Sustainability Discussion Part I

1. Sustainability Discussion Part I Committee on Earth Observation Satellites • Steve Volz, CEOS SIT Chair • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) • CEOS SIT-34 • Session 2, Agenda Item 2.4 • Miami, FL, USA • 3 – 4 April 2019

2. Actions Address 32-12 first, then 32-11 and 32-13.

3. “The interim goal of a Constellation is to demonstrate the value of a collaborative partnership in addressing a key observational gap; the end goal is to sustain the routine collection of critical observations. Implementation of Constellation activities is ultimately dependent on the coordination of formal agreements among participating agencies.” - Virtual Constellations Process Paper 2013 VCs were created to address gaps in missions and inform agencies on how to plan for future missions, maintain continuity of measurements and climate records, and avoid duplication and overlap in EO missions. • Four Prototype VCs created at SIT-19 (Sep 2006) to “give balance across different domains and geographies with an eye on leverage of international linkages to support continuity of funding for missions at the time which were under some threat” Ocean Surface Topography (NOAA and EUMETSAT) Atmospheric Composition (NASA) Land Surface Imaging (USGS) Precipitation (JAXA and NASA) VCs circa 2019 • Virtual Constellations • A Little History and Current Situation

4. Focused on specific observing targets or themes (ocean vector winds, precipitation, sea surface temperature, etc.), tied to a small set of technologies or singular measurement technology • Identified potential gaps in critical measurements and missions that existed around disciplines of land imaging, precipitation, altimetry, and atmospheric chemistry Timeline: • 2006-2007 Four prototypes • OST-VC: NOAA & EUMETSAT • AC-VC: NASA • LSI-VC: USGS • P-VC: JAXA & NASA • 2008 VC Process Paper formalized and two additional VCs • OSVW-VC: NOAA, EUMETSAT & ISRO • OCR-VC: EC, NASA, ESA, ISRO • 2011 CEOS Self Study • SST-VC: ESA, NOAA • 2013 VC Process Paper updated • LSI-VC reorganization • SIT Chair (NASA) works with VCs to compile Statement of Deliverables in Support of 2015 GEOSS by CEOS • 2015 GEOSS’ first decade comes to an end • Virtual Constellations • A Little History and Current Situation

5. VC Leadership 2006-2012

6. VC Leadership 2013-2019

7. 2018 VC Questionnaire and SIT-33 Goals • Try and assemble a common information set to take stock of the current status of each VC • Assess what observation objectives are being considered • Gather views on the suitability of the current VC reporting and feedback structure within CEOS • Determine how to best communicate the significant contributions of the VCs to the CEOS community • Identify shortcomings, and share best practices and successes Selected of Key Statements in Response • Resources, best efforts are a challenge • Visibility VCs bring is important • Perceived difficulty in scaling to support broader themes • Rigorous gap analysis does influence agency planning • Strong engagement from thematic community required • Raison d’etre of CEOS, i.e. sustainment and enhancement of satellite EO, should remain paramount

8. Success in defining and championing satellite constellations and ensuring observation continuity • Requested each VC to provide processes for leadership transition and refreshment • Virtual Constellations • Current Leadership

9. Proposals from the VCs CEOS-32-12 VC Leadership Rotation

10. Propose for discussion and consideration a restructure of the CEOS Virtual Constellations: • Merge the four current ocean-related VCs into a single Ocean VC focused on creating an integrated and coordinated multi-variable picture of oceans. • Merge AC-VC and P-VC into an Atmosphere VC. • LSI-VC already follows this model, looking at a “family” of variables for integrated picture of the land, and is popised to become the Land VC. Context: • This approach could better enable CEOS to support the community and user needs that draw on products and information from across different existing VCs. • The global satellite observing system has expanded significantly over the past 10+ years, and the selection of satellites has been informed in part by CEOS VC reports and assessments. • Proliferation of satellite systems have significantly lowered the risk of gaps in major satellite measurements, and increases the resiliency of the integrated global observing system to address measurement continuity risks. • VCs will continue to coordinate closely with thematic international science teams. • Demands by users for ready-to-use information drawing on multiple measurements and observations continues to increase. • Virtual Constellations: • A Proposal for Consideration

11. Possible Merged Structure for CEOS VCs Current Measurement VCs Observing System VCs WGISS WGCalVal

12. Opportunities: New construct will encourage satellite data coordination at the observing system level, done by satellite agencies and across agencies before developing tailored system information deliveries for individual user groups, making the integrated observations more user ready. Cross VC consistency and interoperability of datasets brings the concept of CARD4L in0tegration to oceans data sets. Reduces the number of stand-alone CEOS structures, allowing Agencies to focus resources and personnel to higher value CEOS working organizations, relieving some administrative burdens. Allows Constellation focus on data and information continuity across different platforms and different measurement technologies Issues: Need to ensure smaller subset of three VCs do not lose sight of a primary driver of the VCs – focused attention on continuity of critical satellite measurements through generations of satellites. Need to continue to assess potential gaps and address several different measurement technologies and orbits that may not exist today. Issues and Opportunities

13. CEOS Terms of Reference and Governance and Processes state that if permanent mechanisms are judged to be insufficient for CEOS to undertake a particular activity, CEOS may establish, as mutually agreed and on an ad hoc basis, temporary mechanisms (known as Ad Hoc Teams) to investigate specific areas of interest, cooperation and coordination and to report at subsequent Plenary meetings. The Plenary assigns short-term objectives to each Ad Hoc Team and defines the team lifetime when the team is created. The primary reporting path for an Ad Hoc Team is either to the CEOS Chair or to the SIT Chair, as designated by the Plenary according to the purpose and function of the Ad Hoc Team. Annually, the Plenary reviews all Ad Hoc Teams for continuation, termination, or transition to a permanent mechanism. Conclusions resulting from CEOS Plenary sessions or the findings and recommendations of Ad Hoc Teams will be acted upon at the discretion of each CEOS Member. Ad Hoc Teams Current Situation

14. CEOS-32-11 and 32-13 Ad Hoc Teams • At this SIT we will identify progress existing Ad Hoc Teams are making to define end-state: • SDG AHT • SDCG for GFOI • GEOGLAM AHWG • We will hear from the teams on their progress and prospectus

15. Ad Hoc Teams A Proposal Propose a two-year initiation cycle for standing up new AHTs. The two-year initial cycle will allow for defining the objective, evaluating the merit and value of the objectives, and determining the appropriate path forward for continued support within CEOS. All other aspects of the AHT reporting process will remain, including annual reporting at Plenary. History and Context: The CEOS Ad Hoc Team process has been successful and productive. CEOS has used the AHT process, or variations of it, to consider how best to support emerging needs and apply new capabilities where a permanent CEOS mechanism does not exist. To date, CEOS has initiated as many as nine activities since 2008 to consider emerging needs. Of these, at least four have been dispositioned, three into existing CEOS Working Groups, and twice with the creation of new groups, WGClimate (2010) and WGDisasters (2013).

16. 2-year leadership rotation detailed in the CEOS Working Group Process Paper • Agencies commit to leadership role (actually 4-year commitment with Vice Chair, followed by Chair) • WG leadership does require a sustained commitment from CEOS members, but we have been able to fill the seats. No Proposed changes for Existing WGs • Working Groups • Current Situation

17. New Working Group A Proposal Establish a new Working Group focused on Information Provision, to coordinate all activities related to user outreach and applications (e.g., forests, agriculture, freshwater, land degradation, urban, biodiversity, and more in the future). Context: All three existing AHTs focus on external user information and service delivery, in a class with the existing Working Groups on Disasters and Climate. Expansion of such focused groups reflects the growing demand by the global community for specific, refined information products from CEOS and CEOS Agencies for operational decision-making. The SDCG for GFOI and GEOGLAM activities are mature, externally focused activities relying on sustained delivery of CEOS data and information to meet user needs.

18. New WG Proposal: Issues and Opportunities Opportunities: Different activities share a common expectation for CEOS to help them find and apply the right satellite observations datasets to address their operational needs. WG can perform this filtering, definition, and data product subsetting by working with the user communities to understand the needs and by pulling appropriate data from any or all of the VCs. Allows secretariat functions of the WG to consolidate across several similar service provision activities within a single WG, saving resources and the development of common practices executed across the activities. Provides a path for more tasks as subgroups to existing permanent mechanism. Issues: We do not want to create another management layer on existing functioning activities (SDCG for GFOI, GEOGLAM) A multi-activity working group will require Member resources and support

19. Proposal from SIT Chair Concept Paper Working Group on Information Provision (TBC) Chair and Vice Chair – 2 yrs Secretariat Forests (GFOI) Lead(s) – no term GEOS4M Lead(s) – no term GEO Wetlands Lead(s) – no term Biomass Lead(s) – no term Agriculture (GEOGLAM) Lead(s) – no term Biodiversity Lead(s) – no term Water Lead(s) – no term SDG Lead(s) – no term … Connections to : WGISS – Interoperability WGCV – Validated data WGCapD – User Capacity Ocean, Atmosphere, Land VCs Issues raised with these examples

