1
DataExchangeandDisseminationDeliverable3.3byAAU
August2017
2
Preface
TheaimofWorkPackage3istoprovidedataandbuildaprototypeBalticMarineSpatialDataInfrastructure(MSDI),whichwillmakeiteasytoaccessopenstandarddatasets.
Basedontheanalysisofdataneedsandavailability(Report3.1)thenextsteptowardsdesigningthisprototypeMSDIistoestablishguidelinesondataexchangeanddissemination.
ThisreportsummarizestheresultsoftheanalysisoftheprerequisitesforaSystemsArchitectureforaTransnationalDataInfrastructureforMSP.Thefirstpartincludesthefindingsofadesktopstudyofavailablesystemsprovidinginteroperabledataandexistingtechnologystandards.Thesecondpartispresentingtheanalysisofuserdemandsbasedonexperiencefromformerprojectsaswellasinterviewswithplannerscarriedoutduringthisproject.Finally,thespecificationofthedesignrequirementsandaconceptualmodelforthesystemispresented.
ThisreportisproducedbyHenningStenHansenandLiseSchrøder,AAU,incollaborationwithManuelFriasandFlorentNicolas,Helcom.ThankstoIdaReiter,AAU,forvaluableinput.Theanalysisisalsopublishedasascientificpaper(Hansenetal,2017).
3
Tableofcontents
1. INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................4Aworkplandividedinto5WorkPackages 5TowardsadecentralizedsystemwiththeWorkPackage3 6Dataexchangeanddissemination 6
2. DATAPORTALSFORMARINESPATIALPLANNING............................72.1Marinegeoportaldesigns 72.2Demandsformarinegeoportals 10
3. SPATIALDATAINFRASTRUCTURE.........................................................113.1INSPIRE 123.2Standardsfordataexchange 12
4. SYSTEMSDESIGN..........................................................................................154.1Userdemands–specifications 154.2Conceptualmodel 174.2.1DataDiscovery 184.2.2DataVisualisation 184.2.3DataProcessing 184.2.4DataAccess 18
5. IMPLEMENTATION......................................................................................215.1Challenge1–dataavailability 215.2Challenge2–datainteroperability 215.3Challenge3–shippingdata 225.4Challenge4–languageissues 22
6. CONCLUSION..................................................................................................23
7. REFERENCES..................................................................................................24
4
1. Introduction
TheBalticLINesINTERREGprojectseekstoincreasetransnationalcoherenceofshippingroutesandenergycorridorsinMaritimeSpatialPlansintheBSR.Thiswillpreventcross-bordermismatchesandsecuretransnationalconnectivityaswellasefficientuseofBalticSeaspace.TherebyBalticLINescontributestothedevelopmentofappropriateframeworkconditionsforBlueGrowthactivities(e.g.maritimetransportation,offshoreenergyexploitation,coastaltourismetc.)forthecoming10-15yearsincreasinginvestors’security.ApreconditionforthisistocreatetheinformationalaswellasinstitutionalcapacitiesofMaritimeSpatialPlanning(MSP)bodies.Basedonpastexperiencesandasectorinvolvementstrategy,astructuredandcoordinatedinvolvementprocesswithrelevantnational/transnationalstakeholderforawillbecarriedoutinclosecooperationwithstakeholdersfromtheshippingandtheenergyindustry.TheBalticLINesprojectpartnerswillanalyserequirementsforMSPoftheshippingandenergysector(basedonforecastedeconomic,environmental,technologicalandland-searelateddevelopments)andtheirspatialimplications.TheinformationgatheredwillbevisualisedinscenarioswiththehelpoftheMSPChallenge,acomputer-supportedsimulationgamebasedonaccuratedataandfeedback,thatgivesmaritimespatialplannersinsightinthediversechallengesofsustainableplanningofhumanactivitiesinthemarineandcoastalecosystem.
TheBalticLINesprojectwillimproveaccesstorelevanttransnationalMSPdataneededformakingspatialallocationsforshippingandenergyusesinMSPbypilotingthefirsteverBSRMSPdatainfrastructure.ThisinfrastructurewillallowaccesstodecentralisedMSPdatabeyondtheprojectlifetimeandmaybeexpandedtoothersectors.
Inordertocomeupwithplanningsolutions,MaritimeSpatialPlannerswillidentifytransnationalcross-sectoralplanningissues.Thesesingleorcross-sectoralmismatches/foregonesynergiesmaycurrentlyprevailormaybeforecastedbasedonfuturescenarios.
Plannerswilljointlyagreeonplanningcriteria,takingintoaccountsectorrequirementsforMSPandtheecosystemapproach.Theywilldetermineoptionsforplanningsolutionsforshippingroutesandenergyinfrastructure,whichwillbeconsultedwithsectorsviatheMSPChallenge.ThefinallysuggestedplanningsolutionswillbepresentedtothenationalMSPprocessesand,hence,areexpectedtobeconsideredinthenationalMaritimeSpatialPlansintheirdevelopmentorrevisionstage.Consequently,increasedtransnationalcoherenceoflinearinfrastructuresinMSPisachieved.TosetconditionsforacontinuousMSPcoordinationonlinearinfrastructures,BalticLINeswilldeveloprecommendationsforaBSRagreementontransboundaryconsultationsonlinearinfrastructureswithintheMSPprocess.TheywillbepresentedtotheHELCOM-VASABMSPWorkingGrouptodecideonandfollowuptheirimplementation.
5
Aworkplandividedinto5WorkPackages
BalticLINeswillachieveitsaimsthankstoaconsortiumof15partnersledbytheFederalMaritimeandHydrographicAgencyofGermany.Theprojectisdividedin5WorkPackages(WP)includingWP1fortheprojectmanagementandadministration.
TheWP1isledbyaprojectsteeringcommitteewhichmonitorstheimplementationoftheprojectinrelationtotheworkplanandtheobligationstowardstheBalticSeaRegionProgrammeSecretariat.
TheWP2“RequirementsforMSPinrelationtotheshippingandenergysectorinBSR”aimstoincreasetheunderstandingofmaritimespatialplannersonthefuturesectoraldevelopmentsandtoanticipatespatialusesfortheBalticSea.Theresultswillbeusedtodevelopfuturescenariostohighlightcross-bordermismatchesanddiscusspotentialgatesforshippingcorridorsandpowercableswithinotherWPs.
