Pan-European land monitoring: results and Title...

Title

First name SURNAMEPosition

Place, date

Name of the entity

Pan-European land monitoring:

results and challenges

Hans DUFOURMONTProject manager Copernicus land monitoring services

Copenhagen, 19 October 2015

European Environment Agency

pace

New Horizons for European and Global land monitoring - Copernicus

products and services ready to use, 19-20/10/2015, Copenhagen

THE GIO LAND DELEGATION AGREEMENT EU-EEA

pace



GIO delegated tasks to the EEA 2011-14

A. Copernicus land monitoring service: Pan-European Continental Component

HR + VHR image mosaics

bio-geophysical parameters

Production of 5 thematic high resolution layers (imperviousness, forests, grasslands, wetlands, small water bodies)

Corine Land Cover (CLC) + Land Cover Change (CLCC)

Support to EAGLE

Independent statistical validation

B. Copernicus land monitoring service: Local Component

Riparian Zones mapping

Natura 2000 sites: evolution of LC/LU + Threats

Urban Atlas 2012

C. Dissemination + archiving + cataloguing

Development and management of the portal: land.copernicus.eu

Archiving of land monitoring products

D. Reference Data Access

Improve access to national/regional in situ data (CORDA) and maintain pan-European Reference data (EU-DEM, EU-hydro, contribute to LUCAS)

Upgrade, validation and dissemination of EU-hydro & EU-DEM

pace



New DA signed 4 December 2014

4

pace



Copernicus full operations delegated tasks to the EEA 2014-2020

A. Copernicus land monitoring service: Pan-European Continental Component

HR + VHR image mosaics + bio-geophysical parameters

Production of 5 thematic high resolution layers (imperviousness, forests, grasslands, wet lands, small water bodies)

Production of HRL Green Linear features

Set up of a European snow & ice cover monitoring service

Providing land cover and land cover change information at Pan-European scale

B. Copernicus land monitoring service: Local Component

Riparian Zones mapping

Natura 2000 sites: evolution of LC/LU + Threats

Coastal zone monitoring

Urban Atlas

TBD… cfr. service evolution

C. Dissemination + archiving + cataloguing

Management of the portal: land.copernicus.eu

D. Cross-service in situ coordination

Improve access to national/regional in situ data (CORDA) and maintain pan-European Reference data (EU-DEM, EU-hydro, contribute to LUCAS)

Coordinate access to in situ for multiple services in need of access to the same in situ data

Partnership agreements with (umbrella) data providers EurogeoSurveys, EuroGOOS…)

Support the EC with in situ topics.

pace



GRANTS IMPLEMENTATION

pace



Duration grant agreements

Amended extension

Initial duration

Starting point

pace



CONTRACTS IMPLEMENTATION

pace



GIO framework service contracts

About 80 specific contracts established under GIO land

Approximate total expenditure of EUR 26 M

pace



Relative distribution of production costs pan-European component

47%

7%

46%

Distribution of pan-European production costs(CLC+ HRLs)

Service providers

ETC/SIA - ULS

Participating countries

pace



Approximate cost per land product per km2

Product Total areakm2

Nr of classes

MMU (ha) MMW (m) Price/km2

(€)

HR Image Mosaics 6 M n/a n/a n/a 0,03

Corine Land Cover 6 M 44 25 (change: 5)

100 1

HRLs on 5 data themes 6 M density / binary

grid cell: 1 n/a 2

Riparian Zones 557 K 79 0,5(UA 0,25)

10 5,5

Natura2000 160 K 62 0,5 10 5,5

Urban Atlas 1.015 K 27 urban 0,25rural 1

10 1,5

Remark:

Prices / km2 decrease over the years, e.g.:

