Geographic Information Systems: Challenges to Effective Data Sharing
Published: 2003-06-10T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: Geographic information systems (GIS) manipulate, analyze, and graphically present an array of information associated with geographic locations, have been invaluable to all levels of government. Their usefulness in disaster response was recently demonstrated during the Space Shuttle Columbia recovery effort. GIS provided precise maps and search grids to guide crews to the debris that was strewn across 41 counties in Texas and Louisiana. The federal government has long been attempting to develop an integrated nationwide GIS network. The information available through such a network could significantly enhance decision--making in myriad public--service areas, including emergency response, national security, law enforcement, health care, and the environment. Among GAO's objectives were to describe the federal government's efforts to coordinate GIS activities, the long-standing challenges of adopting and implementing federal GIS standards, and the role of Geospatial One-Stop.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: For decades, the federal government has tried to reduce duplicative geospatial data collection by coordinating GIS activities within and outside the federal government. For example, in 1990, the Office of Management and Budget established the Federal Geographic Data Committee to promote the coordinated use, sharing, and dissemination of geospatial data nationwide. In 1994, the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) program was established by executive order to address the problem of the redundancy and incompatibility of geospatial information on a national basis. More recently, Geospatial One-Stop, a component of NSDI, was initiated. Although efforts to build the NSDI are progressing, achieving the vision of a nationwide GIS network remains a formidable challenge. Developing standards that meet stakeholders' needs remains a challenging and time-consuming task, and achieving full participation across governments in their development has also been difficult. Geospatial One-Stop is aimed at promoting coordinated geospatial data collection and maintenance across all levels of government. Among its objectives are (1) deploying an Internet portal for one-stop access to geospatial data; (2) developing data standards; and (3) encouraging greater coordination among federal, state, and local agencies. While these objectives are important, Geospatial One-Stop has focused on limited, near-term tasks and was not intended to fully address the longer-term challenges of implementing the NSDI. A much more substantial effort will be required to attain the broader vision of seamless integration of GIS data nationwide. Existing draft standards may need further revision, and more extensive coordination efforts may be required to ensure broad adoption at all levels of government. Further, the effort is likely to require a continuing effort over an extended period of time, due to the fact that significant investments have already been made in existing non-standard systems.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: I appreciate the opportunity to participate in the Subcommittee’s hearing  regarding the challenges of developing an integrated nationwide network  of geographic information systems (GIS). A GIS is a system of computer  software, hardware, and data used to manipulate, analyze, and graphically  present a potentially wide array of information associated with geographic  locations. GIS’s powerful ability to integrate different kinds of information  about a physical location can lead to better-informed decisions about  public investments in infrastructure and services—including national  security, law enforcement, health care, and the environment—as well as a  more effective and timely response in emergency situations. However,  long-standing challenges to data sharing and integration need to be  addressed before the benefits of geographic information systems can be  fully realized.
As requested, in my remarks today, I will discuss the many GIS activities  under way throughout the federal government, the federal government’s  efforts to coordinate these activities, and the long-standing challenges of  adopting and implementing federal GIS standards. I will also discuss the  role of Geospatial One-Stop, one of 25 high-profile e-government  initiatives sponsored by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). To  supplement my remarks, I have included an attachment that lists examples  of the numerous GIS activities led by various federal agencies.
subsections: section_title: Background
paragraphs: The primary function of a GIS is to link multiple sets of geospatial data and  graphically display that information as maps with potentially many  different layers of information. Assuming that all the information is at the  same scale and has been formatted according to the same standards, users  can potentially overlay spatial information about any number of specific  topics to examine how the layers interrelate. Each layer of a GIS map  represents a particular “theme” or feature, and one layer could be derived  from a data source completely different from the other layers. For  example, one theme could represent all the streets in a specified area.  Another theme could correspond to all the buildings in the same area, and  others could show vegetation or water resources. As long as standard  processes and formats have been arranged to facilitate integration, each of  these themes could be based on data originally collected and maintained  by a separate organization. Analyzing this layered information as an  integrated whole can significantly aid decision makers in considering  complex choices, such as where to locate a new Department of Motor  Vehicles building to best serve the greatest number of citizens. Figure 1  portrays the concept of data themes in GIS.
