for applying geographic knowledge, models, and tools. Potential non-federal partners 

include the United Nations, the Organization of American States, the American Red Cross, MercyCorps International, the 

Pacific Disaster Center, and the Public Entity Risk Institute. Similar partnering opportunities exist with local and State 

officials, and organizations that represent them, such as the National Association of Counties, the League of Cities, the Urban 

and Regional Information Systems Association, and the American Planning Association. Research will benefit from partnerships with academic researchers. 

Performance Measures: 

• Application development staff is increased (within 2 years). 

• A national all-hazards portal for data, knowledge, and tools is developed (within 3 years). 

• An international symposium is held to assess the state of mitigation modeling research and indicators, including economic and institutional metrics (within 3 years).
22 Geography for a Changing World 

Sidebar 4.2 (cont.)

• Studies on the effectiveness and feasibility of mitigation strategies are completed (within 2 years). 

• Predictive mitigation models, metrics, and decision-support tools are developed (within 4 years). 

• Predictive models and decision-support tools that provide intelligent access to remotely sensed data and geospatial 

layers for response and recovery efforts are developed (within 3 years). 

• Collocate geography researchers with risk reduction practitioners and agencies (within 2 years).

• Collaborate with Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to develop training materials on research and 

tools (within 5 years).

Wildland fire is a serious and growing hazard throughout much of the United States, posing a great threat to life and 

property. During fire seasons, fire coordination centers set priorities for deploying firefighting resources based on human safety, 

property protection, and natural resource values. To support this decisionmaking, the USGS works closely with experts from 

Federal fire management agencies and the private sector, and has developed an Internet-based mapping tool referred to as 

Geospatial Multi-Agency Coordination (GeoMAC). As the sole science agency for the DOI, the USGS also hosts and maintains 

the GeoMAC Web site.

Since 2001, GeoMAC has disseminated information about fire status and potential to a wide variety of users in the 

western United States. General users seeking information about location and possible movement of fires in their area will 

see maps of fire perimeters overlaid on base-layer information, similar to that in The National Map. Firefighting practitioners 

have access to sophisticated potential fire movement maps, status of suppression resources, and proximity of wildfires to life, 

property, and infrastructure. Daily updates provide current fire perimeter data from incident intelligence sources, GPS data, and 

infrared (IR) imagery from fixed wing and satellite platforms.

Figure 3: The GeoMAC Web site and 

mapping application customizes the dissemination mode and type of information 

supplied to both the general public and 

to firefighting practitioners

Highlight 4: Supporting Fire Response Needs for the Nation
Geography for a Changing World 23

Goal 5. Develop credible and accessible 

geographic research, tools, and 

methods to support decisionmaking 

related to the human and environmental 

consequences of land change. 

In 2015, understanding and managing land 

change will still be a challenge for policymakers 

and the general public because of the complexity 

of these changes and the overwhelming amount 

of available information. However, the USGS 

will improve the link between science and 

decisionmaking by developing a national toolbox 

of metrics and indicators to characterize the 

natural, social, and economic implications 

of land change. Decision-support systems 

will help users visualize and gain context 

for decisions regarding these implications. 

Innovative and effective mechanisms to identify 

the Nationʼs needs for science will help focus 

USGS research. Research about collaborative 

processes will lead to science-based activities to 

expand public involvement in decisionmaking. 

Multidisciplinary teams of USGS natural and 

social scientists will address pressing societal 

issues. The USGS will improve its ability to meet 

the Nationʼs key science goals by addressing the 

needs of decisionmakers and the general public. 

For more than 125 years, USGS science has supported 

resource management related to hazards, the environment, 

and natural resources, providing policymakers and the general 

public with integrated information to understand and adapt 

to human and environmental changes. In recent years an 

increase in citizen involvement in societal decisionmaking has 

greatly increased demands, opportunities, and expectations for 

USGS science (Ehlers, 2002). Policymakers and the general 

public now expect information to be available quickly in a 

convenient-to-use format that reflects the best available science and that is useful to a broad array of users with varying 

needs and levels of science knowledge (National Research 

Council, 2002). 

Although the demand for USGS science is rising, the 

links between science and public decisionmaking often are 

complicated and obscure. Scientists may not be aware of 

societal issues where their expertise is needed. The technical 

nature of scientific research and the language used to report 

results may not be readily comprehensible to non-scientists. 

The scales, spatial boundaries, and timeframes of scientific 

investigations may be different than those needed to support 

specific management issues. Science reports usually do not 

explain the uncertainty associated with scientific results, so 

that users of these reports may not be aware of the implications of scientific uncertainty in making policy decisions 

(Bradshaw and Borchers, 2000). Research questions related to 

making the transfer of knowledge from scientist to decisionmakers include: 

• What is the decision context in which USGS science 

information typically is used?

• What roles do scale, resolution, and uncertainty of 

scientific information play in addressing different types 

of issues? 

• When asked to provide scientific information, how 

do USGS researchers balance research timeliness and 

completeness? 

• How can science performed with natural boundaries 

support decisions that have political or social boundaries? 

• What science-based tools and products can be developed to support decisionmaking? 

• How do we demonstrate the value of geographic information in decisionmaking? 

• How can collaborative processes facilitate the use of 

science in decisionmaking? 

Research to improve the links between science and 

decisionmaking must have a geographic component for 

several reasons. Geography has the relation between society and nature as one of its primary research traditions. This 

tradition requires the use and integration of natural and social 

sciences to better understand the implications of land change. 

With expertise in geospatial analysis, geographic researchers 

have an important role in contributing to improved metrics 

and tools. For example, decisionmakers in jurisdictions with 

specific geographic definitions, such as a city, county, or state, 

may find that access to science data through a geographically 

oriented portal is most useful. The creation of geographic 

interfaces for decision-support systems will be an important 

USGS geographic contribution.

The research outlined here focuses on the development 

of multidisciplinary methods and techniques for science to 

support policymaking and be understood by the public. This 

research will establish the USGS as a leader in improving 

the use of science for societal decisionmaking. Developed 

methods and techniques will improve the ability of the USGS, 

its partners, and the general public to use USGS science in 

addressing societal issues to protect the Nationʼs safety, economic well-being, and natural resources. 
24 Geography for a Changing World 

Strategic Science Actions 

The National Research Council (2002) charged the USGS 

to develop research that bridges the gap between science and 

policymaking and management. As policymaking processes 

become more diffuse, the NRC contended that the USGS has 

the responsibility to deliver adequate information in a timely 

fashion to communities. Fulfilling this responsibility will 

require fundamental geographic and social science research to 

find ways to expand public involvement through more easily 

used decision-support software. Realization of these possibilities will require commitment to six high priority strategic 

actions. 

Strategic Action 5.1:

Establish a science and decisionmaking focus within the 

vulnerability and resilience science center of excellence.

USGS social science research and application development must draw on the expertise of geographers, economists, 

sociologists, policy analysts, and other social science disciplines, programmers, and operations engineers. In some cases, 

specialists engaged in this activity will be collaborators in 

universities or in private companies. They should serve as 

a USGS and DOI advisory group and resource for research 

methods related to the use of science for societal needs, such 

as multidisciplinary policy analysis, visualization, and needs 

assessments. 

Strategic Action 5.2:

Improve our understanding of the motivations and processes used by decisionmakers to manage and adapt to 

land change. 

The Nation requires research on societal decisionmaking related to land change, the role of science in making land 

change policy, and the different information needs, incentives, 

constraints, and timeframes of key decisionmakers and USGS 

customers. USGS geographic research will provide a better 

understanding of how local and regional institutional elements 

become part of the decisionmaking processes. Such research 

also will provide collaborative models, role-playing simulations, and visualization techniques for understanding decision 

processes. The USGS will explore current local, State, and 

Federal policies to better frame the use and communication of 

science. 

Strategic Action 5.3

Develop innovative and effective mechanisms for identifying needs and opportunities for science to support 

decisionmaking. 

The USGS will evaluate past and current use of the 

Bureauʼs science products to determine factors that promote or 

inhibit their use. Because perceptions often dictate the use of 

science, the USGS will conduct landscape and risk perception 

studies of policymakers and the general public. Using case 

studies, the USGS will conduct research to define its potential 

contributions to adaptive management of public resources and 

to identify the Bureauʼs most likely customers. These studies 

focused on adaptive management will include the identification of issues and concerns, opportunities for public involvement, areas of potential conflict and resolution, and important 

areas for further research and application development. The 

USGS will organize a symposium involving relevant agencies 

and organizations to assess the breadth of research and applications that expand the use of science. 

Strategic Action 5.4:

Develop a national toolbox of metrics, indicators, models, 

and decision-support systems that characterizes the 

environmental, social, and economic consequences of 

land change. 

The USGS will develop a set of metrics, indicators, and 

models tied together by decision-support systems to support 

management of public natural resources. Parts of such a toolbox are already available, but their assembly into a functional 

system to describe the interaction of environmental, social, 

and economic consequences of land change is not yet complete. Geographers must create systems for collecting, storing, 

displaying, and analyzing basic spatial data, and design easyto-use interfaces for users who are non-specialists. A national 

toolbox that is straightforward to access and use can substantially contribute to the engagement of an interested public, 

allowing citizens to discern the likely outcomes of alternative 

management scenarios.

Strategic Action 5.5:

Conduct multidisciplinary case studies to support 

environmental policy analysis and hazard risk-reduction 

efforts. 

Case studies offer the USGS opportunities to analyze 

environmental policy and hazard risks while refining the 

Bureauʼs capabilities to support risk-reduction efforts. USGS 

geographers also will contribute to case study efforts for 

environmental and hazard policies by providing generalizations from two of its traditions, an emphasis on nature-society 

connections and spatial analytic approaches. Decision-support 

systems are needed to integrate socioeconomic models and 

physical models of land change with geospatial databases. 
Geography for a Changing World 25

Strategic Action 5.6:

Develop and apply methods for examining the value, 

format, and transfer of knowledge for societal decisionmaking and policy analysis. 

Although USGS geographers will continue to engage 

extensively in the creation of new data and knowledge, 

geographic research also must focus on how those data and 

knowledge are used for decisionmaking and policy. USGS 

geographers must determine the particular preferences of the 

end users of USGS geographic products for the types and format of the data they use. Knowledge and technology transfer 

from research settings to applications are key elements of the 

USGS mission, but the most useful and efficient approaches to 

these activities are not well understood. Primary issues awaiting resolution include scale, accuracy, timeliness, and thematic 

content of geographic data in policy analysis. Resolution of 

these issues will aid the USGS in creating useful products and 

will help policy customers make better use of USGS science. 

Sidebar 5.1: Improving the use of USGS science in decisionmaking 

Linkages: 

Geographyʼs efforts to improve the use of science in decisionmaking requires partnering with other USGS disciplines, 

because their science provides basic explanations for much of the knowledge and many of the data transferred to customers. Additional partners include other DOI Bureaus and Federal agencies that use USGS science, such as the Departments 

of Defense and Energy, and university departments with mutual research interests. The USGS will foster relationships with 

organizations that focus on improving the integration of othersʼ science with societal decisionmaking, such as the Congressional Natural Hazards Caucus. To better understand societal issues and needs and to apply new techniques, the USGS will 

extend partnerships to include local, State and Federal practitioners, and their representatives, such as the National Association of Counties, the League of Cities, and the American Planning Association. 

Performance measures: 

• A focus on integrating science and decisionmaking is established within the vulnerability and resilience science center 

of excellence (within 2 years). 

• Increase social science research and application development expertise (within 2 years).

• A Bureau advisory group is established on research issues and methods related to linking science and decisionmaking 

(within 3 years). 

• Mechanisms to determine needs and opportunities for USGS science are developed (within 2 years). 

• An international symposium is held to assess the breadth of research and applications that expand the use of science 

for decisionmaking and to develop a coordinated research agenda (within 2 years). 

• A Bureau-wide research agenda on metrics, indicators, and models (within 2 years). 

• A national toolbox of metrics, indicators, models, and decision-support systems to support societal decisionmaking is 

developed (within 5 years). 

• Case studies are completed on the use of decision-support systems to support environmental policy analysis and hazard risk-reduction efforts (within 3 years). 

• Case studies on the use of collaborative models, role-playing simulations, and visualization techniques for facilitating 

the use of science (within 5 years). 

• Methods are developed for demonstrating the value of USGS science (within 3 years). 

• Training materials and workshop curriculum on the value and use of USGS science information and tools are developed (within 7 years).
26 Geography for a Changing World 

Highlight 5: Developing Indicators to Support Famine Prevention Efforts 

Sub-Saharan Africa is one of the worldʼs most vulnerable regions in terms of food security. In an effort to lower the 

incidence of drought-induced famine, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) established the Famine Early 

Warning System Network (FEWS NET), which is a U.S. Government funded partnership to provide decisionmakers with timely 

and accurate information regarding potential famine conditions. They use the information to establish more effective, sustainable 

networks for food security and response planning. These networks, led by Africans, reduce the vulnerability of groups who are 

at risk from famine and flood hazards. 

