ARCTIC POLAR REGIONAL CLIMATE CENTRE (PRCC) NETWORK IMPLEMENTATION PLANNING MEETING

7 – 9 November 2016Geneva, Switzerland

REPORT

WORLD METEOROLOGICAL ORGANIZATION

November 2016

WORLD CLIMATE PROGRAMMEWORLD CLIMATE SERVICES PROGRAMME

The World Climate Programme (WCP) implemented by WMO in conjunction with other international organizations consists of the following major components (as per decision of the Seventeenth World Meteorological Congress (Cg17) in 2015:

Global Climate Observing System (GCOS) World Climate Research Programme (WCRP) World Climate Services Programme (WCSP) Global Programme of Research on Climate Change Vulnerability, Impacts and

Adaptation (PROVIA)

World Meteorological Organization7bis, av. de la PaixCase postale 2300CH 1211 Geneva SwitzerlandTelephone: +41 (0) 22 730 81 11Telefax: +41 (0) 22 730 81 81Email: wmo@wmo.int

NOTE

The designations employed and the presentation of material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the World Meteorological Organization concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area, or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.

Editorial Note: This report has for the greater part been produced without editorial revision by the WMO Secretariat. It is not an official publication and its distribution in this form does not imply endorsement by the Organization of the ideas expressed.

CONTENTSExecutive Summary...........................................................................................11. Purpose of the meeting...............................................................................32. Opening......................................................................................................33. Organization of the meeting........................................................................44. Background................................................................................................4

4.1 Review of the status of Arctic PRCC Preparations including relevant constituent body decisions......................................................................................4

4.2 Review of WMO RCC implementation processes and designation criteria................44.3 Review of Arctic climate services requirements.......................................................54.4 Review of existing WMO RCC implementations with a focus on RCC-

networks: technical and organizational....................................................................74.5 Outcome of Arctic PRCC requirements and capabilities surveys..............................84.6 Brainstorming session on defining PRCC products and services...............................8

5. Arctic PRCC-Network arrangements.............................................................85.1 Organizational arrangements: Nodes, Node leads, consortia, network

coordination, partnerships.......................................................................................95.2 Technical arrangements: mandatory functions, highly recommended

functions, other activities (additional products and services, projects, RCOFs, etc.)...........................................................................................................11

5.3 Partnership arrangements to integrate contributions from other sources of RCC-relevant products for the Arctic, such as GCW and IICWG..............................13

6. Engagement of user groups and consultations on their requirements..........157. Arctic PRCC-Network Implementation Plan.................................................168. Conclusions and recommendations.............................................................169. Closure.....................................................................................................17Annex 1: Agenda and workplan........................................................................20Annex 2: List of Participants............................................................................22Annex 3: PRCC Timeline...................................................................................26Annex 4: RCC Highlights..................................................................................30Annex 5: Detailed criteria for Mandatory Functions Of WMO RCCs/RCC Networks

.............................................................................................................31Annex 6: RCC Highly Recommended Functions..................................................33Annex 7: RCC implementation around the world (as of Nov. 2016).....................34Annex 8: Summary of STT findings on users, needs and requirements for climate

services................................................................................................35Annex 9: Status and organization of WMO RCC Networks..................................36Annex 10: Summary of Arctic PRCC Requirements and capacities......................37Annex 11: Technical and administrative roles and responsibilities of the PRCC

lead, Nodes and consortium members....................................................39Annex 12: Background information on GCW and the IICWG................................41Annex 13: Revisions to tables of potential contributions to the Arctic PRCC-

Network................................................................................................42Annex 14: Tentative outline for the Arctic PRCC-Network Implementation Plan. .43

Executive Summary

Under the leadership of the WMO Executive Council Panel of experts on Polar and High Mountain Observations, Research and Services (EC-PHORS) Services Task Team (STT), a meeting on Arctic Polar Regional Climate Centre (PRCC) Network Implementation Planning was held (7-9 November 2016, Geneva, Switzerland) to facilitate discussions of the potential contributing agencies on the technical and organizational arrangements for the proposed Arctic PRCC-Network and to support the launch of a demonstration phase in 2017.

The concept of PRCCs is a WMO legacy, initiated following the 2007-2008 International Polar Year. With the (then) Executive Council Panel of experts on Polar Observations, Research and Services (EC-PORS) taking up oversight on PRCC development (EC-65, 2013), further evolution of the concept proceeded briskly. In 2013, the Government of Canada funded a ‘Programme of Implementing the Global Framework for Climate Services (GFCS) on Regional and National Scales’ and in 2014 at the 5th session of EC-PORS, its Services Task Team (STT) began consultations on an implementation strategy for PRCCs. A survey to gauge needs for and capability to support an Arctic PRCC was conducted in 2015 and, based on the interest shown by Members, a scoping workshop was held in November 2015. Members identified potential contributions to the Arctic PRCC in early 2016, which encouraged the next step, development of a concrete plan to launch a demonstration phase of an Arctic PRCC-Network. The support of EC-PORS/PHORS and its STT has been invaluable in solidifying the evolution of the PRCC concept in a unique situation for WMO, in which the cooperation across three WMO Regional Associations is required for launch and operation of a WMO Regional Climate Centre.

At the PRCC-Network Implementation Planning meeting, key decisions included:

• The Arctic PRCC-Network will consist of three nodes with specific geographical domains of primary responsibility, each of which will perform all mandatory (and some additional high priority) RCC functions for a sub-region: Canada will lead the North American Node (with Canada and USA as members of consortium); Norway will lead the Northern Europe and Greenland Node (with Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden and possibly other interested European countries as members of consortium); and the Russian Federation will lead the Eurasian Node.

• Each node will also take on a significant cross-node (mandatory) function for the entire pan-Arctic domain: Canada will lead development of Long-Range Forecasts (LRF); Norway will lead operational Data Services based on WMO Information System (WIS) requirements; and the Russian Federation will lead the Climate Monitoring.

• The PRCC-Network operational entities will adhere to WMO Resolution 60 (Cg-17), WMO Policy for the International Exchange of Climate Data and Products to Support the Implementation of the GFCS.

• The first priority in the demonstration phase will be to set up the necessary cooperation and technical processes to ensure that all mandatory functions are fully operational, in order to attain WMO designation as an RCC-Network.

• Important shared interests and objectives exist between the PRCC-Network, Global Cryosphere Watch (GCW) and the International Ice Charting Working Group (IICWG). All three will embed the intent to cooperate in their respective Terms of Reference and Implementation Plans. For example, GCW can offer its data portal for access to datasets stored at partner data centres (including data from CryoNet stations), and can assist in assessing the quality of some PRCC products including long range forecasts for Polar Climate Outlook Forums and other model output.

• Identification of user requirements has been initiated by the STT: in addition to hazard identification and risk reduction requirements, high priority sectors that could eventually benefit from PRCC-Network products and services would include the marine, hydrological, natural resources and tourism communities. This would require

1 | P a g e

development of products based on elements in addition to Temperature and Precipitation, many of which will be Essential Climate Variables as defined by the Global Climate Observing System (GCOS) and priority elements important to WMO and international bodies such as JCOMM, CHy, IICWG, GCW.

• Canada is taking steps to host the first Polar Regional Climate Outlook Forum (PCOF), possibly in autumn 2017, in conjunction with representatives from the Year of Polar Prediction (YOPP) initiative, which aligns well with EC-PHORS priorities for polar regions.

• The proposed Arctic PRCC-Network will, to the extent feasible, consider the Arctic Council principles on the use of Traditional Knowledge.

• A timeline for completion of the Implementation Plan and having it presented to EC-PHORS-7 (March 2017) and WMO Executive Council 69th Session in mid-2017 has been developed.

Next steps

Several important decisions are still pending at the time of this report, the key one of which is identification of a lead agency to coordinate the launch and process of the Arctic PRCC-Network demonstration phase. This is being urgently addressed.

Other gaps will be tackled before the end of the Arctic PRCC-Network demonstration including setting up the required web portals and access mechanisms; creation of new, pan-Arctic products, some with polar projection; and establishing a feedback and response mechanism for users.

The support and guidance of EC-PHORS and its STT will be very important to planning and holding the first (and subsequent) Polar Climate Outlook Forums (PCOFs), and to further identification of user requirements so that the Arctic PRCC-Network will increasingly become recognized and relied upon by user groups ranging from national northern communities to international businesses and international bodies such as the Arctic Council and other United Nations agencies.

A successful implementation of the Arctic PRCC-Network is expected to lead next, with the continued guidance of EC-PHORS, to the launch of a Polar RCC or RCC-Network for the Antarctic region and, potentially, the Third Pole region.

______________________

2 | P a g e

1. Purpose of the meeting

The meeting on Arctic Polar Regional Climate Centre (PRCC) Implementation Planning was held at the headquarters of the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) in Geneva, Switzerland from 7-9 November 2016.

The meeting was designed and conducted under the leadership of the WMO Executive Council Panel of experts on Polar and High-mountain Observations, Research and Services (EC-PHORS) Services Task Team (STT), and aimed to facilitate the development of a technical implementation plan, including the assignment and commitment of contributing entities, to support the launch of a demonstration phase of an Arctic Polar Regional Climate Centre Network (Arctic PRCC-Network) in 2017. The work is built upon the recommendations from the WMO-WCRP IPY Workshop1 on CLIPS2 in Polar Regions held in St. Petersburg, Russian Federation, from 8-11 September 2008; the “Survey of Members on needs and capacities for Polar RCC services” conducted in February-March 2015 which identified the priority functions of PRCCs; the conclusions and recommendations of the Scoping Workshop on Climate Services for Polar Regions3 held 17-19 November 2015 in Geneva, Switzerland; and, most recently, the input of participating countries on potential national contributions to the proposed Arctic PRCC.

Expected outcomes included: definition (to the extent possible) of the initial set of Arctic PRCC products and services

for the demonstration phase, with the priority on the mandatory functions; agreement on a final structure for the Arctic PRCC-Network, including the Node

configuration, consortia of contributing entities, Node leads, overall coordination and governance aspects;

agreement on the technical and organizational arrangements for an Arctic PRCC-Network for each of the constituent Nodes; and

identification of the next steps towards the Arctic PRCC-Network implementation, including the commencement of a demonstration phase.

Decisions on these matters will be incorporated in an Implementation Plan for launching the demonstration phase of the Arctic PRCC.

The meeting was supported by the ‘Programme of Implementing the Global Framework for Climate Services (GFCS) on Regional and National Scales’, funded by Environment and Climate Change Canada and implemented by WMO.

2. Opening

On behalf of Mr Petteri Taalas, the Secretary-General of the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), Dr Rupa Kumar Kolli welcomed the participants to Geneva and to the meeting to discuss technical aspects of the implementation of the Arctic Polar Regional Climate Centre Network (PRCC-Network). He noted that there had been remarkable progress in this respect, and particularly in implementing the Action Plan that had been developed during the Scoping Workshop on Polar Regional Climate Centres held in November 2015, under the leadership of the EC-PHORS.

Dr Kolli briefly referred to the background to the initiative, noting that the proposed PRCC-Network was unique in WMO in that it requires cooperation across three WMO Regional Associations (RAs II, IV and VI), and that WMO Executive Council had requested that an Implementation Plan be developed and presented to its sixty-ninth session (EC-69) in 2017. He extended appreciation to EC-PHORS for its oversight, guidance and assistance in fostering the establishment of Polar RCCs for the Arctic, Antarctic and high mountain regions of the world. 1 http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/wcp/wcasp/seriespubs/documents/WCASP78_TD1509.pdf 2 WMO’s Climate Information and Prediction Services (CLIPS) project implemented over the two decades 1995-2015.3 http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/wcp/wcasp/meetings/PRCC_Scoping_Workshop2015.html

3 | P a g e

The enthusiastic offers of potential national contributions to meet the Arctic PRCC-Network requirements, and the presence at this meeting of leading experts representing the PRCC-Network contributing countries were also warmly appreciated. Assuring the participants of the Secretariat’s support for the meeting, he wished a successful outcome to the session and to the follow-up actions necessary for the PRCC-Network implementation.