CLC2000: 6 €/km2, CLC2006: 2 €/km2, CLC2012: 1 €/km2

UA2006: 2,5 €/km2, UA2012: 1,5 €/km2

pace



PAN-EUROPEAN AND LOCAL LAND PORTFOLIO AND SYNERGETIC USE

pace



Copernicus land monitoring service

pan-European, local & RDA products

Imperviousness

Forest typeTree cover density (Semi-)

naturalGrassland

Wetlands

Water bodies

Corine Land Cover 2012

Image mosaics

Urban

Atlas

IMDTimeSeries

Riparian Zones

Natura2000

EU-DEM

EU-hydro

pace



EU-DEM: Sound integration with EU-hydro

Editing of blunders

and water features

in 3D stereo environment using QCed

water layer

pace



Land portfolio interdependencies: Riparian Zones example

15

RZ LCLU Extent RZ GLEsUrban Atlas

HRL Forest EU-DEM

VHR imagery

EU-hydro

pace



Coherence in nomenclatures: CLC

16

pace



Coherence in nomenclatures: CLC + UA

17

pace



Coherence in nomenclatures: CLC + UA + RZ

18

pace



Coherence in nomenclatures: CLC + UA + RZ+ GLEs + RZ extents

19

pace



VALIDATION BY COUNTRIES

pace



Analysis and estimation

Degree of imperviousness

Scatter plot (Degree of imperviousness 100 m)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Degree of imperviousness (%) (Photo-interpreted)

Deg

ree o

f im

perv

iou

sn

ess (

%)

(HR

L)

Degree of imperviousness

Pearson correlation (R) 0,87

Coefficient of determination (R2) 0,75

Mean absolute error (MAE) 12%

Root mean square error (RMSE) 18%

Strata

(Degree of imperviousness)

(Tree cover density)

Sample observations

(nh)

0% 200

[1% – 20%[ 200

[20% - 40%[ 200

[40% - 60%[ 200

[60% - 80%[ 200

[80% - 100%] 200

pace



Analysis and estimation

Tree cover density

Scatter plot (Tree cover density 100 m)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Tree cover density (photo-interpreted) (%)

Tre

e c

over

den

sity

(H

RL)

(%)

Tree cover density

Pearson correlation (R) 0,79

Coefficient of determination (R2) 0,63

Mean absolute error (MAE) 14%

Root mean square error (RMSE) 20%

pace



DISSEMINATION

land.copernicus.eu

pace



land.copernicus.eu

http://land.copernicus.eu

pace



Dissemination 2014

0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000

WISE WFD Database

Waterbase - UWWTD: Urban Waste Water Treatment…

National emissions reported to the UNFCCC

European catchments and Rivers network system…

EEA reference grids

World digital elevation model (ETOPO5)

Monitoring of CO2 emissions from passenger cars

European Union Emissions Trading System

Nationally designated areas (CDDA)

Corine Land Cover 2000 raster data

The European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register

Corine land cover 2000 (CLC2000) seamless vector…

Elevation map of Europe

AirBase - The European air quality database

Corine Land Cover 2006 seamless vector data

EU-DEM

Natura 2000 data - the European network of protected…

Urban Atlas

Corine Land Cover 2006 raster

Unique Pageviews of downloadlink 2014

Product (July – Aug – Sept 2015)

Nr of downloads

CLC2012 1524

UA2012 (317 FUAs) 581

EU-DEM 121

HRL Forest TCD 121

pace



LESSONS LEARNT FROM GIO AND CHALLENGES AHEAD

pace



(IRS 2011-12 coverage:

Cyan: acquired but

not yet pre-processed)

Gaps enforce to

substantial re-processing

Status Sept 2013

pace



GAP status COV 1 Dec. 2013 24k km2 yellow = gaps due to rejections

pace



Image acquisition bottle neck

Cloud cover, short summer season and shallow sun angles !!!

Programming satellites and budgetary considerations

Reference year 2012 in practice: 2011 to 2014 incl.

