1 / 22

14 th GEO Programme Board Meeting Outcomes and Actions

This document outlines the key outcomes and actions discussed during the 14th GEO Programme Board Meeting, including observations from the GEO Symposium and reports from the Review Teams.

julied
Download Presentation

14 th GEO Programme Board Meeting Outcomes and Actions

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 14th GEO Programme Board Meeting Outcomes and Actions 14th GEO Programme Board Meeting Agenda Item 3.7 Craig Larlee GEO Secretariat Geneva, Switzerland 12-13 June 2019

  2. PB-14 Outcomes and Actions -- Session 1 • 1.1 Opening Remarks • PB Co-chairs thanked Review Team leads and members, AWS reviewers, PB members attending, and Secretariat staff. • Co-chairs encouraged PB members to look at the GWP as a whole and engage additional organizations in reviews as needed. • Co-chairs noted that GEO and the PB need to organize to respond to requests from international organizations, such as that from UN Habitat. • 1.2 Adoption of Agenda • Outcome: Agenda (Rev 2) adopted with added item in AOB re UNGGIM report.

  3. PB-14 Outcomes and Actions -- Session 1 • 1.3 Observations from GEO Symposium • Attendance was about average in comparison to previous years, though lower than in 2018. • GEO should engage a broader set of stakeholders, including those not currently involved in GEO, especially at Director level. • Noted low commercial sector (CS) involvement. There should be a win-win relationship between CS and GWP activities. How can GWP activities be structured to facilitate CS development? • Reminder that the PB previously recommended to have some Symposia more inward looking while others are more outward looking. 2019 was an example of one that was inward looking, which was appropriate given the development of the 2020-2022 GWP. • Need to encourage more collaboration among GWP activities. Engagement priorities could be a basis for this. • Time should be provided in a future Symposium to discuss essential variables within GWP activities. • There was clear interest by Regional GEOs to interact with one another and with GWP activities. • Apart from the “interactive sessions” there was insufficient interaction between audience and presenters. • Most GWP activities are focused on producing results, however, success on GEO’s engagement priorities requires that member states use EO in their reporting to international conventions.

  4. PB-14 Outcomes and Actions -- Session 1 • 1.3 Observations from GEO Symposium (continued) • PB should consider financial sustainability in its review of GWP activities. Ensure that proposed outcomes are consistent with confirmed resources. • Consider space for thematic discussions, perhaps breakout groups. • Consider creating PB subgroup on commercial sector (after September, given the current workload). • Look at whether the PB subgroup on Regional GEOs should be revived, although the mandate of such a subgroup would need to be defined.

  5. PB-14 Outcomes and Actions -- Session 1 • 1.4 Reports from Review Teams (RTs) • Atmosphere RT: • RTs should report on the extent to which the activities are producing their planned outputs. Also on observations across the plans, not just individually. • Need to identify specific linkages/dependencies between activities, not just a list of relationships. Should aim to complete this for version 2. • Reviews have provided a baseline, but the PB should follow up with activity leads regarding interactions with other GWP activities and support to GEO engagement priorities. • Climate RT • More engagement is needed from RT members. • It is difficult to assess financial viability due to activities not sharing details of contributions. • Look for opportunity for GEO to promote consistency in the methods that are used. • Climate is not well reflected in the GWP; it includes many other activities than the 2 reviewed. • Consistency of methods is not necessarily desirable; it is more important that the methods are trusted and used by countries and international organizations. • Recommended that SCO start initially as a CA.

  6. PB-14 Outcomes and Actions -- Session 1 • 1.4 Reports from Review Teams • Cross-cutting RT: • It was noted that the GWP includes many water-related activities that don’t seem to be connected; RTs should promote integration among similar activities. • RTs should advise activities, where appropriate, to choose titles that are more descriptive. • GEO EV should involve experts in each domain in the GWP, particularly those working on modelling, where relevant. • A possible future step could be to transition to a component within the Data, Information and Knowledge Resources FT. • EO & Citizen Science should consider working with at least one other GWP activity to integrate citizen science data into the activity. • EO4SDG should move from facilitation and engagement toward development of shareable methods. This may apply to other activities as well. • IPs should clarify the unique value provided by the activity, beyond what may be done by other organizations (eg international organizations).