TheWP3“BalticSeaRegionMSPdatainfrastructureforshippingroutesandenergycorridors”,ledbytheHELCOMSecretariat,isconcernedwiththedevelopmentofapan-BalticdatainfrastructureforMaritimeSpatialPlanners.ThisreportwillexplaintheresultsofoneoftheGroupofActivitiestoanalysethedataexchangeanddisseminationalternatives.
Workpackage4named“Transnationallycoherentplanningofinfrastructure”aimstodevelopandproposetransnationallycoherentplanningsolutionsforlinearenergyinfrastructuresandshippingcorridorswhichareinlinewiththeecosystemapproach.
Workpackage5“Governanceforthecoordinationoflinearinfrastructures”ensuresthattheprojectactivitiesandresultsaresharedamongprojectpartnersandrelevantstakeholders.Itisimportanttosafeguardthemainoutputsforimplementationafterthefinalizationoftheproject.
6
TowardsadecentralizedsystemwiththeWorkPackage3
WP3aimsatdevelopingaprototypeMarineSpatialDataInfrastructure(MSDI)toprovidedatatotheplannerswhocarryouttheplanningproposals.ThisinfrastructurewillallowMSPpractitionerstoaccessMSPdatainadecentralizedsystem.
Inacentralizedsystemdataissenttoadatabasefromtheoriginalsource.
Inadecentralizedsystemdataisnotsentanywhere.Asystemaccessitfromtheoriginalsource.
Thisdecentralizedsystemallowstheuserstohaveaccesstothemostupdatedatasetshostedbythecountries.
WP3includesfourgroupsofactivities:
3.1Dataneedsandavailability
3.2Harmoniseddatalayers
3.3Guidelinesondataexchangeanddissemination
3.4RegionalMSPdataaccessandvisualisationtool
Dataexchangeanddissemination
Thisdocumentisreportingontask3.3ondataexchangeanddissemination.Inordertospecifytherequirementsforthenewsystem,availablesystemsprovidinginteroperabledataandexistingtechnologystandardshavebeenstudiedanduserdemandshavebeenanalysed.Basedonexperiencefromotherprojectsandinterviewscarriedoutamongplannersinthepartnercountriesandananalysisofuserdemandsinordertodesigntherequirementspecification.Furthermore,thereportisreferringtotheresultsofthepreviousworkdocumentedinreport3.1ondataneedsandavailability.
7
2. DataportalsforMarineSpatialPlanning
Withinmarinespatialplanning,marinegeoportalsareimportanttoolsandvariousgeoportalscontainingmarinedataalreadyexistaroundtheworld.Besidesallowingportaluserstofindexistingmarinedata,theseweb-basedaccesspointscontainingnetworksofgeographicdatafacilitatescollaborationprojectsbetweendifferentshareholdersowningmarinedata,andimproveinteroperabilitybetweentechnicalplatformsofdifferentdatausersanddataownersbyusinginternationallyrecognisedstandards(Strainetal,2006).
Manyportalshavebeenevaluatedinscientificpaperswithinrecentyears.ReferringtotheconceptofspatialdatainfrastructuresbyRajabifardetal(2003),whichwillbeintroducedintheChapter2,SeipandBill(2016)deducethefollowingindicatorstoevaluatemarinegeoportals:
• theextentofmarinedatacovered• theavailabilityandstructureofmetadata,• theavailabilityofoptionsfordiscovering,viewing,anddownloadingdata,• theuseofstandardsensuringinteroperabilitybetweentechnicalplatforms• degreetowhichtheportalisrelatedtoagovernmentpolicyformarineplanning.
Thisapproachwillbeusedasaframeworkfordescribingthebasicqualitiesofamaritimegeoportal(seetable1).
2.1Marinegeoportaldesigns
SeipandBill(2016)referstoCanadaandAustralia,astheyhavegeoportalsdevelopedearlyastheyaredatingbacktoatleast2004.CanadaandAustraliahaveportals,thatwereinitiatedaspartofnationalgovernmentalmarinestrategies(Canada:theGeoGratisportalandtheDFOGeoPortal;Australia:AMSISandIMOS),IrelandhasamarineportalcalledMIDAthatoriginallywasbasedonaprojectofa3-yearduration(Seip&Bill,2016).SeipandBill(2016)pointoutthatallthreecountriesaresuccessfulinusinginternationalstandardsandopensourcetoimproveinteroperability,gatheringdatafrommanydifferentshareholders,andpresentingmanycoredatasets.However,theyalsomentionthattheportalsfromCanadaandAustralialackasingleentry,whileallthreecountrieshaveseparatemetadataportals.
Kocur-BeraandDudzińska(2014)examinegeoportalsofinterestfortheBalticSearegion,andtheysimilarlyconcludethatcurrentenvironmentaldataunfortunatelyarenotavailablefromonesingleentryandthattheresolutionofthedataissometimesinadequateformarineplanning.Kocur-BeraandDudzińska(2014)refertotheINSPIREgeoportal,whichlinkstheusertoterrestrialandmarineenvironmentaldataatvariousEuropeaninstitutions’homepages,andHELCOMData&MapService,hostingmanymarinedatasetsfromtheBalticSearegion,whichcanbeviewedthroughArcGISrestserviceorWMS.
8
Whenexaminingthesegeoportals,itbecomesapparentthatthesetup,interfaces,andabilitiesoftheplatformsvaryaslistedintable1.Someofthegeoportalshaveonlyasmallmapviewer(e.g.theINSPIREgeoportalandCanada’sGeogratis),whileotherportalshaveabigmapviewer(e.g.HELCOMData&MapService,Canada’sDFOGeoPortal,Australia’sAMSIS,IMOSandtheINSPIREportal).Someportalshavefewornodatasearchoptions(e.g.DFOGeoportalandAMSIS),whileothershavemoreadvanceddatasearchoptions(e.g.HELCOMData&MapService,Geogratis,IMOS,andMIDA).Ingeneral,itisdifficulttogainanoverviewoverthedatadownloadoptions.MIDAappearstobetheonlyportalforwhichitispossibletosearchforonly‘downloadabledata’.However,theIMOSportalseemstobemoreconsistentinregardstoitsdownloadoptionsbyprovidingdatainnetCDFandURLs.Furthermore,theIMOSportalhasaverynicestepwiseandintuitiveinterfacewithbigbuttonsprovidingafineoverviewoverthestructureoftheportal.Allportalsincludemetadatatosomeextent,fortheEuropeanportalsthemetadataisintheINSPIREstandard,butitisdifficulttogainanoverviewoverallthedataprovidedandthedateoforiginofthedata.TheGeogratisportalandtheIMOSportalaretheonlyportalsenablingatime-basedsearchfunctionbasedoncreationtimeandpublishingdaterespectively.Noneoftheportalsprovideaclearoverviewofthequalityandresolutionofthedata.Furthermore,notalldataisdownloadable,andthedegreetowhichtheportalsincludedatafromprivatecompaniesappeartobelimited.Strainetal(2006)mentionthatmanyorganisationsarereluctanttosharetheirgeographicdata.
