GEO User Requirements for Air Quality Report

< GEO User Requirements for Air Quality | Report | Documents | Resources

The following is the outline for the US-09-01a preliminary and final reports. We’ve included general descriptions of the content for some sections. We will also provide an annotated outline, which describes each sections’ content in more depth.

• Cover (1 page) - Backside of front cover will have the Analyst and Advisory Group names
• Summary (1-2 page; 1 page strongly preferred) (If 1 page, the backside should be blank)
• Table of Contents (1 page) - List of Tables and Figures (1 page – on the backside of the Table of Contents)

Introduction (2-3 pages)

This report articulates Earth observation priorities for the Human Health: Air Quality SBA based on an analysis of YY publicly-available documents, including documents produced by Group on Earth Observations’ Member Countries and Participating Organizations.

GEO and Societal Benefit Areas

The Group on Earth Observations (GEO, www.earthobservations.org) is an intergovernmental organization working to improve the availability, access, and use of Earth observations to benefit society. GEO is coordinating efforts to build a Global Earth Observation System of Systems (GEOSS) . GEOSS builds on national, regional, and international observation systems to provide coordinated Earth observations from thousands of ground, airborne, and space-based instruments. GEO is focused on enhancing the development and use of Earth observations in nine Societal Benefit Areas (SBA): Agriculture Biodiversity Climate Disasters Ecosystems Energy Human Health Water Weather

GEO Task US-09-01a

The objective of GEO Task US-09-01a is to establish and conduct a process to identify critical Earth observation priorities within each Societal Benefit Area and those common to the nine SBAs. Many countries and organizations have written reports, held workshops, sponsored projects, conducted surveys, and produced documents that specify Earth observation needs. In addition, researchers and practitioners have also identified and recommended key Earth observation needs in publications and peer-reviewed literature. Task US-09-01a focuses on compiling information on observation parameters from a representative sampling of these existing materials and analyzing across the materials to determine the priority observations.

Purpose of Report (this includes audience)

The primary purpose of this report is to articulate the critical Earth observation priorities for the Human Health SBA, specifically Air Quality. The Human Health SBA EO priorities are addressed by two additional reports: Infections Diseases and Aeroallergens. The intent of the report is to describe the overall process and specific methodologies used to identify documents, analyze them, and determine a set of Earth observation parameters and characteristics. The report describes the prioritization methodologies used to determine the priority Earth observations for this SBA. The report also provides information on key challenges faced, feedback on the process, and recommendations for process improvements.

The primary audience for this report is the GEO User Interface Committee (UIC), which is managing Task US-09-01a for GEO. The GEO UIC will use the results of this report in combination with reports from the other eight SBAs. The GEO UIC will perform a meta-analysis across all nine SBA reports to identify critical Earth observation priorities common to many of the SBAs. Based on the nine SBA reports, the GEO UIC will produce an overall Task US-09-01a report, including the common observations and recommendations for GEO processes to determine Earth observation priorities in the future.

The report’s authors anticipate that the GEO Secretariat, Committees, Member Countries, Participating Organizations, Observers, Communities of Practice, and the communities associated with the Human Health: Air Quality SBA are additional audiences for this report.

Scope of Report (this includes terminology)

This report addresses the Earth observation priorities for the Human Health SBA. In particular, this report addressed the sub-areas of Air Quality within the Human Health SBA (see Section 3 for more details).

The report provides some background and contextual information about Air Quality and Health. However, this report is not intended as a handbook or primer on Air Quality, and a complete description of the Human Health SBA is beyond the scope of this report. Please consult the GEO website (http://www.earthobservations.org) for more information about the Human Health SBA.

The report focuses on the Earth observations for Air Quality and Health, independent of any specific technology or collection method. Thus, the report addresses the “demand” side of observation needs and priorities. It does not address the specific source of the observations or the sensor technology involved with producing the observations. Similarly, any discussions of visualization tools, decision support tools, or system processing characteristics (e.g., data format, data outlet) associated with the direct use of the observations are beyond the scope of this report.

The term Earth observation refers to parameters and variables (e.g., physical, geophysical, chemical, biological) sensed or measured, derived parameters and products, and related parameters from model outputs. The term Earth observation priorities refers to the parameters deemed of higher significance that others for the given SBA, as determined through the methodologies described within. The report uses the terms “user needs” and “user requirements” interchangeably to refer to Earth observations that are articulated and desired by the groups and users in the cited documents. The term “requirements” is used generally in the report to reflect users’ wants and needs and does not imply technical, engineering specifications.

Following this introduction, the report discusses the overall approach and methodologies used in this analysis (Section 2). Section 3 describes the Human Health SBA and the specific sub-areas. Section 4 articulates the specific Earth observations for Human Health relevant to Air Quality: (a) ambient concentrations (b) Air pollution sources, emissions, transport, transformation and removal and (c) Human exposure and health effects. Section 5 presents the priority observations for Air Quality and Health. Sections 6 & 7 present additional findings from the analysis of the documents and any recommendations. The Appendices include the documents cited and sourced as well as any additional information describing aspects of Air Quality and Health.

Methodology and Process (~5 pages)

This section documents the general process followed and specific methodologies used to identify documents, analyze them, determine Earth observation parameters and characteristics, and establish a set of priority Earth observations for this SBA.

