Mr Karl reviewed some of the background of the panel for the participants. He noted that, since its inception in 1994, the GCOS Data and Information Management Panel (DIMP), had collaborated with GOOS and GTOS, in particular as related to the climate elements from the ocean and land surface. The ‘expanded’ DIMP, the Joint Data and Information Management Panel, will now, in partnership with the G3OS, address the additional data and information management needs of the other modules within these two observing systems. This is a substantial new responsibility, and will require the cooperation, collective thought, and energy among all parties concerned to develop and implement an effective and coordinated observing system.
The Chairman noted that over the past years DIMP has had some success in meeting some of its goals, but at this juncture JDIMP must make a transition, re-examine its objectives in terms of the needs of all three observing systems, and prioritize the most expeditious course of action. At the present time, not only are GOOS and GTOS looking toward JDIMP for data management leadership, but the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP) projects, such as the Climate Variability and Predictability Study (CLIVAR), have publicly stated that they will use JDIMP to assist them with their data management issues. Although there are many users and a lot that could be done, the panel may have to examine, not only what would be good to do, but who will be a champion for each project. Without such champions, either individuals or institutions, even good ideas will not be effectively implemented.
The JDIMP has both a scientific and a technical role with respect to the terms of reference as currently written. The technical role is obvious with respect to data access, archival, and distribution, but the scientific role is equally critical as it relates to providing data of adequate or known quality to address specific science questions. JDIMP has two basic responsibilities: first it has to ensure effective and efficient access to data, products, and information, and second it must ensure that the users are provided with the highest quality data, products, and information. This latter responsibility requires the application of scientific knowledge to adequately assess and build databases, products, and information sources.
He noted that based on past experience, data systems, even distributed ones, seem to work best when they are built for specific applications and users in mind. If true, the question JDIMP must address is to what extent must our data system(s) be generalized? Is the development of an “Information Center” (IC) the common denominator that links together a variety of systems? Then to what extent, if any, do we require common formats and protocols among the data systems comprising the data and information flow for the G3OS programmes?
How do we go about ensuring adequate data quality to the users of the G3OS databases? Again, this is likely to require knowledge of the user needs. Some applications will require long-time series with minimal time-invariant biases, while others may require dense observations with relaxed time-dependent observing biases. So, JDIMP may best serve its community of users through a variety of quality control schemes, but with strict adherence toward practices which ensure that all users are fully aware of the implications of the control upon the data, products, and information they receive through G3OS.
Since observations are not made without a purpose, perhaps one of the more important considerations for JDIMP at this stage should be an aggressive view toward our ability to provide critical data and information services to ongoing programmes such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), CLIVAR, the Global Energy and Water Cycle Experiment (GEWEX), the World Ocean Circulation Experiment (WOCE), and others. This is where the panel will need to have some serious discussion. Clearly there are many existing international data systems in place that are working quite effectively. How does JDIMP complement and build upon such activities? Working with the user communities is clearly necessary, but this first requires knowing who they are. Subsequently, we will need to identify their current and future needs.
Clearly, many challenges lie ahead for JDIMP. None will be overcome however without the identification of “champions” willing to take on specific challenges. JDIMP would be well served by ensuring we have such champions in mind as we identify our primary tasks.
