G6.06

G6.06a) Lack of dedicated funding for fast-delivery of targeted observations for satellite validation/calibration

G6.06b) Lack of structural funding for station maintenance, data acquisition and initial analysis

Gap Detailed Description

Several applications (e.g., validation efforts) and services (e.g., Copernicus) take the availability of observational non-satellite data for granted and only support the better access / use / harmonisation of the data. There is still a lack of structural funding for the station maintenance, data acquisition and initial analysis.

Networks like NDACC and ACTRIS (and to a lesser extent TCCON) have been developed through the coordination of ongoing individual observations with similar objectives and implementation methodologies. The coordination has been formalised as a network with clearly outlined objectives, and guidelines for the implementation of the observations by the individual partners; these guidelines include protocols and directives for the observation hardware and operating procedures, the data analysis and archiving, the data quality control, etc. However, the organisation of the network does not imply any coordinated funding for the partners. Therefore, the partners have to search for their own funding, often with the national funding agencies, to comply with the network protocols on a best effort basis. Today, it turns out to be difficult to find the necessary funding, and even more so when it comes to structural funding. Any additional requirement requires additional resources.

For satellite validation, fast delivery of the independent non-satellite network data is often requested by the satellite agencies. This generally is not foreseen in the network protocols and cannot be afforded by the network partners without additional dedicated funding. It turns out to be difficult to find the funding authority that is willing to provide the necessary resources: in several cases, the funding authorities defer the responsibility to provide the funding to one another.

Activities within GAIA-CLIM related to this gap

The harmonisation tasks in WP2 will, in the end, support the partners to develop commonly agreed data analysis tools – which can then be more easily automated and distributed among the network partners – therefore minimizing the individual efforts by each partner.

This will however not completely remedy the funding gap.

Gap Remedy / Remedies

Specific remedy proposed:

The satellite agencies should provide the additional resources needed to satisfy the fast delivery and specific requirements. However, this does not completely solve the problem, because it only helps if the basic support for maintaining the observations compliant with the network protocols is available. As long as the basic network observations are not considered ‘mandatory’, as is for example the case for air quality measurements in the frame of the national environmental reporting requirements, there will always be funding gaps.

Measurable outcome of success:          

EU opens discussion with Member States and ESA.Awareness of the various funding agencies for the structuralfunding problem and high-level agreements among themabout each other’s responsibilities for funding the non-satellite ‘routine’ network observations and for funding the additional specific requirements (e.g., fast-delivery, specific format, etc.)

Indicative cost estimate:                      

Low

Relevance:                                          

Guarantee long-term continuation of non-satellite observations withinternationally recognised quality and relevance for air quality, climate, and the ozone layer, and enable delivery of the data for validation applications (satellite, Copernicus services, downstreamapplications, …) with specific requirements such as fast delivery.

Time bounds:                                     

Initiate high-level discussions within GAIA-CLIM timeframe – with outcomes on the mid-term.

Gap Risks to Non-Resolution