Tosumup,thedevelopmentofmarinegeoportalsbasedonopensourcetechnologyareintroducedallovertheworld.However,theyappeartolack
• asingleentry,• anoverviewovertheorigin,thequality,andtheresolutionofthedata,• anoverviewofdownloadandaccessoptions,• propermarinedataoverviewcatalogues,• collaborationwithprivatedataowners,• specificproceduresforupdatingthedatathatareobvioustotheusersoftheportal
AsHartmann(2014)states,itisdifficultforallpotentialusersofgeoportalstohavethepropertechnicalskillsforusingtheportals,forwhichreasonbetterguides,interfaces,andmoreclearproceduresareneeded.
9
Table.1.MarinegeoportalsbasicqualitiesreferringtotheindicatorsbySeipandBill(2016)
*CanadianGeospatialDataInfrastructure(CGDI),alsoknownas“GeoConnections”,whichincludestheMarineGeospatialDataInfrastructure(MGDI)
**AustralianSpatialDataInfrastructure(ASDI)
***Seeparagraph3.1
Dataportal Extentofmarinedatacovered
Metadata Functionality(discovering,viewing,download)
Standards Relationtogovernmentpolicies
GeoGratisCanadiannationalrepository
Marine-themeddatafor(almost)everybody
Separateportal:GeoConnectionsDiscoveryPortal(GDP)
NosingleentrySmallmapviewerTime-basedsearchfunction
Internationalstandardsandopensource
InitiatedaspartofnationalgovernmentalmarinestrategiesincludingMGDI*
DFOGeoPortalCanadianDepartmentofFisheriesandOceans
EnableDFOemployeestoindexandpublishtheirdataandfind,viewanddownloadotherspatialdata
Separateportal:GeoConnectionsDiscoveryPortal(GDP)
NosingleentryBigmapviewer
Internationalstandardsandopensource
InitiatedaspartofnationalgovernmentalmarinestrategiesincludingMGDI*
AMSISAustralianMarineSpatialInformationSystem
80layersofinformationintheAustralianmarinejurisdiction(boundaries,infrastructure,cadaster,etc.)
Separateportal:AustralianSpatialDataDirectory(ASDD)
NosingleentryBigmapviewer
Internationalstandardsandopensource
Initiatedaspartofnationalgovernmentalmarinestrategies–includingASDI**
IMOSIntegratedMarineObservingSystemOceanPortal
VarietyofdatamostlyfromscientificresearchinAustralia
Separateportal:AODN-GeoNetworkmetadatacatalogue
NosingleentryBigmapviewerStepwiseandIntuitiveinterfaceTime-basedsearchfunction
Internationalstandardsandopensource
AustralianGovernment’sNationalCollaborativeResearchInfrastructureStrategy(NCRIS)
MIDA(Ireland)
140datalayers(+metadata)frommorethan35datasources
Separateportal:MarineDataOnline(MDO)
BigmapviewerSearchfacility:“downloadabledata”
INSPIREcompliant***
Aprojectofa3-yearonmarineandcoastalgeospatialinformationinIreland
INSPIREGeoportal
EU Integratedportal Smallmapviewer
INSPIREcompliant***
EUdirective
HELCOMData&MapService
BalticSeaRegion
Integratedportal Bigmapviewer INSPIREcompliant***
1992HelsinkiConventionontheprotectionoftheBalticSeaarea
10
2.2Demandsformarinegeoportals
Toconclude,basedonthereviewofgeoportaldesignsandthetheoryofmarineSDI,itisimportantforgeoportalstobefoundedinnationalmarineSDIstoensurelong-termstrategiesfordatasharingandlessredundantdatadisplays.
Theserecommendationsinclude:
• Thereshouldbeonlyonesingleoverallnationalgeoportalentryprovidingaclearoverviewofalldataanddownloadoptionsavailableandthedatashouldberegularlyupdatedinordertoimprovetheusabilityofthedata.
• Abetteroverviewshouldbeprovidedoverthequalityandresolutionofthedata.• Aclearstrategyshouldbedevelopedforhowthedataispublishedandupdated,andit
shouldbepossibletosearchfordatabasedonresolutionandtimeoforigin.• geoportalsshouldincludewebservicestoallowviewingthedataintheusers’own
applications,improvinginteroperability.• International,opentechnicalstandardsshouldbeused,ensuringinteroperability
betweenplatformsofdifferentcountries.• Ifanyoverlapbetweendataindifferentportalsexist,itneedstobeclearly
communicatedtotheusersoftheportals.• Easy-to-readguidesshouldbeprovidedforhowtousetheportals.
Furthermore,strategiesshouldbeimplementedtoimprovethedatasharingofprivatedatashareholderstoexpandthesourcesofopenmarinedata.
11
3. SpatialDataInfrastructureASpatialDataInfrastructure(SDI)isaboutfacilitationandcoordinationoftheexchangeandsharingofspatialdata.Itisdescribedastheunderlyinginfrastructure,oftenintheformofpolicies,standardsandaccessnetworksthatallowsdatatobesharedbetweenpeoplewithinorganisations,statesorcountries.ThefundamentalinteractionbetweenpeopleanddataisgovernedbythetechnologicalcomponentsoftheSDIrepresentedbytheaccessnetwork,policiesandstandards(Rajabifardetal.,2003).Inaccordancewiththisunderstanding,thediagraminfigure1illustratesthedynamicinter-relationshipsbetweenthepeopleandspatialdatawithinanSDI.Thedynamicnatureofthespatialdatainfrastructureisattributedtotherateoftechnologicaladvancementandchanginguserneeds.PeopleanddataarethekeyelementsinSDI,andaspatialdatainfrastructureatanylevelwhetherlocal,regional,nationalorevenglobalinvolvesanarrayofstakeholdersbothwithinandacrossorganisationsincludingdifferentlevelsofgovernment,theprivatesectorandamultitudeofusers.Inordertodesignandimplementaspatialdatainfrastructure,thestakeholdersneedtobeidentifiedtogetherwiththebusinessprocessesandfunctionsoftheorganisationsinvolved.Thedatarequiredandtheflowofdatabetweenvariousfunctionsmustbeknownbytheuserorprovidedbythefunctions.Inthisrespectdatasharing,exchange,security,accuracyandaccessaswellasrights,restrictionsandresponsibilitiesmustbemanaged.
