ࡱ> VXU ?bjbjߍ *L7 ,6j666666666 6 6 6 6 6 6,7:b66666666666K66"66666t45X*5"5a6065";;D55 66666666666;666666666 :   Considerations for the IOC Strategic Plan By Bob Keeley Introduction Below are a series of notes prepared as a result of reading the Framework for Ocean Observations (FOO), a document that was spawned from the OceanObs'09 meeting. The document provided to this meeting is the latest draft and as such is subject to change, though I would expect it is close to final. The ideas reflected here have direct relevance to actions of the Strategic Plan (SP) or may only impact the tone of the words. My view is that there are important issues that will have some impact on how IODE functions as well. The notes are organized as comments under the section headings employed in the FOO. This should ease cross referencing my views with the text of the FOO. Note that text extracted from the FOO appear in quotes and italicized. Although the FOO speaks for the international research community, it expresses intent only. How well that community adheres to the principles as it executes observation programmes is likely another matter. Still, the document does express a fairly broadly held conviction and points in a direction that the SP needs to take seriously. IOC data management encompasses activities that lie beyond what is discussed in the FOO. The SP clearly needs to reflect these interests as well. It would be desirable for the SP to demonstrate that IOC has a consistent treatment for all interests. There are a few points I would highlight. First, biological issues take greater prominence for international collaboration than in the past. IODE/IOC has been working in these areas for some time and the SP should note this. In fact, the SP should at least reference areas where IOC/IODE have made significant contributions in the spirit expressed in the FOO. I believe these contributions are under appreciated. Second, the thrust for standards appears prominent in the FOO. While this, too, is an area being pursued by IOC/IODE, there has not been strong engagement as yet. The SP needs to consider this. Third, capacity building and teaching are featured, but Information Management is not present in the FOO. The SP should be sure (as I am sure it will) to identify the importance of IM. But it should do so in a way that shows its importance to the intents expressed in the FOO. Finally, I don't think the SP should respond directly to each and every point of the FOO. It is, after all, only one view, albeit an important one since significant volumes of ocean data comes from the research community. However, the SP needs to capture the spirit and intents expressed in the FOO to demonstrate to the research community that IOC/IODE is in tune with their interests. A Framework for Ocean Observation (FOO) Executive Summary: This plan does not include consideration of meteorological variables over the ocean. Thus the authors took ocean observation in a strict interpretation. A broader one would have acknowledged the need to mesh with meteorological systems (observations/platforms, data systems, products) if we truly want to address the earth system. The SP should reflect this larger view. Physics, biology (in its broadest sense ecosystems, biogeochemistry, etc.) are considered as part of FOO. There is no mention of information functions as in the IODE mandate so this needs to appear in the SP. FOO endorses a concept of Essential Ocean Variables (EOVs) that are a subset of ECVs. The incorporation of observing systems (OSs) for these follows the same sentiments as for ECVs. The governance of FOO has a SG composed of international sponsors of OceanObs'09, and leaders of Observing Panels. IOC would be included, but strong representation of the data management community is important. The SP should establish this point. Data management representatives will be present in Implementation Teams, but this is perhaps too low a level of influence. Common data management protocols are required. ODS must move more smartly. Introduction: Imposition of a centralized control structure will not work; all groups involved must recognize the advantages of working in concert and initiate the work required to align