Earth Observations: Types and Quality

Earth observations have many facets and require a range of attributes for a full characterization and . Special effort will be devoted to the development of a suitable characterization of Earth observations for AQ SBA. The natural dimensions of EOs are the the measured parameters as well as the spatial and temporal extent. Each physical dimension is also characterized by the resolution of the observation, i.e. spatial and temporal resolution, and the possible grouping/lumping of the measured parameters.

Hardly any of the EOs can be used directly as raw data for decision making. Value adding processes (data filtering, aggregation and fusion) are needed to derive decision-ready products. The complementary use of EOS with air quality models is particularly important given the model’s potential to characterize multiple pollutant species across variable spatial and temporal scales. The more difficult characterization of EOs is along the value chain from the raw observed data to the derived information and knowledge that is used for decision making. Typical derived parameters include the air pollution index (an aggregate of multiple air pollutant concentrations), that informs the public on the general level of air pollution and facilitates personal decision making. Similarly, compliance with an AQ standard (derived from multi-year data series) informs an air quality manager whether an AQ control action is required. Other facets of EOs include relevancy to the application, data quality, tracability, timeliness, etc. During the project, the suitability of such a multi-faceted characterization of EO priorities will be examined and, if possible simplified.

End-User-Driven Approach

Identifying the key users is a necessity for proper evaluation of their Earth Observation (EO) needs. In the proposed approach, the user categories are represented in a two dimensional matrix. The first dimension is the end-use category. An end user uses the EO for making a personal or societal decision. We will consider three groups of end-users of air quality-relevant observations: general public, air quality managers, and air quality policy makers. Each end use group has different EO needs. The respective information needs for each end user category will be determined.

The second dimension of EO user classification is along the value chain that transforms the raw observations into suitable information for the decision-makers (end users). Data managers and data flow mediators are a class of users who are responsible for the timely, robust and proper flow of EOs to the SBA application. These users, can be considered part ot the GEO information infrastrucuture. Intermediate users include researchers, analysts, and modelers who digest and prepare the raw observations in a manner that is suitable for the end-user's decision making needs. The consumers of the processed EOs are the end-users listed above. Classifying users along the value adding chain would aid consistency with the GEOSS data sharing infrastructure, the right information is delivered to the right user. It is here recognized that public documents that explicitly address the information requirements for each user class in the 2D user matrix will be sparse.

• Emphasis on quality control… at all stages of the data flow.

GEOSS 10-Year Plan Reference Document Pg. 43

[earthobservations.org/docs/10-Year%20Implementation%20Plan.pdf GEOSS 10 Year Implementation Plan]

• GEOSS will be a vital means of bringing useful environmental data to the health community in a user friendly form. Comprehensive data sets are powerful tools that support prevention, early warning, research, epidemiology, health care planning and delivery, and provide a variety of timely public alerts. For example, by linking weather, air quality data and the urban heat island effects, air quality forecasts can help protect asthmatics, the elderly and the young from cardiovascular and respiratory problems resulting from air pollution episodes. These data can also provide linkages to longer-term air quality impacts such as cancers, respiratory diseases, asthma and birth defects.

Task Process

The GEO UIC established a general process for each of the SBAs to follow in order to ensure some consistency across the SBAs. This general process for each SBA involves 9 steps, as summarized in the following list:

• Step 1: Identify Analyst and Advisory Group for the SBA

The first step in the nine-step GEO Task US -09-01a process is the formation of an expert Advisory Group (AG) that helps identify appropriate documents, provides feedback on the analysis approach and also reviews the preliminary and final reports. For the Air Quality and Health SBA, 17 potential AG members were identified. The sources of AG candidate names came from major Agency representatives, selections by the Analyst team, as well as additional AG candidates suggested by the AG members themselves. Ten of the invited candidates responded favorably and are listed in the Table below, two invitations were declined, three candidates did not respond and two candidates are still pending. Effort was made to include representatives from developing nations and to achieve a representation across geographic domains. Additional AG members would be desirable, particularly from the developing countries. The current AG is cordially invited to suggest additional candidates.

• Step 2: Determine scope of topics within the SBA

A significant task of the AG is to assess, evaluate and comment on the proposed scope of the AQ SBA EO requirements. The initial scope proposed by the Analyst group is given below.

The composition of the atmosphere plays a significant role in at least three societal benefit areas defined by GEO: Climate, Disasters and Human Health. In Climate, atmospheric composition influences the energy budget of the Earth System, most notably through greenhouse gases and aerosols. The atmospheric observations, as they pertain to Climate, do influence air quality; however, they will be beyond the scope of this report as they are more directly addressed elsewhere. Among the Disasters, wild-land fires, dust storms, volcanic eruptions and severe pollution events have significant effect on atmospheric composition and through that on human health and well being. These causes will be considered within the scope of this EO needs assessment. The Human Health SBA will be the primary application of this EO needs assessment.

