Executive Summary

Geological maps convey the composition, spatial relationships, and age of rocks and structures at, near, and below the Earth’s surface. They have a wide spectrum of applications ranging from mitigating the effects of natural hazards, enhancing public safety, facilitating environmentally sound economic development of Earth resources, and resolving fundamental research questions regarding the evolution of Earth’s physical environment. Notably, geological maps produced by State Geological Surveys (SGS) and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) are viewed as a public good, are a vital component of the Nation’s information infrastructure, are available and accessible to all, and can be used by many at the same time without being “consumed”. They commonly remain for decades as the “best available data” and can be used multiple times by many stakeholders for numerous applications. Therefore, their benefits to society are cumulative, and geological maps generally accrue their value to society over a long timeframe. However, despite their importance, there have been very few quantitative analyses of the actual costs and, more importantly, the resultant benefits of geological maps.

This report provides the first economic analysis of geological mapping conducted for the entire United States. Globally, this is the largest and most comprehensive jurisdictional economic assessment for geological mapping ever conducted. It is timely given substantial investment by the federal government in geological mapping since the early 1990s, with significantly enhanced funding since 2019. An important question is the degree to which this public investment has yielded tangible results. Four different approaches were employed to analyze the costs, benefits, and economic impacts of geological mapping, and all consistently demonstrated large returns on investment and significant societal benefits.

Costs dedicated to geological mapping were gathered from SGS and the USGS for the period 1994 to 2019. The USGS provided most of the geological map funding to SGS through the National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program (NCGMP), with SGS commonly exceeding the matching USGS grants. Funding from other federal, as well as state, local, and private sources also supported geological mapping by many SGS. Total spending for geological mapping by SGS and the USGS from 1994 to 2019 was $1.99 billion in 2020 dollars. Data were also collected from SGS and the USGS on mapping accomplished at various scales and types of available derivative maps. Geological maps can be large (1:62,500 or more detailed), medium (e.g., 1:100,000), or small scale (1:500,000 or less detailed). Greater coverage has been accomplished at small scales. SGS generated 73 different types of derivative maps (e.g., maps focused on a specific natural resource or hazard).

Estimating the total number of maps used (e.g., downloaded or sold) during the 1994-2019 project period was critical for evaluating the cost effectiveness of geological mapping. The project period experienced a rapid decline of geological map sales, as paper copies were increasingly replaced by digital maps. Thus, geological map demand over the project period was based primarily on numbers of map downloads and online views, as provided by 24 SGS. A complicating factor was the interaction of robots, or “bots”, which can make websites appear more popular than reality. Data from nine SGS and the USGS were employed to evaluate bot activity and develop a conversion rate of 3.32% to estimate what percentage of online web page views resulted in transactions. Considering numbers of reported downloads, views equal to downloads, application of the conversion rate, and paper maps purchased by the reporting SGS and the USGS, as well as extrapolation to those SGS unable to report such data, more than 7.1 million maps were downloaded or sold in the project period.

A challenging task was assessing the “returns” on the mapping investments, because as a “public good”, geological maps, data, and reports, are not sold at prices determined by market demand and supply in contrast to “private goods”. Thus, a questionnaire was developed to solicit information on the willingness to pay and perceived benefits of geological mapping. This questionnaire was sent to more than 81,000 stakeholders, who were map users or who could reasonably be expected to benefit from geological information portrayed on the maps. Questions were intended to (1) obtain respondent background; (2) gather information on preferences for geological mapping; (3) acquire quantitative estimates of geological map value in monetary terms and time saved; and (4) collect qualitative/descriptive input on the benefits of geological maps. Responses were received from 4,779 individuals and all 50 states. Many respondents worked in multiple states. About 63% worked in the private sector and 37% in the public sector. Nearly every industry, economic sector, and activity related to the environment and geosciences are represented in this study. About 81% of respondents indicated a preference for large-scale maps, with 37% preferring 1:24,000-scale maps and 35% favoring more detailed maps.