with the Framework.. The SP should spend some effort explaining real benefits that support the spirit in quotes. Framework Concept: The first sentence claims that the research community is largely responsible for ... disseminating information.... I disagree with this statement. IODE and other organizations have played significant roles in data assembly and dissemination that are under recognized. The SP needs to consider how to raise awareness of the contribution of non-research contributions. Defining the Framework: EOVs are a subset of the at sea measurements that are made. While the FOO does not take this into consideration, the SP needs to acknowledge this and discuss how harmonization with these other systems (for example meteorological) can be accomplished. JCOMM DMPA has a role here. ... many ocean observation systems have been designed to measure as many variables as possible. This understandable practice has often led to unnecessary duplication and difficulties in setting standards.... Bringing together separate groups to harmonize practices must be an evident outcome of the SP. This has been tried (GOSUD & SAMOS for example) but has been less than successful. My assessment is the result is such because there is not sufficient resources and/or the results are altruistic rather than having a demonstrable benefit. Such a benefit should be demonstrated and so the SP should orient its focus on demonstrating tangible results. I think GTSPP could contribute to this thinking. Perhaps the SP needs to accentuate upfront acceptance by the research community of the merits of harmonization of programmes before embarking on a build it and they will come strategy. I think this means greater engagement (being pushier) in getting data management and harmonization concerns into designs of observing programmes on conception rather than later. All data centres can play a role here. The data management community having a seat on the FOO Steering Group is crucial. The definition of observing element includes ... broad scientific guidance.... There must also be data management representation at this level. The SP must address this. Readiness level is a concept that does include the elements of data management (see 4.2). The SP should reference this in making the case for early data management inclusion in the initiation of an observing system element. It is recognized that ... the ocean observing community is also segmented.... My view is that getting researchers to buy into the co-operation as expressed in the FOO will be a major issue for the FOO-SG. If possible, the SP could suggest ways that the data management community can assist in this. Perhaps it is through demonstrating direct benefits in past co-operative endeavours. Governing the System: I re-iterate comment 6 in Defining the Framework. How willing are individual researchers to submit to international governance? What can the SP do to help convince them this is worth their time? ... implementation groups that deal with the realities of making the observation elements and data systems work.... I think this statement will challenge the present operation of IODE. The JCOMM DMPA is better oriented organizationally to respond, but actual implementation comes mostly into the domain of IODE members. But IODE members act independently except when organized into projects. To respond to such a statement, many more projects will be needed, or some other organizational way to meet the expectations. The SP should consider this challenge and set IODE Officers and members to consider how to respond. One idea is to reorient IODE views of its activities to one that captures the EOV concept. GOOS was asked to reinforce global participation through capacity development.. Here is a lead in for a strong statement in the SP. IM should figure here. Within the membership of the GSC, there is a place for a data management technical expert. The SP (perhaps IODE) needs to make the case that such a person will be placed. There may be a sentiment that a data management expert can be present as an ex-officio member. The SP should consider this only as a second best membership. The functions outlined in the FOO clearly call for a data management