While the application is the protection of Human Health, the focus of this meta-analysis will be on the Earth Observations that are relevant to human health. Morbidity, mortality, and other human health observations will not be assessed. The EOs of particular interest will include the concentration of and population exposure to pollutants near the Earth surface, where people live. The spatial domain of primary interest will be the continents with emphasis on regions with highest population density. The vertical distribution will be considered as it relates to pollutant emission sources and transport. The temporal domain may extend over decades for the epidemiological studies, to short-term, hour-scale impacts of natural or anthropogenic pollution events. Geographic areas with high population densities will also be of high priority. Air pollutants over remote locations over land or ocean will be considered as they pertain to the identification of air pollutant sources and their transport.

The types of Earth observations will include ground-based in-situ monitoring of gases and aerosol particles, passive remote sensing (satellites), active remote sensing (lidar) and conceivably some aircraft sampling. Air quality models on local, regional and global scales will be considered as they contribute to the understanding and forecasting of air pollution that impact on human health. The focus on specific air pollutants will differ regionally: ozone and fine aerosols for the industrial countries and additional focus on biomass and waste-burn (urban and agriculture) smoke, traffic emissions and windblown dust in the developing countries (in addition to motor vehicle, industrial, and waste-combustion emissions [redundant?]). The above is not a prioritization per se, but guidance for the prioritization process. Note to AG: Feedback on this Scope from the AG will be particularly helpful, since it will guide both the selection of the relevant publicly available documents, as well as the subsequent prioritization of the required Earth observations. The suggestions regarding how to narrow the Scope wil be particularly welcome.

J. Fishman: One important website is the IGOS/IGACO report for the integrated observing of trace gases and aerosols: http://www.igospartners.org/Atmosphere.htm J. Meagher: I'm not sure I understand how you intend model products to factor into an analysis of earth observations. In my opinion there has been a disturbing trend to talk about model output as "data", or as a substitute for real observations. If the intent is to use models as a way to determine the adequacy of the current or proposed observational networks, I think that is appropriate. If the intent is to use models as another source of "observations" I think that is totally inappropriate. This section needs to be more clearly written so the use of models, in this context, can be clearly understood.

Do we use model parameters as EOs?

I don't quite know how to do it, but there needs to be more emphasis on observations whose quality are clearly quantified. You mentioned data quality as an important parameter earlier in the report. Is there some way we can be sure that more emphasis is placed on defining data quality (accuracy, precision, specificity, etc.)? Obviously this is a pet peeve. There are lots of data out there which are of very poor quality, including some of the US networks. The presence of these data actually, in my opinion, cause more ham than good.

• Step 3: Identify documents regarding observation priorities for the SBA

The documents selected for this meta-analysis will include multiple sources, such as publicly available consensus reports and open publications by authoritative contributors including academic and other public research contributions (library-stored thesis or any other grey literature, especially in developing countries). The document identification will be performed by the Analyst Group, the Advisory Group as well as other experts. The Analyst Group will focus on the identification of consensus documents prepared by major national and international organizations, including the World Health Orgnization (WHO), US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), European Monitoring and Evaluation Programme (EMEP), and Air Pollution Information Network Africa (APINA). The selection of journal and other publications will be focused on multi-author review articles relevant to EO needs. An expanding list of publications under consideration is given in the project website and a subset in the GEO Task Website.

The AG is requested to point out documents referring to EO needs for Air Quality. Of particular interest would be documents that discuss the EO needs in developing countries where the health impact may be dominated by non-industrial sources and the relevant observations are particularly scarce.

J. Meagher: You probably know that Rich Scheffe is putting together a white paper on US AQ monitoring networks for the CENR/AQRS.  That document should be helpful here.

Again there have been a few reports on data quality, Should they be included?

• Step 4: Develop analytic methods and priority-setting criteria

The identification of documents, the extraction of the relevant Earth observations and their prioritization is a highly subjective activity. Also, there are currently no generally accepted methods for conducting this process. For this reason, the leads for GEO Task US-09-01a have strongly encouraged the Analysts and the AGs to be inventive and resourceful in performing this delicate process. However, they also strongly suggest to the Analysts to formulate and to describe clearly the process that they have pursued. In this early phase of the project, we, the Analysts of this task have not developed a definite set of criterion for prioritization. The criteria below represents the initial ideas on the process that will evolve throughout the project.

Similar document analyzes and earth observation priority setting already conducted in other SBAs provide methods that will be considered in defining the method for AQ SBA, including:

J. Meagher: I didn't see any discussion of analytical methods or prioritization criteria so I assume that is something the group will work on.

• Step 5: Review and analyze documents for priority Earth observations needs

This step of identifying, reading and analyzing the reports, documents and recommendations is in progress. Records of the activities are kept on the open project wiki website.

http://wiki.esipfed.org/index.php/GEO_User_Requirements_for_Air_Quality

Interested members of the AG and others may examine the current state of the project including the project plan, chronological list of project events, interactions with the Analyst of other SBAs in this GEO task etc

Additional Comments from Kjetil – No comments. In the report need to include sections on each of the EO table columns, e.g. timeliness/latency

• Step 6: Combine the information and develop a preliminary report
• Step 7: Gather feedback on the preliminary report
• Step 8: Perform any additional analysis
• Step 9: Complete the report on Earth observations for the SBA

A detailed description of the general US-09-01a process is available at the Task website http://sbageotask.larc.nasa.gov or GEO website. Some steps in the process occurred simultaneously or iteratively, such as identifying documents (Step 3) and reviewing documents (Step 5).

