Submitted by: the. Secretariat 14.X.2017 DRAFT 1. First Session. Alert. events.

Transcription

1 World Meteorological Organization Executivee Council Working Group on Disaster Risk Reductions Expert Group on WMO Global Multi-Hazard Alert System (EG-GMAS) First Session October 2017, Geneva, Switzerland EG-GMAS/Doc.5(2) Submitted by: the Secretariat 14.X.2017 DRAFT 1 TECHNICAL ASPECTS OF WMO GLOBAL MULTI-HAZARD ALERT SYSTEM The following are some areas that may need to be considered in the Technical Aspects document, bearing in mind there will be significant overlap between, and dependency on, the outcomes of the Policy Aspects document: Ref: Annex to Decision 3 (EC-69): Vision for WMO Global Multi-Hazard Alert System: To be recognized globally by decision makers as a resource of authoritative warnings and information related to high-impact weather, water, ocean and climate events. Figure 1: Draft of the simplified GMAS Framework

2 EG-GMAS/Doc.5(2), DRAFT 1, p User requirements: Questions for discussion by the Expert Group on GMAS with a view of providing advice/recommendation for drafting GMAS Concept: What do the users require from GMAS and what purpose will the GMAS outputs serve? What format do they need to be in and why? The requirements should address, among others: (a) System architecture; (b) Partnership with major stakeholders, especially with the relevant UN agencies; (c) Hydrometeorological hazards to be dealt with by GMAS and their prioritization for step-wise GMAS implementation approach; (d) Information related to high-impact weather, water, ocean and climate events and their prioritization for step-wise GMAS implementation approach; (e) Warning criteria used by WMO Members and/or criteria to announce warnings; (f) Timeliness, global scale, redundancy and relevance of warnings provided by the official alerting authorities to GMAS; (g) Standardization of coding and dissemination of warnings, e.g., through updating the existing WMO practices (BUFR, GRIB, XML, ) or adoption of the new practices, e.g., CAP (XML-based) as WMO standards, including its sustainable development; (h) Impact-based warnings; (i) System architecture related Central System such as the Common (global) Technical Platform (CTP) and its possible adoption as RSMC within the WMO technical Regulations (GDPFS Manual), including defining: CTP Functions; CTP Responsibilities; CTP Infrastructure; CTP Staff; A standard message for coding warnings, e.g., version of the Common Alert Protocol (CAP) that was suggested by Cg-15 (2007) as a potential for use as a WMO standard, including interfaces to import agreed standard warning messages from the authorized national providers (such as NMHSs) and export to identified users; Information related to high-impact weather, water, ocean and climate events; Aggregation of warning and Information related to high-impact weather, water, ocean and climate events; Development of GMAS products, their visualization and other services to users; Communication links from providers of warnings to the WMO TCP (WIS); Communication links from WMO TCP to VIP users (WIS); Dissemination of products to VIP and other users; Limitations of the system; Regular testing and review of the CTP procedures; Others; (j) What pilot and demonstration projects should demonstrate?; (k) Responsibilities of the official national and other authorities in providing warnings and related information to CTP, including a verification before dissemination or publishing of warnings/information; (l) Capacity development (CD), training and technical (IT) support at NMHSs and other national official warning/alerting authorities; (m) Crowdsourcing;