20. (Slightly) Revised Concept Working Group on Information Provision (TBC) Chair and Vice Chair – 2 yrs Secretariat Forests (GFOI) Lead(s) – no term Agriculture (GEOGLAM) Lead(s) – no term GEOS4M Lead(s) – no term GEO Wetlands Lead(s) – no term Biodiversity Lead(s) – no term SDG Indicator 1 Lead(s) – no term SDG Indicator 3 Lead(s) – no term SDG Indicator 2 Lead(s) – no term … Original presentation “Mature Activities,” enjoying continuing support from CEOS through established data partnerships

21. A New Concept for VCs and WGs Working Group on Information Provision to cover these and future efforts WGISS WGCalVal WGCapD

22. Further discussion in Session 7

23. Backup slides

24. Proposals from the VCs • SST-VC • P-VC • AC-VC • LSI-VC CEOS-32-12 Virtual Constellation Leadership Rotation

25. SST- VC (copied from SST-VC Presentation) The SST-VC Terms of Reference indicate: • The Co-Chairs shall be responsible for the overall management of the CEOS SST-VC, supported by the Secretary and SST-VC members. • Co-chairs and Secretary shall be elected by the SST-VC members on a 3 year renewable term following candidate proposal by a CEOS Agency Member. Election shall be by majority vote. • In order to maintain continuity, only one co-chair shall be replaced on a single occasion with at least 1 year between successive replacements where feasible. • As a principle, Co-Chairs shall rotate throughout CEOS Agencies with SST capability. • SST-VC members shall be proposed by CEOS principals. • The current membership list is identified and updated annually in the separate SST-VC Implementation Plan document

26. Co-Leads Steve Neeck/NASA and Riko Oki/JAXA were the original co-leads from 2007. Gail Skofronick-Jackson/NASA replaced Steve Neeck in 2019. • Discussions are underway to include a third co-lead from EUMETSAT • Our leads had a brief discussion on leadership rotation, thoughts include: • Co-leads from precipitation satellite agencies • Extended terms (in line with satellite mission lifetimes) • Documented approach to be determined P-VC (copied from P-VC Presentation)

27. All space agencies currently engaged in AC-VC focus topics are active, participating in the annual AC-VC meeting and during other meetings of opportunity (e.g., AGU/EGU, mission team meetings) • AC-VC#14 included over 20 agencies and multiple universities • Korea’s NIER is a notable new partner – joined CEOS 2018 • China participation is becoming more regular and we continue to encourage broader participation • Commitments of participating agencies appear viable at this time • AC-VC Proposal for leadership cycle • No set term limits, but include a dedicated discussion of leadership rotation during annual AC-VC meeting • Allows flexibility to adapt to new focus activities being undertaken • Encourage a vice-chair period (6-12 months) to aid succession • Consider expanding to 3 co-chairs, given geostationary perspective • Nominally Europe, USA, and East Asia but extensible in future AC-VC (copied from AC-VC Presentation)

28. LSI-VC (copied from LSI-VC Presentation) • LSI-VC revised Terms of Reference includes a Leadership Rotation Cycle. The leadership of the LSI-VC: • Will continue to consist of co-chairs endorsed by their agencies • Will nominally rotate, through an annual call for expressions of interest in joining the Chair team. However it will not be a strict requirement that the Chair rotate. In the event of a lack of nominations, for example. • These proposals build on past success to: • Provide broad representation in the leadership • Ensure sustainability of group, with co-chairs able to jointly provide the level of effort needed to continue the functions of the LSI-VC • Increase procedural clarity and transparency and around leadership appointments

29. OCR-VC (copied from OCR-VC Presentation) All IOCCG/OCR-VC agencies are actively engaged, including NOAA, CSA, JAXA, KIOST, SIO, ESA, NASA, EC CMEMS, EUMETSAT etc. Agencies/members meet 2-3 times per year, including at the annual IOCCG meetings and 1-2 Executive Committee meetings (in conjunction with other meetings IOCS, Ocean Sciences, Ocean Optics, and through telecons) Strong synergies with WGCV, WGClimate, COVERAGE initiative, and other aquatic VCs VC-09 deliverable realized in modular and coordinated manner across the OCR-VC agencies No obstacles to the future viability –activities supported under IOCCG