Marc Olijslagers (KU Leuven, SADL) [presentation not yet available]
As part of the project of Reportnet modernisation, EEA is aiming to streamline the environmental reporting processes. In this context KU Leuven explored the options to use the geospatial information covered by INSPIRE in environmental reporting in order to avoid double reporting and resulting possible data inconsistencies. In particular, the geometry of Natura 2000 sites is also reported in the INSPIRE Protected Sites theme. The study tested the possibilities to reference, find and download specific spatial objects required for Natura 2000 through the INSPIRE infrastructure.
To find a specific spatial object first the correct dataset must be identified, followed by locating the specific object in that dataset. The study exposed issues in both steps. With the metadata currently available in the INSPIRE geoportal it is trivial to identify the correct (authorized) dataset(s). Within the datasets there is not always common identifier linking the Natura 2000 reporting information to the correct INSPIRE Protected Site. The absence of a common identifier is often the result of the actual data flow within a Member State, with different administrations for Natura 2000 and INSPIRE Protected Sites, and only one directional communication.
Is the use of a linked data approach the way to avoid these problems?
When a reporting obligation is covered by combining data from different origins (Natura 2000 reporting and INSPIRE reporting), can the use of linked data guarantee reporting synchronisation between the 2 datasets? On the other hand, the current reporting dataflow is slow. The final uniform European dataset reflects a situation often already 1 to 2 years old at the moment of the data release. Can the use of linked data give access to the present version of a protected site at any moment.
Finally, offers the use of a linked data approach offer additional benefits, or introduces new issues that need to be addressed?
13:30-15:00 Plenary session 3