expert to be a full member. In fact, there should be experts from the observing system community (likely not an issue), from the requirements community (this may be a user community, societal issue reps.) and data and information. This aligns with the concept of readiness and the SP should use this to make its case. Ocean Observing Panels would do well to have data management experts in their membership. The SP should make this case and IODE should push for this representation. I think the SP can make a case that the data management community is well engaged in activities that are germane to the new biology and ecosystem panel as well as the others. Guiding Principles: It (the FOO) will also provide demonstrable system engineering benefits that will attract adherence to best practices by observing elements.. The SP should have the tone that reinforces this statement. The FOO ...will reduce duplication among ocean observation elements, and promote data standards and broad accessibility, to support a principle of measure once/use many times.. An important principle of the Framework approach will be the free and open exchange of data and products, with robust mechanisms to apply user feedback...will include strong efforts in education, outreach, and capacity building .... These statements align with IOC principles and the SP should draw attention to this. Processes of the Framework: Item 4 in the Defining the Framework section above notes the appearance of data management system assessments in the concept of readiness as illustrated in this section of the FOO. The SP should demonstrate how it will support this. For each EOV, the Framework processes will provide for the public record a fully-vetted set of requirements,.... While the statement does not explicitly mention data management components, the SP should assume this is included and define how to contribute information about vetting the data management component in the public record. Figure 8 may provide some guidance on how to approach this. Requirements: Once a requirement for a new EOV is widely accepted and independently matured through the Framework process, a process for maturation will be initiated. The arguments for the initiation for a new EOV will be external to the IOC SP. If successful, initiating the process will challenge the data management community as it currently operates. A new research programme assembles funding from organizations that are in place to support this. But building a new data management system, is not usually funded through this research avenue and most often relies on existing organizations to accommodate new needs within existing budgets. This is a fundamental weakness that the SP needs to highlight. The data management components will need advocacy by the researchers / FOO governance to access new funds to move the readiness maturation process along. This is where full membership on the FOO-SG by a data management expert will be important. Data and Information Products: It is gratifying to see such a section. I think it is weak in explaining the challenges. The SP should expand the information content that this section should have described. Data usage metrics is highlighted here. IODE has been promoting this for a few years. The SP should reinforce the need to do this and might suggest some useful ones. I am not sure what is currently done is sufficient. DOIs are suggested as the way to provide recognition to data providers. The SP should either endorse this, point out weaknesses or propose a more viable alternative (if there is one). I think the treatment of DOIs in this section deflects attention from issues within the data management component. For example, dealing with new variables, developing standards, harmonization, accessing funding, developing new dissemination techniques / software. These need attention and should have been mentioned in this section. DOI is just one more demand. Since these other ideas were not mentioned here, the SP needs to draw attention to them (as noted in comment 1 here). And while not all data collected will become a part of the global sustained observing system, consideration should be given to the potential for this eventual outcome.. IOC/IODE