The USGS, in cooperation with other Federal agencies and private sector partners, provides the data, information, and 

analyses to support FEWS NET activity. Using daily satellite images of the continent, USGS researchers create “greenness 

maps” with standardized protocols. These maps depict surrogate indicators for biomass that cannot easily be measured on a 

regular cycle throughout the year. An advantage of remotely sensed data is its ability to frequently monitor large areas. Field 

observations and ground-based measurements enhance the accuracy of the remotely sensed data. Investigators estimate famine 

potential in future months by combining information on local conditions, weather and climate assessments, hydrologic cycles, 

and socio-economic data. These estimates are communicated to local decisionmakers, and relief organizations use the resulting 

predictions to plan the distribution of relief supplies.

Figure 4. Normalized Difference 

Vegetation Index (NDVI) data 

used in FEWS NET activities, with 

a spatial resolution of 8 km. The 

NDVI measures the amount and 

vigor of vegetation on the Earth’s 

surface. The magnitude of NDVI 

is related to the level of photosynthetic activity in the observed 

vegetation. In general, higher 

values of NDVI indicate greater 

vigor and amounts of vegetation. 

The NDVI is derived from data 

collected by NOAA satellites 

and processed by the NASA 

Global Inventory Monitoring and 

Modeling Studies (GIMMS). The 

USGS National Center for Earth 

Resources Observation and Science (EROS) further develops and 

processes the data before providing them to the FEWS NET.
Geography for a Changing World 27

Goal 6: Develop and test hypotheses 

about the use of geographic regions 

to understand the human and 

environmental dynamics of land change.

In 2015, States will continue to face 

requirements to report to the USEPA on waterquality conditions in their State using data 

collected from a statewide physical, chemical, 

and biological monitoring network. Scientists 

use comparative information from relatively 

natural reference sites to make use support 

assessments for each waterbody in the State. 

USGS geographic research and applications are 

widely used by States in making scientifically 

sound use support assessments. A USGS 

maintained library of regional ecoregion 

frameworks supports monitoring network 

design and the choice of appropriate reference 

sites so that the usefulness of monitoring data 

can be maximized. Integrated USGS regional 

databases characterizing human factors (such 

as population, agricultural chemical use, 

atmospheric deposition, and point sources) 

and natural factors (such as soil, topography, 

climate, geology, and hydrology) that influence 

water quality enable scientists to incorporate 

monitoring data into powerful predictive 

water-quality models. USGS geographers 

work with scientists from State programs and 

nongovernmental organizations to develop 

and test regional indicators of ecological 

integrity and approaches for using indicators to 

summarize information collected at a local scale 

for drawing conclusions about regions.

Regional geography provides a cross-cutting understanding of processes and forms that are characteristic of a region. 

Geographers examine the relations among these processes in 

a vertical sense (integrating the understanding of physical, 

biological, social, and cultural processes at a single place) and 

horizontally (examining the interactions among these processes occurring between places or within a region) (National 

Research Council, 1997). A regional perspective enables 

analysts to deal with complexities of places and regions that 

include environmental and social systems. In the regional 

perspective, the spatial framework of the region and the 

spatial structure of processes lead to integrative explanations. 

Rather than assess processes topically, one at a time (such 

as geologic, biologic, or hydrologic processes), the regional 

approach is to consider all the processes together within a 

perspective defined by the region.

A central contribution of regional geography is the concept of ecological regions. These regions, which classify the 

landscape into relatively homogeneous spatial units based on 

biotic and abiotic associations, are not simply inert containers 

filled with similar biophysical attributes. Rather, ecological 

regions are functional spatial entities on the landscape, shaped 

by human and natural processes. Regions are open systems 

with internal dynamics that exchange organisms, energy, matter, resources, people, and ideas with adjoining regions. These 

regional frameworks support sound scientific research on topics ranging from water quality and biodiversity to sustainable 

development.

Addressing science goals related to the rates, causes, consequences, and risks associated with land change will require 

a regional geographic perspective and the use of ecological 

regions. The application of a regional geographic perspective:

• Helps scientists and managers place geographic 

processes, such as local land change, into the larger 

context that reflects spatial and temporal interactions at 

a broader scale.

• Stratifies the variability in landscape processes that 

shape the identity of a place, increasing the likelihood of detecting and understanding environmental 

responses generated by human activities.

• Allows the extrapolation of data from information-rich 

locations to those where information is lacking.

• Reduces the costs of monitoring, scientific investigation, and resource management by intelligently guiding 

data-collection activities.

• Provides a construct for comprehensive assessment 

from both spatial (such as regional comparisons and 

national-scale landscape assessments) and thematic 

(such as comparative effects of different land change 

scenarios) points of view.

• Provides a bridge between science activities, often 

undertaken at local levels, and the needs of decisionmakers for information to guide decisions at a regional 

or national scale. 

Strategic Science Actions

 The National Research Council (2002) has challenged 

the USGS to become the integrative regional geography 

experts for the Nation. Critical research questions about 

regional geography include:

• How can regions be efficiently and/or objectively 

defined and validated?
28 Geography for a Changing World 

• Is it possible to develop a continuous measure of the 

ecological potential or capability of a region? How 

would such a spatially continuous index compare with 

a discrete index? 

• What insights regarding the nature of landscapes and 

the processes that affect them are provided through 

integrated regional frameworks that are not possible 

when relying on a single disciplinary perspective? 

• How might the inability to draw sharp regional boundaries be best portrayed and validly analyzed?

• What landscape processes are responsible for the 

patterns observed in regional frameworks at various 

scales?

• What is the role of spatial heterogeneity within and 

among ecosystems in the functioning of individual 

ecosystems and of entire regions?

• What allows ecosystems and ecosystem processes that 

are characteristic of a region to persist in the face of 

perturbations? 

The rich USGS scientific cultures in geology, hydrology, and biology provide a reservoir of process-based 

regional expertise. The regional administrative framework 

of the USGS lends itself easily to support Bureau geographers who serve as regional experts providing advice and 

products to regional customers. A USGS institutional commitment to seven high priority strategic actions will ensure 

successful development of a Bureau-wide capability in 

regional geography. 

Strategic Action 6.1:

Include a regional geography emphasis within the land 

change science center of excellence. 

Strategic Action 6.2:

Take a leadership role in working with the USEPA, States, 

and other Federal agencies in completing the USEPA 

Level IV Ecoregion framework. 

Strategic Action 6.3:

Provide ongoing assistance to scientists in the USGS and 

DOI in the development and use of regional frameworks. 

The regional frameworks designed by geographers will 

contribute to the interpretation of monitoring data that trace 

the pulse of environmental and social systems. Such monitoring is a key component of adaptive management used by DOI 

agencies in land, water, and wildlife systems. Regionalization 

of data also entails solving the inherent problems in scaling 

up data collected at the site or local level to regional or global 

scales, or scaling down data collected at a global scale for use 

in more restricted regions. Prediction of potential hydrologic 

effects from global climate change, for example, relies on sensible divisions of continental surfaces into groups of functionally similar regions.

Strategic Action 6.4:

Conduct research to answer questions associated with 

four priority issues related to regional frameworks: 

regional identity, regional boundaries, hierarchical relations, and regional ecosystem functioning. 

Several regional spatial frameworks commonly are used 

for Federal resource planning and management, and to help 

design and implement natural resources research, including 

frameworks of the USEPA, the U.S. Forest Service, and the 

U.S. Department of Agriculture. Users of these frameworks 

often do not have a broad appreciation of the purposes, underlying concepts, and the ability of the hierarchical nature of the 

framework to support the generalization of findings from one 

scale to another. USGS geographers will work with scientists 

from across Federal and State government to understand and 

use existing frameworks in terms of common and emerging applications. A major challenge for USGS geographers 

(including those working on The National Map) will be to 

combine information from these various regional frameworks 

into a single workable database. In recent years, USGS geographers have played a leadership role in establishing a research 

agenda for the development and use of regional frameworks 

(Bailey, in press; McMahon and others, in press; Omernik, 

in press). Continuing leadership is needed to develop an 

infrastructure to implement the research agenda. By playing 

a leading role in completing the Level IV ecoregions, USGS 

researchers and their colleagues in other Federal and State 

agencies will provide the final component of a hierarchical 

system that can be used in studies from a local to continental 

scales. 

Strategic Action 6.5:

Use a hierarchical local-regional-national-global 

approach to improve understanding of the phenomena 

and processes that cause land change.

The social and environmental drivers for land change 

have hierarchical characteristics that operate at local, state, 

national, and global scales. Increasingly large scales encompass increasingly complex systems. Geographers will develop 

new knowledge, theory, tools, and methods to specify these 

scale-dependent features, and to aggregate or disaggregate 

them. The results of these developments will enable improvements in our understanding of how land change operates and 

will provide improved predictive capability. 
Geography for a Changing World 29

Strategic Action 6.6:

Articulate a set of scaling rules for describing the mechanisms of land change that can be used for generalizing 

local study findings to larger scales.

Landscape processes are connected, regardless of where 

they occur along a local-global continuum, and influence 

human and environmental systems at other places and scales 

that are different from their origins. Geographers have 

observed that (1) causal mechanisms are best observed at local 

levels; (2) macro-scale events (such as national and global 

scale) are not always best explained by reducing them to localscale events; and (3) macro-scale processes do not always 

deterministically structure local-scale events. Interactions 

across scale are not linear but involve thresholds and abrupt 

changes between different conditions, and outcomes vary considerably locally and regionally (National Research Council, 

1997, 2001a, 2002). A better understanding of these scalar 

relationships will support drawing more powerful regional and 

national conclusions about the human-environment relation 

from local-scale monitoring efforts.

Strategic Action 6.7:

Establish regional data observatories and archives in 

conjunction with USGS programs, the NSF Long-Term 

Ecological Research (LTER) Network, National Ecological 

Observatory Network (NEON), the National Acid Precipitation Program, NOAA, NASA, and other organizations 

that collect earth-science and biological data. 

USGS scientists are able to conduct research at unprecedented spatial and temporal scales only because of the collection of long-term local and national data sets. The paucity of 

long-term regional data sets for many environmental parameters, particularly for land-cover and ecological outcomes, 

limits our current and future ability to understand the relations 

between land change and its causes (Jones and others, 1995). 

The USGS will remedy this critical deficiency by creating 

databases covering the entire Nation with region-specific data 

on critical land-cover types, including forests, grasslands, 

agriculture, and human settlement and industrial uses, and 

complementary demographic, economic, and institutional data. 

Sidebar 6.1 Improving the development, 

evaluation, use, and understanding of 

ecological region frameworks

Linkages: 

The USGS will assign a high priority to working in 

partnership with programs that make use of regional 

frameworks, such as USGSʼs National Water-Quality 

Assessment (NAWQA) Program and Priority Ecosystem 

Studies Program. Priority DOI partners include the Bureau 

of Land Management, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 

and the National Park Service. Priority non-governmental 

partners include the Association of American Geographers 

and the American Society of Photogrammetry and Remote 

Sensing.

Performance measures: 

• Establish a regional geography component in the 

land change science center of excellence (within 1 

year).

• Complete Level IV ecoregion frameworks for the 

11 remaining states (Calif., Ariz., N. Mex., Minn., 

Mich., Ill., N.Y., Maine, N.H., Vt., and N.J.) (within 

5 years).

• Collaborate regularly on regional framework issues 

with USGS and DOI scientists, resulting in at least 

one peer-reviewed publication each year for each 

scientist at the land change center of excellence.

• An international symposium is held on regional 

geography to assess the state of research practice 

and develop an international regional geography 

research agenda. A focus of the symposium will be 

the development of indicators of regional condition, 

particularly indicators of ecological integrity, and 

approaches for using these indicators at multiple 

scales (within 2 years).

• Develop an interpretive atlas of the status and 

trends of ecosystems and environmental resources, 

updated on a regular (for example, every 5 years) 

interval, in collaboration with other government 

agencies and non-governmental organizations 

(within 5 years).

• Develop a more detailed set of research issues 

and a research plan as part of the regional geography symposium and publish this plan in a peerreviewed outlet (within 4 years).
30 Geography for a Changing World 

Sidebar 6.2 Developing regional databases 

Linkages: 

The USGS will give priority to cooperative working arrangements with the USGS Earth Surface Dynamics (ESD) Program, 

the NAWQA Program, and the GIO. Other important partners include the Census Bureau, the NSFʼs LTER and NEON centers, and NASAʼs Socioeconomic Data Archive Center.

Performance measures:

• Complete a pilot implementation of a regional data observatory and archive with the ESD and NAWQA programs 

(within 2 years).

• Develop, in collaboration with the GIO, the Census Bureau, and private vendors, a long-term, regional database of 

annual human population estimates at the census block level (within 5 years).

• Integrate long-term ecological databases (such as demographics and physical and biological resources) across multiple governmental and non-governmental agencies, and manage data to allow efficient study of issues in a regional 

framework (within 10 years).

Highlight 6:

Choosing an Ecological Region 

Framework to Guide Global Change 

Investigations

Geology, topography, climate, 

ecosystems, and other factors vary across 

the surface of the Earth and interact in 

many complex ways. There are several 

alternative geographic regional frameworks 

for the contiguous United States, and the 

basis for recognizing and defining regional 

boundaries varies among the frameworks. 

