Coordination and Integration in Designing Observing Systems/Networks

1. Working Group 2: Observing system/network design: Coordination/integration through observations and modeling

2. Overarching Question: As AON is currently a 3-5 year program … it would help us achieve success if we could organize around a tractable question

3. Possible Question: • Need felt for one central question to keep AON focused and to create greater integration • The question needs to address the practical consideration of what is achievable with the network now in place • Number of candidate questions considered • How are terrestrial and oceanic water systems linked ? • What caused the sea-ice minimum of 2007 ? • Explain sea-ice changes during IPY • Put into context of pre IPY observations (where available) • Design of future observational system post IPY • look for links across disciplines, e.g., counterpart in terrestrial system

4. Gaps in Network: • A ‘gap’ is a function of the question being asked • AON may need a few years up and running before important gaps are self evident

5. Gaps across Disciplines: • Each discipline needs to identify what observations it needs from other disciplines • As a guide, atms. boundary fluxes are the lineages between disciplines

6. Gaps across Disciplines: • Specific gap between ocean and terrestrial: • Natural linkage is river runoff • Problem of coastal erosion is a common interface to ocean and terrestrial disciplines

7. Gaps in Network: • Does modeling inform the observations? • E.G. 1: DAMOCLES: initial design drawn from obs like SHEBA/IABP and model results • E.G. 2: Perovich: sea-ice model results help decide were to deploy instruments • Counter Point: Failure of model predictions for 2007 cast significant doubt on usefulness of models at this point

8. Gaps in Network: • Specific data gaps identified, but not inclusive • Terrestrial research lacks spatial coverage • Alaska scale coverage incomplete • Pan-Arctic scale coverage incomplete • Lack of atmospheric boundary layer research • Sea-ice thickness data remains lacking • Lack of seasonal sea-ice zone data

9. Network Sustainability: • Concern for ability to track long-term changes • Mismatch of time-scale of funding (short) versus time-scale of climate (longer) • LTER funding model much better, (suggesting LAON) • AON continuation could serve as an umbrella to support future sustained observations • Experience gained in AON projects can lead to optimization of future long-term observations (NSF) or monitoring (NOAA) • Concern that satellite observations may disappear (NASA)

10. Network Sustainability: • Follow up workshop • Identify ‘gap’ sessions • Disciplinary focus sessions • A benefit of AON structure thus far is bringing different observational disciplines together • Greater awareness of other’s activities helps future planning: • Placement of instruments • Piggybacking • Technology transfer

11. AON Next Steps: • Identify central question • Identify priorities to address the question • Outcome -> AON current activities as lasting legacy of IPY