Yichuan Shi, Matea Osti and Elise Belle note: A) thanks for coming always
B) pleased to launch: report back work progress, share ideas
C) most importantly hear from your opinions 1) what works, what doesn't 2) where work should be heading 3) the means to achieve that
test ideas
note: a) a platform for ideas, what can be done to utilise what's already there for natural World Heritage
b) to bridge the gap or better facilitate between production of knowledge products and their consumption - in order be more impactful.
c) I want a shift of delivering such analytical work to 1) easy to access and understand 2) more public facing, communication oriented
communicating data, analyses and tools
note:
a) to better reach audience by tapping into opportunities it offers 1. direct and ubiquitous access with internet 2. interactive and engaging 3. dynamic and agile, i.e., quick to modify and improve
b) reports are less appealing, if I, as an author, can’t be bothered to read my own work of 70 pages. I find it powerless to convince other people to read.
c) five minutes attention span. fundamentally there is too much information and too little time - People are busy, swamped by information around them, spoiled by the influx of wealth of information.
your voice matters
note: 1) aim empower you by informing you
2) must be useful for end users
3) hear from you, give you the data and tools to enable you. everything is open
note: QUICKLY go through them, still useful
(and do less!)
note: 1. it is not rocket science, nor even research we do - risk losing out of touch - no need to be complicated and full of jargons.
2. it is about what we do; but also about what we don't do -> concious of resource. a) Don't reinvent wheel. b) Do less but do it very well.
3. concious of limited resources; one thing at a time, set ambitious goals but with achievable low aims
link, provide services, and extend beyond WH
note: with future extendibility in mind.
- intrinsically not in isolation - imperative connection to existing more established KP
- easily extendible to have additional functionality. modern architecture, web services
- WH trailblazing, but equally could be scaled up to other protected areas
Data, methodology and result note: open data, open technology and open accessibility. Source code, analytics reproducible. empower others.
- certainly external pressure to be open, because many are open
- personal view that data etc should not be held back.
- benefits from transparency: allow comments, healthy debate that leads to better ideas, solution and outcome. 2) empower others
any device note:
- maximise accessibility. no matter what terminal device is used. to make it easy for them
- mobile first design.
- http://world-heritage-analyses.iucn.org note: demo knowledge lab
note:
- boundary importance for evaluation, monitoring and upstream research and policy
- major refresh since 2011, digitised 150 of 200 sites, annual update
- humble beginning as KML to flexible data products
- continous improvement, updates after committee meeting and when best data is available, next update July
Didn't we already have ProtectedPlanet? note: noting the good things - but clunky, no dedicated or even intuitive interface for just WH sites; cannot be easily extended for use outside protectedplanet
as a data service
note: it's all about enabling you to fully use the data and do amazing things
E.g. A prioritisation exercise where was asked to look at the relationship between intact forest and existing WH sites, with a view to identifying sites with significant overlap. 238 maps were, to the maximum detail, despite the massive effort (more than 1G in file size). Cannot address every user needs, which may have specific focus somewhere, look at a bigger picture -> why not enable them to do it themselves? The WH boundary service lets you do just that.
- World Heritage viewer
- World Heritage data service metadata
- 2016 inscription story map note: quickly run through the examples
GlobeLand30 - 30 meter resolution
note: 1. first time quantitative analysis of land cover for all natural sites
2. thanks to 30 meter global land cover - datasets two time epochs using the same methodology thus change can be estimated
note: 1. what we did - calculate pixel by pixel change within each WH site
2. calculate not only total amount but also the change, from each landcover classification
note: validation required. it tells you what but not why - another source of potential threats.
- example, WHO assessment. Could refer to the LCC for any substantial change, if so, this signals an alert, if otherwise unknown, a possible damaging event. forest loss, water body change, amongst others.
- Land Cover change note: first time comprehensive, systematic land class mapping exercise, first time investigated the dynamics of change, first time used the web as a media to deliver findings
note: sense from a distance, on board aircraft and satellite. Valuable, frequent direct observations of features, such as... on the ground from a distance. E.g. look at spetrum of infrared, tell a lot about vegetation.
note: archiving, no longer relevant -> no need to host data in house while it's ubiquitous and easily accessible
note: move away from the original goal, frees time for more interest work
- Time series data, finds the best image (cloud free) in any past given time range. composition of spectra.