Analyst and Advisory Group

a general description on how the Analyst formed the Advisory Group and a table listing the Advisory Group members, including region, area of expertise, and GEO Member Country or Participating Organization affiliation.

The XXX SBA had an “Analyst” and an “Advisory Group” to conduct the process of identifying documents, analyzing them, and prioritizing the Earth observations. The Analyst served as the main coordinator to manage the activities.

Analysts

For the XXX SBA, the Analyst was ZZZ. He/she ... (brief paragraph on Analyst, including appropriate information to establish his/her credentials and qualifications as the Analyst).

The XXX SBA Analyst served ... (sentence/paragraph about the arrangement for the Analysts involvement (a pro bono basis as a representative of organization RRR, under contract to organization RRR, etc.)

Advisory Group

The Advisory Group for the XXX SBA consisted of # (scientific, technical, programmatic, etc.) experts from the field of (SBA topic) or some subset thereof (e.g., sub-set of SBA topic). Table X shows the Advisory Group members.

Table X of the AG Members, including: Name, GEO Member Country or Participating Organization, Organizational Affiliation, Geographic Region, Specialty/Area of Expertise. Note: Please use the template table which Lawrence provided in an email. If the Organizational Affiliation is the same as the GEO Organization, then either repeat or provide the person’s sub-organization in the affiliation line.

The Analyst identified the Advisory Group members through (literature searches, personal contacts, web searches, research, references, professional associations, authorship of documents/papers, etc.). The Analyst attempted to recruit Advisory Group members from all geographic regions and multiple developing countries. The Analyst contacted #/numerous people to participate on the Advisory Group. # expressed interest; # did not respond; and # were unable to participate but provided document references or suggestions for other possible Advisory Group members. Overall, the Advisory Group includes members from XX countries and YY continents, including ZZ from developing countries.

The primary roles of the AG were to (assist in identifying documents, assess methodologies and analytic techniques, assess prioritization schemes, review findings, and review reports.) The primary contact with the AG was thorugh (telecons, emails, etc.); the Advisory Group met (in person, telecom, etc) # number of times during the course of the analysis.

Other information about selection of AG, roles of AG.

Note: Comments on the success of the AG or suggestions how to improve the AG should be in section 7.

Name	Country	Organization	Specialty
Jeff Brooks	Canada	Env. Canada	Air Quality
Jack Fishman	US	NASA Langley	Air Quality
Barry Jessiman	Canada	Health Canada	AQ and Health
Patrick Kinney	US	Columbia University	AQ and Health
Jim Meagher	US	NOAA	Air Quality
Rashmi S. Patil	India	IIT Bombay	AQ and Health
Leonora Rojas	Mexico	National Institute of Ecology	AQ and Health
Paulo Saldiva	Brazil	University of São Paulo	AQ and Health
Rich Scheffe	US	EPA OAR/OAQPS	Air Quality
Kjetil Tørseth	Norway	Norwegian Institute of Air Research	Air Quality
Michael Gatari	Kenya	University of Nairobi	Air Quality
*	China	Peking University	Air Quality

Air Quality CoP

This GEO Task mentions that 'Wherever possible, the Advisory Groups involve members of the GEO Communities of Practice.'

Methodology

This section provides a general description of the processes, analytic methods, and approaches the Analyst/AG used to identify documents, analyze them, and establish a set of priority Earth observations. (Note: this section is essentially a summary of your activities in Step 4 of the nine-step process.)

Documents (general description on how Analyst/AG identified documents; not a list of the documents)

This section provides a general description of the process/method/approach the Analyst/AG used to identify documents and select a representative sampling for the analysis. Note: Section 3.3 provides specific information about the documents, such as number of them, geographic distribution, etc.

Task US-09-01a methodology required examination of a wide range of geographically distributed sources for potentially relevant, publicly available documents, including:

• International, regional, and national documents focused on data sources, applications, or research priorities
• Project reports (e.g., findings from major regional/national projects)
• Surveys (e.g., of users of solar resource data)
• Workshop and conference summaries
• Individual peer-reviewed journal articles.

The Analyst used a 3-part methodology for identifying potentially relevant documents: (1) online searches, and (2) requests for Advisory Group members to suggest documents (3) Referred to the references listed in the documents identified through other methods to provide potential new sources of information. The online searches conducted by the Analyst focused on the websites of international, regional, and national organizations engaged in Air Quality and Health. This 3-prong approach was used to ensure that the set of documents ultimately analyzed would have broad geographic distribution and represent both developed and developing countries. The Analyst emphasized to Advisory Group members that any documents suggested for analysis need to be publicly available. This resulted in an initial set of potentially relevant documents.

GEO US0901a Task Overview

• Task US-09-01a focuses on compiling and analyzing the results and observation needs expressed in those existing documents.
• the task will harvest information identified in existing, publicly-available documents.
• GEO is especially interested in ensuring an international breadth

From Climate:
The analysis used literature reviews, internet searches, and Advisory Group recommendations to identify documents with information related to observation requirements. International working groups and intergovernmental agencies have previously compiled information about global Earth observation requirements for climate, and their reports are included in the analysis. These include reports by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and experts working under the auspices of the Global Climate Observing System (GCOS). The documents also include assessments by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Reports by regional and national working groups and agencies provided information about regional requirements. These documents include reports of regional workshops and assessments by national meteorological and environmental agencies. Mission planning documents for future Earth observation systems were also a source of information about priority requirements.

