Suchergebnisse

Uncertainty over the data quality of Volunteered Geographic Information (VGI) is the largest barrier to the use of this data source by National Mapping Agencies (NMAs) and other government bodies. A considerable body of literature exists that has examined the quality of VGI as well as proposed methods for quality assessment. The purpose of this chapter is to review current data quality indicators for geographic information as part of the ISO 19157 (2013) standard and how these have been used to evaluate the data quality of VGI in the past. Tese indicators include positional, thematic and temporal accuracy, completeness, logical consistency and usability. Additional indicators that have been proposed for VGI are then presented and discussed. In the final section of the chapter, the idea of integrated indicators and workflows of quality assurance that combine many assessment methods into a filtering system is highlighted as one way forward to improve confidence in VGI. ; COST action TD1202 (Mapping and the Citizen Sensor)

The Digital Observatory for Protected Areas (DOPA) has been developed to support the European Union's efforts in strengthening our capacity to mobilize and use biodiversity data, information and forecasts so that they are readily accessible to policymakers, managers, experts and other users. Conceived as a set of web based services [1,2], DOPA provides a broad set of free and open source tools to assess, monitor and even forecast the state of and pressure on protected areas at local, regional and global scale. Recognized by the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) as a reference information system, DOPA Explorer is a web based interface of the DOPA providing simple means to rank protected areas at the country and ecoregion levels. It further provides users with the information at the site level species, important ecosystems and the pressures they are exposed to because of human activities. First launched in 2015, and recently updated in 2018, the DOPA Explorer 2.0 currently documents all protected areas in the world at least as large as 50 km2, around 23 000 of them covering in total more than 95% of the global protected surface. Distinguishing between terrestrial, marine and mixed protected areas, DOPA Explorer can help end users, for example, to identify those exposed to highest pressure and at the same time hosting unique threatened biodiversity. The DOPA provides a broad range of consistent and comparable indicators, based on global reference datasets, on protected area coverage, connectivity, species, ecosystems, ecosystem services and pressures at multiple (country, ecoregion and protected area) scales. These indicators are derived from more than 400 metrics and include new indicators on the connectivity of protected area systems as well as new indicators derived from Copernicus services that highlight changes in the land cover, surface water and built-up areas in protected areas. These indicators are particularly relevant for Aichi Biodiversity Target 11 (Protected Areas) of the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the UN Sustainable Development Goals 14 (Life below Water) and 15 (Life on Land), and can be used to support spatial planning, conservation and international reporting. It is the purpose of this presentation to introduce the audience with this new DOPA Explorer 2.0 tool as released in February 2018. The above work has been made with the kind collaboration of the UN Environment World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC), the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and BirdLife International. References 1. Dubois et al. 2016. Integrating multiple spatial datasets to assess protected areas: Lessons learnt from the DOPA. International Journal of Geo-Information ISPRS 5(12), 242; doi:10.3390/ijgi5120242 2. Bastin et al. 2017. Processing conservation indicators with Open Source tools: lessons learned from the DOPA. Proceedings of the FOSS4G Conference 2017", Boston, USA, 14 -19 August 2017. ; peerReviewed

Interest in the formal representation of citizen science comes from portals, platforms, and catalogues of citizen science projects; scientists using citizen science data for their research; and funding agencies and governments interested in the impact of citizen science initiatives. Having a common understanding and representation of citizen science projects, their participants, and their outcomes is key to enabling seamless knowledge and data sharing. In this chapter, we provide a conceptual model comprised of the core citizen science concepts with which projects and data can be described in a standardised manner, focusing on the description of the participants and their activities. The conceptual model is the outcome of a working group from the COST Action CA15212 Citizen Science to Promote Creativity, Scientific Literacy, and Innovation throughout Europe, established to improve data standardisation and interoperability in citizen science activities. It utilises past models and contributes to current standardisation efforts, such as the Public Participation in Scientific Research (PPSR) Common Conceptual Model and the Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) standards. Its design is intended to fulfil the needs of different stakeholders, as illustrated by several case studies which demonstrate the model's applicability.

