Very important, if sobering, piece on the TerraWatchSpace newsletter on why “handing off to industry” is not a great idea for Earth Observation (EO) for basic science. In some ways, I see parallels with the discussion in the social sciences around how traditional sources (think decadal censuses, but also large surveys, etc.) could potentially be replaced by new sources such as mobility from phones or, for that matter, modern uses of Earth Observation. Don’t get me wrong, I am more excited than most about the potential of new data in the social sciences (imagery in particular!). We do need more data than a drop every ten years to not fly blind through everything that happens between release points (which is a lot). The bit that makes me very uneasy here is the replace, rather than complement. Without the census, satellites and phones are fairly close to useless for social scientists, and the reasons are very similar to why commercial EO needs large, public, and free programmes like Sentinel and Landsat.

Metadata

Highlights

Jared Isaacman, President Trump’s nominee for NASA Administrator has articulated a compelling vision: “NASA needs to constantly be recalibrating to do the near impossible, what no one else is doing - and the things they figured out, they hand off to industry.”

Earth Science Data Is Infrastructure, Not a Service

Infrastructure requires institutional commitment that transcends market cycles and political administrations. It requires transparency, neutrality, and guaranteed long-term access. It requires optimization for societal benefit rather than profit margins.