Figure.1.ComponentsofaSpatialDataInfrastructurereferringtotheillustrationoftheSDIconceptbyRajabifardetal(2003).
12
3.1INSPIRE
inordertoensureSDIsasabackboneinenablingadigitalsocietywithinEurope,thelegalframeworkincludingdata-relatedEUdirectivesisimportant.AmongtheveryimportantEUinitiativesrelatingtoSDIs,areDirective2003/98/EConthere-useofpublicsectorinformation(knownasthe'PSIDirective')wasenteredintoforceon31December2003,whichhasgainedaveryhighimpactforexampleonthecreationofEuropeangeoportals.AlsoRegulation1367/2006(COM2006)onpublicaccesstoenvironmentalinformationhascontributedsignificantlytothenotionofeasieraccessandsharingofpublicsectorinformation(ItwasrevisedbyDirective2013/37/EUwhichenteredintoforceon17July2013).Athirdmajorsteptowardsapan-EuropeanspatialdatainfrastructurewasDirective2007/2/EConestablishinganInfrastructureforSpatialInformationintheEuropeanCommunity(INSPIRE),whichwasenteredintoforcein2007.
Figure2.AkeyobjectiveofINSPIREistomakemoreandbetterspatialinformationavailableforEUpolicy-makingandimplementationinawiderangeofsectorsasspecifiedinthethreeannexes(COM2007).
3.2Standardsfordataexchange
RecentlytheEUe-GovernmentActionPlan2016-2020wasintroduced,whichunderlinestheimportanceofreusabilityofdataandtechnologiesandreferstotheEuropeanInteroperabilityFramework(EIF)(COM2016),anditisthecoredocumentdefininginteroperabilityseenfromacommonEuropeanperspective(Bovalisetal,2014).Ensuringinteroperabilitymeansensuringreusabilityofdataandtechnologies,whichiscost-savinginregardstotimeandeconomy(Bovalisetal,2014).InteroperabilitywithinEUhasbeencloselylinkedtoapublic-sectoragendasince1995throughvariousprograms:IDA(1995-1999),IDAII(1999-2003),IDABC(2004-2009),ISA(2010-2015),andnowISA2(2016-2020)(Bovalisetal,2014).DuringtheIDA
• AnnexI:addresses,administrativeunits,cadastralparcels,coordinatereferencesystems,geographicalgridsystems,geographicalnames,hydrography,protectedsites,transportnetworks
• AnnexII:elevation,geology,landcover,orthoimagery• AnnexIII:agriculturalandaquaculturefacilities,areamanagement/restriction/
regulationzones&reportingunits,atmosphericconditions,bio-geographicalregions,buildings,energyresources,environmentalmonitoringfacilities,habitatsandbiotopes,humanhealthandsafety,landuse,meteorologicalgeographicalfeatures,mineralresources,naturalriskzones,oceanographicgeographicalfeatures,populationdistributionanddemography,productionandindustrialfacilities,searegions,soil,speciesdistribution,statisticalunits,utilityandgovernmentalservices
13
(TelematicInterchangeofDatabetweenAdministrations)program,theprimaryfocuswastodeveloptrans-Europeantelematicsnetwork.LaterwiththeISA(InteroperabilitySolutionsforPublicAdministrations)program,theEUleadersagreedtoaligntheirnationalinteroperabilityframeworkswiththeEuropeaninteroperabilityframework(EIF).Thus,sinceIDA’sintroductionin1995,thefocushasmovedawayfrombeingontechnicalinteroperabilitywithinsinglesectorstoincludesemantic,legal,andorganizationalinteroperabilityaspectsworkingnotonlywithinsectors,butalsoacrosssectors(Bovalisetal,2014).
Criado(2011)referstotheEuropeaninteroperabilityframework(EIF),includingfourtypesofinteroperability:
• Technicalinteroperabilitylinkingdataandtechnologiesthroughformatsandstandards• Semanticinteroperabilitypreservingthemeaningofsemanticconceptswhensharing
dataandinformation• Legalinteroperabilityintroducinglegislationfordataandtechnologyreuse• Organisationalinteroperabilitycoordinatinginformation-basedprocessesbetween
differentorganizationswithmutuallybeneficialgoals
AspointedoutbyBovalisetal(2014)otherkeycomponentsoftheISAprogramsare:
• theEuropeanInteroperabilityStrategy(EIS)statingobjectivesforinteroperabilitywithinEUandbuildstheobjectivesontheconditionscontainedintheEIF.
• theEuropeanInteroperabilityReferenceArchitecture(EIRA)providingaservice-orientedarchitecture-basedandplatform-independentmodelforcreatingfrom-scratchinteroperablearchitecturesorimprovinginteroperabilityforexistingones.
• theEuropeanInteroperabilityCartography(EIC)presentinganoverviewoverinteroperabilitysolutionsforEuropeanpublicadministrations
• theCommonAssessmentMethodforStandardsandSpecifications(CAMSS)isastandardprocessenablingEUmemberstatesinspecificprojectstosystematicallyevaluateandcomparecandidatestandardsandspecifications
Regardingtechnologiesenablingtechnicalinteroperabilityandexpandingoptionsfordatasharing,webservicesareapplicationsthatusetheInternettomakethemselvesaccessibleforotherapplications.AsdescribedbyTreiblmayretal(2012),webservicesarecharacterisedby:
• beingaservice-orientedarchitecture(SOA),whichmeansanarchitectureinvolvedwhenproviding,searchingfor,andusingservicesoveranetwork
• beingbasedonthehypertexttransferprotocol(HTTP)andsometimesthesimpleobjectaccessprotocol(SOAP)inordertocommunicatewithserversovertheinternet.
• theuseofthewebservicedescriptionlanguage(WSDL),basedontheextensiblemarkuplanguage(XML),isusedtodescribethespecificabilitiesofwebservices
TheOpenGeospatialConsortium(OGC),whichisaninternational,non-profitorganizationincludingmembersfromgovernment,companies,andNGOs,havedefinedsomeofthemostusednetworkservices:
14
• Thewebmapservice(WMS)enablessharingofimages,• thewebfeatureservice(WFS)enablessharingoffeaturedatawithattributes,• thewebcoverageservice(WCS)enablessharingofrasterdata• thewebprocessingservice(WPS)enablessharingofalgorithmstoperformondata
(forexamplecodedinPython)(Cannataetal,2014).
