The European Organization for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites (EUMETSAT) was formed in 1986 to take responsibility for operation of European weather satellites. Prior to the organization's creation, these satellites had been operated by the European Space Agency and data was shared freely in accordance with meteorological and research community norms. However, EUMETSAT's creation corresponded with increasing efforts among national meteorological agencies to recover costs through commercial sales of data and products. To enable these activities, EUMETSAT quickly moved to restrict access to its own data, adopting both legal and technical restrictions. EUMETSAT worked to gain acceptance for these more restrictive policies in international fora, particularly the WMO.
Over the course of the 1990s, however, it became clear that data sales were not generating significant revenues for national meteorological agencies, and they were slowing the growth of private-sector meteorological activity in Europe. European leaders reversed course and began to push for the adoption of more open data policies. EUMETSAT followed this trend, gradually increasing the amount of data it made freely available, eventually reaching a point at which nearly all of the satellite data the agency collected was freely available to all users.
Impetus for the first joint European Earth observation satellite came from the British Secretary-General of the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), D. A. Davies. In a 1967 speech to the WMO, he argued that a European meteorological program would bring immediate practical advantages and provide data of scientific interest. A geostationary meteorological satellite would not only benefit Europe, but provide useful data for Africa, he noted, constituting a form of indirect technical assistance to developing countries. The satellite would also make a meaningful contribution to the WMO's World Weather Watch plan, which European nations had unanimously supported.1 This was Europe's chance to make a global impact in its first foray into Earth observations.
At the time of Davies’ speech, the WMO was just beginning to plan the Global Weather Experiment (GWE), with the goal of testing global observing systems in support of the World Weather Watch Program.2 A major goal for the GWE was to establish monitoring of the entire globe using a constellation of five geostationary satellites. This provided Europe with the potential to play a key role in global efforts, contributing a geostationary satellite and working to provide this global coverage in coordination with the United States and Japan. This opportunity to play a role on the international stage helped to solidify support for the European meteorological satellite program.3
Meteosat-1 was chosen as the European contribution, building on a program originally started as a national effort in France. The satellite was launched in 1977.4 In accordance with the GWE plans, datasets from the satellite were held at the World Data Centers in the United States and the Soviet Union and provided at the cost of reproduction and dissemination to any user who requested them.5 The European Space Agency, which had been formed in 1975 when the European Space Research Organization (ESRO) merged with the European Launcher Development Organization (ELDO), held meetings in 1979 and 1980, attended by more than 80 scientists from a dozen countries, to share information with scientific users.6 ESA launched Meteosat-2 in 1981.
From the beginning, the intention had been to develop the first meteorological satellites at ESA and then transition them to operational status, but there were challenges to doing so. First, it was not clear what organization should be given operational responsibility, or if a new entity would need to be created. Also, despite the promising results of early meteorological satellite systems and the numerical weather forecasting techniques they enabled, the technology was still relatively new and very expensive compared to traditional meteorological practices. Many in the meteorology community saw these new technologies and techniques as experimental, and did not want to use limited resources from their operational National Meteorological Services (NMSs) to pay for them. The result of this was tension between ESA and meteorologists and a slow transition to operational status for European meteorological satellites.7
The US policy of providing meteorology data free of charge affected the European policy in multiple ways. On one hand, the availability of free data from the United States decreased the incentive for European states to invest in their own systems. On the other hand, some European meteorologists expressed concern that if other nations did not begin to develop systems and reciprocate, the United States may not continue this practice.8 It was clear that the United States was considering alternate arrangements already. In 1983, as the transition of meteorological satellites to operational status was being discussed in Europe, the Reagan administration announced a proposal to privatize both Landsat and the US weather satellites. Privatization of the weather satellites was rejected by the US Congress, but the consideration of the option was sufficient to gain attention in Europe.9
The convention creating the European Organization for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites (EUMETSAT) was signed in 1983 and entered into force in 1986. The convention began by recognizing the fundamental importance of the task at hand—stating that meteorological data contributes to forecasts that ensure the safety of the population. Addressing previous skepticism, the convention argued that meteorological satellites had “proved their aptitude and unique potential,” and noted the WMO's plans to feature satellites in development of the World Weather Watch. It stated that the experimental Meteosat program had proven Europe's capability to “assume its share of responsibility” in the WMO's Global Observation System. It also reminded members that no national or international organization planned to collect meteorological satellite data in Europe's primary zones of interest, and that the magnitude of resources needed to support these activities was beyond the means of any single European country. EUMETSAT was the only solution for meeting European meteorological needs.10
Accordingly, the convention stated, “the primary objective of EUMETSAT is to establish, maintain and exploit European systems of operational meteorological satellites, taking into account as far as possible the recommendations of the World Meteorological Organization.” The system would also support meteorological research and benefit European industry by “taking maximum advantage of the technologies developed in Europe” (although in contrast to ESA, it would emphasize low cost, not distribution of work among its member nations, in its contracting). EUMETSAT was governed by a council of representatives from the National Meteorological Services, which determined its activities and set its budget. Plans approved by the council would be implemented by a director aided by a small staff—fewer than 10 people at the outset.11 Investments of the original 16 participating nations were determined based on internal negotiations, with Germany, France, and the United Kingdom together providing more than half of the initial contributions. In 1991, EUMETSAT transitioned to a payment system based on each country's Gross National Product.12