From Energy:
Task US-09-01a methodology required examination of a wide range of sources for potentially relevant, publicly available documents, including:

• International, regional, and national documents focused on data sources, applications, or research priorities
• Project reports (e.g., findings from major regional/national projects)
• Surveys (e.g., of users of solar resource data)
• Workshop and conference summaries
• Individual peer-reviewed journal articles.

The Analyst used a twofold methodology for identifying potentially relevant documents: (1) literature and online searches, and (2) requests for Advisory Group members to suggest documents. The online searches conducted by the Analyst focused on the websites of international, regional, and national organizations engaged in renewable energy. The literature searches relied on standard library search tools using a variety of renewable energy key words. This twofold approach was used to ensure that the set of documents ultimately analyzed would have broad geographic distribution and represent both developed and developing countries. The Analyst emphasized to Advisory Group members that any documents suggested for analysis need to be publicly available. This resulted in an initial set of potentially relevant documents.

Upon further examination by the Analyst, each document had to include one of the following for consideration in the analysis: (1) specification of Earth observation parameters needed by users for renewable energy applications, or (2) reference to Earth observation parameters currently in use for renewable energy applications, with some indication of the adequacy of the parameter characteristics as currently available. While the Analyst focused initially on identifying the first type of document (identifying parameters needed by users), only a few of the identified documents fit neatly within this category. Thus, it was necessary to include the second type of document (focused on the adequacy of current observations) in order to have a broad enough set of documents from which priorities could be derived.

A certain degree of specificity was required for a document to be deemed relevant for analysis. That is, the document had to name the specific parameter(s) required or used, along with at least some indication of parameter characteristics (e.g., spatial resolution), in order to be included in the analysis. The parameter characteristics that were sought are as follows:

• Coverage/Extent
• Temporal resolution (frequency)
• Spatial resolution (vertical and horizontal, as relevant)
• Timeliness (availability of measurement)
• Accuracy/Precision.

From Disasters:
In order to identify as many publicly available documents as possible for consideration in the analysis of priority observations for the Disasters SBA, the Analyst and support team attempted to locate documents from various sources. The types of documents sought included international, regional, and national-level reports; workshop and conference proceedings, summaries and presentations; peer-reviewed journal articles; and other published documents. The Disasters SBA team used the following key methods in the document identification process:

• Requested document references for the three disasters subtopics directly from the Advisory Group.
• Searched the websites of large national and international working groups and government agencies. Examples of such working groups and agencies include the IGOS Geohazards Community of Practice, the US Subcommittee on Disaster Reduction (SDR), the Committee on Earth Observation Satellites (CEOS), USGS, and Bureau de Recherches Géologiques et Minières (BRGM- France).
• Performed web-based literature searches using standard search tools and databases. The Analyst used combinations of specific disasters and Earth observation keywords (e.g., earthquake, observation, priorities, spatial resolution, etc.) to perform the searches.
• Referred to the references listed in the documents identified through other methods to provide potential new sources of information.

Analytic Methods

This section provides a general description of the process/method/approach the Analyst/AG used to analyze documents and extract information to identify Earth observation parameters and characteristics.

For those documents identified in Section 2.3.1, the Analysts conducted a detailed data extraction process. The first round of extraction involved the documentation of region, doc type and parameters mentioned in the document. For each document a table was made to track the parameters and any mention of desired parameter characteristics such as: :

• Coverage/Extent
• Temporal resolution (frequency)
• Spatial resolution (vertical and horizontal, as relevant)
• Timeliness (availability of measurement)
• Accuracy/Precision.

For better comparison and recording all mentioned Earth observation parameter information was added to a spreadsheet organized by parameter and document. Each row in the spreadsheet represented a document, and each column represented a parameter (e.g., wind speed), facilitating a quick review of the total information gleaned, either by document or parameter.

Climate:
Each document was evaluated for its usefulness in describing specific observation requirements. The extracted information was inventoried and compiled into a single master database listing all requirements and documenting all sources. The information was then organized into three Climate sub-areas (described below) for global and regional requirements for each sub-area.

Energy:
For those documents that met the criteria described in Section 2.3.1, the Analyst first categorized the documents by renewable energy type(s) and region(s) represented (or global/international, if no specific geographic focus was noted). The results of this categorization are shown later in Section 3.3. The Analyst then conducted a detailed data extraction process. This entailed reading or skimming the document for mention of Earth observations, and recording all mentioned Earth observation parameter information in a spreadsheet organized by parameter and document. Each row in the spreadsheet represented a document, and each column represented a parameter (e.g., wind speed), facilitating a quick review of the total information gleaned, either by document or parameter. The Analyst recorded all relevant information provided in the document, including any mention of desired parameter characteristics

In cases where the information in the document referred to the adequacy of the characteristics of a current observation rather than the ideally required parameter characteristics, the parameter characteristics of the current observation were recorded for reference purposes. For example, if a document indicated that current spatial resolution of wind speed data is inadequate, the spatial resolution of the current observation referenced in the document, if specified, was recorded (such as on a 10km x 10km grid). While this information on adequacy of current observations does not provide an absolute target of ideally required parameter characteristics, this information was used to fill gaps where information was lacking on ideally required parameter characteristics. A distinction between the information derived from these two approaches is clearly made in the results section of this document.

The next step was to construct a table of priority observations for each renewable energy subarea, as described in Section 3.2. To do this, the Analyst noted whether there were one or more documents for each sub-area that addressed ideally required user needs, as opposed to the adequacy of current observations. For solar and wind energy, such documents addressing ideally required user needs were available, and these “primary” documents were used as an initial basis to construct a priorities table for those sub-areas. The Analyst then compared the needs in these primary documents to parameters identified in other relevant documents, and added parameters to the table in cases that did not contradict the primary sources. Where there was a parameter that was indicated as important by three or more documents, but not the primary document, the Analyst included it in the table, but flagged such parameter as not derived from a primary user needs document.

For the renewable energy sub-areas other than solar and wind energy, the Analyst and Advisory Group were not able to identify any clear-cut surveys or reports focused on end user needs. Thus, the Analyst pieced together the priority needs from the remaining relevant documents.

Disasters:
Each document was evaluated for its usefulness based on the inclusion of specific observation requirements related to earthquakes, landslides, and/or floods. As a result, in order for a document to be included in the analysis, it had to explicitly identify required disasters-related Earth observations, and it had to contain information regarding the desired physical characteristics of the observation. The physical characteristics include the temporal resolution (frequency), spatial resolution, timeliness (how quickly the observation is available), accuracy/precision, and coverage or extent of the observation.

The Analyst performed a detailed data extraction process on the documents that met the criteria for inclusion in the analysis. All of the data extracted were compiled into a single database for further analysis. For each observation, the extracted information included the applicable disaster type(s) (earthquake/landslide/flood), the region of interest of the document (Global/Africa/Europe/Oceania/Asia and the Middle East/East Asia/North America/South and Central America), the type of document (e.g., international working group report, peer-reviewed journal article, conference proceedings, etc.) and the desired physical characteristics of the observation, where applicable.

In addition to extracting as much information from the reports into the database as possible, each observation parameter was grouped into a broader category of observations. The aggregation of certain parameters that are similar in nature in this way provides a more robust analysis, since individual observation requirements may not be frequently identified in the documents, but the effect could be larger if the observation were to be considered at the aggregated level. For example, precipitation duration, precipitation intensity, and precipitation amount were combined into a single “precipitation” category that was carried forward into the prioritization analysis. For each of the disaster types, the Analyst constructed a table of the observation priorities, as well as the aggregated observation category, that were identified in at least one of the document references. References to the documents that explicitly identify each observation as a priority are also included in the tables.

Prioritization Methods

This section provides a general description of the process/methods/approaches the Analyst/AG used to prioritize the Earth observations, including the specific priority-setting criteria.

Climate:
The prioritization method involved two steps. The first step was documentation of an already-determined set of climate observation priorities,the essential climate variables (ECVs) identified by international teams of climate science and related experts convened under the auspices of the GCOS. The second step was review of documented requirements, both included among and in addition to the ECVs, to identify priorities of additional users. The analyst anticipated that the priorities of these users may overlap with the ECVs, but by taking account of their specific requirements, the needs of these users could provide a sense of relative priority, for these users, among the ECVs. As described further in Section 3.4, these users include regional and national governments.

In this second step, the method for assigning priority used well-known bibliometric methods (OTA, 1986). Priority was indicated by the relative frequency with which an observation was cited by the documents as a required climate observation. For identifying global priorities, and using the master database of all required observations generated during the document review, a simple count was taken of the number of documents in which a particular Earth observation was described in the document as a required observation. This value was divided by the total number of documents in which global requirements are discussed.

For the regional priorities, the count was taken of the number of regions for which an observation was described as a priority (for example, the number of regions for which extreme precipitation observations is required). This value was divided by the total number of possible regions. Several of the documents describe requirements for multiple regions. Appendix C identifies reports containing regional information.

Energy:
The Analyst developed a linear method of prioritization of the Earth observation parameters identified through the document meta-analysis described in Section 2.3.2 above. The Advisory Group reviewed the method of prioritization. Only two Advisory Group members made minor comments on the method.3 The three consecutive steps of this prioritization are as follows:

• Cross-Cutting Parameters: The first step in identifying Earth observation priorities was for the Analyst to assess which observation parameters are required, with similar scales and characteristics, across several of the six sub-areas of renewable energy. The Analyst deemed that parameters that are required for multiple types of renewable energy would have an “economy of scale” that provides a multi-faceted return on investment. To ensure that these parameters are required with similar scales and characteristics, the Analyst checked the original literature and noted where required characteristics between renewable energy sub-areas varied significantly. However, in many cases, although the ideally required scales varied, meeting the finer scale requirement (e.g., hourly data) for one renewable energy sub-area would also allow averaging to meet a coarser scale requirement (e.g., monthly averages) for a different renewable energy sub-area.
• Key Parameters for Priority Renewable Energy Types: The second step was for the Analyst to identify the renewable energy types that are projected by experts to gain prominence over the next 20 plus years. For this, the Analyst relied on the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) World Energy Outlook 2008 (IEA, 2008b). The World Energy Outlook draws on a worldwide body of experts to identify required actions in the energy realm for a sustainable future. The Reference Scenario presented in the World Energy Outlook projects the energy mix out to 2030. The Analyst deemed that the top four renewable energy types by Terawatt-hours generated in the 2030 Reference Scenario should be considered “priority” types in this US-09-01a analysis. These were hydropower, onshore/land-based wind, bioenergy, and offshore wind.
• Advisory Group Refinement: The third step was oversight and review from the Task US-09-01a Energy SBA Advisory Group of the observation priorities identified by one or both of the first prioritization steps. This also served as a final check, should one of the above two methods fail to identify or properly categorize an observation. When combined with additional analysis by the Analyst, this allowed for ordering the parameters identified by the two methods above into a single tiered set of parameters.

