MIG-T meeting #29 - MIWP 2016-2020 introductory presentation and tour de table

Introductory presentation by Joachim D'Eugenio

  • MIG-T meeting is preparation for MIG-P meeting in June
  • priority setting is important. Not a wish list but what can be achieved in the real time
  • short intro to MIWP 2016-2020 document prepared by DG ENV + EEA + DG JRC with the vision and main strategic directions. Detailed discussion is expected
  • need to be pragmatic (but not a lower ambition level), not always just "pure"
  • one of the main themes from the bilaterals - the end user community to focus on is the environmental community
  • consider the wider context (DSM, e-gov, ...), open up and contribute to other activities, may need to adapt to better fit these activities ("the tail should not be wagging the dog")
  • 4 WAs
    • fitness for purpose
    • end user applications
    • relations to other policies/initiatives
    • support to implementation
  • The "balance challenge"
    • investments in ambitious/complex system are worth if benefits are clear. There seems to be cases where the complexity is not justified.
    • TGs are not law - there are some misinterpretations about this
  • New Rules of procedures to be discussed @ MIG-T in June
  • National debates are important
  • Written feedback welcome by 25 May
  • MIG-P will focus on outstanding issues
  • Elaborate MIWP in more detail by December focusing on 2017+2018 actions
  • Some actions will already start in 2016, e.g. "fitness for purpose" review, priority list of data sets
  • If legal changes needed INSPIRE Committee will be called (Back-to-back in December 2016)