How should potential users choose which 

ecoregion system to employ in their work? 

Thompson and others (in press) examined 

the relations between biological and climate 

data along three latitudinal transects across 

the United States for three ecoregion 

frameworks, including the framework used 

by the World Wildlife Fund (WWF). Along 

a 35° N latitudinal transect, the WWF 

ecoregion boundaries align reasonably well 

with major changes in bioclimatic variables, 

especially in the western United States. The 

WWF ecoregion framework therefore is 

likely to be most useful to organizations that 

have conservation or management goals at 

a similar taxonomic resolution and spatial 

scale as those of the WWF.

Figure 5. World Wildlife Fund Ecoregions: 35 ° N Transect.

World Wildlife Fund Ecoregions

35° N Latitude Transect

Elevation (m)

Mean Temperature

of the Coldest Month (°C)

Growing Degree Days

on a 5°C Base (x1000)

Moisture Index

(Actual Evaporation/

Potential Evaporation)

Species

Richness (black)

Unique Species (gray)

Longitude

3000

2000

1000

0

10

0

-10

6.0

4.0

2.0

0.0

0.9

0.5

0.1

80

40

Species

0

(N) -125 -115 -105 -95 -85 -75
Geography for a Changing World 31

Goal 7. Observe the Earth at all scales 

using remote sensing to understand the 

human and environmental dynamics of 

land change.

In 2015, the USGS will provide ongoing 

surveillance of the dynamic Earth using a 

constellation of aircraft- and satellite-based 

remote sensing instruments. The remote 

sensing observations will be part of a nearreal time terrestrial monitoring system 

that meets the Nationʼs needs for timely, 

accurate, and comprehensive information 

and knowledge on landscape state and 

condition and on the broad characteristics 

of land change. This contribution to 

the Nationʼs economic security will lead 

to improved resource management and 

environmental health.

Remote sensing science is an important part of geographic research and is essential to identifying, characterizing, measuring, and mapping the Earthʼs surface and near 

Earth surface phenomena. Remote sensing is a cost-effective, 

integral part of our national arsenal of resource assessment, 

environmental management, and environmental monitoring 

capabilities. The USGS will need to understand, improve, 

apply, and provide advocacy for remote sensing, particularly 

for multi-resolution capabilities of optical sensors (such 

as Landsatʼs Enhanced Thematic Mapper Plus and Terraʼs 

MODIS) and a collection of new sensors based on radar, light 

detection and ranging (LIDAR), and other technologies. The 

USGS cannot meet its science, environmental monitoring, and 

mapping goals without remote sensing.

The National Research Council (2001a) has challenged the USGS to make greater use of remote sensing in its 

investigations, and the role of remote sensing has grown in 

importance as a source of objective data from which landscape 

conditions can be mapped and measured. The USGS currently 

uses remotely sensed data for land-cover mapping and landcover change studies, investigates habitat status and ecosystem 

productivity, and studies surface formation relating to geomorphic change and geological hazards. To continue addressing 

the NRC challenge, the USGS will:

• Provide access to a rich archive of historical aerial photography and calibrated historical and contemporary 

remotely sensed data of all the Earthʼs land masses.

• Contribute a steady stream of remotely sensed data 

to USGS and other scientists suitable for near realtime assessment of changing land-surface conditions, 

including the effects of natural and anthropogenic 

hazards.

• Operate a landscape characterization program that 

translates remotely sensed data into accurate measures 

of land use and land cover, ecosystem properties, and 

surface form. Of equal importance will be the USGS 

paradigm shift in landscape characterization from 

baseline mapping to dynamic and rapid identification 

of conditions and changes with map and measurement 

accuracies substantially improved over those achieved 

today.

Strategic Science Actions

The USGS has a substantial investment in remote sensing. USGS scientists define and direct the acquisition of 

remotely sensed data sets, such as Landsat; ensure the preservation of and access to remotely sensed data sets; improve 

access and distribution systems to ensure timely availability 

of remotely sensed data and products; place increased emphasis on research, education, and awareness of the benefits of 

remote sensing technology and products; promote the development of data analysis tools and techniques; and promote 

expanded and enhanced use of remotely sensed data by 

exploring advancements in remote sensing instrument technology and developing innovative ways to exploit remotely 

sensed data. Current research has focused on several critical 

methodologies: data access and archiving, calibration and validation, and mapping strategies. In addition, the USGS has a 

substantial investment in developing applications of remotely 

sensed data; such as interferometric research on volcanic and 

earthquake hazards, and LIDAR analysis for surface forms 

and tree structures. Continuation of these methodological and 

application activities is essential. 

The remote sensing science actions that follow should be 

planned through the GIScience Center of Excellence. As the 

USGS capability grows in the topical area of remote sensing 

in a period of a few years, remote sensing and other GIScience 

activities may divide themselves into two separate centers. 

Close communication with DOI resource managers must take 

place so that all research is relevant to the needs of the user 

community. At the same time, the USGSʼs long-standing 

association with the USEPA and U.S. Forest Service is equally 

important in documenting and assessing the consequences of 

land change and hazards on the Nationʼs land and water. A 

strong program affiliation with NASA, the Climate Change 

Science Program, and international equivalents, such as the 

International Geosphere-Biosphere Program, are very important. The USGS is an international participant in the global 

effort to understand the changing Earth system and must 

assume a leadership role in conducting research with and in 

support of international science objectives.
32 Geography for a Changing World 

Sidebar 7.1: Custodian of the Nation’s global 

Earth observations 

The USGS is the custodian of the Nationʼs archive of global 

Earth observations obtained from aircraft and satellites. 

Examples of the holdings of the archives include aerial 

photographic coverage of the United States beginning in the 

1930s; Landsat data, representing the longest continuous 

global record of land and water conditions, beginning in the 

1970s; and daily global images collected from NOAA polar 

orbiting missions and the NASA Earth Observing System 

program. The USGS has unmatched access to remotely 

sensed data and analytical capabilities that are needed to 

map, measure, and monitor the changing Earth. 

The Landsat Program housed at the USGS National Center 

for Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) 

in Sioux Falls, S. Dak., is the centerpiece of the USGS 

Earth observation capability. The primary objective of the 

Landsat Program is to ensure a collection of consistently 

calibrated Earth imagery. Since July 1972, six Landsat satellites have used multispectral scanner (MSS) and thematic 

mapper (TM) instruments to gather images of the Earthʼs 

land mass, coastal boundaries, and coral reefs. The Landsat 

Program also ensures the data are of maximum usefulness in supporting the scientific objectives of monitoring 

changes in the Earthʼs land surface and associated environment. 

The Landsat Program has been an interagency partnership 

involving the USGS, NASA, and NOAA in various capacities. Today, the Landsat Program is a joint initiative of the 

USGS and NASA. NASA is responsible for developing and 

launching the spacecraft, while the USGS is responsible 

for flight operations, maintenance, and management of all 

ground-data reception, processing, archiving, product generation, and distribution. In addition, the USGS conducts 

research that has led to improvements in the understanding 

and applications of Landsat and other remotely sensed data.

Strategic Action 7.1:

Survey the requirements of the DOI, USGS, other government agencies, and the international remote sensing 

community for environmental data and monitoring, and 

define the remote sensing capabilities needed for current and future applications.

Documentation of the uses of remotely sensed data 

within DOI and internationally will provide the foundation for 

defining Earth observation mission requirements and remote 

sensing research needs. The USGS will create plans for 

enhancing application capabilities, conducting research, and 

promoting new development processes that enable the use of 

remote sensing to operationally monitor the Earthʼs environment. An essential multimission perspective for the research 

and operational activities of the USGS and DOI includes using 

the capabilities of both government and commercial remote 

sensing programs as well as the unique National Technical 

Means assets of our intelligence and defense agencies. 

Strategic Action 7.2:

Investigate new technologies for Earth observation and 

define the specifications for the remote sensing capabilities needed to meet current and future Earth observation 

and monitoring requirements. 

This action includes determining which of the emerging 

capabilities are candidates for technology development. For 

example, given the promising uses of LIDAR data, the USGS 

will pursue research leading to the systematic national collection 

and application of LIDAR measurements. Initially, research is 

needed to understand the role of historical and contemporary 

remotely sensed data so that the products of future instruments 

are compatible with pre-existing data. The investigation of new 

technologies must include determination of the advances in processing, multi-temporal assessment, and analysis of these types 

of data at multiple scales and resolutions. 

Strategic Action 7.3:

Undertake an aggressive role in the development and 

continuation of the Nation’s participation in the Global 

Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS).

Scientists, planners, managers, and decisionmakers for 

Earth resources must have access to the best available data to 

analyze the continuously changing Earth. USGS geographers, 

working with others throughout the USGS, will actively pursue a strong international leadership role in GEOSS to ensure 

access to needed data. It is especially important that the 

USGS leadership continue to advocate for Landsat continuity 

as Landsat data provide an unprecedented time series of observations for understanding global land change attributes. 

Strategic Action 7.4:

Consolidate and convert the Nation’s vast and dispersed 

historical aerial photography into an electronically 

accessible USGS remote sensing archive in a format 

that enables studies of the Earth’s land-cover/land-use 

history. 

Archives of historical remotely sensed data, including 

aerial photography, offer a unique and objective means to 

reconstruct the history of land change for the Nation. This 

history provides a yardstick for measuring present and future 

environmental change. Historical aerial photography exists in 

public and private archives across the country. The deterioration and loss of historical aerial photographs due to the lack 

of resources for their storage and use represents a substantial 

loss of irreplaceable information, constraining our scientific 

and management capability. The USGS will lead the effort to 

consolidate and preserve this valuable endangered resource.
Geography for a Changing World 33

Sidebar 7.2: Expanding the use of remote sensing for Earth observation

Linkages:

The most immediate and ongoing priorities for remote sensing at the USGS are that the Bureau must assert its role as a 

national and international leader in the processing, management, and analysis of remote sensing data. The USGS will 

maintain the continuity of long-term remotely sensed data and will ensure that new remote sensing capabilities needed to 

meet USGS and DOI program requirements are available. Remote sensing is a critical geographic method for providing 

cost-effective mapping, measurement, and monitoring of the dynamic landscape. The Climate Change Science Program 

(2003) identified a strong role for remote sensing to meet program objectives related to key science goals. The Earth 

Observation Summit of 2003 lead to the establishment of the Group on Earth Observations (GEO), that called for a concentrated international effort, founded on strong national programs, to develop a comprehensive Earth observation system to 

address economic and environmental issues. The USGS provides leadership in the GEO initiative. The USGS also is a plenary member of the Committee on Earth Observation Satellites (CEOS) and the International Global Observation Strategy 

(IGOS) that strives to achieve maximum use of Earth observations for the purpose of improving the understanding of the 

state and processes of the Earthʼs system. The USGS is an international remote sensing leader, and through its geography 

programs the Bureau will advance remote sensing in partnerships with NASA, NOAA, and the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency (NGA). 

Performance Measures:

• Establish a remote sensing science capability within the GIScience center of excellence and prepare an implementation plan (within 1 year).

• Complete a user needs assessment of the specific remote sensing data, applications, research, and training needs 

within the USGS and DOI (within 2 years).

• A land remote sensing strategic plan is implemented that lays out the path for meeting the needs of USGS and DOI 

remote sensing users, and specifies the actions required for the USGS to be an international leader in operational 

Earth observation (within 3 years).

• A USGS strategy is implemented that defines the leadership role of the USGS in advancing global Earth observations 

and the USGS role in GEOSS (within 1 year).

• LIDAR data acquisition program is institutionalized and systematic LIDAR measurements improve digital elevation 

databases and are used to characterize vegetation structure and biomass (within 6 years).

• USGS takes a leadership role in new missions, such as National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite 

System (NPOESS), and use of new remote sensing technologies in order to facilitate cost-effective monitoring of the 

changing Earth at a variety of scales (within 5 years).

• A definitive assessment summarizes the monetary and non-monetary benefits of the Landsat Program (within 1 year).

Strategic Action 7.5: 

Develop a plan for the preservation of USGS remote 

sensing archive data that ensures the long-term availability of those data to support science investigations.

Over the past five decades, our Nation has invested billions of dollars for the collection of Earth observation satellite 

and aerial imagery. During those decades, the USGS established itself as the largest civilian, remotely sensed archive in 

the world. The National Satellite Land Remote Sensing Data 

Archive administered by the USGS (Land Remote Sensing 

Policy Act of 1992 - 15 U.S.C. 5652; P.L. 102-555) has the 

responsibility to preserve the existing imagery. This task is 

increasingly challenging as the hardware and software that 

created the images become obsolete. The USGS also must 

plan for newer, supplemental Earth observation systems. 

Strategic Action 7.6:

Conduct research on advanced data access and mining 

capabilities that leads to robust use of the USGS remote 

sensing archive for the purpose of gaining knowledge 

about the Earth’s dynamic history at multiple scales and 

temporal periods. 