are managing data that are not EOVs. The SP needs to note this and describe how the demands to manage both types, EOV and non-EOV, can be dealt with consistently. Education, Outreach and CB: This is clearly within the domain of the SP both now and in the future. The need for education products is well in hand, though the SP may want to broaden this. The FOO does not consider information management issues as IODE treats this term. So the SP needs to tie these to this stated FOO need. This section considers the preparation of products for public education as part of this topic. Generally this has been outside IODE consideration. How should the SP deal with this? Applying the Framework Processes: It is possible for the SP to note contributions already in the descriptions of both SST and carbon. I think this should receive some attention. However, I think it should call greater attention to the contributions in the zoology example. GE-BICH comes to mind, as well as efforts in taxonomic standards. Highlighting these especially points to the forward looking aspects of the SP in that these were initiated before the FOO came along. It can also highlight challenges to getting this done. Benefits of Using the Framework There is much motherhood and apple pie sentiments in this section. I would not have the SP read like this. Next Steps: Comments above apply to items in this section. *9P5e39 Y !!#k$&'+",--]//0189?$hM6CJOJPJQJ]^JaJh|CJOJPJQJ^JaJhMCJOJPJQJ^JaJ*89:GHX Y : ; '( & 6m I %\7$8 545M & F & 6m I %\7$ & F & 6m I %\7$ & F & 6m I %\7$ & 6m I %\7$Md !##3##&^',*+++a,T.U. & F & 6m I %\7$ & F & 6m I %\7$ & 6m I %\7$ & F & 6m I %\7$U.q.\/000444v5P6 78A:B:^: & F & 6m I %\7$ & F & 6m I %\7$ & F & 6m I %\7$ & 6m I %\7$^::;><?<a<O>P>p>>>>??{ & F & 6m I %\7$ & F & 6m I %\7$ & F & 6m I %\7$ & 6m I %\7$ & F & 6m I %\7$ (/ =!n"n#n$n% 666666666vvvvvvvvv66666686666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666hH6666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666666662 0@P`p2( 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p 0@P`p8XV~_HmH nH sH tH N`N Normal*$1$ CJKHPJ_HaJmH sH tHDA D Default Paragraph FontVi@V 0 Table Normal :V 44 la (k ( 0No List :/: Numbering SymbolsNON Heading x$OJQJCJPJ^JaJ6B@6 Body Text x(/@"( List^JH"@2H Caption xx $CJ6^JaJ].OB. Index $^JPK!pO[Content_Types].xmlj0Eжr(΢]yl#!MB;.n̨̽\A1&ҫ QWKvUbOX#&1`RT9<l#$>r `С-;c=1g~'}xPiB$IO1Êk9IcLHY<;*v7'aE\h>=^,*8q;^*4?Wq{nԉogAߤ>8f2*<")QHxK |]Zz)ӁMSm@\&>!7;wP3[EBU`1OC5VD Xa?p S4[NS28;Y[꫙,T1|n;+/ʕj\\,E:! t4.T̡ e1 }; [z^pl@ok0e g@GGHPXNT,مde|*YdT\Y䀰+(T7$ow2缂#G֛ʥ?q NK-/M,WgxFV/FQⷶO&ecx\QLW@H!+{[|{!KAi `cm2iU|Y+ ި [[vxrNE3pmR =Y04,!&0+WC܃@oOS2'Sٮ05$ɤ]pm3Ft GɄ-!y"ӉV . `עv,O.%вKasSƭvMz`3{9+e@eՔLy7W_XtlPK! ѐ'theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsM 0wooӺ&݈Э5 6?$Q ,.aic21h:qm@RN;d`o7gK(M&$R(.1r'JЊT8V"AȻHu}|$b{P8g/]QAsم(#L[PK-!pO[Content_Types].xmlPK-!֧6 -_rels/.relsPK-!kytheme/theme/themeManager.xmlPK-!!Z!theme/theme/theme1.xmlPK-! ѐ'( theme/theme/_rels/themeManager.xml.relsPK]# 7L? MU.^:?!"#$%17!77*7 PR57im355Y[ "$$$%%%%I'M'''))**1155v6x67:::::::::::::::::::::::     ^`.88^8`.^`.^`.pp^p`.  ^ `.@ @ ^@ `.  ^ `.^`.^`.88^8`.^`.^`.pp^p`.  ^ `.@ @ ^@ `.  ^ `.^`.^`.88^8`.^`.^`.pp^p`.  ^ `.@ @ ^@ `.  ^ `.^`.^`.88^8`.^`.^`.pp^p`.  ^ `.@ @ ^@ `.  ^ `.^`.^`.88^8`.^`.^`.pp^p`.  ^ `.@ @ ^@ `.  ^ `.^`.^`.88^8`.^`.^`.pp^p`.  ^ `.@ @ ^@ `.  ^ `.^`.^`.88^8`.^`.^`.pp^p`.  ^ `.@ @ ^@ `.  ^ `.^`.^`.88^8`.^`.^`.pp^p`.  ^ `.@ @ ^@ `.  ^ `.^`.^`.88^8`.^`.^`.pp^p`.  ^ `.@ @ ^@ `.  ^ `.^`.^`.88^8`.^`.^`.pp^p`.  ^ `.@ @ ^@ `.  ^ `.^`.^`.88^8`.^`.^`.pp^p`.  ^ `.@ @ ^@ `.  ^ `.^`.^`.88^8`.^`.^`.pp^p`.  ^ `.@ @ ^@ `.  ^ `.^`.^`.88^8`.^`.^`.pp^p`.  ^ `.@ @ ^@ `.  ^ `.^`.P^`P@@^@`0^`0``^``^`^`^``^``00^0` M|77@++#{++7@UnknownG*Ax Times New Roman5Symbol3 *Cx Arial;Helvetica5TahomaA$BCambria Math" hj'8'0/x0/x! 2066 P$P|!xx , Bob KeeleyPeter PissierssensD          Oh+'0   0 < H T`hpx' Bob Keeley Normal.dotmPeter Pissierssens2Microsoft Macintosh Word@F#@@11@ʜ0/ ՜.+,0 hp  ' UNESCO/IOCx6  Title  !"#$%&()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>?@ABCDFGHIJKLNOPQRSTWRoot Entry FŪY1Table'S;WordDocument*LSummaryInformation(EDocumentSummaryInformation8MCompObj` F Microsoft Word 97-2004 DocumentNB6WWord.Document.8