Current and future SEIS based ICT solutions –

1. Current and future SEIS based ICT solutions – related to eReporting, INSPIRE and the SOER process Stefan Jensen, Head of groupWorkshop on future trends in Environmental Reporting – at Swedish EPA Stockholm, 30.10.2013

2. Outline Some European policy framework a) SEIS and SIIFs - drivers for the evolution of eReporting b) SEIS and INSPIRE implementation - potentials of a technical framework to foster interoperability and harmonisation c) SEIS, SENSE and SOER - tools for deeper integration with EEA member countries

3. SEIS and related EU policy instruments SEIS communication 1/2008 >>> vision, background, principles c) SEIS staff working paper 6/2012 (EU internal) >>> re-inforcement, guidance and priority setting b) Communication on better implementation 03/2012 >>> policy relevance through Structured Information and Implementation Frameworks (SIIFs)

4. SEIS implementation outlook – shortcomings • Quality of data and information • lack of comparability in the information provided by the Member States • scale of the data and the level of detail in the assessments • Data flows and information systems • Where the public at large is concerned • Not suited to the needs • Not enough flexibility, not enough feedback possibilities • Where the Member States and local authorities are concerned • better adress cross-border environmental issues • improved ways to find data and information needed • Data redundnacy – not folling SEIS principles • Where the Commission is concerned • More timely access in support of policy proposals • Better monitoring of implementation of legislation • Better disemmination through more open source powered solutions

5. SEIS implementation outlook – priorities • Assessing (and support the improvement of) • the current capacities within the Member States • (e.g. Copernicus GISC, EMODNET, GEO projects) • Streamlining EU reporting requirements towards fully on-line reporting • (e.g. WISE, BISE, SENSE, eReporting systems) • Improving public access to environment information • (EU open data strategy, strengthen EU environmental data centres) • Improving public participation in the collection and dissemination • of environment data and information • (e.g. review of PSI directive) • Promoting and assessing the implementation of • the Infrastructure for Spatial Information in Europe Directive • (Review INSPIRE – a core architecture for SEIS)

6. Outline Some European policy framework a) SEIS and SIIFs - drivers for the evolution of eReporting b) SEIS and INSPIRE implementation - potentials of a technical framework to foster interoperability and harmonisation c) SEIS, SENSE and SOER - tools for deeper integration with EEA member countries

7. 3: Concept for a new UWWTD reporting, assessment and information system SIIF Principles Keep up to date (free to update their national systems when data become available) Look forward (from assessing non-compliance of the past to future actions on getting into compliance) Reduce burden (reducing reporting for areas in compliance, focusing on non-compliance) Develop step-by-step (development of a modular approach) • Focus on compliance(implementation/compliance) • Ensuretransparency(publicallyavailableandaccessible) • Decentralise (fromcentralisedtodistributedinformationsystems) • Self-assess(EU-MS carry out a compliance assessment themselves)

8. Consolidating the data models Tabular data: thematic attributes incl. compliance data Reference data / layers: Spatial data – INSPIRE conformance - UWWT plants, discharge points - agglomerations - sensitive areas Example: simplified reference data:

9. Data structure and IT system Guiding principles: Flexibility, decentral maintenance, more up-to-date data and information Implemented through: Common structure to use for integrated work in WISE > reference data, INSPIRE data models Use of standardised, distributed services > INSPIRE network services (WMS, WFS)

10. SIIF using distributed services – the simple picture holds relationship between National WFS services and EU base layers / EU SIIF node national SIIF nodes EU SIIF node UWWTD Data viewer 2nd generation WFS WFS WFS Broker / Harvester UWWTD Viewer integration view WFS WFS WMS WFS WFS REST WS Discomap REST services reference maps

11. SIIF using distributed services – the experiment part 1 holds relationship between National WFS services and EU base layers / EU SIIF node national SIIF nodes EU SIIF node WFS Broker / Harvester UWWTD Viewer integration view WFS WFS REST WS Discomap REST services reference maps

12. The European SIIF node – WFS/WMS „experiment“ – reference data EEA starts providing INSPIRE conformant network services http://inspire.discomap.eea.europa.eu/arcgis/rest/services

13. The European SIIF node – WFS/WMS „experiment“ – reference data UWWT plant info related catchment Info UWWT discharge point info ... and more