Assessment of large-area land change will require access 

to vast volumes of remotely sensed data with efficient user 

interfaces. USGS geographers will create new methods to 

mine and visualize these large data sets to support USGS 

research in all disciplines. 
34 Geography for a Changing World 

Strategic Action 7.7:

Conduct research that leads to the calibration of all 

appropriate USGS remote sensing assets.

The comparison of data from a variety of remote sensing instruments requires USGS geographers to calibrate and 

integrate data over several time periods, over many geographic 

areas, and at different resolutions. This cutting-edge effort 

will require considerable USGS research to develop appropriate methods to bring the Bureauʼs remote sensing products 

into alignment with each other. The ultimate objective is to 

have a consistent remote sensing database that allows comparisons of data over time and across space. The USGS will 

develop this geographic capability to support monitoring, 

analysis, mapping, and projection of changes in the Earthʼs 

environment. 

Strategic Action 7.8:

Define and test protocols for determining the uncertainty, 

accuracy, and precision of products derived from USGS 

remotely sensed data. 

USGS geographers will develop methods for defining 

uncertainty and mechanisms for communicating the uncertainty to scientists, resource managers, and decisionmakers so 

that the data fulfill their potential but are not extended beyond 

their reasonable capabilities.

Sidebar 7.3: Improving access and use of 

USGS remote sensing archives

Linkages: 

The USGS will ensure the long-term availability of the 

Nationʼs remotely sensed data. To ensure that historical 

and contemporary data are available, the USGS will establish a remote sensing center of excellence that includes 

the geographic researchers needed to meet data mining, 

visualization, archiving, and integration challenges. The 

USGS will work with NASA, NOAA, USDA, and other 

Federal agencies that acquire remotely sensed data. It will 

also cooperate with the National Archive and other Federal 

and State historical experts. In addition, the USGS will 

work through professional societies, such as the American 

Society of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, to identify opportunities for preserving non-governmental aerial 

photography holdings.

Performance Measures:

• The availability of historical aerial photography 

through the USGS remote sensing archive for as far 

back in time as the 1920s is doubled through the 

addition of photography from private and government archives (within 5 years; ongoing to continue 

to add new records).

• All aerial photography in the USGS remote sensing 

archive are converted to electronic records and 

accessible through the Internet (within 6 years).

• Researchers can bring “algorithms to the archive” 

to mine through massive volumes of data for the 

purpose of collecting information on specific land 

characteristics (within 5 years).

• Archive preservation program is in place that 

results in long-term security and viability of USGS 

remote sensing archive records (within 3 years). 

Strategic Action 7.9:

Define the analytical methods needed to make better use 

of data from current and future remote sensing instruments for accurate measuring and mapping of landscape 

properties, including land-cover status, ecosystem 

services, and surface form.

USGS geographers will identify the methods and techniques needed to transform electromagnetic measures into the 

spatial, spectral, and biophysical types of data and information needed by other disciplines in the USGS, DOI, and the 

Bureauʼs customers. Example capabilities include (1) methods for developing accurate, robust, and flexible land-change 

metrics, (2) development of near real-time landscape condition monitoring capabilities for quantifying ecosystem stress, 

change, and conversion, (3) methods for transforming LIDAR 

observations into complete three-dimensional measures of 

surface form, canopy configuration, and structure, and (4) 

advancements in scaling in situ measurements into regional 

and global contexts. 

Strategic Action 7.10:

Establish training and outreach activities that provide 

technical advice and support needed to incorporate 

USGS remote sensing capabilities into the DOI and USGS 

programs and projects. 

USGS geographic innovation in the exploitation of 

remotely sensed data will directly support the missions of 

DOI, other civil community agencies, and stakeholders while 

fostering commercial enterprises through technology transfer. To meet mission responsibilities, the USGS must provide 

training, outreach, data grants, and support for remote sensing applications development. Examples include monitoring 

and mapping urbanization with increased frequency to enable 

improved assessments of urbanization effects on water quality; 

flooding risks and fire hazards; advanced data capture and 

processing methods that can lead to a new generation of topographic data that provides the resolution and accuracy needed 

to permit more reliable assessments of hydrologic processes; 

and improved measurements of vegetation canopy that can be 

used in operational weather forecasting models. 
Geography for a Changing World 35

Sidebar 7.4: Monitoring the changing Earth using remote sensing

Linkages:

Remote sensing research requires specialized capabilities. In addition to research by geographers and remote sensing scientists, the USGS will engage in partnerships with other government agencies, industries, and academia. For example, the 

USGS has been working with the AmericaView Consortium, which is a consortium of universities across the United States, 

to expand the understanding and applications of remotely sensed data. The USGS and NASA have worked cooperatively on 

the Landsat, EO-1, and EOS missions, as well as many research activities. This relationship is critical to the long-term success of the USGS in remote sensing. Similarly, universities provide unique capabilities in basic research related to algorithm 

development. Fertile topical areas for USGS-led partnerships include large-area land characterization and mapping, as well 

as the creation of new paradigms for land characterization.

Performance Measures:

• A research strategy outlines the feasibility, approaches, and priorities for calibrating the primary global Earth observation remotely sensed data (such as Landsat, EO-1, and ASTER) managed by the USGS (within 2 years).

• All primary global Earth observation remotely sensed data are calibrated so that intra- and inter-sensor comparisons 

can be made, enabling more detailed and definitive assessments of changing land conditions (within 10 years).

• All USGS land data sets derived from remotely sensed data are validated and include appropriate measures of accuracy and uncertainty (ongoing).

• A research strategy outlines the high priority methodological developments needed to map and measure land attributes from local to global scales using remotely sensed data (within 2 years).

• Improved remote sensing-derived measures of highest priority land attributes enable expanded global monitoring of 

land change and other key environmental processes (within 3 years; ongoing).

• Remote sensing training and outreach programs double the applications of remote sensing within the USGS and DOI 

(within 10 years).

The use of three-dimensional (3-

D) elevation data is rapidly becoming an 

important tool in the visualization and analysis 

of geographic information. The creation 

and display of 3-D models representing bare 

earth, vegetation, and structures has become a 

major focus of research in the past few years. 

A relatively new remote sensing technology 

called Light Detection and Ranging, or 

LIDAR, offers exciting advances in high 

resolution imagery. 

Highlight 7: Applications of Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) Technology 

Figure 6a. Elevation and imagery fusion of LIDAR point cloud. 
36 Geography for a Changing World 

Current LIDAR research involves improving 3-D 

visualization techniques, designing methodology to extract 

vegetation characteristics from LIDAR point clouds, 

automating feature extraction of urban structures, 3-D 

modeling, and combining imagery and LIDAR-derived 

elevation data. In the future, 3-D simulations of landscapes 

will enable more realistic and comprehensive products as 

computer-processing power continues to improve and new 

methods are developed for representing massive data sets. 

Users will be able to walk through 3-D “virtual forests” and 

“virtual cities,” allowing unprecedented realistic views of the 

Earth.

LIDAR is an active sensor that records the distance, or range, of a laser fired from an airborne platform such as an 

airplane, helicopter, or satellite. Conversion of LIDAR data into bare earth, vegetation, or structural elevation information 

produces extremely accurate, high-resolution elevation models to visualize and quantify scenes in three dimensions. Results 

permit high-resolution bare-earth digital elevation models, quantitative estimates of canopy height, canopy closure, biomass, 

and 3-D models of cities that include building footprints. 

Figure 6b. Vegetation LIDAR point cloud.

Figure 6c. Three-dimensional virtual city from LIDAR. 

Highlight 7 (cont.)
Geography for a Changing World 37

Goal 8: Provide timely, intelligent 

access to new and archived USGS 

geographic data needed to conduct 

science and support policy decisions.

By 2015, a host of consumer items will have 

integrated spatial data into their operations by 

taking advantage of wireless communications 

technology, mobile and portable computing 

devices, global positioning systems (GPS), 

and The National Map. The National Map 

will become the preferred gateway for popular 

access into geographical data for everyday 

tasks. For example, farmers may walk their 

fields looking at satellite imagery centered on 

their location, historians may browse historical 

air photos while walking through a 19th century 

industrial plant, and tourist buses may show 

a digital display of the dayʼs sightseeing 

circuit that changes themes depending on 

the tour guideʼs discussion. Tourists in their 

seats may see the map differently, with their 

own customized maps portrayed according to 

preferences learned by the display system.

The National Mapʼs goal of 7-day update 

will be achieved, meaning that data are 

timely and accurate. This will be possible 

because automated software agents will 

have “data mined” data sources, seeking out 

changes on the Earth surface and extracting 

new map information with only minimal 

human intervention. This timeliness will 

lead to myriads of new applications in real 

estate, emergency management, policing, 

environmental management, and commerce.

During the 20th century, the USGS developed and 

produced the Nationʼs topographic map series, which is the 

flagship data product of the Bureau. Unlike many scientific 

products, the topographic map series became a familiar, muchrelied-upon resource for the public as well as scientists. The 

geographic description of the Nation presented on these maps 

enabled scientists to plan field investigations and monitoring 

programs, allowed objective analyses, and provided Federal, 

State, and local agencies a reference base from which new 

maps could be made. The general public used the maps to 

enjoy a range of outdoor activities, such as hiking, canoeing, 

and hunting.

Beginning in 2001, the USGS replaced this signature geospatial data product with The National Map, an Internet-based, 

interactive map service designed to meet the Nationʼs needs 

for current base-geographic data and maps. The development 

of these mapping activities reflects an evolution in how geographers understand, represent, manage, and access geospatial 

information. Geographic information science (GIScience) has 

transformed mapping and the entire practice of geography that 

once encompassed field surveys, photogrammetric methods, 

cartographic finishing, and publishing. GIScience provides 

information about places on the Earthʼs surface, knowledge 

about where geographic features are located, and knowledge 

about what is at a particular location. GIScience initially 

involved, and still includes, the science behind the traditional 

mapping disciplines of surveying, aerial photographic interpretation, photogrammetry, remote sensing, and cartography. 

Today it also includes a broader scope of issues related to the 

modeling and representation of geographic data, phenomena, 

and processes; human cognition of geographic information; 

the analysis and use of uncertainty; spatial analysis and modeling, including GIS; scale; geographic ontologies; visualization; and other similar topics (McMaster and Usery, 2004). 

Strategic Science Activities

Technological innovation has allowed the capture, storage, processing, and display of unprecedented volumes of georeferenced information about the Earth. Yet large amounts of 

data have not always led to more information and knowledge. 

Increasingly as the Internet has become the dominant distribution medium, scientists communicate directly with individual 

citizens and data consumers, making data and information 

delivery tasks even more complex. Supporting intelligent 

access to information contained in large geospatial data sets is 

an important niche for the USGS (National Research Council, 

1995). Important research issues that will address information 

access needs include:

• Geographic representation topics related to computer 

data models and structures, and communication of 

uncertainty. 

• Design and symbol representation problems, including 

display of critical data elements, for portrayal of The 

National Map data on different display devices.

• Generalization research that deals with representing 

features at different scales. 

• Data mining algorithms for handling geospatial data, 

spatial data access structures, and use of domain 

knowledge for improved query processing and mining. 

Intelligent access to geographical data is an important 

science focus of the USGS for three reasons, all based on 

the premise that geographic base data are a critical component of the USGS research infrastructure. First, the promise 

of The National Map cannot be realized without substantial 
38 Geography for a Changing World 

GIScience research over the 10-year plan in the areas of 

visualization, generalization, information fusion, and knowledge discovery and data mining. Second, development and 

implementation of The National Map will require strategic 

collaboration and partnerships both in developing data and in 

designing and undertaking the research necessary to realize the 

promise of the idea. Finally, The National Map will provide 

an efficient framework for organizing and managing disparate 

geospatial databases needed by USGS scientists and the public-at-large through a single, easy-to-use point of access. 

Strategic Action 8.1:

Establish a GIScience center of excellence.

The GIScience center for excellence should lead the 

planning and implementation of the research associated 

with goals 7, 8, and 9. The USGS must invest in personnel, 

resources, and infrastructure to establish a center of excellence focused on GIScience that builds, nurtures, and maintains a core of GIScience researchers to further these goals 

and actions. Additional researchers, both doctoral and masterʼs levels, will be needed to address the science activities 

described here, with specialties in GIScience and the themes 

listed above. Senior scientists will have to be supported with 

junior scientists and technicians to help in data gathering and 

information processing. Strategic Action 8.2:

Improve understanding of The National Map user needs, 

both inside and outside of the USGS. 

The USGS will continuously assess user needs for 

geographic data and translate those needs into collection, 

representation, and distribution procedures for geospatial data. 

To be effective, USGS geographers will need to anticipate 

user requirements for next generation products, such as model 

results, planning scenarios, and decision support tools. 

Strategic Action 8.3:

Address research questions on the topic of geographic 

representation, including data model issues associated 

with multiple resolution data and data integration and 

fusion, uncertainty representation, and human cognition 

of the dimensions of geographic phenomena in a computer environment.