Great expectations on Sentinel 2A and 2B

Complementarity with Sentinel 1 to be introduced in the land service

Acquisition for reference year 2015 more promising

29

pace



Key lessons learnt from GIO

Acquisition

Ortho-rectification

Streamlining

Pre-processing

Processing

Semantic checks

Verification

Enhancement

Integration

Validation

ESA

EEA

2011 2012 2013 2014

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

pace




Acquisition

Ortho-rectification

Streamlining

Pre-processing

Processing

Semantic checks

Verification

Enhancement

Integration

Validation

ESA

EEA

Too much image gap-filling shifts the extra costs from acquisition /pre-processing to service implementation

Acquisition

Ortho-rectification

Streamlining

Pre-processing

Processing

Semantic checks

Verification

Enhancement

Integration

Validation

ESA

EEA

2011 2012 2013 2014

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

2011 2012 2013 20142015

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

pace




Detailed specifications needed:

Streamlining of bio-geophysical parameters to be explored

now included in Copernicus work programme

More detailed understanding of the workflows

SPs to understand that difference is made in organisational capacities, rather than in methodological approaches

Methodological support needed

(in)compatible with H2020 time lines ?

Minimum requirements to be imposed on SPs

Better harmonisation of HRLs needed

Geographic discrepancies <> inclusion of local expertise

Time series inconsistencies (relative <> absolute calibration)

INSPIRE implementation less evident than initially expected

pace




Better QA/QC:

Member States to do quantitative verification

Quantitative validation needed from the first deliveries

No standardised internal quality checks by SPs

Participating countries: Evaluation of grants <> contracts

Service Level Agreements (SLA) ?

Co-financing ?

EAGLE distributed approach to European LC/LU

Bottom-up methods not yet fully proofed to provide CLC compliant result

pace



Key lessons learnt from GIO land

External factors:

Critical dependency from ESA Copernicus Data Warehouse

ETC/ULS now tasked to assess cloud cover, haze, and coverage assignment

In situ data access: high level of heterogeneity at all levels

(between Service Provider efforts, time stamps, countries, access and use conditions, data models… despite INSPIRE)

Legal Framework issues:

Copernicus regulation provisions for non-EU countries difficult to fulfil

IPRs in general: a limiting factor to ensure coherence and homogeneity

Still too much “black box” parts in the production workflow at SPs

IPRs on FP7 projects e.g. Geoland-2 methodological developments

pace



Upcoming challenges

Timeliness, TIMELINESS, TIMELINESS !!!

image full coverage within 1 year ?

organisational setup of service production

simplification of workflow and procedures

Coherence and consistency within service and between services

full methodological transparency

time series re-analysis

QA/QC and validation improvements

From (almost) mono-temporal classification to full time series analysis

how to access a full time series ?

from local to remote processing

big data challenge

35

pace



GIO LAND IN FIGURES

pace



Secre-

tariat

HRLs

Con-

tracts

Grants

RZ –

N2K

Data

- IT

Resour-

ces

CLC

QA/QC

Coor-

dination

- UA

RDA

Head of

Pro-

gramme

RZ –

Service

Evolution

GIO-land building upon…

admin support

pace



GIO land & employment: Approximate number of technical experts working on land products

38

Product Approx. duration(years)

Nr. of technicalstaff

Corine Land Cover 2,5 225

High Resolution Layers 3,75 80 (peak 100)

Urban Atlas 3 20

Riparian Zones + Natura2000 0,75 150 (peak 200)

Semantic Checks 3,75 10

Validation 0,5 60

Remarks:• Figures to be taken with care• No basis for comparison between products:

• Too different specifications, time lines, • Important difference in work volume between “first-of”, and updates

pace



GIO land in figures

Product Approximate nr of polygons

CLC 2,2 M

RZ 5,5 M

UA (317 FUAs so far) 6,5 M

39

Product Nr. of reports from semantic checks

CLC 130

HRLs 1100

UA (317 FUAs so far) 300

RZ 86

pace



Data download and view: land.copernicus.euQuestions and feedback: [email protected]

40

http://land.copernicus.eu

mailto:[email protected]

Pan-European land monitoring: results and Title...

Documents

Transcript of Pan-European land monitoring: results and Title...