Mr Helge Tangen, Co-Lead of EC-PHORS STT, also welcomed participants and expressed his wishes for successfully addressing the meeting objectives and for the eventual launch of a demonstration phase of the PRCC-Network. Mr Tangen further noted that the STT and EC-PHORS hoped to follow a successful implementation of an Arctic PRCC-Network with an RCC or RCC-Network for the Antarctic.

3. Organization of the meeting

Mr Helge Tangen chaired the meeting. Dr Johanna Ekman led the meeting through its final afternoon. The agenda for the meeting (Annex 1) was adopted without revision, with the understanding that it could be modified as needed during the sessions. The objectives of the meeting were presented to participants (see item 1 above).

Participants briefly introduced themselves and identified their interests and background relevant to the goals of the meeting. The final list of participants is attached as Annex 2.

Documents relevant to the meeting, including presentations, are available at: http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/wcp/wcasp/meetings/PRCC_IPMeeting.html

4. Background

To set the stage for the discussions on Arctic PRCC implementation, the meeting reviewed the background to this activity and accomplishments to date; climate services requirements for the Arctic area; outcomes of the 2016 RA VI RCC Network review; and outcomes of the PRCC surveys. Participants also began the process of assessing the proposed contributions for mandatory and highly recommended functions.

4.1 Review of the status of Arctic PRCC Preparations including relevant constituent body decisions

The meeting was informed by Dr R. Kolli (WMO) on the status of preparations for the implementation of an Arctic PRCC-Network (presentation ‘Arctic PRCC-Network: Review of Current Status’ (R. Kolli, WMO)). He reviewed the significant events, activities and decisions relevant to implementation of polar RCCs leading up to the present meeting (see PRCC timeline, Annex 3). Dr Kolli noted that the structure for the PRCC-Network preferred by the Members in the PRCC domain involved a mixed model approach, with establishment of three nodes with sub-regional responsibilities, and several cross-node activities. A critical factor for the next steps towards launching a demonstration phase will be drafting an Implementation Plan, presenting it to the March 2017 meeting of EC-PHORS, and then delivering it to WMO Members at EC-69, 2017.

4.2 Review of WMO RCC implementation processes and designation criteria

An overview of the WMO Global Data Processing and Forecasting System4 (GDPFS), especially as it pertains to RCCs was provided by Ms Anahit Hovsepyan (presentation ‘RCC implementation and designation criteria’ (A. Hovsepyan, WMO)). The meeting was reminded that the definitions and mechanisms of all components of the GDPFS (including Global Producing Centres of Long-Range Forecasts (GPCLRFs) and RCCs) are part of WMO’s technical

4 http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/www/DPS/gdps.html, 4 | P a g e

regulations, and are published in the Manual on the GDPFS5 (WMO No. 485). This ensures that GPCLRFs and RCCs shall follow respective standard practices and procedures, resulting in adequate uniformity and standardization in their practices and procedures.

Ms Hovsepyan reviewed important characteristics of RCCs (see Highlights of RCCs, Annex 4), as well as the mandatory functions of RCCs with criteria (Annex 5) and highly recommended functions (Annex 6) that all RCCs are strongly encouraged to consider when addressing national and regional priorities for climate services.

RCC implementation around the world (as of November, 2016) was described (Annex 7). The steps to follow to implement a WMO RCC or WMO RCC Network are described in WMO /TD- No. 15346, however in the case of the Arctic PRCC, a modified process is developing due to the oversight of EC-PHORS and the unique situation that the Arctic PRCC will require cooperation across three WMO Regional Associations.

In discussion, the participants strongly encouraged consideration of several applications sectors that are of high priority at high latitudes, including the hydrological community (represented at WMO by the Technical Commission for Hydrology, CHy) and the marine community (represented at WMO and the IOC of UNESCO by the Joint WMO-IOC Technical Commission for Oceanography and Marine Meteorology (JCOMM). Development of relationships with hydrological, marine and other sectors would fall under ‘Highly Recommended’ functions of the Arctic PRCC, and would be undertaken if contributing Member countries make it a priority, either at Node or pan-Arctic levels. The experience of Regional Association VI in this regard would suggest that while the priority must be to ensure that the PRCC fulfils all the mandatory requirements for its designation through WMO, it should also undertake functions with such high relevance to national and international users with minimal delay.

With respect to relationships with bodies such as CHy and JCOMM, it was felt that the instructions for RCC implementation as per the Manual on the GDPFS were sufficiently flexible without modification to the Technical Regulations. It was agreed that liaison with WMO’s hydrological and marine communities could potentially be initiated through EC-PHORS, particularly the Services Task Team. PRCC Members are also invited to explore such linkages as needed, based on regional priorities. It was noted that at EC-68, Members requested EC-PHORS to guide the development of the draft Implementation Plan in collaboration with CCl, CBS and JCOMM as needed, and requested CCl to review and provide guidance for the demonstration phase of the Arctic PRCC-Network in close collaboration with CBS, EC-PHORS and participating Members.

4.3 Review of Arctic climate services requirementsDr Johanna Ekman of the EC-PHORS Services Task Team (STT) reviewed climate services requirements for the Arctic, as identified in the STT white paper ‘The known requirements for Arctic Climate Services7’ of 2015 (presentation ‘Requirements for Arctic climate services (J. Ekman, FMI). A brief summary is provided in Annex 8, and covers human, economic and climate drivers, including hazards and risks, that lead to a demand for improved climate services and itemizes several specific user needs.

Based on the studies assessed to date, the STT concluded that: “Improved sea ice and marine weather forecasting would assist the energy, maritime

shipping and transportation industries, as well as infrastructure planning, economic development, and ecosystem stewardship;

An enhanced and integrated set of environmental observations is required to track changes to the Arctic across the land, in the atmosphere, and in the ocean, including physical indicators, biological responses, and social and economic impacts;

Rapid integration, interpretation, and dissemination of this information in near-real time are required to support decision-making.”

In discussion, it was noted that:

5 http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/www/DPFS/Manual/GDPFS-Manual.html 6 http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/wcp/wcasp/rcc/documents/WCASP80_TD1534.pdf 7 http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/wcp/wcasp/meetings/documents/EC-PHORS-STT-Services_WhitePaper_Nov2015.pdf

5 | P a g e

the STT white paper could be expanded to taken in additional findings (e.g. through consultation with Copernicus proponents and even more relevant published studies). The energy sector, for example, is not yet well enough covered. The concept of a compendium of user requirements, based on the STT paper, was raised – to be followed as quickly as possible by a compendium of tailored products designed to meet those needs.

the significance of freshwater in the Arctic cannot be underestimated, given that twenty percent of the freshwater that enters the world’s oceans does so in the Arctic. Users of hydrological information include, inter alia, communities, governments, the energy sector and those affected by permafrost. Arctic HYCOS is now operational with a focus on real time and climatological data and a goal to develop a pan-Arctic hydrological model and forecast system.

while some coordination efforts exist (e.g. through IICWG), there is not a sufficient ‘ready-model’ for the cooperation and coordination that needs to be in place for an effective pan-arctic approach on climate services.

effective climate services will depend on having a range of real-time cryospheric observations.

there are highly relevant and useful datasets in the Global Precipitation Climatology Centre8 (GPCC) and the Global Runoff Data Centre9 (GRDC) that the PRCC-Network should consider using, as well as reanalysis datasets (it would be interesting to be able to compare products and services from observed and reanalysis datasets).

the existence of the Arctic PRCC-Network will help National Meteorological and Hydrological Services (NMHSs) provide increasingly useful services to national-scale users. There is a significant ‘added value’ through the PRCC-Network, to what the individual NMHSs can provide on their own.

other sectors increasingly needing climate services include aviation, tourism, insurance etc.

ensuring that the mandatory functions are in place and will meet the WMO designation criteria is the priority but soon, the PRCC-Network will need to address other priority products beyond the minimum requirement of Temperature and Precipitation in order that the benefits of the PRCC will be demonstrated and to gain the desired relationship with stakeholders. For WMO designation, however, decisions will be based on performance of the mandatory functions.

the WMO publication "Sea Ice Information Services in the World" (WMO No. 57410) is intended to provide to mariners and other users the latest snapshot of the sea ice services available world-wide, effectively extending the WMO publication No. 9, Volume D - information for Shipping.

a useful reference to marine climate services is ‘Ice Information Services: Socio-economic Benefits and Earth Observation Requirements11’.

Annex VI to the WMO Technical Regulations, the Manual on Marine Meteorological Services (WMO-No. 558, Volume I) contains the regulatory material for the global aspects of providing marine meteorological services. This covers services for the high seas, coastal and offshore areas, main ports and harbour areas and training in the field of marine meteorology (covering not only National Meteorological Service personnel, but also seafarers and marine observers on board ships). 

4.4 Review of existing WMO RCC implementations with a focus on RCC-networks: technical and organizational

Mr Peer Hechler informed the meeting of technical and organizational aspects of RCC-Networks (presentation ‘Review of implementation of RCC-Networks’ (P. Hechler, WMO). The status and organizational systems of WMO RCC Networks and a brief description of the RA VI RCC-Network are summarized in Annex 9. 8 https://climatedataguide.ucar.edu/climate-data/gpcc-global-precipitation-climatology-centre 9 http://www.bafg.de/GRDC/EN/Home/homepage_node.html 10 http://jcomm.info/components/com_oe/oe.php?task=download&id=18467&version=2010%20edition&lang=1&format=1 11 ftp://sidads.colorado.edu/pub/projects/noaa/iicwg/business/IICWG_SE_2007_Update_Final_.pdf

6 | P a g e

Based on the experience gained in RA VI and in RCC-Networks evolving around the world, some useful technical and organizational aspects of the coordination across such networks were identified, to help guide implementation of the Arctic PRCC-Network:

Ensuring product and service consistency within and across RCC functions through: o seamless product and service access through single Web Portal, o consistent product and service labelling, in part to distinguish between RCC and

national products,o use of agreed upon normal periods (some countries may use different normal

periods which can affect anomaly products, forecasts, etc. – it is essential to have a common agreement for RCC uses),

o use of agreed upon definitions (such as for extremes, e.g. heatwaves, etc.), o language(s) of RCC services (of more than 30 languages used in RA VI, the

dominant one for RCC work is English);

Development of a coordination mechanism that involves:o meetings, telecons, email, etc.o coordination meetings (RA VI holds a full coordination meeting for providers and

users every 3-5 years, to review progress and define needed improvements), o agreement on data and information sharing arrangements among RCC service

providers (the more that is shared, the better the products), o understanding/respecting the various data policies among consortium members,o based on contributor’s policies, agreement on password-protected services vs

publicly accessible services;

Additional aspects to cover: o service consistency across RA borders, o efficient feedback mechanism (surveys are useful, but getting feedback at

regional training events and stakeholder forums has proven to be more useful),o make RCC services attractive and meaningful (the ‘highly recommended’

functions have proved to capture the interest of users),o A Rolling Review of Requirements (RRR) - it is recommended to regularly review

requirements, and to address emerging interests, o respond to changes in international context, e.g.: Paris agreement, COPERNICUS,

GFCS, o develop, and keep current a product catalogue (including tailored products

relevant to user requirements in the RCC domain), o identify the role of the Regional Association’s working groups/teams.

In discussion:

it was reiterated that while the Mandatory Functions are the basis for the WMO decision on designation, they represent the very minimum an RCC is expected to do in provision of climate services in the RCC domain.

regarding data, the KNMI stores a selection of data for the whole of RA VI, but more detailed and specialized datasets can be found in sub-regional centres.

the most popular RCC products in RA VI are LRF; and users are asking for better downscaled products and training in the use of LRF products.

the model used in RA II is not the same as the model proposed for PRCC. Both Tokyo and Beijing RCCs are individually designated, fully-functional RCCs that provide products and services for the entire RA II. WMO recommended that they agree between themselves on a single gateway for RA II. While this is the choice made in RA II, it is not required in a network model with geographical sub-regions that each Node itself become a designated RCC (as is the case for Tokyo and Beijing).

with respect to consistency, it was noted that there are often inconsistencies between the various GPC products, and that the RCC needs a mechanism to objectively use these inputs and develop a consensus. The Global Seasonal Climate Update (GSCU) deals with large-scale features such as El Nino and La Nina, but not smaller scale conditions that will be important to the RCC domains.