The USGS faces a monumental intellectual task in 

addressing questions related to representation of data. As The 

National Map continues its evolution and other more specific 

products become necessary, geographers will develop solutions to a series of vexing problems still common to geospatial products. Because data for most of the USGS products 

will come from several sources, the data will initially be in a 

variety of resolutions and symbolizations, with the boundaries between contiguous coverages that may not match. The 

solution to these data management problems will have to be 

automated so that rapid, automatic updating becomes a reality. 

Human cognition of geographic phenomena will become a 

Sidebar 8.1: Establishing a GIScience center 

of excellence

Linkages

The USGS must redevelop and reassert its leadership role 

in GIScience. Through collaboration with other major 

research organizations, such as the University Consortium 

for Geographic Information Science (UCGIS) and academic departments, the USGS can establish major research 

objectives in GIScience that meet the needs of all USGS 

disciplines and The National Map. Formal exchanges with 

other Federal agencies involved with spatial data, such as 

NGA and the Census Bureau, are highly desirable. USGS 

geographers also must evaluate linkages with data user 

communities so that data specifications and analytical 

capabilities are based on both strong peer-reviewed science 

and USGS needs. A dialog with the organizations listed 

as strategic partners throughout this document must be 

maintained.

Post-doctoral appointments, internship programs with universities, and close collaboration between USGS scientists 

and university researchers are required to meet the objectives of the 10-year vision. Direct support of universitybased GIScience research critical to the USGS mission will 

be necessary.

Sidebar 8.1: Establishing a GIScience center 

of excellence (cont.)

Performance Measures

• Establish a center of excellence in GIScience 

(within 2 years).

• Staff the center of excellence initially with 10 Ph.D. 

scientists with support staff (within 2 years) and 

expand to 20 scientists (within 5 years).

• A science plan addressing key topics from goals 7, 

8, and 9 that are needed to meet the overall goals 

of this plan is prepared and approved by USGS 

(within 2 years).

• Establish post doctoral, internship, and visiting 

scholar relationships with universities with at least 

20 scholars in residence (within 3 years) and provide continual rotation to maintain the 20 each year.
Geography for a Changing World 39

substantial topic of research for USGS geographers. In order 

to present the Bureauʼs vast data holdings in forms that are 

useful to people, USGS researchers will need to understand 

the maps that appear in the minds of the users as well as on 

their display screens.

Strategic Action 8.4:

Research and develop design and symbolization 

specifications and innovative methods that support The 

National Map viewer and other geographic data displays 

on a large variety of display devices. 

The USGS is the primary Federal GIScience agency, and 

part of the responsibility that goes with that identity is to offer 

standardized guidelines for generators and users of geospatial products. Standard design and symbolization speeds the 

fusion of otherwise disparate data sets and ensures maximum 

return for the Nationʼs investment in collecting the data. 

Standardization among products will increase their appeal and 

utility to users and shorten learning times for creators, managers, and users of the data.

Strategic Action 8.5:

Research and develop automated methods for generalization to support multiple-scale display and delivery of 

The National Map and other USGS geographic data. 

The National Map and other USGS geospatial products 

will require the acquisition and display of enormous amounts 

of data, quantities far greater than can be handled manually. 

Automated methods for generalization and multiple-scale 

display or delivery are the only approaches that are viable, but 

they are not yet a reality. The USGS will conduct considerable research to develop these automated methods, but the 

Bureau will also require a continuing commitment to improvement of methods to accommodate constantly improving data 

collection.

Strategic Action 8.6:

Build a critical mass of USGS scientists familiar with and 

able to exploit new developments in spatial data mining 

and knowledge discovery in supporting The National 

Map and other large spatial databases. 

Increasingly, resource management and environmental 

assessment research require efficient access and use of very 

large data sets. USGS researchers also will refine and improve 

pattern or knowledge validation as part of the Bureauʼs 

responsibility for quality control and certification of geospatial 

products.

Sidebar 8.2: Improving access to 

geospatial data

Linkages:

The USGS will assign a high priority to partnerships with 

academic departments of geography to explore innovative 

mechanisms for involving university faculty and graduate 

students in research connected to the USGS geographic 

mission. Linkages with private industry for research and 

development in geographic information science also will 

be fruitful. 

Performance Measures

• Establish a single Web point-of-access to the data in 

The National Map and other Federal environmental 

data (within 1 year).

• Develop an ongoing user needs assessment methodology for The National Map (within 1 year).

• An operational data-management protocol is 

established to manage and access information from 

continental- and global-scale databases, using geographic data mining techniques (within 2 years).

• Create tools for error detection and elimination, and 

for automated updates of core base data sets (within 

2 years).

• Multiple resolution data integration methodology is 

developed (within 3 years). 

• Appropriate representation and symbolization are 

developed for multiple-scale display of data that 

are a part of The National Map and other USGS 

products (within 4 years).

• Complete ontology of features, attributes, and 

relations for all layers in The National Map at all 

possible resolutions (within 5 years).

• Develop appropriate representation and symbolization methods for multiple-scale display of data that 

are a part of The National Map and other USGS 

products (within 5 years). 

• Develop methods to automatically generate maps at 

any scale from The National Map (within 7 years).
40 Geography for a Changing World 

Strategic Action 8.7:

Develop specifications and analytical methods and tools 

for use in producing widely used, high-priority data layers for The National Map.

The land change and vulnerability science goals of this 

plan give rise to broad and diverse geographic data requirements. USGS scientists will develop detailed specifications 

for these data to ensure that they are useful in scientific 

research.

Sidebar 8.3: High priority data for The National Map

Linkages

To support the development of continuously updated base layers for The National Map, USGS geographic information 

researchers will work with scientists and data producers in other Federal agencies, State, local, and Tribal governments, 

private industry partners, and academia to develop effective geographic information science research for display and delivery 

of these data. Coordination with research geographers and investigators in other disciplines in the USGS is a prerequisite for 

successfully addressing the other science goals expressed in this plan. Data specifications below are based on input received 

during the USGS geography science planning effort.

Performance measures: Landcover data

• Identify the multiscale requirements for national land-cover data (within 1 year).

• Develop an implementation plan to produce the needed land-cover data, considering repeat frequencies, attributes, 

accuracy standards, and methods enhancements (within 2 years).

• Develop and implement a strategy for mapping 1992-2001 U.S. land-cover change using National Land-Cover Database (NLCD) inputs (within 3 years).

• In selected geographic areas that correspond to science priorities, capture digital versions of archived land-cover 

photos going back to the early 20th century–and perhaps other archived museum data– to allow investigation of landcover trends and their effects on biodiversity (within 5 years).

• Develop digital archive of historic USGS topographic maps (within 5 years).

• Retrospective, comparable national scale land-use/impervious surface data sets from remotely sensed data are developed for every 5 years to the present, beginning in 1970 or earlier, to help analyze long-term environmental response 

(such as water chemistry, breeding bird surveys data sets) (within 7 years)

Performance measures: Elevation data

• Procedures are developed to create topographic derivatives from the base geographic data of The National Map on the 

fly (within 3 years).

• Develop tools and a distributed computing-based approach for producing hydrologically-related elevation derivatives 

consistent with the National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) and watershed boundaries (within 3 years).

• A process is developed to receive data back from users and establish a national elevation database (within 3 years).

• Develop precise topographic data for sites that are difficult to map, such as areas with very low relief, steep terrain, or 

heavy vegetative cover, in order to identify microhabitats of interest (ongoing). 

• Integrate bathymetric and topographic data into The National Map (within 3 years).

Performance measures: National hydrography data

• A procedure is developed for implementing a user-maintained 1:24,000-scale NHD (within 2 years).

• Integrate data about consumptive water use, land-use, fertilizer and pesticide use, and socioeconomic data into NHD 

(within 3 years).
Geography for a Changing World 41

Goal 9: Develop innovative methods of 

modeling and information synthesis, 

fusion, and visualization to improve our 

ability to explore geographic data and 

create new knowledge.

By 2015, flooding of local coastal areas will 

increasingly affect human populations and 

biological ecosystems. Using high-resolution 

global data sets and methods for fusing 

massive volumes of disparate data, USGS 

scientists will routinely provide global models 

of areas, populations, and resources of any 

affected world locality. These models will be 

instrumental in the efforts to mitigate loss of life 

and property through preparedness, prevention, 

and response. Other USGS models that use the 

same massive data sets and fusion methods will 

provide risk and hazards assessment modeling 

for preparedness and prevention of Homeland 

Security threats.

Spatial modeling is one logical response to the NRCʼs 

recommendation to USGS scientists to become “consumers of 

their own data” to create new knowledge (National Research 

Council, 2002). Spatial models developed and used by 

geographers are a subclass of scientific models that consume 

spatially oriented input data, such as vector and raster maps, 

remotely sensed imagery, and aerial photos, and produce 

spatially oriented environmental or human response information. To formulate spatial models, geographers must identify 

the relations among key components of complex geographic 

systems; developing this conceptual framework provides scientists with a better understanding of these systems. The use 

of models adds value to USGS data, providing an increased 

understanding of the landscape change processes and an ability to predict future states. Research also is needed into the 

integration of data at a variety of themes and scales, over time, 

and on methods for the discovery and understanding of patterns in the data, including visualization and automated feature 

extraction. 

Strategic Science Activities

Important modeling research questions include:

• What models are best suited to creating value-added 

data layers that have multiple uses, using data already 

served by USGS and The National Map? 

• How can models and their results be compared? 

• Is it better to couple inputs and outputs from specialized models, or to integrate models into a single operational framework? 

• What methods best facilitate model calibration and 

validation? 

• What mechanisms allow scientists to locate, share, and 

rapidly implement models? 

Sidebar 8.3: High priority data for The National Map (cont.)

• Integrate catchments and stream channels derived from DEMs with the NHD and contours (within 3 years).

• Develop highly attributed NHD data that includes nationally consistent, fully attributed elevation and other landscape 

derivatives, and smaller headwater streams (within 3 years).

• Perform high quality research on stream networks, including defining a classification of streams into perennial, intermittent, and ephemeral reaches, using digital network data management capabilities that deal with individual mapping differences in a consistent way (within 3 years).

• In collaboration with the USGS Water Discipline, develop the capability to use NHD to follow water through the 

hydrologic cycle and track human water withdrawals and consumptive use. (within 5 years).

• Complete data sets needed for deriving watershed catchments, including updating NED, the Watershed Boundary 

Dataset (WBD), and a high-resolution (for example, 1:24,000-scale) NHD single line stream network (within the 

next 3-5 years).

• Complete development of the 1:24,000-scale NHD, with catchments defined for all stream reaches having boundaries that agree completely with watershed divides from topography maps. A large collection of attributes should be 

derived for those catchments that can be linked to the NHD flow network. The flow network must be thoroughly 

quality assured and corrected (within 5 years).

• Enhance NHD to include a uniform and scientifically defensible classification of streams into perennial, intermittent, 

and ephemeral reaches (within 5 years).
42 Geography for a Changing World 

• How can models and model results best be communicated to scientists, decisionmakers, and the general 

public?

Geographic information synthesis and fusion research 

questions that must be addressed include:

• Can a theoretical model be developed and verified that 

provides a basis for fusing geospatial data sets of different geometry, resolution, and accuracy? 

• Can such a model provide a basis for users to automatically combine data through access to metadata that 

includes resolution and accuracy? 

• Can we develop appropriate methods of handling color 

and contrast issues when combining multiple raster 

and/or raster and vector data sets? 

• Can mathematical tools such as Fourier transforms and 

wavelets provide a basis for information synthesis and 

data fusion?

• Can we develop methods to fuse data with widely 

varying characteristics and can we establish appropriate limits for the fusion of these data sets based on the 

methods and the basic data characteristics of geometry, 

data type and scaling, resolution, and accuracy? 

Geographic visualization research questions must provide 

answers to the following questions:

• Can USGS develop appropriate visualizations of geospatial data sets that work in the Web-based interfaces 

of The National Map? 

• Does uncertainty visualization provide support to 

understanding landscape dynamics and hazards? 

• Is animation an effective visualization tool for studying 

landscape change, including hazards? Which types of 

animations work best? 

• Can animation be a part of the visualization interface 

for The National Map? 

• Can we develop automatic visualization of spatial data 

based on data type, data scaling, resolution, accuracy, 

and other metadata?

Strategic Action 9.1:

Address research questions on the topic of information 

synthesis and fusion.

USGS geospatial products, including The National Map, 

will combine or fuse data from disparate sources, a seemingly 

simple task that is fraught with difficulty. In order for The 

National Map and similar products to become a reality, USGS 

geographers must resolve theoretical questions about how to 

combine data from different and possibly incompatible time 

periods, classifications, semantics, geometry, resolution, and 

accuracy. Metadata, descriptions of the data contained in geospatial products, will assist in the fusion of the input data in an 

automated fashion, but these capabilities await fundamental 

geographic research. 

Strategic Action 9.2:

Address research questions on the topic of map and 

geographic database projections.

All map-like products represent the Earthʼs surface as 

essentially a flat plane, while the Earth that generates the data 

has a curved surface. USGS geographers will explore the 

thousands of methods for projecting the curved Earth onto a 

flat sheet of paper or onto a flat screen for use in the Nationʼs 

primary geospatial databases. Additional issues that must 

be resolved include automated methods for identifying the 

projections of geospatial data that are to be combined, and 

determining transfer algorithms to accomplish the fusion. 