AlltheseOGCwebservicesareISO-approvedstandards,whichmeansthattheyarestandardsacknowledgedbytheInternationalOrganizationforStandardization(ISO).
Besideswebservices,otheropentechnologyoptionsaredevelopedandgainingpopularityaroundtheglobeatafastpace.Withinthegeographicdatasector,importantexamplesareGeoServerandMapServer,whichareserversfordistributingwebservice,OpenLayers,whichenablesdynamicmapsonwebpages,theopensourcedatabasepostgreSQLwithitsspatialpostGISextension,andtheNetCDFsoftwarelibrariesthatenablethree-dimensionaldatasets,whichisveryimportantformarineecosystemmodelling.
Theimportanttechnicalstandardforthemarinesector,theS-100datamodel,iscreatedbytheInternationalHydrographicOrganization(IHO)andadoptedbytheUnitedNations’InternationalMaritimeOrganization(IMO)tobethebasisofIMO’sCommonMaritimeDataStructure(CMDS)ofe-navigation.E-navigationcoversstrategiesaimedatimprovingthesharingofmarineinformationthroughtheuseofmoderntechnologyandincludesmarinedatasuchasElectronicNavigationChart(ENC)data,bathymetricdata,tidaldata,meteorologydata,radar-imagedata,andtheradio-basedAutomaticIdentificationSystem(AIS)data(Park&Park,2015).TheS-100standardisbasedontheISO19100seriesofgeographicinformationandisthus,similarlytotheOGCwebservices,ISO-approved(Park&Park,2015).
TheimportanceofinteroperabilitywithinEU,bothfromastrategicallyandtechnicallypointofview,alsorelatestoINSPIREurgingmemberstatestoshareenvironmentaldataandnowaspartoftheEUeGovernmentActionPlan2016-2020implementingametadatastandardizationforthewholeofEU(COM2016).
15
4. SystemsDesignBasedontheexperiencesgainedfromearlierprojectsandtherequirementsfromaratherdiverseandtransnationalusercommunityasystemsarchitecturehasbeendefinedinordertodevelopthesystemsarchitectureandaprototypetobetestedduringtheproject.
4.1Userdemands–specifications
BasedontheresultsofsurveysamongplannersconductedintheBalticScopeINTERREGproject(www.balticscope.eu)aswellassupplementaryinterviewscarriedoutinBalticLINes,theneedsplannersdealingwithcross-borderissuesofMSParefacing,hasbeenspecified.Inbothprojects,therearefocusonawarenesscreationconcerningprocessesandchallengesreferringtotheBluegrowthstrategies,sustainabilityandtheecosystem-basedapproachaswellascollaborativeissuesfocussingonlearningfromeachotherandcollaborationacrossborders.ConcerningtheMSDI,thechallengeishowtosupportusabilityandaddresstheactualneedsconcerningdataandfunctionalityandhowtoactuallygetaccesstodata,thatfitsthepurpose.
IntheBalticLINesprojectthefocusisoncross-borderissuesonshippingandenergylines,leadingtoaspecificneedforinformationonrespectivelyconnectionsonbordersandconnectionsofstructures.Theimportanceofpayingattentiontootherimportantcross-borderissues,ispointedoutbytheplanners:
• theMSPprocesstimeframesbetweencountriesvaries;• militaryareasaredifficulttoincludeinplanning,becausedataisrestricted;• somenationalbordersatseaarenotdefined;• Natura2000networkandbluecorridorsarenotcoherent;• monitoringfisheriesisachallenge.
Overarchingneedsasdecisionsupportduetotheecosystemapproachandtheprovisionofstrategicenvironmentalassessments(SEA)arealsoemphasized.
Accordingtotheanswersfromtheplanners,mostusersofthedataandthesystemassuchareplanners(GISusersandothers)andresearchers.Furthermore,institutionsgivinglicenses(i.e.fishing),academics(researchinstitutions)aswellaseveryoneinvolvedinMSPareusingtheservices.Intable2theresponsesregardingrequirementsforadecisionsupporttoolprovidingaccesstodataandinformationaswellasfunctioningasaplatformforcollaborationislisted.
16
Table.2.Requirementsfordecisionsupportandcollaboration.
Thecountriesaremostlycollaboratingdirectlyorviaprojects(e.g.TOPCONSintheGulfofFinlandbetweenFinlandandRussia),asregardsenergyforinstance,thereisacommongridbetweenLithuaniaandSweden,butitisemphasized,thattheserviceshouldalsoincludeaccesstofutureplans.Specificrequirementsforshippingandenergyplanningpurposesarelistedintable3.
Table.3.Requirementsforshippingandenergyplanningpurposes.
Dataandinformation Platformforcollaboration
Decisionsupport Accesstodataforstatisticsandmodels Cooperationwithnationalinstitutes
Accesstoallavailabledata(updated) Collaborationwithstakeholders
AccesstoGIStoolsfromotherprojects
AccesstoPolicydocuments
Mostoftheplannersanswered Otheranswers
Importantelementforshipping
up-to-datedata uploadyourownlayertothesystem
metadataviewer includeAISdata
open/removelayer select/filterthetypeofports
downloaddata
Importantelementsforenergy
Metadatasearch(sourceofdata,relevance,etc.)andviews
linkinshore/offshoregrid
Downloaddata Meteorologicalstations/data
Presentandfutureplansinborderingcountries
Safetyzoneofstructures
Gateways
17
Backgrounddataisimportantconcerningotheraspects:MPAs,fisheries,hotspotsofecologicalfeatures(nurseryareas,etc.)andalsoconcerningaquacultureespeciallythepossibilitiesforco-location.Andbackgrounddatashouldalsoincludealsoallthemarineareas–notonlycoastalareabutalsooffshore.
Theinterviewsillustratebigdifferencesamongthecountriesconcerningtheplanningprocessaswellasconcerningdataavailability.Aspecificchallengeishowtodealwiththeissuesofharmonisation.Ingeneral,theapproachwillbepragmaticandaimingatsolutionsfitforthepurpose.Detaileddatasetsareneeded,whendoingcomplexanalysis,thoughalotofcross-borderplanningmatterscanbehandledbasedonsimpleharmonisedimages.Likewise,theplannershavepointedouttheimportanceoffocussingonsemanticsandtheattributesneeded.SomeplannersalsoemphasizedhowsharedGISexpertiseinordertoperformmorecomplexanalysiswouldsupporttheplanningprocedures.