3 EG-GMAS/Doc.5(2), DRAFT 1, p. 3 (n) (o) (p) (q) (r) (s) Online monitoring and evaluation of warnings/alerts; Analysis of hazards/incidents and feedback to providers of warnings/alerts; Regular System tests (CTP & warnings/alerts providers); Staff for operating the WMO GMAS (regular staff, secondments, remote support from Members HQ, etc.); Funding (RB, X-budgetary resources; partnership); 2. What needs to be in place to enable this system to happen? EG-GMAS is invited to identify what needs to be in place for GMAS development and implementation with a view of providing advice/recommendation for drafting GMAS Concept, e.g.: (a) Policy and technical guidance of EC & Cg; (b) GMAS Strategy and GMAS Implementation Plan adopted by Cg/EC; (c) GMAS included in the high WMO priorities in the budget for the next financial period; (d) Establishment of the GMAS Trust Fund; (e) Agreements, MoUs with major users; (f) Agreements, MoUs with major stakeholders; (g) Adoption of WMO standard for coding/disseminating warnings; (h) A standard for coding/disseminating warnings implemented by WMO Members and other official national alerting authorities; (i) A standard for coding/disseminating warnings implemented by major stakeholders, including VIP users; (j) CTP adopted as the WMO Standard, through the WMO Technical regulations (GDPFS Manual), including defining its functions and responsibilities of CTP; (k) Agreement with a host of CTP, with the available infrastructure and resources required for operation of CTP as a sustainable system; (l) CTP developed and implemented in the infrastructure of the hosting entity, including e.g.,: Disaster information and visualization platform, supported by the GIS; Applications needed to process input data and to develop requested products; Gateways to Internet providers and Mobile services providers; Development of CTP products; Interfaces to critical UN and VIP users; Interfaces with private sector collaborators (such as: Google, Amazon, Microsoft, IBM); Definition of products dissemination practices, including automatic broadcasting and tools for dissemination; Communication links (WIS, , internet, both terrestrial and satellite based, push/pull service depending on stakeholder and user); Online evaluation and feedback to hydrometeorological warnings/alerts providers; Development of hazard/risk maps, including their impact; XML and Rich Site Summary (RSS) implementation; (m) (n) Development of various user applications; Definition of the search engine for identification hydrometeorological warnings/alerts that could have a major impact and may not be provided by the official national authorities; Development of the Application Programming Interface (API); Use of cloud services (WIS), including of commercial providers; Policy for recognition of the official sources; Establishment of the GMAS Development and Implementation Team; CD, training and technical (IT) support to Members, including software tools;

4 EG-GMAS/Doc.5(2), DRAFT 1, p. 4 (o) (p) Proof of the GMAS Concept through defined pilot and demonstration projects; 3. What existing systems can be leveraged? EG-GMAS is invited to identify what existing systems can be leveraged for the GMAS development and implementation with a view of providing advice/recommendation for drafting GMAS Concept, e.g.: (a) MeteoAlarm of the European Meteorological Services Network (EUMETNET); (b) MeteoAlert of the Federal Service for Hydrometeorology and Environmental Monitoring of Russia (Roshydromet); (c) The Local Alert Platform developed by The Weather Company (TWC) and IBM and piloted in the Tanzania Meteorological Agency (TMA); (d) The WMO Alert Hub developed in working with NOAA as an alert hub for free service to all alerts from Members; (e) The WMO World Weather Information Service (WWIS) hosted and coordinated by Hong Kong Observatory (HKO); (f) The WMO Severe Weather Information Service (SWIC), hosted and operated by the Hong Kong Observatory (HKO) on behalf of WMO; (g) UK Met Office Global Hazard Risk Mapping; (h) ECMWF, including its Extreme Forecasts Index (EFI); (i) EUMETSAT, including its role of CAP in the support of DRR (e.g., volcanic ash and fire detection) as well as its EUMETCast; (j) South-East Multi-Hazard Early Warning System (SEE-MHEWS) being developed for SEE Europe; (k) Regional Specialized Meteorological Centres (RSMC): Nadi-Tropical Cyclone Centre/Fiji Meteorological Service, Fiji; La Réunion-Tropical Cyclone Centre/Meteo-France, France ; Tropical Cyclones New Delhi/India Meteorological Department, India; Tokyo-Typhoon Center/Japan Meteorological Agency, Japan; Miami-Hurricane Center; Honolulu Hurricane Center/National Hurricane Center, USA; (l) Tropical Cyclone Warning Centres (TCWC): Wellington/Meteorological Service of New Zealand, New Zealand; Port Moresby/National Weather Service, Papua New Guinea; Brisbane, Darwin, Perth/Bureau of Meteorology, Australia; Jakarta/BMKG, Indonesia; (m) Tsunami warning centres, such as: The NOAA s National Weather Service Pacific Tsunami Warning Center (PTWC); Joint Australian Tsunami Warning Centre (JATWC); Indian National Centre for Ocean Information Services (INCOIS); Meteorological, Climatological and Geophysical Agency of Indonesia (BMKG); (n) The World-Wide Navigational Warning Service (WWNWS) of the International Hydrographic Organization (IHO) and the International Maritime Organization (IMO), which form part of the Maritime Safety Information (MSI) and are broadcasted via NAVTEX and SafetyNET; (o) The WMO Sand and Dust Storm Warning Advisory and Assessment System (SDS-WAS), namely the Northern Africa-Middle East-Europe Node (hosted by Spain) and the Asian Node (hosted by China); (p) ICAO Volcanic Ash Advisory Centers (VAACS): Anchorage, AK, United States; Buenos Aires, Argentina; Darwin, Australia; London, United Kingdom; Montreal, Canada; Tokyo, Japan; Toulouse, France; Washington, DC, United States; Wellington, New Zealand;