By the time EUMETSAT was established, meteorological satellites, and the World Weather Watch as a whole, had proven its value for improving weather forecasts, but almost immediately the high costs of maintaining operational systems put the program, and assured data continuity, in jeopardy. The international meteorological community struggled with the disproportionately high cost of weather satellites compared to other meteorological data collection methods. Some argued that the burden on WMO members that were also satellite operators was too high. There were considerations in both the United States and Europe of reducing the capabilities of currently planned systems or undertaking international programs to share costs. In facilitating these discussions, the WMO reiterated that free and unrestricted access to meteorological data remained a basic principle.13
WMO's pronouncement was primarily in response to a third option under consideration for dealing with budget challenges: increasing commercialization of government activities. In the 1980s and early 1990s, many European countries began to apply this concept to their National Meteorological Services, requiring these agencies to sell data and products to recover some of their operational costs. Some agencies created commercial branches specializing in creation and marketing of these products and services. These organizations competed with private companies, which also developed meteorological products and services, generally based on data and products provided for free from the NMSs themselves. Often, if access to data was restricted from one NMS, it could simply be obtained from another. Agency officials argued that this constituted unfair competition, and that the private companies should pay for access to data to contribute toward the cost of the observational systems. This would place them on a more equal footing with NMSs, which had to price their own goods consistent with efforts to recoup the costs of developing observational systems.14 In addition to being a practical necessity, agency officials argued this was a more appropriate way to treat data paid for by taxpayers: the data are owned by all citizens, not just those who use them; therefore the government should attempt to reduce the costs for the general population by charging users.15
In keeping with international meteorological norms, data from the first European weather satellites had been provided as a direct broadcast from the satellites, available to anyone with the appropriate ground station equipment.16 However, consistent with the changing interests of its members, EUMETSAT moved to restrict access beginning in 1988, developing its first resolution on data dissemination and charging. The policy acknowledged that EUMETSAT's meteorological satellites made an important contribution to the WMO World Weather Watch and that the free exchange of data between NMSs is a worldwide accepted principle within WMO. It also recognized that there was interest in satellite data and products outside of NMSs and, in particular, a growing interest in commercial use of satellite data which created the need to avoid unfair competition with respect to the distribution of and charging for EUMETSAT data. Under the policy, EUMETSAT member state NMSs would receive free access to EUMETSAT data, products, and services, and they would have full control over the distribution of these products and services within their own national territory. It would be up to each individual NMS to develop its own data policy for sharing, selling, or restricting EUMETSAT data within its own country.17
NMSs in nonmember states and international organizations, including the WMO and the European Center for Medium Range Weather Forecasting (ECMWF), which had been established in 1975 to develop numerical weather forecasts for Europe, would have free access to a limited set of data defined by the EUMETSAT council. The data would be provided for internal use only and could not be redistributed without EUMETSAT approval. If these organizations wished to receive additional data, they would need to pay a fee or develop a bilateral agreement with EUMETSAT. Data access by other users, particularly commercial users, would be subject to a fee that would take into account factors such as the intended use and the market price of the data. Scientific, educational, and humanitarian users could apply for a fee waiver.18
The resolution did not address archived data, which is of particular interest to researchers. Although EUMETSAT had full ownership and utilization rights to Meteosat data, ESA still operated the data archive, which had established fees for access to data ranging from 13 deutsche marks (about $15 in 2016) for a photograph to 450 deutsche marks (about $600 in 2016) for a computer compatible tape with “real-time window data.” The EUMETSAT resolution declared that the prices would be increased by 10 percent annually until the charge reached the marginal cost of reproduction and mailing.19
EUMETSAT held its first workshop on legal protection of meteorological satellite data in 1989 to determine how to implement the necessary copyright over its satellite images.20 International copyright conventions refer to national legislation, but due to the nature of satellite technology, it was not clear whether Meteosat images were subject to copyright under the national laws of any of EUMETSAT's members. EUMETSAT addressed this in two ways. First, it amended its constitution to assert worldwide exclusive ownership of all data generated by EUMETSAT's satellites or instruments. Second, given the remaining uncertainty of this legal protection, it also resolved to develop technical protection, passing a resolution in 1990 stating that it would pursue encryption of its satellite data.21 The European Commission eventually clarified the legal question in March 1996, issuing the directive on the legal protection of databases. The directive acknowledged that databases require the investment of considerable human, technical, and financial resources, and asserted that copyright was an appropriate form of exclusive right for authors who have created databases.22
In 1990, EUMETSAT elaborated on its data policy, creating the concept of a “general license” that would give a nonmember NMS full control over redistribution of the data in its own state: essentially the same rights over the data as a EUMETSAT member state. The license could be acquired by agreeing to provide equivalent data to EUMETSAT—an option available to meteorological satellite operators—or by paying an annual fee equivalent to 90 percent of the relevant EUMETSAT membership fee, determined based on GNP.23 EUMETSAT subsequently developed bilateral data sharing agreements with the National Meteorological Services in all meteorological-satellite-operating nations. Agreements with the United States, Russia, China, and India were signed between 1995 and 2000. Agreements with South Korea and Japan occurred later, in 2006 and 2007, respectively.24