Tour de table of MIG-T representatives

  • NL
    • Covers all important aspects
    • Focus on fitness for purpose is important
    • Changing technical concepts at this stage will be difficult, since most data providers now know what to do
    • Now need to add more data, in particular from the env domain
    • Still have some technical issues, but we are making good progress in MIG-T
    • NL are working on a new cost-benefit evaluation. Costs are much higher than expected in 2009, benefits are difficult to pin down - so focus on end user applications is useful, especially in env domain
    • Finding end users is a high priority
  • UK
    • Harmonisation - need to support business areas in this.
    • Have reference implementations of GML that software vendors can use without first flattening it into their internal format, in order to use the benefits of the complex features -- encourage software suppliers to implement it
  • IT
    • Harmonisation - help needed for data providers, especially for federal countries like IT
    • Harmonisation management plan - which priority data sets are useful to be harmonised first
    • ISPRA is interested in using INSPIRE data in end user applications
      • e.g. making Copernicus layers INSPIRE-compliant
  • CZ
    • Prioritization of activities
    • INSPIRE harmonised download services are not used very often
      • not because of complexity, but because users are already using established national download services
    • Draft is very general, but is going in the right direction
    • M&R - key performance indicators
      • easy for reporting
      • reporting more difficult. some changes already proposed by CZ
  • DE
    • MIWP very strategic paper to be agreed by MIG-P in June. Very general - difficult to give detailed feedback. 
    • Is going in the right direction.
    • Simplification of requirements is important - highly discussed in DE. Struggling with harmonisation of Annex III data. Time-critical because of upcoming deadlines.
    • Missing: Review of current MIWP.
    • Way forward is confusing - where will the on-going actions fit?
  • HR
    • Still early implementation days
    • Important to show usefulness of INSPIRE for other application areas than environment
  • BE
    • No consolidated comments from BE yet
    • Strategic, logical follow-up from bilateral, challenges and opportunities (end users)
    • Main question: entail extra work - can this be done by the existing structures with the existing resources, especially if MS should be focusing on closing the implementation gaps
    • Priorities for BE: comply with legal obligations according to 2017+2020 deadlines. Making this work easier and more feasible.
    • WAs are closely related - how to coordinate between actions
    • "Fitness for purpose" will guide the other activities
      • identify the data sets that are fit for purpose, not only for env reporting, but also for other purposes
    • Cannot make all data sets INSPIRE-compliant - need to prioritise the data that is most useful for users.
    • Product specifications at European level.
  • AT
    • Support to MIWP adoption
    • Legal stability is needed
    • Technical development not mature enough
    • Priority areas: continued support to implementation, more collaboration, data harmonisation "helpdesk" is needed
    • WA1-3 are "nice to have"
    • Missing: INSPIRE community is not well represented in national coordination body
  • FR
    • Useful document
    • Focus on user needs and fitness for purpose --> find use of INSPIRE data and services
    • More strategic document than a WP
    • Analysis of what was done, what worked, what did not work?
      • Worked well: development of tools in MIWP sub-groups - can be used directly. Should be continued.
  • SI
    • Support general ideas
    • Simplification is welcome, fitness for purpose is relevant
    • Devil is hidden in the details
    • Worried about changes in priorities with legal deadlines that are ahead of us
      • Harmonisation of Annex III data before the deadline?? This would mean doing additional activities. This would need additional resources
  • ME
    • Still in process of adoption of legal acts
    • Useful document
  • SK
    • Keep env in scope - communication with other domains
    • Missing: justification of investments (money already invested) and collection of benefits
    • Priority data sets. Final list needed as soon as possible
    • What is the distinction between basic-essential-premium
  • PL
    • Generally positive, need more detail
    • Good: fitness for purpose and user applications
    • Still collecting feedback from env stakeholders in PL
  • CY
    • Agree with strategy - new strategic plan for implementation in INSPIRE in CY
    • Need to encourage tool support for GML
  • FI
    • Confusion. Is it MIG-P or MIG-T document?
    • Strategic document
    • Too many actions
    • Focus
      • fitness for purpose
      • harmonisation
      • use of network services
  • BG
    • No specific comment
    • Implementation according to INSPIRE roadmap
  • MT
    • Still reviewing document
    • Currently working mainly on harmonisation - lack of tool support
    • Would be good to have final priority list
  • PT
    • Strategic document good
    • Focus on env data is good
    • Simplification, incl. GML support in applications
    • Integration of INSPIRE with other policies is important
    • Harmonisation is the main goal
  • DK
    • Very good to have strategic paper
    • Will have more detailed discussions with MIG-P colleagues
    • Comments
      • simplifications seem to be the right approach. Are we also discussing the data models?
      • approach of implementation levels is very interesting
      • how should MS and EU-level agencies be involved? - main goal should be: yes, now we can use INSPIRE
      • more details on Focus Group
      • What is the "e" in e-reporting?
      • Integration of INSPIRE and e-gov is the right direction
      • Keep in mind the prioritisation schema proposed by MIG-P
  • SE
    • Agree to DE and BE
    • Working areas are useful - have overall objectives for detailed activities
    • User focus (env domain) is useful
    • Also need to use other than the reporting data sets for deciding what to do (actions, measures) to improve the situation
    • There are many use cases, but we should focus on few cross-border / pan-European ones 
  • ES
    • Right direction, but also very ambitious
    • Need to work in specific plan detailing also the resources
    • Good: implementation levels and priority lists - should be used to implement INSPIRE more efficiently
    • Set up WM tile services, mainly for mobile devices. Need to move quickly with technological advances. No one is using our WFS
    • MIG-T must be quick and flexible
  • HU
    • Who will be the users of the INSPIRE data & services?
    • Fitness for purpose and user applications
    • Main scope if European not national level - European product specifications
  • EE
    • No specific comments yet
    • Annex I+II are almost fully implemented, Focus in next year will be on Annex III
    • Problem that ESRI is not implementing Annex III
    • Need to finalise priority data sets as soon as possible since development will be outsourced
    • Performance issues because of dependencies on full AD model
  • LV
    • Agree to strategic direction
    • Same problems as EE with ESRI ArcGIS software
    • Communication with env community and implementation of Annex III
    • Organised INSPIRE implementation master classes (8h)
      • communication between users and producers