Transcript Document 7397373

GOFC-GOLD Efforts in
Harmonization and Validation
of Land Cover Datasets
Chris Schmullius & Martin Herold
ESA GOFC-GOLD Landcover Implementation Project Office
IGOL, 13-15 Sept. 2004
GOFC GOLD introduction
Multifaceted international strategy to bring the Earth’s
land cover under continuous operational observation
Vision to share data, information and knowledge, leading
to informed action and decision support
Network of participants implementing coordinated
research for global monitoring of terrestrial resources,
global assessments and the study of global change
Establishing international standards and protocols
especially with respect to issues like validation
GOFC GOLD’s role

A Panel of the Global Terrestrial Observing System (GTOS)

A long term process of building an improved match between
Observations, Data Products and User Needs
Space agencies
Data “producer”
Science community
GOFC GOLD
Data “users”
FAO/UNEP etc.
Implementation priorities
2nd GOFC GOLD land cover implementation team w/s,
Jena, March 2004:
 Harmonization of global and regional land cover
products
 Validation of global earth observation products
 Adequacy and advocacy of earth observation in
serving international conventions
 Towards operational global observations of land
 Support of new IGOL-theme
 Strengthen international cooperations (e.g. regional
networks)
Why harmonization?

Land mapping uses different standards


Compatibility and comparability




national maps, application specific, spectral classes
Within and between countries
Within and between applications and disciplines
From local to global scales
Required for successful



Improvement of mapping products
Validation of global datasets
Foster application: land change dynamics
Harmonization strategy





Originally strong push for single lc/lu legend
Too much standardization reduces application
relevance of lc/lu maps
Standardizing terminology rather than categories
W/S: FAO/UNEP 1994, GOFC GOLD 2004
(Jena/Rome)
Implementation strategy :




Two working groups: cover and use
Find common language (LCCS)
Need for case studies
Impact on operational lc/lu data collection
LCCS Status and Use





LCCS-2: Software completed and ready for
download September 2004
Manual available September 2004,
translations in French, Spanish and Arabic
scheduled in the year 2005
GOFC GOLD endorses LCCS
Feedback to improve LCCS
Translation of legends (start @ Rome w/s)
IGBP legend translation
Rome workshop
translations:
• IGBP DIS
• MODIS LC
• MODIS Cont.Flds.
• CORINE
• GLC2000
-> already in LCCS
MODIS LC
LCCS Software
Workshop discussions
Forest areas in global land cover maps
Forest definitions:
IGBP legend : percent tree cover >60% / tree height >2m
GLC2000 legend : percent tree cover >15% / tree height >3m
Differences for urban areas
Sao Paolo
Shanghai
Sources of urban land:
IGBP DIS – Digital chart of the world
MODIS – MODIS(2000) + DMSP (1994/95)
GLC2000 – DMSP (1994/95)
Forest cover from continuous field products
Credit: M. Hansen/University of Maryland
0% tree cover threshold 100%
VCF can support harmonization of land cover data
Credit: M. Hansen/University of Maryland
0% tree cover threshold 100%
GLOBCOVER
Partnership:
Programs:
Users:
ESA - JRC
GOFC/GOLD - IGBP
FAO, UNEP, UN Conventions (CCD, CB)
Objectives:
Global Land Cover Map in 2005 by using
ENVISAT MERIS data at 300m (15 bands)
Schedule:
Definition phase Spring 2004
Invitation To Tender July 2004
KO December 2004
First Monthly Mosaic September 2005
GLOBCOVER V1 September 2006
GLOBCOVER V2 September 2007
Validation September 2008
Implementation: One European consortium industry/companies
GLC2000 versus GLOBCOVER
GLC-2000 map at 1km res.
LC map from MERIS at 300m res.
Validation of land cover datasets







GOFC GOLD fosters international effort to validate
all existing global land cover products
Consistent with “Best Practices” identified by CEOS
Land Cover Validation Working Group
Create „living“ dataset for future land cover products
(e.g. GLOBCOVER)
Use of GOFC GOLD regional networks
Harmonization experiences are essential
LCCS provides the framework to translate the
individual in situ interpretations
Frustration with lack of funding for validation