Meeting of Committee on Observations and Networks (CON)
20thApril 201717-18CET / 11-12 AM EST (Teleconference)Minutes
1. Welcome to the call
Hannele Savela (co-Chair) welcomed the participantsto the meeting. The agenda and list of participants is found in Appendix 1 and 2.
2. SAON Board meeting 7th April
Jan Rene Larsen (SAON Secretary) gave an overview of the outcomes of the Board meeting. The Committees had reported on their achievements and their effort to finalise their Terms of Reference and work plans for 2017-19. The purpose of the meeting had mainly been to prepare a Retreat for the Board in June which will produce a strategic framework for SAON. For this purpose, SAON countries, Permanent Participants, organisations and networks had provided statements about their expectations to SAON.
3. INTAROS
Stein Sandven and Pirazzini Roberta(both INTAROS) introduced the EU-funded project INTAROS ('Integrated Arctic Observation System'). Pirazzini Roberta is the lead of Work package 2 (‘Exploitation of existing observing systems’), and this work package could be the starting point for the interaction between INTAROS and SAON. The work package will analyse existing observation networks, databases and data sets and will also enhance standardization of data and metadata.
Hanne Sagen (INTAROS) emphasized that the focus of the work is to use inventories already established, but also that the focus with regards to data are those that are available within the INTAROS consortium; it is not an ambition to get a full overview of all data.
The work package will organise 3 questionnaires on existing in situ observing systems, in situ datasets and existing satellite products.
Action: Meeting participants to provide feedback to the survey.
Stein Sandven explained that the work package has about one year to complete the work. It wants to cover as much as possible within the consortium, but in an open process, also involving CON. The primary ambition is to get an overview of existing systems.
Sandy Starkweather (USA) noted the similarity with a process that had taken place within GOOS. She believed that in such exercises, you want understand the networks and their capabilities; on the other hand side you also want to understand the impact of an observation, and how it fits into social benefit areas.
4. Draft work plan – Review
Susan File (Canada) had raised some overall questions on the process of drafting a work plan for CON. She believed that it was worthwhile when determining whether an activity should be added to the SAON CON work plan that consideration first be given to what the role of SAON might be within the broader activity, and how SAON can add value but not take on work that would otherwise be undertaken by the group or organization leading the activity. She also indicated that further consideration should be given to common objectives and planned work across the proposed SAON CON work plan activities to identify potential synergies or coordination opportunities and believed that the descriptions should contain a bit more details about, what the expectations with regards to involvement would be, especially on what input would be required from the members of CON and their countries to consider what is feasible within a given timeframe.
Hannele Savela responded that these comments were very valuable, noting that the work plan is draft. The plan would be to map the proposed activities against overall objectives for CON as well as SAON overall. She also believed that assigning effort estimates to each task would be mandatory.
In a comment to the draft work plan, Vito Vitale (Italy) had proposed two additional activities in the context of inventory work: 1) Implement an IT platform to collect information at national level, and 2) Work on the thematic aspects of atmospheric physics.
Stein Sandven noted that INTAROS would be able to participate in several activities.
The meeting agreed that the detailed discussion about the work plan should be postponed to a coming meeting.
5. Any other business
There were none.
Appendix 1: Agenda
1.Welcome to the call
2.SAON Board meeting 7th April
3.INTAROS
4.Draft Work Plan – Review
5.Any other business
Appendix 2: List of Participants
Name / AffiliationAgnieszka Beszczynska-Möller / Poland
Hanne Sagen / INTAROS, Norway
Hannele Savela / SAON CON co-chair, Finland, INTERACT
Jan Rene Larsen / SAON Secretary, AMAP Secretariat
Jason Stow / Canada
Larry D. Hinzman / USA
Lisa Loseto / SAON CON chair, Canada
ReidarHindrum / Norway
Pirazzini Roberta / INTAROS, Finland
Rodica Nitu / WMO
Roland Neuber / Germany
Sandy Starkweather / USA
Sarah Kalhok / Canada
Stein Sandven / INTAROS, Norway
Susan File / Canada
Tetsuo Sueyoshi / Japan
Vito Vitale / Italy
Vladimir Romanovsky / USA
More information about the participants and their affiliation is found at
Appendix 3: List of documents
Agenda item / Documents1 / Draft agenda
GoToMeeting dial-in information
2 / SAON Board meeting documents (link)
3 / INTAROS (web site)INTAROS (presentation)
4 / SAON CON Draft Work Plan, version 22FEB2017
Comments to Work Plan from Vito Vitale, Italy, dated 06APR2017
Best practise for SAON networks (Short description, Hannele Savela)
GEOCRI Community Portal Development – SAON as Arctic extension to GEOSS (Short description, Hannele Savela)
GEO Cold Regions Initiative (GEOCRI) (Short description, Hannele Savela)
INTAROS Integrated Arctic Observation System under H2020
EU-PolarNet deliverables, Task 2.3: Optimisation of existing monitoring and modelling programmes
Rolling Review of Requirements (WMO, Rodica Nitu)
Inventory work (Jan Rene Larsen)
Development of an International Arctic Observations Assessment Framework: Presentation
The documents are found here: