NIST Special Publication 1900-205

Global City Teams Challenge Smart 

Agriculture and Rural SuperCluster 

Workshop Report 2020 

Dennis Buckmaster

Sokwoo Rhee

Jean Rice

Josh Seidemann

Mo Shakouri

Robert Tse

Hongwei Zhang

This publication is available free of charge from:

https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1900-205 

CYBER - PHYSICAL SYSTEMS
NIST Special Publication 1900-205

Global City Teams Challenge Smart 

Agriculture and Rural SuperCluster

Workshop Report 2020

CYBER - PHYSICAL SYSTEMS

Dennis Buckmaster

Purdue University

Sokwoo Rhee

Smart Grid and Cyber-Physical Systems Program Office

Engineering Laboratory

Jean Rice

National Telecommunication and Information Administration

Josh Seidemann

NTCA–The Rural Broadband Association

Mo Shakouri

Joint Venture Silicon Valley

Robert Tse

U.S. Department of Agriculture

Hongwei Zhang

Iowa State University

This publication is available free of charge from:

https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1900-205

June 2020

U.S. Department of Commerce 

Wilbur L. Ross, Jr., Secretary

National Institute of Standards and Technology 

Walter Copan, NIST Director and Undersecretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology
DISCLAIMER

Certain commercial entities, equipment, or materials may be identified in this document in order to describe an 

experimental procedure or concept adequately. Such identification is not intended to imply recommendation or 

endorsement by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, nor is it intended to imply that the entities, 

materials, or equipment are necessarily the best available for the purpose. 

National Institute of Standards and Technology Special Publication Series 1900-205

Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. Spec. Publ. 1900-205, 25 pages (June 2020)

CODEN: NSPUE2

This publication is available free of charge from:

https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1900-205
NIST Special Publication 1900-205 Global City Teams Challenge

1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary..................................................................................................................2

1. Introduction........................................................................................................................3

2. Smart Agriculture & Rural Supercluster Workshop ........................................................4

2.1. Purpose and Conduct of the Workshop ..................................................................4

2.2. The Smart Agriculture and Rural Blueprint to Date .................................................4

2.3. NIST's Smart Cities and Communities Framework..................................................5

2.4. Plenary Panels........................................................................................................5

2.4.1. Connecting Rural Places to Broadband.......................................................5

2.4.2. Smart Agriculture ........................................................................................7

2.4.3. Funding and Financing................................................................................9

2.4.4. Farm Field Mapping ..................................................................................11

2.4.5. Improving Rural Outcomes with Broadband Access..................................13

2.5. Breakout Sessions: Inputs for Blueprint and NIST Framework..............................15

2.5.1. Group 1 – Smart Agriculture......................................................................15

2.5.2. Group 2 – Farm Field Mapping..................................................................16

2.5.3. Group 3 – Improving Rural Outcomes with Broadband Access .................16

2.6. Research Updates................................................................................................16

2.6.1. Pursuing Connectivity Solutions in Rural Areas.........................................17

2.6.2. Assessing Data Relays in Rural Areas ......................................................17

3. Conclusions .....................................................................................................................19

Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................20

Appendix A: Workshop Agenda.............................................................................................21

TABLE OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Smart Agriculture & Rural SuperCluster Workshop. .....................................................4

Figure 2: Smart agriculture technologies feeding Data Agralytics, enabling predictive farming....7

Figure 3: Corina Ardelean of AGCO............................................................................................8

Figure 4: Monroe Keedo of Navajo Tribal Utility Authority .........................................................11

Figure 5: Varying broadband performance in a field in Yolo County, CA, measured with 

CalSPEED app .........................................................................................................................12

Figure 6: Outcomes Panel (left to right): Matthew Rantanen, Catherine Moyer, Sarah Tyree, 

Dominic Papa............................................................................................................................13

Figure 7: Iowa State University’s software-defined radio access networks ................................17

Figure 8: Illustrations for UAV data relay coverage analyses.....................................................18

______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1900-205
NIST Special Publication 1900-205 Global City Teams Challenge

2

Executive Summary

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) established the Global City Teams Challenge 

(GCTC) for communities across the world to use as collaboration platform in their pursuit of deploying 

Internet of Things (IoT) and Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS) to improve the quality of life for residents. The 

GCTC's overarching goals are to enable standardization and interoperability for these IoT and CPS, and to 

make them scalable and replicable for the widest possible use. 

The Smart Agriculture and Rural SuperCluster is part of this GCTC effort. On February 19, 2020, this 

SuperCluster conducted a workshop in Phoenix, Arizona to further refine its blueprint for smart agriculture 

and rural areas. The workshop ultimately sought to develop a consensus-based smart cities and communities

framework and best practices, which could subsequently inform widespread smart agriculture and rural 

initiatives. 

The workshop included five panels, which addressed the following topics: connecting rural places to 

broadband; smart agriculture; funding and financing; farm field mapping; and improving rural outcomes 

with broadband access. In each area, experts provided wide-ranging perspectives. 

Workshop participants then divided into three groups to discuss challenges for the following areas: smart 

agriculture, farm field mapping, and improving rural outcomes with broadband access. Spokespersons for 

each group reported the results to all workshop participants in a plenary session and for possible inclusion 

in the blueprint and framework. 

A month later, the COVID-19 crisis made us even more aware of the criticality of the issues discussed at 

this meeting, especially broadband connectivity and bandwidth capacity. Closures and stay-at-home 

directives increased communities' reliance on broadband-enabled platforms. Employers set up remote work 

protocols, teachers engaged students in video conferencing, and consumers found more ways to shop online 

with touchless delivery—all for the sake of protecting health and safety. 

The COVID-19 pandemic underlined that both rural and urban areas greatly depend on broadband 

connectivity for distance education, telemedicine, and commerce. This report, along with lessons learned 

from this pandemic, can inform further pursuit of smart solutions, via broadband connectivity, for 

agriculture and rural areas. 

______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1900-205
NIST Special Publication 1900-205 Global City Teams Challenge

3

1. Introduction 

In late February 2020, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Global City Teams 

Challenge1 (GCTC) hosted a Smart Agriculture & Rural Supercluster Workshop in Phoenix, Arizona, USA. 

This gathering was sponsored by NIST, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration 

(NTIA), NTCA–The Rural Broadband Association, RTO Wireless, and Telrad Networks. The workshop 

convened participants from government, industry, and academia to discuss the many benefits and 

challenges of bringing smart technologies and broadband to more rural areas of the United States.

Barely a month later, the COVID-19 crisis made us even more aware of the criticality of the issues discussed 

at this meeting, especially regarding broadband connectivity and bandwidth capacity. The benefits of 

distance education, telemedicine, and broadband-enabled commerce were no longer theoretical 

explorations. 

Rather, closures and stay-at-home directives increased the reliance on broadband-enabled platforms. 

Employers set up remote work protocols, teachers engaged students in online teaching using video 

conferencing, and consumers sought online shopping with touchless delivery—all because of the need for 

health and safety. At the same time, locally-operated, rural broadband providers opened Wi-Fi hotspots, 

met increasing new home broadband subscription requests, and developed innovative ways to provide 

hardware and initiate service, all while maintaining technician and customer safety.

We have yet to fully understand the lasting impacts of the COVID-19 crisis. Rather, we have focused on 

meeting many immediate needs that have arisen as a result of this crisis – to include enabling the widest 

use of broadband. Support for broadband, which once seemed like abstract advocacy, now is based on 

extensive practical experience in a time of national emergency. What is apparent is that broadband is a 

critical tool for communities of all sizes and people of all ages. 

This workshop report provides a timely framework for addressing critical issues related to the deployment 

of broadband and smart technologies in remote and rural areas. This framework complements the lessons 

learned from the COVID-19 response. Moreover, this framework can serve as a valuable resource for 

technology innovators, communities, and policymakers, who have brought to prominence the imperative 

of rural broadband. Together this framework and lessons learned, along with public and private team efforts, 

can produce manifold benefits in the recovery phase and beyond.

1 https://pages.nist.gov/GCTC/

______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1900-205
NIST Special Publication 1900-205 Global City Teams Challenge

4

2. Smart Agriculture & Rural Supercluster Workshop

2.1. Purpose and Conduct of the Workshop

The Smart Agriculture and Rural SuperCluster Workshop was conceived and planned to further

development of a SuperCluster blueprint to contribute to the development of a consensus-based smart cities

framework. The workshop focused on best practices for widespread smart agriculture and rural initiatives. 

The event was held on February 19, 2020, in Phoenix, Arizona, USA.

The workshop began by orienting participants to its purpose and tasks. It primarily consisted of five panels 

addressing key topics, with experts providing diverse perspectives. Participants then worked in breakout 

sessions to develop inputs for the SuperCluster blueprint. The workshop also included updates on aspects 

of smart agriculture research in academia. 

2.2. The Smart Agriculture and Rural Blueprint to Date 

Josh Seidemann2 and Mo Shakouri3 jointly presented a blueprint titled Rural America, Rural Economies, 

and Rural Connectivity4 published by the Smart Agriculture and Rural SuperCluster in July 2019. The 

document provides case studies and examples, showing how expanding broadband access to rural 

communities can improve smart agriculture, healthcare, education, telecommuting, and more. These case 

studies and examples are intended to aid further study and this workshop should expand on the blueprint. 

2 Vice President of Policy, NTCA-The Rural Broadband Association 3 Director of Community Broadband at Joint Venture Silicon Valley

4 https://pages.nist.gov/GCTC/uploads/blueprints/2019-Ag-RuraBlueprint.pdf?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Newsletters&utm_source=sendgrid 

Figure 1: Smart Agriculture & Rural SuperCluster Workshop.

(Photo by NIST)

______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1900-205
NIST Special Publication 1900-205 Global City Teams Challenge

5

Seidemann emphasized the workshop’s value; it brings together multiple perspectives on rural 

communities’ widely varying needs. As Seidemann said, “If you’ve seen one rural area, you’ve just seen 

one rural area.”

2.3. NIST's Smart Cities and Communities Framework 

NIST speaker Sokwoo Rhee outlined the goal for the SuperCluster’s blueprint, which will be further 

developed and included in a consensus-based smart cities and communities framework, guiding widespread 

smart agriculture and rural initiatives. This framework will be developed, based on blueprints published by 

SuperClusters, public working groups in the Global City Teams Challenge program. 

NIST works with SuperClusters to review each blueprint and promulgate it to smart city and community 

stakeholders via website and newsletter. These inputs allow NIST and its working group members to 

develop a consensus-based framework that guides stakeholders—cities, communities, industry, and 

research agencies—in the planning and implementation of smart solutions. 

This blueprint will be incorporated into NIST’s series of publications, called Smart Cities and Communities 

Framework (SCCF).

5 The SCCF is composed of publications in four categories. 

• Cross-cutting and Foundational Issues: This category addresses all aspects of smart cities and 

communities’ development, such as data, platforms, key performance indicators, municipal IoT, 

cybersecurity, and privacy. 

• Sector-specific Issues: This category addresses smart city and community services, such as smart 

transportation, public safety, utility, agriculture and rural area, and smart buildings. 

• Implementation, Methods, and Approaches: This category includes publications addressing 

collaboration, innovation capacity building, education, procurement, economic sustainability, and 

workshop reports. 

• Case Studies: While publications in other categories may include case studies, those in this fourth 

category exclusively address case studies, providing detailed descriptions and analysis for pilots and 

deployments of smart cities and communities solutions. 

2.4. Plenary Panels 

2.4.1. Connecting Rural Places to Broadband 

In the introduction to the first plenary panel, broadband was described as being similar to electricity: it is 

foundational, and communities will find it difficult, if not impossible, to function without it. Panel members 

were asked to address the varying challenges of providing broadband connectivity for given rural areas. 

They were also asked to address common approaches to enabling it, which included the following: 

• Understanding customer needs, which inform services and infrastructure provided;

• Team flexibility and technology options, which are key to achieving connectivity, especially in the last 

mile and to farmland; 

5 https://www.nist.gov/el/cyber-physical-systems/smart-americaglobal-cities/nist-smart-cities-and-communities-framework 

______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1900-205
NIST Special Publication 1900-205 Global City Teams Challenge

6

• Various approaches taken by state, tribal, and local governments with respect to funding, use of assets, 

inclusion programs, participation in public–private partnerships, and more;

• Educating consumers on the technology—many seek to use it but do not always know how to use it or 

how to use it in a meaningful way; 

• Anticipating and forecasting opportunities, provided by new technologies; and

• Various approaches and funding sources used by broadband providers to expand their systems to serve 

more homes and local institutions.

Connectivity in Minnesota, North Dakota, and South Dakota, by Dave Giles6

: According to the speaker, 

grants from the Connect America Fund, primarily Phase II, enabled MIDCO7 to build broadband 

infrastructure in this three-state area. Low population densities make it difficult for companies to develop 

successful business models for the area. Presently, MIDCO owns about 10,000 miles of fiber optic networks 

in the three states, servicing about 400,000 customers, mostly smaller rural communities. It uses whatever 

tool it can for the last mile in its “fiber to edge-out” effort. MIDCO uses fiber when possible, but also uses 

copper, microwave, LTE technology, and more. Providers face labor and terrain challenges. North Dakota’s 

oil sector growth has increased labor costs. They also must cover rugged terrain, such as the Black Hills. 