The expansion of Internet connectivity in recent years has substantially  enhanced the potential value of GIS because now it is possible to locate  and harness data from many disparate GIS databases to develop very rich  analytical information on almost any topic that is associated with physical  locations. Data that were once collected and used only for a single  purpose could now have much broader applications. Further, the  community of GIS users has been broadened to include potentially anyone  with an Internet connection. For example, citizens can now use home  computers to obtain answers to specific questions about land use in their  state or local jurisdiction. Commercial entrepreneurs can combine GIS  data about zoning and tax-incentive areas to determine what parts of a city  are best suited for establishing a new business.
Federal, state, and local government agencies are using GIS today to  provide vital services to their customers. For example, local fire  departments can use geographic information systems to determine the  quickest and most efficient route from a firehouse to a specific location,  taking into account changing traffic patterns that occur at various times of  day. Highway departments use GIS to identify intersections that have had  a significant number of personal injury accidents to determine needs for  improved traffic signaling or signage. GIS can also be an invaluable tool in  ensuring homeland security by facilitating preparedness, prevention,  detection, and recovery and response to terrorist attacks.
Many federal departments and agencies use GIS technology to help carry  out their primary missions. For example, the Department of Housing and  Urban Development (HUD) worked with the Environmental Protection  Agency (EPA) to develop E-MAPS, which combines information on HUD’s  community development and housing programs with EPA’s environmental  data. The program provides homeowners and prospective homebuyers  with ready access to detailed local information about environmental  hazards that otherwise would likely have been very difficult to obtain. In  another example, the Department of Health and Human Services uses GIS  technology to analyze data on population and topography (including  roads, streams, and land elevation), as well as information gathered from  residents. These data are used to track the spread of environmental  contamination through a community, to identify geographic areas of  particular health concern, and to identify susceptible populations, such as  children or the elderly.
The usefulness of GIS in disaster response was demonstrated recently in  connection with the Space Shuttle Columbia recovery effort. After the loss  of Columbia on February 1, 2003, debris was spread over at least 41  counties in Texas and Louisiana. Analysis of GIS data was critical to the  efficient recovery and documentation of that debris. The Texas state GIS  program provided authorities with precise maps and search grids to guide  field reconnaissance and collection crews. Officials in charge of the effort  used maps of debris fields combined with GIS data about the physical  terrain to carefully track every piece of debris found. This information not  only contributed to an efficient recovery effort but also may help experts  to refine theories about why Columbia perished.
In developing this testimony, our objectives were to describe the many GIS  activities under way throughout the federal government and the federal  government’s efforts to coordinate these activities, the long-standing  challenges of adopting and implementing federal GIS standards, and the  role of Geospatial One-Stop. To address these objectives, we obtained  relevant documentation from the Department of the Interior and  interviewed Geospatial One-Stop project officials as well as  representatives from state agencies and private sector organizations  involved in GIS activities with the federal government. We also analyzed  the accomplishments and planned activities of the Geospatial One-Stop  initiative in light of identified challenges to geospatial data sharing. We  performed our work between May 2003 and June 2003, in accordance with  generally accepted auditing standards.
section_title: Many Federal Government GIS Activities Overlap
paragraphs: According to the Department of the Interior, about 80 percent of all  government information has a geospatial data component, such as an  address or other reference to a physical location. It is not surprising, then,  that a wide variety of geospatial data collection efforts are ongoing  throughout the federal government, each established for a different  purpose but often collecting and maintaining the same or similar  information. In fact, according to the 2001 initial business case for  Geospatial One-Stop, about 50 percent of the federal government’s  geospatial data investment is redundant.
For every GIS application, federal agencies must manage the geospatial  data that are at the heart of that application. In many cases, agencies  maintain the same data that are referenced to the same geographic  location. For example, both HUD and the Census Bureau maintain  essentially the same geospatial data regarding congressional districts, city  boundaries, railroads, interstate highways, and state highways. The two  agencies maintain separate GIS systems for storing and analyzing this  information.
In many cases, agencies independently collect data that, while not  identical, is similar and potentially duplicative in many respects. For  example, both the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Nuclear  Regulatory Commission (NRC) collect and analyze information regarding  uranium-milling facilities, and they both cover the same geographic areas.  DOE concentrates on tracking the status of former uranium processing  sites, whereas NRC gathers and maintains information on current uranium  milling facilities in the same mid-western locations. In cases such as this,  significant efficiencies may be gained by coordinating the two collection  efforts.
