Towards future CLC Conceptual design and product outline Stephan Arnold, Geoff Smith & EAGLE Group

Overview of existing land monitoring data (EU-level) Content Overview of existing land monitoring data (EU-level) Background and Motivation: Dilemma of classification Criteria for new Land Monitoring Framework Concept of future CLC EIONET NRC Land Cover Meeting, EEA, Kopenhagen

Complex Landscape Situations Forest or just Group of trees? Natural lake or Reservoir? 321 Natural Grassland or 231 Pasture, Meadow EIONET NRC Land Cover Meeting, EEA, Kopenhagen

Complex Landscape Situations 311 Broadleaved forest or 411 / 412 Wetland type EIONET NRC Land Cover Meeting, EEA, Kopenhagen

Complex Landscape Situations 121 energy production or 231 pasture ? EIONET NRC Land Cover Meeting, EEA, Kopenhagen

Characterization, not classification ! Growth form homogeneous heterogenous Growth density slosed sparcely Soil condition wet dry acidic Use/Funktion Pasture Recreation Sport Air traffic Ecosystem type Wetland, swamp

Background and given situation Broad variety of applications of LC/LU data => various different classification systems (on national or European level) Effects: Emphasises on specific feature type groups Incomplete mixture of LC and LU classes => Lack of comparability between definitions hamper exchange of information between nomenclatures and datasets EIONET NRC Land Cover Meeting, EEA, Kopenhagen

De-Composition of landscape From classification to object-oriented description Fotos: © Copyright Ursus Wehrli

Issues with CLC A number of deficiencies and limitations restrict wider exploitation at the Member State level and below. MMU of CLC (25 ha) is too coarse to capture fine spatial details. Mixed thematic classes with broad definitions difficult to interpret. Partly overlap of some class definitions by thematic content. Not sufficient thematic details or attribution. Many changes smaller 5 ha of the CLC change layer. 6-yearly update too slow for community policy needs. Dynamic landscape features, which are highly relevant to policy, may be missed or underestimated.

Information overview or overflow?

Copernicus: Local component data Merger of all current local Component layers

Requirements review (1) Key European policy requirements Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) Energy Union Climate change monitoring Long-term climate mitigation objectives Additional policy requirements EU Biodiversity Strategy to 2020 Mapping and Assessment of Ecosystems and their Services (MAES) Ecosystem services and natural capital European ecosystem map

Requirements review (2) EIONET members needs Survey by ETC of those involved with the CLMS and CLC production. Addressed shortcomings of CLC and requirements for future LULC. Some CLC classes cause problems because of their mixed nature. A smaller MMU makes features more homogeneous. MMW reduction so linear features are represented more realistically. Land monitoring needs Finer spatial resolution, 0.05 ha to 25 ha, majority 0.5 to 5 ha. MMU for CLC-status (so far 25ha) and CLC-change (so far 5ha) layers the same. Refined thematic detail, separation of LC and LU, split mixed classes. Addition of further attributes to the spatial polygons.

Requirements review outcomes Summary of requirements review MMU 0.5 to 5 ha, 0.5 ha for LULUCF Change layer MMU = status layer MMU Revised thematic content (more classes, increased characterisation) 3 year to yearly update cycle Pan-European coverage (EEA-39) Integrating aspects of …. Current CLC Local Components HRLs EAGLE Group developments

EEA and thematic EC DGs (ENV, REGIO, AGRI, MARE, etc.) have requested Long term goal EEA and thematic EC DGs (ENV, REGIO, AGRI, MARE, etc.) have requested A higher performance pan-European mapping product 2nd Generation CLC within Copernicus Land Monitoring Service To finally result in a so called CLC+ EAGLE Group Selected to develop the conceptual design and technical product specifications (apart from methodology) for the 2nd Generation CLC Major shift in the concepts supporting European land monitoring Can not be done in a single step Time required to develop

Constraints on first step Conceptual design (1) Constraints on first step Industrial production by service providers Vector product Highly automated Short timeframe Based on Earth Observation Data (Sentinel-2)

Different production philosophies Different resource models Conceptual design (2) Multi-stage process Multiple products Different production philosophies Different resource models Industrial and Member State involvement (“working titles” not yet fixed)

Outline: CLC-Backbone (1) Wall-to-wall coverage (EEA-39) Complete the picture started by the LoCo which cover less than one third of EEA-39. Spatially detailed, large scale Vector format Based on digital cartography and EO Limited, but robust thematic detail Geometric backbone Basic land cover inventory to support other products

Example using UK Land Cover Map CLC-Backbone (2) Example using UK Land Cover Map

Outline: CLC-Core (1) Next stage of development after CLC-Backbone A consistent, multi-use repository for environmental information Grid database with EAGLE data model (stable regular spatial units) Populated with a broad range of land cover, land use and ancillary data, forming the information CLMS and external sources MS contribution (land use, habitats, etc.) Engine to deliver tailored thematic information.

CLC-Core (2) Spatial domain EAGLE Data Model Source: CSU, http://heleneloyan.cikeys.com/update/gis-layers/

Integration schema for a future land monitoring framework in Europe CLC-Core (3) Integration schema for a future land monitoring framework in Europe

Outline: CLC+ An improved LULC monitoring product Addressing a broad range of requirements Based on CLC-Core, which is built on CLC-Backbone, the local components and HRLs. Improved spatial detail relative to CLC Improved thematic content relative to CLC

Must be back compatible Link into CLC-Core and CLC+ CLC-Legacy Conventional CLC Must be back compatible Link into CLC-Core and CLC+ Potential improvements to attribution

Involvement of Member States Input to and review of the conceptual framework and technical specifications. Support to population of thematic information in CLC-Core. Change mapping. Member State benefits CLC-Backbone aligned to national / local mapping requirements Access to information-rich CLC-Core CLC+ contributes to national reporting

Next step in conceptual development Will continue to outline the conceptual strategy and potential technical specifications. Four more deliverables to March 2018. Communicate these developments to the stakeholders involved in European land monitoring. Success of project and long term development of land monitoring in Europe dependent on commitment of all relevant stakeholders. Collate and incorporate feedback from MS & NRCs. Call for tender for CLC-Backbone (expected in 2018). Deliver the final version of the conceptual design and technical specifications at the end of March 2018.

Impact on statistical analysis Benefits for statistical analysis More thematic content Less bias regarding definition overlaps Smaller MMU => less generalization of landscape Higher update cycles Better comparability with LUCAS classes

Thank you very much for your attention! http://land.copernicus.eu/eagle EIONET NRC Land Cover Meeting, EEA, Kopenhagen