standardization of environmental data and information - International ...

necessary standardisation could be achieved. She replied that a minimum
level of standardisation would help in such areas as equipment, sieving
methods and sample processing. However, not everything could be
standardised because, for example, not everybody agreed about what was
the best equipment. The trawl was not the best candidate, but the box
corer and the multiple corer might be easier to standardise. Nor was it easy
to standardise processing because, whereas evidence of change was
minimised when analysing the total sample from a box corer, change
became apparent when the core was split into different levels. With
researchers in the infancy of their understanding of how to see natural
changes, it was too early to standardise, although the stage had been
reached where there was enough understanding to show the need for more
detailed research. She did not like the word “standardisation” when it was
used to minimise information gathering. Impact studies had to be based on
the best level of science. An oil company might like to have a baseline
study with minimum effort, but that could not be done. The effort to do
good science must not be minimised, when what was needed was more
detailed understanding.
The moderator, Craig Smith, commented that standardisation was
obviously a complex issue. On the one hand, scientists would like to
compare measurements of certain parameters across the whole Clarion-
Clipperton Fracture Zone (CCFZ). For example, to understand species
ranges, a standardised taxonomy was needed to see whether an animal
identified at one end of the zone corresponded to something at the other
end. If a coherent database was to be set up, there would have to be a set
of standards or protocols for submitting the data, so that one group’s
measurements of a particular parameter were not totally different from
another’s. Some basic issues of standardisation could be recognised, such
as using a 250-µm screen for box-core processing.
On the other hand, he said that certain kinds of measurements or
studies should not necessarily be standardised. These included process
studies -- site-specific investigations at the forefront of science. For
example, in time-series work on a particular phenomenon a researcher
might want to change a sampling protocol or time series to get a better
resolution or better understanding of what was going on at a particular site.
A change of technology might be required to adopt the newest scientific
method. People should not be forced to measure something in a certain
way when they had a better way. In his own research, he often did not do
things the way others did, preferring to modify his approach to suit the
problem.
INTERNATIONAL SEABED AUTHORITY 231