MIG/MIWP-16 (subgroup on monitoring): Final activity report Infrastructure for Spatial Information in Europe MIG/MIWP-16 (subgroup on monitoring): Final activity report Title Final activity report of the MIG subgroup

  • Published on
    25-May-2018

  • View
    212

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Transcript

  • INSPIRE Infrastructure for Spatial Information in Europe

    MIG/MIWP-16 (subgroup on monitoring): Final activity report

    Title Final activity report of the MIG subgroup on monitoring (MIG/MIWP-16)

    Creator MIG/MIWP-16 members

    Creation date 2015-11-29

    Date of last revision 2015-12-15

    Subject INSPIRE Implementing Rules for Metadata

    Status V. 1.0

    Publisher European Commission Joint Research Centre

    Type Text

    Description Report on the activities carried out by the MIG-T temporary sub-group MIWP-16 set-up to work on the improvement of the usefulness and the reliability of the monitoring information delivered annually by the Member States to the European Commission (via the EEA).

    Contributor MIG/MIWP-16 members

    Format doc

    Source European Commission Joint Research Centre

    Rights Public

    Identifier MIG_MIWP-16_activity_report_v1.docx

    Language EN

    Relation Not applicable

    Coverage

    Comments

    Not applicable

  • 2

    Table of Contents Acknowledgements.....................................................................................................................3 1 Mandate ...............................................................................................................................4 2 Review of the monitoring indicators with the objective of automating their calculation ......4

    2.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................4 2.2 Proposed non mandatory additional elements to be reported for spatial data sets and/or services ........................................................................................................................4

    2.2.1 Metadata UUIDs of spatial data sets ......................................................................5 2.2.2 Metadata UUIDs of the discovery, view and download services related to a spatial data set ....................................................................................................................5 2.2.3 Metadata UUID of the discovery service servicing the metadata of a network service 5 2.2.4 Direct accessibility of a service ...............................................................................5

    3 New INSPIRE monitoring workflow available to Member States ........................................5 4 Prototype tools to automate the inspire monitoring .............................................................6 5 Prototype dashboard for monitoring data officially reported by Member States .................8 6 Proposed updates to the current monitoring requirements .............................................. 10

    6.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 10 6.2 Indicators proposed to be discarded ....................................................................... 10

    6.2.1 DSi1: Geographical coverage of spatial data sets .............................................. 11 6.2.2 NSi3: Use of network services ............................................................................. 11

    6.3 Indicators proposed to be discarded in case of fully automated monitoring ........... 12 6.3.1 MDi1: Existence of metadata ............................................................................... 12 6.3.2 NSi1: Accessibility of metadata through discovery services ............................... 13

    6.4 Monitoring variables proposed to be added (on a voluntary basis) ......................... 13 6.5 Indicator proposed to be added ............................................................................... 13 6.6 Open Issues ............................................................................................................. 13

    Annex A Theoretical and Practical Mapping of Metadata Elements to Monitoring Variables ................................................................................................................................................. 14

    A.1. Introduction .............................................................................................................. 14 A.2. Remarks................................................................................................................... 14 A.3. MIWP-16 monitoring mapping - theoretical & practical ........................................... 15 A.4. Indicator MDi1 (Existence of metadata) .................................................................. 16 A.5. Indicator MDi2 (Conformity of metadata) ................................................................. 18 A.6. Indicator DSi1 (Geographical coverage of spatial data sets) .................................. 19 A.7. Indicator DSi2 (Conformity of spatial data sets) ...................................................... 20 A.8. Indicator NSi1 (Accessibility of metadata through discovery services) ................... 22 A.9. Indicator NSi2 (Accessibility of data sets through view and download services) .... 23 A.10. Indicator NSi3 (Use of network services) ............................................................ 24 A.11. Indicator NSi4 (Conformity of network services) ................................................. 25 A.12. Raw data section ................................................................................................. 27

    Annex B Questionnaire issued to Member States by the working group. ............................ 28 B.1. Questions related to the implementation of a dashboard ........................................ 28 B.2. Review of the monitoring indicators ......................................................................... 28 B.3. Questions related to the inclusion of reporting elements into the dashboard ......... 29 B.4. Questions related to the current and foreseen use of monitoring information at European and Member State level ...................................................................................... 30

    Annex C Analysis of the responses from member states to the questionnaire and answers to the questionnaire (Q1/2014). ............................................................................................... 31

    C.1. Questions related to the implementation of the dashboard (questions D-B 1-13) .. 31 C.2. Questions related to the inclusion of reporting elements (Art. 11 to 16) into the dashboard ............................................................................................................................ 32 C.3. Questions related to the current and foreseen use of monitoring information at European and Member state level ....................................................................................... 32 C.4. Review of the monitoring indicators ......................................................................... 32 C.5. Answers to the questionnaire .................................................................................. 35

    Questions related to the INSPIRE dashboard .................................................................. 35 INSPIRE Indicators .......................................................................................................... 48 INSPIRE Reporting .......................................................................................................... 84 INSPIRE General Information .......................................................................................... 87

  • 3

    Acknowledgements The work reported in this document has been possible thanks to the active involvement of many experts of the MIWP-16 whose members are listed below:

    BE Nathalie Delattre National Geographic Institute of Belgium

    BG Martin Baychev Department EA Electronic communication networks and

    information systems

    BG Lilyana Turnalieva Department EA Electronic communication networks and

    information systems

    DE Sabine Geissler Coordination Office SDI Germany

    DE Daniela Hogrebe Coordination Office SDI Germany

    DK Lars Storgaard Danish Ministry of the Environment, Danish Geodata

    Agency

    EE Age Sild Estonian Land Board Bureau of Spatial Data Services

    ES Paloma Abad Power National Geographic Institute

    FI Kai Koistinen National Land Survey of Finland

    FI Ilkka Rinne Spatineo

    FR Sylvain Grellet French Geological Survey

    FR Marc Leobet Ministry of Ecology, Sustainable Development and Energy

    FR tienne Taffoureau French Geological Survey

    GR Elena Grigoriou Ministry of Reconstruction of Production, Environment &

    Energy

    GR Kalliope Pediaditi Environmental Sustainability Consultant & Researcher

    IS Anna Gurn Ahlbrecht

    National Land Survey of Iceland

    IT Nico Bonora Istituto Superiore per la Protezione e la Ricerca Ambientale

    NL Ine de Visser Geonovum

    NL Michel Grothe Geonovum

    PL Ewa Surma Office of Geodesy and Cartography

    SE Anders Rydn Lantmteriet

    SK Tomas Kliment

    SK Jan Tobik

    SK Martin Tuchyna Slovak Environmental Agency

    UK John Dixon Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (DEFRA)

    UK Alex Ramage Transport Scotland

    EC Freddy Fierens European Commission Joint Research Centre

    EC Sven Schade European Commission Joint Research Centre

    EEA Paul Hasenohr European Environment Agency We also wish to acknowledge the key contribution of Franois Prunayre at Titellus who has developed a prototype dashboard and prototype tools to automate the INSPIRE monitoring, as well as the contribution of Angelo Quaglia at JRC who developed the metadata validator currently available on the INSPIRE Geoportal. Contact information Paul Hasenohr (MIWP-16 coordinator) European Environment Agency Kongens Nytorv 6 1050 Copenhagen K DENMARK E-mail: paul.hasenohr@eea.europa.eu

  • 4

    1 Mandate As a result of a meeting of Member States in Copenhagen on the 15/10/2013 a strong need was expressed for the improvement of the usefulness and the reliability of monitoring information. The MIWP-16 group was formed as a result of the meeting and the work programme of the group was defined in two phases. The objectives of the phases are shown below:

    Phase 1

    Review the indicators defined in Articles 3 to 10 of the Commission Decision

    of 5 June 2009, implementing Directive 2007/2/EC of the European Parliament

    and of the Council as regards monitoring and reporting, with the objective of

    automating their calculation.

    Analyse how to extract monitoring information from the metadata records

    available in the EU-Geoportal or from the metadata records available in

    national geoportals.

    Analyse how to filter out the metadata records which are for INSPIRE datasets

    out of a catalogue containing metadata on more datasets than only INSPIRE

    datasets.

    Design a dashboard (including functional requirements) which would provide

    access to all monitoring information and related indicators for every Member

    State.

    Test the approach with pilot countries.

    Update the justification document for indicators as appropriate.

    Update the Technical Guidelines on monitoring as appropriate.

    Phase 2

    Possibly, propose evolutions of discovery metadata or monitoring data

    requiring modifications of some legally binding pieces of INSPIRE legislation.

    2 Review of the monitoring indicators with the objective of automating their calculation

    2.1 Introduction A questionnaire, available in Annex B, was issued to all Member States asking questions about the monitoring and reporting set up and the perceived usefulness of the information provided by the Member States. The group explored how the information in the Implementing Rules for monitoring and reporting could be derived automatically from the metadata that is provided by the Member States relating to INSPIRE data. It was clear at this stage of the work, that a small number of indicators could not be derived solely from the metadata without Member States providing some additional information. A review of all indicator variables with their automatability status as well as a theoretical mapping to metadata elements is available in Annex A. As a result of the questionnaire a very small number of indicators were considered not to be useful in the real world and thus we are proposing that these indicators be dropped. For those indicators that cant be derived directly from the provided metadata records, the group has identified methods that would allow Member States to supplement the metadata with additional information allowing for the calculation of the indicator from a combination of the metadata and the additional information.

    2.2 Proposed non mandatory additional elements to be reported for spatial data sets and/or services

    In order to improve the quality of the monitoring data, we propose to add to the current monitoring requirements a few elements which can be derived from the metadata for spatial data sets and services.

  • 5

    2.2.1 Metadata UUIDs of spatial data sets A UUID (universally unique identifier) is a unique and persistent identifier. Applied to metadata for datasets, it allows for the unambiguous identification of a metadata record describing a dataset. Retrieving metadata uuids of spatial data sets can be done automatically and this has been demonstrated during the set-up of prototype tools to automate the Inspire monitoring.

    2.2.2 Metadata UUIDs of the discovery, view and download services related to a spatial data set

    Knowing the metadata UUID of the discovery, view and download services related to a spatial data set permits to establish the link between data sets and services. From this link, it is then easy to know which themes are related to any given service by analysing the information reported for the underlying datasets and there is no need anymore to provide the information required under column T of the XLS monitoring template (list of themes related to the spatial data service). Furthermore this linkage improves significantly the quality of the reported information as, instead of simply knowing that a data set is available through a view and/or a download service, it would then be possible to know through which services the data set is actually available. Retrieving metadata uuids of services related to a spatial data set can be done automatically in most cases and this has been demonstrated during the set-up of prototype tools to automate the Inspire monitoring.

    2.2.3 Metadata UUID of the discovery service servicing the metadata of a network service

    This information provides more value than simply knowing that the metadata of a network service is available through an unknown discovery service. Retrieving the metadata uuid of the discovery service servicing the metadata of a network service can be done automatically in most cases and this has been demonstrated during the set-up of prototype tools to automate the Inspire monitoring.

    2.2.4 Direct accessibility of a service In order to automatically validate the conformity of reported network services with the INSPIRE Implementing Rules, it is necessary to know if they are directly and fully a...

Recommended

View more >