Harmonization of methods and measurements (GSP Pillar 5) Rainer Baritz

Transcription

1 Harmonization of methods and measurements (GSP Pillar 5) Rainer Baritz ESP, Rome, March

2 Pillar 5 writing team: Compiled after expert registration through GSP web site; 2 experts dropped out; 4 additional external reviewers participated Chair: also Pillar 4 writing team; cross-link Chair: Rainer Baritz o Asia: Hakki Erdogan, Kazumichi Fujii and Yusuke Takata o Europe: Marco Nocita, Bernd Bussian and Niels Batjes o North America: Jon Hempel o South West Pacific: Peter Wilson o GSP Secretariat: Ronald Vargas ESP, Rome, March

3 Context Pillar 5 PoA Plan of Action (PoA) PoA proposes the development of an over-arching system for harmonized soil characterization Back-up for Pillar 1 (indicators) and Pillar 4 (data products) 6 recommendations: Definition Harmonization provides the ability to describe, sample, classify, and analyze the soil in a way that allows the combined use of the resulting data on a scientifically sound basis. Soil data and information derives from many sources, across time, projects, agencies, and countries.

4 Overview Pillar 5 PoA: easy structure 1. Harmonization concept Definitions Key areas Recommendation 1 Principles for harmonization Recommendation 2 Implementation procedures in the regional partnerships 2. Products in support of Harmonization Recommendation 3, 4, 5, 6 3. Governance as closely as possible to Pillar 5

5 Recommendations Recommendation 1 Develop an over-arching system for harmonized soil characterization as the central objective of Pillar 5. The system builds on and merges existing approaches to describe, classify, map, analyse and interpret soils. GSP Harmonization Concept Definitions Key areas of harmonization Principles for harmonization Recommendation 2

6 Recommendations Key areas of harmonization 1 soil profiles, soil classification and soil maps Recommendation 3 2 Soil sampling and analysis 3 Interoperability - Exchange of digital soil information 4 Interpretation and evaluation Global Implementation Report Reference system for soil profile description Reference system for soil classification Reference system for soil mapping Good Practice field sampling, sample preparation and measurement Recommendation 4 Global soil information model Recommendation 5 Catalogue of soil health indicators Recommendation 6 Method data base of pedo-transfer rules and functions

7 Aim of the Implementation Plan at global level Why global? to facilitate the fitting together of the regional efforts and products ( Pillar 4-products) To develop and implement some global-level rules and procedures: extended and improved ISOstandards and cook-book-style support, e.g. soil information model Develop a framework for uniting the regional harmonization activities: reference material, good practice examples, pathway for partnering, sharing of facilities, global guidance for harmonization principles

8 Context European Regional Partnership

9 General background Much involvement of European experts in standardization Experiences from European and other international networks TC 190 Soil Quality IUSS WGs - Soil ESBN Forest Soil Expert Panel Experiences from national and European harmonization projects European Soil Data Centre (ESDAC) and European Environment Agency (EEA) with expert networks Significant basis and progress on harmonization in Europe

10 1.a Soil Description Status European Soil Bureau Network: Transforming of nationally defined properties from local data bases into European format 1,897 complete soil profiles, which are linked to 1,077 STUs (35 % of EU-15) Challenges Pillar 5 Many coding issues not solved due to lack of measured and harmonized soil profile data sets (e.g. texture)

11 1.a Soil Description: Example soil texture Target: FAO Soil Profile Description (tbd) JRC/ESBN 1: 1Mio soil map Belgium Finland etc. Status: several countries have conversion methods/reference tables Challenge: adapt to possibly new targets; many countries lack such methods

12 1.b Soil Classification WRB in Europe Target: International soil classification system World Reference Base for Soil Resources (WRB) Status: Many countries have transformation-/ conversion-procedures developed Challenges: prototypes: hardly applied to large national data bases national approaches are at a fairly low classification level [GS Soil test cases] Austria Belgium Bulgaria CZ Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Portugal Scotland/N. Ireland/ Rep. Ireland Slovakia Slovenia

13 1.c Soil mapping Target: Harmonized Pillar 4 mapping scheme Status: European soil map 1:1 Mio Vast amounts of national maps (differ for scales and content) INSPIRE, but not related to content Manual 1:250k soil mapping Challenges: Content-related and geometric impurities Higher resolutions: not harmonized/national gaps Harmonize national maps for new global soil map

14 2. Soil analysis Status: ICP Forests/FSEP: Calibration exercises... MANUAL on soil sampling and analysis (mostly ISO) Intercalibration exercises 1992, 1993, 2002, 2005, 2007, 2009 (2007: 42 Parameters, 5 samples; 51 labs registered) National correlations: National handbooks: Few examples: Wet oxidation dry combustion (various countries) different extractions (BaCl2 vs. NH4Cl) Comparisons of acid extractions (e.g. Aqua regia vs. HF) particle-size analysis: Koehn pipette vs. X-ray granulometry Few examples: VDLUFA 1991, GAFA 2005/2009, Van Ranst et al. (1999) Challenges: European representation of harmonized analytical data sets is extremely patchy/lack of comparable monitoring results Application of central methods to new and older data sets is difficult Network of reference labs needed/capacity building offers Reference samples/reference data sets/method libraries

15 3. Interoperability exchange of digital soil data Status: INSPIRE, ISO (lead: Europe) National experiences exist (GS Soil) Multiple ways to store data ISO tested via network Challenges: Ensure compatability of standards with national approaches Ensure routine applications Develop soil thesaurus Build distributed system

16 4. Indicators (and applied methods) Status: Many national and European initiatives, e.g. EEA/EIONET-Soil/European research: ENVASSO Various extensions of existing indicator sets ongoing: Sustainable Development, Climate Change Challenges: Compile and harmonize indicators Develop criteria, baselines good status, thresholds Improve information about national systems in place

17 4. (Indicators and) applied methods Background: Models are needed to estimate parameters difficult to measure, to convert between analy. methods, and to extrapolate into areas with scarce data: pedo-transfer functions (PTF) pedotransfer rules (PTR) Hypres Database of Hydraulic Properties of European Soils -95 soil types soil profiles Status: Various national methods are in place; coordination in place for soil hydrology; all other fields not coordinated (national results are not comparable!) Challenges: Catalogue of agreed and coordinated methods (requires testing and validation with representative harmonized data sets )

18 Conclusions A European implementation plan is needed (e.g. incl. ideas for a network of reference labs) Existing efforts and project results are under-utilized due to lack of financed follow-up Involvement in standards-development is often voluntary Subsequently, active ESP partners are needed to successfully implement; very active and well-staffed European data centre/node with coordination and support tasks needed Positive side effects: GSP provides opportunity to fill long-existing data and knowledge gaps Harmonized information allows boost for innovation and cross-border understanding, especially in rural areas

19 Thank you for your attention!