1. /foredr/tfmm2 Nor wegian Institute for Air Research www.nilu.no Regional monitoring programmes National programmes European Monitoring and Evaluation Programme (EMEP) Working Group on Effects (ICP-F, ICP-IM, ICP-V) World Meteorological Organisation - Global Atmosphere Watch (WMO-GAW) (6 WDCs) Marine Conventions (OSPAR, HELCOM) Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP) EEA (EiO, EIONET) North American Programmes (CAPMON, NADP, NTN) Acid Deposition Network in East Asia (EANET) Impacts project (China) others

2. /foredr/tfmm2 Nor wegian Institute for Air Research www.nilu.no EMEP-CCC tasks Recommendation of methods, preparation of manuals, Field and laboratory intercomparisons, Data and metadata collection, validation and storage, Evaluate QA/QC-procedures Data interpretation, –data reports and joint reports –comparison with CTM-estimates –deposition and exposure estimates Representativeness, Development of network and measurement programme, All in close cooperation with parties, the other EMEP Centres, external bodies and the research community.

3. /foredr/tfmm2 Nor wegian Institute for Air Research www.nilu.no Databases handled by NILU National programmes (remote, rural, urban, hot-spot) EMEP –also TOR2, PM-Nordic OSPAR HELCOM AMAP WDCSO3 (WMO-GAW) NADIR –CALVAL (ESA - ENVISAT) –Data handling for research projects e.g. DG- RES.

4. /foredr/tfmm2 Nor wegian Institute for Air Research www.nilu.no How data flows Data are reported through many channels; –by the person doing the measurements (official) –by independent scientists (unformal) –by or through a national reference institution (official) –by or through appointed contact person (NFP)(official but often not responsible for the actual measurement) –by or through official body (non scientific) –exchange between databases or similar Varies upon compound, site or network Varies upon to which database data are reported for Experience show that the organisation of dataflow within countries are poor Joint validation, correction and re-submission crucial points where good procedures are essential

5. /foredr/tfmm2 Nor wegian Institute for Air Research www.nilu.no The site “NN” story

6. /foredr/tfmm2 Nor wegian Institute for Air Research www.nilu.no Reporting of ozone data from Norway

7. /foredr/tfmm2 Nor wegian Institute for Air Research www.nilu.no Needs attention; Multiple storage –inconsistencies Joint validation with data originator –by whom, –how are corrections handled Which are the official data? Route of data flow –Data suppliers often not identical –Formats –Deadlines

8. /foredr/tfmm2 Nor wegian Institute for Air Research www.nilu.no Official data and its quality - a recent example from one site

9. /foredr/tfmm2 Nor wegian Institute for Air Research www.nilu.no Difficulties with “mega” databases Objectives may partly be different Many organisations with different requirements Rigid and low flexibility Restriction on data-use, permits, acknowledgements Large resources required “Ownership” to and knowledge of data may decrease Documentation and need for metadata differs Quality differs

10. /foredr/tfmm2 Nor wegian Institute for Air Research www.nilu.no Key reasons to harmonise Methodologies Algorithms Software QA/QC criteria, metadata Easy access (use of portals?) Capacity building Network improvement

11. /foredr/tfmm2 Nor wegian Institute for Air Research www.nilu.no Conclusions Harmonisation can be beneficial in many ways –cost savings, better utilisation, more data, improved knowledge Several steps have been made Several challenges to be resolved Flexibility decreases Cost may rather increase (?) Is the potential for savings larger by other means ? –cost of running sites, harmonisation of networks, –“the ICP Forest example”