5th adc meeting

17. T3 (Target Task Team) Report and Recommendations

Greg Withee
Background: in GEO since 2005 we have had an official text and a reference document. Between them you find a vision for GEO and GEOSS. Then there were some targets – about 250. Work Plan – there’s many tasks in the 2007-2009 work plan (over 100). When this came up for revision logic did not prevail. The Executive Committee decided that the work plan needed to be revised, started about a year ago, is under version 2 now (2009-2011). Finally, the Executive Committee approved a task team to look at the targets.
Many of the 10 and 6 year targets are actually extensions of the 2 year targets. The targets range from the very broad to the very specific. The 47 Health targets were compacted down to 5.
T3 is still defining the targets quasi independent of the work plan. What T3 needs to do, after the new targets are defined, is to have a cross walk between the work plan and the targets. This cannot be done before the Pleanry. T3 should recommend that there be another meeting after the Plenary to do the cross walks and check the targets.
J. Pearlman commented;

1. 
   As a lot of the benefit of GEOSS is cross referencing and coordination between the SBAs; they should work together not alone. G. Withee: these should naturally evolve and don’t need to be part of the targets
   
2. 
   Technologists should be involved in the targets. G. Withee: I agree, we need to invest in as many experts as we can get in the area.
   
3. 
   How are we going to prioritize the 20-30 targets? G. Withee: You need to leave the word priority out (and do it by another name).
   
4. 
   How are you going to address the need for commitments? G. Withee: Voluntary organizations are problematic. It offers countries the chance to get into an organization that they might not get permission from their governments ordinarily. That’s an important part of GEO. You can join without signing up explicitly. However when it comes to making GEO work, e.g. data sharing, if there was a rule requiring data sharing, most countries would have to examine such a mandate in light of their national policies and capabilities. Either they couldn’t provide the technology or there would be a policy issue. The GEO answer is that 73 countries have endorsed data sharing principles so there is a high probability that it will get done.