7 | P a g e

4.5 Outcome of Arctic PRCC requirements and capabilities surveys

The meeting was informed of the inputs from interested PRCC contributors of their needs for and capabilities to perform RCC services (presentation ‘Arctic Polar Regional Climate Centre: Requirements and capacities’ (P. Hechler, WMO). Sources used for this analysis were the WMO Survey on PRCC requirements and capabilities (February 2015) and the responses to the WMO request for potential national contributions to the proposed Arctic PRCC (December 2015). A preliminary high-level summary of Arctic PRCC Requirements and capacities based on these inputs is presented in Annex 10.

Mr Hechler noted that key challenges (and, in brackets, opportunities) for implementation of the Mandatory Functions included:

Development of sufficient LRF capability for the circumpolar Arctic (skills and interest are available amongst the consortium members);

Ability to inventory and set up access to the available climate monitoring services, perform regular gap analyses against user requirements, achieve consistency to provide circumpolar Arctic products and services (ingredients largely available);

Ability to inventory and set up access to the available climate data sets, perform regular gap analyses against user requirements, develop circumpolar Arctic data sets of selected ECVs (ingredients largely available);

Development and implementation of a training concept (skills available); Development of an Arctic RCC Web Portal (skills available).

He also reiterated the importance of developing new products based on user requirements and feedback to meet the priorities of the PRCC region, and getting a Climate Watch System set up and operational.

4.6 Brainstorming session on defining PRCC products and services

The meeting began the process to evaluate the potential contributions by Member countries for an operational PRCC. Discussions and decisions were continued under agenda item 5.2.

5. Arctic PRCC-Network arrangements

Participants decided on some aspects of the structure of the network, including considering roles and responsibilities for the required functions, and continued to review what has been offered as contributions by Member countries and by partners towards the mandatory and recommended functions of the Arctic PRCC-Network.

Participants noted that, at the Scoping Workshop on Climate Services for Polar Regions: Establishing Polar Regional Climate Centres - Towards Implementing an Arctic PRCC-Network (November 17-19, 2015, Geneva, Switzerland), experts had agreed to pursue a network-based approach in the Arctic, and had recognized that the roles of entities including the International ice Charting Working Group (IICWG) and Global Cryosphere Watch (GCW), and the research community through the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP), should be made explicit in this network.

5.1 Organizational arrangements: Nodes, Node leads, consortia, network coordination, partnerships

8 | P a g e

For the Arctic PRCC-Network, a network design had been proposed to include three multi-functional Nodes with geographic specialization and relevant cross-node activities. Using a geographical approach is expected to foster a more detailed coverage in each sub-region, but the risk would be lack of attention to boundary issues within the overall domain. It was recognized that a mixed model design like this requires effective coordination (most likely more than for distributed function models) of the RCC operations, products, services access and delivery, so that the entire Arctic polar region is covered in a seamless manner.

Decisions of the meeting included that each of the three sub-regional Nodes would: undertake to perform all the mandatory functions for the countries in its domain (of

course, with the support and inputs of the countries in its domain and from the pan-Arctic cross-node activities);

undertake one or more cross-node activities for the whole pan-arctic domain; and take a turn, in rotation, in serving as the lead for the Arctic PRCC-Network (noting the

need for stability throughout the demonstration phase and designation process).

The meeting then agreed on the following structural elements for the Arctic PRCC-Network:

i) Northern Europe and Greenland Node: Norway (NMI) will serve as the lead. Members of the Node are Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden. Institutions in these countries that will support and contribute to the Node include the NMHSs (DMI, FMI, IMO, NMI and SMHI). Concern was expressed to ensure Denmark/Greenland’s interests in data services are incorporated into the Implementation Plan and demonstration phase. The Nordic countries could consider rotation of the Node lead if it suits the sub-region to do so – this might serve to strengthen collaboration and commitment.

ii) Eurasia Node: Russian Federation (AARI). There will be four institutions supporting the PRCC work for Eurasia, namely Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute (AARI), St. Petersburg; Main Geophysical Observatory (MGO), St. Petersburg; Russian Institute for Hydrometeorological Information – World Data Center (RIHMI-WDC), Obninsk; and Hydrometcenter of Russia (RHMC). AARI will coordinate all PRCC functions for the Eurasian Node domain. Russian Federation will also support many ‘Highly Recommended’ Functions, including seasonal forecasting, climate diagnostics and monitoring, data services, etc. for sea-ice, for the whole Arctic Ocean.

iii) North America Node: Canada will serve as lead. Members of the Node are Canada and the USA. Agencies at national level that may support PRCC efforts include for Canada, Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) with its Canadian Ice Service and the Meteorological Service of Canada; and possibly other organizations such as Polar Knowledge Canada; and for the USA, NOAA’s National Weather Service (NWS) and NWS/Alaska; NCEP; NESDIS; and the US National Ice Center.

iv) Support for the Arctic PRCC has also been offered through France, Germany, the Netherlands and the UK, in their capacity as RA VI Nodes and/or as GPCs. This support will assist the Northern Europe and Greenland Node but may also contribute to pan-Arctic functions. Note that all GPCs and other existing RCCs can be considered as input providers to PRCC.

v) Cross-node LRF services: Canada. The LRF product(s) will be pan-Arctic, large scale, with appropriate projection. Each Node will be responsible to downscale and provide more tailored products for their sub-regions. Roshydromet has indicated willingness to support Canada in this work. Collaboration with the WMO Lead Centre for Long-Range Forecast Multi-Model Ensemble (LC-LRFMME), jointly coordinated by the Korean Meteorological Agency and the Climate Prediction Centre of NOAA, will be required, in particular to add new polar projection maps to their existing map set. Canada will request this of the LC-LRFMME but, if needed, the Secretariat may be asked to officially request this by letter.

vi) Cross-node Climate Monitoring: Russian Federation (AARI) will coordinate all operational Climate Monitoring functions for the pan-Arctic. Development of the pan-Arctic Climate Bulletins will be done using the bulletin products from the three Nodes and a template approach. It is possible that the Arctic Report Card prepared by NOAA could contribute to the pan-Arctic climate diagnostics bulletin. The pan-

9 | P a g e

Arctic Climate Watch will be carried out in accordance with the WMO Guidance on Climate Watch Systems. Across the PRCC countries, there is a lot of monitoring activity – countries will have to better evaluate what fits the Arctic PRCC model for climate monitoring (e.g. through the climate committee for Nordic Countries).

vii) Cross-node provision of operational data services: Norway (NMI). Subject to all relevant data having the appropriate WIS-designed metadata, Norway would be able to provide operational data services for the whole PRCC (no data would be archived in Norway, all datasets would be discoverable where housed). It is critical to comply with WMO standards and practices for WIS.

The meeting discussed the roles and responsibilities for the Nodes and lead agency, noting that some specifics could be derived from the need to perform the Mandatory and other priority functions for the region. Some non-binding suggestions for roles and responsibilities, including for technical and administrative components of the work were proposed, which could be useful for scoping the level of work with national contributing agencies (See Annex 11).

Gaps: Structure/Coordination/governance Leading institution for the PRCC-Network: TBD. There were no firm offers made

(Canada, USA and Russian Federation indicated they were not (so far) authorized to take the lead in the initial stages of PRCC implementation). As a first step, Norway will explore the feasibility, with its appropriate decision bodies, of this being assigned to the Nordic Node for the first 2-3 years, to guide PRCC implementation through the demonstration phase and will inform the Secretariat on the results. Should this not prove feasible, all other countries in the PRCC domain will be asked to explore the option with their governments.

Single web portal for the Arctic PRCC: TBD. Normally the lead agency for the entire Network would host the Arctic PRCC-Network web portal. It might be technically feasible for Norway to host a basic PRCC web page with links to the other Nodes for content, if internal approval is granted. It is unlikely to be able to do more without discussion on funding.

Web portal, North America Node: TBD. At this time, Canada cannot commit to developing and operating a web portal for the North American Node, and is seeking options.

Web portal, pan-Arctic LRF: TBD. At this time, Canada cannot commit to developing and operating a web portal for the cross-node LRF. Norway will internally consult on legal and other considerations for Norway to host the LRF website.

5.2 Technical arrangements: mandatory functions, highly recommended functions, other activities (additional products and services, projects, RCOFs, etc.)

The meeting explored product/service elements as contributed by PRCC-supporting countries through national inputs. These proposed contributions had been reorganized into sets of thematic functions for the four categories of Mandatory Functions (LRF, Climate Monitoring, Data Services and Training), and another six sets for Highly Recommended Functions, to better identify gaps and possible corrections. Following the model established in the implementation of the RA VI RCC-Network, these tables will be included in the Implementation Plan for the Arctic PRCC-Network.

The participants had made a preliminary assessment of how well the offers are organized, and whether there are any gaps. In reviewing the set of potential contributions in the earlier brainstorming session, the following had been highlighted for further discussion and action:

Some of the products offered for the Arctic region, while excellent, are more on the weather scale than on the climate scale. The meeting agreed that truly weather scale information and products are beyond the scope of the Arctic PRCC. However, there is

10 | P a g e

reason to consider products in the 10-day to seasonal timeframe because, initially, there may be a relative scarcity of climate products and data. The meeting decided to retain offers of relevant sub-seasonal products in the tables for mandatory functions, but to capture weather scale products for now under Highly Recommended Functions.

There are also some excellent products offered that are based on satellite data, some in the form of animations, and some products based on accumulated or sequenced daily data. As well, many of the offered climate data and products are based on variables other than Temperature (T) and Precipitation (P), e.g. snow, sea-ice, etc. While very useful for complimenting the suite of mandatory climate products and services, if there is no climatology involved or (at least initially) if they are based on elements other than T or P, these offers will be captured under Highly Recommended Functions.

There is no single, agreed, definition of the ‘Arctic’. For various political and scientific purposes, there are several differing boundaries, including those from AMAP, that adopted by IPY 2007-2008, the permafrost extent, Arctic watersheds, the 10° July mean temperature isotherm, and so on. The issue of geographical domain for PRCC contributions needs to be agreed to help identify the variety of climate products and services to be offered (eventually) beyond the minimum requirement for products based on T and P for national users.

While certain T and P products are mandatory (for WMO designation), it was not easy to identify from the national contributions that all needed T and P data was specifically offered to be shared – this needs to be clarified in the table for Data Services.

The criteria for operational climate monitoring include incorporating as mandatory any of the GCOS ECVs as agreed by the region in question. Participating countries are urged to identify specific priority elements on which to base the products and services needed to serve user communities for decision making and to contribute to risk reduction, during the demonstration phase (e.g. sea-ice elements such as concentration and extent; freeze up and break up dates; Snow Water Equivalent (SWE); snow data needed for trackers; etc.).

The Secretariat clarified that when implementing a sub-regional or regional PRCC Climate Watch System, it was expected that the WMO guidance on Climate Watches would define the related processes and outputs. The relevant reference materials were made available to participants.

There will be work required to create pan-arctic or sub-regional products using existing national ones, as these may have been developed using different methodologies, normal, formats, projections, languages, etc.

It was noted that ECMWF has, in addition to long range forecasts, extended-range forecasts (up to 46 days) that could potentially be considered by the PRCC along with other forecast products from GPCs.

On behalf of the Northern Europe and Greenland Node, Dr Eivind Støylen described contributions to the PRCC by the Nordic countries (presentation ‘Nordic PRCC: Contributions’ (E. Støylen, Norway)), to illustrate the inputs provided in the tables. Dr Vasily Smolyanitsky did the same for the contributions that will be made by various institutes in the Russian Federation for the Eurasia Node (presentation ‘Technical arrangements – Mandatory functions, highly recommended functions, other activities’ (V. Smolyanitsky, Russian Federation). These presentations indicated keen interest in polar climate services, and in forecasts and products related to land, marine and atmospheric characteristics representative of the whole polar environment.

The meeting noted with appreciation Canada’s offer to host the first Arctic Polar Regional Climate Outlook Forum (PCOF), probably in autumn 2017 and possibly to coincide with the launch of the PRCC demonstration phase. Responsibility for hosting an RCOF could rotate across all the Nodes, possibly even other Member countries of the Arctic PRCC. Given that training (e.g. in downscaling techniques, etc.) of the technical experts is unlikely to be required of a PCOF, Canada was thinking to use the opportunity for liaising with the research community

11 | P a g e

(e.g. the YOPP experts). Helge Tangen noted that this would be in line with the STT objectives. The Secretariat further noted the importance in many regions of involving policy and decision makers in the COFs, which raises visibility, spreads understanding of the work being undertaken, and fosters sustained financial and administrative support. The Secretariat can advise on the programme and on who needs to be at the session. It would be expected that most experts would fund their own participation. If needed, the Secretariat could advise on resource mobilization.

The meeting made decisions as follows:

Language of PRCC products and services: Pan-Arctic PRCC products and services will be in English. Translations of some of the products and information to national languages may be available through the sub-regional Nodes. The Russian Federation, for example, will offer the pan-Arctic Climate monitoring products in both Russian and English through the Eurasia Node; coordination and communications between the PRCC countries would likely/generally be in English.

Geographical domain of responsibility for Arctic PRCC-Network operations: The Northern extent of the PRCC domain was agreed to be 90°N Latitude. The Southern boundary for the Northern Europe and Greenland Node and the Eurasia Node was decided to be (generally) 60°N Latitude, but outside of that as needed for development of products and services needed for the region (e.g. for Arctic watershed products and services). For the North America Node, all of Alaska and the Aleutian Islands would be included for the USA. For Canada, the southern extent would include the Yukon Territory, the Northwest Territories, Nunavut, and Nunavik and likely a portion of the Labrador Coast (Nunatsiavut). This domain is for operational purposes and does not constitute a definition of the Arctic.

Data Policy: The Arctic PRCC-Network operational entities will adhere to WMO Resolution 60 (Cg-17), WMO Policy for the International Exchange of Climate Data and Products to Support the Implementation of the GFCS. They will take into account the work of EC Task Team on data policy for GFCS on relevant PRCC data and products. All PRCC contributing countries further agree to the free and open exchange of the metadata necessary for data discovery and access for the data needed for PRCC functions, and to appropriately provide attribution to the data sources.

Discussions also revealed gaps that will need to be addressed before the end of the demonstration phase.

Initial Gaps in performing the Mandatory Functions:

Operational Activities for LRFo As noted in item 5.1 above, Canada will lead a Node and provide pan-Arctic LRF

to the PRCC but cannot, at present, establish the required web portals and access.

o For the pan-Arctic LRF, at present the LC-LRFMME map set does not contain one with polar projection for the Arctic. To address this, Canada will work with the LC-LRFMME to create the new map(s).

o There is no process yet established for development of a consensus statement on regional or sub-regional forecasts.

o No process has yet been established to collect user feedback, or to address it, for the improvement of PRCC products and services over time.

Operational Activities for Climate Monitoringo With respect to development of a pan-Arctic Climate Watch, as happened in RA

VI RCC Network implementation, there may be a need for a workshop on the WMO Climate Watch process.

o While there are many climate monitoring products available at national levels, no process has yet been established to determine common methodologies (including algorithms, models, formats, projections, etc.) that could help merge

12 | P a g e

national and sub-regional products into seamless pan-arctic products with polar projections.

o The Russian Federation (Eurasian Node) will create an historical reference climatology for the PRCC domain. In most cases, national reference datasets do exist, but it is not known to what extent these are interoperable.

o There was no agreement to undertake development of climate monitoring or forecast products and services based on elements other than T and P for PRCC implementation, or to set up a timeline for the network participants to consider doing so.

Operational Data Services to support operational LRF and climate monitoringo Capability across all PRCC contributors to share the WIS metadata needed for all

products and datasets is not yet known, but it was agreed to provide this information in the tables of contributions that will be included in the Implementation Plan.

o There is no process yet set up for development of and oversight for quality-controlled, regional, gridded data sets.

Training in the use of operational RCC products and serviceso There is no process for development of guidance materials specific to PRCC

mandatory products and on their use, but possibly those developed for other RCCs could be applicable and reused for PRCC.

o There is no process to develop training for users in the interpretation and use of mandatory RCC products, but some PRCC contributors do have training facilities and methods that could be built on.

5.3 Partnership arrangements to integrate contributions from other sources of RCC-relevant products for the Arctic, such as GCW and IICWG

The meeting was provided information on the activities of the Global Cryosphere Watch (GCW) and the International Ice Charting Working Group (IICWG) as they pertain to the Arctic, by Dr Arni Snorrasson (Iceland) and Dr Vasily Smolyanitsky (Russian Federation), along with their suggestions on how GCW and the IICWG could contribute to and benefit from the Arctic PRCC-Network. For background information on GCW and IICWG, please see Annex 12. Detailed information is available at: http://globalcryospherewatch.org/ for GCW and http://nsidc.org/noaa/iicwg for IICWG.

Potential areas of cooperation between the Arctic PRCC-Network and GCW:

There will be many common interests in data, and opportunities to share data. The use of measurements from GCW CryoNet and contributing sites could, for example, be used for PRCC product validation.

GCW products such as snow trackers (which portray seasonal variations against climatology), snow watch intercomparisons and snow assessments, inter alia, could all contribute to and benefit from collaboration with the Arctic PRCC-Network.

The GCW metadata archive could be linked to the PRCC-Network metadata archive. Norway houses the GCW data portal, and will likely also house the WIS compliant PRCC data portal. Norway has plans to have the relevant data host become a WIS Data Collection and Production Centre (DCPC). There is important synergy and shared interests to build on.

GCW would benefit from having PRCC and associated regional associations promote improved exchange of snow data, or other cryospheric data elements. In this light, GCW indicated that the breakdown of total precipitation to rainfall and snowfall is very important in areas where solid precipitation occurs.

GCW would be able/willing to help review and assess PRCC products relevant to cryosphere including LRF and other model output. For example, GCW can provide

13 | P a g e

advice and information on forecast verification and on initial conditions, and can assist in interpretation of long range forecasting products for Polar Climate Outlook Forums.

Certain research and development activities could have mutual areas of interest. New products related to cryosphere could be co-developed. A caveat: The GCW experts are all volunteers, so challenges include identifying the

human and financial resources needed to undertake the work. Specific opportunities will arise and be pursued during the course of the demonstration phase.

Potential areas of cooperation between the Arctic PRCC-Network and IICWG:

The evolution of the Ice Services through IICWG includes activities that should have common threads with the PRCC-Network:

Extending analysis of multispectral satellite information for multiple cold regions variables;

Identifying research priorities for nowcasting, short-term and seasonal forecasting of sea ice, polar atmosphere; contributing to verification and validation processes and participating in transitioning of research advances to operations;

Improving assimilation of observations & remotely sensed products, numerical modelling, downscaling and coupling the models;

Supporting / organizing assessment of quality and applicability of sea ice products and services – from analysis and nowcasting to long-range forecasts.

As well, while the ice services are primarily focused on providing operational ice information in support of maritime activities, they have a great interest in climate data and products related to ice information. All of the services, to one degree or another, use and/or produce climate products and long range forecasts for sea ice and icebergs. The IICWG [has] expressed its unanimous support for the establishment of PRCCs covering both polar regions.

It was noted that both IICWG and GCW have excellent collaboration with satellite providers, managed through the WMO Space Programme and EC-PHORS, which could support product development opportunities for PRCC. Collaboration between PRCC, GCW and IICWG could potentially influence space missions, and provide new data and products to meet user’s needs. Also, the IICWG could facilitate contact with marine users for PRCC, and GCW could do the same for users of cryosphere information. Both would serve as excellent resources for technical expertise in their scientific domains, in support of common goals with the Arctic PRCC-Network.

Products produced under the auspices of GCW and IICWG will also identify the national entity that develops them (i.e. a GCW or IICWG product contributed to the PRCC may also be considered as a national contribution).

Decision: The GCW and Arctic PRCC-Network Implementation Plans will each refer to the synergy and common interests between them, and indicate the intent to collaborate as needed and as possible.

Decision: The Terms of Reference of the IICWG and the Arctic PRCC-Network Implementation Plan will each refer to the synergy and common interests between them, and indicate the intent to collaborate as needed and as possible.

6. Engagement of user groups and consultations on their requirements

The EC-PHORS STT had earlier identified significant user communities that would benefit from having pan-Arctic and sub-regional climate products and services through the Arctic PRCC-Network. The meeting appreciated the excellent opportunity for interacting with various Arctic Council initiatives, including those through which user engagement could be promoted, as Finland assumes the chair of the Arctic Council in 2017. One of the priorities that will be promoted during Finland’s chairmanship is meteorology.

14 | P a g e

The need to consider Traditional Knowledge (TK) in the work of the Arctic PRCC-Network was recognized, and it was suggested that the Implementation plan refer to the intent to do so. In that regard, it was suggested that the work SAON is doing on community based monitoring would be relevant to consider when looking for opportunities for engaging local communities. ECMWF also has a user focus, as does GCW. There are many potential sources of advice, particularly the results/recommendations of work done by academic institutions; the private sector; UN bodies such as WHO, UNESCO, UNEP, UNDP, WTO; IGOs and NGOs; indigenous communities; local and sub-regional governments; Arctic Council; COPERNICUS; EUPORIAS, etc. regarding vulnerability and information needs to support risk reduction and adaptation.

The meeting understood the importance of early engagement of user groups as products are being identified and/or developed for the PRCC product catalogue. Some understanding of user needs for climate information, products and services will be developed through Climate Outlook Forums, at regional and national scales. Considering the vast territory covered by the Arctic PRCC-Network, however, as well as the infrequency of holding COFs, using this method alone to assess user needs would be slow and most likely would provide incomplete results.

Identification of user needs is a national responsibility and optimally each contributing country will take the steps necessary, in a systematic way, to collect this information (this could include assembling available references and links to published studies that refer to user needs for climate services in the Arctic, and identifying partners (agencies, institutes, etc.) in the country that could assist in user liaison and refining of user requirements for the climate services a PRCC would be expected to address), and to prioritize the requirements as needed for PRCC operations. A continued effort of the STT to define user requirements (through its White paper) would be helpful. In this way, the PRCC-Network will develop and issue climate products and services that the NMHSs can tailor to meet their domestic users’ most urgent needs for decision making and risk reduction.

There is a need to have a clear understanding of the benefits, to each participating country, of having the products and services of an Arctic PRCC-Network. This would help identify the added-value of the PRCC, over and above the business-as-usual current situation, which could be important for promotion of the products to users, and for resource mobilization for new initiatives.

ACTION 1: PRCC contributors will define, from national perspectives, the expected/desired benefits from PRCC activities (priority ranking would be of interest) to include in the Implementation Plan (by the end of December 2016).

7. Arctic PRCC-Network Implementation Plan

As discussed under item 5.2 above, the participants reviewed the input from countries to support the work of the Arctic PRCC-Network. Noting that the tables of potential contributions for both Mandatory and Highly Recommended Functions would be included in the Implementation Plan, the meeting agreed to revise them. Details of the agreed revisions are presented in Annex 13. The tables are available at: http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/wcp/wcasp/meetings/PRCC_IPMeeting.html.

ACTION 2: PRCC contributing countries will provide revisions to the tables for Mandatory and Highly Recommended Functions, by 23 November 2016, to the Secretariat and Leslie Malone.

Furthermore, the meeting recognized the need to work over the upcoming months to contribute to and review the draft Implementation Plan. Given that WMO Executive Council had requested that the Implementation Plan be presented to EC-69 in 2017, the participants developed a timeline (Table 1) that would ensure that all appropriate actions would be carried out in time to meet that deadline, and to launch the demonstration phase of the Arctic PRCC-Network.

15 | P a g e

Action 3: Experts from PRCC contributing countries will provide inputs, contributions, and conduct review and editing of the draft Implementation Plan over the period November 2016 through the end of January 2017, so as to ensure meeting the deadlines described in Table 1.

The meeting considered the contents of the Implementation Plan, and tentatively suggested an outline (Annex 14). It was agreed that the Implementation Plan would be a living document that would be further developed over time at the wishes of the countries and as the implementation evolves.

8. Conclusions and recommendations

The meeting reflected on the expected outcomes for the session, and noted that:

the initial set of Arctic PRCC-Network products and services developed during the demonstration phase would be those needed to attain WMO designation;

progress had been made in identifying the PRCC-Network structure with, however, the lead agency not yet decided;

progress had been achieved in identification of the technical and organizational arrangements needed for an operational PRCC-Network, but that there would be specific gaps to address during the demonstration phase;

the next steps towards the Arctic PRCC-Network implementation, including the commencement of a demonstration phase had been clearly articulated.

The Chair noted the importance of adhering to the timelines agreed during the meeting, for Actions 1 and 2 (agenda item 6) and Actions 3 and 4 (agenda item 7), and urged all participants to comply.

9. Closure

The meeting was closed in the afternoon of 9 November 2016 by Dr Johanna Ekman (representing EC-PHORS STT), with appreciation of the contributions by the participants and the support by the Secretariat. Dr Kolli in turn thanked all participants for their efforts, and warmly appreciated the guidance and leadership of the EC-PHORS STT.

16 | P a g e

Table 1: Timeline of actions necessary to the launch of the Arctic PRCC-Network demonstration phase and eventual formal WMO designation of the PRCC-Network

Activity Deadline RemarkEnd of demonstration phase When feasible

to the PRCC region.

Apply for formal designation; IP to be reviewed and converted into an Operating Plan.

Evaluation of readiness to apply for formal designation by consortium members

After approximately two years.

Possible coordination meeting After approximately one year.

It is proposed that the IP be a living document belonging to the countries that will contribute to the Arctic PRCC-Network, and that it be adjusted as needed during the demonstration phase. The PRCC contributors have many gaps to fill, and will be setting priorities on addressing these and developing the necessary coordination mechanisms – at the discretion of Arctic PRCC-Network Members.Start of demonstration phase TBD: Fall 2017

in conjunction with potential PCOF

Demonstration period estimated to last two years; after two years consider an evaluation period for the consortium as part of the demonstration phase

IF needed, announce the start date for the demonstration phase to WMO SG

Network coordinator. This may have been already identified in the submission to EC-69

Celebrate Everybody roll up the sleeves and get to work Approve the resolution on implementing the Arctic PRCC-Network

EC-69 EC-69.

Submit IPv4 to EC-69 Members as an annex to the Draft Resolution on Implementing the Arctic PRCC-Network

As soon as possible after EC PHORS, by no later than mid- April if possible

EC-PHORS via the Secretariat (E. Charpentier). The EC Document should identify what development work is pending during the demonstration phase (to raise awareness of the resources required to get ready for WMO designation.

Confirm (endorse and commit to) the Arctic PRCC-Network Implementation Plan

Early to mid-April 2017

PRs. (the timing is written this way to make sure of the agreement of the PRCC PRs before the documents go to the whole EC, so those discussions go smoothly).

Disseminate IPv4 to the PRs Early April 2017 Secretariat will disseminate IPv4 to the PRs of contributing Members and request that they urgently confirm in writing the services and products described in the Implementation Plan (with commitment to provision of the resources required to meet the goals) including the start date of the demonstration phase.

Incorporate EC-PHORS comments into IPv4, the final draft Arctic PRCC/Network IP.

Early April 2017 To be facilitated by EC-PHORS STT and/or PRCC-Network co-ordinator; Secretariat will make the revisions.

EC-PHORS consideration of the draft IP and approval of the resolution for submission to EC-69 (IP will be an annex to the resolution?)

21-24 March 17 EC-PHORS may mandate a group of members to do a review after their face-to-face meeting, if Members have not had enough time prior to the meeting, BUT TIME FRAME WOULD BE VERY SHORT. It is assumed that GCW proponents and the JCOMM Co-President will review relevant aspects of the IP.

Submit IPv3 along with a draft resolution on implementing the Arctic PRCC-Network for EC-69

Early March 2017

The Arctic PRCC-Network coordinator (or the STT or Secretariat if needed) will provide the current draft IP to EC-PHORS for consideration

17 | P a g e

to EC-PHORS and a draft resolution for approval (assuming that EC-PHORS will be asked to review and comment on the IP)

Incorporate feedback from PRs concerned

Early March 2017

The Secretariat will be responsible to develop IPv3 based on feedback from the PRs.

Develop a draft resolution for EC-69 on Arctic PRCC-Network implementation

Late Feb 2017 Secretariat, STT and Network Node and overall leads

Disseminate IPv2 to the PRs concerned(also copy for information the RA presidents and any applicable RA Working Groups?)

Early Feb 2017 Secretariat will disseminate IPv2 to the PRs and request their review and comment by end-Feb 2017, noting their endorsement and commitment will be requested in April 2017. It would speed this up if the experts keep their PRs in the loop all earlier stages…

Draft IPv2 will be agreed End of Jan 2017 Consortium members and EC-PHORS STTFinal review, IPv2 Late Jan 2017 Consortium members and EC-PHORS STTRevisions to the draft IPv1.1 Late Jan 2017 Leslie Malone will incorporate proposed edits

into IPv2. The Secretariat will circulate IPv2 for final agreement.

Review, comment on the IPv1.1 Mid Jan 2017 Consortium members and STT.First draft IP (v1) Early January

2017Leslie Malone will provide a first draft (v1) to the Secretariat for its preliminary review; then the draft (v1.1) will be submitted to consortium members and the EC-PHORS STT for comments/agreement.

Revise the tables of potential contributions to the Arctic PRCC-Network, based on experts’ input to Action 3 below.

Late Nov – Dec 2016

Leslie Malone

Action 3: Input to, review, edit the draft Implementation Plan

November 2016 through January 2017

Experts/countries to provide input

Action 2: Define expected benefits from PRCC activities

End of December 2016

Experts/countries to provide input

Action 1: Propose revisions to the tables of potential contributions to the Arctic PRCC-Network

23 November 2016

Experts/countries to provide input

18 | P a g e

Annex 1: Agenda and workplan

DAY 1: MONDAY, 7 November 20161. OPENING OF THE MEETING

09:00 – 09:20 Opening Remarks by Chairperson (H. Tangen) Statement on behalf of WMO Secretary-General (R. Kolli) Logistical information by Secretariat (R.Kolli) Tour de table (All)

2. ORGANIZATION OF THE MEETING09:20 – 09:45 Adoption of the agenda

Review of the objectives of the meeting Establishment of the working arrangements

H. Tangen (Chair)

3. BACKGROUND9:45 – 10:15 3.1 Review of the status of Arctic PRCC preparations

including relevant constituent body decisionsR. Kolli

10:15 – 10:45 Health Break and Group Photo10:45 – 11:30 3.2 Review of WMO RCC implementation processes and

designation criteriaA. Hovsepyan

11:30 – 12:30 3.3 Review of Arctic climate services requirements (EC-PHORS Services Task Team (STT))

J. Ekman

12:30 – 13:30 Lunch13:30 – 15:00 3.4 Review of existing WMO RCC implementations with a

focus on RCC-Networks: Technical and organisationalP. Hechler

15:00 – 15:30 3.5 Outcome of Arctic PRCC requirements and capabilities surveys

P. Hechler

15:30 – 16:00 Health Break4. BRAINSTORMING SESSION ON DEFINING PRCC PRODUCTS AND SERVICES

16:00 – 17:30 4.1 Assess the potential contributions to the PRCC H. Tangen; all

DAY 2: TUESDAY, 8 November 20165. ARCTIC PRCC-NETWORK ARRANGEMENTS

09:00 – 09:15 Brief recap of the key outcomes of Session 4 H. Tangen09:15 – 10:30 5.1 Organisational arrangements: Nodes, Node leads,

consortia, Network coordination, partnershipsH. Tangen, all

10:30 – 11:00 Health Break11:00 – 11:30 5.1 continued11:30 – 12:30 5.2 Technical arrangements – Mandatory functions, highly recommended

functions, other activities (additional products and services, projects, RCOFs etc.)12:30 – 13:30 Lunch13:30 – 15:30 5.2 continued H. Tangen, all15:30 – 16:00 Health Break16:00 – 17:30 5.2 continued H. Tangen, all

DAY 3: WEDNESDAY, 8 November 201609:00 – 10:30 5.3 Partnership arrangements to integrate contributions

from other sources of RCC-relevant products for the Arctic, such as GCW and IICWG

GCW: A. Snorasson;IICWG: V. Smolyanitsky

19 | P a g e

10:30 – 11:00 Health Break6. ENGAGEMENT OF USER GROUPS AND CONSULTATIONS ON THEIR REQUIREMENTS

11:00 – 12:30 Mapping of Arctic PRCC-Network products and services versus relevant service needs in the Arctic region

H. Tangen, all

12:30 – 13:30 Lunch7. ARCTIC PRCC-NETWORK IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

13:30 – 15:00 Review of the final elements of the Arctic PRCC-Network Implementation Plan, and way forward

H. Tangen, all

8. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS15:00 – 16:00 Summary of conclusions and recommendations H. Tangen

16:00 End of Meeting

20 | P a g e

Annex 2: List of Participants

Participants in the Arctic Polar Regional Climate Centre (PRCC) Network Implementation Planning Meeting, 7-9 November 2016, Geneva, Switzerland.

CANADA

Ms Côte, ChantaleRegional Director, Prediction Services Operations CentralEnvironment and Climate Change Canada800 rue de la Gauchetière OSuite 7810Place Bonaventure, portail Nord-EstMonréal, QC, H5A 1L9CanadaTel: + 1 514 283 1600Mobile: + 1 514 220 8432Fax: + 1 514 496 2415E-mail: chantale.cote@canada.ca

Dr Denis, BertrandMeteorological Service of Canada2121 Trans-Canada HighwayDorval, H9P 1J3CanadaTel: + 1 514 421 7264Mobile: + 1 514 554 0574Fax: + 1 514 421 4657E-mail: Bertrand.denis@canada.ca

Ms Malone, Leslie4 Vezina PlaceKanata, ON K2K 3G9CanadaTel: + 613 435 3859Mobile: + 613 716 1593E-mail: lesliemalone@rogers.com

21 | P a g e

FINLAND

Dr Ekman, JohannaFinnish Meteorological InstituteP.O. Box 503Helsinki, Fi-00101FinlandTel: + 358 400 291066E-mail: Johanna.ekman@fmi.fiMember: EC-PHORS; Member EC-PHORS STT

ICELAND

Dr Snorrason, ArniDirector GeneralIcelandic Meteorological Office andPermanent Representative of Iceland with WMOVeðurstofa ÍslandsBústaðavegur 7-9, 108 Reykjavík IcelandTel: +354 522 6000E-mail: arni.snorrason@vedur.isMember: EC-PHORS; Co-Chair GCW Steering Group

NORWAY

Dr Støylen, EivindResearch ScientistNorwegian Meteorological Institute PO Box 43 BlindernNO 0313 OsloNorwayE-mail: eivinds@met.no

Mr Tangen, HelgeRegional DirectorMeteorologisk instituttVervarslinga i Nord-NorgeP.O. Box 6314NO – 9293 TromsoNorwayTel: +47 7762 1300E-mail: helget@met.no Member: EC-PHORS; Co-Chair EC-PHORS STT

22 | P a g e

RUSSIAN FEDERATION

Dr Smolyanitsky, VasilyArctic and Antarctic Research Institute (AARI)Russian Federation Service for Hydrometeorology and Environmental Monitoring (ROSHYDROMET)38 Bering Str.St Petersburg 199397Russian FederationTel: + 7812 337 3149Mobile: + 7951 654 4196Fax: + 7812 337 3241E-mail: wms@aari.aq

SWEDEN

Dr Jönsson, AnetteSwedish Meteorological and Hydrological Institute (SMHI)Folkborgsvägen 17SE-601 76 NorrköpingSwedenTel: + 46 11 495 8456Fax: + 46 11 495 8001E-mail: anette.jonsson@smhi.se Member: EC-PHORS; Member EC-PHORS STT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Dr Garcia, HernanNESDIS/ National Center of Environmental InformationNOAA1315 East West HighwaySSMC 3, RM 426Silver Spring MD 20910United States of AmericaTel: + 301 713 4856E-mail: Hernan.Garcia@noaa.gov

Dr Kumar, ArunNWS/NCEP/ Climate Prediction CentreNOAA5830 University Research CTNCWCP, RM 3000College Park, MD 20740United States of AmericaTel: + 1 301 683 3385E-mail: arun.kumar@noaa.gov

Ms Pitter, ShannaNWS/ International Affairs OfficeNOAA1325 East West HighwaySSMC 2 17312Silver Spring, MD 20910United States of AmericaTel: + 301 427 9066E-mail: shanna.pitter@noaa.gov

WMO SECRETARIAT

23 | P a g e

World Meteorological Organization7 bis, Avenue de la Paix Case Postale 2300 CH 1211 Geneva 2

Climate and Water Department Observing and Information Systems Department

Mr Hechler, PeerScientific OfficerData Management Applications DivisionTel: +41 22 730 8224E-mail: phechler@wmo.int

Mr Charpentier, EtienneChief, Observing Systems DivisionTel: +41-22 730 82 23E-mail: echarpentier@wmo.int

Ms Hovsepyan, AnahitScientific OfficerWorld Climate Applications and Services DivisionClimate Prediction and Adaptation BranchTel: +41 22 730 8212E-mail: ahovsepyan@wmo.int

Ms Ritu, RodicaProject manager, Cryosphere Watch (GCW)Observing Systems DivisionTel: +41 22 730 8482E-mail: rnitu@wmo.int

Ms Jepsen, Lisa-AnneProject OfficerWorld Climate Applications and Services DivisionClimate Prediction and Adaptation BranchTel: +41 22 730 8343E-mail: ljepsen@wmo.intDr Kolli, Rupa KumarChiefWorld Climate Applications and Services DivisionClimate Prediction and Adaptation BranchTel: +41 22 730 8377E-mail: rkolli@wmo.int

24 | P a g e

Annex 3: PRCC Timeline

Timeline of significant events, activities and decisions relevant to implementation of polar RCCs leading up to the present meeting:

Date/Period Event Remarks2007-2008 International Polar Year (IPY) WMO was co-lead; decided to

contribute to the IPY legacy8-11 September 2008

WMO-WCRP IPY Workshop12 on CLIPS13 in Polar Regions (St. Petersburg, Russian Federation)

Ref. WMO-TD No. 1509: As part of its efforts to extend the implementation of its Climate Information and Prediction Services (CLIPS) project to address the special needs of the Polar Regions, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) recognizes a unique opportunity for the National Meteorological and Hydrological Services (NMHSs) of its Members to contribute to the legacy of the ongoing International Polar Year 2007-2008 (IPY), to build collaborative mechanisms for generating sustained, practical, operational products and services, to meet user needs for climate risk management in Polar Regions.Recognizing the scientific challenges of climate prediction in high latitude regions, and also the acute vulnerability of Polar Regions to climate variability and change, consideration has been given at the workshop to extending the benefits of the RCOF process to high latitudes to facilitate sharing of national experiences and networking among the stakeholders for a collaborative handling of the climate issues common to most of the countries in this area.Ideally, a PCOF will be a regular international collaboration between climate and user representatives with interests in Polar Regions, to share currently available information, to respond to user requirements for climate information, products and services, and to engage in awareness and technical training of both climate providers and users. The PCOF is recognized as a WMO legacy of IPY 2007-2008, and as a contribution to the future WMO Global Cryosphere

12 http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/wcp/wcasp/seriespubs/documents/WCASP78_TD1509.pdf 13 WMO’s Climate Information and Prediction Services (CLIPS) project implemented over the two decades 1995-2015.

25 | P a g e

Watch (GCW).31 August -4 September 2009

World Climate Conference-3 (WCC-3) (Geneva, Switzerland)

Ref. WMO/TD - No. 1048: The Conference Declaration noted the decision to establish a Global Framework for Climate Services (GFCS) to strengthen the production, availability, delivery and application of science-based climate prediction and services

19-24 February 2010

CCl-15 (Antalya, Turkey) Ref. WMO-No. 1054, Resolution 5 (CCl-XV) on Establishment and Operation of Regional Climate Centres worldwide: urged the WMO Secretary-General to promote a global coverage of RCCs/RCC Networks, and regional associations to make all possible efforts to accelerate their establishment.

On Monday 22 February 2010, experts from 15 countries informally discussed the concept of a Polar COF (a potential WMO contribution to the IPY Legacy). Challenges include limited observations and limited skill in seasonal scale predictions at high latitudes.

6-8 June 2011 Sixty-third session of WMO Executive Council (EC-LXIII) (Geneva, Switzerland)

Ref. WMO-No. 1078, Resolution 1 (EC-LXIII): A Task Team was set up to develop the draft GFCS Implementation Plan and suggest the governance structure

29-31 October 2012

Extraordinary Session of the World Meteorological Congress (WMO Cg) (Geneva, Switzerland)

Ref. WMO-No. 1102, Resolution 2 (Cg-Ext.(2012)): Congress established the Intergovernmental Board on Climate Services (IBCS) and adopted the GFCS Implementation Plan. RCCs and RCOFs constitute key elements in the implementation of the GFCS, particularly in its Climate Services Information System (CSIS) pillar.

15-23 May 2013

Sixty-fifth session of WMO Executive Council (EC-65) (Geneva, Switzerland)

Ref. WMO-1118, Item 4.3.23: Members agreed that EC-PORS, the Global Cryosphere Watch (GCW), the Commission for Climatology (CCI), the Commission for Basic Systems (CBS), and the concerned Regional Associations (RAs) need to work in close cooperation to develop Polar Regional Climate

26 | P a g e

Centres (PRCCs), for both the Arctic and Antarctic regions, and to be engaged with the relevant priority projects of the Global Framework for Climate Services (GFCS) Implementation Plan

2013 Environment and Climate Change Canada, Government of Canada funded a ‘Programme of Implementation of Global Framework for Climate Services on Regional and National Scales’, for the period 2013-2017. Key results include an improved climate service framework across the Arctic Polar Region, which will be achieved through the implementation of Arctic PRCC-Network;

25-28 February 2014

fifth session of EC-PORS,Wellington, New Zealand

The Services Task Team (STT) took on responsibility for fostering the establishment of Polar RCCs for the Arctic, Antarctic and high mountain regions of the world and began consultations on an implementation strategy for PRCCs.

February-March 2015

“Survey of Members on needs and capacities for Polar RCC services” was conducted

The survey identified the priority functions of PRCCs (excellent response (70%)). The survey results clearly indicate the requirements for, and capabilities to run relevant PRCC services, and moreover a strong interest by the concerned Members to contribute to PRCC activities.

25 May to 12 June 2015

17th World Meteorological Congress (Cg-17), Geneva, Switzerland

Ref. WMO-No. 1157, Resolution 40 (Cg-17): Members decided that Polar and High Mountain Regions would be one of the seven WMO Priorities for 2016-2019, especially to “Improve operational meteorological and hydrological monitoring, prediction and services in polar, high mountain regions and beyond”. Furthermore, Cg-17 agreed that an integrated approach was needed to provide the required services to users and advice to governments about adaptation and mitigation, based on an understanding of the global impact of changes in Polar and High Mountain Regions;

15-17 June 2015

Sixty-seventh session of WMO Executive Council (EC-67), Geneva, Switzerland

Ref. WMO-No. 1158, Resolution 3 EC-67: Members expanded EC-PORS to become EC-PHORS and

27 | P a g e

undertake responsibility additionally for high mountain areas.

17-19 November 2015

A scoping Workshop on Climate Services for Polar Regions14 (Geneva, Switzerland)

There was a clear indication of interest and requirements for establishing an Arctic Polar RCC-Network; expression of national capabilities, expertise and commitment in producing relevant products and providing services; and initiation of potential mapping of national capabilities for populating the Arctic PRCC-Network.

December 2015

WMO requested detailed input from interested Members for proposed contributions to Arctic PRCC.

Jan./Feb. 2016 Members provided detailed information on potential contributions, using a template.

June 2016 PRCC Concept Paper (v.2) disseminated

V2 of a Concept Paper on "Development of a Polar Regional Climate Centre (PRCC): Towards an Arctic PRCC-Network", incorporated decisions from the Nov 2015 workshop.

15-24 June 2016

Sixty-eighth session of WMO Executive Council (EC-68), Geneva, Switzerland)

Having considered the recommendations of the Scoping Workshop on PRCCs, Members adopted Decision 52 (EC-68) in which EC endorsed the Arctic PRCC-Network as a joint initiative between RAs II, IV and VI, and requested that a draft implementation plan be developed in a coordinated manner, and be brought to the attention of EC-69 for further consideration. Guidance is to be sought from EC-PHORS, CCl, CBS and JCOMM. As well, EC requested the Commission for Climatology to review and provide guidance for the demonstration phase of the Arctic PRCC Network in close consultation with the Commission for Basic Systems, the Executive Council Panel of Experts on Polar and High-mountain Observations, Research and Services and participating Members.

October 2016 Member’s potential contributions to Arctic PRCC were organized into contributions by function (for both mandatory and highly recommended functions)

14 http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/wcp/wcasp/meetings/PRCC_Scoping_Workshop2015.html28 | P a g e

7-9 Nov.2016 Arctic Polar Regional Climate Centre (PRCC) Network Implementation Planning Meeting (Geneva, Switzerland)

Progress towards defining Arctic PRCC structure and governance; technical and organizational arrangements; definition of initial products and services; and identification of next steps.

29 | P a g e

Annex 4: RCC Highlights

RCCs are Centres of Excellence designated by CBS and CCl to perform regional-scale climate functions,

RCCs are complementary to and supportive of NMHSs, who will deliver all Warnings and national-scale products.

The primary recipients of RCC products and services (RCC Users) are the NMHSs, other RCCs and international institutions recognized by the regional association.

RCC definitions include that: o a WMO-RCC is a multifunctional centre that fulfils all the required functions of an

RCC for the entire region, or for a sub-region to be defined by the regional association;

o a WMO RCC-Network is a group of centres performing climate-related activities that collectively fulfil all the required functions of an RCC; and that

o a WMO RCC-Network Node is a centre in a designated WMO RCC-Network. A Node will perform, for the region or sub-region defined by the regional association, one or several of the mandatory RCC activities (e.g. long-range forecasting (LRF), climate monitoring, climate data services, training).

30 | P a g e

Annex 5: Detailed criteria for Mandatory Functions Of WMO RCCs/RCC Networks

From the Manual on the GDPFS, Part II, new Appendix II-1115

Functions Activities CriteriaOperational Activities for LRF(both dynamical and statistical, within the range of 1 month to 2 year timescale, based on regional needs)

Interpret and assess relevant LRF products from Global Producing Centres (GPCs), distribute relevant information to RCC Users; and provide feedback to GPCs (see Attachment II-13)

Product: assessment of the reliability and outcomes of GPCs or LCs-LRFMME products including the reasoning (making use of LC SVSLRF), for the region of interest, in the form of texts, tables, figures, etc.Element: 2-m mean temperature, total precipitationUpdate frequency: monthly or at least quarterly

Generate regional and sub-regional tailored products, relevant to RCC User needs, including seasonal outlooks etc.

Product: probabilities for tercile (or appropriate quantile) categories for the region or sub-regionElement: 2-m mean temperature, total precipitationOutput type: rendered images (maps, charts), text, tables, digital dataForecast period: one month up to 6 monthsUpdate frequency: 10 days to one month

Generate consensus* statement on regional or sub-regional forecasts.

*NB: A collaborative process involves discussion with experts in the region (e.g. through Regional Climate Outlook Forums (RCOFs), teleconferencing, etc.).

