If you collect novel domestic sensing data and share it with the world, that is exploitable as intelligence against your country. If another country gives you their domestic sensing data, it may be manipulated to effect some other national objective. These are not idle concerns because both have been done many times by many countries. It is a dual use technology. There is a lot of paranoia around the sharing of sensing data sets between countries because much of it is easy to abuse.
It is a “default deny” environment. The majority of international data sharing deals I’ve seen, and I’ve seen quite a few, never happen because they can’t get past what governments see as the political risks. The scientific mission barely even enters the discussion when it comes to getting sign-off from governments. When they do give their approval, it often comes with conditions that impede the scientific mission. I’ve also seen data sharing denied for unrelated petty geopolitical reasons between governments quite a lot.
It is less obvious in the US because so much sensing data resides there; there is still a lot of scientific sensing data in other countries that would be useful in the US if you could get it. Outside the US people feel it more acutely because of the relative paucity of available domestic data.
I’m not making an endorsement of any type, I’m just saying this is how it works internationally in my experience. You may have simple scientific missions but the approvals come from people that have a different agenda. It is a pain in the ass and really demotivating if you need that data for your research.
I mean, Trump said on covid, 'if we stop testing, we'd have fewer cases'. People who deal in a steady stream of lies don't want the inconvenience of facts like scientific measurements. Same reason all the climate data is being removed.