24 pages, 4 figures, 3 tables ; Interest in the formal representation of citizen science comes from portals, platforms, and catalogues of citizen science projects; scientists using citizen science data for their research; and funding agencies and governments interested in the impact of citizen science initiatives. Having a common understanding and representation of citizen science projects, their participants, and their outcomes is key to enabling seamless knowledge and data sharing. In this chapter, we provide a conceptual model comprised of the core citizen science concepts with which projects and data can be described in a standardised manner, focusing on the description of the participants and their activities. The conceptual model is the outcome of a working group from the COST Action CA15212 Citizen Science to Promote Creativity, Scientific Literacy, and Innovation throughout Europe, established to improve data standardisation and interoperability in citizen science activities. It utilises past models and contributes to current standardisation efforts, such as the Public Participation in Scientific Research (PPSR) Common Conceptual Model and the Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) standards. Its design is intended to fulfil the needs of different stakeholders, as illustrated by several case studies which demonstrate the model's applicability ; Peer reviewed

The Digital Observatory for Protected Areas (DOPA) has been developed to support the European Union's efforts in strengthening our capacity to mobilize and use biodiversity data so that they are readily accessible to policymakers, managers, researchers and other users. Assessing protected areas for biodiversity conservation at national, regional and international scales implies that methods and tools are in place to evaluate characteristics such as the protected areas' connectivity, their species assemblages (including the presence of threatened species), the uniqueness of their ecosystems, and the threats these areas are exposed to. Typical requirements for such analyses are data on protected areas, information on species distributions and threat status, and information on ecosystem distributions. By integrating all these global data consistently in metrics and indicators, the DOPA provides the means to allow end-users to evaluate protected areas individually but also to compare protected areas at the country and ecoregion level to, for example, identify potential priorities for further conservation research, action and funding. Since the metrics and indicators are available through web services, the DOPA further allows end-users to develop their own applications without requiring management of large databases and processing capacities. In addition to examples illustrating how the DOPA can be used as an aid to decision making, we discuss the lessons learnt in the development of this global biodiversity information system, and outline planned future developments for further supporting conservation strategies

Much biodiversity data is collected worldwide, but it remains challenging to assemble the scattered knowledge for assessing biodiversity status and trends. The concept of Essential Biodiversity Variables (EBVs) was introduced to structure biodiversity monitoring globally, and to harmonize and standardize biodiversity data from disparate sources to capture a minimum set of critical variables required to study, report and manage biodiversity change. Here, we assess the challenges of a 'Big Data' approach to building global EBV data products across taxa and spatiotemporal scales, focusing on species distribution and abundance. The majority of currently available data on species distributions derives from incidentally reported observations or from surveys where presence-only or presence–absence data are sampled repeatedly with standardized protocols. Most abundance data come from opportunistic population counts or from population time series using standardized protocols (e.g. repeated surveys of the same population from single or multiple sites). Enormous complexity exists in integrating these heterogeneous, multi-source data sets across space, time, taxa and different sampling methods. Integration of such data into global EBV data products requires correcting biases introduced by imperfect detection and varying sampling effort, dealing with different spatial resolution and extents, harmonizing measurement units from different data sources or sampling methods, applying statistical tools and models for spatial inter- or extrapolation, and quantifying sources of uncertainty and errors in data and models. To support the development of EBVs by the Group on Earth Observations Biodiversity Observation Network (GEO BON), we identify 11 key workflow steps that will operationalize the process of building EBV data products within and across research infrastructures worldwide. These workflow steps take multiple sequential activities into account, including identification and aggregation of various raw data sources, data quality control, taxonomic name matching and statistical modelling of integrated data. We illustrate these steps with concrete examples from existing citizen science and professional monitoring projects, including eBird, the Tropical Ecology Assessment and Monitoring network, the Living Planet Index and the Baltic Sea zooplankton monitoring. The identified workflow steps are applicable to both terrestrial and aquatic systems and a broad range of spatial, temporal and taxonomic scales. They depend on clear, findable and accessible metadata, and we provide an overview of current data and metadata standards. Several challenges remain to be solved for building global EBV data products: (i) developing tools and models for combining heterogeneous, multi-source data sets and filling data gaps in geographic, temporal and taxonomic coverage, (ii) integrating emerging methods and technologies for data collection such as citizen science, sensor networks, DNA-based techniques and satellite remote sensing, (iii) solving major technical issues related to data product structure, data storage, execution of workflows and the production process/cycle as well as approaching technical interoperability among research infrastructures, (iv) allowing semantic interoperability by developing and adopting standards and tools for capturing consistent data and metadata, and (v) ensuring legal interoperability by endorsing open data or data that are free from restrictions on use, modification and sharing. Addressing these challenges is critical for biodiversity research and for assessing progress towards conservation policy targets and sustainable development goals. ; This paper emerged from the first two workshops of the Horizon 2020 project GLOBIS‐B (GLOBal Infrastructures for Supporting Biodiversity research; http://www.globis‐b.eu/). Financial support came from the European Commission (grant 654003). C. A. additionally received funding from the LifeWatchGreece infrastructure (MIS 384676), funded by the Greek Government under the General Secretariat of Research and Technology (GSRT), ESFRI Projects and National Strategic Reference Framework (NSRF). M. O. was supported by the Swedish LifeWatch project funded by the Swedish Research Council (Grant no. 829‐2009‐6278), and J.E. by the Australian Research Council (grant FT0991640).