----------------------------Original message---------------------------- Following is an extract of a report on "a very interesting conference" attended by Duncan Aldrich (Chair-elect, ALA/Government Documents Round Table) last week. I thought folks on this list may be interested in seeing it. (Thanks to Duncan for his permission to re-post his message!) --Rhonda Marker (Chair, GODORT Cataloging Committee) Rutgers University Libraries 908/932-5902 [log in to unmask] **********Original message********** Date: Mon, 17 May 1993 21:39:00 CST Subject: National Geo-Data Policy Forum Sender: Discussion of Government Document Issues <[log in to unmask]> From: [log in to unmask] (Duncan Aldrich) Date: Mon, 17 May 1993 17:59:00 +0000 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: National Geo-Data Policy Forum Folks: Below is a somewhat lengthy report of a VERY interesting conference I attended in D.C. last week. duncan *********************** Duncan M. Aldrich Head, Government Publications Department Main Library University of Nevada, Reno Reno, Nevada 89557-0044 (702) 784-6570 [log in to unmask] [log in to unmask] *********************** National Geo-Data Policy Forum Thanks to a recommendation from Prue Adler of ARL, I was invited to participate in a panel discussion held at the National Geo-Data Policy Forum, which met on Monday, May 10, through Wednesday, May 12. The Forum's theme was "Present and Emerging U.S. Policies Governing the Development, Evolution and Use of the National Spatial Infrastructure." The topic of the panel on which I served was "Issues of Public Access to Data, Data Fees and Copyright." Other members of the panel included Ed Spar (moderator), of the Council of Professional Association on Federal Statistics, Hugh Archer, Information Management Consultant, Michael Blakemore; Executive Director, British Online Manpower Information System; James Love, Director, Taxpayer Assets Project; Steven Metalitz, Vice President and General Counsel, Information Industry Association; and a gentleman from OMB who filled in for the scheduled OMB participant, Peter Weiss. Needless to say, the prospect of discussion with these folks was a bit heady to a library department head from the mountains of Nevada. The biggest impression I got from the conference was that there is an enormous amount of spatial data out there that is without any sort of control -- bibliographic or otherwise. Hundreds of towns, counties, states, and federal agencies are developing a rich body of computerized mapping data, but there is neither an agency that has any specific responsibility for identifying, cataloging, and providing access to that information resource, nor is there an established index or catalog that delineates these resources. This lack of bibliographic control made me, as a librarian, more than a bit uneasy. One federal government committee, the Federal Geographic Data Committee, was established in 1990 to examine this disparate situation, and to work toward coordinating efforts to bring some sort of order to spatial data at all levels of government. The National Geo-Data Policy Forum, of course, was one step in that direction. The second impression I got was that most federal bureaucrats, at least on the face of it, buy into the concept that user fees should be no higher than the nominal costs of disseminating the information. At the same time, however, I only heard one federal official mention libraries as potential outlets for spatial data. Of course the focus of my comments was that libraries are obvious service points for all categories of Americans requiring access to spatial data. My third impression was that many spatial data producers at the local level ardently believe that fees should be set so as to recover costs associated with production as well as dissemination of their data products. A major point they raise is that without such fees their ability to enhance and expand their products will be minimized. Their underlying premise is that the spatial data with which they work is intended for internal government work, not as a public good. My initial response to the forcefulness with which they express their concern is that the library community should re-examine its position on the question of user fees for certain types of government information, particularly at the local level. After a bit of reflection, however, I concluded that perhaps the more important response will be for librarians to renew with vigor their efforts to impress upon (educate) local agencies the inherent public good of their data products. Though I had many other "impressions," I did have one over riding concern, particularly as I stood before this group of federal, state and local bureaucrats, and private sector information vendors (about 700 all together), and promoted libraries as a wide spread, free to the public access point to spatial data. My concern was that I might be stretching the truth as to what libraries can deliver. I know that quite a few libraries are effectively dealing with electronic products, and that several ARL libraries are having great success with spatial data products such as ArcView. Yet at the same time many of us are struggling to keep afloat simply providing service on the handful of Census and BEA CDs that have come as depository items. So my concern was that perhaps I was pushing too hard for libraries generally -- sort of making promises I'm not always convinced we can keep. Personally, I sincerely hope that libraries can adjust to accommodate the sort of data that will be available through the National Spatial Data Infrastructure. Again, the ARL/GIS project suggests that we can. I hope but am not convinced that all libraries will make the significant steps they must to be capable of dealing with large bodies of electronic information -- spatial or whatever. Yet my gut level faith that libraries will respond to the new information environment kept me lobbying for libraries as primary access points to electronic information such as mapping data. I sincerely believe that as librarians we must work with electronic information or we are short shrifting our clients -- and for some reason assume most of us feel that way. We see many obstacles, but they are there to overcome rather than give in to. And there's also the reality, of course, that if we don't take the tiger by the tail someone else will and our lot will be to sit on storehouses of paper and fiche documents that will become increasingly less mainstream. We'll be on the information periphery. **********Commentary********** Here, Duncan went on to expand on the role that GPO and Depository Libraries can play in providing access and organization to spatial data. All in all, it sounded like a most provocative conference! --RJM