Project

General

Profile

GRSF ยป

12 January 2018 - Discussing the matter on GRSF business model with CNR and FORTH colleagues (FAO, CNR, FORTH)

Meeting Notes
Topics: Review the value proposition draft, topics for EAB TWG3
Participants:
CNR (Donatella Castelli, DC; Pasquale Pagano, PP)
FORTH (Yannis Marketakis, YM; Nikos Minadakis, NM)
FAO (Nicolas Bailly, NB; Marc Taconet, MT; Aureliano Gentile, AG)

Comments on the value proposition

  • NB: Presented the context of the value proposition writing (FAO/FI, FIRMS, GRSF current partners, countries through FIRMS partners).
  • PP: Now the value proposition is a lot emphasized on the FIRMS partnership after FSC10 (which was held after TWG2: keep the IT partners informed). Likes the 10 reasons listed at the end of the value proposition
  • DC: It is not clear if FAO is co-developing the iMarine e-infrastructure or the GRSF in the text (NB to correct: DONE). Which is the ownership of the GRSF? Being created by BlueBRIDGE, we need to verify the ownership rules for the GRSF VRE after the end of the project, in particular regarding the BB partners who were not involved in its development. PP suggested that the ownership for each product should be under the actors who actually contributed to the product. DC: Anyway the formulation should be checked carefully.
  • NM: There is already an agreement about the code developed in BB.
  • NM: Partners should be more visible in the value proposition document. NB: there are in infra-paginal notes to keep the text short and concise.
  • PP: I understand the document on value proposition is only a part of the overall document where D4Science and FORTH will be clearly put in relation in the business model.
  • AG: A special check has be made in the pre-workshop documents to be very clear about D4Science, iMarine, BlueBridge to avoid confusion.

Comments on the Business model (the FIRMS-GRSF model selected by FIRMS SC10)

  • PP: Position of CNR and FORTH seems correct in the FIRMS-GRSF option (schema from TWG2).
  • DC: CNR must be involved indeed, not only D4Science.
  • NM, YM: FORTH is willing to continue.
  • MT: we need to simplify when communicating the business model/governance diagram. CNR and FORTH may provide a zoomed vision on their component (as mentioned above).

Worskshop

  • NB: The participants need to hear a clear message on the sustainability of the infrastructure / the continuity of service providing.
  • PP: This is included in the Service Level Agreement. To be discussed along with the Data policy agreement (to be added in the Agenda: DONE). However, it must be clear that the commitment of continuity is for a certain period of time only, possibly renewable.
  • NB: Report the TCOM happening the week before but not in the technical details.

Potential questions to future partners for the questionnaire

  • Ask how future GRSF participants can benefit from GRSF services in return. And if there are extended services they could benefit from.
  • NM: During the project, there were some obstacles for data imports from RAM/FS, more precisely for updates (= running regular imports). Question: will the other databases remain alive in parallel after GRSF is published. AG: yes because GRSF extracts only part of information from there. NM: ask if they will continue to align with the GRSF current and future standards.
  • AG: Also, GRSF does not modify data (it does not include a data entry interface). NM: actually some quality controls during the importation phase led to request for changes, which was a slowing down process because RAM/FS do not necessarily spent/had resources for QC and corrections. NB summary of discussion: ask how participation to GRSF may be beneficial for helping the management of partners' external data. Ask if they wuld consider to manage their full data within GRSF and under which conditions (especially those that do not have strong IT capacities). Ask for cost of maintenance of partners' database. NM: This may imply training on-site, with associated costs.

Other matters

  • MT: Next week a FAO e-learning module will be launched on stock status determination (a part of the stock assessment).
  • AG: Webinar on GRSF on January 25th.
  • MT: Next week meeting e-learning curriculum SDG14.4.1 MT to complete the notes
  • Yimin, DPS e-learning, FIAS(BB) MT to complete the notes

Follow-up actions

  • DC, PP, MT: To read the BlueBridge Consortium agreement to check the current ownership of the GRSF VRE after the end of the project.
  • Discuss how to mention D4Science, iMarine, BlueBridge during the teleconf Tuesday 16 Jan.
  • NB to complete the questionnaire with suggestions made.

Resources

Add picture from clipboard (Maximum size: 8.91 MB)