Disasters:
Using the data from the observation database generated during the document review process, a weighted index was computed in order to generate a list of priority disasters observations that is as objective as possible given the information and resources available. The index value for each of the observation categories takes into account how frequently the observation category is mentioned in the documents as a priority, as well as document -specific weighting factors based on the cross-cutting applicability of the observation category and a report weight based on the type of document.

The cross-cutting applicability weight for each document is an integer value from 1 to 3 that is equal to the number of disaster types (earthquakes, landslides and/or floods) to which a single observation applies, as identified by the document. This weight did not rely on the Analyst’s judgment; rather it was assigned based only on the disaster types identified as applicable by the document.

The document weight is also an integer value from 1 to 3. International working group or consensus documents carry the highest weight with a value of 3, since they typically represent the viewpoints of scientists from a broad range of geographic locations and technical specialties. National-level government or working group documents have a weight of 2. The national-level documents are weighted slightly lower due to the narrowed geographic focus of the documents. Journal articles, conference presentations, conference proceedings, and unpublished studies have a weight of 1, as they typically represent the viewpoint of one or a few scientists, have a narrow geographic focus, and are not always subject to the peer-review process. Table 2 summarizes the weighting factors and gives examples of each document category.

The document-specific index value for each observation category, do i , is calculated by taking the product of the weighting factor for the number of disaster types applicable for the observation category in the document, no w , and the weighting factor for the document type, d w , as seen in Equation 1.

The final aggregated weighted index for each observation category, Io, is calculated for all documents by taking the sum of the document-specific index values for the observation category over all of the documents (Equation 2).

By taking the sum of the index values over all of the documents, the aggregated index value takes into account how frequently the observation categories are identified as priorities. Those that are identified more frequently will have higher aggregated index values. The final aggregated index values are then used to rank the observation priorities across all three hazard types and all documents.

Air Quality and Health (~5 pages)

This section provides summary information of the XXX SBA and the specific sub-areas. This section also discusses the specific documents used in the meta-analysis (general discussion rather than specifics on each document) and the broad user-types within the SBA.

Description (General information, includes brief GEO definition)

Health: Understanding environmental factors affecting human health and well-being

Health issues with Earth observation needs include: airborne, marine, and water pollution; stratospheric ozone depletion; persistent organic pollutants; nutrition; and monitoring weather-related disease vectors. GEOSS will improve the flow of appropriate environmental data and health statistics to the health community promoting a focus on prevention and contributing to the continued improvements in human health worldwide.

The following is the brief statement of topics covered and key outcomes in the Health SBA from the GEOSS 10-Year Implementation Plan: Health issues with Earth-observation needs include: airborne, marine, and water pollution; stratospheric ozone depletion; persistent organic pollutants; nutrition; and monitoring weather-related disease vectors. GEOSS will improve the flow of appropriate environmental

Section 3.1 should briefly state the broad set of sub-areas within the SBA. For example, the Disasters report stated the broad categories of disasters (weather-related, geologic, and human-induced) and specific disaster types (earthquakes, volcanoes, wildfires, avalanches, etc.). Section 3.2 articulates the specific sub-areas the report addresses.

GEOSS 10-Year Plan Reference Document Pg. 43

• Currently, the work being conducted with remote sensing technologies and disease is through interdisciplinary research groups involving scientists with varied backgrounds such as remote sensing, epidemiologists, and atmospheric scientists (e.g. the international ESSP). The science of epidemiology involves observing factors that might be associated with disease, and then calculating the degree of significance in the association. The true value of Earth Observation data will become more fully realized when simple, user-friendly data products are prepared that are easily overlaid onto disease/dysfunction maps. For example, if an epidemiologist wishes to investigate factors associated with childhood asthma, it will be useful to model the physical location of patients with real-time and cumulative local airborne particulates over the study period. GEOSS can make a significant contribution to this class of activity by ensuring data are available and developing the modelling capability.

Sub-areas (statement and brief description/rationale)

This section states the specific sub-areas that the report addresses. This section should briefly describe each sub-area. This section should provide the reason or rationale why the Analyst/Advisory Group selected these sub-areas.

Documents

a general statement about the set of documents; a table of the documents with region, sub-area, organizational author, GEO Member or Participating Org.

This section states the specific documents that the Analyst/AG reviewed in the analysis. The section can include specific information about the identification and selection of a representative sampling. This section might include a table to summarize the number of documents by SBA sub-area, geographic region, authorship (by GEO member or participating organization). Note: Please use the template table, with additions as needed, which Lawrence included in an email.

