1 making international collaboration work: a view from brazil gilberto câmara director for earth...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Making International Collaboration
Work: A View from Brazil
Gilberto CâmaraDirector for Earth Observation
National Institute for Space Research (INPE)Brazil
Earth Observation Business NetworkVancouver, CA, May 2002
2
Introduction International co-operation
Key issue in civilian EO programmes
Major obstacle to success “My Fair Lady” syndrome
How to improve? Understanding each partner’s motivation Proposal: framework with four critical
factors
3
Introduction Brazilian Space Program
Basis for the position stated Hope that rationale can be generalized
Relevant experience LANDSAT data reception and use since 1974 CBERS China-Brazil Earth Resources Satellite RADARSAT reception and use
4
Introduction
Position paper Perspectives from a DSP (developing
country with space program) User and producer of EO data
Government perspective “Public good” must prevail “Best use” of citizen’s money
We support the high-tech industry (our own, preferably....)
5
Government and Job Creation
Low-Tech High-Tech
Fixed Waiter Surgeon
Mobile Assembly-line worker
Aeronautics Engineer
6
Assessing International Collaboration
Four Key Factors Strategy Societal Benefits Industrial Innovation Cost
Based on Porter’s Approach “Competitive Advantage of Nations”
7
The Strategy Factor
Impact of the program in the nation-wide policymaking When presidents meet, is the program in
their agenda? Is the program seen as influencing
positively the commercial balance of trade? Is the imagery provided capable of making
a novel contribution to the management of country’s territory?
8
The Industrial Innovation Factor
Impact of the program in fostering innovation in its high-technology sector
Governments expect some form of spillover effect reluctant to spend public funds in
supporting high-tech jobs abroad Requirement
Tangible compensation for the local high-technology industry
9
The Societal Benefits Factor
“Public good” component of EO data Assessment criteria
Proven applications that can be derived from satellite imagery
Data reliability Data quality Data continuity.
10
The Cost Factor Expected cost reduction by international
collaboration EO programs in DSP
High degree of government intervention. Seen as R&D investment
Right question Not “how much does the program cost?” But “what fraction of a country’s R&D budget
is being committed to the program?”.
11
EO-diamond: An example Hypothetical situation
Useful type of EO satellite Ground segment = Us$ 50 million (public
money)
0
0,5
1STRATEGY
COST
INDUSTRY
SOCIETY
12
EO-diamond: LANDSAT Societal benefits (0.95)
Helping Brazil manage its large territory Cost (0.75)
US$ 60 million in 18 years Acquisition of ground stations and satellite access fees
Strategy (0.6) Foundation for the establishment of the Brazilian Earth
Observation program Changes in program status in the US administration
Industrial Innovation (0.3) Development of Image Processing and GIS technology
13
EO-diamond Assessment of an EO-program Benefits of LANDSAT Program to Brazil (1974-2002)
0
0,25
0,5
0,75
1STRATEGY
COST
INDUSTRY
SOCIETY
14
Applying the EO-diagram
How Can International Collaboration Work in EO?
when all four decision-making factors (strategy, industry, society and cost) have properly been taken into account and each partner is satisfied that his objectives are met (in practice....)
15
Improving Societal Benefits
Perspective for increasing market returns EO from a government-led program to a
commercially-led one Uncertainty in terms of market growth
perception about the limitations of the information content of the satellite data
“Knowledge gap” (MacDonald) Data-to-information conversion
16
Improving Societal Benefits
Removing barriers to information use Some high-resolution imagery companies
Restrictions on data distribution Aerial imagery companies
less restrictive dissemination policy provide the data integrated into a GIS
Increasing EO market share Requires changing commercial EO
practices
17
Improving Societal Benefits “Knowledge gap” from EO data
Result of market segmentation Satellite operators == data providers, Image processing software companies ==
systems for information extraction Market comparison
Spatial information systems = $1.08 billion (1999)
ESRI, leading GIS = US$340 million (1999) ERDAS, leading IP = US$23.5 million (2000)
18
Improving Societal Benefits “Deadlock” situation
Small size of commercial IP Not enough income for R&D investment
Improvements on information extraction Needed for the market to grow
Knowledge extraction procedures very litlle technological innovation limited academic research in EO-GIS
integration
19
Improving Societal Benefits Most applications of EO data
“Snapshot” paradigm Recipe analogy
Take 1 image (“raw”) “Cook” the image (correction +
interpretation) All “salt” (i.e., ancillary data) Serve while hot (on a “GIS plate”)
But we have lots of images!