The 1990 resolution also stated that NMSs that were interested in only a limited subset of data, and all other users outside of EUMETSAT member states, including scientific and education institutions, commercial entities, and personal users, could obtain a “limited license.” Limited licenses would provide access to data for internal purposes, but would restrict any redistribution to third parties. The type of data covered, the length of the license, and the cost of the data would be negotiated on a case-by-case basis taking into account the intended use of the data, the market price of the data, and other considerations.25
A EUMETSAT official explained in 1992 that the restrictions contained in its data policy were necessary because “certain National Meteorological Services are under tremendous pressure to ensure that services are provided on a fully commercial basis and that income is used to offset costs.” Cost recovery wouldn't be possible if these agencies had to compete against private entities that use the data but do not contribute to the cost of data collection. In addition to allowing EUMETSAT to recover some costs and enable commercial activities by its members, the new policy also provided an incentive for European countries to become and remain members of EUMETSAT. Ensuring that the benefits of membership were worth the costs was seen as critical for the sustainability of the organization.26 There are some indications that the incentive structure worked: Austria joined as the 17th member of EUMETSAT in 1993.27
Despite these actions, EUMETSAT insisted that it remained committed to international sharing of meteorological data. In fact, EUMETSAT officials stated that data sharing needed to be not only continued, but increased, and explained that, perhaps paradoxically, restrictions in its data policy were a necessary element of achieving that goal. The basic argument was that it was the NMSs that paid for the development and maintenance of observational systems, and the commercial sale of data and products was necessary to provide funding for NMSs. If commercial activities and cost recovery were more successful, the resources of NMSs would increase, and they could increase the amount of data they collected and exchanged, even if that data was subject to some fees or restrictions. Conversely, failure to raise revenues could put continued operation of observational systems in jeopardy, potentially reducing the amount of data available to share. It was this logic that led European officials to make the seemingly contradictory statement that “in order that data exchange may continue to grow, it is essential to safeguard and increase the relevant databases.”28
Part of the reason that EUMETSAT argued that data collection and sharing needed to increase was its awareness of the growing importance of global climate change. WMO had sponsored the Second World Climate Conference in 1990, and EUMETSAT recognized the critical role of meteorological satellites in collecting global environmental data vital to understanding this issue. The organization went so far as to develop amendments to its founding convention in 1991 stating this and adding contribution “to the operational monitoring of the climate and the detection of global climatic changes” as an extension of its primary objective.29 European Union law recognized the importance of environmental issues, as well. A 1990 directive on the freedom of access to information on the environment reinforced the need to improve public access to information held by environmental authorities. It called for information relating to the environment to be provided at a reasonable cost within two months of a request.30
That same year, EUMETSAT agreed to the international Committee on Earth Observation Satellites (CEOS) data sharing principles for global change and environmental research, which promoted sharing among CEOS members and identified maximum data use as a fundamental objective.31 Researchers relied primarily on archived data, which had been maintained by ESA since the Meteosat program began in 1978 and which EUMETSAT continued to provide to ESA within five months after collection.32 EUMETSAT delayed and eventually abstained from voting on CEOS data sharing principles related to operational environmental data use in 1994, noting that its own policy was still evolving.33
In 1992, EUMETSAT began its Meteorological Data Dissemination (MDD) program to improve accessibility of Meteosat data in Africa. Because geostationary satellites must be placed above the equator, the data collected by Meteosat was arguably more relevant to Africa than it was to Europe—more than 70 percent of the land area covered by the satellite was of the African continent. EUMETSAT developed data relay stations, held meetings, and organized training sessions to strengthen the capacity of African nations to use satellite data. Bilateral agreements were developed in 1996 to provide free EUMETSAT data to the African Centre of Meteorological Applications for Development (ACMAD) and the Centre Regional de Formation et d’Application en Agrométéorologie et Hydrologie Opérationnelle (AGRHYMET).34
Despite arguments made by EUMETSAT and others about the ability for restrictions to enhance data sharing, the continuing trend toward commercialization caused concern in the WMO, which continued to argue that free and unrestricted data sharing was essential to its activities. In 1991, it reported, “Commercial meteorological activities have the potential to undermine the free exchange of meteorological data and products between national Meteorological Services.” There was concern that without free and open data sharing, the World Weather Watch, the heart of the WMO system, would be in jeopardy.35 European countries insisted there was middle ground: a way to preserve the free and unrestricted international sharing of data underlying the WMO systems and to allow for national efforts of cost recovery and commercialization. They advocated for a two-tiered system, which would preserve free and unrestricted exchange of the data that is most important for global weather prediction, consistent with existing practice. Other data, they argued, could be restricted without harming the international system.36
This compromise was formalized in WMO Resolution 40 in 1995. The resolution reiterated “the continuing fundamental importance” of the exchange of meteorological data and products, and recognized “the increasing requirement for the global exchange of all types of environmental data.” It mentioned the importance of meteorological data and international data sharing in providing services that support safety, security, and economic benefits, and called attention to the dependence of the research and educational communities on access to meteorological data. The resolution also recognized the trend toward commercialization of many meteorological activities and “the requirement by some Members that their NMSs initiate or increase their commercial activities.”
