Prepared by: Connolly, N. and Cummins, V. University College Cork Ireland

USER REQUIREMENTS FOR

EARTH OBSERVATION INFORMATION AND DATA FOR

MARINE AND COASTAL APPLICATIONS January 2002 Prepared for the BOOST Consortium, Brest, France.

1

Contents Page 1. Introduction 4 2. The Need for End User Studies 6 3. Approaches to User Requirements Analysis 8 4. Issues with using EO data 17 5. User Groups Classified by Thematic Area 26 6. Case Studies and Relevant EU Projects 30 7. User Requirements for Synthetic Aperture Radar 36 8. Products and Markets 45 References 61 Appendices Appendix A: End User Questionnaire Based Around Open Ended Questions 63 Appendix B End User Questionnaire with SAR Emphasis Based on Multi Choice 71 Cover Image On the upper right hand corner of this image two straight black lines originating from oil released from traveling ships are visible. Extrapolating along these black lines, leads to two bright spots being hit. Presumably they represent the ships that have released the oil.

2

List of Acronyms ARGOSS Advisory and Research Group on Geo Observation Systems and Services AVHRR Advanced Very High Resolution Radar BCRS Netherlands Remote Sensing Board CEO Centre for Earth Observation CLIOsat Climatologies Oceaniques Satellitaires COASTMON Metocean and Coastal Zone Monitoring in Harbour Regions using Satellite Radar COLORS Coastal Region Long-term measurements for Color Remote Sensing development and

validation DEM Digital Elevation Model DG Directorate General EEA European Environment Agency EO Earth Observation ESA European Space Agency EU European Union EuroGOOS European Global Ocean Observation System FAME Forest Assessment and Monitoring Environment Group FAO Food and Agriculture Organisation GIS Geographical Information Systems GLOSS Global Level of Sea Surface Programme GOOS Global Ocean Observation System HELCOM Helsinki Commission – (Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission) HNDAs High Natural Dispersion Areas ICAMS Integrated Coastal Analysis and Monitoring System ICES International Council for the Exploration of the Seas ICZM Integrated Coastal Zone Management IOC Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission IR Infra Red IT Information Technology JCOMM Joint WMO-IOC Technical Commission for Oceanography JRC Joint Research Council MARSAIS Marine SAR Analysis and Interpretation System MODIS Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer NGOs Non Governmental Organisations NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NODC National Oceanographic Data Centre NWS North West Shelf OCTS Ocean Colour and Temperature Scanner OSPAR Oslo Paris Convention (Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the

North-East Atlantic) RADARSAT Radar Satellite SAI Space Applications Institute SAR Synthetic Aperture Radar SeaWiFS Sea Viewing Wide Field of View Sensor SME Small to medium enterprise SST Sea Surface Temperature SWOT Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats

3

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION Background Currently, operational information on the marine environment is derived largely from sparse in situ measurements, local models and in some cases from airborne remote sensing and satellite sensor data. Satellite remote sensing is providing an increasingly important contribution to ocean and coastal monitoring and forecasting. Since the 1970s the number and variety of oceanographic sensors that have been flown in space has dramatically increased (including: infra red radiometers for Sea Surface Temperature (SST); passive microwave radiometers for sea ice extent and concentration; microwave scatterometers for surface wind; radar altimeters for sea surface height and wave height; synthetic aperture radars for ocean wave spectrum and detailed sea ice conditions and motion; and instruments for measuring ocean colour). Improvements in availability, sensor range and resolution of earth observation (EO) data (both airborne and satellite) provide a practical and valuable tool for integrated coastal zone management (ICZM) (Durand et al; 1999). A vision for enhanced coastal zone management involves the use of earth observation based technologies in integrated management systems, where EO products will be more and more integrated into intelligent systems capable of assimilating and manipulating different types of data to produce what is requested by environmental, coastal and ocean resource managers. The European Union (EU) Demonstration Programme on ICZM highlighted the lack of awareness amongst ICZM practitioners of many technologies, data and information available to them (Doody, et al; 1998). However, the level of use of EO data in ICZM is increasing, which indicates that there is a greater awareness of EO data in the so-called user community. Users include government departments and agencies, small to medium enterprises (SMEs), and research institutes that make use of the products generated by operational remote sensing applications. Different applications require different products. As a result, the identification of specific data and product requirements by different end user sectors is an important task that has to be augmented by a user requirement analysis procedure. Potential end users of EO data are those involved in industries and activities such as:

�� Offshore oil and gas �� Wind and wave energy sitings �� Coastal fisheries �� Aquaculture �� Mineral extraction �� Defence �� Pollution management �� Climate prediction �� Port operations �� Marine engineering �� Dredging

4

�� Coastal protection �� Ship-routing �� Tourism and public health �� Environment protection and preservation.

Objectives of the study The objectives of this study include:

�� To identify the specific needs for earth observation data and information in marine and coastal environments, as perceived by those involved in developing coastal and marine area policies, and implementing coastal and marine area management.

�� To provide an overview of projects and reports which have considered end user

requirements, from earth observation data and information for marine and coastal applications.

Approach to the Study This study originates from the need for the BOOST consortium to identify end user requirements for earth observation data and information in the marine and coastal environments. The study aims to evaluate the extent to which these requirements are met by existing EO remote sensing systems, and to identify the requirements for an improved information supply. A summary of actual user information needs was developed through: �� A literature review of the most relevant documentation on the subject; �� Detailed studies in Ireland, based on output from the COASTMON project (Jenkins et

al; 1997), the CEO funded End User Training Course (1999) and the MARSAIS project, currently underway (http://marsais.ucc.ie), all of which were carried out by the Coastal Resources Centre, University College Cork, Ireland;

�� A review of relevant websites. The report begins by describing why there is a need for end user requirements studies, and how this issue has become a priority in Europe. An approach to user requirement analysis is provided followed by an outline of some of the major issues that must be considered. End user requirements are then outlined according to thematic areas of interest, followed by examples in the form of case studies. Finally existing products and markets, including some issues of relevance to BOOST, are defined.

5

CHAPTER 2. THE NEED FOR END USER STUDIES

A recent EU conference on Marine Science and Ocean Technology (EurOCEAN, 2000), considered how science could be made more visible in integrated coastal zone management (ICZM). Discussions highlighted the need to provide a user requirements analysis and apply user centred focus for all ICZM projects. Such user involvement would allow for better definition of research needs, and allow for user focus in outputs. The focus on the need to involve end users in research resulted in some of the following conclusions:

�� The research community and the end users need to understand the importance of listening to each other, and to respect each other’s viewpoint.

�� Researchers need to realize that what may appear to be self- evident thought processes to them are not always evident to other disciplines operating within the coastal area.

�� Researchers need to communicate the dynamic and volatile nature of marine and coastal ecosystems.

�� There should be acknowledgement that researchers and end users work to different time scales.

�� Researchers need to identify the practical issues to which end users require clearly defined answers.

�� Researchers need to identify the groups to which their research is directed.

�� Researchers must differentiate between communication to the general public and communication to other professionals involved in coastal and ocean resource management.

�� Data should be relevant to management needs, accurate, precise, consistent, comparable and accessible.

�� Researchers should endeavor to develop tools that will be of applied use to the coastal resource manager.

Management strategies for coastal and marine resources need to adopt a relatively wide perspective (spatially and temporally). The juxtaposition of different spatial, functional and temporal scales inherent in the catchment-coastal ecosystems-seas-oceans continuum poses difficult challenges for both science and resource management and governance. Coastal managers and planners tend to use concepts and informed knowledge; they do not consider that they need scientific research and its associated data. The EU Demonstration Project on ICZM considered this issue (Doody et al; 1998) of the lack of awareness amongst ICZM practitioners of technologies, data and information available to

6

them, and often provided by EC funded agencies. In particular, Doody criticised the lack of access to the Joint Research Centre (JRC) as a data source for coastal and marine resource management. He attributed this to the continuing technological focus on new satellites and image manipulation, concluding that the JRC should give greater emphasis to practical applications for the use of remotely sensed data. Doody also concluded that the EU should promote the involvement of users in defining research needs, and engender a greater user focus in the outputs of such research. While there may be a scientific requirement for quantitative data in time intervals, operators need to know how and when they can get information. We need to detail the definition of delay of availability and sampling. We must consider the difference between technically oriented use of information technology and publicly oriented information technology. Improvement of access of end users to the data and databases must be considered. Thus end user involvement, and the development of a user requirements catalogue per end user is of prime importance. The user requirements catalogue is central to the development of a tool for end-users, based on their perspective requirements. The challenges yielded by end user requirements analysis are both technical and cultural. The EO community must develop instruments, missions, resolutions, algorithms and models, while also making further efforts to integrate with managers and make products more attractive, relevant, applicable and user friendly. McDonald (1998) encapsulated the complexities involved in communicating scientific information on the marine and coastal area to end-users. The following statement summarises the importance and necessity of end user studies to be carried out: On one side are the scientists and engineers who know how to measure variables in the Earth system from space, but have little, if any idea, of what the real information requirements of operational users with economic, social, strategic, political or environmental objectives may be, and on the other side are the operational users (information consumers), each of whom expresses their information requirements in different ways using the jargon of their particular discipline, and has little, if any, knowledge of what can be done to deliver information from spaceborne platforms, how it can benefit form them, or what it is worth. McDonald (1998)

7

CHAPTER 3. APPROACHES TO USER REQUIREMENTS ANALYSIS A user requirements study brings together the information needs of coastal and marine area managers and policy makers responsible for the sustainable development, conservation and safe operation of activities at sea, working at practical levels in the maritime sector. To evaluate end user requirements, the following questions must be considered:

�� Who are the users? �� What is known about them? �� How should their preferences be incorporated into the design process?

This chapter examines each of the above questions to describe an approach to user requirements analysis. Specific examples are given where appropriate. Determining user profiles is a first step in understanding the users. User profiles give an impression of persons who might use the BOOST products, and their expectations. Any user requirements analysis, must serve the aims of the project and the aim of the individual user. Thus, the goals of the BOOST consortium must be developed in tandem with the needs of the user.

8

Who are the users? The first step in identifying end user requirements is to build a database of user profiles. Identifying end-users and describing their requirements is complicated by the different sectors, categories and levels of end users that exist. End users can be classified according to their sectoral area of interest. For example, for the purpose of EuroGOOS research, end users for operational oceanography were divided into 12 sectoral groups: research, services, environment, building, transport, defence, energy, food, equipment, hinterland, mineral, tourism (Fischer & Flemming, 1999). Potential end users may occur across a broad range of categories with different functions, including: government/management, enterprise/business, research/academic. When dealing with the user, the product developer needs to identify which group they belong to: �� Decision maker/Policy maker �� Administrator �� Researcher �� Other End users can also be classified across different organisational levels, ranging from the institutional level to the individual level (Eleveld et al; 1999). All of these groups can be further subdivided, for example, the institutional groups can be grouped based on their focus (European, regional, national, local). End users will include users interested in oceanography from European to regional (involved in OSPAR and HELCOM Conventions), to national and local levels. Examples of users at an institutional level, within Europe are given in Table 1. Table 1. Examples of users at an institutional level, within Europe

Level Institute European JRC ETC/MCE, SAI, EEA, DG Environment, DG Fisheries, DG

External Relations, EuroGOOS Regional ICES National Ifremer Local Harbour authorities

The level of expertise amongst users will also differ from group to group and this is worth considering when building a database of user profiles. In general, researchers have a detailed knowledge of a special area of interest, whereas policy makers and decision makers working in the coastal zone need to have a broader perspective and understanding of many issues. This difference will result in different user needs. Researchers may require access to raw data, whereas decision makers and policy makers may need interpreted data (i.e. information). Figure 1 illustrates this point.

9

DAR

Fig199 ThereqdevInfowitpurcon Thecritsenal;

Raw Data

atabase dministrators/esearchers

ure 1. Different levels of 9).

level of expertise among theuired for dissemination (fromelop more than one platformation System (GIS) is an

h spatial data sets. Howevechase and difficult for the nostructed in appropriate World

Forest Assessment and Meria for the classification ofsing based spatial information1999). These criteria were as

Level of (administrative) World-wide Regional National

Local (manageme

Type of body: Governmental Non-governmenta Non-profit Profit

Type of decision-making b Policy (strategic) p Resource managem Conservation man Resource managem Environmental pro

Ecological zones: E.g. Ocean, coasta

Data Interpretation

Decision Makers/ Policy Makers

Ge

user interest in data and informa

end-user community will determine raw data to information). It m

rm for dissemination. For examp appropriate technology for interacr, most commercial GIS packagen-specialist to use. Therefore, a use Wide Web (WWW) based software.

onitoring Environment group (FAM user groups in a user requiremen for the sustainable management of

follows:

operation:

nt unit)

l

odies (purpose for which informatiolanning and financing bodies ent bodies

agement ent

tection

l zones

Information

neral Public

tion (Eleveld et al;

the type of product ay be necessary to le, a Geographical ting model outputs s are expensive to r interface could be

E) used different ts study for remote forests (Westinga et

n is needed):

10

Durand et al; (1999) summarised varying degrees to which EO is used by the following categories of users:

1. Actual Use

�� Oil and gas �� Ice services �� Education and training �� Research community �� European Commission �� Meteorological sector

2. Near Actual Use

�� Shipping �� Navigation �� Software �� Travel – tourism – leisure �� Local government �� Intergovernmental bodies

3. Some use

�� Fishing �� Water �� Public operational services �� Public national administration �� Non-governmental organisations

4. Little or no use

�� Wind and wave - alternative energy �� Construction industry �� Insurance industry �� News – media industry

Defining these types of parameters may assist in the identification of the relevant bodies (at international and regional level) or categories of bodies (national and local level) to be specifically included in the study.