In other cases, data may be collected in different resolutions or with  different degrees of accuracy but still essentially cover the same theme  over the same geographic area. Local governments often possess the most  recent and highest resolution geographic data; however, these data often  are collected to serve specific missions and may be difficult to use for  other purposes. For instance, when the Forest Service created a national- level GIS for the forest ecosystem, it was faced with reconciling data from  a variety of incompatible locally developed systems. Local agencies had  used a variety of standards for each forest and district. In assembling these  data into a unified, coherent database, the Forest Service had to adopt the  lowest-resolution format in order to maintain full coverage of all forests.  As a result, much of the higher-resolution content of the local data could  not be used. Much of the effort in building this system was spent  reconciling data sets to make them usable in an integrated database.
The biggest problem with collecting this duplicative geospatial data is its  cost. According to a recent study, up to 80 percent of GIS costs are related  to the collection and management of geospatial data. In 1993, OMB  performed a data call in which it estimated that $4.1 billion was spent  annually, at the federal level, on collection and management of  geographically referenced data. In addition, state and local governments  are estimated to spend twice that of the federal government on collection  and management of geographic referenced data.
section_title: Many Attempts Have Been Made to Coordinate GIS Activities
paragraphs: The federal government has tried for years to reduce duplicative  geospatial data collection by coordinating GIS activities both within and  outside the federal government. In 1953 the Bureau of the Budget first  issued its Circular A-16, encouraging expeditious surveying and mapping  activities across all levels of government and avoidance of duplicative  efforts. More recently, the E-Government Act of 2002 directed the Office  of Management and Budget to coordinate the development of standard  protocols for sharing geographic information to reduce redundant data  collection and promote collaboration and the use of standards. Although  progress has been made over this 50-year span, much work still remains to  be done.
Over the past several decades we and others, such as the National  Research Council and the National Academy of Public Administration,  have made a set of recommendations aimed at promoting the coordination  of GIS efforts and data. In 1969, we recommended that mapping by state  and local agencies under federal programs should be accomplished, where  appropriate, in a manner enabling such work to contribute to the national  mapping program. In 1982, we issued another report recommending  interagency coordination to prevent duplicative computer-mapping  programs. In response to this and other recommendations, OMB revised  Circular A-16 in 1990, to, among other things, establish a Federal  Geographic Data Committee (FGDC), chaired by the Department of the  Interior, to promote the coordinated use, sharing, and dissemination of  geospatial data nationwide. Building on that effort, a program was  established by Executive Order 12906 in 1994 to develop a National Spatial  Data Infrastructure (NSDI) to address the problem of the redundancy and  incompatibility of geospatial information collected by many different  organizations and stored and maintained at many different physical  locations. Figure 2 provides a federal GIS coordination timeline.
As a result of these federal geospatial coordination efforts, the federal  government has begun to establish the NSDI through a number of  component programs. These include the Geospatial Data Clearinghouse  to promote data sharing on a national level, a collection of voluntary “I- Teams” to foster community-level data collection and sharing, a  Cooperative Agreements Program to provide seed money for initiatives  aimed at better data integration and use, and—most recently—the  Geospatial One-Stop initiative, aimed at promoting coordination and  alignment of geospatial data collection and maintenance across all levels  of government. Table 1 gives more details about the components of the  NSDI. I will discuss the Geospatial One-Stop initiative at greater length  later in my remarks.
Although efforts to build the NSDI are progressing, achieving the vision of  a nationwide GIS network remains a formidable challenge.  Notwithstanding federal attempts to promote interagency and  intergovernmental collaboration, the difficulty in developing and  implementing effective standards remains a barrier to effective data  sharing and to achieving the level of integration that would lead to full  development of the NSDI.
