In order to help data providers make informed decisions regarding the availability and accessibility of Earth observations for societal benefit, a cross-sectoral meta-analysis of observation priorities was conducted from the perspective of users. The analysis was organized around the Group on Earth Observations' (GEOs) societal benefit areas (SBAs): Agriculture, Biodiversity, Climate, Disasters, Ecosystems, Energy, Health, Water, and Weather. Users' needs for Earth observations were prioritized using a two-stage process. In the first stage, critical observations for each individual SBA were determined based on observation needs expressed in publicly available documents, such as scientific journal articles, scientific reports, and workshop summaries. In the second stage, an ensemble of four statistically robust methods was used to prioritize the observations identified in the individual SBA analyses, based on their criticality and commonality to multiple SBAs. The result of the meta-analysis is a ranking of 152 critical Earth observation priorities; the highest priority Earth observations are those that are considered critical for the largest number of SBAs. The 10 highest ranked observations are: (1) Precipitation, (2) Soil Moisture, (3) Surface Air Temperature, (4) Land Cover, (5) Surface Wind Speed (6) Vegetation Cover, (7) Surface Humidity, (8) Urbanization, (9) Vegetation Type, and (10) Surface Wind Direction and Sea Surface Temperature (tie). This study represents one viable method to assess the priority of Earth observations from the perspective of users. The list of critical Earth observation priorities from this study is a foundation for engagement between data providers and users in regard to observation priorities.

Cyanobacterial blooms present a risk to water supplies, especially in nutrient‐enriched bodies of water. Some algal blooms can produce cyanotoxins at levels of concern for human health and aquatic ecosystems. Currently no federally enforceable limits exist for microcystins, cylindrospermopsin, or any other cyanotoxins. However, several states have taken action based on nonenforceable U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (USEPA's) health advisories and their own processes. This study assessed the status and scope of those state‐level programs. Data were collected through interviews with state regulatory officials accompanied by publicly available information. The authors contacted officials in each of the 50 U.S. states. Forty‐six provided responses, and four have only publicly available information. Twenty‐nine states reported to have already developed or are currently developing guidance, while 13 indicated that cyanotoxins are not an issue of concern within their jurisdiction. Two states appear in both categories. The statuses of the remaining 10 states' programs fall in between.

U.S. water systems need to consider actions to mitigate risks and enhance resilience in the face of natural hazards to comply with America's Water Infrastructure Act (AWIA) of 2018. This study describes federal policies, programs, and financial resources that support the water sector in implementing mitigation and resilience strategies, and includes a detailed review of water sector participation in Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) programs. An opportunity exists to use the AWIA assessments to justify investment under various funding and financing programs to achieve policy goals.