11

What is known about the users? An analysis of end user requirements will require more than just the generation of a preliminary user profile. Specific details on the capacity and capability of the user to use EO data products need to be formulated. To achieve this, a survey of user requirements may be carried out, either through interviews or through the distribution of questionnaires. An all encompassing approach taken by the Forest Assessment and Monitoring Environment group included: 1. Theoretical approach on functions, management principals and requirements 2. User inquiry

o Interactive interviews per fax, email and WWW o Interviews by contact person in different countries o In-depth country studies o Direct interviews

3. Inventory of existing literature, documents and initiatives

(Westinga et al; 1999) In some cases a two-tiered approach to developing a questionnaire may be appropriate. Firstly, to identify the end users and to obtain some general information about their organizations, for example:

a) The type of organisation and specific tasks of the respondent, b) The actual use and additional needs for spatial information, c) The actual supply of spatial information and how this could be improved;

and secondly, to target specific groups to obtain more detailed feedback. The follow-up questionnaire can be formulated with the ultimate aim of acquiring such a level of specification of information needs (in marine and coastal area management) that an adequate translation can be made into functional, system and product requirements for EO applications. Choices on the style of the questionnaire and approach to be implemented need to be made in the first instance. For example, should the questionnaire contain open–ended questions (Westinga et al; 1999), or multiple-choice questions (Fischer & Flemming, 1999)? It is well known that long questionnaires tend to have lower responses. Open questionnaires, compared to multiple-choice formats tend to invite answers that are more laborious to process and statistically difficult to analyse. However, they have the advantage that they unintentionally do not influence the respondents in any specific direction in their answers. An example of an extensive analysis using a multi-choice questionnaire can be seen in the data requirements survey carried out for the EuroGOOS project (Fischer & Flemming, 1999). As there is no dominant customer for marine environmental data, the survey was multi dimensional, and took into account a broad range of variables, showing the range of characteristics that end-users require for different applications. A survey questionnaire was distributed in six countries giving a

12

balanced north-south sample of operational marine data requirements from 155 organisations. The questionnaire itself, listed 116 user applications sectors (e.g. shipping operations, navigational safety, oil and gas production, tidal energy etc.), and 136 measured variables (e.g. current velocity, current direction, waves period, sea surface temperature, bathymetry etc.). The first Global Ocean Observing System Users Forum also identified this approach as a more effective and structured strategy than one that begins with open-ended questions when asking the user community to identify their related needs (IOC, 2000). In general the types of questions that need to be considered when undertaking a user requirements analysis include the following: �� What are the existing monitoring activities? �� Identify what types of data are required (e.g. oceanographic parameters, biological

parameters etc.). �� What categories of coastal and marine information are required? (e.g. bathymetry, sea

state etc.). �� What tools are currently used for monitoring? �� What is the information technology (IT) capacity of the organisation? �� Does the organisation currently use earth observation data? �� What are the capabilities of the organisation in terms of the hardware, software, and

staff skills for utilistaion of earth observation data? �� What are the spatial and temporal resolutions required? �� How can monitoring and data collection be improved? �� What is the financial capability of the organisation for data purchase and acquisition? �� What is the geographic area of interest? �� Have they a need for EO data? Examples of questionnaires developed to assess end user requirements for earth observation data of the marine and coastal environment (for the MARSAIS and MODIS projects) are given in Appendix A. The results of any survey would have to be interpreted with careful attention, checked for bias in the selection of respondents, and for carelessness in the completion of the forms. Correlations and trends between variables, user applications, geographical scales,

13

accuracy requirements and other characteristics can be interpreted from well-defined questionnaires. The feedback should provide a basis for categorizing end-user requirements.

14

How should the user preferences be incorporated into the design process? Having established who the users are and what is known about the users, it should be established how the user preferences can be incorporated into the design process of products under development. The first Global Ocean Observing System Users Forum (IOC, 2000), identified the following priorities: ��Communication ��Co-ordination of design, implementation and operation ��Capacity building Communication Effective dialog between users and researchers should drive the design phase of any project, which aims to develop EO data and information products for end users. Information must flow from the users to the researchers. It is a challenge to collect information from a very broad range of potential users from many different regions, and harder yet because many potential users of EO marine and coastal data and information are unfamiliar with what it might offer them. Consequently, effective communication from researchers to potential users is also essential for effective design and implementation. Users must be informed about opportunities that exist, the technologies that might be used, and the range of data products that can be provided. Discussions and consultations with user groups should be conducted on scales appropriate to the issues: local, national, regional, and global. This will require a range of approaches and structures for communication. Coordination of design, implementation and operation During the operations phase, procedures must be established for periodic review and revisions of the plan. There exists the need for a free, open, honest and continual dialog with the user community designed towards the development of a long-term partnership. The process of continual evaluation should be carried out to ensure that new products would appropriately evolve over time in response to ongoing assessments of their successes and failures. Capacity building The benefits of any new product under development will be realized broadly only through capacity building. Even at the design stage, there is a great need to provide information and training to potential users, so they can participate in planning for observation systems that will meet their needs. Capacity building goes hand in hand with communications, with an added level of technology transfer between countries. Efforts toward capacity building could be coordinated with, or added to, well established international projects, (e.g. MARSAIS project, COASTBASE project etc). Training and capacity building should address concrete problems on the local or national level: new skills and tools should address real needs. In turn, training is only useful if the new skills and tools can be put to use by the participants in their home environments. This requires investments in infrastructure (e.g. equipment) with adequate and lasting commitments for supplies and repairs.

15

A range of mechanisms to attract potential users and stakeholders could include for example: (i) public meetings with local communities around major port or tourist complexes

where there are many potential users; (ii) seminars or workshops targeted at particular users groups, such as the fishing

industry, or the tourist industry, or port and harbor authorities; (iii) demonstration projects with results provided free for a period then at some cost; (iv) attracting NGOs to help to identify the full range of users, (e.g. marine

conservation), recognizing in addition that NGOs can often form very effective political lobbying agents;

(v) working through education programmes, like the Train-Sea-Coast programme (as applied for instance in Brazil), which raised awareness and gained potential customers (like port authorities);

(IOC, 2000)

16

CHAPTER 4. ISSUES WITH USING EO DATA In February 1994 a workshop was held in Ispra with representatives from all EU member states, ESA, SPOT and Eurimage. One of the conclusions from the workshop was that it had left more questions than answers, which highlighted the complexity of the European EO network, and the number of unresolved issues in the EO infrastructure in Europe (CEO, 1994). There are many issues associated with the acquisition of EO data and information (access, quality, cost, resolution etc.). There are also many barriers that need to be overcome by end users to obtain the data and information they need to carry out marine management and monitoring operations. This section looks at these issues, firstly by giving a list of some of the major issues that have to be overcome, and secondly by providing examples of specific issues which have emerged as a result of end user studies. 1. Data available in relatively raw form Space agencies mainly supply EO data as relatively low level products (single instrument, single pass data, with only engineering calibration applied). These data would be enhanced by combining with in situ data for geophysical or biological calibration, and further processing is required to extract the information. The expertise required to turn measurements into useful information resides in research institutes. This is not often transferred to operational end users. 2. Expertise needed to locate and order data, particularly for follow-up observations - Data sources and catalogues are widely spread and significant expertise is need to locate and acquire data As EO data from different instruments are spread among a number of data centres, many points of contact have to be established to locate relevant data. Increasingly, these data centres are making their directories, catalogues and browse facilities available for searching online over networks. However, the user interface to these catalogues is often difficult. Similarly, the ordering process tends to be different for each data centre. There is a learning curve associated with the ability to locate and obtain data sets. Co-ordinating directory, catalogue and browse developments are needed. This would assist existing users and encourage new users. Scientific research is increasingly tackling interdisciplinary projects requiring the integration of data from a wide range of sources. Locating and acquiring data remains a difficult and time consuming task. Co-ordinating directory, catalogue and browse developments, their availability over networks and encouraging standardisation of the user interface, could greatly increase the efficiency with which data is located and obtained. Need to provide user-friendly inter-operable catalogues, directories and browse services, which clearly explain the existence and means of access to data and algorithms.

17

3. Difficult to access and use data from non-European missions (eg Indian IRS-1

and Japanese JERS-1) The difficulties associated with accessing EO data within Europe are mirrored in the other continents. A one stop shop for finding and retrieving data is required. 4. Combined user of diverse datasets and assimilation into numerical models Assimilation of diverse datasets into numerical simulation models is a complex task. Such expertise usually resides in research institutes. 5. Analysis of data Extraction of information requires significant expertise because of:

��Geophysical calibration (merging) with in-situ data often required; ��Lack of standardisation; ��Poor quality control.

Standardisation activities for satellite data are already taking place through the CEOS (Committee for Earth Observation Satellites) and the Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS). 6. Need to request ad-hoc satellite observations at short notice When an algal bloom is detected through routine observations, additional ad-hoc observations are required to characterise the bloom and determine its likely development. In many instances, observations being made routinely will already be available (Such as AVHRR infrared images). For some instruments, observations may have to be requested and scheduled into the observing plan of the satellite. There is a need for standardisation of the ordering process and encouragement of satellite operators to build in flexibility into their mission planning. This could be attained by co-ordinating requirements through user fora. 7. Inappropriate data – spatial and temporal coverage not optimum, resolution not optimum Users could have a larger influence on the trade-off between temporal and spatial coverage. The influence could be enhanced by user fora, where the needs of users would be fully evaluated and optimum trade-offs established. Such fora would also help to identify requirements and focus priorities for future missions and instruments. 8. Lack of co-ordination within and between countries There is currently little co-ordination of bloom watch activities between European nation states. There are European for a concerned with trans-national issues, such as those of OSPAR and ICES. However, these organisations tend not to co-ordinate at a technical level. There is a need for co-ordination of fora at a technical level.

18

9. Current pricing policy for satellite EO data is not clear and fixed Although some satellite EO data is available for marginal reproduction costs (such as Advanced Very High resolution Radar [AVHRR]), much of it is sold on a commercial basis (such as SPOT). Pricing is usually costed per image, irrespective of the usefulness of its content. For monitoring purposes, many images may need to be scanned before finding one containing something of significance, such as a potential algal bloom. User fora would again provide an opportunity for users to co-ordinate their views and to influence the pricing policy of data providers. The aim should not be simply to reduce prices, but rather to encourage data producers to be more flexible in their approach. 10. Awareness of new developments and the capabilities of new instrumentation Research activities continue to identify new capabilities for existing instruments, for example the use of Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) to identify and track algal blooms in all weather conditions. There is little active promotion of these activities to potential end users, although they are reported in the scientific literature. Similarly, new instruments will provide new capabilities, the significance of which may not be apparent to naïve or non EO users. Increasing public awareness of EO and promoting it to potential users could be carried out in a cost effective manner. Increased awareness of EO will help o create demand, which will encourage industry to invest in providing services and so lead to an expansion of the market place.

19

11.Temporal and spatial resolutions There can be large gaps between what EO sensors can provide in terms of spatial and temporal resolution, and what end users require to enhance their monitoring and management activities in the marine and coastal area. Examples of the types of spatial and temporal resolution that can be obtained from some current EO sensors are given in Table 2. Table 2. Examples of the types of spatial and temporal resolution that can be obtained from some current EO sensors Satellite Sensor Spatial

Resolution Temporal Resolution

Start Year

SPOT 4 High Resolution Visible & Infra Red (ARVIR)

10m/20m 3 days 1998

SPOT 5 High Resolution Geometry

5m/10m 3 days 2002

Landsat 4-5 Thematic Mapper 30m/120m 16 days 1976 Landsat 7 High Resolution

Multi Spectral Stereo Imager

15m/30m/60m

16 days 1999

ERS-1;2 Along Track Scanning Radiometer Synthetic Aperture Radar

1km (IR) 50km (SST) 25/100m

3 (4) days revisit 3 (4) days revisit

1991 1991

RADARSAT Synthetic Aperture Radar

28m/50m/100m

24 days (3 & 7 day cycles)

1995

ENVISAT Medium Resolution Imaging Spectrometer Advanced SAR

300m/1200m 30m/100m/1km

3 days revisit 3 days revisit

2002

When comparing what sensors can offer in terms of spatial and temporal resolution (Table 2), with what end users really need (Tables 3, 4 and 5 - examples of issues defined by end user studies), there is a clear mismatch between what is desired and what can be offered by EO sensors.

