NEON:Where We Are Today

(And How We Got There)

Jeffrey GoldmanScience Office Director,

American Institute of Biological Sciences

Interacting Drivers of Biological Change

Land use & habitat alteration

Invasive species

Evolution of infectious disease

Climate changeBiogeochemi

cal cycles

BiodiversitySpecies composition

Ecosystem functioning

Common Features

• Regional, continental, or global in extent• Multicausal & complex• Require information about

interdependence of species• Require comparative analysis of

ecosystems over large areas and long periods

All profoundly impact our society

Current Infrastructure

• Research centers, sites, stations– Distributed across U.S., haphazard assemblage

of equipment, often without basic connectivity• Informatics

– Ecological data highly heterogeneous, data sets largely undocumented, difficult to find

• Networks– Many US-based and international networks,

few enforce standardized protocols and documentation or collection at multiple spatial scales

The National Ecological Observatory Network

A continent-wide research platform to study phenomena at regional to continental scales

NEON will:• Consist of distributed field- and laboratory-

based observatories (facilities, sites, etc.)• Engage large multidisciplinary teams• Employ high technology to link facilities,

sense the environment, forecast changes• Promote data sharing and open data

policies• Create an ability to predict biological

changes and consequences

NEON Milestones

• NEON planning workshops (2000 & 2002)• Regional planning meetings (2000-present)• Federal funding requests (FY’01, FY’03,

FY’04, FY’05)• NRC study (Summer 2003)• The IBRCS project (2002-2005)

Federal Funding Requests

• Special NSF budget account: Major Research Equipment and Facilities Construction Account (MREFC)– Reserved for facilities and equipment that cannot be

supported at the NSF directorate level– Generally, of use to a large segment of a research

community

• Examples: – Gravitational wave observatories– Radio telescope arrays– Distributed networks of equipment (lately)

Colors of Money

1. Planning (workshops, NRC, AIBS)2. Implementation (MREFC)3. Maintenance and Operation4. Research (independent

investigators)

AIBS Infrastructure Project

Initiated IBRCS project, a catalyst for community activity surrounding biological research infrastructure, especially NEON.• Attempt to represent community vision • Attempt to unify voice of community• Inform and build constituency• Provide venues for discussion• Develop knowledge of existing biological

research infrastructure

AIBS Infrastructure Project

1. Infrastructure Working Group2. White paper, town meetings, and

roundtable3. Outreach (annual meetings, reports,

BioScience, briefings)4. NEON Coordination & Implementation

Conference5. Current Workshop Series: NEON Science

Drivers

Framing questions1. What are the regional/continental scale issues of

national concern?

2. Is a network of infrastructure needed to address them?

3. Will NEON, as conceived, do the job?

4. What impact will NEON have on the community and the next generation?

NRC study

Six themes emerged

Recommended Organizing Themes

•biodiversity, species composition, and ecosystem functioning

•ecological aspects of biogeochemical cycles•ecological implications of climate change•ecology and evolution of infectious disease• invasive species• land use and habitat alteration

NRC study

Framing questions1. What are the regional/continental scale issues of

national concern?

2. Is a network of infrastructure needed to address them?

3. Will NEON, as conceived, do the job?

4. What impact will NEON have on the community and the next generation?

NRC study

Six themes emerged

Yes

Yes and no

A profoundly positive impact

Coordination & Implementation Conference

Recommendations

• NEON should exist as a national network of regional observatories

• Observatories should be established simultaneously but should mature incrementally according to specific organizing questions, including those identified by the NRC

• A new organization with broad representation should be established to manage NEON

• establish before observatories• receive all funding for infrastructure/M&O and

distribute it to observatories• Specification of the NEON design should begin

immediately

Detail Remains Elusive

• What science will NEON enable?• What solutions will be sought?• Who will benefit?• Where will infrastructure reside?• Who will administer and in what

context?

Challenges

• Steep learning curve• National spotlight premature• “Big Science” model unfamiliar

– Requires design blueprint earlier than initially realized

– Garners political scrutiny that is unfamiliar to initial champions

– Requires a framework for concept development initially absent

What is “Big Science”?