  7. PB-14 Outcomes and Actions -- Session 1 • 1.4 Reports from Review Teams • Land RT: • Reviews sometimes hampered by plans that do not follow the template and/or do not provide complete information. • RT may not have sufficient expertise to fully review the technical elements of the plans. • Ecosystems RT: • Uncertain to what extent the activities work closely with GEO or operate largely independently? PB and the GEOSec should have more regular contact with Flagships and Initiatives. • GEO Wetlands should be encouraged to draw from work done by JAXA, ESA and others in support of the Ramsar Convention.

  8. PB-14 Outcomes and Actions -- Session 1 • 1.4 Reports from Review Teams • Disasters RT: • GWIS website should link to national wildfire monitoring systems. Important also to understand the differences in methodologies between GWIS and national systems. • Geographic RT: • It was recommended that Atlantic GEOSS either be included within of Blue Planet or start as a Community Activity.

  9. PB-14 Outcomes and Actions -- Session 1 • 1.4 Reports from Review Teams • Urban RT: • It was noted that some GWP activities are not using GEO branding for their products/services. In some cases, these products may be from individual organizations and not collaborative efforts of the activity. • The data policy of GUOI appears not to be compliant with the GEOSS DSPs.

  10. PB-14 Outcomes and Actions -- Session 1 • 1.4 Reports from Review Teams • Water RT: • GWP summary document should include information on cross-linkages between GWP activities. PB and GEOSec should do more to facilitate connections. • Extra effort is needed to understand the connections between the GWP activities, as these cut across RTs and subgroups. • GEO Sec should reach out to re-engage IOC. • Regional GEOs should help facilitate connections. • Cross-analysis of the plans should form a second step following the review of the individual plans.

  11. PB-14 Outcomes and Actions -- Session 1 • 1.4 General comments • GEOSec to follow up with outstanding IPs: GEO LDN, GEO CRI, GEO ECO, AfriGEO, EuroGEO. • All existing Flagships should continue in that category, but those currently lacking a policy mandate should be given time (1-2 years) to obtain one.

  12. PB-14 Outcomes and Actions -- Session 1 • 1.5 Regional GEOs • It is important for PB to see the RG plans; helps to understand linkages with other GWP activities. • Review should take a light touch: provide comments to improve the plan, but not to approve or direct what they do. • Don’t require review guidance. Just ensure that the RGs are consistent with the principles of GEO. • Review team should proceed with their review of submitted plans. • 1.6 Community Activities • Secretariat should suggest combining CAs with Initiatives, where relevant. • Action: Secretariat to bring forward a proposal on GEO naming and branding.

  13. PB-14 Outcomes and Actions -- Session 2 • 2.1 Paris Agreement Subgroup • The proposed objectives are broad and challenging. Unclear whether the WG will have sufficient capacity to address all of them. • Easier to go to other groups than to expect them to come to GEO. GEO should aim to provide experts to attend meetings of key organizations. • WG should focus on: 1) identifying how GEO/EO can support countries in meeting their NDCs, and 2) reviewing the upcoming IPCC reports on land and oceans to identify gaps (observations, etc.) that GEO could address. • WG should review where GEO is best placed to act, eg climate modelling/science; mitigation, adaptation. • Land / terrestrial observations (remote and in situ) may offer the greatest potential for a GEO role, as these relate directly to country NDCs and are critical for meeting zero net emissions goals. • Outcomes: • PB approves the inclusion of a “Climate Working Group” under the Engagement Priorities FT. • Draft Climate Working Group ToR to be included in the next version of the GWP Summary Document. • Action: PA Subgroup to revise the ToR based on PB comments.

  14. PB-14 Outcomes and Actions -- Session 2 • 2.2 Sendai Framework Subgroup • Subgroup has drafted a ToR for a Disaster Resilience WG but it is still under review within the subgroup. • The Disaster Resilience WG is proposed to be included under the Engagement Priorities FT. • First action of the WG (and for the Climate WG) should be to understand the current capabilities in the GWP, needs of key stakeholders, and how GEO can best engage. • Action: The draft ToR should be circulated to PB members prior to its inclusion in the GWP Summary Document.