Strategic Action 9.3:

Address research questions on the topic of geographic 

visualization.

The growth of geospatial databases at local to global 

scales has created a flood of environmental and social data that 

threatens to overwhelm researchers and decisionmakers. Innovative methods for visualizing statistical data with locational 

identifiers can speed the search for anomalies as well as for 

trends and associations within these data. Visualization will 

improve the interfaces between users (researchers, decisionmakers, and citizens) seeking to capitalize on the USGS storehouse of data and information. Such interfaces can mask the 

complexities of the database that do not interest the user, while 

making queries and data handling simple and efficient. These 

interfaces, along with animated approaches to geospatial 

databases and automatic visualization await further research 

and development by USGS geographers. USGS geographers 

are well positioned to address the issues because they have the 

greatest knowledge and the easiest access to the databases that 

will benefit from the innovations.

Strategic Action 9.4:

Research and develop methods and techniques in modeling and geostatistics to exploit geographic data.

Models can extract useable information from otherwise 

overwhelming data sets. Statistical summaries and predictions can improve the ability of scientists, decisionmakers, 

and the public to get the best value from Earth science data 

sets. Spatial statistics provide a primary mathematical support 

for geographic models and are part of a specialized branch of 

more general statistical methods. USGS geographers, mathematicians, and computer scientists have a unique contribution 

to make in the realm of spatial statistics, because they can 

tailor advances in the field to the needs of models dealing with 

the nature-society interface. Additional interaction with USGS 

researchers from geology, hydrology, and biology will permit 

the creation of new spatial statistical methods specifically 

designed to address problems in those disciplines.
Geography for a Changing World 43

Sidebar 9.1: Using geographic data to create new knowledge

Linkages

Because of the strength of modeling and fusion research in academia, USGS geographers will work with university departments of geography and geographic information science to develop new methods and models. USGS geographers will 

nurture linkages with other Federal scientists (such as biologists, global change experts, and climatologists) to build domainspecific models. Linkage to software developers in private industry will permit USGS researchers to share in advances in 

commercial products that will be essential to the Bureauʼs models. 

Performance Measures

• Develop the ability to build and use spatial models to explore geographic data within specific domains and create new knowledge from these data (within 2 years).

• Develop an understanding of the offerings of spatial models (including their input requirements, methodologies, and outputs) 

as distillers or synthesizers of the terabytes of data created by the USGS (within 3 years).

• Establish model primitives that can be assembled on an ad hoc basis to create new models within specific domains (within 3 

years).

• Generalize the domain-specific primitives for multi-purpose modeling within various domains (within 5 years).

• Develop an ability to couple models of different types and from different domains to create complex systems (within 5 years).

• Develop an efficient model building system that allows users within various domains to construct complex models from the 

set of basic primitives (within 7 years).

Highlight 8: Map-Projection Software for Global Raster Data Sets

USGS research in GIScience includes map and global database projections, a field where few other agencies have any 

expertise. In a recent project, USGS researchers determined that many commercial software packages fail to produce correct 

projections for global raster data sets, such as USGS Global Land-cover. USGS scientists determined the form and extent of the 

errors and developed a projection system, now publicly available, that produces correct results. The maps below provide one 

example of a projection problem. Commercial software created the first map by projecting Global Land-cover from geographic 

coordinates to a Mollweide projection (note the repetition of Siberian Russia and Alaska on both sides of the map).

Figure 7a. Global land cover projected with commercial GIS software.
44 Geography for a Changing World 

Highlight 8 (cont.)

The second map shows the same data in a superior product, projected with USGS mapimg software. This software, 

developed within the USGS, and other GIScience research results are available at http://carto-research.er.usgs.gov.

Figure 7b. Global land cover projected with USGS maping software.

Operational Objectives

During the next 10 years, the focus of USGS geography 

will change from an emphasis on production-oriented, cartographic excellence to emphasis on serving as a full research 

partner in USGS science activities. The transition to a focus 

on research and science partnerships will require a substantial 

transformation in the culture of USGS geography. Key components involved in this transformation include leadership, 

science management, communication, focused growth in the 

number of researchers, an effective annual science planning 

process, and the use of education to increase the understanding and use of geography to meet USGS and DOI objectives. 

The following operational measures will stimulate progress in 

attaining the science goals and provide benchmarks for evaluating progress in the transformation of geography at USGS.

Objective 1– Greatly enhance the leadership on 

behalf of research-based geography at USGS. 

Operational strategic action 1: By the end of the transition 

period, the Associate Director and Chief Scientist for Geography positions should be filled by scientists with recognized 

research expertise in geography.

The likelihood of realizing the science goals and the other 

objectives described in this chapter will be increased if both 

the Associate Director and Chief Scientist for Geography are 

experienced researchers with a record of competing for external grants, and have publication records equivalent to accomplished academic researchers. 

Operational strategic action 2: To encourage a vibrant 

research culture, geography managers must recognize and 

reward accomplishments achieved under these science goals 

through the research grade evaluation system and through the 

allocation of funds in the annual budget process.

Operational strategic action 3: Proactively seek out collaboration opportunities with other USGS scientists that will 

advance USGS geography science priorities.

Successful completion of many of the strategic actions 

described in this plan requires collaboration with non-geographers. USGS geographers should take the initiative to define 

and contact potential collaborators, many of whom are already 

conducting geographic research.
Geography for a Changing World 45

Objective 2 – Increase the number of 

experienced, competent geography science 

managers that are excited about and committed 

to managing scientists on behalf of the science 

plan priorities.

During the science planning process, administrators and 

scientists identified the lack of research-oriented managers 

as a major problem. Although this circumstance is an understandable legacy of the cartographic era at USGS with its 

emphasis on production, production-oriented management is 

ill-suited to the demands of a new era of geographic science. 

Growing a corps of managers for geography science will not 

happen overnight, and will require a mix of training, mentoring, and consideration of alternative methods for increasing 

the number of science managers. 

Operational strategic action 4: Develop a mentoring program to link current and potential geography science managers 

with exemplary USGS science managers.

A formal mentoring program will allow geography science managers to learn from experienced, successful science 

managers about a range of issues, ranging from hiring and 

supporting young researchers to creating a balanced science 

portfolio for a program. 

Operational strategic action 5: Explore innovative 

approaches to expanding the number of science mangers.

Three options will expand the pool of well-qualified 

geography science managers. First, experienced managers 

from other USGS science areas can be assigned for time-limited (1-2 years) service as geography science managers. A 

second option is the use of a rotational model, drawing on a 

pool of scientists from across the USGS. Utilized with some 

success in other parts of the USGS, accomplished scientists 

rotate into a management role for a period of time (3-5 years) 

and then return to science positions at the end of the rotation. 

An advantage of the rotational model is that an increased 

number of people experience the responsibilities of managing their fellow scientists, and scientists develop a broadened 

understanding of the importance and challenge of good science management. Finally, science management training that 

includes both leadership and science management components 

should be offered to scientists interested in management 

responsibilities. 

Objective 3 – Communicate and highlight the 

competencies of USGS geographers, identify 

the science needs of potential collaborators, 

and establish ongoing relationships with the 

geographic research community outside of 

the USGS.

In general, USGS geographers and their accomplishments 

have been largely invisible to scientists inside and outside 

of the USGS. Members of other science disciplines in the 

USGS often have little acquaintance with modern geographic 

research, and have low research expectations of their geographer colleagues. Visibility is not an aim itself, but in order 

to successfully collaborate with other scientists on behalf of 

the science goals of this plan, USGS geographers must be 

more assertive in reaching out to their counterparts inside and 

outside of USGS. 

Operational strategic action 6: Publish an online, annually 

updated directory of USGS geographers that lists current primary project responsibilities, including a digital version that 

is searchable by keywords. Include in the directory scientists 

from other disciplines who are emphasizing geography in their 

work.

Operational strategic action 7: Publish an online, continously updated listing of all geography-oriented publications 

and conference presentations that is searchable by keywords.

Operational strategic action 8: Create constructive, projectbased opportunities for geographers to communicate and interact proactively with USGS scientists from all science fields, 

using vehicles such as the Directorʼs Venture Capital Fund, 

the Bureauʼs annual planning activities, and science-related 

outreach of the National Geospatial Programs Office (NGPO) 

state liaison offices. 

Operational strategic action 9: Establish a standing 

Geography Science Council (GSC) in the Office of the Chief 

Scientist for Geography with representatives from Geography 

program offices, other USGS disciplines, DOI agencies, the 

Association of American Geographers (AAG), the NRCʼs 

Board on Earth Sciences and Resources, and prominent academic departments. The primary functions of the GSC are to 

increase awareness of geography issues, foster collaborative 

science opportunities, and serve as a sounding board to the 

Associate Director for Geography. 
46 Geography for a Changing World 

Objective 4 – Develop and implement a USGS 

geography workforce plan that supports a 

critical mass of geography researchers able to 

sustain a high level of excellence in research 

and applications on behalf of the priorities 

identified in the geography science plan.

This objective recognizes the need to increase the intellectual standards and vitality of USGS geographers in areas 

associated with DOI and Bureau science priorities. Strategic 

actions include provisions for focused development of new 

researchers in centers of excellence, a path for career advancement and professional development, and regular infusions of 

new intellectual energy through post-doctoral appointments 

and partnerships with academic geographers. The realization 

of the objective to increase intellectual standards and vitality 

will help elevate geography within the USGS to its rightful 

position as a full-fledged research partner. It also will propel 

the USGS to a position of national and international prominence in geographic research.

Operational strategic action 10: Develop a detailed implementation plan for three centers of geographic excellence in 

the areas of land change science, vulnerability and resilience 

science, and GIScience.

As described in the planʼs Introduction section, centers 

of excellence are organized around groups of geography 

researchers possessing special knowledge or expertise in a 

particular area of concern identified in the science plan. These 

centers are particularly important during the transition from a 

production to a science-research geography orientation. The 

centers can provide a focal point for organizing science activities associated with the priorities of the science plan and an 

initial point of contact for scientists interested in the centerʼs 

subject area. Each center can be effective with a minimum 

of 10 Ph.D. scientists, along with 10-15 scientists at a lesser 

grade level who work to support the research projects. Scientists affiliated with these centers need not all work in a single 

geographic location, although it is desirable that a core group 

of staff be collocated. Core researchers include senior scientists who provide leadership and guidance for junior investigators. USGS scientists who are not directly affiliated with the 

centers but have an active interest in the themes addressed 

by a center can expect center scientists to serve as an important part of their extended intellectual community and act as 

collaborators and direct colleagues on some projects. This 

includes scientists affiliated with NGPO State liaison offices 

who already are collaborating with other USGS scientists on 

integrated science projects. Center researchers will connect 

with universities and collaborate with academic colleagues. 

The vitality of the centers will be improved by short-term 

personnel exchanges. Centers will be staffed by new hires and 

current USGS scientists. All center scientists will be part of 

the RGE system.

The land change science center of excellence will primarily address science concerns associated with the land change 

science (goals 1-3) and the regional geography (goal 6) goals; 

the vulnerability and resilience science center will primarily 

address science goal 4 and goal 5 dealing with the integration 

of science and decisionmaking; and the GIScience center will 

primarily address goals 7-9. Center-affiliated scientists also 

will provide expertise and guidance across all three centers 

in the design and implementation of projects that provide 

integrated science solutions for geography-oriented science 

questions.

Operational strategic action 11: Implement the proposed 

USGS Land Cover Institute as a center of excellence prototype 

for land change science.

Operational strategic action 12: Develop a mentoring 

program to link current and new geographic researchers with 

successful USGS researchers.

Operational strategic action 13: Increase the use of the 

research grade (RGE) and equipment development grade 

(EDGE) evaluation systems by geographers, promoting excellence in geographic research and providing a path for career 

advancement.

The RGE program provides scientists with a career 

development path that is based on research accomplishments 

aimed at providing new knowledge and insights into varied 

and complex earth-system processes. 

Operational strategic action 14: In order to make the 

RGE/EDGE option more attractive to geographers, the Office 

of Chief Scientist for Geography should: (1) publish clear 

examples of research accomplishments associated with all 

grade levels above GS-11, with examples drawn from the 

Geography Discipline and including partial RGE/EDGE position descriptions; (2) provide appropriate training and mentoring as appropriate for geographers in the creation of research 

scientist records (RSR) used in the RGE/EDGE evaluation 

process; (3) provide scientists interested in the RGE/EDGE 

program a cross-walk between a scientistʼs 9-factor position 

description and a 4-factor research position description; and 

(4) designate a person in the Office of Chief Scientist with 

formal responsibilities to coordinate, mentor, educate, and 

encourage geographers who have an interest in the RGE or 

EDGE programs. 

Operational strategic action 15: Reinstate the Graduate 

School Training Program to train geographers and geography 

science managers; encourage scientists who complete the 

Graduate School Training Program to enter the RGE program. 
Geography for a Changing World 47

Operational strategic action 16: Develop and provide short 

technical courses that are focused on specific skill acquisition 

supporting the priorities identified in the science plan. 