Addressing gaps requires flexibility in teams and various products, said Giles. 

Connectivity in Alaska, by Wanda Tankersley8

: Matanuska Telephone Association9 (MTA) is a large coop 

of about 30,000 members, with a service area of about 10,000 square miles, north of Anchorage, Alaska, 

Tankersley mentioned. MTA primarily runs a telephone and Internet service, owns a wireless Internet 

service provider, and has fixed wireless technology. The estimated cost to cover the service area with fiber 

is about $400 million to $500 million—which is costly for 30,000 customers. MTA leverages fiber for 

middle miles and uses mostly copper for the last mile. Building infrastructure faces multiple challenges due 

to Alaska’s climate and remote location. Transporting materials is expensive, and the cost of network 

construction is about $132,000 per mile. Mountains and forests pose challenges, and some infrastructure is 

not accessible via road networks. The construction season is relatively short, running from May to 

September. Hiring workers with the necessary expertise is also difficult in Alaska.

Connectivity on Tribal Lands, by Traci Morris10: “It is different in Indian Country,” stated Morris, 

addressing connectivity from the perspective of the American Indian Policy Institute.

11 Tribal lands contain 

574 federally recognized tribes, and each has a different form of government.12 Some tribes are also 

businesses. Thus, their numerous and varying needs pose challenges for providers. Current regulatory 

systems also have challenges. Additionally, rugged terrain is a factor. Most end-users have wireless 

connectivity because that is the only choice available. Solutions based on community needs have been 

effective, as demonstrated by work with the Southern California Tribal Chairmen’s Association.13 

6 General Manager of Fixed Wireless, MIDCO

7 https://www.midco.com/ 8 Chief Operating Officer for Matanuska Telephone Association 9 https://www.mtasolutions.com/ 10 Director of the American Indian Policy Institute 11 https://aipi.asu.edu/ 12 Brian Howard, Traci Morris, “Tribal Technology Assessment: The State of Internet Service on Tribal Lands,” July 27, 2019, 

 SSRN. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3427547 13 https://sctca.net/ 

______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1900-205
NIST Special Publication 1900-205 Global City Teams Challenge

7

Providing New Connectivity, by Jeremiah Marbie14: Marbie said Microsoft launched its Airband TV White 

Space Initiative15 to close gaps in rural coverage and increase connectivity to the cloud. It uses television 

spectrum bands not assigned or used by broadcasters. The company sees Airband TV White Space 

technology as one tool in the toolbox to access the internet when fiber doesn’t work and satellite is too 

expensive. The company has supported Airband TV White Space Internet service providers in about 26 

states. Microsoft seeks to understand users’ needs to match them with technology that works. 

2.4.2. Smart Agriculture 

In this panel, several factors were described as driving smart farming, including smart devices that enable 

faster, better, and cheaper production. The resulting data from smart devices enables data analytics for 

agriculture, or “Data Agralytics,” which could aid predictive farming that reduces its risks (see Figure 2). 

Broadband is needed for smart agriculture—which will, in turn, impact broadband infrastructure and 

connectivity. 

Disruptive Events Driving Smart Agriculture, by Robert Tse16: According to Tse, disruptive events are 

driving accelerated innovation and adoption of agriculture technology and Data Agralytics in the food and 

agriculture system. Several disruptions are pushing technological changes in agriculture. Labor shortages 

are driving the need to produce more with less labor. Thus, the need and development of “Ag-robotics.” 

Specialty crops (fruits, vegetables, and tree crops) are particularly labor intensive, demanding use of Agrobotics and other new technologies. For farmland without sufficient rainfall, farming requires more 

efficient use of water and chemicals through smart irrigation. There is a need for new technology to improve 

plant hybrids and animal breeds, which could be enabled by smart agriculture. For example, wearable 

technologies for cows can track fertility cycles, enabling more effective breeding and more efficient 

management of animal health. New regulations are especially driving the need for Data Agralytics. For

example, California mandates water reporting, which could be more easily done by farmers using Data 

14 Director of Digital Transformation, Airband Initiative, at Microsoft 15 https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/corporate-responsibility/airband/technology 16 Senior Policy Advisor, Telecommunications, Rural Utilities Service, Rural Development, at U.S. Department of Agriculture

Figure 2: Smart agriculture technologies feeding Data Agralytics, enabling predictive farming

(Image used with permission from Robert Tse)

______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1900-205
NIST Special Publication 1900-205 Global City Teams Challenge

8

Agralytics, enabled by an app. Disruptive technology has introduced real-time sensor-based farm 

management. 

Technology-based precision agriculture enables greater agricultural production, minimizes inputs and costs, 

and shrinks the environmental footprint. Such smart agriculture results from the Internet of Things (IoT). 

However, it depends on the availability of broadband as a platform. 

A Vision for Smart Agriculture, by Dennis Buckmaster17: Buckmaster noted that, at its core, agriculture is 

logistics—putting the right seed in the right place at the right time, or putting the right food in front of the 

right cow at the right time of the day. Farmers must make countless decisions in real time, with times 

varying for each aspect of agriculture. Making those decisions requires information about the fields, 

animals, machines, facilities, and more. Farmers must also address “what-if” questions, such as, “If the 

moisture in a field is too high, and it’s late in the season, what can be planted?” 

Such data-driven decisions can be aided by IoT devices. Sensors indicating nitrate and moisture levels in 

fields could help decide when to plant, spray, or harvest. With Data Agralytics feeding biophysical models, 

agriculture could be gamed, allowing “what if” questions to be answered. However, such capabilities 

depend on a huge amount of data and IoT devices connected to the internet. This requires getting the 

broadband highway to the farm.

The Manufacturers’ Need for Connectivity, by Corina 

Ardelean18: Ardelean explained that AGCO Corporation19 is a 

manufacturer of agricultural equipment designed to help farmers 

increase yields, reduce costs, and achieve more opportunities. 

That goal depends on connectivity for its machines as well as its 

customers. Specifically, the company seeks connectivity so that 

its machines can download data, thus improving operations. It 

also seeks data analytics for aiding decisions in the moment and 

in the future. This could reduce labor costs, wait times, and other 

expenses. The ability to retrieve data is also key to making supply 

chains more cost-effective, thus getting fresh products to the 

customer. For example, a new generation of balers will be 

capable of releasing hay bales with radio-frequency 

identification tag, enabling geospatial location of each bale. The 

radio-frequency identification can carry information on relative 

feed value of the hay, moisture, and other valuable data points. 