The resolution adopted a policy committing WMO members “to enhancing the free and unrestricted international exchange of meteorological data and related data products,” and laid out a tiered policy. The policy required free and unrestricted sharing of essential data, to include, at minimum, data and products needed to support “protection of life and property and the well-being of all nations.” Sharing of additional products was also encouraged, but the resolution noted that WMO members may restrict the redistribution of these “nonessential” data and products to enable commercial sales or cost recovery.37
In anticipation of this change, in 1994, EUMETSAT updated its data policy. The set of data, products, and services freely available to WMO and nonmember NMSs was expanded and no longer subject to restrictions on redistribution. A further set of data and products was made available without charge for official use by NMSs of nonmember states, subject to licenses preventing commercial use or redistribution to third parties. EUMETSAT's highest-quality data, near-real-time Meteosat data updated every hour or half hour, would also be made freely available in the event of disasters or other emergencies. Educational and scientific users who would not use the data commercially or operationally were provided access to all real-time EUMETSAT data free of charge.38
EUMETSAT implemented a new fee structure for nonmember NMS's interested in gaining access to EUMETSAT's highest-quality near-real-time data for their official use, with the cost of a license calculated based on GNP. Countries with a GNP above $3,000 would pay 50 percent of the equivalent member state contribution for access to hourly data or 60 percent for half-hourly data. Countries with a GNP below $2,000 could access this data without charge. Countries with a GNP above $2,000 but below $3,000 would pay a fee based on GNP, but reduced according to a linear scale developed by EUMETSAT.
A separate schedule of fees was developed for commercial and other users, with prices based on the data to be accessed and its intended use, differentiating between service providers offering value-added services and broadcasters showing EUMETSAT data or imagery on television. EUMETSAT noted that service providers that also use data for broadcasting would be subject to both fees. Any nonmember nations wishing to redistribute data within their territory, regardless of GNP, would be assessed an additional fee established for service providers and/or broadcasters, as appropriate.39
In 1995, the same year that WMO passed Resolution 40, a group of European nations formed the European Cooperation in Meteorology (ECOMET) economic interest group. Through ECOMET, European countries would make meteorological data available across Europe under the same conditions, developing a joint catalog of data and products and their prices. While nations were still free to set their own fees, members agreed on an initial goal of recovering 3 percent of combined infrastructure costs—there was no expectation that government sales of data and products would fully, or even significantly, cover the costs of observing and analysis systems. ECOMET explicitly recognized the division of essential and additional data defined by WMO, and committed to ensuring free exchange of the essential data.40
Interestingly, even this economically -focused group stated that the first of five objectives was “to preserve the free exchange of datasets and products between members of the grouping within the framework of WMO regulations.” ECOMET would also help to maintain and improve infrastructure, expand the availability of meteorological information, and increase the use and improve the distribution of data, products, and services. Last on the list was ECOMET's objective “to create the conditions for members of the grouping to develop their economic activities.”41 Once again, the emphasis was on the potential for commercialization and cost recovery to increase data availability, rather than reduce it.
In 1998, EUMETSAT developed a new, consolidated data policy, explicitly referencing WMO Resolution 40 and taking into account a number of amendments made to its 1991 policy in the intervening years that had been designed to ensure fair competition. Access to EUMETSAT data remained free for official use by the NMSs of its member states, and those states would continue to have control over access to real-time data by third parties within their own territory. However, the cost and conditions of access were now uniform, defined by the EUMTSAT Council. Member states were also required to treat their own commercial activities in an equivalent way to commercial service providers, ensuring that data access fees were paid by both and competition was fair.42
The updated policy also called out some efforts to increase data availability. ECMWF would be provided all data without charge, defined as no more than the cost of reproduction and delivery, although redistribution of the data, including to its member states, was prohibited.43 Archived data would be provided to all categories of user at no cost through EUMETSAT's new Meteorological Archive and Retrieval Facility (MARF). However, to avoid an unmanageable load and consequential degraded service, the amount of data that could be requested in a single or successive orders was limited. Once the limit was reached, users would be required to wait two weeks before making another request.44 In 1999, EUMETSAT applied similar conditions to access to real-time and archived data from its Meteosat Second Generation (MSG) satellites, the first of which, Meteosat-8, launched in 2002.45
After years of promoting commercialization of government functions, and successfully gaining accommodations for this policy in international organizations, the position of European government leaders was beginning to change. In 1999, the European Union published a “Green Paper,” a report aimed at prompting debate and discussion, on the use of public-sector information in Europe. The paper argued that public-sector information played a fundamental role in the function of the market, and that data should be made clearer and more accessible to potential users. It argued that European companies were at a serious competitive disadvantage to their American counterparts, which were benefiting from a highly developed, efficient public information system—inaccessibility of weather data was given as an example.46
The emerging international and European private meteorological sector agreed with this assessment and provided further elaboration of the problems from their perspective. A paper written by officials from a private weather services company in Finland and printed in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society in 2000 argued that “ECOMET functions primarily as a price-fixing cartel for the National Meteorological Service,” noting that the prices for satellite data were particularly excessive. They leveled the same complaint at the NMSs that had earlier been aimed at them: commercial branches of NMSs were engaging in unfair competition. They noted that the public and commercial activities of NMSs are often not strictly separated, with commercial branches benefiting from colocated facilities and privileged access to data. They argued that it was unfair for the NMSs to profit from publicly funded data while commercial entities, which pay taxes, are forced to pay again. They contrasted this with the policy adopted in the United States in which meteorological data collected by the government was seen as a public good and made freely available to all users. The article listed a number of industry groups—the Coalition for the Open Exchange of Global Data, the Association of Environmental Data Users in Europe, and the Association of Independent Weather Services—that had mobilized to lobby against the European policy.47