5 EG-GMAS/Doc.5(2), DRAFT 1, p. 5 (q) Meteo France CAP-based WINTDO (What I need to Do) Toolkit; (r) China's National Early Warning Release Center (the Center studies and formulates relevant policies and technical standards) and China's National Early Warning Release System (NEWRS); (s) The German Weather Service, Deutscher Wetterdienst (DWD) implementation of CAP; (t) The German Aerospace Center (DLR) Project on a Multi-Hazard Open Platform for Satellite Based Downstream Services (PHAROS), which has a CAP alerting component; (u) Norway on cooperation between MET Norway and the Norwegian Broadcasting Company; (v) Other countries relevant projects, e.g., Botswana, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Mexico, USA, Zimbabwe, etc.; (w) Sahana Foundation Alerting and Messaging Broker (SAMBRO), already operational in Maldives, Myanmar, and the Philippines; (x) Existing WMO projects such as the WMO Severe Weather Forecasting Demonstration Project (SWFDP), Coastal Inundation Forecasting Demonstration Project (CIFDP, DPFS Division) and Flash Flood Guidance System (FFGS, Hydrology Division). It may be noted that some of the projects, for example the SWFDP (DPFS) of southern Africa, are already planning on a regional system to aggregate warnings, which would feed into the GMAS system; (y) Global Disaster Alert and Coordination System (GDACS) the cooperation framework between the United Nations, European Commission and disasters managers worldwide to improve alerts and information exchange; (z) Emergency alerts and news by Google Crisis Response, including Google Crisis Map and Google Public Alerts as an online notification service; (aa) 4. The use of the CAP (Common Alerting Protocol) as a potential standard to communicate warnings. How necessary/essential will CAP be in enabling a robust mechanism for aggregating warnings? EG-GMAS is invited to advise on potential use of CAP for GMAS vis-à-vis a development of a standard warning message format based on the existing WMO coding standards and procedures (e.g., BUFR, GRIB, XML), including recommendation for the development of GMAS Concept. (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) Know-how exist in the WMO Service Delivery Division, which could be responsible for CAP-related issues within GMAS, if CAP is proposed as the WMO standard; CAP is and international standard (ITU) but needs unique implementation procedure otherwise CAP implemented in different entities may not be compatible; CAP standard: OASIS s CAP ver. 1.2; ITU-T X.1303 CAP; New WMO CAP standard (in coordination with ITU); should include development of documents, such as CAP Profile, and description of needed software (CAP Free) tools, removing existing ambiguities; CAP is technology neutral; CAP is an open source. Entities exist that develop software packages and support implementation, such as the Open Source Disaster Management Software from Sahana Foundation with its Sahana Alerting and Messaging Broker (SAMBRO) that is already operational in Maldives, Myanmar, and the Philippines;