section_title: Developing and Implementing GIS Standards Have Posed Long-Standing Challenges
paragraphs: Developing common geospatial standards to support vital public services  has proven to be a complex and time-consuming effort. The number of  types of geospatial data and the complexity of those data make developing  geospatial standards a daunting task. For example, 34 different broad  categories of geospatial data, called “data themes,” were identified in OMB  Circular A-16 as a necessary foundation for the NSDI. These basic themes  relate to all types of services provided by the federal government— including climate, flood hazards, federal land ownership, public health,  soils, and transportation. Each of these themes, in turn, may have any  number of subthemes. The transportation theme, for example, includes  such divergent subthemes as road, railroad, air, transit, and waterway,  each the domain of a different organization or group of organizations. For  data associated with the NSDI’s themes and subthemes to be effectively  shared, standards must be developed that allow interoperability and  integration of the many disparate formats of data that are currently  collected for each theme and subtheme. Circular A-16 further identifies  seven of the themes as the core set of most commonly used data, called  “framework themes.” FGDC has been working to coordinate the  development of these themes as well as other standards since it was  established 13 years ago. Although FGDC has developed versions of  several of these standards, it has not attempted to finalize a complete set  of the seven framework standards. These framework standards would  define the simplest level of geographic data commonly used in most  geospatial data sets.
OMB Circular A-16 calls for a well-coordinated effort among federal, state,  local, and tribal governments, academic institutions, and the private sector  to build an effective NSDI. Yet in the capital asset plan for the Geospatial  One-Stop project published in January 2003, the Department of the Interior  noted that the risk was high that agencies would be unwilling to adopt  framework data standards. Given that most federal agencies—including  large agencies such as DOE, Justice, and Health and Human Services— have not participated in the NSDI framework standards development  process, the risk is substantial that the proposed standards will not meet  their needs. In addition, agencies could be faced with a potentially  expensive effort at “migrating” to the new standard. Substantial  investments have already been made to independently develop geospatial  systems using formats and standards that meet the specific needs of the  agencies that developed them. The potential for agencies to continue to  deploy agency-specific, noninteroperable geospatial systems was another  high risk identified by Interior in its January 2003 Geospatial One-Stop  plan.
Many states and localities have established Web sites that provide a  variety of location-related information services, such as updated traffic  and transportation information, land ownership and tax records, and  information on housing for the elderly. Existing commercial products  using a variety of formats are already meeting the needs of the states and  localities in providing this information. Hence these organizations are  likely to have little incentive to adopt potentially incompatible federal  standards that could require substantial new investments. According to  Arizona’s state cartographer, many local governments currently do not  comply with existing FGDC standards because most of their GIS  applications were created primarily to meet their internal needs, with little  concern for data sharing with federal systems.
section_title: Geospatial One-Stop’s Objectives Are Limited
paragraphs: Geospatial One-Stop is intended to accelerate the development and  implementation of the NSDI by promoting coordination and alignment of  geospatial data collection and maintenance across all levels of  government. Specifically, its objectives include (1) deploying an Internet  portal for one-stop access to geospatial data as an extension to the NSDI  Clearinghouse network (see figure 3); (2) developing data standards for  the seven NSDI framework data themes; (3) creating an inventory of  federal data holdings related to the seven framework themes; and (4)  encouraging greater coordination among federal, state, and local agencies  about existing and planned geospatial data collection projects.
Deploying an Internet portal. This task was to design and implement an  Internet portal to serve as a one-stop interface for users seeking links to  geospatial data that were already available and cataloged in the NSDI  clearinghouse. A demonstration version of the portal has been developed,  and the first publicly available version is expected to be implemented by  the end of June 2003. Plans are to begin adding new data to the portal, now  that it has been developed. Project officials are also considering future  enhancements to the functionality of the portal; however, no milestones  have been set for any specific enhancements.
Developing data standards. The specific objective was to draft the seven  NSDI framework standards. Drafts of these seven framework standards, as  well as five transportation subthemes and a base standard have now been  completed. Project officials plan to submit these drafts to the American  National Standards Institute by the end of September 2003.
Creating an inventory of federal data holdings. To meet this objective,  metadata for all relevant federal data sets must first be collected and  made available in the NSDI Clearinghouse. Users need metadata to  determine whether a data set is useful for their purposes and to be aware  of any special stipulations about processing and interpreting the data.  Accordingly, OMB Circular A-11 required that all federal data sets with a  replacement value exceeding $1 million be documented in FGDC metadata  and the metadata be accessible and searchable in the NSDI Clearinghouse  network by February 10, 2003.
Encouraging greater coordination among federal, state, and local  agencies. To support this objective, a process has been established to  coordinate Geospatial One-Stop’s activities across these various  government levels. According to the project’s cooperating states  coordinator, eight federal agencies are participating in developing and  implementing the initiative. In addition, an intergovernmental board of  directors was established with two-thirds of the vote held by state, local  and tribal representatives. The purpose of the board was to help ensure  collaboration among potential stakeholders from all government sectors.  According to the National States Geographic Information Council’s  (NSGIC) representative, state, county, and municipal levels of government  are well represented and play a useful role in providing alternative views  about the direction of the initiative.
While Geospatial One-Stop’s objectives are important, they do not  represent a significantly new or different approach to the GIS integration  problem that the government has been struggling with for more than a  decade. First, while developing and implementing an Internet portal may  offer users additional functionality over the existing Clearinghouse, unless  the underlying geospatial data offered through the portal are standardized  across data providers, the additional functionality offered by the portal  may be of limited value.
Second, the objective of finalizing the seven framework standards, while  important, is limited. As I discussed earlier, a total of 34 data themes was  identified in OMB Circular A-16 as a necessary foundation for the NSDI.  Geospatial One-Stop’s objectives do not include plans to address any of  the remaining 27 themes. Before the broader vision of a unified nationwide  network of geospatial data and systems can be achieved, standards for all  of NSDI’s foundation data themes will need to be established. Further,  definition of the standards is only the first step in gaining their benefits;  Geospatial One-Stop has not yet addressed the challenge of gaining  consistent implementation of the standards across government, which I  have already discussed. In order to attain the broader vision of seamless  integration of GIS data on a nationwide basis, a longer-term effort will be  required.
Third, creating a complete and useful inventory of federal data holdings  will require much more substantial work than is planned through the  Geospatial One-Stop initiative. For example, according to the FGDC  Metadata Coordinator, the extent to which agencies have posted metadata  about their geospatial data sets is unknown. In addition, obtaining  complete metadata from all federal sources is likely to be very challenging.  If the metadata were not created when the data were originally captured,  they could be expensive and time-consuming to generate after the fact,  and agencies may not have resources available for the effort. Accordingly,  unless Geospatial One-Stop devotes more resources to working with  agencies on generating and posting metadata, its objective of creating an  inventory of federal data holdings may be delayed.
Finally, despite the creation of the Board of Directors, questions have been  raised about the breadth of participation in Geospatial One-Stop. The chair  of the board acknowledged that the small group of nonfederal  representatives on the board may not be able to speak for all the states  and thousands of local governments. It is also not known how well these  representatives are disseminating information about the initiative and  encouraging collaboration among the states and localities that are not  directly represented. As with the initiative’s other objectives, limited  actions have been taken aimed at achieving near-term results that only  partially address the broader objective of building the NSDI. To fully  achieve that broader objective, Geospatial One-Stop will need to better  ensure that it has coordinated with all relevant governmental entities and  that they understand the initiative and their role in it.
In summary, a coordinated nationwide network of geographic information  systems offers many opportunities to better serve the public, make  government more efficient and effective, and reduce costs. As a  sophisticated decision making tool, GIS provides the capability to  strengthen national security, enhance law enforcement, increase public  health, and protect the environment. However, to date, the potential of GIS  has not been fully realized. While steps have been taken to improve the  coordination of government GIS efforts, much more work still needs to be  done to round out a comprehensive set of standards and to ensure that  they are being broadly applied. Geospatial One-Stop, in particular, while  addressing useful near-term tasks, has not focused on the need for a  longer-term strategy for facing the challenges of implementing the NSDI.
While it may be appropriate for many systems, especially at the state and  local level, to retain non-standard approaches to geospatial data collection  and analysis, priority should now be given to ensuring that the federal  government promotes common GIS standards wherever practicable,  facilitates participation by all stakeholders, and as a result reduces  redundant systems and data collection efforts. Adoption of a core set of  framework standards by the GIS community should lay the groundwork  for achieving the goals of the NSDI. However, additional work may be  needed. Existing draft standards may need revision to accommodate the  needs of major federal agency users, and more extensive coordination  efforts may be required to ensure broad adoption at all levels of  government. Further, the effort is likely to require a continuing effort over  an extended period of time, due to the fact that significant investments  have already been made in existing non-standard systems, and the task of  replacing those systems and migrating their data to new standards cannot  be accomplished overnight. Nevertheless, we believe that until these  challenges are addressed, the goal of a single, coordinated, nationwide  system of geospatial data will remain out of reach.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. I would be pleased to answer  any questions that you or other members of the subcommittee may have at  this time.