20

Table 3. The table demonstrates that explicit information is needed on specifically defined as well as unpredictable marine and coastal locations. Source – NOOS Strategic Plan (2001). User Parameter variable Location Real time Forecast

time scale Statistic

Shipping all kinds Navigation shallow areas and harbour entrance

Current Waves Water depth Current Waves Swell

NWS Shallow area Harbour entrance

Y Y

1 week 1 day

Y N

Rescue operations Waves Wind Drift

NWS Y 1 day- 1 week

N

Storm surge warning Water level Coastal area Y 1-3 days N Flood protection Water level and waves

Climate change Coastal area NWS

Y Y

1 week n/a

Y Y

Coastal protection Water level Waves Transport of sediment Current Climate change

Coastal area NWS

Y Y

n/a n/a

Y Y

Transport calculations of water, substances & biological material e.g. algae & fish eggs

River outflow, Discharge, Bio ecological parameters, SST

Rivers Channel, NWS

N n/a Y

Coastal engineering Water level, Waves, Current, Meteo, Water depth

Coastal areas Y 1 day-1 month

Y

Hydrographical survey

Water level Waves

NWS N Y

Hind cast 1day- 1 week

Y N

Ecosystem assessment

Bio ecological parameters NWS N n/a Y

Fisheries Physical & environmental parameters

NWS N n/a Y

Off shore oil industry

Waves Currents Wind Water level, Air pressure, Air temperature, Temperature bottom layer

Local or NWS

Y 1 day - 1 week

Y

Mineral extraction Waves

Local NWS

Y

1 day – 1 week

Y

21

Bottom structure, Current

Local NWS Local NWS

N/a Y

n/a Y

N/a Y

Recreation Waves Water depth Wind SST

NWS Coastal area NWS Coastal areas

Y Y Y N

1 day – 1 week 1 day – 1 week 1 hour – 1 day

Y N N Y

NWS – North West Shelf n/a – not applicable

22

Examples of Issues defined by End User Studies Relevant end user studies are summarised below, to provide an overview of the types of issues that are of importance to the marine and coastal community. The studies summarised are: Coastal Zone Earth Watch Study by ESA CEO Report 1999 CEO Pathfinder Study, 1995 EuroGOOS Project ICAMS Project Coastal Zone Earth Watch Study by ESA The Coastal Zone Earth Watch report by ESA (1995) outlined the issues that would benefit from the acquisition of EO data for the operational community in the coastal zone. The main characteristics of the coastal zone of Europe, which would benefit from the use of EO data, were summarised. Some major issues include: �� Can we obtain required satellite data in a timely fashion? �� Are the data in a convenient form? �� Are users making the most of airborne, coastal and satellite remote sensing data? �� Is there a need for concerted approach to in situ and satellite studies in regions of

interest? The CEO (1999) Report (Durand et al; 1999) The CEO (1999) report summarised general end user needs as requiring the following: �� Near real time information delivery through the Internet �� Long term record for risk assessment. �� Easy access and information directly usable by the decision maker. �� Combine both wide coverage and high level of detail. On reviewing available literature on user requirements, the study identified that parameters relating to water quality would have the highest priority. This involved primarily optical and infrared satellite data and related algorithms. Algorithms for wave height, tidal range / sea level / water level, winds and currents are of general relevance to coastal waters. They concluded that SAR is important for oil spill monitoring and they also consider use of SAR in deriving bathymetric measurements, as bathymetry is one of the most frequently cited user requirements. A number of products are already available with regard to SST, primary productivity, algal bloom monitoring, bathymetry, oil spill detection, chlorophyll and ocean colour. CEO Pathfinder Study 1995 (CEO, 1995) A detailed user requirements analysis document was produced by the Centre for Earth Observation (CEO) in December 1995. The CEO pathfinder study (CEO, 1995) surveyed ten coastal application areas:

23

1. Water quality / pollution 2. Coastal protection 3. Nature conservation 4. Global change 5. Observatories 6. Ports and marinas 7. Urbanisation 8. Tourism and leisure 9. Fishing and aquaculture 10. Offshore structures

Over 560 users were surveyed, most of who were not familiar with the types of data that can be derived from remote sensing satellites. Many applications require data and surveys and data for a particular area; these data are generally gathered at a local level, by commercial companies undertaking in-situ sampling. Where parameters can be derived from satellites, accuracy and re-visit times were cited as potential problems. Most important user data requirements identified:

�� Wave data �� Physio-chemcial parameters of sea water

Very important user data requirements: �� SST

Important user data requirements: �� Chlorophyll �� Sediment

Table 4. Preferred spatial and temporal resolutions Spatial: 100m-1km Temporal: 1 day – 1 month

SST, suspended matter, physio-chemcial parameters (transparency, pigments), micro-organisms

Higher spatial and temporal resolutions Current, tides, wind and waves The Pathfinder Study found that in-situ data and modeling were critical features required to meet spatial and temporal demands. It concluded that remote sensing data can be ideal to initialise models, follow boundary conditions and validate output. Predictive capability is important, as is the ability to make inferences over larger areas or to particular depths. EuroGOOS Project Every marine activity in Europe has a demand for improved operational marine data, and would therefore benefit economically from the provision of those data. EuroGOOS has surveyed the role of EO data and information in coastal and ocean resource management. Points of relevance from EuroGOOS include:

24

�� Only 20% of users require raw observational data on average; varies with topic. �� Most organisations and ocean data users require data products which have a

spatial horizontal resolution of the order of 1km, temporal resolution of the order of 6hr, data variable accuracy of the order of 1%, with an almost equal interest at all geographical scales from estuarine to oceanic.

�� 15% of respondents identify remote sensing as a major application of their own work, and the 9 most commonly requested variables by all respondents are characteristics of the surface fields of currents, waves, temperature, wind and salinity, in that order.

ICAMS Project.

Table 5. ICAMS project feedback on end user requirements Irish User requirements Data requirements SST and chlorophyll maps. Derived maps of

algal blooms and toxins. Data at 1km for the bay and offshore and higher resolution in harbour areas. Daily or weekly data, as well as time-series.

Technology requirements Web access to data. GIS compatibility for local analysis of data. Interest in advanced warning and forecast systems, which require modelling capability.

Adriatic User Requirements Data requirements Chlorophyll concentration, dissolved organic

matter, transparency / Secchi depth, SST. Primary productivity and turbidity index. Data every 2-3 days. 1km data to complement higher resolution local data.

Technology requirements Web and fax access to data. PC-based data analysis; interest in using ICAMS analysis tools.

FAO User Requirements Data requirements Chlorophyll, SST and sediment. 1km and higher.

Access to archives of time-series data. Land-use and inland water quality data.

Technology requirements Stand alone ICAMZ archive and analysis systems for local use. PC based data analysis.

ICAMS also found that many users were interested in: �� Coastline mapping from high resolution data �� Wind data �� Current data �� Meteorological data

25

5. END USER GROUPS CLASSIFIED BY THEMATIC AREAS This chapter outlines the types of information required by a selection of user groups, classified by thematic areas such as: Meteorological Services; Shipping; Naval Services and Coast Guards; Oil and Gas Industry; Energy Companies; Pollution and Environmental Protection Authorities; Fisheries and Aquaculture. The information presented in this section is based on feedback from a CEO Training Course, held in Cork in January 1999. The course focused on the requirements for Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) data, but the specifications for other types of EO data were also documented and are included in this summary. The information is also based on feedback obtained from personal communications with end users operating in the thematic areas defined above, carried out for the COASTMON (Jenkins et al; 1997) and MARSAIS research projects. Meteorological Services Meteorological services require scatterometer data (large scale) and SAR data (local scale) available in real time to contribute towards developing better estimates of surface winds, required for many marine and coastal operations (e.g. shipping). SAR wave spectra can contribute as input data to wave forecasting models. Altimeter data are useful for significant wave height measurements. One of the most important physical parameters in the coastal zone and harbour regions is the wind field. Scatterometer wind velocities from the ERS satellites are used in the analysis of wind fields - speed and direction at 25km resolution along a 500km swath. Wind speed is also available from the altimeters flown on the ERS and TOP satellites. Altimeter wind speeds are available at 7km intervals along the ground track. Shipping – Navigation, Harbour Authorities Harbour authorities require information on wind, waves, currents, fronts, eddies and marine pollution. It is particularly important to obtain data with sufficient resolution near the coast, where much shipping traffic is concentrated. Wind and wave height are priority data requirements. Real time data is needed to improve monitoring and forecasts of wind, waves, swell, visibility, sea surface temperature (SST) and sediment transport. Satellite data of various kinds (SAR, AVHRR, SeaWiFS) can provide input data to such operational services. The funnel effects of winds within harbours as observed by SAR, is of interest to shipping. Vessel detection by SAR would also be of interest to harbour authorities, and to security services for monitoring purposes. Bathymetric charting is very important in near coast areas; these need to be frequently updated. Information on sediment flow using optical sensors and SAR for shallow water bathymetry changes is of particular interest for port engineering and oil and gas companies. Harbour and local authorities have also shown interest in the use of EO data to monitor long term coastal erosion and sediment tracking. Examples of products which may be required by shipping: surface current velocity map; wave height map; wave length map; wave direction map; wave period map; wind velocity map; sand cell movements, sedimentation; efficacy of breakwaters. A global wave climate database would be of relevance coastal engineering, and other products, such as Global Digital Surface

26

Currents Atlas, Ship Traffic Monitoring or Mapping of Inter Tidal Zones may also be of relevance. Planners and Insurers Planners and insurers require information on coastal vulnerability. EO data can provide information, which can enhance vulnerability mapping such as zonation for flood and erosion risk. Thus EO data can aid decision-making of planners, insurers, etc. Predicted sea level rise may be effectively monitored using changes in vegetation patterns and expanse increases and decreases in salt marsh areas obtained from EO imagery. EO data can also be used to monitor human impacts on the coastal zone, such as areas vulnerable from beach sediment extraction by unlicensed activities or licensed activities. Naval Services & Coast Guards The naval service and coast guards may use SAR to monitor possible pollution incidents at sea. They require real time access to data; it would be of most benefit if they could receive it on board. All types of information are useful: wind, waves, currents, eddies, fronts, internal waves, pollution, ship detection etc. They are also interested in detection of discharge of ballast water, temperature differences (from high resolution Infra Red ([IR] images) or surface roughness difference (SAR images). SAR data would be of relevance both as support data during daily operations and for general oceanographic knowledge. Oil & Gas Industry Reliable forecasts of weather and waves are essential. Industry operators need data on wind, waves, swell and currents. Real time data and forecasts are required during operations. They are very interested in altimeter data, scatterometer data and SAR data; however, SAR data is not widely used by the oil industry, as it is considered too expensive. During specific operations such as towing large platforms, there is a need for special monitoring and forecasting of the environmental conditions. For exploration and exploitation of oil and gas on continental shelves, and the edges of these shelves, oil companies need data on wind, waves, swell and currents. Statistical data are required for design purposes, while real time data and forecasts are required during operations. For drilling in deeper waters, with floating constructions, it is important to have technical knowledge of currents at different depths; this requires modelling and observations. Both SAR and altimeter data contribute to better data on currents, fronts and eddies. Altimeter data from all pervious and existing satellites are important, as are scatterometer and SAR data. Rig response (i.e. heave) to oceanographic conditions has to be forecasted. Rig motion is sensitive to longer periods of swell. Operators require more information on local storms and on remotely generated swells. Energy Companies The most important technologies extracting energy from the ocean (e.g. tidal energy, wave energy) use surface wave data and climate data on waves, which is essential for planning. Altimeter wave statistics are useful, but the spatial resolution appears to be too coarse. High resolution wave climatology from SAR would be very useful near the coasts to find the best locations for these energy plants.

27

Pollution and Environmental Protection Authorities SAR from ERS can be used for operational monitoring of oil spills in combination with aircraft surveys. More frequent observations and better resolution and spatial coverage are required. The Netherlands Remote Sensing Board summarises the benefits of a spaceborne SAR system for slick detection as follows:

�� Data acquisition is independent of weather conditions. �� Low resolution data can be available within one hour. �� Easy data handling and interpretation. �� Minimal manpower necessary. �� Accurate indication of geographical position and size of slicks detected. �� Approximately 85% of spills larger than 0.3km2 are detected correctly.

Information can also be provided on predicted and actual beach movements, risk assessment and impacts, pollution detection and monitoring, and coastal defences. According to Campbell (1996) data delivered to end users must include:

�� Estimate of slick extent, thickness and volume. �� Classification of slick type. �� Identification of slick source. �� Slick location and time of observation. �� Direction and speed of slick movement.

Not all of this information can be derived from SAR; source identification, oil type and slick thickness would require airborne surveillance. The targets, which the information must meet, are:

�� Detection probability: to plan air surveillance, coast guards would require alarm notification with a guarantee that any slick will be detectable using SAR. The probability of detection must be almost 100%. Without this guarantee, end users will continue to rely on airborne measurements.

�� False alarms: end users require a low false alarm threshold. Investigation of false alarms will reduce the cost benefit of including ERS data.

�� Deliver time: to allow maximum benefit to be derived from the service, information on slick events is required within two hours of overflight for early warning applications. Information user for the compilation of statistics rather than the routing of surveillance aircraft is not subject to this time constraint.

�� Coverage: information on national priority waters is required daily. Fisheries and Aquaculture Satellite data is not widely used for fisheries and aquaculture activities in Ireland, but users stated that improved weather and wave forecasts would be of assistance. SAR data can be used to monitor fishing vessels and SeaWifs data can improve monitoring of chlorophyll for fishery management. Altimeter, scatterometer and SAR data can be used to improve climatic estimates of winds, waves and frontal locations. EO data can assist in the determination of the position of licensed operators and also in the determination of

28

relative volumes of equipment and estimates of production using ground truth data sets. Sea surface temperature from thermal infra-red sensors can be useful in the determination of upwelling zones, front formations, stratification within bays, settlement success (e.g. oyster spat settlements), and thermal plumes. SAR monitoring of current fronts, meso-scale eddies, upwelling, wind fronts, wind speed, wind direction, surface waves, internal waves, surfactants and oil spills can also be applied to fisheries and aquaculture. Monitoring of Algal Blooms Monitoring of algal blooms is a major issue for fisheries managers in Ireland, as toxic algal blooms can have a serious impact on shellfish aquaculture. Visible near IR can be used to monitor algal blooms and upwellings. NOAA AVHRR satellite data have been demonstrated as useful when in combination with in-situ observations and models in occurrences of toxic algal blooms (harmful algal events). In 1992, the NANSEN Centre carried out a test case investigation into the use of remote sensing data to monitor toxic algal blooms off Norway, Sweden and Denmark, May to June 1988. The study showed that sea surface temperature from AVHRR and ATSR can be used to monitor algal fronts, as these tend to be associated with temperature fronts and tidal mixing fronts in shelf areas. They also showed that some satellite EO data (AVHRR data from ERS-1) can be obtained in near real time (within 12 hours of observation); this was particularly useful for assimilating into numerical models for making predictions of algal growth movements. Thus, EO can provide data with regard to spatial coverage and temporal sampling. This is an advantage in directing research vessels for sampling. Civil Engineering Industry For civil engineering, EO images could be used in feasibility studies and concept design for major projects. The scale required would have to be of one meter resolution. Civil Engineering companies would make use of very high resolution (VHR) maps of 1:5000 to 1:10000 scale for: water catchment modelling, water flux and flood risk modeling, coastal zone management, etc. Civil Engineering information requirements are: �� Coastline morphology; high resolution data, to a few metres resolution; required for

determination of beach movements, accretion rates etc. �� Sea level, wave, current and tide data and statistics, including historical data. �� Sea state forecasts. �� Sediment transport. �� Chemical concentration. �� Bathymetry – up to 20m depth contours required for modelling purposes (wave-beach

interactions). �� Regional and local plans and field boundaries (<1km resolution) – to prioritise

protection of land areas.