Consensus is both the agreed process, and its joint conclusion, and can be that there is limited skill in the prediction for a region or sub-region

Product: consensus statement on regional or sub-regional forecast.Element: 2-m mean temperature, total precipitationOutput type: reportForecast period: a climatologically significant period (from one month to one year)Update frequency: at least once per year (to be defined by the region)

Perform verification of RCC quantitative LRF products, including the exchange of basic forecasts and hindcast data.

Products: verification datasets (e.g. SVS LRF scores, Brier Skill Score; ROC; Hit Rate Skill Score)Element: 2-m mean temperature, total precipitation

Provide on-line access to RCC products/services to RCC Users.

Product: an on-line data/information portal

Assess use of RCC products and services through feedback from RCC Users.

Product: analysis of feedback (which is made available using a template)Update frequency: annually, as part of a regular reporting of RCCs to WMO RAs

Operational Activities for Climate Monitoring

Perform climate diagnostics including analysis of climate variability and extremes, at regional and sub-regional scales

Products: climate diagnostics bulletin including tables, maps and related productsElement: Mean, Max and Min temperatures, Total precipitation; other elements (esp. GCOS essential climate variables) to be determined by the region,Update frequency: monthly

15 http://library.wmo.int/pmb_ged/wmo_485-v1_en.pdf 31 | P a g e

Establish an historical reference climatology for the region and/or sub-regions

Product: database of climatological means for various reference periods (e.g. 1931-60; 1951-80; 1961-90; 1971-2000; etc.)Spatial resolution: by stationTemporal resolution: monthly at a minimumElements: Mean, Max and Min temperatures, Total precipitation; other elements (esp. GCOS essential climate variables) to be determined by the region,Update frequency: at least 30 years, preferably 10 years

Implement a Regional Climate Watch

Products: climate advisories and information for RCC UsersUpdate: whenever required, based on the forecast of significant regional climate anomalies.

Operational Data Services, to support operational LRF and climate monitoring

Develop quality controlled regional climate datasets, gridded where applicable

Products: regional, quality controlled climate datasets, gridded where applicable, following CCl guidance on QA/QC proceduresElements: Mean, Max and Min Temperature, and Precipitation, at a minimumTemporal resolution: dailyUpdate: monthly

Provide climate database and archiving services, at the request of NMHSs

Products: national databases with metadata, accessible to the NMHS in question (backup service, development site, etc).Elements: as determined by the NMHSUpdate: at the request of the NMHS

Training in the use of operational RCC products and services

Provide information on methodologies and product specifications for mandatory RCC products, and provide guidance on their use

Products: Manuals, guidance documents and information notes.Update frequency: when methods/products are revised or introduced or discontinued

Coordinate training for RCC Users in interpretation and use of mandatory RCC products

Products: survey and analysis of regional training needs, and proposals for training activities.

NOTE: An RCC is expected to perform certain functions (e.g. for homogeneity testing; database management; metadata management, statistical evaluation of climate data, etc.) using procedures proposed in the WMO Guide to Climatological Practices and in other official Commission for Climatology Guidance documents.

32 | P a g e

Annex 6: RCC Highly Recommended Functions Climate prediction and projection

o Assist RCC Users in the access and use of WCRP-CMIP climate model simulationso Perform downscaling of climate change scenarioso Provide information to RCC Users for use in development of climate adaptation strategieso Generate, along with warnings of caution on accuracy, seasonal forecasts for specific

parameters where relevant, such as: onset, intensity and cessation of rainy season; tropical cyclone frequency and intensity

o Perform verification on consensus statements for forecastso Perform assessment of other GPC products such as SSTs, winds, etc.

Non-operational data serviceso Keep abreast of activities and documentation related to WMO WIS, and work towards WIS

compliance and DCPC designationo Assist NMHSs in the rescue of climate data from outmoded storage mediao Assist NMHSs to develop and maintain historical climate datasetso Assist RCC Users in the development and maintenance of software modules for standard

applicationso Advise RCC Users on data quality managemento Conduct data homogenization, and advise RCC Users on homogeneity assessment and

development and use of homogeneous data setso Develop and manage databases, and generate indices, of climate extremeso Perform Quality Assurance/Quality Control on national datasets, on request of an NMHSo Provide expertise on interpolation techniqueso Facilitate data/metadata exchange amongst NMHSs, including on-line access, through an

agreed regional mechanismo Perform Quality Assurance/Quality Control on regional datasets

Coordination functionso Strengthen collaboration between NMHSs on related observing, communication and

computing networks including data collection and exchangeo Develop systems to facilitate harmonisation and assistance in the use of LRF products and

other climate serviceso Assist NMHSs in user liaison, including the organisation of climate and of multidisciplinary

workshops and other forums on user needso Assist NMHSs in the development of a media and public awareness strategy on climate

services

Training and capacity buildingo Assist NMHSs in the training of users on the application and on implications of LRF

products on userso Assist in the introduction of appropriate decision models for end-users, especially as

related to probability forecastso Promote technical capacity building on NMHS level (e.g. acquisition of hardware, software,

etc.), as required for implementation of climate serviceso Assist in professional capacity building (training) of climate experts for generating user-

targeted products

Research and developmento Develop a climate Research and Development agenda and coordinate it with other

relevant RCCso Promote studies of regional climate variability and change, predictability and impact in

the Regiono Develop consensus practices to handle divergent climate information for the Regiono Develop and validate regional models, methods of downscaling and interpretation of

global output productso Promote the use of proxy climate data in long-term analyses of climate variability and

changeo Promote application research, and assist in the specification and development of sector

specific productso Promote studies of the economic value of climate information

33 | P a g e

Annex 7: RCC implementation around the world (as of Nov. 2016)

• RA I (Africa)– 6 potential RCCs identified covering East, South, Central, West and North Africa

(plus the continental scale), – ACMAD designated RCC-Africa in 2015,– East: ICPAC and North African RCC-Network - in demonstration phase - both

candidates for designation• RA II (Asia)

– 3 RCCs designated; BCC and TCC in 2009, NEACC in 2013,– India started demonstration phase in 2013, - Candidate for designation– Iran, Saudi Arabia and Kazakhstan have formally expressed interest.

• RA III (South America)– 3 potential RCCs identified covering Western Coast of SA (WCSA), Northern SA,

and Southern SA.– CIIFEN designated as RCC-WCSA in 2015– RCC-Network Southern SA in demonstration phase since 2014 – candidate for

designation • RA IV (North America, Central America and the Caribbean)

– CIMH (Caribbean) started the demonstration phase in 2013 – candidate for designation

– US RCC (USA and Central America) is in demonstration phase• RA V (Southwest Pacific)

– 2 RCC-Networks (South-East Asia and Pacific Island Countries) identified by RA V in 2014. Implementation consultations in progress

• RA VI (Europe)– RCC-Network designated in 2013 (3 Nodes: Data: De Bilt; Monitoring: Offenbach;

LRF: Toulouse + Moscow)

34 | P a g e

Annex 8: Summary of STT findings on users, needs and requirements for climate services

In the STT white paper ‘The known requirements for Arctic Climate Services16’ of 2015, it is noted that the economy of the Arctic region, home to almost four million people, is heavily dependent on natural resources (in particular: oil, gas, metal ores, fish, reindeer and birds), and that the needs of the tourism industry and settlements (for services related to hydrology, river ice and sea ice, storms, ocean currents, freshwater discharge, etc.) were increasing.

While the provision of weather and oceanographic services is inherently challenging in the Polar Regions where observational data is sparse and the climate is particularly harsh, this work is further complicated by climate change, causing e.g.: permafrost degradation; increasing winter runoff; coastal erosion; reduced sea ice thickness and extent; and changes in water regimes.

Particularly at weather scales, Member countries provide a range of services including forecasts and warnings for surface, marine, and aviation weather interests, with emphasis when possible on high-impact events such as extra-tropical storms and polar lows, storm surge and other coastal hazards, heavy precipitation, floods, droughts, volcanic ash, and space weather. Across the pan-Arctic area, these services vary in terms of content, presentation, and time scales covered.

The Arctic Council Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment (AMSA) report17 (2009) indicated that ocean operators need to know ‘where the ice is and is not; where it is going to be, how closely packed it is and how thick and strong it is; generally, how difficult it will be to go around or, when necessary, go through’.

At climate scales, known requirements include: seasonal predictions, particularly the period of open water that defines an extended

operations and shipping season; multi-decadal sea ice projections for infrastructure planning, ecosystem stewardship,

and projection of global climate impacts forced by changes first occurring in the Arctic; decadal predictions of sea ice loss - needed but problematic (long-term modeling gives

diverse model results + lack of good physical data regarding winds and clouds + current models are too slow in future projections of sea ice loss);

climate information in general; and long time series of weather and ocean data, to support research.

Specific, known user needs include: Natural Resource Development (energy and mineral extraction and development):

length of open water season, sea ice melting/freezing; Transportation, Search and Rescue, oil spill combatting: length of open water season,

ice movements, sea ice melting/freezing, wave height, sea currents…; Community Resilience and Adaptation Planning: weekly – seasonal – long-time weather

and climate looks needed for understanding, adapting and transforming to known and/or predicted changes;

Infrastructure Protection and Hazard Mitigation (information of e.g. erosion, flooding, permafrost thawing);

Versatile Ecological Changes caused by changes in e.g. sea ice, higher sea-surface temperatures, warmer summers, reduced snow cover, etc.

Annex 9: Status and organization of WMO RCC Networks

16http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/wcp/wcasp/meetings/documents/EC-PHORS-STT-Services_WhitePaper_Nov2015.pdf 17 http://www.pmel.noaa.gov/arctic-zone/detect/documents/AMSA_2009_Report_2nd_print.pdf

35 | P a g e

Current RCC networks:the RA VI RCC network is designated and operational, and the North Africa RCC-Network and the Southern South America RCC-Network have completed their demonstration phases and are now applying for WMO designation.

NA RCC-Network: model of activity specialisation: Nodes on data services (lead: Algeria), climate monitoring (lead: Tunisia), LRF (lead: Morocco) and training (co-leads: Libya and Egypt), implemented in close collaboration with each Node being supported by all five countries

SSA RCC-Network: Co-led by Argentina (Buenos Aires Node) and Brazil (Brasilia Node) serving Southern South America (Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, Paraguay, Uruguay) with seamlessly distributed responsibilities.

Proposed RCC Networks: the ECOWAS RCC-Network (West Africa); the Northern South America RCC-Network; the Pacific Islands RCC-Network (implementation meeting scheduled);

o model of activity specialisation: Nodes on data services, climate monitoring, LRF, training and highly-recommended functions (Node leads and consortium members);

the Southeast Asia RCC-Network (implementation meeting scheduled); o model of activity specialisation: Nodes on data services, climate monitoring and

LRF (Node leads and consortium members); the Arctic Polar RCC-Network (meeting currently underway).

The RA VI RCC-Network:The RA VI RCC Network model is based on activity specialisation, with three Nodes (on climate data, on climate monitoring, and on long-range forecasting), with all three Nodes having integrated training activities. Together, these three Nodes meet all mandatory requirements for the RA VI RCC-Network. There is one network coordinator, and also six consortium members that provide sub-regional or highly specialised RCC functions (both mandatory or highly-recommended). There is considerable cooperation and coordination amongst the contributing countries.