4.2Conceptualmodel
ManycountriesarenowdevelopingnationalSpatialDataInfrastructuresformarineandmaritimeinformation–so-calledMSDIs.ThesenationalnodeswillserveasbasecomponentsinatransnationaldatainfrastructureinaccordancewiththeINSPIREprinciples(COM2007),that‘datashouldbecollectedonceandmaintainedatthelevelwherethiscanbedonemosteffectively’,andthat‘itshouldbepossibletocombineseamlesslyspatialinformationfromdifferentsourcesacrossEuropeandshareitbe-tweendifferentusers’.
DataaremostoftenstoredinspatialrelationaldatabaseslikeOracle,SQLServer,andPostGIS.TheISO19125standarddefinesadatamodelforsimplefeatures(2Dfeatures)withahierarchyofgeometryclassesfrompointsoverlinestopolygons.Besides,thedistributednationaldataservers,itismostoftennecessarytohaveadedicatedcentraldataservercontainingdata,whicharenotgeneralavailablefromtheofficialdataservers.Thesedatacompriseresearchdata,voluntarygeographicinformation,andothernon-operationaldatasets.
Thecentralnodeshouldinprincipleonlybeanaccesspoint(adataportal),wherethedifferentuserscan
1. searchfordatathroughaCatalogueandDiscoveryservice2. visualisethedatathroughaPortrayalservice,3. transformthedatathroughaProcessingservice4. getaccesstothedatathroughdownloadorviawebservices.
18
4.2.1DataDiscovery
Acatalogueserviceenablesyoutosearchforgeographicaldatasetsandgeoservicesbasedonthecorrespondingmetadata.InEurope,INSPIREDirectivesetstherulesformetadatausedtodescribethespatialdatasetsandservicesaslistedinthedirective.TheMemberStateswithintheEUareobligedtodescribetheirdatabymetadataandsettinguplocalcatalogueservices.ThemetadataelementsfollowtheISO19115fordataandservices.TheMetadataXMLschemaimplementationisdefinedbyISO19139.
4.2.2DataVisualisation
ThePortrayalserviceallowsdatatobepresentedinteractivelythroughservicessuchasWMS(WebMapService)andusingastandardinterfaceovertheinternet.TheISO19117standarddefinesaschematocreategraphicoutputfordataprovidedthroughtheISO19110groupofstandards(REF).TheISO19117standarddoesnotcontainstandardisationofcartographicsymbols,whicharekeptseparatefromthedata.Thus,thecartographicrepresentationofanobjectisstoredinaportrayalcatalogue.
4.2.3DataProcessing
TheprocessingservicesallowsspatialdatatobeprocessedbyusingWebProcessingService(WPS),whichisanOGCimplementation(OGC,2007).WebCoordinateTransformationService(WCTS),RoutingServiceorAnalysisandTopologicOverlayServiceareotherexamplesonweb-basedprocessing.TheWPSstandarddefineshowarequestsendbytheclientcaninitiatedtheexecutionofaprocess,andhowtheoutputfromtheprocessisafterwardshandled.ThedatarequiredbytheWebProcessingServicecanbedeliveredacrossanetworkortheycanbeavailableattheserver.AWPSprocessisnormallyasingularfunctionthatperformsaspecificgeospatialoperation,butaWPSprocesscanbedesignedtocallasequenceofwebservicesincludingotherWPSprocesses,thusactingastheservicechainingengine(REF).
4.2.4DataAccess
Theseservicesareneededtoaccessrawgeo-spatialdata(notmapsincaseofWebservices)bydownloadingstaticdatafilesthroughFTPorviaWebServicesusingcommonfileformatssuchasXML,GML,NetCDF,GeoTIFF,andASCII.AccessthoughFTPmostoftenusesproprietaryfileformatslikeESRI’sShapefile,orMapInfo’sMIFfile.Recently,SQLite(REF)anditsspatialextensionSpatiaLitehavegainedincreasingpopularityinfilebasedaccess(downloading).
Figure2illustratesthedescribedarchitecture,whichwillprovidearobustplatformfordevelopingthenewdatainfrastructuressupportingmarinee-governanceintheBalticSeaRegion.Mostdataarestillcollected,storedandmaintainedbythenationalagencies,authorities,andotherdataproviders,butwillbedistributedbywebservicesbasedoninternationalstandards.
19
Figure.3.ComponentsofaSystemsArchitectureforaTransnationalDataInfrastructureforMSP(Hansenetal2017)
Thestandardsreferredtointhetextandfigure2arelistedintable4.
20
Table.4.Standardsformetadatasearchdataandservices
*ISOstandards(www.iso.org)
**OGCstandards(www.opengeospatial.org)
Standard Name
ISO19101 Geographicinformation–Referencemodel
ISO19107 Geographicinformation–Spatialschema
ISO19108 Geographicinformation–Temporalschema
ISO19109 Geographicinformation–Rulesforapplicationschema
ISO19110 Geographicinformation–Methodologyforfeaturecataloguing
ISO19111 Geographicinformation–Spatialreferencingbycoordinates
ISO19112 Geographicinformation–Spatialreferencingbygeographicidentifiers
ISO19115 Geographicinformation–Metadata
ISO19117 Geographicinformation-Portrayal
ISO19118 Geographicinformation–Encoding
ISO/TR19121 Geographicinformation–Imageryandgriddeddata
ISO19125 Geographicinformation–Simplefeatureaccess
ISO19128 Geographicinformation–Webmapserverinterface
ISO19136 Geographicinformation–GeographyMarkupLanguage(GML)
ISO/TS19139 Geographicinformation–Metadata–XMLschemaimplementation
ISO19142 Geographicinformation–WebFeatureService
OGCTCS ThematicCoreServices
OGCWPS WebProcessingService
21
5. ImplementationBasedonthearchitecturedescribedabove,theprototypeforthenewBalticSeaMapService,BASEMAPS,willbedeveloped.Accesstodatavaries,butbasedontheavailabledataBASEMAPSwillprovideatestbedforanewdatainfrastructuresupportinggovernanceoftheBalticSeainatransnationalcontext.
Concerningtheservertechnology,HELCOM’sexistingsolutionisbasedonArcGISServer,whiletheprototypewillbebasedontheopensourceGeoServerplatform.Thisprovideagoodbasisfortestingthearchitectureaswellascomparingtheunderlyingsoftwaretechnologyforthesystem.Bothsoftwareplatformshaveitsadvantagesaswellasdisadvantages.
Theoverallarchitectureoftheprototypeiscompliantwiththemodeldescribedinfigure3,butseveralobstaclesneedtobeovercomeasdescribedinthefollowingparagraphs.