That data enables the dairy producers to optimize nutritional value for their herd and increase milk 

production. Retrieving this data requires connectivity. 

Solving User Needs is Key to Solving the Big Broadband Problem, by John Jefferson20: Jefferson described 

rural broadband as being a big problem made up of many small problems. The big problem is largely 

known: broadband doesn’t adequately cover rural areas. The question is how to solve the smaller problems. 

17 Professor of agricultural and biological engineering and Dean's Fellow for Digital Agriculture at Purdue University 18 Manager of Global Fuse Product Management, Data Integration Logistics, AGCO Corporation 19 https://www.agcocorp.com/ 20 Managing Partner, Sage Synergies LLC and Cofounder of Insight Labs

Figure 3: Corina Ardelean of AGCO

(Photo by NIST)

______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1900-205
NIST Special Publication 1900-205 Global City Teams Challenge

9

This comes down to who is going to use the broadband. There are high and low bandwidth applications, 

and their uses depend on user needs. It is a matter of understanding the users’ needs.

The big problem could be solved by bringing together stakeholder groups. These groups could figure out 

where demands are and where grants are needed. When stakeholder groups address the smaller problems, 

they chip away at the bigger problem. For example, if carriers are in the vicinity, it is a matter of 

understanding their capabilities and matching the appropriate one to the farm’s needs. It is also possible to 

piece together different technologies to create a solution, as exemplified in Minnesota and the Dakotas. 

Satellite capabilities are also changing, making connectivity available at lower costs. Additionally, there 

are solutions at the edge, such as fixed wireless.

2.4.3. Funding and Financing 

In this panel session, speakers provided details on their respective funding programs for rural 

telecommunications initiatives and selection criteria. 

US Department of Agriculture’s Funding Programs for Broadband in Rural Areas, by Robert Tse: Tse 

described the following USDA efforts: 

• The Telecommunications Infrastructure Loans and Guarantees program21 has $690 million available 

annually. As a legacy of the telephone era, many applicants are rural phone companies.

• The Rural Broadband Access Loan and Loan Guarantee program22 will provide $11.2 million in 2020. 

At the time of the workshop, the program was not open.

• The Community Connect Grants program23 will have $35 million in 2020. At the time of the workshop, 

this program was also not yet open. 

• The Distance Learning and Telemedicine Grants program24 had opened at the time of the workshop 

and has $71 million available in FY 2020. Of this, $12 million and $9.4 million are dedicated to treating 

opioid addictions and substance abuse disorders, respectively. Due to COVID-19, the program received 

an additional $25 million in funding. A second window for applications was opened, which closes on 

July 13, 2020.

• The New Broadband Pilot Program25 is conducting Reconnect 2, which is providing $550 million. This 

is a grant, loan, and grant/loan program. Being a pilot, it is more flexible in terms of meeting legislative 

requirements. In Reconnect 1, a recommendation was made to address precision agriculture and 

connectivity for farms, which is now recognized in Reconnect 2.

National Science Foundation (NSF) Funding, by David Corman26: Corman described NSF27 funding as 

focused on projects that go beyond the state of the art, rather than those that simply improve state of the 

process. These projects have a goal to significantly impact society. For example, NSF funded university 

research on how to improve communications in tribal communities in Pueblo, New Mexico. NSF has also 

21 https://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services/telecommunications-infrastructure-loans-loan-guarantees 22 https://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services/rural-broadband-access-loan-and-loan-guarantee 23 https://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services/community-connect-grants 24 https://www.rd.usda.gov/programs-services/distance-learning-telemedicine-grants 25 https://www.usda.gov/broadband 26 Program Director at National Science Foundation 27 https://www.nsf.gov/ 

______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1900-205
NIST Special Publication 1900-205 Global City Teams Challenge

10

funded research on landslide prediction and warning in Sitka, Alaska. For those proposing projects, NSF 

asks applicants to address the following questions: 

• What problems will be solved?

• What are the risks?

• What are the payoffs?

• What are the impacts? Who will be impacted, and how much? 

• Who will care if the project succeeds?

• How will success be measured?

Since 2017, NSF has funded 52 projects under the Smart and Connected Communities program,

28 totaling 

$42 million. They assess such issues as disaster relief and the impact of ride-sharing in a rural area. This 

year’s budget is $40 million, and the awards are highly competitive. 

CoBank’s Lending for Rural Projects, by Sarah Tyree29: Tyree explained that CoBank30 is one of the largest 

providers of credit to the U.S. rural economy and one of the world’s 50 most credit-worthy institutions. It 

is part of the Farm Credit System, set up by Congress, which also directs who CoBank can lend to. CoBank 

is a cooperative (or coop), meaning that it is owned and governed by its customers. 

CoBank lends to operations that can show a record of cash flow over several years. It does not lend to startups. Agribusiness comprises about 28% of CoBank’s business, rural infrastructure comprises 21%, and 

farm credit banking comprises 51%. Regarding rural infrastructure, CoBank lends to rural electrification 

and rural water coops. Regarding telecommunications, CoBank lends to companies in all aspects of rural 

telecommunications, such as those providing fiber transport, wireless, and data centers. 

How Grants Have Benefitted the Navajo Nation, by Monroe Keedo31: Keedo said that, in 2010, the Navajo 

National Middle Mile/Last Mile Project32 applied for a $32 million grant under the American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act of 2009.

33 To obtain the grant, the project had to raise $10 million in matching funds. 

Being a partner in the project and a semi-autonomous entity, the Navajo Tribal Utility Authority34 (NTUA) 

was able to raise the $10 million, working with the Navajo people more easily than could its government, 

which must follow extensive regulations. 

The project built fiber optic and microwave infrastructure and then partnered with Commnet Wireless35 to 

provide wireless broadband to the homes. In the first three years, the project laid 550 miles of fiber on the 

Navajo Nation and built 59 towers. Today, the Nation has over 800 miles of fiber and 110 towers. The 

project also provided 4G LTE services. The result was major change for the Navajo Nation in terms of 

telecommunications and the ability for more tribal members to access 911 for emergency services. 