  15. PB-14 Outcomes and Actions -- Session 2 • 2.3 GEOCAB Portal – Deferred to PB-15. • 2.4 Outcomes from the DTW and EAG • Treated as an item for information only. • 2.5 Foundational Tasks • DSWG revised ToR should include how to gain access to private sector data. • The plans for the FTs should identify expected outputs, but they should be simpler than IPs.

  16. PB-14 Outcomes and Actions -- Session 2 • 2.6 Comments on the Summary Document • Separate Flagships and Initiatives. • Add a summary of what is new (compared to 2017-2019 GWP). • Add diagrams showing activities by SBAs and by engagement priorities (front section of the document), to replace the indexes. • Add information in the activity summaries to identify connections among GWP activities. • Add an index of acronyms. • Improve consistency in level of detail in each summary (to the extent feasible).

  17. PB-14 Outcomes and Actions -- Session 2 • 2.7 Recognition Subgroup • PB agreed to proceed with the proposed approach, based on option A. • Categories should be understood as kinds of contributions that may be recognized but nominations will not require identification of a specific category. • Frequency of awards should be stated as annual. • Funding for recipients to attend the ceremony may not be available from the Secretariat. • Excluded individuals will remove reference to “conflict of interest” and include the qualification “while serving”. • Consider adding awards for groups next year. • Consider including travel to the Plenary as part of the award (pending approval of the Budget Working Group). • Consider reducing the number of awards for 2019. • Secretariat to support the preparations of communications materials for the awards. • Awards Committee members: ESIP, Ghana, GRSS, MRI, UK.

  18. PB-14 Outcomes and Actions -- Session 3 • 3.1 Ministerial Summit • PB welcomed the work of the MinWG to structure GEO Week with the goal of mobilising new investments into GEO and the Work Programme. • PB will work closely with the GEOSEC on high impact presentations to plenary on the results of GEO’s first three year work programme, and the second three year work programme. • PB noted opportunities the Industry Track presents for meaningful discussion between companies, GEO activity leads, work programme contributors contributors, and programme board members on how the commercial sector can support the Work Programme and vice versa. • PB encouraged ExCom members to highlight these opportunities to GEO activity leads and commercial sector players in their country and region

  19. PB-14 Outcomes and Actions -- Session 3 • 3.2 Work Programme Progress Reporting • Treated as an item for information only. • 3.3 GEO-AWS Cloud Credits Programme • Treated as an item for information only. • 3.5 Recognition Subgroup • Addressed under item 2.7. • 3.6 Letter from UN Habitat • PB co-chairs, with the GEO Secretariat, to propose a process to PB members for supporting the UN Habitat request.

  20. PB-14 Outcomes and Actions -- Session 3 • 3.4 Changes to the Rules of Procedure • Changes approved, with revision to 6.6.5. • Proposed text for section 6.6.5: • Documents for decision at a Programme Board meeting will be sent to the Programme Board co-chairs at least three weeks prior to the meeting for their review and comment. Once approved by the Programme Board co-chairs, documents for decision will be distributed to all Programme Board members at least two weeks prior to the meeting. Documents that are for information or discussion will be distributed at least one week prior to the meeting. Documents having significant implications and which have not been previously reviewed by the Programme Board will be distributed to all Programme Board members at least four weeks in advance, the determination of significance to be decided by the Programme Board co-chairs.

  21. PB-14 Outcomes and Actions -- Session 3 • 3.8 Programme Board Report to Executive Commitee • Topics for inclusion in the report: • Status of development of the 2020-2022 GWP • Decision on Flagships: retain the current 4 but give extra time to meet the policy mandate requirement. • Observations from Initiative reviews • PB guidance to Secretariat regarding Community Activities • Status of Foundational Tasks • Response to requests from international organizations • PB and Secretariat are assessing the best approach to respond to such requests, eg the recent request from UN Habitat. • GEO Symposium: recommendations for future events • Inward vs outward looking events • PB awards process • Revisions to the GEO Rules of Procedure • Details to be presented in a separate document.

  22. Attendance • IAG • IEEE • IUGG • MRI • OGC • POGO • Australia • Canada • China • European Commission • Finland • France • Germany • Ghana • Greece • Italy • Japan • South Africa • United Kingdom • United States • CEOS • COSPAR • ESIP • ESA • GODAN • GRSS

More Related