In 2000, a report prepared for the European Commission on commercial exploitation of Europe's public-sector information directly compared the results of open policies in the United States to cost recovery efforts in Europe. The analysis found that the European value-added sector was significantly smaller than the corresponding sector in the United States. Not only were cost recovery efforts against the interests of private industry, they also seemed to be resulting in a net loss for European governments: by their calculations, the tax revenue from a larger commercial value-added sector would be greater than the loss of revenue from eliminating user charges. Once again, weather data was called out as an example, with overpricing and unfair competition from the government identified as particular problems.48 Additional reports in the United States and the academic sector reinforced this finding.49
Taking note of these findings, the EU released a directive on public access to environmental data in January 2003, replacing its earlier 1990 directive with a much more strongly worded statement in favor of broad data sharing. The goal of the new directive was to ensure that environmental information was made available as soon as possible for free or at a reasonable cost in order to achieve “the widest possible systematic availability and dissemination to the public.” The directive was designed to encourage transparency, increase public awareness in environmental matters, and lead to a better environment. Generally, reasonable cost was defined as a fee not exceeding the actual costs of producing the material in question. However, the directive stated that a market-based charge would be considered reasonable in cases where commercial sales are necessary in order to guarantee the continuation of collecting and publishing such information.50
Later that year, the European Union issued a directive further reinforcing these ideas, encouraging public-sector bodies to make data available in a timely manner at or below the marginal cost of reproduction and dissemination. The European Union Directive on the Reuse of Public Sector Information, generally known as the PSI Directive, allowed as an upper limit pricing that includes “a reasonable return on investment” in the price of the data, above the cost of collecting, producing, and disseminating the data, but stated that excessive prices should be precluded. The directive argued that public-sector information was an important resource in the move to an information and knowledge society and stated that making public-sector documents available to the public was part of the fundamental right to knowledge and a basic principle of democracy.51
Many NMSs also provide national hydrological services. Noting this, EUMETSAT agreed in 2001 to establish an optional program to allow its members to participate in the Jason-2 Ocean Surface Topography Mission (OSTM) along with NASA, NOAA, and the French Centre National d’Etudes Spatiales (CNES). Aligning with US practice, EUMETSAT adopted a free and open policy for Jason-2 data, categorizing all data from the satellite as “essential” in accordance with WMO Resolution 40.52 In 2008, EUMETSAT decided to participate in Jason-3, which made data available under the same conditions.53
In 2006, EUMETSAT launched its first polar-orbiting satellite, Metop-A. Plans for the EUMETSAT Polar System (EPS) stretched back more than 20 years to the 1980s, when the United States contemplated reducing the number of polar-orbiting satellites that it maintained. As part of this plan, the United States would operate polar-orbiting satellites that cross the equator in the afternoon, which were most relevant to US weather developments. Europe was the natural candidate for taking over operations in the morning orbit, as the data collected by those satellites would be of greater interest for Europe. After years of discussions and changing plans, including a phase in which meteorological instruments would have flown on the space station in coordination with NASA's Mission to Planet Earth, in 1998, NOAA and EUMETSAT signed an agreement to develop the Initial Joint Polar System. Under the arrangement, NOAA and EUMETSAT would coordinate launches to provide continuous global coverage of the afternoon and morning orbits, and each satellite would carry some instruments developed by each agency.54
The agreement also described the data sharing policy that would govern the joint system. From the beginning, the data policy leaned toward the US system. Data from all instruments on the satellites operated by NOAA and from NOAA instruments operating on the Metop satellites would be subject to NOAA's data policy. Only data from the Metop instruments on the Metop satellites would be subject to control and potential restriction by EUMETSAT under its data policy.55 The agreement was extended in 2003 in the lead-up to the first Earth Observation Summit—the high-level meeting that eventually resulted in the creation of GEOSS. The NOAA Administrator stated that the agreement set a strong precedent for the free and open exchange of data.56
When EUMETSAT released its official data policy for the EPS system in 2006, a significant amount of data was made openly available. EUMETSAT classified all real-time direct readout data from the satellite as “essential” under WMO, meaning that data of each region collected by local ground stations as the satellites passed overhead would be available to all users without charge or restrictions. A collection of global and regional products was also made available under the same conditions. Additional minimally processed data from the satellite and all archived data and products could be accessed without charge or conditions on use, but required signing a license agreement, and redistribution of this data was restricted.57
The European Union continued to push for increased data sharing. In May 2007, it issued a directive establishing the Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community (INSPIRE). Building on the PSI Directive and the directive on public access to environmental information, the directive stressed the importance of interoperability, discoverability, and accessibility of data. It stated that access to metadata and the ability to view geospatial data should be made available free of charge. However, it stated that the reuse of this data for commercial purposes could be restricted, and charges could be levied for data viewing if necessary to secure their maintenance, particularly in cases involving very large volumes of frequently updated data. The ability to download or transform data as well as data-related services could also be subject to a reasonable charge.58 The directive required that all member states adopt measures for sharing geospatial datasets for public tasks that have an impact on the environment. Member states could license and charge for these datasets, but should avoid any restrictions likely to create practical obstacles to their use, and any charge should be kept to the minimum required to ensure the necessary quality and continued supply of data. Exceptions to sharing could be made in cases where public safety or national security may be compromised.59 Overall, in tone and spirit, the directive advocated for more open data provision, but in practice, it allowed for potentially significant restrictions.
