OUTCOMES OF THE 2016/17 CAeM GLOBAL SURVEY World Meteorological Organization Working together in weather, climate and water WMO OUTCOMES OF THE 2016/17 CAeM GLOBAL SURVEY (Minsk, Belarus, 15-16 June 2016) Olga Petrova, Expert in International Issues Aviamettelecom of Roshydromet

Background Global Survey-2016/17 Conducted by the Commission for Aeronautical Meteorology (CAeM) Geared by ET-GOV & ET-CCP To involve all the WMO Members (190 Members) Within the period October 2016 – February 2017 Similar Survey done 10 years ago

Background Objective To build a picture of the current (2016/17) global/regional landscape, since: Meteorological service to international air navigation looks to evolve in line with air transport modernization programmes; Advances in science and technology, evolving user requirements, drivers for change, changing business models and governance methodologies, emerging challenges and opportunities, as well as increased competition and partnership become obvious. - To identify a picture of the institutional and governance arrangements that exist, including the application of meteorological authority at a national level - To examine the responsibilities and capabilities of the various parties involved in aeronautical meteorological service provision

Background Format Global Survey: Made available as an online questionnaire, using the Survey Monkey platform, in October 2016; Remained open for responses until February 2017; Comprised almost 50 questions, structured around the following main topic areas: Contact information and representation National legislation/regulation Institutional arrangements Organizational aspects Compliance monitoring Cost recovery Technical capacity Challenges

Background Responsibilities Global Survey: Launched by the CAeM ET-GOV; The CAeM ET-CCP was tasked to assist ET-GOV by: Inviting appropriate MET expert/experts in the Members’ organizations to complete the online questionnaire within the time limit set by the Secretariat; Giving proper instructions, when necessary, on how to make the questionnaire complete, since only complete questionnaires were counted by WMO.

Response rate Total responding rate Reached 92% (174 of 190 Members for incomplete and complete questionnaires); Out of which 171 out of 174 surveys (90% of 190 Members) were completed.

Response rate Regional Associations The Regional Association (RA) responding rate (RR), complete rate (CR) and not-started (NS) number within each region are: RA I (47/53) - RR 89% / CR 87% / NS 6 RAII (29/34) - RR 85% / CR 85% / NS 5 RAIII (12/12) - RR 100% / CR 100% / NS 0 RAIV (21/22) - RR 95% / CR 91% / NS 1 RAV (19/21) - RR 90% / CR 86% / NS 2 RAVI (46/49) - RR 94% / CR 94% / NS 3 All WMO Regional Associations (RAs) exceeded an original target response rate of 80%.

Response rate Regional Associations

Response rate Regional Associations

Response rate Contributing factors Such a high response rate was achieved through: Concerted efforts of the ET-CCP/ET-GOV to reach out to Members; The network of focal points established by ET-CCP/ET-GOV beforehand and continuously updated; The on-line questionnaire developed by the Secretariat to facilitate regular monitoring of the response rate, reminders and responses to queries from the focal points seeking clarification.

Analysis of the responses Brief analysis Commenced by ET-GOV with the assistance of the Secretariat in March 2017; Aims to identify the key findings and recommendations which can inform WMO constituent bodies and the parties concerned, including the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and International Air Transport Association (IATA), of the global and regional landscape in aeronautical meteorological service provision in 2016/17.

Analysis of the responses TOPIC AREA 1. Contact information and representation INITIAL FINDINGS The response rate in all RAs exceeded expectations The importance of up-to-date subject matter expertise/focal points of contact cannot be underestimated AMSPs, NMHSs, Met Authorities, government ministries and national civil aviation authorities were all strong represented in the survey response

Analysis of the responses TOPIC AREA 2. National legislation/ regulation INITIAL FINDINGS 80% of responding States/Territories have some form of legal/ regulatory framework The ICAO/WMO regulatory framework is strongly reflected in a majority of responding States/Territories The ICAO functions for Aeronautical Meteorological Station (AMS), Aeronautical Meteorological Office (AMO) and Meteorological Watch Office (MWO) are designated by law and/or the regulatory in 80% of responding States/Territories