29

CHAPTER 6. CASE STUDIES AND RELEVANT EU PROJECTS The following details were summarised from a survey of commercial case studies, carried out by the Centre for Earth Observation (CEO, 1995). Coastal Zone Management Most commercial companies operating in the coastal zone have limited experience in using satellite EO data, and view EO data as potentially complementary to other more traditional sources of data (tide gauges, bouys etc). Advantages of use of EO data in ICZM, include: �� Coverage of wide area; �� Synoptic; frequent coverage; �� Allows for analysis of spatial and temporal variation in phenomena such as wind and

wave fields. Often, a combination of in situ and EO data offers best advantage to ICZM practitioners. Types of impacts and benefits include: �� Operations which already use EO data can be made more efficient and cost-effective

through provision of more suitable data and information products and services. �� Expansion of the EO market by the stimulation of increased and enhanced use of EO

data. Insurance Companies Insurance companies are primarily interested in assessing likelihood of damage to property in the coastal zone. Their main areas of interest incorporate: �� Identification of flood risks to the coastal zone; �� Prediction of storm events.

Information requirements for insurance companies:

1. Sediment transport data, beach movement and volatility under offshore conditions.

2. Mean sea level, wave and water level time series, current and tide data, sea state forecasts.

3. Land use profiles. 4. Records of flood events.

EO data is particularly relevant to the first three. Direct economic benefit to insurance companies would result from: �� More accurate assessment of risk and more appropriate setting of premium levels;

30

�� More accurate placement and reinforcement of sea defences as a result of improved impact assessments; this may reduce incidence of claims;

�� Setting more appropriate premiums in high risk areas will dissuade development in such areas.

The following estimates were made by the CEO (1995) report: The UK coastal zone accounts for 3% of total land coverage; There are approximately 3 billion ECU of insurable assets in the region; Assuming a scaling of 50, a total insured value of 150 billion may be an estimate for Europe (CEO, 1995). Benefits can be obtained if areas within the coastal zone may be classed as high or low risk. Water Companies Water companies need to identify high natural dispersion areas (HNDAs) into which waste water can be discharged. The location of such areas will impact on the level of treatment which has to be applied to the waste water, in adherence with the EU waste water directives, and the Water Framework Directive. If HNDAs are identified, then primary treated waste can be discharged ; if no HNDA can be identified, then secondary treatment has to occur; this has a cost implication to the local authority, as secondary treatment plants are expensive to build and need maintenance. Information requirements - detection of areas of high natural dispersion require knowledge of: �� Chlorophyll concentration; �� Current and mixing coefficients; �� Wind and wave data; �� Long-term statistics on variability of the above. Water companies would generally be regarded as intermediate level users of EO data. While aware of general uses, they are wary of the level of investment required, compared with the limited current usefulness of such data. Use is made of airborne remote sensing data, for example from the Combined Airborne Spectral Imager (CASI), which measure chlorophyll concentration (an indicator of the possibility of eutrophication). They have also used sensors such as HRV on the SPOT satellite to locate water channels near the coastline. There may be a shortfall in area coverage and a synoptic view from in situ measurements. Increased use of data from SeaWiFS, MERIS and OCTS would be of assistance to water companies. It may help to identify sensitive or high natural dispersion areas (HNDAs) into which waste water is discharged.

31

Summary of Commercial Case Studies Companies such as civil engineering, insurance and water companies are interested in use of EO. Civil engineering companies appear to be the most expert, while water companies have experience of monitoring. However, there is a perception of low cost-effectiveness. Insurance companies are considered as naïve users, interested only in high level information products derived from satellite EO data, rather than the low level data themselves. For civil engineering companies, insurance industry and water companies, there appears to be significant potential for the expansion of EO related activities. Current use of satellite EO data and products may be low because: �� In the past, companies have found EO data difficult to obtain, very time consuming,

and not tailored to their needs. �� The expertise to analyse satellite data does not generally reside within these

organisations, so that data and information which are not directly applicable have limited usefulness.

�� There is also a perception that, in the past, satellite EO data may have been over sold. �� Satellite data would form part of the overall data requirements, they would not

replace in-situ measurements. Commercial companies are unwilling to commit themselves to experimenting with satellite EO data, while they do recognise its potential. They need more user support, and application support. Interest in use of satellite data must be sustained. Need to demonstrate simple and cost effective means of acquiring the data and services in which the companies may be interested. This may be achieved through development of easy to use interfaces to fast, online catalogues which are appealing to commercial users, with little interest in anything other than relevant and cost effective information products. User fora would allow companies and the information suppliers to enter into dialogue concerning requirements for satellite EO data.

32

Projects Research Projects involving the use of Remotely Sensed Data in Northern Europe: COASTMON – Metocean and Coastal Zone Monitoring in Harbour Regions Using Satellite Radar The COASTMON project explored methods for the use of synthetic aperture radar and other new satellite data and their integration with GIS to aid CZM and to improve use of satellite observations in the user community. ERS SAR, with a resolution of 25m has a large potential for observing many important processes; wave spectra, oil spill detection, shallow water bathymetry and ship detection, currents, eddies fronts, flooding, erosion, estuarine tides. The project used SAR data, which will give qualitative information about the presence and location of eddies, fronts, internal waves, ships, oil and natural slicks. SAR data can provide quantitative wind and wave field parameters, but is unable to provide current or temperature parameters. The incorporation of satellite as well as in situ observations into coastal zone management plans will be greatly aided by an integration of these data with GIS, to assist the safe development of harbour industrial activities. Work at the CRC has shown that there is a need for quantitative data about ocean current, wind wave and temperature fields in Ireland. Our user requirements study showed that weather forecasting services, local coastal and harbour authorities with responsibilities for ship traffic, pollution control, fisheries and aquaculture would benefit from acquisition of satellite data. It would be necessary to provide the interpretation of the satellite images for the users, rather than provide the raw images. ICAMS - Integrated coastal analysis and monitoring system This was an EU project, funded under the Environment and Climate Programme. The objective was to bridge the gap between the potential user community for information on water quality and the means for delivering that information from current EO missions. This was achieved by developing, demonstrating, evaluation the Integrated Coastal Analysis Monitoring System (ICAMS) which met user needs. The project used in situ and RS data, concentrating on ocean colour and sea surface temperatures. It used AVHRR, MOS, SeaWifs and MODIS. ICAMS will provide an integrated engineering and scientific system to monitor temperature, turbidity, chlorophyll concentration and primary production from multiple EO data sources and coincident standard surface measurements. The resulting maps of water quality were used to provide a decision aid for those end users who are managing the often conflicting demands of human exploitation that affect coastal water quality. CLEAN SEAS The CLEAN SEAS project provided a case study of pollution monitoring from space, for European marginal seas. The project concentration on the issues of marine pollution and environmental risk. It confined itself to the parameters that could be remotely measured: meteorological, oceanographic, chlorophyll concentration, surface reflectivity, surface thermal emission, surface brightness temperature, surface roughness. No information is available as to measurement precision, spatial / temporal resolution etc.

33

COASTIOOC This project identified as areas of concern: ecological status of coastal marine waters; the impact of eutrophication and anthropogenic sediment transport; study of red tides. It confined itself to the parameters that could be remotely measured: water absorption, water scattering, water attenuation, and concentrations of chlorophyll, suspended matter and coloured dissolved organics. No information is available as to the measurement precision, spatial / temporal resolution, etc. RESSAC- Remote sensing support for analysis of coasts This project identifies the subjects of concern as: coast preservation and protection. If confines itself to the parameters which could be remotely measured: metocean parameters: sea surface state, wind; Morphological parameters: bathymetry, suspended minerals concentration, delineation of shoreline dynamics. No information is available as to the measurement precision, spatial / temporal resolution, etc. ABDMAP Concerted action on algal bloom detection, monitoring and prediction. The project identifies as areas of concern: eutrophication, detection, monitoring prediction of algal blooms, and impact on shellfish production, health hazard, and tourism. Chlorophyll concentration is the main remotely inferred parameter within the project. No information is available as to the measurement precision, spatial / temporal resolution, etc. OIL-WATCH Oil Spill Detection and monitoring in the European Union Mediterranean and South West Atlantic coastal areas. This project identifies the subjects of concern as: environmental damage, oil spills, high risk areas. Identification an delineation of oil spills (scatterometer signal intensity – surface roughness) is accomplished. No information is available as to the measurement precision, spatial / temporal resolution, etc. DESIMA -Decision Support of Integrated Coastal Zone Management The project aims to support coastal zone management applications through an improved integration and use of various information sources and information providing tools. The project intends to increase and broaden the use of existing and future EO data by integration of EO and non space data, and by enlarging the user and customer base of EO data. LACOAST - ERA-Maptech This EU project run in Ireland by ERA-Maptech was funded under the Environment and Climate programme. It examined a strip of 10km along the European coastline, to provide land cover maps of different periods studied, maps of land cover changes between different dates; statistical analysis of changes per land cover class; statistical analysis of changes per fringes of the coastal zone, from 1km, 1km to 2km, etc. The CORINE land cover inventory, created during 1986 to 1996, was used as reference data for downdating landcover information for approximately 10 years (Landsat TM, SPOT XS) 20 years (Landsat MSS), and 40 years aerial photography. Data produced on land cover changes will be used to identify a number of indicators responsible for coastal zone

34

change. Identification and analysis of indicators was done using a GIS handling various available georeferenced data. COLORS From 1995 the Irish Marine Data Centre managed data from a series of interdisciplinary marine research projects (100 institutes; 10 countries) funded by the EC MAST III programme. They have recently announced the publication of a CD-ROM “Colors Voyager” which is due for release to the public domain at the end of September 2002. The main aim of the COLORS project was to establish the basis for a European network of sampling sites where a systematic programme of long term ocean colour measurements in both the water and atmosphere could be carried out. In situ data were combined with satellite observation data in the prediction of harmful algal events. Sampling sites included the Adriatic Sea, English Channel and the North Sea. Marine and atmospheric data collected at these sites was submitted to the central databank at the Marine Data Centre, where it was quality controlled and processed into a CD-ROM, which provides information in an easily accessible, user-friendly format. BIOCOLOUR Ocean colour for the determination of water column biological processes. This project focussed on the dynamics of marine phytoplankton communities. It looked at the following parameters: water absorption, water scattering, water attenuation, concentration of chlorophyll, suspended matter, coloured dissolved organics, remote sensing reflectance, spatial / temporal distributions of phytoplankton, water surface temperature, salinity, phytoplankton taxonomy. NO information is available about the measurement precision, spatial / temporal resolution etc. In conclusion, analysis of general information presently available on existing EU funded research projects shows that they address, but do not completely cover, the topics of major concern in the marine and coastal environments. The remotely sensed parameters relating to the water are not always explicitly specified. Very few projects (such as ICAMS, COASTMON) give access to the results of their assessment of user requirements for precision and temporal / spatial resolution of remotely sensed parameters. Summaries on other relevant projects, including C-star, DIADEM, EuroROSE MFSP and NICE are available in Durand et al; (1999). MARSAIS - Marine SAR Analysis and Interpretation System The objective of MARSAIS is to design and implement a prototype generic Marine SAR Analysis and Interpretation System (MARSAIS) with sufficient product accuracy and optimum resolution for specific application to the coastal zone. A fundamental component of the MARSAIS project is to consult potential end users via questionnaires, through user consultation workshops and through the establishment of a MARSAIS Advisory Group (MAG) and a MARSAIS User Group (MUG). The use of workshops will assist in educating potential end users to make better use of EO data and information. In this way, the applications of EO will be promoted making them more widely understood in accordance with the RTD priorities of the Fifth Framework Programme.

