Background
EC-OBPSS includes a metadata field for Marine Spatial Planning (MSP). This field does not currently exist in IOC-OBPS.
Current situation
IOC-OBPS: No dedicated metadata field for Marine Spatial Planning.
EC-OBPSS: uses the following controlled vocabulary:
- Biodiversity and Conservation
- Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation
- Conflict Resolution
- Cultural Heritage
- Environmental Protection
- Fisheries and Aquaculture
- Mineral and Resource Extraction
- Renewable Energy
- Scientific Research and Monitoring
- Shipping and Navigation
- Socio-Economic Development
- Tourism and Recreation
Assessment
The MSP categories appear relevant and could potentially improve the discoverability of Best Practices related to marine spatial planning and ocean management.
However, during the review we were unable to identify the provenance, governance, or authoritative source of this controlled vocabulary, nor how it is intended to be applied consistently across other systems.
In addition, several of these categories appear to overlap with information that may already be represented through existing or proposed metadata fields (e.g., Parameter Disciplines, Sustainable Development Goals, or Essential Variables).
Before introducing a new metadata field, it is important to determine whether it provides unique information that cannot already be captured elsewhere in the metadata model.
Questions for the community
- What is the source and governance of this vocabulary?
- Is this an established community standard for Marine Spatial Planning?
- Does this field provide information that cannot be represented through existing metadata?
- Are there use cases demonstrating that this field significantly improves discovery or interoperability?
Proposed outcome
Current recommendation: Do not introduce Marine Spatial Planning (MSP) as a separate metadata field until its provenance, governance, intended use, and added value have been clearly demonstrated.
This recommendation can be revisited if an authoritative vocabulary and clear use cases are identified.
Background
EC-OBPSS includes a metadata field for Marine Spatial Planning (MSP). This field does not currently exist in IOC-OBPS.
Current situation
IOC-OBPS: No dedicated metadata field for Marine Spatial Planning.
EC-OBPSS: uses the following controlled vocabulary:
Assessment
The MSP categories appear relevant and could potentially improve the discoverability of Best Practices related to marine spatial planning and ocean management.
However, during the review we were unable to identify the provenance, governance, or authoritative source of this controlled vocabulary, nor how it is intended to be applied consistently across other systems.
In addition, several of these categories appear to overlap with information that may already be represented through existing or proposed metadata fields (e.g., Parameter Disciplines, Sustainable Development Goals, or Essential Variables).
Before introducing a new metadata field, it is important to determine whether it provides unique information that cannot already be captured elsewhere in the metadata model.
Questions for the community
Proposed outcome
Current recommendation: Do not introduce Marine Spatial Planning (MSP) as a separate metadata field until its provenance, governance, intended use, and added value have been clearly demonstrated.
This recommendation can be revisited if an authoritative vocabulary and clear use cases are identified.