Analysis of the responses TOPIC AREA 3. Institutional arrangements INITIAL FINDINGS The notion of ‘Meteorological Authority’ is not applied uniformly by all responding States/Territories The National Civil Aviation Authority (NCAA) is the regulator in half of all responding States/Territories The National Meteorological and Hydrological Service (NMHS) is the regulator in 20% of responding States/Territories The NCAA is responsible for performing oversight in half of responding States/Territories The NMHS is responsible for performing oversight in 20% of responding States/Territories Functional separation between service provision, regulation and oversight exists in a majority of responding States/Territories Where the aeronautical meteorological service provider (AMSP) is not the NMHS, there is no formal cooperation arrangement for data sharing, cost sharing, education and training, etc. in 60% of responding States/Territories Other formal cooperative arrangements between the AMSP and other entities exist only in half of all responding States/Territories

Analysis of the responses TOPIC AREA 4. Organizational aspects INITIAL FINDINGS - A majority (>90%) of responding States/Territories with MWO responsibilities serve no more than 5 flight information regions (FIR) - Bilateral arrangements for the delegation of MWO responsibilities from one State/Territory to another occurs only in a minority of instances - A majority (70%) of responding States/Territories have no more than five AMOs - NMHS provide the AMO functions in half of all instances - One central AMO served all aerodromes in a State/Territory in 30% of responding States/Territories - All AMO functions are provided locally at all aerodromes in 30% of responding States/Territories - A majority (>70%) of States/Territories have AMS that serve no more than 5 international airports - NMHS provide the AMS functions in half of all instances - In a majority (>90%) of instances, the ownership of the met observational equipment at the aerodrome is wholly or partly under the responsibility of the AMS - In a minority (5%) of instances, met observational data from an AMS is not being made available to the NMHS, either for free or for a charge

Analysis of the responses TOPIC AREA 5. Compliance monitoring INITIAL FINDINGS In a majority (>80%) of responding States/Territories the AMSP has a full or partially implemented quality management system (QMS) Where a QMS is implemented, it is certified and conforms to: ISO 9001:2008 in 80% of all instances ISO 9001:2015 in only 1% of all instances A competency assessment programme for aeronautical met personnel (AMP) exists only in 70% of responding States/Territories Competency assessment of all aeronautical met observers (AMO) within an AMSP has been completed in just over half of all cases Competency assessment of all aeronautical met forecasters (AMF) within an AMSP has been completed in half of all cases Where competency assessment of AMO and AMF has been completed, a majority (>80%) of AMSP conduct reassessment at least every 3 years The WMO qualification standard for AMF has been completed in about 40% of responding States/Territories

Analysis of the responses TOPIC AREA 6. Cost recovery INITIAL FINDINGS Aeronautical met service provision in a majority (nearly 60%) of responding States/Territories is wholly funded by the government budget, while cost recovery (in whole) accounts for about 30% and commercial (in whole) less than 5% En-route charges and terminal charges are the main mechanisms of recovering costs for aeronautical met service provision where cost recovery is applied Only 30% of responding States/Territories include a portion of the core cost for met facilities or services in the cost recovery arrangements for aeronautical met service provision

Analysis of the responses TOPIC AREA 7. Technical capacity INITIAL FINDINGS AUTO METAR and AUTO SPECI with no manual intervention are produced in less than 20% of responding States/Territories METAR and SPECI without the aid of automated weather observing equipment are produced in 20% of responding States/Territories Where automated observations are not yet produced, almost half of all responding States/Territories have no plans to migrate to fully automated aerodrome observations, while the other half have plans to do so A majority (>80%) of responding States/Territories do utilize NWP output and nowcasting products (fully or to some extent) in the forecast production process, including for warnings, while a minority (less than 20%) do not Only 70% of responding States/Territories conduct forecast verification Aircraft-based observations are used in the forecast production process only by 30% or responding States/Territories Almost half of all States/Territories with MWO responsibilities conduct no form of cross-border SIGMET coordination

Analysis of the responses TOPIC AREA 8. Challenges INITIAL FINDINGS - The primary challenges facing AMSPs are: • Automation of aerodrome observations • Maintenance and calibration of observing equipment • Qualification of AMF • Migration to XML/IWXXM • Meeting demands for advanced products and services - Secondary challenges include QMS, cost recovery, competency assessment, SIGMET quality, and advanced met information and services for the terminal area

Communication and follow-up A more comprehensive analysis, containing recommendations, will be communicated to WMO constituent bodies and all parties concerned through online resources and other reference materials.

Thank you! Any questions?