28 https://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=505364 29 Vice President of Policy and Public Affairs at CoBank 30 https://www.cobank.com/ 31 Research and Development Engineer at Navajo Tribal Utility Authority 32 https://www.ntia.doc.gov/legacy/broadbandgrants/factsheets/NavajoTribalUtilityAuthority.pdf 33 https://www.ntia.doc.gov/page/2011/american-recovery-and-reinvestment-act-2009 34 http://www.ntua.com/ 35 https://www.commnetwireless.com/ 

______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1900-205
NIST Special Publication 1900-205 Global City Teams Challenge

11

Despite such projects, many on Navajo tribal lands still lack broadband access. Thus, the NTUA seeks 

partnerships to help change this situation. It also is a partner in other projects, which have received several 

grants from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Keedo asserted that only 0.6% of FCC 

telecommunications funding has gone to Indian lands. Some grant programs are difficult to apply for, as 

they require matching funds, which are hard for tribes to secure. Keedo also asserted that the same is true 

for Rural Utilities Services. Only 11% of its telecommunications funding goes to Indian lands. NTUA also 

partnered on a grant to extend connectivity provided by the State of Arizona.

Another problem in getting grants is meeting the demand for a project to show a design. This also depends 

on an understanding of user needs. The problem is, many on tribal lands have never had broadband and so 

are unaware of its benefits. Obtaining grants means educating people on its uses, which drives design. Grant 

programs also want to see sustainability, which many tribal governments lack the financial means to 

demonstrate. 

2.4.4. Farm Field Mapping 

In this panel session, participants discussed the need for better broadband mapping in rural areas. The 

Federal Communications Commission’s broadband mapping is focused on people and houses. However, 

concerns have arisen over the coverage needed for precision agriculture, as indicated by comments received 

by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. For example, the state of Mississippi measured and found a 50% 

difference from what the FCC had mapped for the state’s broadband coverage. Without accurate farm field 

mapping, it is difficult to allocate resources for broadband coverage effectively. The following are varying 

perspectives on such mapping. 

Figure 4: Monroe Keedo of Navajo Tribal Utility Authority

(Photo by NIST)

______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1900-205
NIST Special Publication 1900-205 Global City Teams Challenge

12

Broadband coverage measured in Yolo County, CA, by Tyler Boyle36: Boyle presented that the 

Geographical Information Center37 at California State University, Chico, measured the broadband coverage 

in Yolo County. The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) developed an Android mobile app 

called CalSPEED38 to measure mobile broadband performance in urban and rural areas. Initially, 

researchers with the apps drove the streets of Yolo County, measuring throughput and latency at more than 

150 sites in its agricultural lands. They then focused on taking more precise measurements in fields at seven 

farms, finding huge variations in service. At one vineyard, for example, much of the field had no service, 

while other parts of it had download speeds varying from three to 32 megabits per second (see Figure 5). 

Most fields had an average download speed of about 3 megabits per second and a 10% failure rate. 

Landowners indicated that the service would not support smart agriculture. 

The Challenges of Providing Broadband Maps in Agriculture Areas, by Joe Carey39: Carey explained that 

his employer, Trimble, Inc.40, provides services such as connected farming, with the goal to enable farmers 

to download data and services. However, connected farming works well near cities and interstates, but 

much less so in other areas. Getting broadband maps to farmers, and showing them where connected 

farming is possible, entails several challenges, which include the following: 

• Radio is unpredictable due to reflection off snow and water and absorption by foliage. 

• A Cat M1 modem for LTE will get a different map than one that a Cat 1 modem gets.

• The type and height of an antenna above the ground will impact the type of map that users will receive.

• Antenna movement, even by an inch, can cause “fast fading,” impacting the maps that users get. 

There are possibilities for addressing these variables in broadband mapping. A state-of-the-art network 

analyzer costs about $20,000 and requires a very skilled engineer to interpret data. However, university 

36 Senior GIS Analyst, Geographical Information Center (GIC) at California State University, Chico 37 https://www.gic.csuchico.edu/ 38 http://www.tellusventure.com/downloads/cpuc/calspeed/biba_webinar_calspeed_measurement_6feb2019.pdf 39 Director of Wireless Strategy, Natural Resources Sector, at Trimble, Inc. 40 https://www.trimble.com/

Figure 5: Varying broadband performance in a field in Yolo County, CA, measured with CalSPEED app

(Images used with permission from Tyler Boyle)

______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1900-205
NIST Special Publication 1900-205 Global City Teams Challenge

13

researchers are proposing the development of a software-defined radio that can do the same thing for users

for only a few hundred dollars. 

Network Providers’ Needing Maps of Unserved Agricultural Lands, by Melissa Clawson41: According to 

Clawson, Geolinks42 is a provider of point-to-point wireless networks that may be installed instead of fiber 

optics networks. It uses microwaves to deliver the last mile of service to a parabolic antenna. The company

has been successful in securing grants for providing service to difficult areas and seeks to do the same for 

agricultural lands. The problem, however, is that FCC’s broadband maps show homes and population 

densities but not the locations of farms. The company is in need of maps showing agricultural lands that 

are not served, or that are underserved, so that it can focus its efforts. 

2.4.5. Improving Rural Outcomes with Broadband Access 

In addition to explaining what improved outcomes with broadband access in rural areas would look like, 

panel members provided approaches to achieve them and the partnerships enabling them. 

Outcomes on Tribal Lands, by Matthew Rantanen43: Rantanen explained that when network providers 

began establishing infrastructure across the US, they avoided difficult areas, such as the Sierras and tribal 

lands, because they lacked knowledge of how to work with tribal governments. Consequently, there were 

8,000 missing middle miles to 320 tribal lands in the 48 contiguous states. The estimated cost for fiber to 

cover these middle miles is about $1.5 billion.

As a result of several initiatives by the Southern California Tribal Chairmen’s Association44 since 2001, 

broadband networks were extended to 20 tribes in California, covering an area of 650 miles. These efforts 

41 General Counsel and Vice President of Government Affairs and Education, at GeoLinks 42 https://geolinks.com/ 43 Director of Technology at the Southern California Tribal Chairmen’s Association 44 https://sctca.net/ 

Figure 6: Outcomes Panel (left to right): Matthew Rantanen, Catherine Moyer, Sarah Tyree, Dominic Papa

(Photo by NIST)

______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1900-205
NIST Special Publication 1900-205 Global City Teams Challenge

14

initially were focused on connecting networks with libraries, then tribal community centers, followed by 

municipal centers and homes. This has had an impact. “In the 19 years I’ve been there, I’ve seen kids born 

there and go off to college, because they have had Internet and thus were exposed to higher education,” 

said Rantanen. However, such initiatives are only the first phase. Many who leave tribal lands to pursue

higher education do not return. Thus, tribal lands are losing their next generation of thinkers. 