6 EG-GMAS/Doc.5(2), DRAFT 1, p. 6 (f) (g) (h) (i) (j) It allows for wide interoperability; Implementation of CAP require extensive CD, training and technical (IT) support to Members (know-how, software, technology) and other official national hydrometeorological hazards/alerts providers; WMO support to Members implementing CAP is already underway (CAP Jump-start) by the WMO Service Delivery Division; Is implementation of CAP feasible in the WMO Members infrastructures or a warning standard format is better built on existing WMO coding formats? 5. How will the development of the proposed WMO Alert Hub impact on the GMAS development? EG-GMAS is invited to advise on synergies between the WMO Alert Hub and the proposed GMAS and to what extent GMAS should built on the WMO Alert Hub, including possible duplications. Recommendations on this issue would be needed to draft GMAS Concept. (a) The WMO Alert Hub was proposed by the United States and has been endorsed by WMO. The Filtered Alert Hub technology is expected to be used for the WMO Alert Hub and under the development by US (this would allow to distinguish between official and unofficial sources of hazards/alerts providers); (b) The WMO Alert Hub aggregates CAP alerts from CAP news feeds published by official alerting authorities listed in the International Register of Alerting Authorities established by WMO and available on the WMO website; (c) The WMO Alert Hub uses all available sources but filtered technology will allow identifying official sources, such as those alerts issued by NMHSs; (d) Technology can be customized so that it can change scale from local to global, distinguish private and public alerts, alerts from only official sources, as well as identify priority alerts; (e) The WMO Alert Hub may become one of the building stones of the WMO GMAS; (f) The WMO Service Delivery Division is assisting the WMO Alert Hub development and has the necessary expertise; 6. Lessons learned from the experiences of the existing or currently developing platforms. EG-GMAS is invited to comment on the lessons learned re existing or planned platforms, e.g.: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) The MeteoAlarm of Europe: (to be provided by Michael Staudinger, ZAMG) MeteoAlert system of Roshydromet, Russian Federation: (to be provided by Alexander Frolov, Roshydromet) The WMO global platforms namely the SWIC and the World Weather Information Service (WWIS) operated on behalf of WMO by Hong Kong Observatory of Hong Kong, China: (to be provided by Chi-Ming Shun) The South-East Europe Multi-Hazard Early Warning System (SEE-MHEWS) currently being developed: (to be provided by Milan Dacić, WMO ROE)

7 EG-GMAS/Doc.5(2), DRAFT 1, p What challenges will need to be addressed? EG-GMAS is invited identify major challenges that should be address in drafting GMAS Concept, e.g.: The complexity of the GMAS; (a) (b) Harmonizing wide spectrum of diverse requirements of users; Legal issues on Members country levels, including mandates from NMHSs to use their inputs by GMAS either in disseminating their national, or developing new products; (c) Integrating variety of (heterogeneous) sources from the existing programmes, projects, platforms, regional and global centres, etc., in one system/platform (GMAS); (d) Readiness of Members to provide required information in the required standard form (e.g., readiness to adopt new standards for exchange of warnings/alerts by WMO Members, such as CAP or similar; (e) Readiness to host GMAS CTP as a new RSMC; (f) Agreements and/or MoUs among (many) major users and stakeholders, including non-disclosure agreements; (g) Different development (technical, infrastructural, human and financial resources, ) of users and major stakeholders; (h) The interoperability and capabilities of participating systems; (i) Role of the Private sector; (j) How to handle a broad range of hazard types (through CAP only?); (k) Associated display of symbols in multiple languages; (l) Development of needed GMAS products; (m) Resources for development and implementation, including Capacity Development, Training and technical (IT) support to Members; (n) 8. Other areas? (a) to be completed during the session