1

EMEP/CORINAIR Guidebook: EMEP/CORINAIR Guidebook: Summary of on-line Summary of on-line questionnaire resultsquestionnaire results

Joint TFEIP/EIONET air emissions meetingJoint TFEIP/EIONET air emissions meeting

Tallinn, 26-27 May 2008

Martin AdamsAir and Transport Group

European Environment Agency

2

Objectives of the questionnaireObjectives of the questionnaire

Obtain feedback from Guidebook users concerning the way in which the GB material is published on EEA’s website

Provide some information on how EEA might be able to improve the future service offered to Guidebook users

To provide an initial basis for monitoring the impacts of any future changes to the website

3

The starting point…The starting point…

Invitation to complete questionnaire sent to TFEIP and EIONET mailing lists

A highlights box on Guidebook website invited public users to fill in questionnaire

Open for responses for 2 month period (Mar-May08) 3 sections:

Part A – Background and user profile: to understand the different types of users who access the guidebook.

Part B – Evaluation of the current content/structure of the Guidebook: to provide background information concerning the current Guidebook to help track future improvements

Part C – How do you think the Guidebook should be presented in the future? To help learn user preferences concerning how Guidebook information could be presented

4

• 62 responses - 33% Eionet representatives (47 ++)

++ the number in brackets provides number who answered a particular question

Part A: Background and user-profilePart A: Background and user-profile

User background (58*) Visit frequency (55)

Involved with national inventory

compilation40%

Public sector org.

13%

University / Academic

12%

Research institute

15%

Other10%

Commercial company

7%

NGO3%

Every 1-2 months

31%

About once each year

7%

Every few weeks15%

Every 3-6 months

36%

Less frequently

11%

5

Part B: Evaluation of the current Part B: Evaluation of the current content & structurecontent & structure

Simpler Methodol.

25%

reference/ background information

14%

Other5%

Detailed Methodol.

28%

Emission factors28%

Information used (55*)

with other literature sources

50%

it depends on the sector30%

main information

source2%

with a national/

international model18%

How the GB is used… (50)

6

Part B: Evaluation of the current Part B: Evaluation of the current content & structurecontent & structure

The current website is: (54*)

adequately structured

60%

poorly structured

8%

well-structured

32%

in need of more

advanced search

features for locating

information67%

easy to find what you are looking for

33%

7

Part B: Evaluation of the current Part B: Evaluation of the current content & structurecontent & structure

EFs are generally: (49) Scientific quality is: (53)

complete, with

occasional gaps54%

Incomplete23%

Complete23%

acceptable47%

poor0%

difficult to estimate

34%

very good19%

8

Part C – Opinions: how might the Part C – Opinions: how might the GB be presented in the future?GB be presented in the future?

9

Continuing to just have

pdf files available for each source

category40%

Replacing the pdf files

with html web pages to help with

on-line browsing/ searching

5%

Having some

combination of pdf files and (limited html) web

pages content

41%Other 14%

Part C – Opinions: how might the Part C – Opinions: how might the GB be presented in the future?GB be presented in the future?

PDFs or webpages? (49)

10

Yes, it's easily

accessible and always available for

download72%

No, I would also prefer a

CD-ROM8%

No, I would like a

complete printed version despite

knowing this may not

always be up-to-date

No, in addition I would like both a CD-ROM and a

printed version

12%

Part C – Opinions: how might the Part C – Opinions: how might the GB be presented in the future?GB be presented in the future?

Just web information? (50)

8%

11

No, it is useful to

view EFs in context with methodol.

16%

Not sure/don’t

know6% Yes, it would

make finding EFs easier than having to browse

through the entire GB section

78%

Part C – Opinions: how might the Part C – Opinions: how might the GB be presented in the future?GB be presented in the future?

Provide an on-line EFDB to support GB users? (49)

12

Official’ EFs plus

additional EFs

received from experts

and peer-reviewed by the TFEIP

60%‘Official’ EFs plus

any additional

EFs added by users

21%

‘Official’ EFs from the latest published

GB 19%

Part C – Opinions: how might the Part C – Opinions: how might the GB be presented in the future?GB be presented in the future?

What EFs should be included in an EFDB? (46)

13

Yes, if contributions are first peer-

reviewed e.g. by expert panels 48%

No, a forum with different

opinions/ methods to the GB may

confuse users17%

Yes, I would like to see a

publicly available

forum related to

the Guidebook

35%

Part C – Opinions: how might the Part C – Opinions: how might the GB be presented in the future?GB be presented in the future?

Useful to establish a GB emissions user-forum? (49)

14

Some key observations:Some key observations:

• The GB is used by a range of users – not just national emission inventory compilers;

• The current website seems good for most users, but user-search functions need improvement;

• There is a clear desire from users to retain (at least) downloadable pdfs of GB content;

• Strong user interest in having both an EFDB and a user-forum. Future discussions will be needed on both to discuss priorities in the context of potential development, content, responsibilities, resources etc.

15

www.eea.europa.euwww.eea.europa.eu

martin.adams@eea.europa.eumartin.adams@eea.europa.eu

European Environment AgencyEuropean Environment Agency