More is needed to increase connectivity and opportunities on tribal lands. Recently, the FCC gave tribal 

lands priority in accessing the FM radio spectrum, with no fees and no external competition. Today, these 

lands have 75 stations. The FCC is also giving them priority access to 2.5 GHz licenses. Addressing the 

need for partnerships, Rantanen noted that these successes and more resulted from the Southern California 

Tribal Chairmen’s Association work with over 160 organizations. 

Outcomes of Telehealth Pilots, by Sarah Tyree: Tyree further explained that CoBank lends to broadband 

providers, seeking to connect rural areas. The challenge, however, is securing additional funding from other 

sources for initiatives, covering areas with low population densities. Thus, CoBank seeks initiatives that 

can show potential benefits for such areas, and, thus, qualify for help from the Universal Service Fund.

45 

Based on a Mississippi State University study on a telehealth pilot, CoBank and partners replicated the pilot 

in rural southwest Georgia. It connected 100 patients with uncontrollable type 2 diabetes facing risks of 

loss of sight and amputation. Each day, patients reported on their sleep, blood sugar levels, diet, and

walking. Remote healthcare providers advised them on adjustments to intake and habits. The results were 

significant. Fifty of the patients decreased their blood sugar levels by 2.5% on average. Patient surveys 

were even more remarkable. Tyree quoted patients as saying, “This is the first time I have felt loved by my 

healthcare provider” and “I am minding my ‘Ps & Qs’ because I know someone is out there.” Cost analysis 

also revealed savings of almost $4,000 per patient each month. 

The pilot was described as having additional results. The hospital in Macon, GA, adopted this connectivity 

to expand their treatment to 400 patients, also receiving reimbursements per patient on a monthly basis. 

The project also found that most patients preferred use of smartphones, as opposed to tablet computers. 

Additionally, the most compliant patients were those over 60 years of age. Subsequently, CoBank is 

pursuing other telehealth initiatives, such as reducing risks to women in rural areas, who have a greater 

chance of dying during pregnancy than their mothers did. 

Pursuing Transformational Outcomes—Smart Region and Smart State, by Dominic Papa46: The Arizona 

Commerce Authority47—a public-private sector partnership—has established the “Smart Region 

Consortium.”48 It is a permanent platform that allows governments, industry, and research institutions to 

collaboratively design and develop pilots that address seemingly insurmountable challenges, cutting across 

multiple local jurisdictions, such as connecting broadband in rural areas. This smart region approach is seen 

as enabling solutions on a larger scale than if pursued by individual municipalities. For now, the Smart 

Region Consortium is focused on the Phoenix metropolitan area, including the 22 nearby cities and towns. 

The Arizona Commerce Authority is expanding collaborative efforts to form a Smart State effort

45 https://www.fcc.gov/general/universal-service-fund 46 Vice President, Smart State Initiatives, Arizona Commerce Authority 47 https://www.azcommerce.com/ 48 https://www.azidp.com/the-smart-region/ 

______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1900-205
NIST Special Publication 1900-205 Global City Teams Challenge

15

encompassing the other cities and areas in Arizona. This statewide collaboration is exemplified by the 

Institute of Automated Mobility,

49 established by the governor of Arizona.

The Precision Agriculture Connectivity Task Force, by Catherine Moyer50: According to Moyer, the 2018 

Farm Bill established the Precision Ag Connectivity Task Force.51 Its purpose is to provide the FCC with 

advice and recommendations on how to advance broadband access for unserved agriculture lands and thus 

promote precision agriculture. The FCC has the authority to consult with the Department of Agriculture 

regarding related issues. The Task Force’s objectives are to: 

• Identify and measure gaps in the availability of broadband. 

• Develop policies promoting reliable broadband for 95% of agricultural lands by 2025. 

• Encourage adoption of broadband on farms and ranches and promote precision agriculture. 

• Accelerate deployment on unserved agriculture lands. 

The Task Force, which lasts until the end of 2021, faces a very aggressive timeline. However, its 

establishment highlights the importance of connectivity for agriculture. Many have previously discussed 

the importance of broadband for rural areas, but agriculture has received little attention. Precision 

agriculture and the increasing data it requires have received even less attention. Increased connectivity is 

needed to keep future generations in rural areas so that they will take over and run the farms.

Referring to partnerships, Moyer stated that the Task Force’s success will greatly depend on working 

relationships. From a provider’s perspective, Moyer stated that Pioneer Communications often partners 

with electric coops when they build infrastructure into rural areas, thus allowing extension of broadband 

coverage. 

2.5. Breakout Sessions: Inputs for Blueprint and NIST Framework 

Workshop participants were divided into groups to discuss several topics for the SuperCluster blueprint for 

agriculture and rural areas, as input to the NIST Smart Cities and Communities Framework. 

2.5.1. Group 1 – Smart Agriculture 

According to the participants in the smart agriculture discussion, moderated by Dennis Buckmaster, 

agriculture varies in terms of products, including livestock, wide-acre crops, and high-value crops. 

Agriculture also includes many processes beyond the farm gate; the supply chain for food and other 

agricultural products could be improved with enhanced connectivity and interoperability among systems. 

There are instances in which low-tech approaches can succeed (e.g., niche markets), but high-tech

approaches are needed in larger and more complex systems. Agriculturalists always bear risk, and smart 

agriculture should lead to reduced variability, increased resilience, improved sustainability, and improved 

quality of life.

Regardless of what is grown, produced, transported, and processed, smart agriculture should measure the 

common elements—the “whats”—that are needed to reduce risks and ensure a minimum viable product. 

49 https://www.aztechcouncil.org/institute-for-automated-mobility-created-with-intel-at-helm/ 50 CEO, Pioneer Communications 51 https://www.fcc.gov/task-force-reviewing-connectivity-and-technology-needs-precision-agriculture-united-states 

______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1900-205
NIST Special Publication 1900-205 Global City Teams Challenge

16

This includes measuring and tracking land, labor, input resources data required for automation, and, 

certainly, market demand and prices. Smart agriculture involves appropriate location, timing, and accuracy 

of these measurements.

2.5.2. Group 2 – Farm Field Mapping 

According to the participants in the farm field mapping discussion, moderated by Tyler Boyle, the 

availability of data regarding connectivity in farming/field areas is relatively poor. Crowdsourcing could 

be used to improve the availability of data. Specifically, property owners and organizations such as 4-H52

could be encouraged to download crowdsourcing apps to measure radio signal strength on properties. 

Another possible improvement could come from questions added to map survey requirements regarding 

connectivity in their fields. This survey would also encourage participation in crowdsourcing measurement 

efforts. Additionally, incentives could be provided for graduate students or a “hack-a-thon” to develop an 

affordable unit—hardware and software—to measure wireless signals for large areas. Conceivably, drones, 

4-H groups, broadband consortia, or even mail trucks could deploy this unit to collect data. Machinery that 

traverses these fields a few times a year can also be used to gather data.

