Session 4: Working Groups Introduction Committee on Earth Observation Satellites Session 4: Working Groups Introduction Steve Volz, CEOS SIT Chair National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Mark Dowell, CEOS Chair Team European Commission (COM) CEOS SIT-33 Session 4, Agenda Item 4.1 Boulder, CO, USA 24 – 25 April 2018

Session Objective and Questions OBJECTIVE: To support tangible and sustainable outcomes from CEOS Working Groups by providing an opportunity to air key issues, identify barriers to progress, and discuss ways to overcome those barriers. Reflect on findings from the recent WG questionnaires and telecons. KEY SESSION QUESTIONS: How does CEOS best ensure continuity and sustainability of WGs? What outputs are the WGs delivering? What additional outputs are needed or could they deliver? What obstacles are being raised by the WGs? And can they be resolved? If so, how? Can and how can, the work of the WGs support the VCs, as well as current and future CEOS Work Plan and GEO Work Programme items?

Strategic Directions - VCs Ensuring tangible outcomes from, and sustainable commitment to, our VCs and WGs Maximizing the value of their output for CEOS objectives (e.g., ECVs and SDGs) and for individual CEOS Agency objectives Ensuring the necessary support for our existing thematic teams to flourish and to deliver Clearer overall CEOS observing system assessment and desired observing strategies – and known contribution from each CEOS Entity Same as VC STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS AND PARTNERSHIPS FOR CEOS DISCUSSION PAPER – SIT-33

Preparation Process Updated status on reality of each group in 2018 - sought frank assessments from leadership. VC and WG Telecons with SIT Chair Team Dedicated Questionnaire to VCs and WGs and Former VC and WG Leadership Analysis of 2018-2020 CEOS Work Plan for Tangible Outputs Corresponding Reporting Template for SIT-33 Same as VC

Working Group Questionnaire - Process All WGs asked to respond to 10 questions (all responded and three former Chairs responded) Effort to try and assemble a common information set to take stock of the current status of each WG Gather views on the suitability of the current WG reporting and feedback structure within CEOS Determine how to best highlight the significant contributions of the WGs to the CEOS community Identify shortcomings, best practices, and successes across WGs. Same as VC

WG Responses - Process

Working Group Questionnaire Key Statements “We are motivated to integrate our different Agency assets and the values of them for users so that they aren’t as confused by our many assets and can make better decisions with EO more efficiently.” “WGXX promotes collaboration in the development of systems and services that manage and supply Earth Observation data.” “The hope of course is that we enable the global space agency community to provide the right data for many…applications and help the …agencies in making the right plans for continued and additional measurements that may fall between the cracks in individual agency planning.” “WGXX, as the other CEOS working groups, relies for its activities on a best effort contribution from participating agencies. Additional resources are committed by some agencies to support development and operations of key CEOS infrastructure…ensuring the availability of these resources in \the mid-long-term might be a challenge…as there is no plan or commitment ensuring this..” “One issue is that WGXX members tend to be active within specific satellite projects in their agencies. Collaborations with other projects tends to distract from their primary efforts” Non-Attributional

Working Group Questionnaire Key Statements (con’t) “WGXX membership is not well connected to the CEOS Plenary. Efforts to incorporate other WGs and VCs at the meeting have helped but it has still been difficult to get a broader connection between the membership and what is happening at the SIT and Plenary levels.” “Maybe someone from CEOS leadership could sometimes participate to WGXX plenary meetings to have a better insight of the WG activities and provide suggestions from an “external” point of view.” “CEOS leadership could help in highlighting benefits deriving from participation to WGXX.” “Structure of the WG is kept lean, no subgroups just specific activities that are carried by whole group.” “Subgroup organization provides an opportunity to incorporate efforts and results from subgroup members that are not members of a CEOS agency.” “Chinese and Japanese engagement would probably make the biggest impact.” Non-Attributional

Group Health and Viability SIT Assessment Health of leadership, contribution and engagement from CEOS Agencies, meeting processes and active link to CEOS were all looked at All WGs demonstrate vibrant activity, participation, and contributions to the CEOS Work Plan

Group Health and Viability SIT Assessment WG activity appears healthy Identification of Vice Chairs sometimes an issue – all WGs currently have Chairs and Vice Chairs

VC/WG Outputs Cited in 2018- 2020 CEOS Work Plan NOTE: not all Deliverables are created equal! WGs have well established Deliverables within CEOS WP Ocean VCs have noticeably fewer Deliverables (nil for OST) COVERAGE initiative has four Work Plan Deliverables that span Ocean VCs Ocean VCs also cited in Blue Planet Deliverables For comparison, ad hoc teams like GFOI and SDGs have ~3 Deliverables each in the Work Plan Same as VC

WGs Asked to Provide Following Info to SIT (template) Linkages to CEOS Work Plan (e.g., action numbers), open SIT and Plenary Actions Indication of required decisions and discussion points Team Achievements and Planned Outcomes – Major past achievements/planned future outputs that contribute to global observing architecture and national planning purposes e.g., datasets, products, standards, architecture studies, gap analyses Synergies Amongst Teams (e.g. WG-VC, WG-WG, other) Obstacles/barriers to progress and suggestions on how to overcome Sustainable Commitment Identify the active agencies in your team and whether this implies a viable team for your objectives How frequently does your team physically meet? Are their any obstacles to the future viability of your team meeting its objectives? Proactive Consideration of Plenary and SIT TWS Deliverables and Discussion Items Same as VC

30th Plenary Actions Plenary Action 31-01 Due Date

Discussion Seeds – for Later For each entity, what action is necessary to ensure the necessary leadership, engagement and connection to the CEOS objectives? Should we (can we) achieve greater specificity in tangible outcomes from each entity (as appropriate)? Is more direction required to maximize the value of VC/WG outputs for CEOS objectives and in support of individual CEOS agency objectives (like planning processes)? How realistic are these ambitions given operating realities – and what further support would be needed in each case? Same as VC

Session 4 Agenda Session 4: WGs 4.1, 10 min: Session Introduction (Steve Volz, Mark Dowell) 4.2, 10 min: WGCapD (Nancy Searby) 4.3, 10 min: WGCV (Kurt Thome) 4.4, 20 min: WGDisasters (Simona Zoffoli) 4.5, 10 min: WGISS (Mirko Albani) 4.6, 15 min: WGClimate (Jörg Schulz) 3.10/4.7, 30 min: Session 3 / 4 Virtual Constellations and Working Groups Wrap-up Sustaining activity, WG framework support to VCs, Support to agency mission planning, Broader observing strategy, 2018 activities