The Network of European NMSs, EUMETNET, which had many of the same members as EUMETSAT, in 2009 produced the Oslo Declaration. This document noted the INSPIRE and PSI Directives and their impact on expectations for NMSs. It also stated that the Internet and other technologies had “changed radically the expectations from the general public and the access to and possible sharing and use of data, products, and services.” EUMETNET members committed to progressive expansion of both the datasets that they provided on a free and unrestricted basis as “essential” data consistent with WMO Resolution 40 as well as the datasets that are licensed for reuse by the private sector. They aimed to lower prices and adopt user-friendly online access systems.60 EUMETSAT officially adopted the Oslo directive in 2009.61
EUMETSAT highlighted its existing efforts in this area, rebranding its satellite archive as the EUMETSAT Data Center in 2009 to better reflect the service it provided to the user community, including not only storage, but also processing and dissemination of data for all users.62 EUMETSAT had operated a satellite archive since 1995, as an important aspect of its mission to support the collection of long-term data records for climate change. Data in the archive stretched back to 1981. From 2008 to 2009, the amount of data retrieved by users jumped from 400 terabytes to more than a petabyte.63
Also in 2009, EUMETSAT signed the EUMETSAT/ESA Framework Agreement on Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES), later renamed Copernicus. Copernicus was originally conceived in 1998 as a joint European Commission (EC) and ESA program to provide data needed by European decision-makers to address environmental policy issues.64 Given the potential for overlap with its own activities and the high-profile nature of the program, EUMETSAT had a significant interest in becoming involved.65 Under the June, 2009, framework agreement, EUMETSAT would contribute data from its missions to the Copernicus program. It would also operate three “Sentinel” satellites focused on oceanography, atmospheric composition, climate, and global land monitoring. Participation in Copernicus required that EUMETSAT provide the relevant data in accordance with the Copernicus full and open data policy.66
Membership of EUMETSAT expanded over time, particularly following expansion of the European Union as a whole—although the memberships of the two organizations still differed. In early 2016, EUMETSAT had 30 member states.67 Its most advanced geostationary satellite, Meteosat-11, launched in July, 2015. It also operated two polar-orbiting satellites, Metop-A and -B, and was participating in the Jason 2 and 3 oceanographic satellite programs.68
As of early 2017, nearly all EUMETSAT data was freely available to all users. Some of the freely available data is provided with no restrictions and without the need for a license, consistent with the definition of “essential” data in WMO Resolution 40. This includes a subset of data from the Meteosat geostationary satellites, direct readout data from all instruments on the Metop satellites, and all data from the Jason-2 and -3 oceanographic satellites. Additional data is freely available to all users, but subject to user registration and covered by a license that restricts redistribution of minimally processed data. These conditions are designed to allow EUMETSAT to monitor use of its data and maintain close communication with its users. Much of the data from the Meteosat and Metop satellites falls into this category.69
As of early 2017, the only data for which EUMETSAT still charged a fee was the near-real-time half-hourly and quarter-hourly data from the Meteosat geostationary satellites. Commercial users, including commercial activities of member and nonmember NMSs, and nonmember countries at or above the “Upper Middle Income Value” level as defined by the World Bank are required to pay. Countries that have negotiated bilateral agreements with EUMETSAT, which includes all of the global meteorological satellite operators, nations below the “Upper Middle Income Value” threshold, and research and educational users can all access this data for free, subject to a license and restrictions on redistribution. Data is provided free to all relevant users in the case of a tropical cyclone or natural disaster.70 Given the limited application of fees, revenue from EUMETSAT data and product sales was quite low, approximately €2 million in 2015, and accounted for less than 1 percent of the agency's budget for the year.71
As in the United States, European meteorological satellite programs were developed in coordination with WMO and the international meteorological community, embracing the tradition of free and open data sharing. However, Europe's start also took place at a time of tight government budgets and increasing government commercialization efforts. EUMETSAT had the added challenge of attracting and retaining national participants to fund its programs. These economic challenges generally dominated the historical normative arguments for continuing free and unrestricted data exchange.
Although European agency officials advocated for acceptance of cost recovery policies on the international level within WMO, the wording used suggests that they saw this as a policy of necessity, imposed by national-level decision-makers. Advocacy for cost recovery was often couched in terms of NMSs being “pressured” or “required” to recover costs or engage in commercialization. NMSs argued that it was something they had to do in order to maintain and increase their existing data collection efforts, knowing that without continued collection, there would be no data to share, freely or otherwise. Further, European agency officials repeatedly expressed support for free and open international data exchange. EUMETSAT took a leadership role in promoting the responsibility of meteorological agencies to provide critical data for understanding climate change and recognized that this would require an increase, not a decrease, in international data sharing.