36 | P a g e

Annex 10: Summary of Arctic PRCC Requirements and capacities

WMO Survey on PRCC requirements and capabilities of February 2015:

For WMO RCC mandatory functions (data-, monitoring-, LRF- and training services), o almost 70 per cent of responding Members required this activity to be performed

or co-ordinated by a Polar RCCo more than 75 per cent of responding Members indicated interest in contributing

to PRCC mandatory functions For WMO RCC highly recommended functions (climate prediction and projection

services, non-operational data services, co-ordination functions, capacity building and R&D),

o almost 70 per cent of responding Members required this activity to be performed or co-ordinated by a Polar RCC

o around 60 per cent of responding Members indicated interest in contributing to PRCC highly recommended functions

WMO request of December 2015 for potential national contributions to the proposed Arctic PRCC for Mandatory Functions:

Activities PRCC contributions offered PRCC services to be developed

Function: Operational Activities for Long Range ForecastingInterpret GPC products Various GPC products availableGenerate regional tailored products

Various regional/sub-regional sea-ice forecasts (mainly monthly or seasonal)

Arctic LRF capability for TT, RR and other parameter to be developed (MME)

Generate consensus statements

Arctic RCOF and other consensus mechanisms to be developed

Perform verification incl. data exchange

Available for GPC products Verification system to be developed for regional LRF

Provide on-line access to services

Largely available for above existing services

To be developed for new products and services

Facilitate user feedback Assumed to be in place for above existing services

To be considered for new products and services

Function: Operational Activities for Climate MonitoringClimate diagnostics Various products offered, which

together cover almost the entire Arctic

Minimum option: InventoryDesired option: Consistency(Review user requirements)

Historical reference climatology

Various reference climatologies exist, which together cover large parts of the Arctic

?Reference climatology for classic parameter (TT, RR) for Eurasia?Minimum option: InventoryDesired option: Consistency

Climate Watch system implementation

Partly available for European Arctic sub-regions

Climate Watch system to be developed

Function: Operational Data Services to support LRF and Climate MonitoringDevelop regional climate data sets

Various data sets offered, which together cover almost the entire

Minimum option: InventoryDesired option: Development

37 | P a g e

Arctic of an Arctic (gridded) data set of selected ECVs

Provide climate database and archiving services at the request of NMHSs

n/a n/a

Function: Training in the Use of Operational RCC Products and ServicesProduct specifications and guidance on their use

Partly in place Consolidation needed

Co-ordination of training Some opportunities exist Concept development and implementation needed

WMO request of December 2015 for potential national contributions to the proposed Arctic PRCC for Highly Recommended Functions:

A wide range of suggestions were made by the potential contributors. Some common threads were for regional downscaling, assistance in access and use of climate model simulations, vulnerability assessment, extremes indices, Traditional Knowledge, data rescue and development of long time series incl. QC, user interaction assistance, develop R&D agenda, R&D: regional climate variability, use of satellite derived products.

38 | P a g e

Annex 11: Technical and administrative roles and responsibilities of the PRCC lead, Nodes and consortium members

The following suggestions are non-binding, and serve as guidance only.

1. The lead institution would have the following responsibilities for the Arctic PRCC:a. Technical

The lead organization may have technical/operational roles and responsibilities, if it also undertakes to be a PRCC Node (see item 2 below);

Hosting the single point-of-entry website/portal through which RCC products and services will be made available;

b. Administrative and coordination Managing the relationship with WMO and relevant partners (e.g. GCW, IICWG,

AC, etc.) and their constituent bodies (e.g. the RAs, CBS, CCl, etc.); handling correspondence, requests for updates and inputs, receiving and responding to requests from member countries and users, managing the feedback process;

Facilitating the relationship of PRCC with all GPCs and with the global set of RCCs and RCC-Networks;

Coordination across all Nodes and cross-node activities to ensure development and delivery of seamless products and services for the pan-Arctic region;

Organising meetings as needed on coordination and technical matters; Coordinating a pan-Arctic Climate Watch System; Ensuring the sharing of data and product across the geographical Nodes, to

ensure development of pan-Arctic products as needed; Promoting18 the establishment and sustained operation of regular RCOF activities

and promoting national COFs; Coordinating the pan-Arctic cross-node activities including provision of LRF using

an MME approach with products of relevance for the whole Arctic (e.g., sea ice)) Providing oversight and guidance on PRCC outreach efforts; Promoting WIS compliance in all PRCC activities, and fostering the role of the

geographical Nodes to become WIS DCPCs; Providing oversight on adherence to WMO principles on the exchange of data

and products; Etc.

2. Each Node would have the following responsibilities for the Arctic PRCC:a. Technical

Each Node would undertake all 19 mandatory RCC functions for its geographic domain and would undertake a number of highly recommended or other functions as required for the geographical domain of the Node (i.e. each Node would be multi-functional RCCs for their sub-region). As many functions with pan-Arctic applicability as possible are encouraged.

Contributing data, methodology and expertise for development and provision of seamless pan-Arctic products and services.

Hosting a web site/portal pertinent to and in the language(s) of the geographic domain for RCC products.

b. Administrative and coordination18 noting that hosting COFs is not a mandatory function for RCC designation, but widely recognized as useful for capacity development of the scientists in a new system, and for interaction with users19 It is not required that an RCC have the capability to develop/conduct LRF, but it must be able to interpret, assess LRF products and disseminate to and get feedback from its users.

39 | P a g e

Managing the relationship with the lead PRCC agency in terms of responding to requests for input and services, providing and responding to feedback;

Contributing to problem solving and coordination of the PRCC as a whole; Participating in and conducting meetings on cooperation, outreach, and on

technical matters; Promoting regular RCOFs for the geographic domain and promoting national

COFs; Establish a Climate Watch System for the geographic domain and participate in

the pan-arctic climate watch system; Ensuring WIS compliance of the Node, and seeking the status of WIS DCPC; Adhering to WMO principles for the exchange of data and products; Arrange for/coordinate activities to establish the financial and human resources

necessary to meet any PRCC requirements not otherwise covered through ongoing national or institutional mandates;

Etc.

3. Each Consortium Member would have the following responsibilities for the Arctic PRCC:a. Technical

Accessing, tailoring and applying the products developed through PRCC activities and ensuring their provision to national user communities through website and other means as required;

Contributing data, methodology and expertise for development and provision of seamless pan-Arctic products and services;

b. Administrative and coordination Supporting the PRCC system as requested by the Nodes and lead centre

(requests for input, feedback, data, product, expertise, etc); Supporting implementation of national and sub-national COFs; Adhering to WMO principles for the exchange of data and products; Conduct national networking with potential contributors to the RCC activities

(e.g. academic institutions, other government agencies, etc) to seek sources of data and products;

Conduct national networking with user communities to ensure effective dissemination of climate information and collection of (and response to) their feedback;

Dedicate the human and financial resources to any new work that would be required to fulfil the RCC responsibilities and to ensure the PRCC is effective and meets the WMO standards for designation.

Etc.

40 | P a g e

Annex 12: Background information on GCW and the IICWG

Global Cryosphere Watch (GCW)

The GCW provides authoritative, clear, and useable data, information, and analyses on the past, current and future state of the cryosphere to meet the needs of WMO Members and partners in delivering services to users, the media, public, decision and policy makers. GCW is one of four components of WIGOS, and has three working groups (Observations, Integrated Products and Information and Services), each of which has teams working on various activities.

GCW is led by a Steering Group (GSG), of which Dr Arni Snorrasson and Dr Barry Goodison are co-chairs. The GSG is comprised of experts – some are from EC-PHORS, relevant WMO Programmes, Technical Commissions and co-sponsored programmes, and some are from partners and contributors. EC-PHORS appoints the GSG chair and vice-chair and approves GSG membership. GCW works through EC-PHORS for making recommendations to WMO (for example, to propose amendments to the Technical Regulations).

International Ice Charting Working Group (IICWG)

The International Ice Charting Working Group (IICWG) (presentation ‘International Ice Charting Working Group (IICWG)’, V. Smolyanitsky, Russian Federation) was founded in 1999 to promote cooperation between the world's ice centers on all matters concerning sea ice and icebergs. It is a technical forum of the national Ice Services with interests in both Northern and Southern hemispheres. Its work is described in a Charter (signed in 2007), and it meets annually in October (its 17th meeting was in Ottawa, 26-30/10/2016, hosted by the Canadian Ice Service). The IICWG has strong linkages an feedback with satellite operators and customers at sea, both federal and commercial.

The IICWG Terms of Reference cover Data and Product Exchange; Terminology, Data, and Mapping Standards; Operations and Customer Support; Training; Technology for Analysis and Forecasting; and Applied Science, Research, and Development. The Group has 2 Standing Committees (on Data, Information, and Customer Support; and Applied Science and Research); and one sub-committee on Icebergs. The IICWG works in collaboration with JCOMM, and reports to WMO bodies including EC-PHORS, GCW, and the Arctic PRCC-Network in development.

41 | P a g e

Annex 13: Revisions to tables of potential contributions to the Arctic PRCC-Network

PRCC experts jointly agreed that a revision of the contribution tables is required in the light of the meeting discussions. The tables to be revised are the ones organized by function (four for mandatory functions, six for highly recommended functions), and are available at: http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/wcp/wcasp/meetings/PRCC_IPMeeting.html.

Each PRCC contributor (node leads as well as consortia members) is requested to undertake the following tasks:

1. For any dataset or product not based on Tmax, Tmin, Tmean or Ptotal (e.g. ocean parameters such as sea ice; satellite imagery; animations that do not contain any climatology such as normal values; hydrological parameters; cryosphere parameters, atmospheric chemistry parameters; etc.), please mark these to be moved to one of the ‘Highly Recommended’ Function tables, and specify which table and task,

2. Please identify any potential contributions that are essentially "weather" scale and mark them for relocation to one of the tables for Highly Recommended functions (specify which table and task, please) or even deletion,

3. Please check your text on areal coverage and make sure any pan-Arctic ones are clearly and accurately identified,

4. In the Mandatory Function tables, please fill in any blanks in part 1 (we will ask for the details to be filled in to part 2 as the IP is being developed – the IP should be in FIRST DRAFT status in January 2017),

5. For each dataset/product/service in column 2, please check, fill in, and/or correct if needed the specific task that is most applicable (Appendix 1 at the end of each file holds the task descriptors). Under Climate Monitoring, it is important to distinguish between what is data (with the exception of reference climatologies), and climate monitoring activities which involve diagnostics/interpretation of the data and development of analyses,

6. For all mandatory datasets/products/services where T and P are required, please indicate that these variables are available (and for what period),

7. For training (mandatory function), please specify the availability (including those planned to be developed during the demonstration phase) of the requested manuals, guidance documents and information notes and for which mandatory function they apply (LRF, CM, DS),

8. In the remarks column on the left of each table, please add information for each dataset/product on whether the WIS metadata are already available or whether they need to be developed, and also indicate whether a dataset has open access, password-protected access to RCC Users, or any other type of restricted access.

For questions and clarifications, please contact any or all of:  Rupa Kumar Kolli: rkolli@wmo.int  Peer Hechler: phechler@wmo.int Leslie Malone: lesliemalone@rogers.com

With the input for table revisions, Leslie Malone will amend the tables (moving, as needed, certain contributions to other tables), and will highlight the pan-Arctic products. As a second step, the mandatory functions could be grouped by Nodes (i.e., co-locate Canada and USA contributions, and the Nordic countries, in each table), and also by task.  The revised tables will be distributed to the participants for final review and comment as soon as possible.

Due date: 23 November 2016, so that the IP can be completed in time for some of the hard deadlines coming up in early 2017.

42 | P a g e

Annex 14: Tentative outline for the Arctic PRCC-Network Implementation Plan

It was proposed that the draft Implementation Plan include the following, inter alia:

Introduction including rationale for a PRCC Background (including a timeline of steps taken to date) Statement of benefits of implementing an Arctic PRCC-Network Arctic PRCC-Network Structure Guidance on Roles and Responsibilities of the lead agency, Node leads and Consortium

members Priorities for implementation Contributions to the PRCC – overview with links to Appendices 1 and 2 Partnerships (e.g. GCW, IICWG, Research community, etc.) Governance/oversight (WMO constituent bodies, EC-PHORS, etc.) User Engagement (e.g. COFs and other mechanisms) Challenges/Issues (e.g. identifying priority HRFs and when to implement them;

identification of user requirements; developing new products; integrating research achievements; identifying common methods and practices; etc.)

Next steps/Timeline with deliverables and milestones* Conclusions and recommendations References; Acronyms

*Note that the timeline may only have detail up to the point of handing over the IP to the countries – the rest would be up to them to sort out during the demonstration phase.

Appendix 1: Tables for Mandatory functionsAppendix 2: Tables for Highly Recommended functions

43 | P a g e