Landsat Image – Rondonia (Brazil)
Landsat Image – Rondonia (Brazil)
Landsat Image – Rondonia (Brazil)
23
Improving Societal Benefits
What’s in an Image? Is an image a field of energy received by a
sensor? Are images instruments for capturing
landscape dynamics?
24
Improving Societal Benefits In search of a “killer-app”
How many cutting-edge applications exist for extracting information in large image databases?
How much R&D is being invested in spatial data mining in large repositories of EO data?
How do we put our image databases to more effective use?
25
Improving Societal Benefits
Breaking the “deadlock” in knowledge extraction for EO data Partnerships between data providers and IP
software companies Government-funded research programmes Co-operative development environments
(“the Linux of EO”)
26
Improving Societal Benefits
International co-operation Co-operative research programmes
Emphasis on complete cycle of information processing
Research, applications, and technological developments
“Knowledge gap” is tough to remove Requires a lot of talented researchers Incompressible amount of time
27
Improving Industrial Innovation EO industrial components
Commodity-based Critical technologies
Commodity-based segment Solar panels, on-board computers, ground
stations, launching services Worldwide market Russia, India, China, Ukraine and Brazil are
potential suppliers.
28
Improving Industrial Innovation Commodity-based market
Still heavily regulated Reduced competitiveness Increased cost
International co-operation Confidence building Developing countries becoming major
suppliers “Balanced mutual dependence”
29
Improving Industrial Innovation
Critical technologies Guidance systems, high-quality optics and
electronics, fault-tolerant computing Technology transfer is very restricted
Countries with EO programs Cannot affort critical dependence
International co-operation Step-by-step confidence building Long-term agreements for reducing tensions
30
Improving Strategy
Key factor Diplomatic and economic relations
EO development partnerships No longer limited to G-7 countries China-Brasil agreement
High-technology development can happen outside of the G-7 world
31
Improving Strategy
Current Situation Many alternatives for EO collaboration
Negotiations between G-7 and DSP countries DSP countries no longer simply a market
for EO data DSP countries
More demanding in technology transfer Access to G-7 markets
32
Improving Cost
Least independent component of the “EO-diamond”
Theory Co-operation can reduce cost of EO
programs Practice
Relative distortions = preferred allocation to country’s own industry
33
Improving Cost
Can we achieve productivity gains from scale effects? Requires co-operation at a global scale Process of industry consolidation Each major component of a EO mission
available from a small number of industries
Unlikely situation?
34
EO-diamond: CBERS Expected benefits of CBERS (2000-2010)
Strategy (1.0), Society (0.8), Cost (0.3), Industry (0.65)
0
0,5
1STRATEGY
COST
INDUSTRY
SOCIETY
35
Co-operation at a Global Scale
“How many EO satellites does the world need?” Utopian, not superfluous question Increase scale effects and cost reduction Avoid duplication in missions Enhance complementarity
36
Co-operation at a Global Scale
“How many EO satellites does the world need?” Example from meteorological community Coordination Group for Meteorological
Satellites (CGMS) Five geostationary satellites (2 US, 1 EU,
1 Russia, 1 Japan) + China + India Could CEOS play a similar rôle?
37
Co-operation at a Global Scale Utopia or Possible Realization?
Imperfect, Regulated Market “Invisible hands” are tied
Need for an international consensus Requires positive climate for international relations May take time, but we’ll get there....
EOBN is an important part of such positive build-up