Making better sense of the mosaic of environmental measurement networks: a system-of-systems approach and quantitative assessment

Abstract

Abstract. There are numerous networks and initiatives concerned with the non-satellite observing segment of Earth Observation. These are owned and operated by various entities and organisations often with different practices, norms, data policies etc. The Horizon 2020 project GAIA-CLIM is working to improve our collective ability to use an appropriate subset of these observations to rigorously characterise satellite observations. The first fundamental question is which observations from the mosaic of non-satellite observational capabilities are appropriate for such an application. This requires an assessment of the relevant, quantifiable aspects of the measurement series which are available. While fundamentally poor or incorrect measurements can be relatively easily identified, it is metrologically impossible to be sure that a measurement series is correct. Certain assessable aspects of the measurement series can, however, build confidence in their scientific maturity and appropriateness for given applications. These are aspects such as that it is well documented, well understood, representative, updated, publicly available, maintains rich metadata etc. Entities such as the Global Climate Observing System have suggested a hierarchy of networks whereby different subsets of the observational capabilities are assigned to different layers based upon such assessable aspects. Herein, we make a first attempt to formalise both such a system-of-systems networks concept and a means by which to, as objectively as possible, assess where in this framework different networks may reside. In this study, we concentrate upon networks measuring primarily a sub-set of the atmospheric Essential Climate Variables of interest to GAIA-CLIM activities. We show assessment results from our application of the guidance and how we plan to use this in downstream exemplary applications of the GAIA-CLIM project. However, the approach laid out could be more widely applicable. If broadly adopted, the system-of-systems approach will have potential benefits in guiding users to the most appropriate set of observations for their needs, and in highlighting to network owners and operators areas for potential improvement.

Land Surface Air Temperature Data Are Considerably Different Among BEST‐LAND, CRU‐TEM4v, NASA‐GISS, and NOAA‐NCEI

“…With appropriate statistical methods, combining global station network observations, reanalysis temperature data, and remotely sensed temperature products to generate a spatial‐complete LSAT data is possible. Efforts in this aspect are already ongoing, which could significantly benefit climate change studies requiring LSAT data sets (Merchant et al, ; Thorne, Madonna, et al, ).…”

Towards a Traceable Climate Service: Assessment of Quality and Usability of Essential Climate Variables

“…(1) The historically heterogeneous governance structures of in-situ observation networks have inevitably led to significant difference in data policy, adoption of network nomenclatures and practices. The consequence of this heterogeneity places end users in a dilemma to understand the measurement systems and networks, on an ECV-by-ECV basis, while not likely having the time and/or the necessary in-depth knowledge and expertise to achieve a full understanding [54,82,83]; (2) The lack of a commonly adopted system-of-systems approach to enhance linkages between the different components of the climate observing system, such as infrastructure co-location, inter-comparison campaigns, information sharing, training and development [27,83].…”

“…Climate Reference Network) [79,86,87]. The endeavor to approach the second barrier is only recently made within the GAIA-CLIM project [83], wherein the Measurement System Maturity Matrix (MSMM) was proposed to be adapted to serve the purpose of system-of-systems approach, based upon the substantial work undertaken by CORE-CLIMAX [11] and a number of precursor studies assessing dataset maturity [88].…”

“…Particularly, the logical structure of the Architecture for Climate Monitoring from Space (ACMS) can be used as a "template" to map the description of the use case, enabling the practical demonstration of ACMS. There are ongoing efforts on addressing the incorporation of independently coordinated in-situ observation networks into the ACMS, ultimately yielding a description of the functional components of an integrated, in-situ and space-based climate monitoring system [29,79,83,89].…”

“…There are many more programs and initiatives with the context of quality assurance of ECV CDRs from space, when looking at the international and European landscape of climate services [4,26]. Nevertheless, there is not yet a consistent, international coordination mechanism for in-situ observations and reanalysis for climate services [11,29,35,54,83,89,103,104]. It is evident that the upstream of climate services has been developing and maturing, while the midstream and downstream are still in their infancy [105,106].…”