35

CHAPTER 7. USER REQUIREMENTS FOR SYNTHETIC APERTURE RADAR Spaceborne Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) has the unique capability to provide a high-resolution image of the roughness distribution at the ocean surface at any time of the day and independent of weather conditions. The SARs aboard the European satellites ERS-1 and ERS-2, which were launched in 1991 and 1995, respectively, provide images of the Earth's surface with a spatial resolution of 25m and a swath width of 100km. SAR images from the Canadian RADARSAT-1, launched in 1995, have a resolution between 10m and 100m and a swath width of up to 500km. In 2002, the European Space Agency will launch ENVISAT with the"Advanced SAR" instrument, offering a variety of resolutions, swath widths, and polarisation modes. The technology for processing and extracting geophysical quantities from SAR data is mature, with validated algorithms and models for important oceanographical parameters like wind, waves, current and slicks. This makes SAR imagery suitable for a number of marine applications, ranging from support of near real-time operations to use in long-term planning. The availability of spaceborne SAR data has, for nearly a decade, provided regular and global observation wave spectra. Furthermore, its capabilities to detect and locate oilspills and ships have also led to the systematic use of SAR images in operational surveillance associated with marine coastal pollution control and fisheries. An emerging application has been developed for the monitoring of atmospheric boundary layer processes and mesoscale coastal wind fields. An expected capability to further advance the regular application of the SAR data for the upper ocean current feature monitoring, implies that the SAR will play a vital role in marine coastal ocean monitoring and prediction systems. As BOOST seeks to develop new coastal applications for SAR, an assessment of potential users needs to take into consideration the capability and capacity of users to handle SAR data products. The limitations of SAR must also be taken into account, as well as the potential benefits of combining data from several sensors and satellites. For example, the best repetition from SAR is once every three days. A repeat pass over the same location will not occur for another 30 days. Sensor synergy offers opportunities to increase spatial and temporal coverage and to advance the analysis and interpretation of EO data (Figure 2). Having reviewed available literature and research projects in Chapter 6, it has become clear that several efforts have already been undertaken to analyse user requirements for EO data. However, little has been done to identify the specific requirements for SAR data products. With the advent of improved technologies such as improved resolution expected from ENVISAT, this research is necessary to guide the development of new SAR products and to ensure maximum benefits for potential end users. Appendix B presents an example of the type of questionnaire that may be useful in the identification of end user requirements specifically for SAR data products. The example in Appendix B is of a multiple-choice questionnaire format, which facilitates statistical analysis of the results.

36

Figure 2. Synergy with Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR) and SAR Sensors. Sensor synergy offers opportunities to increase spatial and temporal coverage and to advance the analysis and interpretation of EO data.

Considering an emphasis on user requirements for SAR data, an end user survey need not be confined to the identification of organizations and institutes that are currently using SAR or other EO data. Greater benefits could be achieved by broadening the scope of such a survey to take into account as wide a range of users of marine environmental data as possible. If SAR or other EO are not utilized by a particular organisation, it could be established through the survey if cost or other parameters are limiting factors. Targeting end users to carry out a survey of this kind requires consultation with existing resources such as the EDMED directory (European Directory of Marine Environmental Data), which catalogues holders of marine environmental data throughout Europe. Table 6 provides contact details for marine environmental data holders in France as extracted from EDMED.

37

Table 6. Potential end user organisations in France based on information supplied by the European Directory for Marine Environmental Data. CENTRE-NAME ADDRESS CENTRE-WEBSITE IFREMER / IFREMER/DRV/RH - ECOHAL (NANTES)

IFREMER - Lab.Ecologie halieutique, rue de l'Ile d'Yeu, BP 21105, 44311, NANTES CEDEX 03, FRANCE

http://www.ifremer.fr/drvecohal/

IFREMER / IFREMER STATION PORT EN BESSIN

Avenue du General de Gaulle, B.P. 32, 14520, PORT EN BESSIN, FRANCE

http://www.ifremer.fr/

IFREMER / IFREMER/DEL/ST (STATION DE SETE)

Bd Jean Monnet, BP 171, 34203, SETE CEDEX, FRANCE

http://www.ifremer.fr/delst/

IFREMER / IFREMER/DEL/ EC - ECOLOGIE COTIERE

IFREMER Centre de Brest, BP70, 29280, PLOUZANE, FRANCE

http://www.ifremer.fr/delec/

IFREMER / IFREMER/DEL/AO (BREST)

IFREMER Centre de BREST, Technopole de BREST-IROISE, BP 70, 29280, PLOUZANE, FRANCE

http://www.ifremer.fr/delao/

IFREMER / IFREMER/DEL/MP ( NANTES)

Rue de l'Ile d'Yeu, BP 21105, 44311, NANTES CEDEX 03, FRANCE

http://www.ifremer.fr/francais/org/delmp.htm

IFREMER / IFREMER/DEL/PC (NANTES)

Rue de l'Ile d'Yeu, BP 1105, 44311, NANTES CEDEX 03, FRANCE

http://www.ifremer.fr/delpc/

IFREMER / IFREMER/DEL/SR SERVICE ETUDES REGIONALES

IFREMER Centre de Brest, BP 70, 29280, PLOUZANE, FRANCE

http://www.ifremer.fr/anglais/org/del.htm

IFREMER / IFREMER/DC DIRECTION DE LA COMMUNICATION

IFREMER, Technopolis 40, 155 rue Jean-Jacques Rousseau, 92138, ISSY-LES-MOULINEAUX, FRANCE

http://www.ifremer.fr/francais/org/dcom/index.htm

IFREMER / IFREMER/DRO/EP - ENVIRONNEMENT PROFOND

IFREMER Centre de Brest, BP 70, 29280, PLOUZANE, FRANCE

http://www.ifremer.fr/droep/index.html

IFREMER / IFREMER DRV/RA-LCB LA TRINITE/MER

Lab. Conchylicole de Bretagne, 12, rue des Resistants, BP 86, 56470, LA TRINITE-SUR-MER, FRANCE

http://www.ifremer.fr/lcb/

IFREMER / IFREMER/DRO/UM LAB. PHYSIQUE DES OCEANS

IFREMER Centre de Brest, BP 70, 29280, PLOUZANE, FRANCE

http://www.ifremer.fr/lpo/

IFREMER / DEPARTEMENT D'OCEANOGRAPHIE SPATIALE

IFREMER Centre de Brest, BP 70, 29280, PLOUZANE, FRANCE

http://www.ifremer.fr/cersat/

IFREMER / IFREMER/DRV/RH/L (STATION DE LORIENT)

8, rue Francois Toullec, 56100, LORIENT, FRANCE

http://www.ifremer.fr/drvlorient/

IFREMER / IFREMER/DRV/SEM SERVICE ECONOMIE MARITIM

IFREMER Centre de Brest, BP 70, 29280, PLOUZANE, FRANCE

http://www.ifremer.fr/drvsem/

IFREMER / IFREMER/TMSI/IDM/CELLULE OCEANO-METEO

IFREMER Centre de Brest, BP 70, 29280, PLOUZANE, FRANCE

http://www.ifremer.fr/metocean/index.htm

IFREMER / TMSI/IDM/SISMER Centre IFREMER de Brest, BP 70, 29280, PLOUZANE, FRANCE

http://www.ifremer.fr/sismer/

IFREMER / IFREMER/DRO/GM - IFREMER Centre de Brest, http://www.ifremer.fr/drogm/

38

CENTRE-NAME ADDRESS CENTRE-WEBSITE GEOSCIENCES MARINES BP 70, 29280, PLOUZANE,

FRANCE

CNRS / LEGOS Observatoire Midi-Pyrenees, 14, Avenue Edouard Belin, 31401, TOULOUSE CEDEX 4, FRANCE

http://www.omp.obs-mip.fr/omp/umr5566/francais/

BRGM BREST IFREMER Centre de Brest, BP 70, 29280, PLOUZANE CEDEX, FRANCE

http://www.mnhn.fr/

CEA / LAB. SCIENCES DU CLIMAT ET DE L' ENV.

CNRS, LSCE-Vallee, Bat.12, Avenue de la Terrasse, 91198, GIF-SUR-YVETTE CEDEX, FRANCE

http://www.lsce.cnrs-gif.fr/

CEA / LAB. PIERRE SUE / IPGP Groupe Sc. de la Terre B637, Centre d'Etudes Nucleaires de Saclay, 91191, GIF-SUR-YVETTE CEDEX, FRANCE

http://www-drecam.cea.fr/lps/

CENTRE DE RECHERCHE MAMMIFERES MARINS / CENTRE DE RECHERCHE MAMMIF. MARINS /CRMM

Institut de la Mer et du Littoral, Port des Minimes, 17000, LA ROCHELLE, FRANCE

http://crmm.univ-lr.fr/

CENTRE SCIENTIFIQUE DE MONACO / MUSEE OCEANOGRAPHIQUE DE MONACO

Avenue Saint-Martin, MC, 98000, MONACO-VILLE, MONACO

http://www.oceano.org/

CENTRE SCIENTIFIQUE DE MONACO / OBSERV. OCEANOLOGIQUE EUROPEEN DE MONACO

Centre Scientifique de Monaco, MC, 98000, MONACO, MONACO

CETMEF / CETMEF/PORTS& LITTORAL MAR./G.PROTEC.LIT

Technopole Brest Iroise BP5, 29280, PLOUZANE, FRANCE

http://www.equipement.gouv.fr/cetmef/candhis/

CNRS / BUREAU GRAVIMETRIQUE INTERNATIONAL

Observatoire Midi-Pyrenees, 18, Avenue Edouard Belin, 31400, TOULOUSE Cedex 4, FRANCE

http://bgi.cnes.fr:8110/

IFREMER / DRV/RH CENTRE IFREMER BOULOGNE-SUR-MER

150 quai Gambetta, BP 699, 62321, BOULOGNE-SUR-MER CEDEX, FRANCE

http://www.ifremer.fr/drvboulogne/

CNRS / LABORATOIRE DE MICROBIOLOGIE MARINE

CNRS UMR 6117, Campus de Luminy Case 907, 13288, MARSEILLE CEDEX 9, FRANCE

http://www.com.univ-mrs.fr/LMM/

IFREMER / DRV/RH IFREMER LA ROCHELLE-L'HOUMEAU

IFREMER Lab. Ressources Halieutiques, Place du Seminaire, BP 7, 17137, L'HOUMEAU, FRANCE

http://www.ifremer.fr/drvrhlr/

CNRS / LPCM PARIS Universite P. et M. Curie (Paris VI), 4, Place Jussieu- case courrier 134, 75252, PARIS CEDEX 05, FRANCE

CNRS / STATION BIOLOGIQUE DE ROSCOFF

Place Georges Teissier, BP 74, 29682, ROSCOFF, FRANCE

http://www.sb-roscoff.fr/

CNRS / STATION BIOLOGIQUE DE ROSCOFF

Place Georges Teissier, BP 74, 29682, ROSCOFF, FRANCE

http://www.sb-roscoff.fr/

ECOLE NORMALE SUPERIEURE / LAB. DE GEOLOGIE - ENS

24, rue L'homond, 75231, PARIS CEDEX 05, FRANCE

http://www.geologie.ens.fr/

Fina Exploration and Production - TOTALFINA

Paris FRANCE http://www.fina.com/

39

CENTRE-NAME ADDRESS CENTRE-WEBSITE IRD / IRD - CENTRE DE NOUMEA BP A5, NOUMEA CEDEX,

NEW CALEDONIA (FRANCE)

http://www.ird.nc/

IFREMER / DRV/RA/LGP STATION IFREMER LA TREMBLADE

Laboratoire de Genetique et Pathologie, Mus du Loup, BP 133, 17390, LA TREMBLADE, FRANCE

http://www.ifremer.fr/drvlgp/

INSTITUT DE PHYSIQUE DU GLOBE DE PARIS / OBSERVATOIRES VOLCANOLOGIQUES - IPGP

Institut de Physique du Globe de Paris, Boite courrier 89, 4, place Jussieu, 75252, PARIS CEDEX 5, FRANCE

http://volcano.ipgp.jussieu.fr:8080/

CNRS / GEOSCIENCES AZUR - SITE DE SOPHIA

250, rue Albert Einstein, Sophia Antipolis, 06560, VALBONNE, FRANCE

http://www-geoazur.unice.fr/

MUSEUM NATIONAL D'HISTOIRE NATURELLE / LABORATOIRE DE CRYPTOGAMIE

Museum National d'Histoire Naturel, 12, rue Buffon, 75005, PARIS, FRANCE

http://www.mnhn.fr/

INSU (I. NATIONAL SCIENCES DE L'UNIVERS) / SERV. D'OBS. EN MILIEU LITTORAL - SOMLIT

LAB. OCEANOGRAPHIE BIOLOGIQUE, (Universite Bordeaux 1), 2,rue du Professeur Jolyet, 33120, ARCACHON, FRANCE

http://www.insu.cnrs-dir.fr/

INSTITUT OCEANOGRAPHIQUE DE PARIS / BIBLIOTHEQUE - INSTITUT OCEANOGRAPHIQUE

195 rue Saint-Jacques, 75005, PARIS, FRANCE

http://www.oceano.org/

MUSEUM NATIONAL D'HISTOIRE NATURELLE / LABORATOIRE DE GEOLOGIE (MNHN)

43 rue Buffon, 75231, PARIS CEDEX 05, FRANCE

http://www.mnhn.fr/

MUSEUM NATIONAL D'HISTOIRE NATURELLE / LABORATOIRE D'OCEANOGRAPHIE PHYSIQUE

Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, 43-45 rue Cuvier, 75231, PARIS CEDEX 05, FRANCE

http://www.mnhn.fr/

MUSEUM NATIONAL D'HISTOIRE NATURELLE / LABORATOIRE D'ICHTYOLOGIE GENERALE ET A.