2.5.3. Group 3 – Improving Rural Outcomes with Broadband Access 

According to the participants in the broadband access discussion, moderated by Jean Rice53, there are 

several possibilities for connectivity with wireless networks, including satellites, cellular technologies, 

aerial drones, aerostats, and fiber optics. Each has advantages and disadvantages. Each requires partnerships 

established in advance, enabling cybersecurity and privacy, and regulations, scaling up from local, tribal, 

state, and federal levels. 

Each also requires financing. Many initiatives are established and continue operations using grants. This 

approach carries an inherent risk of service disruption in the event a grant is not received. Such initiatives 

should build in funding for sustainability beyond grants. In the case of loans, such as from CoBank, lenders 

require evidence of active capital for a return on investments. Other options for making construction 

economical in rural and remote areas are grant or subsidy programs available from federal and state sources. 

The challenge of developing a good business case for rural areas is low population density. There are 

network services that people would pay for, such as telehealth. Such network services would also improve 

quality of life and outcomes. A case study suggests that providing network access to students at home helps 

increase the graduation rate.

54 

Lastly, many areas are heading for “data everywhere and users everywhere.” There are no boundaries for 

either. Technology is thus needed to address this challenge and provide opportunities. 

2.6. Research Updates

The workshop included presentations on aspects of smart agriculture research in academia. Researchers 

from Iowa State University and Purdue University presented their work. 

52 https://4-h.org/ 53 Senior Program Specialist at the National Telecommunication and Information Administration 54 “Cradlepoint Helps California School District Ensure No Child Is Left Offline” (Cradlepoint, 2016),

https://www.cosn.org/sites/default/files/Coachella-Customer-Success-Story.pdf 

______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1900-205
NIST Special Publication 1900-205 Global City Teams Challenge

17

2.6.1. Pursuing Connectivity Solutions in Rural Areas 

As part of the NSF CyNet project,55 Iowa State University (ISU) researchers deployed software-defined 

radio access networks in the ISU Curtiss Research Farm and ISU Research Park and connected them to the 

campus fiber networks and cloud centers (see Figure 7). Researchers in wireless networking, smart 

agriculture, and smart transportation are using CyNet as a living lab to develop wireless and application 

solutions for smart and connected rural communities. In particular, CyNet enables the study of rural 

connectivity solutions and their applications, with a special focus on: 

• Convergence of open-source, software-defined wireless, fiber, and edge/cloud computing 

infrastructures; 

• Data analytics; and 

• Applications in different domains, such as smart agriculture and smart transportation. 

2.6.2. Assessing Data Relays in Rural Areas 

Yaguang Zhang56 presented the latest developments at Purdue University for a large-scale cellular coverage 

analysis project. This project focused on modeling the blockage and coverage conditions for unmanned 

aerial vehicle (UAV) data relay via channel modeling. The research team has quantified the cellular data 

coverage improvement when the 4G LTE system is relayed by UAVs over large geographic areas of interest 

55 https://www.ece.iastate.edu/~hongwei/group/projects/CyNet.html 56 Ph.D. Candidate at Purdue University 

Figure 7: Iowa State University’s software-defined radio access networks

(Images used with permission from Hongwei Zhang, Iowa State University)

______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1900-205
NIST Special Publication 1900-205 Global City Teams Challenge

18

(up to the whole state of Indiana). Data layers regarding terrain and LiDAR-based elevation and cell tower 

layout were utilized to render the analysis realistic. This simulation yields connectivity performance 

improvements with deployment of UAV data relay systems (see Figure 8). 

Their work proposed algorithms for blockage and path loss maps with fixed-height relay UAVs. The 

blockage maps were generated based on high-resolution LiDAR data and were used to locate regions with 

line-of-sight obstructions. On the other hand, path loss maps generated from terrain elevation data were 

used to identify regions with satisfactory coverage conditions. Novel procedures on result visualization and 

analysis also provided for system-level performance evaluation. Their analyses showed that a coverage 

ratio gain over 40% can be achieved at a drone height of 100 m, compared to a typical pedestrian height of 

1.5 m, for Indiana. More details can be found in their IEEE paper57. 

The flexibility of extending wireless communication coverage via UAV data relay is extremely valuable 

for digital agriculture applications in rural areas, especially for those where network coverage is sparse or 

nonexistent. Purdue researchers are using these simulation results to chart area coverage differences when 

the relay is blocked by structures and obstacles and when UAVs could be used to avoid them. Their goal is 

to optimize the UAV deployment locations with simulations to provide configuration and performance

references on real-life UAV data relay systems. A similar approach could also be used to optimize the 

deployment of aerostats or cell towers on wheels.

57 Y. Zhang, T. Arakawa, J. V. Krogmeier, C. R. Anderson, D. J. Love, and D. R. Buckmaster, "Large-Scale Cellular Coverage 

Analyses for UAV Data Relay via Channel Modeling," to appear in 2020 IEEE International Conference on Communications 

(ICC). IEEE.

Figure 8: Illustrations for UAV data relay coverage analyses

(Images used with permission from Yaguang Zhang) 

A typical UAV data relay scenario for agriculture Path loss map for the WHIN area with UAVs at 30 m

______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1900-205
NIST Special Publication 1900-205 Global City Teams Challenge

19

3. Conclusions

The Smart Agriculture and Rural SuperCluster workshop brought together various perspectives, which 

introduced success stories related to broadband access in the U.S. Participants described the potential 

benefits of improved rural broadband access, which are diverse and include increased agricultural 

productivity, environmental monitoring, education, healthcare, logistics for all businesses, and general 

quality of life. This potential, coupled with successes to date, gives hope to residents of regions and 

localities, which have yet to gain satisfactory broadband access. Equally important, this workshop identified

lessons learned from overcoming past challenges and considered how they inform further expansion of 

broadband access and smart solutions for agriculture and rural areas. 

Participants noted that a starting point that many assume is resolved—but evidence proves otherwise—is 

accurately mapping connectivity (cellular, fiber, WiFi, etc.). This mapping has, historically, had limitations. 

Regional maps have been very inaccurate at local levels, and at micro-local levels, such as along a road, 

can be significantly inaccurate. Collection of improved data could be achieved by capitalizing on ongoing 

“business” operations, like mail and package deliveries, farming, as well as, crowdsourcing. These efforts 

could determine access characteristics such as radio signal strength and data speed.