- already an idea or on information that is reported, photographic proof if there is any supporting evidence from remote sensing
note: cloud, web services: data is on the internet and can be easily accessed and customised without the need to download. Computation on the cloud
note: as it stands only visuals - immense opportunity and potential to better visualise but also analyse in the cloud.
- change of NDVI, vegetation index overtime
- give you land cover classification on the fly, dynamically (GEE) - tell you also what they are and how they change
- Landsat 8 for natural World Heritage note: first web service based product. Dynamic in that as long as new data comes in, the maps will be automatically updated. Little or no maintenance cost.
note: 1) petabytes of data already in the cloud, at the click of a button, sno need to download to analyse
2) geospatial parallel computing in the cloud -> near real time result
3) computation on the fly, calculations done at the time you request it
note: we ran sa test that uses the google earth engine to calculate surface water change in all natural world heritage sites
- Google Earth Engine for surface water transition
note: 1) explain global surface water
- refresh the page if inactive - the demo result is done in real time, no result is pre-cooked.
note: Elise to take over
note: 1) concise digest of nominations files, fallen out of use
2) still useful but usefulness plagued by accessibility (explain before)
note: 1) a major revision was undertaken to revitalise as a source of useufl information
2) web based + search functionality
- Natural World Heritage information sheets note: demo a case site + search + by country
note: iucn contributed a paper that uses the google earth engine to quantify human footprint change and forest loss. It won an award by elsevier out of more than 1000 journals
note: science paper has limited reach to people. therefore a web platform to communicate site specific information to users
- Human footprint change
- Forest loss note: also attempt to get user feedbacks
powered by species climate change vulnerability assessments
note:
- based on the work by Foden 2012, GSP.
- reuse their finding and make it relevant for WH
note:
- the concept: is it sensitive to cc, traits adaptable, will it be exposed
- only when they are high score of all three, are they considered climate change vulnerable
- scores are relative. Thus can't compared across taxa
note:
- infer species within WH using RL
- aggregate all species CCV results within WH
- Are species most vulnerable outside WH or inside
- to what extent do WH provides refugee, high number of ccv species, management responses
- useful for monitoring work. What are the sites that are ccv? in those sites, what are the species that are ccv? What traits leads to their ccv status? What management response could be? delineation based on future extent of such species?
- Brief report
- Reproducible methodology, analysis and findings
- Result for each natural and mixed World Heritage site note: versioned, reproducible, communication oriented. first time data analytics: version controlled, open, accessible, scientific product. New thinking of delivering and communicating knowledge product through means other than lengthy text
(Prototype)
note: from a data point of view, identify where broad gaps are; if a hypothetical site is to be submitted, how does it compare to existing sites. not to be prescriptive
for now
note: to replicate desktop system and make it accessible -> enable wider public to undertake a first screening of their intended sites
replicating full functionalities of spatial comparative analysis
note: 1) prototype done
2) full specification done and next step fund raising, in order to
a. proper spatial analysis
b. complete datasets
b. improved user experience
- Spatial comparative analysis prototype note: web GIS for the first time, complete system that takes input from the frontend interface, pass onto an underlying GIS database for analysis and then return the result to the web.
note: two sides of the same coin - synonymous;
note:
All parts of GIS in the cloud
amazing speed of evolution. e.g. GIS: storage, analysis, presentation of geographic information -> in the cloud, accessible, and dead simple. e.g. irrelevance of initial effort to archive Landsat 8 data in house.
disruptive innovation may drive some of work obsolete.
note:
- natural need to catch up with the rest of the world
- training to catch up: cloud based computing
- harness the power or work risk being made irrelevance in the not-too-distant future.
note:
- no funding
- missed opportunity to make even bigger impact. Split between doing the work, WHO: compile expert knowledge <-> delivering the message to the end users.
- never a one-off effort, maintenance, honing.
- good understanding of resource requirements for creating good products that are robust and long term sustainable, e.g. WHO. scope large, functional, but to do it properly, need more resources.
- not professional development
note: ultimately it is the users we want to influence, educate and modify their behaviours. Without user buy-in, it would be hard work, with little impact. That's why here today, advocating and trying to convince you that 1) this is indeed a good idea 2) get you on-board this journey and get your feedbacks 3) first users to start using and promoting them.