section_title: Contact and Acknowledgements
paragraphs: If you should have any questions about this testimony, please contact me  at (202) 512-6240 or via E-mail at koontzl@gao.gov. Other major  contributors to this testimony included Shannin Addison, John de Ferrari,  Sophia Harrison, and Elizabeth Roach.
section_title: Attachment I: Examples of Federal Geographic Information System (GIS) Activities
paragraphs: Description  Geospatial Data Gateway provides easy and consistent access to natural resource data by  geographic area such as county or state. Users can search for data by theme, such as digital  ortho imagery, digital elevation models, or soils.   NCGC Internet Mapping offers Web access to view samples of hydrography, digital  orthophotography, digital topographic data, and other integrated data layers.
Integrated Training Area Management GIS program provides training area maps, contour  maps, and environmental coordination maps at a desired scale to installation personnel for use  in management and training activities.  NOAA makes extensive use of a GIS to store the large quantity of data it collects. For  example, the Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory and the Alaska Fisheries Science  Center collect a wealth of data about the physical and biological characteristics of the Bering  Sea and the Gulf of Alaska, which are then stored in a GIS.   Provides online maps based on Census data that can be manipulated in many different ways.
Shuttle Radar Topography Mission employs a specially modified radar system to capture the  elevation data, synthetic aperture radar, and single-pass radar interferometry. The objective of  this project is to produce digital topographic data for 80% of the Earth’s land surface.
Provides timely, accurate, global aeronautical, topographical, and maritime, geospatial  information in support of national security objectives.   GIS site provides dynamically generated maps of renewable energy resources that determine  which energy technologies are viable solutions in the United States. These maps include GIS  Clean Cities Map, Wind Map, Transportation Technologies Map, Map of Indian Lands, Solar  Maps, and Federal Energy Management Program Maps.   GISLab supplies geospatial information for internal and external users of geospatial data.  Current projects include fire-related spatial data, floodplain mapping and hydrological  modeling, field mapping for forest management, and mesoscale climate change modeling.   Uses GIS to provide maps and data on public health issues in the United States.
Provides a full range of GIS services to all FEMA program offices which include storm tracking  and damage prediction maps, remote sensing maps, maps of federally declared counties in an  affected state, basic census demographics about an affected area by county and census  block, street locations, and summaries of teleregistered and service center applicants, housing  inspection numbers, Help-line calls, disaster unemployment claims, Small Business  Administration applicants, etc.  E- Maps combines information on HUD’s community development and housing programs with  EPA’s environmental data to provide location, type, and performance of HUD-funded activities  in every neighborhood across the country and select EPA information on brownfields,  hazardous wastes, air pollution and waste water discharges.   Provides a site that serves as a node of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure for finding and  accessing USGS spatial data related to hydrography.  Uses GIS to store and analyze public land and administrative jurisdiction information.
Uses GIS to provide information on vegetation, water, fire, and soil for specified forests.
Strives to have a comprehensive automated information system for each national park that will  integrate spatial (geographic) and tabular data from a variety of sources to enable modeling of  real and theoretical situations for managing all park resources.   Uses GIS to map crime victim services.
Description  Uses GIS to identify data such as county boundaries, roadways, and railroads, measure  ambient noise levels, search for locations such as historic beacon sites and environmental  data.   The EPA provides a wide variety of spatial data such as information regarding air, water, land,  deposition, emissions, climate, sensitive resources, and demographics to support  environmental analysis and uses GIS to aid decision-making.   Provides an interactive map of the entire TVA power system, a network of reservoirs and  power plants.
This  is  a  work  of  the  U.S.  government  and  is  not  subject  to  copyright  protection  in  the  United  States.  It  may  be  reproduced  and  distributed  in  its  entirety  without  further  permission  from  GAO.  However,  because  this  work  may  contain  copyrighted  images  or  other  material,  permission  from  the  copyright  holder  may  be  necessary  if  you  wish  to  reproduce this material separately.