14. SIIF using distributed services – the experiment part 2 holds relationship between National WFS services and EU base layers / EU SIIF node national SIIF nodes EU SIIF node WFS FR data WFS Broker / Harvester HANDCODED UWWTD Viewer integration view WMS WFS WFS Discomap REST services reference maps

15. The National SIIF node - WFS „experiment“ – FR data 2: Next, we choose the dataset. In this case: ”http://inspire.discomap.eea.europa.eu:80/arcgis/services/SIIF_UWWTD_INSPIRE_WM/MapServer/WFSServe” After that, we click on ”Parameters...” button and a large form appears. On this form we have to choose the Feature type. 1: We choose the reader format ”WFS (Web Feature Service)”. Next we choose the dataset. The easiest way to do is to introduce the complete url with the requested feature in the WFS. For example: “http://www.uwwtd.oieau.fr:80/services/wfs?SERVICE=WFS&VERSION=1%2E1%2E0&REQUEST=DescribeFeatureType&TYPENAME=UWWTD%3AUWWTD%5FUrbanWasteWaterTreatmentPlant 3.- 6. .... Special configurations 7: One result .... As of 23.10.2013 - 15:00 - for trial WFS GetCapabilities http://www.uwwtd.oieau.fr/services/wfs/?service=WFS&version=1.1.0&request=GetCapabilities

16. Issues encountered Distinction compliance information / thematic data / (spatial) reference data needs more clarification Availablility of web services not a given > sustainable effort for national SIIF node? Configuration of WFS needs som expertise > extra guidance needed Cost of maintaining the system – who covers what?

17. Scenario 1 (full WFS / evt. WMS based) National SIIF node provides WFS in agreed format – covering all spatial data – both, thematic and INSPIRE data elements in the following alternative forms (i) complete – all data renewed at each update event (ii) updates only – a) the new data added, old data kept EU SIIF nodes loads full data from harvester/broker and updates regularily depending on option (i) or (ii) Parts of EU wide reference data set in EU SIIF node are replaced by National SIIF node data („cookie cutting approach“)

18. Scenario 1 (full WFS / evt. WMS based) MS SIIF node - full national spatial data incl. attribute data SDI (i) only or updated by (ii) EU SIIF node - reference data partly replaced / updated by country data EU SIIF node - EU reference data

19. Scenario 2 (hybrid) a) National SIIF node provides WFS in agreed format – covering only often changing tabular data and or additional compliance data – link through spatial object/ID National SIIF node provides updates to their reference data manually to Reportnet EU SIIF node updates EU reference data sets in regular intervals b) EU SIIF nodes loads this partial data – as done previously – into harvester/broker and updates regularily Reference data sets in EU SIIF node are complemented by National SIIF node data („add-on approach“), proper versioning is needed GREEN = current approach

20. Scenario 2 (hybrid) ID linkage a) ID linkage National SIIF node – partial / dynamic attribute data with enhanced QA/QCfunctions update x integrated version x and y b) Manual update – ETC/EEA QA/QC National SIIF node – more stable spatial reference data update y

21. Scenario 3 (current – extended Reportnet ) National node provides all data manually to Reportnet National node informs / Reportnet+ checks availability of new data The entire dataset is exchanged Only updates are been exchanged b) EU node manually updates member state data and EU reference data sets in regular intervals (maintain versioning) GREEN = current approach BLUE = Reportnet development scenario

22. Scenario 3 (extended Reportnet) MS node - full national spatial data incl. attribute Data (both i and ii option) provided into Reportnet EU node - Reportnet + Reportnet a) initial QA/QC functions b) Manual update – ETC/EEA QA/QC version n version n+1

23. Way forward Conclude on concept validation review lessons learnt from experiments (”mock-ups”) > evt. conduct more in-depth experiments Move from mock-up to first implementation steps > provide full data modelling (thematic vs. INSPIRE) > consider cost implications > build functional system prototype incl. pilot countries

24. Outline Some European policy framework a) SEIS and SIIFs - drivers for the evolution of eReporting b) SEIS and INSPIRE implementation - potentials of a technical framework to foster interoperability and harmonisation c) SEIS, SENSE and SOER - tools for deeper integration with EEA member countries