A successful transformation of the focus of USGS geography from production to research will depend in large part on 

the skills and enthusiasm of the existing staff, many of whom 

do not have formal training in areas that support the science 

goals identified in this plan. The Graduate School Training 

Program, in operation for more than 20 years, has been an 

effective means of supporting employees in gaining education beyond the bachelorʼs level. The program is intended 

to increase the general scientific, technical, and management skills of discipline employees rather than to result in 

an employee receiving a degree. A number of current USGS 

geographers have used this program as a springboard to obtain 

an advanced degree. The program has provided a path for 

some of the USGSʼs most successful geographic researchers. 

Operational strategic action 17: Evaluate and expand participation in the NRCʼs Postdoctoral Associateship Program 

and other programs, in support of the science goals of this plan 

and under the guidance of the Chief Scientist and the GSC. 

The postdoctoral program will be especially helpful for 

adding socioeconomic expertise to understand the forces driving land change, societyʼs vulnerability to the consequences of 

land change, and the efficacy of mitigation strategies. Support for these programs may come from a variety of sources. 

Some organizations sponsor and offer their own postdoctoral 

programs (for example, NOAA, NASA, and Department of 

Energyʼs Global Change Fellowships and the USGS Mendenhall Postdoctoral Fellowship), whereas others participate 

in formal programs established by other organizations (for 

example, the NRCʼs Postdoctoral Associateship Program).

Operational strategic action 18: Prepare a strategy to 

implement university partnerships that support the science 

priorities in this plan. 

Strategic linkages with universities may be the quickest 

way to improve the critical mass of geography researchers 

at USGS. The USGS can collaborate with universities in a 

number of ways, including issuing grants to researchers with 

needed capabilities to accomplish priority research tasks; 

funding collaborative research that pairs university and USGS 

geographers to complete priority research tasks; increasing 

informal communications with university colleagues; hiring 

faculty as term or part-time USGS staff to work on projects 

that will benefit from their unique expertise; encouraging 

USGS staff to serve as adjunct faculty at universities; encouraging scientist-to-scientist collaboration on outside-funded 

projects (such as the NSF, NASA, and private granting institutions); and placing staff at universities and other Federal agencies as is done by the Biology Cooperative Research Program.

Objective 5 – Develop a more efficient, focused 

process to guide annual science planning.

The existing annual geography science planning should 

be modified to provide clear, objective, and efficient procedures for setting priorities and funding targets and allocating 

funds for geographic researchers.

Operational strategic action 19: Adopt an annual science 

planning process that is consistent with overall Bureau planning procedures and DOI objectives beginning in FY06.

Develop and adopt a unified annual planning process 

that specifies new and continuing science opportunities and 

funding targets for all geography activities, mapped back to 

the goals and strategic actions of this science plan. It should 

emphasize accountability and measurable results and be coordinated through the Chief Scientistʼs office so that it can be 

consistent with the 5-year program science plans. The annual 

science plan should include descriptions, contacts, and funding 

targets for new and continuing work and be organized by the 

USGS Geography science goals and strategic actions. The 

descriptions of work for which new proposals are requested 

and guidance for ongoing project work should be relatively 

brief, allowing readers to see the entire range of activities 

being undertaken by the programs and to gain an understanding of the relation of each project to the science goals. The 

development of the annual science plan will involve a series 

of discussions among the regional science staff, program coordinators, senior scientists, and may include consultation with 

the Geography Science Council. These discussions synthesize 

results of consultations at the national and regional levels by 

managers and scientists, as well as workshops and meetings 

with other scientists and managers, stakeholders, partners, 

cooperators, and customers across regions and disciplines. All 

ongoing and new project work and results undergo peer and 

management review for progress toward meeting the goals of 

the science strategy. Also reviewed are the program accomplishments relative to the 5-year program science plans that 

directly supports the overall science strategy.

Objective 6 – Expand geographic awareness of 

scientists at the USGS and DOI.

Geographyʼs potential contributions to the USGS mission 

cannot be realized unless the level of geography awareness is 

elevated. Almost every societal issue that falls within the purview of the USGS mission has a geographic component, and a 

sound understanding of geography is fundamental to addressing these issues. Geography education is inextricably linked 

to the fulfillment of the USGS mission for several reasons:

• Even though most of the data collection and research 

activities at the USGS involve spatial phenomena and 

processes, the awareness and understanding of scientists and the public who use USGS science products 

are limited in regard to geographyʼs tools and methods.
48 Geography for a Changing World

• USGS geographers have a professional responsibility to identify, articulate, and infuse core conceptual 

and methodological competencies of geography into 

education programs for both scientists and the general 

public.

• Geographically well-informed science colleagues are 

able to interact more productively with geographers 

and understand and use geography products more 

effectively.

• As the geography experts of the DOIʼs primary science 

agency, USGS geographers have an obligation to be 

aware of and respond to the Departmentʼs geographyrelated education and application needs.

Operational strategic action 20: Complete a needs assessment for basic and advanced geography education in the 

USGS and DOI.

Operational strategic action 21: Develop basic and 

advanced geography courses to be given at the National Training Center in Denver and other venues in collaboration with 

university partners.

Operational strategic action 22: Work with the GIO to 

use The National Map to expand the awareness of geographic 

concepts, tools, and methods, including the implementation of 

tutorials on The National Map that allow users to explore basic 

geographic concepts using data in an area of their choice. 

Operational strategic action 23: Develop a strategic implementation plan to expand geographic awareness of USGS and 

DOI scientists as one of the first assignments of the Geography Science Council.

Operational strategic action 24: Work with organizations 

such as AAG, American Geographical Society, the National 

Council for Geographic Education, and the National Geographic Society to understand geographic educational needs, 

particularly those associated with landscape change and its 

consequences.

The transition toward a full science-oriented partnership in supporting the USGSʼs mission will not be completed 

for several years. During this period, operational actions in 

leadership, science management, communication, workforce 

planning, science planning, and geography education will 

provide momentum supporting the evolution of the geography science culture at USGS. Most of these recommended 

operational activities can occur in the near-term; many do not 

require substantial expenditures of new funds as much as a 

new attitude and approach to conducting the core geographic 

science business at USGS.

Next Steps

This ambitious science plan describes how USGS will 

use geography to carry out a vital portion of its mission for 

the years 2005-2015. Development of geographic data and 

knowledge through research, assessment, monitoring, and 

effective communication and collaboration with those who 

rely on geographic data and knowledge will be cornerstones of 

the USGS geography contributions to the DOI and the Nation. 

Achievement of the science goals presented in this plan will 

require extensive partnerships, communication, and planning 

as well as leveraging of resources externally and internally 

across the USGS. The successful implementation of this plan 

will strengthen and establish new scientific directions that 

potentially have an enormous benefit to society. Therefore it 

will be critical to implement the plan well, set up performance 

measures and goals, carefully measure progress, and solicit 

critical review. Implementation of this science strategy will be 

the responsibility of the Associate Director and the Chief Scientist for Geography, with support from geographers located 

in all USGS science centers. The following steps will key the 

successful implementation of this science plan:

1) Communicate the ideas in this plan to the Director, the 

USGS Bureau Program Council, Regional Executives, and 

other scientists and managers and build support for the 

planʼs priorities.

2) Create an implementation strategy to carry out the strategic 

actions outlined in the goals and operational objectives that 

cascades from the Associate Director, through Headquarters and regions, to the science centers.

3) Formulate a Geography Science Council to help establish 

the implementation strategy and begin implementation.

4) Adopt and use the science goals in planning documents 

and performance measures.

To learn more about USGS geography activities visit 

http://geography.usgs.gov/ .
References 49

References Cited

Bailey, R.G., in press, Boundaries on ecoregion maps: Environmental Management.

Bernknopf, R., Dinitz, L., Rabinovici, S., 

and Evans, A., 2001, A portfolio approach 

to evaluating natural hazard mitigation 

policies–An application to lateral-spread 

ground failure in coastal California: International Geology Review, v. 43, p. 424-

440.

Bohlen, S.R., Halley, R.B., Hickman, S.H., 

Johnson, S.Y., Lowenstern, J.B., Muhs, 

D.R., Plumlee, G.S., Thompson, G.A., 

Trauger, D.L., and Zoback, M.L., 1998, 

Geology for a changing world–A science 

strategy for the Geologic Division of the 

U.S. Geological Survey, 2000-2010: U.S. 

Geological Survey Circular 1172, 59 p., 

accessed September 15, 2004, at URL http:

//pubs.usgs.gov/circ/c1172/ .

Bradshaw, G.A., and Borchers, J.G., 2000, 

Uncertainty as information–narrowing the 

science-policy gap: Conservation Ecology, 

v. 4, no. 1.

Cardona, O., 2004, The need for rethinking 

the concepts of vulnerability and risk from 

a holistic perspective–a necessary review 

and criticism for effective risk management, in Bankoff, G., Grerks, G., and 

Hilhorst, D., eds., Mapping vulnerability–

disasters, development & people: London, 

Earthscan, p. 37-51.

Caspersen, J.P., and others, 2000, Contributions of land-use history to carbon accumulation in U.S. forests: Science, v. 290, p. 

1148-1151.

Clark, W.C., and Dickson, N.M., 2003, Sustainability science–The emerging research 

program: Proceedings of the National 

Academy of Sciences, v. 100, no. 14, p. 

8059-8061.

Climate Change Science Program, 2003, Strategic plan for the U.S. Climate Change Science Program: Washington, D.C., Climate 

Change Science Program and the Subcommittee for Global Change Research, 364 p.

Cutter, S.L., 2003, The science of vulnerability and the vulnerability of science: Annals 

of the Association of American Geographers, v. 93, no. 1, p. 1-12.

Cutter, S.L., Richardson, D., and Wilbanks, 

T., 2003, A research and action agenda, in

Cutter, S., Richardson, D., and Wilbanks, 

T., eds., The geographical dimensions of 

terrorism: New York and London, Routledge, p. 223-229.

Ehlers, V., 2002, National Science Policy 

Study–Hearing on “The role of science in 

making good decisions:” Washington, D.C., 

U.S. House of Representatives, Committee 

on Science. 

Fisher, W.L., and Rahel, F.J., 2004, Geographic information systems in fisheries: 

Bethesda, Md., American Fisheries Society, 

275 p.

Frerks, G., and Bender, S., 2004, Vulnerability analysis as a means of strengthening 

policy formulation and policy practice, 

in Bankoff, G., Frerks, G., and Hilhorst, 

D., eds., Mapping vulnerability–disasters, 

development & people: London, Earthscan, 

p. 194-205.

Gutman, G., Janetos, A., Justice, C., Moran, 

E., Mustard, J., Rindfuss, R., Skole, D., 

and Turner II, B.J., eds 2004, Land Change 

Science: Observing, Monitoring, and 

Understanding Trajectories of Change on 

the Earthʼs Surface. New York, NY: Kluwer 

Academic Publishers.
50 Geography for a Changing World 

International Geosphere Biosphere Program, 

1999, Land-use and land-cover change 

implementation strategy, in Nunes,C., and 

Augé, J.J., eds., IGBP Report 48: Stockholm, Sweden, International Geosphere 

Biosphere Programme Secretariat, 125 p.

IPCC, 2000, Land use, land-use change, and 

forestry: Cambridge, IPCC Special Report.

IPCC, 2001, Climate Change 2001 Scientific 

Basis: Cambridge University Press.

Hanson, S. 2004. Who are “we”? An important question for geographyʼs future: 

Annals of the Association of American 

Geographers, v. 94, no. 4, p. 715-722.

Holland, E.A., and others, 1997, Variations 

in the predicted spatial distribution of 

atmospheric nitrogen deposition and their 

impact on carbon uptake by terrestrial ecosystems: Journal of Geophysical Research, 

v. 102, p. 15849-15866.

Houghton, R.A., Hackler, J.L., and Lawrence, 

K.T., 1999, The U.S. carbon budget–Contributions from land-use change: Science, v. 

285, p. 574-578.

Jones, B.K., Shaw, D.M., Czaplewski, R., and 

Norton, D.J., 1995, Integrated landscape 

monitoring–Conceptual approaches and 

applications: Toxicological and Environmental Chemistry, v. 49, p. 109-117.

Jones, J.W., Thomas, J.C., Gonzalez, A., 

Henkel, H., 2003, The South Florida satellite image map series—A tool for research, 

monitoring, and education, in Joint Conference on the Science and Restoration of 

the Greater Everglades and Florida Bay 

Ecosystem, Palm Harbor, Fla., p. 294-296. 

Lamb, B.L., Wilds-Magennis, L.J., and Taylor, J.G., 1993, Legal-Institutional Analysis 

Model userʼs manual: U.S. Geological 

Survey, Fort Collins Science Center, Fort 

Collins, Colo.

Matthews, E., 1994, Bitrogenous fertilizers–Global distribution of consumption and 

associated emissions of nitrous oxide and 

ammonia: Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 

v. 8, p. 411-439.