• Expensive large-scale facilities (such as accelerators and reactors) and programs involving large teams of investigators

• Hierarchical organization of scientific labor, multidisciplinary teams, coalition building needed to generate support of funding agency

Elusive History of Big Biology

Prior attempts-mixed success• Biotrons, phytotrons• National biological facility• Oceanographic research vessels• Tropical biology• Human Genome Project

Biologists’ ambivalence to Big Science• Heterogeneity and fragmentation• Couldn’t get line item funding• Don’t need or want it• Rival interests

From: Appel, Toby. 2000. Shaping Biology: The National Science Foundation and American Biological Research, 1945-1975.

DistinguishingSmall and Big Science

Attribute Small science Big science

Success defined by Scientists, creators, inventors, peers

Managers, reviewers, sponsors, peers

Decisions made by Scientists, creators, inventors

Managers, directors, delegated

Design flexibility Flexible, creative Fixed, baselined

Fabricated by In-house craftwork, “make”

Industrial approach, “buy”

Team composition Predominantly scientist

Scientists, engineers, acc’ts., PMs

Project visibility Private Public

Project process Opaque TransparentAdapted from talk by Gary Sanders, CalTech

Is NEON Big Science?

• NEON has been a “big science” project developing in a “small science” culture

• NEON is compared to:– Other big science projects by people

familiar with big science– Small science projects by people familiar

with small science

# of different detectors

# o

f lo

cati

ons

Not All Big Science Projects are the Same

NIF LHC

LIGO

EarthScope NEON

Stages in Big Science Project

Stage

Federal Funding

NSF Intern

alCommunity

Planning

Concept

Development

Implementation

Operation

Renewal

NEON Solicitation from NSF

• Develop a NEON Consortium and establish a project office to:– Lead, coordinate, and organize– Serve as NEON focal point for NEON community

• Implementation plan– Science and education plan– Network design– Schedule– Cost estimates

• National NEON organization– Member-governed– Independent, non-profit

NEON Science Drivers Workshops

• Six Workshops Organized Around Science Themes

– Identify organizing questions– Identify required research

infrastructure• Issues

– Driven by science– Integrative across grand challenges– Selective, not comprehensive– Find right point along the spectrum

An Example

• EarthScope– How does strain accumulate and release at plate

boundaries?– How do earthquakes start, rupture, and stop?– How can we predict earthquake ground motions

over a wide frequency range?

Timeline

NEON conceived, 1998

Planning workshops, 2000 & 2002

Regional Meetings, 2000 - present

IBRCS Project, 2002 - 2005

NRC Study, 2003

NOEN Science Drivers Workshops, 2004Final NEON Planning Phase, 2004 -

2006

Summer Workshops

• Make productive use of the time during which proposals were being written and reviewed

• Initiate the discussion of science drivers and required infrastructure

• Contribute recommendations to eventual NCC• Minimize overlap with NCC

Objectives

• Provide:– state-of-the-art national facility – all levels of biological organization – across temporal and spatial scales

• Connect:– geographically distributed infrastructure– one virtual installation via communication

networks– Remote users to the facility

• Facilitate:– predictive modeling of biological systems – data sharing and synthesis

Path of ideal Big Science project

1. Community develops decadal plan, incl. prioritized list facilities/ instruments required to make a quantum leap in discipline

2. Team, sometimes a consortium, forms to lead development of facility/instrument (Team owns plan)

3. Team receives “small science” funding from sponsoring agency to develop concept into “Big Science” project (Program level buy-in)

4. Program staff shepherds plan through multi-year institutional process (Agency buy-in)

5. Agency proposes Big Science project to Congress6. Congress approves/appropriates7. Agency makes award to original team, often as coop.

agreement8. Team implements project to build facility/instrument with

oversight of sponsoring agency9. Team operates facility/instrument for community-wide use10. Discipline makes quantum leap11. Repeat

Stages in Big Science Project

1. Concept2. Development3. Implementation4. Operation5. Renewal

Emerging Technologies