As time went on, it became apparent that cost recovery efforts would not be a silver bullet, allowing agencies to self-fund the cost of expensive infrastructure. Industry groups complained about unfair competition and negative effects of these policies on private-sector growth. Arguments about the economic benefits of adopting open policies, rather than cost recovery, were made stronger by the use of the United States as an example, particularly in meteorology. The spread of computers and the Internet further strengthened these arguments. These trends began to lessen, and eventually reverse, the pressure from national- and EU-level decision-makers to attempt to recover costs. This allowed national agencies, and by extension EUMETSAT, to gradually reduce the amount of data subject to fees, resulting in the present situation in which the majority of data is freely available.
Unlike the United States, much of EUMETSAT's data is subject to licensing restrictions that prohibit redistribution of the data. This reflects differences in national and regional law between the two entities, with the EU enabling, and originally encouraging, copyright of government databases, while the United States prohibited it. It also reflects ongoing economic pressures on the part of EUMETSAT. Requiring all users to request data directly from EUMETSAT ensures that the agency maintains good statistics on data dissemination. In the absence of revenues, these statistics are the primary tool EUMETSAT has to demonstrate the importance of its data sharing policies and systems to its members, and by extension, their national-level policy-makers.
1. EUMETSAT, Eumetsat 25 Years: Foundations for the Future (Darmstadt, Germany: EUMETSAT, 2011).
2. Gerald S. Schatz, The Global Weather Experiment: An Informal History (National Academy of Sciences, 1978).
3. John Krige, “Chapter 7: The European Meteorological Satellite Programme,” in A History of the European Space Agency 1958–1987, Volume II: The Story of ESA 1973 to 1987, ed. A Russo, John Krige, and L Sebesta (European Space Agency, 2000).
4. Ibid.
5. United States Committee for the Global Atmospheric Research Program et al., The Global Weather Experiment, Perspectives on Its Implementation and Exploitation: Report of the FGGE Advisory Panel to the U.S. Committee for the Global Atmospheric Research Program, Assembly of Mathematical and Physical Sciences, National Research Council (National Academy of Sciences, 1978).
6. Krige.ESA, “Meeting of Meteosat Scientific User: Darmstadt from 19/06 to 20/06/1979” (Darmstadt, Germany, 1979).“Meeting for Meteosat Scientific Users: London from 26/03 to 27/03/1980” (ESA, 1980).
7. Krige.
8. Ibid.
9. US House of Representatives, ““Transfer of Civil Meteorological Satellites,” House Concurrent Resolution 168, November 14, 1983,” in Exploring the Unknown Volume III: Using Space, ed. Roger Launius, John Logsdon, David Onkst, and Stephen Garber (1983).
10. EUMETSAT, “Convention for the Establishment of a European Organization for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites (EUMETSAT)” (Geneva, Switzerland, 1986).
11. Ibid.
12. EUMETSAT 25 Years: Foundations for the Future.
13. Kenneth D Hodgkins et al., “International Cooperation in Assuring Continuity of Environmental Satellite Data,” Space Policy 1, no. 4 (1985).John A Leese, Peter F Noar, and Claude Pastre, “Operational Continuity of the Global Meteorological Satellite Network,” ibid. 5, no. 1 (1989).
14. World Meteorological Organization (WMO), “Exchanging Meteorological Data Guidelines on Relationships in Commercial Meteorological Activities: WMO Policy and Practice” (Geneva, Switzerland: World Meteorological Organization, 1996).
15. EUMETSAT, EUMETSAT 25 Years: Foundations for the Future.
16. Ibid.
17. “EUMETSAT Principles on Distribution and Charging Adopted at the 7th Meeting of the EUMETSAT Council” (EUMETSAT, 1988).
18. Ibid.
19. Ibid.
20. “First EUMETSAT Workshop on Legal Protection of Meteorological Satellite Data” (EUMETSAT, 1989).
21. Volker Thiem, “EUMETSAT Practice for Protection of Its Satellite Data,” Earth Observation Space Programmes, SAFISY Activities (1992).EUMETSAT, “Resolution on Technical Protection of EUMETSAT Data Adoped at the 13th Meeting of the EUMETSAT Council” (EUMETSAT, 1990).
22. European Commission, “Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 1996 on the Legal Protection of Databases,” Official Journal of the European Union 77 (1996).
23. EUMETSAT, “Resolution on Distribution Policy” (EUMETSAT, 1990).
24. EUMETSAT 25 Years: Foundations for the Future.
25. “Resolution on Distribution Policy.”
26. Thiem.Office of Technology Assessment (OTA), “The Future of Remote Sensing from Space: Civilian Satellite Systems and Applications” (OTA, 1993).
27. EUMETSAT, EUMETSAT 25 Years: Foundations for the Future.
28. Thiem.
29. EUMETSAT, “Amendments to the Convention” (EUMETSAT, 1991).
30. European Commission, “Council Directive 90/313/EEC of 7 June 1990 on the Freedom of Access to Information on the Environment,” Official Journal of the European Communities 158 (1990).
31. D Brent Smith, David F Williams, and Akihiro Fujita, “Satellite Missions, Global Environment, and the Concept of a Global Satellite Observation Information Network: The Role of the Committee on Earth Observation Satellites (CEOS),” Acta Astronautica 34 (1994).CEOS, “CEOS Consolidated Report 1992” (London, United Kingdom: Committee on Earth Observation Satellites, 1992).