25. Where is INSPIRE on data specifications (slide from 6/2012) • The implementaion rules related Annex II and III specifications became very generic • For reporting data use cases, the principle was followed to keep thematic details outside • Many environmental themes are spread across Annex III specifications • Maintenance discussion still at the very beginning • Future support to codelists / registries of special interest to EEA

26. Supporting INSPIRE content/infrastructure (slide from 2012) • Provide selected environmental use cases to the data specification work • Contribute expertise on environmental data to the data specification work • Identify potential European reference data sets for maintenance • EEA SDI catalogue operational since late 2011

27. Identify and build INSPIRE data models, reference data, work on INSPIRE conformance Fresh water River basin (sub)districts Flood risk zones ... (tbc) Urban Waste Water Sensitive areas Agglomerations Plants and discharge points Marine Maps of marine (sub)regions Coastal and marine waterbodies European coastline Marine assessment units Noise tbc Natur and biodiversity CDDA (designated areas) ... Land Corine land cover Industrie Emmission Directives tbc Airquality 14 reference layers to be built and integrated

28. INSPIRE data themes and MSFD Presentation by Cecilia Silvestri, ISPRA at INSPIRE Conference 2013

29. Way forward • Working plan and principles • Stepwise implementation • „Learning by doing“ • Based on thematic interest and needs • Based on milestones coming from reporting obligations • Building data models, data sets and services • Involving EIONET in stages, establish action list for work with EIONET • Capacity building through EIONET NRC EIS and other networks (e.g. INSPIRE MIG) and tools (e.g INSPIRE FORUM)

30. Outline Some European policy framework a) SEIS and SIIFs - drivers for the evolution of eReporting b) SEIS and INSPIRE implementation - potentials of a technical framework to foster interoperability and harmonisation c) SEIS, SENSE and SOER - tools for deeper integration with EEA member countries

31. SENSE: Shortly recap the project aims • Support thematic experts in connecting existing indicator specifications and assessment at European, national and sub-national level • Support technical experts in advancing the technological infrastructure (continue to rely on Semantic Web/Linked Data technology) • Facilitate the collaboration between the two communities mentioned above in order to ensure the handshake between thematic desires and technical capabilities • Support input to SOER 2015 and beyond

32. SENSE: Shortly recap the project activities • Capacity Building: training on indicator concept and model, as well as infrastructural capabilities and capacities • Contribution to pan-European Reporting: thematic and technical mapping of indicator components, and agreement on the overall technical approach • Testing: further exploiting new possibilities for sharing SOE information. • Evaluation: evaluating the outcomes and viability of approaches used to support future SOE reporting

33. Relations to indicator work and SOER 2015 SYN A B C Synthesis & Derivatives Thematic SOE summaries Country-levelSOE summaries Global Megatrends Static information Synthesis report 11 GMT fiches 20-30 thematic fiches 39 country fiches 2012 2013 2014 FLIS IMS / CSI SENSE 3 indicator reports & stakeholder workshops 8 to 37 indicators 11 to 44 indicators 37 to 200 indicators Dynamic information FLIS ? Reportnet (incl. PDF, ...) Eionet(incl. SERIS) ? Signals 2015 and other derivatives

34. Feedback on replies to initial questions

35. SENSE3 as support project to SOER 2015 Currently in EEA and Eionet consultation Kick-off in September 2013 Scheduled next project steps

36. Draft set of indicators to work on* X * currently in NFP/EIONET consultation X – 3 out of 8 also tested in SENSE2 X X SENSE2 indicators SENSE3 indicators

37. Actual situation Indicator availability and structure in countries extremely heterogenious (finding from SENSE2 project) A common indicator definition is pending (maybe even unlikely) > EEA needs to come forward with indicator needs for SOER2015 (now in progress)* Key interest of countries lies in capacity building Readiness of some countries to participate in “experiments” Suggested experiments a) An enhanced SENSE2-type indicator submission using slightly revised schemas b) An enhanced RDF-based indicator exchange based on VOID/RDF allowing the usage of attractive visualisation tools c) A metadata-based (non-RDF) submission of (indicator related) data using the DCAT format as used in the EU open data portal Situation and Way forward

38. Summary Thank you for your attention and for a fruitful discussion