Report of the Science and Technology Committee

1. Report of theScience and Technology Committee GEO Plenary VIII Istanbul, Turkey 16 November 2011

2. Target 4:Ensure full interaction and engagement of relevant science and technology communities […] enabling the research community to fully benefit from GEOSS STC Objectives GEO Terms of Reference • Solicit inputs from S&T community • Ensure S&T integrity and soundness of GEO Work Plans • Monitor and review output of GEO Work Plans • Help identify experts to participate in GEO working groups • Facilitate linkages and partnership with relevant research programmes and organizations willing to contribute to GEO

3. The Science and Technology Roadmap • Accepted by GEO at 6th Plenary Session (Washington D.C., 2009) • STC overseeing Roadmap implementation • Much of the work taken up by Tasks ST-09-01 / ST-09-02 • New Workplan places Roadmap implementation under Task ID-03 Recommendation 1: Oversightforimplementingthe S&T Roadmap shouldbeincluded in the Terms of Reference of a relevant bodyunderanynew Work Plan Management, e.g. the „InstitutionsandDevelopment“ Implementation Board.

4. Main items to report on • Scientific Review of the GEO Work Plan • Development of a GEO Label • Showing GEOSS at Work • Catalyzing research and development funding • Review of Work Plan Tasks • Development of a Gap Analysis Strategy • Development of a GEOSS Citation Standard

5. Scientific Review of the GEO Work Plan WP Review GEO Label GEOSS@Work R&D Funding Task Reviews Gap Analysis Strategy Citation Standard • STC mandated to “Ensure scientific and technological integrity and soundness of GEO Annual Work Plans” • Review report “GEO and Science” of WP2009-2011 prepared under Task ST-09-01 • Report informed development of new Work Plan • STC will develop concept by end of 2011 • Members and PO invited to support process by providing (limited) resources Recommendation 2: GEO Work Plan 2012-2015 shouldbereviewedforscientificsoundness.

6. Development of a GEO Label WP Review GEO Label GEOSS@Work R&D Funding Task Reviews Gap Analysis Strategy Citation Standard • GEO Label • helps users to assess quality and reliability of a GEO component or service • presents an incentive for providers to register • Work ongoing in ST-09-02, mainly through EGIDA, GeoViQua • Progress on conceptual development • Test implementations planned for 2012

7. Showing GEOSS at Work WP Review GEO Label GEOSS@Work R&D Funding Task Reviews Gap Analysis Strategy Citation Standard • Compelling examples of GEOSS benefits to S&T applications can support engagement of – and contributions by – scientific communities • Task ST-09 has compiled a set of showcase examples: http://www.geo-tasks.org/geoss_portfolio/ • Continues to be updated

8. Catalyzing Research and Development Funding WP Review GEO Label GEOSS@Work R&D Funding Task Reviews Gap Analysis Strategy Citation Standard • Aim to make R&D resources available for GEOSS by linking to major R&D programmes • Task ST-09-01 established links to • International Group of Funding Agencies for Global Change Research (IGFA) • Belmont Forum (“Council of Principals for IGFA”) • OECD • Issues: • (How) Can programmes support GEOSS implementation?

9. Review of Work Plan Tasks for Societal Benefits WP Review GEO Label GEOSS@Work R&D Funding Task Reviews Gap Analysis Strategy Citation Standard • STC has conducted “SBA-Reviews” since 2009: • Health (Nov 2009) • Disasters (Mar 2010) • Water (May 2010) • Biodiversity and Ecosystems (Sep 2010) • Agriculture (Apr 2011) • Assessed process in Sep 2011 Recommendation3: Plenaryrecognizestheneedfor a processthatallows Components in the Tasks ofthe GEO Work Plan toraisescienceortechnologicalbarriersto a higherlevelofvisibilityandidentifiestheresponsiblebody in GEO.

10. The need for a strategic GEOSS Gap Analysis WP Review GEO Label GEOSS@Work R&D Funding Task Reviews Gap Analysis Strategy Citation Standard • Proposal for Earth Observation Capacity Assessment reported to GEO-VII • Working Group presented report to 21st Executive Committee. Recommended comprehensive process. • Failed to attract consensus support in the Executive Committee. Referred to “post-2015 process”. Recommendation4: Plenarytasksthe post-2015 Working Group, oranothergroupwith a similarmandate, withpreparing a decisionby GEO on whatgapanalysesareneededforinformingthefuturedevelopmentof GEO. The findingsofthe Gap Analysis Working Group wouldinformthisdecision.

11. Developing a GEOSS Citation Standard WP Review GEO Label GEOSS@Work R&D Funding Task Reviews Gap Analysis Strategy CitationStandard • Data Citation important issue for • Recognizing contribution of providers • Establish transparency of sources • Active discussion in many fora(IPY, DataCite, ESIP, ICSU) • STC report proposes GEO position statement (Annex) Recommendation5: GEO shouldclearlypositionitselftocallforfullrecognitionofdatasourcesused in scientificinvestigationsandanyapplicationsandservicesbuildingsignificantly on thesesources.

12. Summary of recommendations • Includeoversightforimplementingthe S&T Roadmap in Terms of Reference of a relevant body. • GEO Work Plan 2012-2015 shouldbereviewedforscientificsoundness. • MaintainprocessforTasks to S&T barriers(„SBA Review“). • Assignresponsibilityforgapanalyses. • Acceptpositionstatementcallingforfullrecognitionofdatasources.