5.1Challenge1–dataavailability
Thefirstchallengerelatestolackofavailability.ThedatarequiredbythemaritimeauthoritiesarenotavailableundersimilarconditionsamongthecountriessurroundingtheBalticSea.SomecountrieslikeDenmarkandFinlandhasimplementedtheprincipleofOpenGovernmentData,whileothercountrieshavevariousdegreesofrestrictions.Datamayinprinciplebeopen,butyoumustpayforthedata,orthedatamaybeavailablefreeofchargebutconfidentialduetomilitaryorothersecurityreasons.
Luckily,severaldataareimposedbyregulationsaccordingtotheINSPIREDirective,andatleastavailableinsomedegree.Althoughsomedatastillhavelimitedaccessibility,thismaychangeinarathershortterm.Likewise,itcanbeexpected,thatevendatawhicharenotgeneralavailablewillbeaccessibleduringtheprojectperiod.
5.2Challenge2–datainteroperability
Secondlyabigchallengerelatestolackofinteroperability.Thedataareonlyavailableinformats,whicharenotinteroperableandcompliantwiththearchitectureoffig.2.Ifthedataisopenandfreelyavailable,theycaninmostcasesbedownloadedinshape-filesorGML-formats,whiletheaccessibilitytothedataviawebservicesarelessfrequent.ThisisparticularlythecaseforthehighlyvaluabledatainGML-formatprovidedthroughWFS(WebFeatureService).Forinstance,tryingtogetaccesstofreeDanishdatathroughwebfeatureservices,willrequireaspecialpermissionbythemappingauthority,andinthatcase,onlyforalimitedamountofdata.Thisisduetotheheavyprocessingpowerandnetworkbandwidthneededtoprocessandtransferthedata.
TheINSPIREDirectivedefinesthedataspecificationsforseveraldatasetsincludedinthedatarequirementslist(Seereport3.1),whichistheguidelinebehindtheimplementationofthe
22
BASMAPSprototype.DataavailablethroughwebservicesareuseddirectlyinBASEMAPSdatainfrastructureandherebyfollowthemainroadinthedistributedsystemsarchitectureoffig.2.Datathatarenotavailablethroughwebservicesarestoredinacentraldatabase,untiltheyeventuallybecomeavailablebywebservices.Thus,thesystemsarchitectureintheprototypeisamixturebetweenapurecentralisedsolutionandadecentralisedsolution.Weusethetermhybridsystemsarchitectureforourprototype.Thisapproachgivestheadvantagethatdatasets,whichdonotsupportapuredecentralisedsolutionthroughwebservices,graduallycanbeadaptedinthesystemovertime,whenmoredatabecomesavailablethroughwebservices.
5.3Challenge3–shippingdata
MostofthedatareferredtoaboveisavailablethroughthepublicauthoritiesandarerequiredtofollowtheINSPIREDirective.Butinformationonshippingtrafficisprovidedthroughtheso-calledAIS-systemstandardisedbytheS-57andS-100.ThroughthenationalAIScentresyoucanbegrantedaccesstodatabya(lowcost)annualsubscription.
Thischallengeisnotarealissue,becauseHELCOMalreadyhaveaccesstoshippingtrafficandhavethepermissiontodelivergeneralisedhistoricaldataforshippingtraffictothemembersofHELCOM.
5.4Challenge4–languageissues
Thelastchallengeisrelatedtothefact,thateachoftheninecountriesaroundtheBalticSeahavetheirownlanguage,andthiscreatesdifficultiescombiningdatasetsfromdifferentcountries.
ThelanguageissueissolvedthroughatranslationtableforthelayernamesinthemapservicesfromthedifferentcountriesaroundtheBalticSea.ThelayernamesinoursystemareinEnglish,butbeforesendingarequestforadatalayer,thenameofthedatasetisconvertedtothelocalnameforthatdatalayer.This,principlecanlaterbeextendedsotheusersintheindividualcountriescanusetheirnativelanguageswhenrequestingdatafromtheneighbouringcountries.
23
6. ConclusionThisreportdocumentsthefirststeptowardsdevelopingthesystemsarchitectureforthenewBalticSeaMapService,BASEMAPS,providingatransnationaldatainfrastructureforMSPintheBSR.
Themainchallengesrelatetodatanotbeingavailableandifavailablenotavailableinformats,thatareinteroperableandcompliantwiththesuggestedarchitecture.MostoftheinformationtobeincludedinBASEMAPSshouldinprinciplebeavailablethroughthepublicauthoritiesandrequiredtofollowtheINSPIREDirective.Though,informationonshippingtrafficisprovidedthroughtheAIS-systemstandardisedbytheS-57andS-100.Besidesthat,eachoftheninecountriesaroundtheBalticSeahavetheirownlanguage,whichcreatesdifficultiescombiningdatasetsfromdifferentcountries.ButseveraldataareimposedbyregulationsaccordingtotheINSPIREDirective,andatleastavailableinsomedegree.
Inordertodealwiththechallengesconcerningaccesstodecentraliseddata,thesystemsarchitectureintheBASEMAPSprototypeisahybridsystemsarchitecturebasedonamixturebetweenapurecentralisedsolutionandadecentralisedsolution,whichwillbeupdatedgraduallyovertime,whenmoredatawillbeavailablethroughwebservices.ThelanguageissuewillbesolvedthroughatranslationtableforthelayernamesinthemapservicesfromthedifferentcountriesaroundtheBalticSea.Thisprinciplecanlaterbeextendedsothattheusersintheindividualcountriescanusetheirnativelanguageswhenrequestingdatafromtheneighbouringcountries.
Theprototypewillbefurthertestedandadjustedduringtheproject,andthenextstepswillbetofurtherdeveloptheprototypewithdataharmonisationstools.
24
7. References
Backer,H.(2011).Transboundarymaritimespatialplanning:aBalticSeaperspective.JournalofCoastalConservation,15(2),pp.279-289.
Bovalis,K.,Peristeras,V.,Abecasis,M.,Abril-Jimenoz,R.-M.,Rodríguez,M.,Gatte-gno,C.,Karalopoulos,A.,Szekacs,I.andWigard,S.(2014).PromotingInteroperabilityinEurope’sE-Government.Computer47(10),pp.25-33Day,J.C.(2002).Zoning–lessonsfromtheGreatBarrierReefMarinePark.Ocean&CoastalManagement,vol.45,pp.139-156.
