1 / 28

Expertise for the non-specialist: delivering forest-related information to non-foresters

This workshop explores the challenges and opportunities in delivering forest-related information to non-foresters, highlighting case studies and discussing ways to ensure optimal use of available data. It also addresses issues of intervention, explanation, and training that fall on the library and information sector.

Download Presentation

Expertise for the non-specialist: delivering forest-related information to non-foresters

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. Expertise for the non-specialist: delivering forest-related information to non-foresters Chair and organiser: Roger Mills, Oxford University Library Services Co-ordinator, IUFRO Research Group 6.03.00 Information Services and Knowledge Organization

  2. Forest Research • Projects over many decades have produced a wealth of data, published and unpublished • Now finding uses in other disciplines • environmental management • climate change assessment • biodiversity conservation • economic planning • economics • politics • social science • law • Easy to access with modern technologies • data frequently needs processing or harmonisation to make it usable • Raises many issues of intervention, explanation and training which fall partly or wholly on the library and information sector

  3. Today’s workshop • Highlight some of the issues • Present case studies • Discuss what we can do to ensure that users unfamiliar with the forestry subject area can make best use of available data • Make a ‘wish list’ for future action – in IUFRO, IAALD, other fora

  4. Trees grow slowly • Not like cabbages – generations needed for controlled study • No equivalent to Rothamsted experiments – started in 1843 and still going • Majority of forest studies carried out for a particular end and data collection not primary purpose

  5. Data gathering • Traditionally: • Field trials • Gather data • Analyse on paper • Publish conclusions • Data stays in a drawer

  6. Early computing • Data on tapes, punched cards etc • Physically managed by central computing units • Data preserved though may not be fully catalogued or readable long term

  7. Modern computing • Gathered on portable devices • Analysed on PC • Stored on removable media • No central responsibility, existence known only to researcher • Unknown, unreachable, unreadable • So data is recompiled

  8. Forest data • Time dependent, not repeatable • Time series important: significant variations may occur over relatively short periods • Essential to preserve all historical data we can

  9. Impact of web • Preserving data in a mediated library allows delivery with health warnings • Make it web-accessible leaves open to misinterpretation • But harmonised data useful in many non-forestry contexts • Problem lies in the harmonisation

  10. DBH • Diameter at Breast Height • How high is your breast? • 1.3m (4’3”) (USA etc) • 1.4m (4’6”) (UK etc) • 1.5m (for ornamental trees). • Decimal conversions also introduce variations: 4’6” is more accurately 1.37m.

  11. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing • Adding stats for DBH from different areas without conversion will be misleading • Can lead to bad decision making • Eg in climatology, basing estimates of carbon incorporation on forest volume

  12. What’s that got to do with librarians? • Aim to make data readily available to all who can use it, without restriction or censorship • Internet helps, but aids unintentional – or intentional – misuse • Answer: better metadata and user education

  13. GFIS • Data harmonization originally an aim of Global Forest Information Service • Not achieved because of manpower required to generate extra metadata defining conversion requirements, or just warning of incompatibilities • Most data not compiled for international use, no funding to provide metadata at source

  14. EU to the rescue • 1989 regulations to set up European forest and Communication System • “well-structured and relaiable forest information at European level” • NEFIS: Network for a European Forest Information Service 2003-5 • http://www.efi.int/portal/project/nefis

  15. Into operation • European Forest Information and Communication Platform (EFICP) • http://eficp-info.jrc.it/ • Long gestation common • Political requirement • Development of prototype • Study problems • Development of production system • Now 19 years since original Regulation

  16. Use it or lose it • Communicate existence of system • Make it easy to use and reliable • Must save user’s time • NEFIS project illuminates problems • Many relate to librarians’ traditionbal expertise • Terminology • Classification • Quality assessment • Searchability • Interoperability • High-quality metadata

  17. Iterative development • Distribute technology favours new uses/users for existing data • Infrastructure needs: • Advanced spatio-temporal data collection and information management • Dissemination and fusion of heterogeneous distributed information • Sophisticated analysis, modeling and visualization of information • Designed to outlive current software

  18. Cf Bioinformatics • Single information system holds: • Sequencing data • Tools for annotation • Tools for analysis • Publications resulting from analysis • E.g. NCBI http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/

  19. An integrated system for forestry? • Much wider variety of data types • Much wider community of users • And of technical infrastructure • NCBI model bridges data acquisition, analysis and curation • Publishing models increasingly incorporate raw data source with peer-reviewed research

  20. Publishing data • Author complies dataset containing forest cover statistics spanning multiple jurisdictions and century-long time series • Data acquisition and harmonisation methods recorded in metadata • Publishes package so data remains available long-term for use or further analysis by others, retrievable alongside journal articels

  21. Open Access • Non-subscription environment to ensure wide availability • Requires new approach to resaerch funding • And long-term funding for data curation • That role likely to fall on library community • Business and technical expertise in archiving • Developing and supporting integration and interoperability tools • Online repositories

  22. Developing standards • NEFIS datasets too different to achieve interoperability • Demonstrated need • EU European Interoperability Framework 2004 • Technical • Semantic [precise meaning] • Organizational • Last two most challenging

  23. Semantic interoperability • Descriptive metadata • Controlled vocabularies • Ontologies • User-nominated terms – requires editor • Tagging • Quality • Accuracy • Logical consistency • Completeness • Positional accuracy • Lineage • Non-censorious indication – ‘quality report’

  24. Data location • Provider’s server • Or central? • If local, owner responsible for metadata management • Interoperability requires metadata on: • Protocols for query translation • Mapping of filed labels • Field contents • Backround information • Associated files • Realed IPR • Required executables • Language and character set • Access control mechanisms • Standards to be agreed so all new compilations and reloaded legacy data have this information

  25. NEFIS Demonstrator • No data harmonization • Showed feasability of retrieving and analysing data for a single request to multiple servers in multiple countries • Comprises: • Resource discovery toolkit – searches metadata • Remote search demonstrator – managing data retrieval form multiple sources • Visualisation toolkit (VTK) – naïve and expert modelling of retrieved data

  26. EDA • Exploratory Data Analysis • Unbiased examination of data to detect patterns, trends, relationships rather than answer preconceived question • Mirrors bioinformatics approach • NEFIS data specially prepared • Adoption of common standards could allow development of VTK with no need for human intervention in preparing data

  27. Librarians are key • In: • Curating data • Developing and supporting implementation of standards • Ensuring ready access to data • Promoting use • Universal Data Control – UDC… • It’s classification, Captain, but not as we know it… or maybe it is! • So let’s do it….

More Related