Several approaches were utilized to assess the monetary value of geological maps, and all indicated high returns on investment. The first was based on questionnaire responses about (1) money and time saved because maps were available from SGS and the USGS at little or no cost; (2) willingness to pay for a map; and (3) estimates of the long-term value of geological maps. Median project time and cost savings were 20% and 15%, respectively. The median value per map use ranged from ~$11,000 to $18,000, with a long-term median of ~$10,000. Median amounts for willingness to pay and expected to pay were similar at $3,000 and $2,883, respectively. Using the most conservative median amount for expected to pay per map ($2,883), the cumulative value of the actual maps downloaded and sold (>4.8 million) together with the extrapolated amounts (>7.1 million) ranges from $13.9 to $20.6 billion. Based on these results and the $1.99 billion cost (in 2020 USD) of producing the geological maps from 1994–2019, the most conservative cumulative monetary value of maps ranges from ~7 to more than 10 times higher than the production cost, with maximum value estimates ranging between ~23 to 35 times the expenditure.

The second approach to evaluating the costs and benefits of geological mapping analyzed the stakeholder questionnaire datasets from the private and public sectors and the USGS/SGS geological mapping expenditure datasets across six regions (Northeast, Southeast, Great Lakes/Great Plains, South-Central, Intermountain West, and Pacific Rim). In this analysis, the estimates on how much respondents would spend on a map were viewed as costs, while appraisals of long-term value were viewed as benefits. All regions showed a high percentage of positive long-term values (benefits), ranging from 71% to 87% for both public and private sectors. The average “cost-savings” for each region ranged from ~$11,000 to $30,000 for both the private and public sectors, with the Intermountain West region having the highest cost savings. To provide an estimate of the average cost of generating a relatively detailed geological map (1:24,000 to 1:100,000), expenditures on geological mapping by SGS and the USGS were compared to the number of maps produced each year using representative states from each region. The average cost ranged from ~$42,000 to $123,000, with the lowest cost in the Southeast region and highest in the Pacific Rim region.

A third approach assessed the general benefits of geological mapping based on data from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) for the SuperFund program designed to clean up polluted industrial sites. About $86 billion (inflation adjusted to 2020) were spent on cleaning polluted sites from 1994 to 2019. If detailed geological maps had been available and used prior to development of these sites, it is possible that some of the environmental impacts may have been reduced. Notably, a mere 2.3% cost savings would have paid for the entire geological mapping program, indicating that the societal investment in geological mapping is relatively small compared to the many benefits and value of geological maps to society.

The final and fourth approach involved an econometric analysis to evaluate the impacts of geological mapping. A key premise of this analysis was that geological maps are a public good that supports multiple economic sectors. The market for maps indicates that geological maps produced by SGS and the USGS provide sufficient detail, reliability, and consistency to make actionable decisions. While scientific sufficiency of geological maps is critical, a private capacity to invest to produce a map comparable to the public good map has a threshold based on the required return on investment for that firm. Logistic regressions were tested to establish the capacity to pay for a geological map. The analysis included evaluation of how the economic value of each sector was expressed by various levels of investment of that sector in geological mapping. Using the gross domestic product (GDP) component of each sector, the sectoral contribution to per capita GDP was identified. Analyzing the actual survey response rates by economic sector, and whether the projects likely used publicly available geological maps or generated custom maps, the allocation of each mapping type was calculated for nine major sectors of the GDP, including mining, energy, real estate, construction, professional, transportation, education, state/local government, and federal government. For projects that likely included all or some publicly produced geological maps, sector per-capita input ranged from ~$131 to more than $4,700 per person, with a collective economic value of greater than $19,000 per person for 2019. Real estate had the highest sector per-capita allocated by rate for geological maps in the public good category. Aggregate behaviors of respondents were generally consistent across the U.S., with some regional differences such as a demand for finer-scale mapping in the Northeast.

Finally, narrative responses by stakeholders conveyed that not all benefits of geological maps could be expressed in monetary terms. Therefore, stakeholders were asked in various ways to provide written narratives of the benefits and uses of geological maps provided by SGS and the USGS. Examples of common themes in the responses included time and cost savings, assistance in resource exploration and development, general education, geological research, filling information gaps, enhancing decision making (particularly land and water-use planning), providing credibility as well as accurate and unbiased information, and furnishing context to site-specific work.

In summary, four different approaches to an economic analysis of geological maps across the entire U.S. yielded strikingly similar results. All approaches demonstrated that geological maps have tremendous value to multiple economic sectors and nearly all aspects of society. Moreover, the value of geological maps accrues through time and far exceeds initial investments, with conservative estimates of monetary value ranging from 7 to 10 times higher than the production cost and per-capita input for various economic sectors ranging from ~$131 to more than $4,700 per person.