43 rue Cuvier, 75231, PARIS CEDEX 05, FRANCE

http://www.mnhn.fr/

MUSEUM NATIONAL D'HISTOIRE NATURELLE / LABORATOIRE D'ANATOMIE COMPAREE

55 rue Buffon, 75231, PARIS CEDEX 05, FRANCE

http://www.mnhn.fr/

MUSEUM NATIONAL D'HISTOIRE NATURELLE / LAB. DE ZOOLOGIE MAMMIFERES ET OISEAUX

55 rue Buffon, 7523, PARIS CEDEX 05, FRANCE

http://www.mnhn.fr/

INSTITUT OCEANOGRAPHIQUE DE PARIS / INSTITUT OCEANOGRAPHIQUE

195 Rue Saint Jacques, 75005, PARIS, FRANCE

http://www.oceano.org/

Universite du Littoral P.A.M.O.C. - Station MarineB.P. 80 28 avenue Foch 62930 Wimereux France

MUSEUM NATIONAL D'HISTOIRE NATURELLE / LAB. BIOLOGIE DES INVERTEBRES MARINS

57, Rue Cuvier, 75231, PARIS CEDEX 05, FRANCE

http://www.mnhn.fr/

MUSEUM NATIONAL D'HISTOIRE NATURELLE / C. RECH. BIOL. POPUL. D'OISEAUX (CRBPO)

55 rue Buffon, 75231, PARIS CEDEX 05, FRANCE

http://www.mnhn.fr/

METEO FRANCE / SCEM/SERV/FDP METEO-FRANCE, SERV. CENTR. EXPLOIT. DE LA METEOROLOGIE, 42, avenue G. Coriolis, 31057, TOULOUSE CEDEX, FRANCE

http://www.meteo.fr/scem/accueil.html

IRD / I.R.D. CENTRE DE BRETAGNE Centre IFREMER de Brest, BP 70, 29280, PLOUZANE,

http://www.brest.ird.fr/

40

CENTRE-NAME ADDRESS CENTRE-WEBSITE FRANCE

MUSEUM NATIONAL D'HISTOIRE NATURELLE / LAB. DE BIO. PARASIT., PROTIST., HELMINT

61, rue Buffon, 75231, PARIS CEDEX 05, FRANCE

http://www.mnhn.fr/

MUSEUM NATIONAL D'HISTOIRE NATURELLE / SERVICE DU PATRIMOINE NATUREL - MNHN

57 Rue Cuvier, 75231, PARIS CEDEX 05, FRANCE

http://www.mnhn.fr/

INSTITUT OCEANOGRAPHIQUE DE PARIS / INSTITUT OCEANOGRAPHIQUE

195 Rue Saint Jacques, 75005, PARIS, FRANCE

http://www.oceano.org/

UNIVERSITE DE PARIS VI / LAB. OCEANO. BIO ET ECOL. PLANCTON MARIN

FRE 2317 Lab. d'Oceanogr. Villefranche, BP 28 - La Darse, 06230, VILLEFRANCHE-SUR-MER, FRANCE

http://www.obs-vlfr.fr/

UNIVERSITE DE PARIS VI / LAB. PALEONTOLOGIE & STRATIGRAPHIE /UPMC

Universite Paris VI Boite 116, 4, place Jussieu, 75252, PARIS CEDEX 05, FRANCE

UNIVERSITE DE PARIS VI / LAB.PETROLOGIE-MAGMATOLOGIE-METALLOGENIE

Universite P. et M. Curie (Paris VI), 4, Place Jussieu (Tour 26 3eme etage), Case 110, 75252, PARIS CEDEX, FRANCE

UNIVERSITE DE PARIS VI / LABORATOIRE DE GEOCHIMIE ET METALLOGENIE

Universite P. et M. Curie, 4, place Jussieu, 75252, PARIS CEDEX 5, FRANCE

UNIVERSITE DE PARIS VI / LODYC Universite P. et M. Curie (Paris VI), 4, Place Jussieu Tour 14 2eme etage, 75252, PARIS CEDEX 05, FRANCE

http://www.lodyc.jussieu.fr/

UNIVERSITE DE PARIS VI / LPCM (O.O.VILLEFRANCHE/MER - U. PARIS 6)

Lab. Physique et Chimie Marines, Quai de la Darse, BP 8, 06238, VILLEFRANCHE-SUR-MER CEDEX, FRANCE

http://www.obs-vlfr.fr/~biocell/index.htm

UNIVERSITE DE PERPIGNAN / CEFREM

Centre F. Recherche Environnement Marin, Universite de Perpignan, 52 avenue de Villeneuve, 66860, PERPIGNAN CEDEX, FRANCE

http://www.univ-perp.fr/see/rch/lsgm/

UNIVERSITE INTERNATIONALE DE LA MER / UNIVERSITE INTERNATIONALE DE LA MER

Avenue du Capitaine de Fregate H. Vial, Port du Cros-de-Cagnes, 06800, CAGNES SUR MER, FRANCE

http://perso.wanadoo.fr/universite-internationale-de-la-mer/

UNIVERSITE DE PARIS VI / LAB. DE ZOOLOGIE MARINE U. PARIS 6

Universite PARIS 6, Case 6, 4, place Jussieu, 75252, PARIS CEDEX 05, FRANCE

UNIVERSITE DE LA MEDITERRANNEE (U2) / DPT BIOLOGIE/LAB. BIO. MAR. F&A - U.MAR2

Faculte des Sciences, Case 901, 163, Avenue de Luminy, 13288, MARSEILLE CEDEX 9, FRANCE

http://www.luminy.univ-mrs.fr/recherche/recherche.htm

UNIVERSITE DE PARIS VII / LAB.DE GEOCHIMIE DES ISOTOPES STABLES

LABORATOIRE DE GEOCHIMIE ET COSMOCHIMIE, U. PARIS VII, 2 place Jussieu, 75251, PARIS CEDEX 5, FRANCE

http://www.ipgp.jussieu.fr/francais/rub-recherche/eq04geochimie-et-isotope/acc04.html

UNIVERSITE DE PARIS VI / LAB. DE BIOLOGIE DU DEVELOPPEMENT / OOV

Station Zoologique, BP 48, 06230, VILLEFRANCHE-SUR-MER, FRANCE

http://www.obs-vlfr.fr/~biocell/index.htm

41

CENTRE-NAME ADDRESS CENTRE-WEBSITE UNIVERSITE DE PARIS VI / LAB. STRATIGRAPHIE / DPT GEO. SEDIM. P6

Universite Pierre et Marie Curie, Case 117, 4 place Jussieu, Tour 16, 4eme etage, 75252, PARIS CEDEX 05, FRANCE

UNIVERSITE DE PARIS VI / GEOSCIENCES AZUR - SITE DE VILLEFRANCHE

Observatoire Oceanologique, La Darse, BP48, 06235, VILLEFRANCHE-SUR-MER, FRANCE

http://www-geoazur.unice.fr/

UNIVERSITE DE NICE SOPHIA ANTIPOLIS / LAB. ENVIRONNEMENT MARIN LITTORAL/U.NICE

Faculte des Sciences, Universite de Nice Sophia Antipolis, Parc Valrose, 06108, NICE CEDEX 2, FRANCE

http://www.unice.fr/LEML/

UNIVERSITE DE NICE SOPHIA ANTIPOLIS / LAB. D'OCEANOG. BIOLOGIQUE, U. NICE-S.A.

Universite de Nice-Sophia Antipolis, Parc Valrose, 06108, NICE CEDEX 2, FRANCE

http://nephi.unice.fr/Medifaune/

UNIVERSITE DE MONTPELLIER II / LAB DEFENSE RESIST. INVERTEBRES MARINS

UMR 219 DRIM, Universite Montpellier 2 case 80, 2 place Eugene Bataillon, 34095, MONTPELLIER CEDEX 5, FRANCE

UNIVERSITE DE LA MEDITERRANNEE (U2) / LAB. OCEANOG. & BIOGEOCHIMIE- COM-LUMINY

UFR Centre Oceanologique de Marseille, Campus de Luminy, Case 901, 13288, MARSEILLE CEDEX 9, FRANCE

http://www.com.univ-mrs.fr/LOB/

UNIVERSITE DE BRETAGNE OCCIDENTALE (UBO) / LAB. D'OCEANO. CHIMIQUE LOC - IUEM

IUEM, Techonopole Brest Iroise, Place Nicolas Copernic, 29280, PLOUZANE, FRANCE

http://www.univ-brest.fr/IUEM/CHIMAR/

UNIVERSITE D'AIX - MARSEILLE 3 / CEREGE

Europole Mediterraneen de l'Arbois BP 80, 13545, AIX EN PROVENCE CEDEX 4, FRANCE

http://www.cerege.fr/

SHOM / EPSHOM (SERVICE HYDROGRAPHIQUE O.MARINE)

13, rue du Chatellier, BP 30316, 29603, BREST CEDEX, FRANCE

http://www.shom.fr/

UNIVERSITE LOUIS PASTEUR STRASBOURG I / C. ARCHIVAGE TRAITEMENT SISMIQUE (CATS)

Institut de Physique du Globe, Ecole et Obs. des Sciences de la Terre, 5 rue Rene Descartes, 67084, STRASBOURG CEDEX, FRANCE

http://cats.u-strasbg.fr/

UNIVERSITE DE LA MEDITERRANNEE (U2) / UMR DIMAR (DIVERSITE BIO...) COM-LUMINY

UFR Centre Oceanologie de Marseille, Campus de Luminy Case 901, 163, Av. de Luminy, 13288, MARSEILLE CEDEX 9, FRANCE

http://www.com.univ-mrs.fr/DIMAR/

Conferences also provide good starting points for building up end user databases. For example, the annual Oceanology International Conference (www.oceanologyinternational.com) attracts participants with an interest in oceanography, satellite remote sensing, marine applications etc., including researchers, trade representatives, scientists and policy makers. In addition to international meetings, France hosts a plethora of national conferences and seminars dealing with marine affairs,

42

all of which can be utilized to build up potential contacts for a comprehensive end user database. Listings of trade and professional associations are also worth investigating. Table 7 provides useful internet addresses for trade and professional associations on an international level, which may lead to additional information at national, regional and local levels, within France and within other European countries. Potential markets that may be of interest to BOOST are: National and International Space Agencies; Research Institutes; Oil Companies; Harbour Authorities; Shipping Industry; Fishing Industry; Defense; and Local and Regional Authorities. The internet addresses in Tables 6 and 7 may yield valuable information which can contribute to the establishment of a comprehensive end user contact database. Table 7. Useful internet addresses of international trade and professional associations. Association of International Shipping Agents www.A-I-S-A.com Association of National Organisations of Fishing Enterprises in the EC (EUROPECHE)

www.marinfo.net/Mar_data/Organisations/stubs/126_stub.html

Bureau Veritas, France www.bureauveritas.com Central Dredging Association www.dredging.org Det Norske Veritas, Norway www.dnv.no European Aquaculture Society www.easonline.org/ European Association of Fish Producer Organisations (AEOP)

www.matinfo.net/Mar_data/Organisations/stubs/48_stub.html

European Centre for Medium Range Weather Forecast

www.ecmrwf.int

Economic Commission for Europe, ECE of UN www.unece.org EUMETSAT www.eumetsat.de European Dredging Association (EUDA) www.matinfo.net/Mar_data/Organisations/stubs/122_s

tub.html European Environment Agency www.eea.dk European Space Agency www.esa.org European Union www.matinfo.net/Mar_data/Organisations/stubs/113_s

tub.html Federation of European Private Port operators (FEPORT)

www.espo.be

Food and Agricultural Organisation, FAO www.esrin.esa.it/ Germanischer Lloyd www.europa.eu.int Helsinki Commission – Baltic Marine Environment protection Commission

www.matinfo.net/Mar_data/Organisations/stubs/128_stub.html

Hydrographic Society Worldwide Website www.fao.org International Association of Cities and Ports www.germanlloyd.org International Association of Dredging Companies (IADC)

www.helcom.fi/

International Association of Ports and Harbours (IAPH)

www.iaph.or.jp/

International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) www.iccwbo.org International Chamber of Shipping (ICS) www.marisec.org International Council for the Exploration of the Sea

www.ices.dk

43

International Hydrographic Organisation (IHO) www.iho.shom.fr/ Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC)

ioc.unesco.org

International Salvage Union (ISU) www.marine-salvage.com International Union of Marine Insurance www.iumi.com Lloyd’s Register of Shipping, UK www.Ir.org/home.html London Convention 1972 Website www.londonconvention.org The Website for Defence Industries – Navy www.naval-technology.com/ The Website for the Oil and Gas Industry www.offshore-technology.com World Health Organisation www.who.ch World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) www.wmo.ch/ World Trade Organisation (WTO) www.wto.org

44

CHAPTER 8. PRODUCTS AND MARKETS Products Any EO derived products must comply with the following basic assumptions:

�� Reliability – that the supply of products / information is guaranteed, with quality control and verified information content.

�� Value / relevance – that the information is of significant importance to the customers’ operation.

�� Cost effectiveness – that the price of the information products are lower than the information value to the customer.

Any products developed can be classified according to a hierarchical data product scheme. This scheme consists of: Raw data - As received from the satellite; Level 0 – Reformatted, time-ordered satellite data (no overlap), in computer

compatible format; Level 1b – Geolocated engineering calibrated products:

Unconsolidated: generated in near real time; an intermediate set in near real time processing, used for instrument performance monitoring; Consolidated: generated off-line, time ordered, no overlap, no data gaps, fully validated; the basis for any further off-line processing.

Level 2 – Geolocated geophysical products Near real time: generated in near teal time from unconsolidated Level 1b products; Off line: generated from consolidated Level 1b products.

Difficulties in developing products include:

a. User requirements not being fully met with available products, b. Insecure markets limiting the degree of available end user investment, c. Lack of knowledge on the part of end users as to the capabilities of services and

products. Digital Elevation models, bathymetric charts and integrated wave climate databases can provide useful products to marine and coastal zone managers. Such products are required by: �� Ship classification associations – responsible for assessing design and performance of

ships; they require more unified and extensive global coverage of wave climate statistics than presently available.

