In today’s interconnected world, the sheer volume of data streaming from an array of instruments—ranging from sophisticated satellites orbiting the Earth to ubiquitous ground sensors and flying drones—is staggering. These remote sensing networks continuously monitor our planet’s climate, terrain, atmosphere, and water systems. This wealth of information profoundly advances scientific research, conservation efforts, and disaster response capabilities. Yet, an interdisciplinary team of Earth scientists, led by Casey O’Hara from the University of California, Santa Barbara, argues that the full potential of Earth Science Information (ESI) remains largely underexplored. Their groundbreaking study seeks to unravel the societal benefits of this data, moving beyond traditional valuations to illuminate the deeper, more nuanced impacts on human communities.
Remote sensing has been a cornerstone of Earth sciences for over fifty years. During this time, scientists have assembled intricate puzzles revealing planetary interconnections—such as linking atmospheric conditions in Southeast Asia to rainfall patterns in East Africa or elucidating how zooplankton migrations influence oceanic carbon sequestration processes. This remarkable scientific achievement underscores the power of ESI as a tool for understanding Earth’s complex systems. However, according to O’Hara, while such data informs critical decision-making—ranging from climate adaptation strategies to agricultural productivity enhancements and targeted air pollution control policies—the extent to which it improves real-world outcomes is rarely quantified with rigor.
Traditional valuation methods of ESI predominantly hinge on monetary metrics or straightforward instrumental benefits such as increased crop yields, cleaner water, or healthier ecosystems. Yet, this approach neglects the subtle social and cultural ramifications intrinsic to how people relate with and value the natural world. Alejandra Echeverri, a conservation science professor at UC Berkeley and co-author of the study, highlights this oversight by emphasizing that nature is not universally viewed as a mere resource or commodity. For numerous communities, natural environments embody relational values—cultural identities, aesthetic appreciation, and deep place attachment that resist conventional economic quantification.
This insight leads to a compelling call for expanding the valuation framework to encompass these “relational values” alongside instrumental and monetary assessments. Echeverri envisions a novel analytical tool she terms a “relational valuation overlay”—a means to digitize and spatially map social sentiments associated with natural landscapes. Such mapping might reveal forest areas where people feel safest or locations that inspire artistic and communal activities. Recognizing and systematically measuring these intangible dimensions could reshape conservation priorities by aligning them more closely with human wellbeing and cultural heritage.
The practical implications of integrating relational values with Earth science data are profound. Generating public trust and fostering deeper community engagement with environmental programs hinges on acknowledging the multifaceted ways nature enriches human life beyond utilitarian benefits. O’Hara points out that enhanced trust in hazard warnings—such as those related to wildfires or hurricanes—could markedly improve compliance with evacuation orders, thereby saving lives and reducing emergency response costs. This illustrates how better capturing and communicating ESI’s societal benefits can translate into tangible improvements in public safety and resource management.
In their comprehensive study, O’Hara and colleagues undertook a rigorous systematic mapping exercise, scrutinizing thousands of peer-reviewed publications on Earth science information. They distilled this corpus down to 171 studies that explicitly applied valuation methodologies to assess ESI’s societal benefits. This curated collection was then categorized according to three distinct value types: instrumental (economic and functional benefits), non-monetary instrumental (e.g., ecosystem services like clean water), and relational (social and cultural values). This triadic framework serves to highlight the diversity of ways people derive benefits from Earth science data, emphasizing the often-overlooked contributions of relational values.
Dominating the valuation landscape is the “Value of Information” framework, a quantitative method that assigns worth to data by its capacity to reduce uncertainty in critical decision-making contexts. Paired frequently with cost-benefit analyses, this approach lends itself well to estimating economic impacts, yet tends to marginalize non-economic benefits. O’Hara and his team argue that an overreliance on such narrowly defined approaches risks obscuring important outcomes that evade simple monetization but hold deep significance to communities and ecosystems.
Researchers advocate for incorporating complementary methods such as qualitative surveys, interviews, and participatory mapping, which reveal richer, more textured insights into how Earth science data influences human experience. For instance, recreational fishing possesses measurable economic benefits, but equally important is the joy and social cohesion derived from outdoor experiences shared among friends and family. Capturing these facets demands extending beyond traditional economic indicators toward frameworks that respect and quantify how individuals and groups emotionally and culturally engage with nature.
This broadened valuation paradigm has profound implications for training the future generation of Earth scientists. As Echeverri emphasizes, recognizing that data is not a neutral artifact but a tool intricately woven with human values encourages scientists to develop interdisciplinary fluency—in both technical remote sensing and socio-cultural literacy. Such dual expertise equips researchers to ask richer, more relevant questions, ultimately fostering scientific leadership that can bridge environmental knowledge gaps while addressing societal needs holistically.
Moreover, embracing a multifaceted approach to assessing Earth science information supports more equitable policy development and resource allocation. By openly valuing relational dimensions alongside instrumental benefits, researchers and decision makers can better understand and serve the diverse priorities of stakeholders, including marginalized and indigenous populations whose connections to landscapes are often deeply cultural rather than commercial.
The study’s publication in the prestigious Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences marks an important milestone for the Earth sciences community. It signals a shift toward more holistic, integrative understanding of data’s role in society—one that transcends financial returns and highlights how science can foster meaningful human-nature relationships. This new perspective promises to amplify the practical and ethical relevance of remote sensing technologies in addressing global environmental challenges.
In conclusion, this innovative research calls for expanding our conceptual and methodological toolboxes to fully realize the societal benefits of Earth science information. By acknowledging and systematically integrating relational values, alongside traditional instrumental ones, the research encourages embracing complexity and human diversity in environmental data interpretation. This evolution in thinking positions Earth scientists not just as data analysts, but as vital agents in nurturing sustainable, inclusive futures grounded in both scientific insight and cultural understanding.
Subject of Research: Methods for assessing societal benefits of Earth science information
Article Title: A systematic map of methods for assessing societal benefits of Earth science information
News Publication Date: 6-Feb-2026
Web References:
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences – DOI 10.1073/pnas.2524370123
References: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Keywords: Physical sciences, Earth sciences
