The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M.Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences.

The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Wm. A.Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering.

The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I.Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine.

The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M.Alberts and Dr. Wm. A.Wulf are chairman and vice-chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.

This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the NRC’s Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their reviews of this report:

Richard J.Aspinall, Department of Earth Sciences, Montana State University, Bozeman

Don F.Cooke, Geographic Data Technologies, Lebanon, New Hampshire

Stephen D.DeGloria, Department of Crop and Soil Sciences, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York

Dennis B.Goreham, National States Geographic Information Council, Salt Lake City, Utah

Matt Hoobler, Department of Agriculture, Cheyenne, Wyoming

William E.Huxhold, School of Architecture and Urban Planning, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee

Kevin Kryzda, Information Systems Department, Martin County, Stuart, Florida

Susan Lambert, Office of Geographic Information, Frankfort, Kentucky

Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse

the conclusions or recommendations nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Frederick J.Doyle, U.S. Geological Survey (emeritus), appointed by the Division on Earth and Life Studies, who was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.

The Mapping Science Committee serves as a focus for external advice to federal agencies on scientific and technical matters related to spatial data handling and analysis. One of the committee’s roles is to provide advice on the development of a robust national spatial data infrastructure for making informed decisions at all levels of government and throughout society in general.

The concept of a National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) was first advanced by the Mapping Science Committee (MSC) in its 1993 report, Toward a Coordinated Spatial Data Infrastructure for the Nation (NRC, 1993). The next year, the committee addressed partnerships as an essential component of the NSDI (Promoting the National Spatial Data Infrastructure Through Partnerships; NRC, 1994). Since then, the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FDGC) has sponsored a series of annual competitions for grants to promote the NSDI. These grants have been used to stimulate the development of partnerships at a variety of levels (local, state, federal); to encourage the documentation of data according to national standards to facilitate their sharing; and to encourage the use of geospatial data in new applications.

By 2000, these FGDC programs had provided support for NSDI development in 49 of the 50 states. Their objectives had varied substantially from year to year, and from program to program. As one of the advisory bodies responsible for originating the NSDI, the MSC identified the need for an assessment of progress to date, and for guidance on directions for the future. Was the NSDI developing according to plan, with FGDC partnership programs working to advance its goals, or was some degree of redirection appropriate? Accordingly, a study to address these questions was conducted by the MSC as one of its core activities in the latter half of 1999 and through 2000. This report is the outcome of that process. It is important to recognize that the committee focused on

the partnership programs promoted by the FGDC, and has not attempted a comprehensive analysis of all NSDI partnership activities.

In addition to the present members of the MSC, I wish to acknowledge the input of former MSC members who contributed to earlier versions of the report—Brian Berry, Nick Chrisman, David Coleman, Hank Garie, Barry Glick, Karen Siderelis, and Lyna Wiggins. I would particularly like to acknowledge my predecessor as MSC chair, Mike Goodchild, who oversaw the conception of this report and made a major contribution to its content.

David J.Cowen

Chair, Mapping Science Committee