�� Port terminal architects and engineers – planning development in remote coastal areas; they require accurate information on swell wave climate to evaluate terminal design and operation criteria.

45

�� Specialised cargo shipment companies – responsible for handling and routing vessels carrying or towing large structure such as cranes, platforms etc. They require detailed wave climate information to minimise potential metal fatigue damage caused by waves during transport.

�� Maritime insurance industry – involved in losses, claims and disputes; would benefit from forensic ability to access retrospective global wave field information against date and geographical location.

Digital Elevation Models (DEMs) DEMs could be developed to describe shoreline and landscape elevations. It would assist in modelling runoff, flood prediction, and also planning. Advantages of EO derived DEMs over land based surveys include: �� Improved accuracy: the image has potential for accuracy of 2-3m. �� Timeliness: DEMs can usually be produced within a few weeks of request. �� Low cost; typically 2 euros / km2. �� Rapid assessment of large areas. Bathymetric charts Bathymetric charts are an underlying requirement for maritime industries. Approximately 30% of existing global coastal charts are of poor quality and out dated. As hydrographic surveys are costly, EO data can in some way assist in production of bathymetric charts for shallow seas. Bathymetric charts from SAR have been produced by ARGOSS in the Netherlands. Integrated wave climate database Global ocean wave climate assessment is generally based on data derived from ship observations. The geographical coverage is restricted and there are limitations in the quality of wave period and swell estimates. EO data provides a source of high quality wave information. Benefits of using EO data include: �� Guaranteed unrestricted global coverage. �� Information on swell height, period and direction. �� Allows time referenced forensic analysis. Existing EO products and services include

��The basin screening service offered by Nigel Press Associates where frontier basins can be assessed using ERS SAR data to identify license blocks with the greatest potential for further hydrocarbon exploitation.

��The CLIOSat marine climatology service offered by MeteoMer to the offshore industry where wind and wave statistics are available for any region of the world’s oceans.

��The oil spill detection service provided by Tromso Satellite Station to the marine pollution control authorities of the North Sea area.

��The Neptune service offered by Meteo-France where up to date wind and wave forecasts, based on state of the art wind and wave models together with Fast Delivery ERS data, are provided to a variety of maritime customers.

46

��Netherlands Remote Sensing Board (BCRS) and ARGOSS - WAVEWATCH project looked at the improving wave forecasts using SAR derived data, for the offshore industry.

��BCRS – use SAR derived data to detect and monitor oil slicks. When received at near real time the SAR images provide an effective early warning method and enable the flight plan of the aircraft to be optimised.

��ARGOSS produced BAS, from SAR derived data, to determine bathymetric profiles in shallow sandy water.

��Sea State Alarm – produced by SOS UK (http://www.satobsys.co.uk). This product provides better information on wave heights for mariners, based on fast delivery radar altimeter data from ERS-2. The service provides:

��Twice daily coverage of the North Atlantic. ��A map comparing Sea State Alarm significant wave height with recent

wave forecasts. ��E-mail warnings when waves in excess of specified limits are detected. ��Electronic delivery.

47

Data Sources The Joint Research Centre (JRC) JRC has an ordered file system of remote sensing data. An overview of the directory structure: Satellite name I Area I Year I Month I Day – time Data is freely accessed via http://me-www.jrc.it Descriptive data is not currently readily available. This type of information would be of use. Frequency of update would need to be very regular. The Ocean Colour European Archive Network (OCEAN) Project – a co-ordinated initiative between the SPAI and the ESA, has performed a reappraisal of ocean colour data from the Coastal Zone Colour Scanner (CZCS) instrument. All historical data over marine regions of European concern have been considered and a comprehensive dataset of ocean colour products has been derived, archived and distributed to a known user community. The OCEAN projects is being expanded through the Ocean Colour Techniques for Observation, Proceeding and Utilisation Systems (OCTOPUS) project to exploit the new generation ocean colour sensors. The Cloud and Ocean Remote Sensing around Africa (CORSA) project has focused on the application of Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer (AVHRR) data, to provide a quality controlled data set of surface, atmospheric and cloud parameters over a time period, and at a resolution, not available from any other source. Products provided by the European Space Agency (ESA)

�� ASAR data products �� AATSR data products �� MERIS data products �� GOMOS data products �� RA-2 data products �� MIPAS data products �� MWR data products �� SCIAMACHY data products �� DORIS data products

48

Table 6 – The following scenarios are presented to illustrate what users may require from monitoring systems and what types of products and services exist to meet those needs, as identified by the Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS) Project Scenario Product and Service Solutions Web Address Local coastline water variations, seasonally, annually and in storms

GLOSS – Global Level of Sea Surface Programme

http://www.pol.ac.uk/psmsl/programmes/gloss.info.html

International Tsunami Information System

http://www.geophys.washington.edu/tsunami/welcome.html

Monitoring and predicting ocean circulation & its control of the heat flux

JCOMM Electronic Products Bulletin http://iri.ldeo.columbia.edu/climate/monitoring/ipb/

Tropical Atmosphere Ocean Array http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/tao/

Monitoring & predicting ocean circulation & its impact on rainfall variability

JCOMM Electronic Products Bulletin http://iri.ldeo.columbia.edu/climate/monitoring/ipb/

Global Ocean Observing Systems Information Centre

http://www.gos.udel.edu/

Ocean parameters to improve ship routing & efficiency of vessel operations

SMHI Marine Services/Weather Routeing

http://www.smhi.se/sgn0102/nodc/index.htm

Ocean parameters to improve operational performance of offshore operations

Bureau of Meteorology, Australia, Marine Weather & Oceanography Services

http://www.bom.gov.au/marine/

24hr and 48hr forecasts of ice & oceanographic conditions, Grand Banks & Labrador Shelf

http://www.mar.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/science/ocean/icemodel/ice_ocean_forecast.html

Improved ENSO forecasting around Pacific Basic & further afield

JCOMM Electronic Products Bulletin http://iri.ldeo.columbia.edu/climate/monitoring/ipb/

Tropical Atmosphere Ocean Array http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/tao/

49

BOOST Product Developers Developing earth observation applications require:

�� Early definition of roles of different actors. �� Different sets of actors in different development phases. �� The right emphasis on relevant activities in different phases. �� Secure key personnel involvement throughout the different phases. �� Secure continuity by neutral project management.

(Durand et al; 1999) The BOOST product developers will have to identify coastal versus deep ocean priorities. Any products developed need to be:

�� Interesting, relevant and attractive. �� Easy to buy. �� Low risk for the customer. �� Identifiable brand names, quality accreditation / association. �� Integrated IT; GIS compatible, ready to use formats.

Questions for the developers of BOOST

�� What are the existing products? �� Who produces them? �� Who uses them? �� What are existing products used for? �� What products does BOOST intend to develop? �� How would you improve on these products? �� What additional products could be developed? �� Need to identify when to use what tools, and how to use them? �� Need to provide information in near real time with highest possible reliability

on the thematic quality. �� Need to assess level of public liability with regard to decisions made on the

basis of BOOST products. The BOOST team needs to assess the following of its potential users:

�� At what level within any organisation will the product be targeted? �� What are the current working practices of the organisation? �� What are the existing economies of data and information with the organisation? �� What are the information needs of the user? �� What are their future information needs likely to be? �� Will they be required to download and process data in house? �� Will they be provided with a bureau service by the product developers, so that the

end users we receive optimal benefit from the information products? The BOOST team needs to decide:

50

�� How much work the EO data interpreters will put into product development?

�� How many products is BOOST to develop? �� To what level of spatial and temporal resolution and accuracy will

BOOST go? BOOST Products:

�� What is the typical lifetime of the products in use? �� What are the strengths and weaknesses of these products? �� What are the opportunities for refining existing products and

producing new products? �� What are the threats to your markets – who might also produce these

add on products?

51

Market In assessing the use and application of EO data to operational oceanography and ICZM, the producers need to assess:

�� number of transactions and participants. �� revenue – need to include non-charging or non-profit organisations, along

with commercial organisations. It is essential to assess the sophistication of the user, as this will affect the details of the way in which users interact with providers. Personnel involved in developing algorithms often regard the distribution of product to the end users as the most straightforward part of any application development. Consequently, little thought tends to be put into how to guarantee that a customer receives the required product within the required timescale. Implementation of an effective and efficient dedicated distribution infrastructure is essential. As used by the CEO (CEO Market and Impact Assessment Report –CEO 1999; market analysis for the CEO programme was also carried out by ESYS UK in 1995), the term market can be defined is used in the following context: In 1999, the Centre for Earth Observations reported the following number of businesses involved in EO data management:

�� Data suppliers 9 �� Value added organisations 58 �� Other organisations 7 �� Research organisations 98 �� Public organisations 106

Analysis showed that major customers were:

�� Government 75% �� Private 22% �� Science 3%

Approximately 76% of transactions were associated with data supply. (Durand et al; 1999) Howes (1999), in assessing the customer profile in Europe, concluded:

�� Public sector 60-70%; mostly national and regional administrations. �� Private sector growing – oil, gas, mobile telecomms and mapping

companies. Demand products and high level information extraction in relation to customer projects.

�� Military and meteorological services – require direct access to data.

52

By April 2004, Howes (1999) predicted: �� Mass market – general public, NGOs �� Expert – education, government, scientists – need quality, up to data, open

access. �� Professional – enterprise, government – use product to make money.

Durand et al; (1999) predicted areas for growth from 1995-2000 as:

�� Environmental monitoring. �� Agriculture. �� Mapping and planning.

This shows a shift away from the trends of the 1990s, which were: mapping and planning, agriculture, forestry and military. As summarized by Howes (1999) current weakness include:

�� Limited choices / coverage �� Unknown status of supplier. �� Price difficult to judge versus value. �� Geared towards the specialist.

Howes (1999) concluded that by the end of the 1990s, the market was characterised by poor data supply and lack of business focus. The customer perception was that EO data was difficult to secure routinely and consistently; and, that the data was of uncertain price and value, and that it was risky. The market for EO based marine information forms a significant part of the general marine information market. The full operating costs of the missions have been covered elsewhere (by ESA, NOAA etc). Service providers have the opportunity to develop service provision with the investment concerned only with a system to generate and distribute a product to the marine market. No consideration of the launch of the satellite or running costs are required. The principal barrier to the development of the market appears to be the lack of investment in the provision of a commercial product to the end user. Reasons for this include:

�� The product does not meet all the customers requirements in terms of information content, robustness, level of guarantee of delivery, cost, update rate, coverage or product quality.

�� The product might not be available for certain geographical areas. �� The perceived returns do not sufficiently justify investment by the end users. �� End users are unaware of the availability of suitable services.

Marine operators may have a tendency to make do with lower quality products rather than invest in new untested technologies where the benefits have not been fully demonstrated.

53

In the development chain: Instrument – 1st process ESA product generation – 2nd process data extraction from ESA product – 3rd process end user product synthesis – 4th process product distribution. The 2nd process, by which signatures are identified within the ERS data and the assimilation into the product generation scheme is well understood. The points where development is required are:

�� The process by which an end product is synthesised. �� The methods by which this product is then distributed to end users.

End user confidence in product quality, reliability and relevance must be enhanced. This could be partly achieved by making products more robust in varying operating conditions. The EO data customer is seldom the final receiver of the information. There is a reluctance by end users to invest in the development of the services. As summarised by Campbell (1996), this may be attributable to:

�� Available products are currently meeting all the market requirements in terms of reliability, delivery times, product quality, update time, information content.

�� The new market emerging for such information systems is developing from service that were originally provided for free or where costs were hidden

�� New data sources were still regarded as unreliable to a certain extent by customers.

�� Financial benefits arising from making use of such services can be such that the return occurs over an extended period of time. In annual accounts, it is often difficult to justify an extensive investment in any system where the immediate returns are low.

Application sectors to target There are several application sectors within coastal waters. As summarised by Durand et al. (1999), those requiring environmental data, including remote sensing data are:

��Public health ��Tourism and leisure ��Coastal protection (external forcing, sea level rise, erosion) ��Fisheries (policy enforcement, fleet monitoring, resource management ��Shellfish waters and water suitable for fish-breeding and mariculture ��Integrated coastal zone management (planning / decision making, harbour management, environmental management). ��Water quality and pollution (phytoplankton, sea surface temperature (SST), oil spill detection, suspended matter. ��Waste management, removal and disposal of disused offshore oil and gas. ��Water level and storm forecast(extreme sea level rise, erosion, risk assessment).

54

��Coastal surveying, including environmental monitoring (pollution and water quality surveillance). ��Mapping, including bathymetry (updating coastal map and admiralty charts). ��Meteorology (forecasting, hindcasting, modeling). ��Shipping (routing and traffic monitoring). ��Engineering (planning and construction). ��Hinterland monitoring (land use, agriculture, vegetation, flood risk assessment).

55

Marketing in BOOST: BOOST - Value added observation data of the ocean through remote sensing. We must understand the objectives of the consortium. Consultation with the potential market:

�� Identify and define the market / audience. �� Determine the user goals and expectations. �� Describe the available data banks. �� Match user requirements with data availability. �� Determine target areas.

