15
User Requirements Abound and Differ (Even if They
Appear Similar)
Understanding user requirements is an integral part of the design of any kind of
product, and is critical to its eventual success. Discovering the real requirements,
however, is often difficult. Different people will define a specific set of needs in different ways, mostly depending on their personal experience, interests and expectations. Furthermore, most users typically think along the lines of their current
framework and existing workflows, rather than being innovative and focusing on the
real needs (both current and future) and exploiting technical developments.
Similarly, users are not always aware of the specifications of current products and
of the potential of future products. As a result, what is a similar requirement at first
sight (e.g., conservation status of a habitat) may actually reveal very different underlying data needs. In heathlands, for instance, desiccation and atmospheric nitrogen
deposition both lead to the dominance of Purple moorgrass (Molinia caerulea).
From a remote sensing perspective, the observation (i.e., the grass cover) is the
same, but from a management perspective, different actions are required.
Conservation status reporting under Natura 2000 requires four aspects for each
habitat to be monitored and assessed against thresholds or reference values: habitat
Fig. 1 Histogram of the number of national habitat definitions in which a plant species is
mentioned, for the two Natura 2000 habitat types European dry heaths (4030) and Luzulo-Fagetum
beech forests (9110) and their subtypes. The majority of species are only mentioned for a few (sub)
types and in a few member states. In contrast, only a few species, mainly vascular plants, are
mentioned in the bulk of the descriptions
Towards a Mature Age of Remote Sensing for Natura 2000 Habitat Conservation: Poor…
User Requirements Abound and Differ (Even if They
Appear Similar)
Understanding user requirements is an integral part of the design of any kind of
product, and is critical to its eventual success. Discovering the real requirements,
however, is often difficult. Different people will define a specific set of needs in different ways, mostly depending on their personal experience, interests and expectations. Furthermore, most users typically think along the lines of their current
framework and existing workflows, rather than being innovative and focusing on the
real needs (both current and future) and exploiting technical developments.
Similarly, users are not always aware of the specifications of current products and
of the potential of future products. As a result, what is a similar requirement at first
sight (e.g., conservation status of a habitat) may actually reveal very different underlying data needs. In heathlands, for instance, desiccation and atmospheric nitrogen
deposition both lead to the dominance of Purple moorgrass (Molinia caerulea).
From a remote sensing perspective, the observation (i.e., the grass cover) is the
same, but from a management perspective, different actions are required.
Conservation status reporting under Natura 2000 requires four aspects for each
habitat to be monitored and assessed against thresholds or reference values: habitat
Fig. 1 Histogram of the number of national habitat definitions in which a plant species is
mentioned, for the two Natura 2000 habitat types European dry heaths (4030) and Luzulo-Fagetum
beech forests (9110) and their subtypes. The majority of species are only mentioned for a few (sub)
types and in a few member states. In contrast, only a few species, mainly vascular plants, are
mentioned in the bulk of the descriptions
Towards a Mature Age of Remote Sensing for Natura 2000 Habitat Conservation: Poor…