McMahon, G., Wiken, E.B., and Gautier, 

D.A., in press, Toward a scientifically rigorous basis for developing mapped ecological regions: Environmental Management.

McMaster, R.B., and Usery, E.L., eds., 2004, 

A research agenda for geographic information science: Boca Raton, Fla., CRC Press, 

402 p.

Munich Re Group, 2003, Munich Reʼs 

analysis of natural catastrophes in 2003: 

Press release for 29 December, 2003, 

accessed October 1, 2004, at URL http:

//www.munichre.com.

National Academy of Sciences, 2001, Climate 

change science–An analysis of some key 

questions: Washington, D.C., National 

Academy Press.

National Research Council, 1995, Finding 

the forest in the trees: Washington, D.C., 

National Academy Press, 127 p.

National Research Council, 1997, Rediscovering geography–New relevance for science 

and society: Washington, D.C., National 

Academy Press, 224 p.

National Research Council, 2001a, Future 

roles and opportunities for the U.S. Geological Survey: Washington, D.C., National 

Academy Press, 179 p.

National Research Council, 2001b, Grand 

challenges in environmental sciences: 

Washington, D.C., National Academy 

Press, 96 p.

National Research Council, 2002, Research 

opportunities in geography at the U.S. Geological Survey: Washington, D.C., National 

Academy Press, 130 p.

National Research Council, 2003a, NEON–

Addressing the Nationʼs environmental 

challenges: Washington, D.C., National 

Academy Press, 136 p.
References 51

National Research Council, 2003b, Weaving a National Map–Review of the U.S. 

Geological Survey concept of The National 

Map: Washington, D.C., National Academy 

Press, 128 p.

Omernik, J.M., 1987, Ecoregions of the 

conterminous United States: Annals of the 

Association of American Geographers, v. 

77, no. 1, p. 118-125.

Omernik, J.M., in press. Perspective on the 

nature and definition of ecological regions: 

Environmental Management.

Paul, E.A., and others, 1997, Soil organic 

matter in temperate agroecosystems–Longterm experiments in North America: Boca 

Raton, Fla., CRC Press, Inc., 414 p.

Pelling, M., 2003, The vulnerability of cities–natural disasters and social resilience: 

London, Earthscan Publications Ltd, 212 p.

Rindfuss, R.R., Walsh, S.J., Turner, B.L., 

Fox, J., and Mishra, V., 2004, Developing 

a science of land change–Challenges and 

methodological issues: Proceedings of the 

National Academy of Sciences, v. 101, no. 

39, p. 13976-13981.

Sarmiento, J.L., and Wofsy, S.C., 1999, A 

U.S. Carbon Cycle Science Plan: Washington, D.C., A report of the carbon and 

climate working group, 69 p.

Schindler, D.W., and Bayley, S.E., 1993, The 

biosphere as an increasing sink for atmospheric carbon–Estimates from increased 

nitrogen deposition: Global Biogeochemical Cycles, v. 7, p. 717-733.

Subcommittee on Disaster Reduction, 2005, 

Framing the grand challenges–A vision 

for federal disaster reduction: Washington, 

D.C., National Science and Technology 

Council.

Thompson, R.S., Shafer, S.L., Anderson, 

K.H., Strickland, L.E., Pelltier, R.T., and 

Kerwin, M.W., in press, Geologic, climatic, 

and vegetation characteristics of three 

ecoregion systems in North America: Environmental Management.

Turner, B.L., II, and Meyer, W.B., 1991, 

Land-use and land-cover in global environmental change–Considerations for study: 

International Social Science Journal, v. 130, 

p. 669-677.

Turner, B.L., Kasperson, R.E., Matson, P.A., 

McCarthy, J.L., Corell, R.W., Christensen, 

L., Eckley, N., Kasperson, J.X., Luers, A., 

Martello, M.L., Polsky, C., Pulsipher, A., 

and Schiller, A., 2003, A framework for 

vulnerability analysis in sustainability science: Proceedings of the National Academy 

of Sciences, v. 100, no. 14, p. 8074-8079.

U.S. Geological Survey, 2000, Strategic plan, 2000-2005: U.S. Geological 

Survey, accessed August 2004 at http:

//www.usgs.gov/stratplan/stratplan_rev.pdf.

Wofsy, S.C., and others, 1993, Net exchange 

of CO2 in a mid-latitude forest: Science, v. 

260, p. 1314-1317.
52 Geography for a Changing World 

GLOSSARY

A

Automated feature extraction – Automated 

algorithms that enable features to be extracted 

from larger geospatial data sets.

C

Carbon budget – The sum of the flows of 

carbon to and from a carbon reservoir.

Carbon flux – The movement of carbon dioxide (CO2

) into and out of the atmosphere.

Carbon sink – A physical site that absorbs 

or stores carbon dioxide (CO2), such as the 

atmosphere, oceans, Earthʼs vegetation and 

soils, and fossil fuel deposits.

Clean Water Act – Established the basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants 

into the waters of the United States and gives 

the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency the 

authority to implement pollution control programs such as setting wastewater standards 

for industry.

Climate Change Science Program – Integrates Federal research on climate and global 

change, as sponsored by 13 Federal agencies 

and overseen by the Office of Science and 

Technology Policy, the Council on Environmental Quality, the National Economic 

Council, and the Office of Management and 

Budget.

Coupled modeling – Linked, interdisciplinary 

models to provide more realistic models of 

environmental behavior.

D

Decision-support systems – Systems that 

integrate socioeconomic models and physical 

models of land change with geospatial databases to enhance the use of U.S. Geological 

Survey science results in policy analysis. 

E

EROS – USGS National Center for Earth 

Resources Observation and Science, a science 

center whose responsibilities include national 

archive, production, distribution, and research 

for remotely sensed data and other geographic 

information.

F

Famine Early Warning Systems Network (FEWS NET) – Research initiative to 

strengthen the abilities of African countries 

and regional organizations to manage risk 

of food insecurity through the provision of 

timely and analytical early warning and vulnerability information.

G

Geography Science Council (GSC) – The primary functions of a U.S. Geological Survey 

Geography Science Council are to increase 

awareness of geography issues, foster collaborative science opportunities, and serve as 

a sounding board to the Associate Director for 

Geography.

Geospatial Multi-Agency Coordination 

(GeoMAC) – The Geospatial Multi-Agency 

Coordination Group or GeoMAC, is an Internet-based mapping tool originally designed 

for fire managers to access online maps of 

current fire locations and perimeters in the 

conterminous 48 States and Alaska.

Global Earth Observation System of Systems 

(GEOSS) – National and international cooperative effort to bring together existing and new 

hardware and software, making it all compatible in order to supply data and information at 

no cost.

Geospatial Information Office’s National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) – The technology, policies, criteria, standards and people 

necessary to promote geospatial data sharing 

throughout all levels of government, the private and non-profit sectors, and academia.

Geographic Information Science (GIScience)

– GIScience provides information about 

places on the Earthʼs surface, knowledge 

about where geographic features are located, 

and knowledge about what is at a particular 

location.
Glossary 53

Global positioning system (GPS) – Use of 

satellite triangulation to determine coordinate 

locations for features on Earth.

H

Hazard – An agent or process of land change 

that has the potential to harm individuals, 

societies, and natural resources. Natural or 

human-induced hazards can manifest themselves as sudden perturbations or slowly 

increasing stresses beyond the normal range 

of variability in a system.

I

International Geosphere-Biosphere Program 

(IGBP) – An international scientific research 

program built on interdisciplinary networking 

and collaboration.

K

Knowledge Discovery (KD) – Technology that 

empowers development of the next generation database management and information 

systems through its abilities to extract new, 

insightful information embedded within large 

heterogeneous databases and to formulate 

knowledge.

L

Land-cover change – Knowledge of past, 

present, and future land use and land cover 

can be used to model, predict, and mitigate 

the effects of natural and anthropogenic 

hazards.

Landsat – Land Remote Sensing Satellite 

Program managed by the U.S. Geological 

Survey. The Landsat Satellite series began in 

1972 to gather information about land surface 

features of the planet. Landsat 5, launched in 

1984, and Landsat 7, launched in 1999, are 

still operational.

Land-Use Portfolio Model – A geographic 

information system-based tool for community 

multi-hazard mitigation analysis.

Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) technology – An active remote sensor platform.

LIDAR point cloud – A group of three dimensional points that can be used to create an 

elevation model.

M

Metadata – Information about data.

Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectrometer 

(MODIS) –Terra MODIS and Aqua MODIS 

are viewing the entire Earthʼs surface every 1 

to 2 days, acquiring data in 36 spectral bands.

Multi-temporal assessments – Geographic 

analysis that incorporates data from multiple 

time dates to measure change over time. 

N

NASA Earth Science Enterprise – An example 

of a multidisciplinary approach to problem 

solving that provides an opportunity for science collaboration.

NASA Global Inventory Monitoring and Modeling Studies (GIMMS) – The GIMMS group 

has been working with the NASA Commercial Remote Sensing Program and the Earth 

Satellite Corporation to provide scientific data 

to the Earth Science Enterprise (ESE) community.

National Acid Precipitation Assessment 

Program (NAPAP) – An interagency scientific 

research, monitoring, and assessment program 

on the effects of sulfur and nitrogen oxides on 

the environment and human health.

National Satellite Land Remote Sensing Data 

Archive – Residing in the U.S. Geological 

Surveyʼs EROS Data Center near Sioux Falls, 

South Dakota, this collection of information is 

known legally as the National Satellite Land 

Remote Sensing Data Archive. It is a comprehensive, permanent, and impartial record of 

the planetʼs land surface derived from almost 

40 years of satellite remote sensing.

Normalized Difference Vegetation Index 

(NDVI) – A method intended to separate vegetated and non-vegetated lands.

National Environmental Observatory Network 

(NEON) – Provides a state-of-the-art infrastructure to support interdisciplinary, integrated research and allow scientists to conduct 

comprehensive, continental-scale experiments 

on ecological systems. Each observatory is a 

consortium of universities and government 

agencies.

NSF Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER)

– The National Science Foundation established the LTER program in 1980 to support 
54 Geography for a Changing World

research on long-term ecological phenomena 

in the United States.

Photogrammetry – The process of making 

maps or scale drawings from photographs, 

especially aerial photographs.

R

Regional Geography – Provides a cross cutting way of looking at processes and phenomena characteristic of a region, both in a 

vertical sense (integrating the understanding 

of physical, biological, social, and cultural 

processes at a single place) and horizontally 

(examining the interactions among these 

processes occurring between places, such as 

within a region or among regions).

Remote Sensing – The measurement of an 

object with a device not in direct contact with 

the object; includes satellite imagery and 

aerial photography acquisition.

Resilience – Ability of a system to mitigate or 

adapt to potential hazards, as well as respond 

and recover from effects after an event.

Role playing simulations – Integration of 

video game technology to create more interactive simulations of geographic phenomenon.

S

Spatial Data Mining (SDM) – Methods, 

such as spatial statistics and data mining, to 

understand spatial data, discover relationships 

between spatial and non-spatial data, detect 

the distribution pattern of certain phenomena, 

and predict the future movement of such patterns. 

Science Planning Team (SPT) – Composed 

of scientists representing all U.S. Geological 

Survey disciplines and the geography academic community.

T

The National Map – A consistent framework 

for geographic knowledge needed by the 

Nation; provides public access to high-quality, 

geospatial data and information from multiple partners to help support decisionmaking 

by resource managers and the public; the 

product of a consortium of Federal, State, and 

local partners who provide geospatial data to 

enhance Americaʼs ability to access, integrate, 

and apply geospatial data at global, national, 

and local scales.

U

U.S. Agency for International Development 

(USAID) – Principal U.S. agency to extend 

assistance to countries recovering from disaster, trying to escape poverty, and engaging in 

democratic reforms.

U.S. Carbon Cycle Science Plan – A strategy to deliver credible predictions of future 

atmospheric CO2 levels, given realistic 

emission and climate scenarios, by means 

of approaches that can incorporate relevant 

interactions and feedback of the carbon cycleclimate system. The program will yield better 

understanding of past changes in CO2 and 

will strengthen the scientific foundation for 

management decisions in numerous areas of 

great public interest.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Level 

IV Ecoregion framework – Level IV is a 

further subdivision of level III ecoregions. 

The level IV ecoregions were compiled at a 

scale of 1:250,000 and depict revisions and 

subdivisions of earlier level III ecoregions 

that were originally compiled at a smaller 

scale (Omernik, 1987).

U.S. Geological Survey Invasive Species 

Forecasting System – Integration of field 

data with remote sensing data and geographic 

information system-based predictive models 

to track the spread of invasive species across 

the country.

V

Vector-borne diseases – A vector-borne 

disease is one in which the pathogenic microorganism is transmitted from an infected individual to another individual by an arthropod 

or other agent, sometimes with other animals 

serving as intermediary hosts (for example, 

West Nile Virus).

Vulnerability – Potential for loss or damage. 

The vulnerability of human-environment 

systems is defined not only by exposure to 

hazards (both perturbations and stressors) but 

also in the sensitivity and resilience of the 

system.

Printed on recycled paper