Several participants emphasized the importance of clarifying stakeholder and customer needs prior to 

establishing broadband connectivity in remote areas. This clarification includes use cases for access. It also 

requires specifying coverage, like whether it is for concentrated homes and businesses, sparse residences, 

or land areas where agricultural activities occur. As use cases and the benefits are identified, the degree of 

latency should be considered, as it influences technical solutions. While no single solutions exist for 

technology or financing, needs assessments significantly influence both. 

Furthermore, participants noted that selection of the best solutions requires decision makers to have 

knowledge of all technical and financial options' strengths, weaknesses, attributes. Alaskan experience 

shows that high-quality internet connectivity solutions can be deployed in the most challenging 

environments, involving distance, climate, and terrain. The tribal lands experience shows that partnerships 

can lead to a significant influx of funding and that a combination of connectivity technologies can increase

access and serve large areas in a short period. Yet, participants asserted that funding often has constraints 

that make equitable distribution of resources difficult, and the all-important business case sometimes seems 

elusive.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1900-205
NIST Special Publication 1900-205 Global City Teams Challenge

20

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the valuable contributions of all workshop speakers and participants. 

Appreciation is extended to NTCA–The Rural Broadband Association, RTO Wireless, and Telrad 

Networks for their support. Tom Linn is recognized for taking detailed notes of the workshop and assisting 

with the report. 

______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1900-205
NIST Special Publication 1900-205 Global City Teams Challenge

21

Appendix A: Workshop Agenda

Smart Agriculture & Rural Supercluster Workshop

Smart technologies are igniting rural economic development, improving health care and education, and 

improving farming and ranching production. The Global City Team Challenge (GCTC) Agriculture and 

Rural Broadband SuperCluster encourages collaboration on innovative agtech and rural projects and 

released a blueprint for rural communities in July 2019. 

Stay tuned with this effort at: https://pages.nist.gov/GCTC/super-clusters/

Tue, February 18th, 2020 – Phoenix AZ

3:30 pm Field Trip to Gila River Telecommunications

Wed, February 19, 2020

9:00 a.m. Welcome and Introductions

 Josh Seidemann, VP Policy, NTCA–The Rural Broadband Association

 Jean Rice, Senior Broadband Specialist, National Telecommunication and Information 

 Administration

 Mo Shakouri, Dir Community Broadband Initiative, Joint Venture Silicon Valley

9:15 a.m. Introduction to the NIST Smart Cities and Communities Framework

Sokwoo Rhee, Associate Director for Cyber-Physical Systems Innovation, National 

Institute of Standards and Technology

9:40 a.m. Overview of Smart Ag & Rural Supercluster Blueprint

 Josh Seidemann, VP Policy, NTCA–The Rural Broadband Association

 Mo Shakouri, Dir Community Broadband Initiative, Joint Venture Silicon Valley

9:50 a.m. Jeff Sobotka, VP – State Broadband Director, Arizona Commerce Authority

10:00 a.m. Panel: Connecting Rural Places to Broadband

 Moderator: Josh Seidemann, VP Policy, NTCA–The Rural Broadband Association

 Traci Morris, Director of the American Indian Policy Institute 

 Wanda Tankersley, COO of Matanuska Telephone Association in Palmer, Alaska

 Dave Giles, General Manager Fixed Wireless, MIDCO 

 Jeremiah Marble, Director of Digital Transformation, Airband Initiative, Microsoft

11:00 a.m. Panel: Smart Agriculture - What is it, who is using it, and how?

Moderator: Mo Shakouri, Dir Community Broadband Initiative, Joint Venture Silicon 

Valley

Robert Tse, Senior Policy Advisor Assistant Administrator’s Office, Telecommunications 

Program, Rural Utilities Service, Rural Development, United States Department of 

Agriculture

Dennis Buckmaster, Professor of Agricultural & Biological Engineering, Dean’s Fellow 

for Digital Agriculture, Purdue University

Corina Ardelean, Manager, Global Fuse Product Management, Data Integration 

Logistics, AGCO Corporation

John Jefferson, AgTech, Strategic Partnership, Program Management Managing 

Partner-Sage Synergies LLC, Co-Founder – Insight Labs

______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1900-205
NIST Special Publication 1900-205 Global City Teams Challenge

22

Noon Lunch Break

12:15 p.m. Deploying Aerostats for Wireless Networks by Steve Hubbard, CEO, RTO Wireless

12:30 p.m. Funding and Financing Panel (Federal and State)

Moderator: Dennis Buckmaster, Professor of Agricultural & Biological Engineering, 

Dean's Fellow for Digital Agriculture, Purdue University

Robert Tse, Senior Policy Advisor Assistant Administrator’s Office, Telecommunications 

Program, Rural Utilities Service, Rural Development, United States Department of 

Agriculture 

David Corman, Program Director, National Science Foundation

 Sarah Tyree, VP Policy and Public Affairs, CoBank

Monroe Keedo, Navajo Tribal Utility Authority

1:30 p.m. Farm Field Mapping

Moderator: Robert Tse, Senior Policy Advisor Assistant Administrator’s Office,

Telecommunications Program, Rural Utilities Service, Rural Development, United States

Department of Agriculture 

Tyler Boyle, Senior GIS Analyst, Geographical Information Center (GIC), California State

University, Chico

 Joe Carey, Director, Wireless Strategy, Natural Resources Sector, Trimble, Inc.

Melissa Slawson, General Counsel and Vice President of Government Affairs and 

Education, GeoLinks

Tyler Boyle, Senior GIS Analyst, Geographical Information Center (GIC), California State 

University, Chico

 

2:00 p.m. Break

2:15 p.m. Topical Breakout Sessions to Populate the Blueprint and Framework with Examples 

Group 1: Smart Agriculture – Moderator: Dennis Buckmaster

Group 2: Farm Field Mapping – Moderator: Robert Tse

Group 3: Rural Connectivity, Improving Rural Outcomes & Quality of Life – Moderator:

Jean Rice

3:30 p.m. Report Out

 Moderator: Sokwoo Rhee, National Institute for Standards and Technology

4:00 p.m. Panel: Improving Rural Outcomes with Broadband Access

Moderator: Jean Rice, Senior Broadband Specialist, National Telecommunication and 

Information Administration

Dominic Papa, VP, Smart State Initiatives, Arizona Commerce Authority

 Matthew Ratanan, Director of Technology, Southern California Chairman’s Association

 Sarah Tyree, VP Policy and Public Affairs, CoBank

 Catherine Moyer, CEO of Pioneer Communications

5:00 p.m. Rural Connectivity Case Studies

 Hongwei Zhang, Associate Professor, Iowa State University

 Yaguang Zhang, PhD Candidate, Purdue University

5:30 p.m. Close 

______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1900-205