603 
Exclusive reliance on the market place philosophy for remote sensing data products 
effectively precludes their use for wide scale intervention on global environmental problems. 
At present there are no effective mechanisms in place to underwrite the provision of data 
required for environmental action programs. Most countries and agencies directly 
responsible for management of their resources have neither the incentive nor the financial 
support to procure the required remotely sensed data. They do not realize the benefits of 
environmental management in the short run. Seen from this perspective, it is clear that the 
public good is not served by a market place remote sensing data policy. Since informed env 
ironmental intervention may be crucial for the well-being of our planet, the point takes on 
particular significance. 
In the market place, the data cost problem is not trivial. Based on an estimate 
[Raney, 1990b] of $10 million to obtain the image data set for one complete coverage of the 
Earth’s 2 billion hectares of tropical forest, more than $30 million would be required for one 
inventory cycle of this environmental regime. This figure includes allowance for selected 
repeat observations for land cover change analysis or for skip or scene overlap, secondary 
coverage at higher resolution where required, value added processing, and merge (using GIS 
for example) with other data sets such as logging permit records. It is unreasonable to 
expect that tropical countries, even with assistance from aid agencies, would find the funds 
or motivation, in the current climate, to make such an investment. There is at present no 
international body with both the mandate and the funds to undertake tropical forest 
inventory using remote sensing, let alone the management of these vital resources. This 
example is generalizable to other environmental regimes of global importance. 
Remotely sensed data as perceived by developing countries has had several 
unanticipated consequences [Morain and Thome 1990]. Developing countries are concerned 
that information that could be damaging to their interests might be obtained by 
neighbouring or developed countries. Data that they do get often comes through aid 
agencies. Thus, aid agencies rather than the countries themselves, have primary influence 
over the remotely sensed data supplied. It follows that developing countries are concerned 
that this may work to their disadvantage. Indeed, some countries would prefer that all maps 
and satellite based observations of their resources remain classified, and soley under their 
own control. These concerns, coupled with the developing nations’ general inability to pay 
market place prices for data, combine to suppress demand for remotely monitored data of 
national resources. 
Inconsistencies in Data Access 
After more than a decade of debate, in 1986 the General Assembly of the United 
Nations adopted Principles to guide international policy on remote sensing [United Nations, 
1986]. One key provision is Principle XII which declares that sensed states should have 
access to data on a non-discriminatory basis and at reasonable costs. When access is 
primarily through the market place, however, a fixed and stable price offered to all parties 
does not necessarily imply non-discrimination, nor is it reasonably equitable. The