Specifically �� What level of involvement will BOOST have in marketing? �� How will BOOST identify its market – are there customers out there willing to

pay for the products that BOOST intends to develop? �� Will BOOST distinguish between commercial market and general interest /

research market? �� Will it visit potential commercial customers to demonstrate the potential of the

products? �� Will BOOST respect the customer by listening to their needs and attempting to

produce a product of relevance? �� Will BOOST incorporate a level of liability disclaimer into any products that it

develops, in the event of such products assisting decision makers? Questions for the BOOST Developers

�� What is your market? �� What is your market size? �� Can you identify a niche appropriate to BOOST? �� What is the key issue that motivates how, what, where, when (the resultant why)

your customers buy? �� What are the economic circumstances of your customers – will or can they pay? �� Are your customers needs being satisfied? �� How quickly do the customers respond to and acquire the current trends in

buying? �� What service package will you provide – timely, high quality, training,

maintenance?

56

BOOST Developers need to do a SWOT analysis of their business Strengths of BOOST Weaknesses of BOOST Opportunities of BOOST Threats to BOOST Where do the BOOST developers want to go with their business What are your sales targets? What are your core products / services?

57

What market share do you want to achieve? What are your ambitions for BOOST? Once the BOOST consortium has identified its profile, it will have to decide:

�� What will BOOST sell and what markets will it target? �� How will BOOST set up production and distribution of its product and services? �� How many staff will BOOST require and what skills will they have to bring to

the business? �� Finance – how will the start up phase be funded? Long term running costs?

Need to document marketing objectives and strategies. A thorough analysis of the market will enable the BOOST consortium to determine whether it is capable of meeting the long-range financial targets with its range of products. The consortium needs to identify what BOOST wants to achieve – objectives. Then, they have to determine how BOOST plans to achieve these objectives – strategy. Any marketing strategy would ideally consider:

�� Product: additions, deletions, modifications, design and packaging. �� Pricing policies: for different product groups. �� Location: distribution and level of customer service. �� Promotion: advertising, mailing, PR, exhibitions, conferences.

The resultant strategy would contain:

�� A financial summary.

58

�� A market overview. �� SWOT analysis and summary. �� A list of assumptions. �� Objectives and strategies. �� Budget for implementing strategy.

59

Competitors The BOOST consortium must also identify its competitors. During compilation of this report, the authors became aware of the following service providers to maritime operators. The consortium members will have a much greater awareness of service providers and competitors.

��Matra Systemes & Information - various ��ARGOSS - BAS ��SOS UK – Sea State Alarm ��BCRS NL – various ��ERA-Maptec Ltd, Irl ��Research Systems International (UK) Ltd. ��THORN Satcom Data Services ��EOS Earth Observation Science Ltd, UK ��British National Space Centre (BNSC) – advises and acts on behalf of Government

and Research Councils. ��Nigel Press Group, UK ��UK Defence Evaluation Research Agency ��ESYS Ltd, UK ��OCEANOR, Norway ��NERSC - Norway ��National Meteorological Services? ��JRC? / ESA?

Associations BARSC - British Association of Remote Sensing Companies – conserves, promotes and protects the interests of, and encourages co-operation between all UK companies and partnerships offering and undertaking consulting and contracting services in the field of EO. 25 members (1998). UKISC – UK Industrial Space Committee – the trade association of the British space industry and represents the collective interests of member companies in increasing space and space-related business. 21 members (1998). ASTOS – Association for Specialists Technical Oganisations for Space represents SMEs in the industry, in engineering, software, consultancy, parts evaluation / procurement including space derived applications. 12 members (1998).

60

REFERENCES ABDMAP Project http://wwwmarin.natgeo.su.se/projects/abdmap/ Bosman, J., Flemming, N. C., Holden, N., and Taylor, K. (1998) The EuroGOOS Marine Technology Survey. EuroGOOS publication No. 4, Southampton Oceanography Centre, Southampton. ISBN 0-904175-29-4. 48pp. Campbell, (1996) CEO (1994) Issues in European Earth Observation Infrastructure. CEO/154/1994. 22pp. CEO (1995) Pathfinder Study on the Coastal Zone: Final Report. ACRI, under contract to CEO. ACR-CEO-FR. 152pp Clean Seas Project http://www.satobsys.co.uk/CSeas/ Desima Project http://desima.jrc.it/ Doody, J. P., Pamplin, C. F., Gilbert, C., and Bridge, L. (1998) Thematic Study F: Information Required for Integrated Coastal Zone Management. European Union Demonstration Programme on Integrated Management in Coastal Zones. Study contract reference number 3050/STU/9700186. 71pp. Durand, D., Pozdnyakov, D., Sandven, S., Cauneau, F., Wald, L., Jacob, A., Kloster, and K., Miles, M. (1999) Characterisation of Inland and Coastal Waters with Space Sensors. European Commission. A study for the Centre for Earth Observation (CEO). Study contract reference number 1409-1998-06F1ED ISP NO. Eleveld, M. K., Siegert, A. G., Schrimpf, B. H. (1999) CoastBase Information Definition and User Requirements. JRC SAI Marine Environment Unit, Monitoring and Assessment of Coastal Environment.. 67pp. ESA Coastal Zone Earthwatch Study http://www.acri.fr/EWPub/ EuroGOOS Project http://www.eurogoos.org/ Fischer, J., and Flemming, N. C. (1999) Operational Oceanography: Data Requirements Survey, EuroGOOS Publication No. 12, Southampton Oceanography Centre, Southampton. ISBN 0-904175-36-7. 60pp. Flemming, N. C. (2001). The EuroGOOS Analysis of the Need for Operational Ocean Remote Sensing. From: Operational Ocean Observations from Space. EuroGOOS Publication No.16, May 2001, pages 6-12.

61

Frey 1997; Ocean Data Symposium, Dublin Guymer, T. H, Flemmin, N. C., Font, J., Gaspar, P., Johannessen, J., van der Kolff, G. H., le Provost, C., Ratier, A., Williams, D. (2001) EuroGOOS Conference on Operational Ocean Observations from Space. EuroGOOS Publications No. 16, Southampton Oceanograpgy Centre, Southampton. ISBN 0-904175-44-8. 131pp. Howes ICAMS project http://www.eos.co.uk/ICAMS/ Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission. (2000). First GOOS User’s Forum. Draft. GOOS Report No. 92 UNESCO. Reports of Meetings of Experts and Equivalent Bodies. 72pp. Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (2000) First GOOS Users Forum. Draft 2000. Reports of Meetings of Experts and Equivalent Bodies. GOOS Report no. 92. Jenkins, A., Sandven, S., Korsbakken, E., Hanre, T., Pettersson, L. H., Kees, M., Wensink, H., Reistad, M., Connolly, N., O Leary, E., Miles, M. (1997). Identification of Gaps Between Current Monitoring Technology and User Requirements. Metocean and Coastal Zone Monitoring in Harbour Regions using Satellite Radar. Contract No. ENV4-CT96-0360. 70pp LaCoast Project http://www.lacoast.gov/ MARSAIS http://marsais.ucc.ie McDonald (1998) EuroGOOS. (2001) North West Shelf Operational Oceanographic System 2002-2006. 63pp. NOOS – Strategic Plan. North West Shelf Operational Oceanographic System. 2002-2006. EuroGOOS publication No. 18. November 2001. Westinga, E., Bijker, W., van Dijk, K., Savenije, H., Heering, J., Looyen, W., and Overbosch, E. (1999). Technical Document 2: Design of the User Needs Assessment Study. User Requirements Study for Remote Sensing Based Spatial Informarion for the Sustainable Management of Forests. 12pp.

62

APPENDIX A END USER QUESTIONNAIRE BASED AROUND OPEN ENDED QUESTIONS

63

QUESTIONNAIRE

PART A GENERAL

1. Name of respondent

2. Position/responsibilities of respondent

3. Name of organization

4. Function of your organization (e.g. academic, research, consulting, centre/local government)

5. Address

6. Telephone

7. Email

64

PART B DATA

8. Area(s) of special interest: (Tick appropriate boxes)

Physical oceanography Marine biology

Civil engineering

Meteorology

Coastal management

Modeling

Other _____________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

9. What type of coastal information do you require? (Tick appropriate boxes)

Wind speed and direction

Wave information

Currents, slicks, eddies

Bathymetry

Sea state

Chemistry

Biology

Other _____________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________

65

10. How do you measure these parameters at the moment?

Parameter_______________Method____________________________________________

Parameter_______________Method____________________________________________

Parameter_______________Method____________________________________________

Parameter_______________Method____________________________________________

11. What is the general IT/GIS capacity and capability of your organisation?

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

12. Does your organisation presently use Remote Sensing (RS) data? Yes No

13. If you have answered yes to Q12, please describe the data type and the data’s primary use

Data_______________Use___________________________________________________

Data_______________Use___________________________________________________

Data_______________Use___________________________________________________

Data_______________Use___________________________________________________

14. If you have answered no to Q12, is a lack of computer resources limiting your ability to utilise RS data?

Yes No

15. Please describe the capacity of your organisation for utilisation of RS data under the following headings.

Hardware__________________________________________________________________

Software___________________________________________________________________

Staff Specialities_____________________________________________________________

Prospects for future staff training________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

66

16. What is the scale of data (spatial resolution) required by your organization (e.g. accuracy within metres or within kilometers or greater)? (Please use extra pages if you are using more than 3 data types)

Data_________________ Data_________________ Data__________________

Sub meter accuracy Sub meter accuracy Sub meter accuracy

1-10m 1-10m 1-10m

10-100m 10-100m

100-500m 100-500m 100-500m

500m-1km 500m-1km 500m-1km

1km-10km 1km-10km 1km-10km

Greater than 10km Greater than 10km Greater than 10km

Other________________ Other________________ Other________________

10-100m

17. What time scales are you interested in (temporal resolution) e.g. hourly, monthly?

Data_________________ Data_________________ Data__________________

Hourly Hourly Hourly

Daily Daily Daily

Weekly Weekly Weekly

Monthly Monthly Monthly

Seasonally Seasonally Seasonally

Yearly Yearly Yearly

Other________________ Other________________ Other________________

18. How can the data collection /monitoring techniques currently used by your organization be improved?

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

67

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

PART C SAR

19. Does your organization use SAR data? (If yes please proceed to question 20, if no please proceed to question 27).

Yes No

20. When did you start using SAR data? _________________________________________

21. Specifically, what are you using SAR data for?

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

22. Do you think that you are using SAR to its full potential? Yes No

23. Do you see economic benefits from using SAR (in comparison with the cost of the methods used at present)?

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

24. What other data/information (that you are not presently deriving) would you be interested in deriving from SAR? (Tick appropriate boxes)

�� Sea state estimates including wind speed & direction

�� Sea state estimates including wave field including amplitude, wavelength & direction

68

�� Feature estimates including surface current gradients, converging and diverging current system, meso-scale eddies, internal waves and shallow water bathymetry

�� Slick estimates including determination and classification of low

scattering areas into presence of natural film, oil spill, and seepage.

Other ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 25. Do you see potential for the synergetic use of SAR alongside other data, e.g. optical and infrared

data from satellites in marine coastal monitoring systems? (If yes please give details).

Yes No

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

26. Have you had problems using SAR data? (If yes please give details).

Yes No

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

If your organization does not presently use SAR data please answer the following questions.

27. Were you aware of SAR data and its possible uses before the workshop?

Yes No

28. What benefits do you see for your organization in using SAR data in the future? _______

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

29. What potential problems do you see in the use of SAR data? _______________________

___________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________

69

30. Does your organization have a budget to incorporate new types of data in the future?

Yes No

PART D OTHER

31. Is there anyone from your country that we should contact who is not presently participating in the MARSAIS User Group (MUG)?

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

32. Would you like to comment on any topics not covered by this questionnaire?

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

33. Would you like to be kept informed of the future progress of the MARSAIS project?

Yes No

Thank you for your cooperation in completing this questionnaire.

70

APPENDIX B

END USER QUESTIONNAIRE WITH SAR EMPHASIS BASED ON MULTI CHOICE

71

END USER REQUIRMENTS SURVEY

General Information

Name of respondent …………………………………………………………………………

Position in organisation …………………………………………………………………………

Name of organization …………………………………………………………………………

Address …………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………

Telephone …………………………………………………………………………

Email …………………………………………………………………………

Application Areas Please list here the activities your organisation for which you require marine and coastal data. Table 1 lists a range of industrial, commercial, service and research activities. Please select from Table 1 the activity, which most closely describes your organisation, and enter the number or numbers below.

Sector of Applications: Number(s) from Table 1 ………………………….

You may add a note explaining your applications in more details if you wish.

Details of application (optional) …………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………

Please return the completed questionnaire to: Thankyou.

72

END USER REQUIRMENTS SURVEY Use of SAR data Do you use SAR data? YES NO If no, is cost a limiting factor? YES NO If no, is capability (e.g. training and know how) a limiting factor? YES NO If no, is lack of capacity (e.g. hardware and software infrastructure) a limiting factor?

YES NO

If yes, please complete the rest of this form. The characteristics defined by this form refer to the SAR products delivered to you the user, not the original observations carried out. Please complete as much of the forms as possible. 1 2 3 4 Variable(s) associated with use of SAR data [select from Table 2]

Geographic Coverage

grade SAR Product Type

grade Sensor Synergy grade

Estuarine Unprocessed Image

Optical

Coastal seas Processed Image

Hyperspectral

Shelf seas Statistics Infra Red Ocean basin Radar Hemisphere Laser Global Other

5 6 7 8 Variable Accuracy

grade Variable Precision

grade Latency Delivery

grade Delivery Medium

grade

0.01% 0.01% 6 hours Tape 0.10% 0.10% 12 hours Disc/CD 1.00% 1.00% 1 day Network/email 10% 10% 5 days Shipboard 20% 20% 1 month Fax 30% 30% 6 months Hard copy Other Notes

73

1