1. Lola Fatoyinbo Agueh – NASA GSFC Collaboration – Interest in Large field campaigns/ ecosystem-scale experiments to validate models. – International collaboration on sensors and field campaigns – Interest in cross disciplinary collaboration, not just across the physical & applied sciences but also with the social sciences Communication: – We need to communicate with each other more across science disciplines and ‘break out of our comfort zone’ to get results: eg. Reconciling the top down with bottom up approaches to CO 2 flux estimations, including better AGB estimates into coupled models. – We need to do a better job at communicating with the public and decision makers about what it is that NASA does in Earth sciences. – We need to take into account what the decision making community needs when we do our science and try harder to make useful the results we already have – But not forget to quantify and explain the uncertainties Continuity – Importance of continuity of the data record but also a lot of excitement about new sensors (and disappointment about losing others)

2. Ken Davis – PSU thoughts Good progress on or attention to many tough issues – data continuity, data management, earth system model assessment, impacts of climate change, uncertainty estimates, human element in CCE, disturbance modeling…congratulations and keep up the good work. Practical needs: – We lack comprehensive plans for ecosystems and land cover science. (!) – The loss of space-borne lidar (DesDynI) is serious trouble - biomass remote sensing is primary limit to our progress at present. – (We should compare biomass maps - do they agree? When/where? what is needed to reach convergence?) – (We need to continue to progress towards closure of carbon budget studies. Progress has been made, but continued attention is needed.) – We have been challenged to develop models that include human actions (e.g. the impacts of socioeconomic shocks on human land management, human contributions to disturbance), and data to support these modeling efforts. Do we have the right data? Scientists? Philosophical questions: – Will models of human behavior ever be “useful?” Or is this just too hard? Someday will the room include many social scientists? We have already integrated biological and physical sciences. – Priorities and economics are driven by goals that are chosen based on values.. We need to consider values and ethics to properly prioritize our scientific agenda. Further, economics is driven by human values. We need ethicists to do integrated assessment properly.

3. Andy Hansen –Montana State University Challenges /Opportunities Better assessment, reporting, and reduction of uncertainty -“It looks pretty good” is not good enough? -Guidelines on standards from NASA community? -Do assessment in random samples stratified by hypothesized drivers to determine the biophysical settings where uncertainty is especially high? Increased science and policy contribution through interdisciplinary and synthetic science and assessment of policy relevancy? – - Programmatic assessment of our progress relative to key NASA questions and policy interests? – - Synthesis workshops and other forums? – - Sabbatical program? – - Joint calls with NSF? Is NASA progress on and funding for land use and socioeconomics proportional to its importance? Address uncertainty and science synthesis simultaneously?

4. Paty Matrai – Bigelow Laboratory Generalized awareness of uncertainties (from scientist to informed user) Other “salmon”-type organisms or proxies linking fresh and salt water ecosystems: “CC&E charismatic megafauna” Early career scientists, especially “sensor physicists,” for future missions Continuity, climate quality and international exchange of satellite data records