32. M G Phillips, “Meteosat Operational Programme Current Missions and Services,” Earth Observation Space Programmes, SAFISY Activities (1992).
33. CEOS, “1998 CEOS Consolidated Report” (Committee on Earth Observation Satellites, 1998).
34. EUMETSAT, EUMETSAT 25 Years: Foundations for the Future.
35. (WMO).
36. Ibid.
37. WMO, “Resolution 40 (Cg-XII) WMO Policy and Practice for the Exchange of Meteorological and Related Data and Products Including Guidelines on Relationships in Commercial Meteorological Activities,” ed. World Meteorological Organization (1995).
38. EUMETSAT, “Resolution on the Conditions of Real Time Access to HRI Data” (EUMETSAT, 1994).“Resolution on the Completion of the Conditions of Real Time Access to HRI Data Outside the EUMETSAT Member States” (EUMETSAT, 1994).
39. “Resolution on the Conditions of Real Time Access to HRI Data.”“Resolution on the Competion of the Conditions of Real Time Access to HRI Data Outside the EUMETSAT Member States.”
40. Commission of the European Communities, “Notice Pursuant to Article 19 (3) of Council Regulation No. 17 Concerning Case No. IV/34.563–Ecomet,” Official Journal of the European Communities 38, no. C 223 (1995).
41. Ibid.
42. EUMETSAT, “Resolution on EUMETSAT Principles on Data Policy Adopted at the 28th Meeting of the EUMETSAT Council” (1998).
43. Tillmann Mohr, Letter, 4 August 1998.
44. EUMETSAT, “Resolution on Amending Resolution EUM/C/98/Res. IV on EUMETSAT Principles on Data Policy” (1998).
45. “Resolution on Access to MSG Data and Products” (EUMETSAT, 1999).
46. Commission of the European Communities, “Public Sector Information: A Key Resource for Europe: Green Paper on Public Sector Information in the Information Society” (Brussels, Belgium, 1999).
47. Pirkko Saarikivi, Daniel Söderman, and Harry Newman, “Free Information Exchange and the Future of European Meteorology: A Private Sector Perspective” (2000).
48. Pira International and European Commission. Information Society DG, Commercial Exploitation of Europe's Public Sector Information: Executive Summary (Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2000).
49. Peter Weiss and Y Pluijmers, Borders in Cyberspace: Conflicting Public Sector Information Policies and Their Economic Impacts (Edward Elger Publishing, 2004).John W Zillman and John W Freebairn, “Economic Framework for the Provision of Meteorological Services,” Bulletin of the World Meteorological Organization 50, no. 3 (2001).National Research Council, “Resolving Conflicts Arising from the Privatization of Environmental Data,” ed. Freeman Gilbert and William L Chameides (2001).
50. European Union, “Directive 2003/4/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2003 on Public Access to Environmental Information and Repealing Council Directive 90/313/EEC,” Official Journal of the European Union 41, no. 26 (2003).
51. European Commission, “Directive 2003/98/EC of the European Parliament and Council on the Re-Use of Public Sector Information (PSI Directive)” ibid. 345, no. 90.
52. EUMETSAT, “The Optional EUMETSAT Jason-2 Altimetry Programme” (2001).
53. “Resolution on the Preparation of a Jason Follow-on Optional Programme” (EUMETSAT, 2008).
54. EUMETSAT 25 Years: Foundations for the Future.
55. United States, “Agreement between the United States National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the European Organization for the Exploitation of Meteorological Satellites on an Initial Joint Polar-Orbiting Operational Satellite System” (Washington, DC, 1998).
56. “Agreement between NOAA and EUMETSAT on Transition Activities Regarding Polar-Orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite Systems” (2003).Bob Hopkins, “U.S., European Satellite Agencies Sign Cooperation, Data-Sharing Accord: Agreement Builds on Partnership to Provide Enhanced Earth Observing Capabilities,” news release, 24 June 2003.
57. EUMETSAT, “Data Policy for Metop Data and Products” (EUMETSAT, 2006).
58. European Commission, “Directive 2007/2/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 March 2007 Establishing an Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community (Inspire),” Official Journal of the European Union 108 (2007).
59. Ibid.
60. EUMETNET, “Oslo Declaration” (2009).
61. EUMETSAT, “Eumetsat Data Policy” (2016).
62. “Satellite Archive Rebranded EUMETSAT Data Centre,” Image, May 2010.
63. “EUMETSAT 2011 Annual Report” (2011).
64. European Commission, “Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council Global Monitoring for Environment and Security (GMES): Establishing a GMES Capacity by 2008—(Action Plan [2004–2008]),” Official Journal of the European Union 92 (2004).
65. EUMETSAT, EUMETSAT 25 Years: Foundations for the Future.
66. “EUMETSAT Contribution to GMES” (2010).
67. “Member States,” http://www.eumetsat.int/website/home/AboutUs/WhoWeAre/MemberStates/index.html.
68. “Current Satellites.” http://www.eumetsat.int/website/home/Satellites/CurrentSatellites/index.html.
69. “Eumetsat Data Policy.”
70. Ibid.
71. “Eumetsat Annual Report 2015” (2015).