COM(2003).Thereuseofpublicsectorinformation,Directive2003/98/ECoftheEuropeanParliamentandoftheCouncil.OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion,L345,pp.90–96.
COM(2006).Regulation(EC)No1367/2006oftheEuropeanParliamentandoftheCouncilof6September2006ontheapplicationoftheprovisionsoftheAarhusConventiononAccesstoInformation,PublicParticipationinDecision-makingandAccesstoJusticeinEnvironmentalMatterstoCommunityinstitutionsandbodies.OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion,L264/13
COM(2007).Directive2007/2/ECoftheEuropeanParliamentandoftheCouncilof14March2007establishinganInfrastructureforSpatialInformationintheEuropeanCommunity(INSPIRE).OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion.
COM(2014).CommunicationfromtheCommissiontotheEuropeanParliament,TheCouncil,theEuropeanEconomicandSocialCommitteeandtheCommitteeoftheRegions.EuropeanCommission,2014.
COM(2014b).Directive2014/89/EUoftheEuropeanParliamentandoftheCouncilof23July2014establishingaframeworkformaritimespatialplanning.TheOfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion,L257/135.
COM(2016).CommunicationfromtheCommissiontotheEuropeanParliament,theCouncil,theEuropeanEconomicandSocialCommitteeandtheCommitteeoftheRegions:EUeGovernmentActionPlan2016-2020Acceleratingthedigitaltransformationofgovernment(COM(2016)179final)
D’Ancra,A.,Conte,L.,Nassisi,P.,Palazzo,C.,Lecci,R.,Cretì,S.andCoppini,G.(2017).Amulti-servicedatamanagementplatformforscientificoceanographicproducts.NaturalHazardsandEarthSystemSciences,17(2).
Day,J.C.(2002).Zoning–lessonsfromtheGreatBarrierReefMarinePark.Ocean&CoastalManagement,vol.45,pp.139-156.
25
Ehlers,P.(2016).Bluegrowthandoceangovernance–howtobalancetheuseandprotectionoftheseas.WMUJournalofMaritimeAffairs,15(2),pp.187-203.
EuropeanCommission(2012).BlueGrowthStrategyontheopportunitiesformarineandmaritimesustainablegrowth.CommunicationfromtheCommissiontotheEuropeanParliament,TheCouncil,theEuropeanEconomicandSocialCommitteeandtheCommitteeoftheRegions.EuropeanCommission.
EuropeanCommission(2014).AEuropeanStrategyformoreGrowthandJobsinCoastalandMaritimeTourism.CommunicationfromtheCommissiontotheEuropeanParliament,TheCouncil,theEuropeanEconomicandSocialCommitteeandtheCommitteeoftheRegions.EuropeanCommission.
Fairgrieve,R.(2016).MaritimeSpatialPlanning–“adutilitatemomnium”.PlanningTheoryandPractice,17(1),pp.140-143.
FAO(2010).TheStateofWorldFisheriesandAquaculture.FoodandAgricultureOrganizationoftheUnitedNations.Rome.
Gourmelon,F.,Creuseveau,J.G.,Tixerant,M.L.andRouan,M.(2012,May).TowardsaSpatialDataInfrastructure(SDI)responsivetotheneedsofIntegratedCoastalZoneManagement:TheGéoBretagneexperience(France).GlobalGeospatialConference:SpatiallyEnablingGovernment,IndustryandCitizens,Québec,Canada,pp.8.3.
Hahn,A.,Bolles,A.Fränzle,M.,Fröschle,S.andPark,J.(2016).Requirementsfore-NavigationArchitectures.InternationalJournalofe-NavigationandMaritimeEconomy,5,1-20
Hansen,H.S.,Reiter,IandSchroeder,L(2017).ASystemArchitectureforaTransnationalDataInfrastructuresupportingGovernanceofMarineSpace.SpringerLectureNotesinComputerScience:Technology-enabledInnovationforDemocracy,GovernmentandGovernance,2017
Hartmann,J.P.(2014).MarineSpatialInfrastructureintheBaltic.InternationalHydrographicReview,12,pp.83-87.
Kocur-Bera,K.andDudzińska,M.(2014).InformationandDatabaserangeusedforMaritimeSpatialPlanningandforIntegratedManagementoftheCoastalZone–CaseStudyinPoland,BalticSea.ActaAdriatica,55(2),pp.179-194.
OGC(2007).OpenGISWebProcessingService.OpenGeospatialConsortium,2007.
Onsrud,H.J.,andPinto,J.K.,(1991).Diffusionofgeographicinformationinnovations.InternationalJournalofGeographicalInformationSystems,vol.5,pp.447–467.
Rajabifard,A.,F.Feeney,M.-E.,andWilliamson,I.(2003).SpatialDataInfrastructures:Concept,NatureandSDIHierarchi,inWilliamson,I.P.,Rajabifard,A.&F.Feeney,M.-E.(eds.)DevelopingSpatialDataInfrastructures:FromConcepttoReality.TaylorandFrancis,London,NewYork,pp.17-40.
26
Santo,E.(2010).‘Whosescience?’Precautionandpower-playinEuropeanmarineenvironmentaldecision-making.MarinePolicy,34(3),pp.414-420.
Santo,E.(2011).EnvironmentaljusticeimplicationsofMaritimeSpatialPlanningintheEuropeanUnion.MarinePolicy,35(1),pp.34-38.
Schaefer,N.andBarale,V.(2011).Maritimespatialplanning:opportunities&challengesintheframeworkoftheEUintegratedmaritimepolicy.JournalofCoastalConservation,15(2),pp.237-245.
Seip,C.andBill,R.(2016)AFrameworkfortheEvaluationofMarineSpatialDataInfrastructures–AccompaniedbyInternationalCase-Studies.GeoScienceEngineering,62(2),pp.27-43.
Strain,L.,Rajabifard,A.andWilliamson,I.(2006).MarineAdministrationandSpatialDataInfrastructure.MarinePolicy,30(4),pp.431-441.
Treiblmayr,M.,Scheider,S.,Krüger,A.andvonderLinden,M.(2012).IntegratingGIwithnon-GIservices–showcasinginteroperabilityinaheterogenousservice-orientedarchitecture.GeoInformatica16(1),pp.207-220.
UnitedNations(1982).ConventionontheLawoftheSea.NewYork10December1982.
VandenBrink,L.,Janssen,P.,Quak,W.andStoter,J.(2017).Towardsahighlevelofsemanticharmonisationinthegeospatialdomain.Computers,EnvironmentandUrbanSystems,62,233-242.
27