This section should also address any attempts or actions taken to close any apparent gaps in types of documents.

User Types

statement and table on the general types of users in the SBA sub-areas; this section also needs to articulate how this User Types contributed to the analysis, such as its use to review & improve the set of documents

This section discusses the broad user types within the SBA. The specific user types can be listed or in a table. This section needs to describe how the user types were employed by the Analyst/AG, such as to perform a gap analysis of the documents to determine any potential biases.

GEOSS 10-Year Plan Reference Document Pg. 42

• Health service providers, researchers, policy makers, and the public in developed and developing countries as well as indigenous communities need such data products for providing the services,science, and decisions that affect human health and well-being.

Earth Observations for Air Quality and Health (length is dependent; maybe 3-4 pages/sub-area)

This section contains the results from the analysis of the documents and the specific observation parameters/characteristics that the analysis revealed for each sub-area.

GEOSS 10-Year Plan Reference Document Pg. 43

• It will be achieved through the development of a system of in situ, airborne, and space-based systems integrated through assimilation and modelling tools with census data on health, and
• GEOSS will be invaluable in allowing exposure and disease data to be related among populations. For example, the aerial particle pollution and health consequences among the World’s major cities could be compared and contrasted, and degenerating environmental conditions that could lead to the emergence of infectious diseases could be identified and reversed before a new epidemic occurs.
• It is essential to be able to relate the results of disease studies conducted in different times and locations. Historical data from satellites on the effects of land use and land cover changes are needed to track, model and predict changes in ozone, particulate matter, chemical emissions, disease vectors, cancers, and birth defects to evaluate improvements in health conditions related to public well-being.

GEOSS 10-Year Plan Reference Document Pg. 201

• Health issues with Earth-observation needs include: airborne, marine, and water pollution; stratospheric ozone depletion; persistent organic pollutants; nutrition; and monitoring weather-related disease vectors. GEOSS will improve the flow of appropriate environmental data and health statistics to the health community, promoting a focus on prevention and contributing to continued improvements in human health worldwide.

Sub-areas (one section per sub-area)

These sections should state what observations and characteristics came out of the meta-analysis of the documents, including a brief rationale based on the documents. These sections need to reflect the methodology from 2.3.2. Essentially, the section for each sub-area needs to articulate which observations “made the cut” and why.

For each sub-area, this section should identify the observations mentioned in the documents and state the specific observations that are common and representative of the sub-area. This section should reference the documents in establishing the set of observations. Since the results should be based on the methodology described in section 2.3.2, this section should blend those methodologies into the discussion in this section. A table listing all the observations and representative characteristics in this sub-area would be beneficial – please use the template table that Lawrence provided in an email.

Priority Observations (4-5 pages)

This section contains the results from the prioritization method(s) applied to the observations identified in section 4.

General description

The section contains and describes specific information about the prioritization of the Earth observations from section 4. This section should contain specific information about the application of the prioritization method(s) described in section 2.3.3.

Priority observations.

List(s) or table(s) of priority observations and characteristics This section needs to reflect the methodology from 2.3.3. This section can also include text to describe the table(s) and its contents This section contains the specific priority Earth observations for the XXX SBA. A table listing all the observations and representative characteristics is preferred – please use the template table that Lawrence provided in an email.

GEO Task US-09-01a: Priority Earth Observations for Air Quality and Health	'	'	'	'	'	'	'
Observation Category	Parameter	Coverage/Extent	Spatial	Temporal	Accuracy	Latency	Other

Additional Findings (1-3 pages)

This section is for other finding and results of the meta-analysis that do not fit in the sections above. Create sub-sections as needed.

Analyst Comments and Recommendations (2-3 pages)

This section is for the Analysts to provide their perspectives on the SBA, documents, set of observation priorities, etc. This section can be a bit more subjective than the other sections. This section might include perspectives on the US-09-01a process and suggestions for improvement.

Process & Methodology

This section contains the Analyst’s perspectives on the overall US-09-01a process as well as perspectives on the analytic methods used. The section can certainly provide suggestions on how to do the process and analysis better in the future.

Challenges (e.g., Advisory Group, Documents, Observations & Meta-analysis)

This section contains the Analyst’s perspectives on key challenges faced in this activity, actions taken to address the challenges, and suggestions how to address, prevent, or overcome the challenges in the future.

Recommendations

This section contains the Analyst’s recommendations to UIC how to improve the US-09-01a activity.

Title of Additional Sub-sections (as needed)

This section (and any others) contains other topics that the Analyst wants to address.

Note: In case the Analyst wants to convey some comments in a non-written format and/or outside of this formal report, the Analyst will have an opportunity to provide comments vocally.

Appendix

Acronyms

GEO Group on Earth Observation GEOSS Global Earth Observation System of Systems SBA Societal Benefit Area UIC User Interface Committee

Bibliography (can be split into the two if desired – not required to do so)

This section can list the documents and references in one list. Or, if preferred, this section can split the documents and references according to those “cited” and those “consulted.”

References Cited

List of the documents cited in the analysis.

References Consulted

List of the documents consulted in the broader analysis.

Other appendices as needed

AQ GEO Task 0901a Report Outline v.1