1. GEO User Needs and Observational Requirements Re-examining the Foundational Task
Programme Board
6th Meeting
23-24 May 2017
Craig Larlee
GEO Secretariat

2. Context
From its initial inception, GEO envisaged a user-driven approach.
Some progress was made during the first 10 years, e.g.,:
Critical Earth Observation Priorities report (Task US-09-01A)
Support and facilitation of Communities of Practice
Expansion of the concept of essential variables
Targeted user engagement activities

3. However, in 2015 this objective was still a long way off
“…Users have not been adequately incorporated into the entire observation-to-information value cycle” “…General perception that…the scientific community dominates involvement in GEO…” “Tasks are primarily focused on establishing collaboration and developing data products, with less focus on the involvement of users”
Only a quarter of GEO participants surveyed could identify specific users benefiting from GEOSS
Quotes and graph from the th (Summative) Evaluation of GEOSS Implementation.

4. User engagement figured strongly in plans for the next 10 years…
“Call on GEO to strengthen its focus on users and stakeholders…” “Call on GEO to convene a stakeholder driven process to contribute to sustainable solutions to global challenges in the Societal Benefit Areas by identifying observation needs and gaps and developing knowledge and tools to enable delivery of useful services to users”
Mexico City Declaration, November 2015
“Implement a structured approach to identifying user needs for observations and services. Beginning with areas where opportunities and relationships with users have been identified, convene key stakeholders across the value chain, from providers of the observations to the end user for whom services are developed, from the public and private sector…
GEO Strategic Plan 2016—2025: Implementing GEOSS

5. …user needs assessment and gap analysis was identified as a Foundational Task of GEO…
Two key objectives:
Implement a regular, systematic approach to identifying user needs, translate these needs into requirements for observations and services SBA by SBA, and identify, prioritize and close gaps in the information value chain.
Document the results of this process using a tool to store and disseminate user needs and gap analyses (Knowledge Base), which will define and document observations needed for all disciplines.
GEO Work Programme

6. …and Programme Board highlighted the importance of end-user involvement
GEO Work Programme Application

7. …however, there has been a lack of coordination across the various activities
Secretariat staff resources have been limited, both for the User Needs FT and in coverage of SBAs.
The User Needs task team has been focused almost solely on the development of the Knowledge Base.
There does not appear to have been much progress made on the SBA-by-SBA approach to identifying user needs.
Information included in Implementation Plans and Reports on Progress is incomplete and inconsistent.
This could be because not all WP activities are engaging users or because the questions are not being asked the right way.

8. Some are questioning the need for a top-down, comprehensive approach...
At least some WP activities are actively engaging users within their communities and, in many cases, involving them in the design and development of services.
Top-down processes are time-consuming and the results may be out- dated by the time they arrive.
Ongoing activities cannot wait for a “definitive” statement of user needs before proceeding.
Users often do not know what they need in advance of engaging with providers, researchers and others who can explain the potential and options.
Iterative, “agile”, case-specific development processes may be more effective in eliciting user requirements than comprehensive processes.

9. …which may be due in part to differences in how “users” are defined
End users may not see themselves as such, as they may not understand the original data sources used in the preparation of the products and services they use.
The type of users engaged may be differ depending on the scale of the process.
Larger scale processes may be less likely to engage users, even intermediate users, closer to the ultimate decision context.
Science users are essential in identifying observational variables, but may not always understand end use cases for policy and operational decisions.

10. Understanding and engaging with end users is difficult, but essential
Cannot demonstrate and quantify impacts unless we first understand end users and the decision contexts in with EO is used.
Without engaging end users directly, there is no assurance that EO data and information are having an impact in practice.
We may be reaching intermediaries within organizations that have potential end users, but this does not ensure that the end users are receiving the information or are using it.
EO information is only one of many inputs into most decisions.
What is the added value of EO information in a particular decision context? It isn’t enough to say that it can be used or even that it is being used.
How does EO data result in a better, or more timely, or more cost- effective decision?

11. What is a realistic and achievable way forward for the GEO User Needs Foundational Task? Some ideas…
Collect, analyse and disseminate more detailed information on how activities in the GEO Work Programme are engaging users and who they identify as their key users.
Develop a common terminology within GEO to describe types of users which will support better information and analysis of user engagement.
Identify and share good practices in user engagement, including by seeking feedback from users who have participated in GEO projects.
Connect activities with similar user groups or similar kinds of use cases to facilitate collaboration.
Provide support to systematic user needs processes (which may or may not be based on SBAs) where these are initiated and led by the GEO community.