Classifying Environmental Monitoring Systems

Conference paper
Part of the IFIP Advances in Information and Communication Technology book series (IFIPAICT, volume 413)


In this article the diversity of environmental monitoring systems is studied. The number of such systems is steadily increasing each year, as systems are tailored to specific, growing needs of authorities, corporate users and citizens. Because of this, it becomes harder to compare systems and their functionality. Systems that appear to have the same functionality may turn out to be tailored for different application domains. Likewise, a chosen system may later on turn out to have insufficient support for connectivity and interoperability, although it provides the best support for core functionality requirements. To make sense of the ever growing diversity, and as the main contribution, a method for classification and analysis is proposed. The method is generic to environmental monitoring systems. The use of the method is also illustrated. The classification results yield even for a limited number of systems relevant clusters that help in identifying critical properties for further inspection.


Environmental information systems Environmental monitoring Systems Architecture Systems Analysis Systems Classification 


  1. 1.
    Messer, H., Zinevich, A., Alpert, P.: Environmental monitoring by wireless communication networks. Science 312, 713 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cyranoski, D., Brumfiel, G.: Fukushima impact is still hazy. Nature 477, 139–140 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gilbert, N.: Drug waste harms fish. Nature 476, 265 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Harlan, J., Terrill, E., Burnett, B.: National high frequency radar network: Update. In: OCEANS 2009, MTS/IEEE Biloxi - Marine Technology for Our Future: Global and Local Challenges. IEEE (2009)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Williams, W., Cornford, D., Ingram, B., Bastin, L., Beaumont, T., Pebesma, E., Dubois, G.: Supporting interoperable interpolation: the intamap approach. In: Swayne, D., Hrebicek, J. (eds.) Proceedings of International Symposium on Environmental Software Systems (2007)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Williams, M., Cornford, D., Bastin, L., Jones, R., Parker, S.: Automatic processing, quality assurance and serving of real-time weather data. Computers & Geosciences 37, 351–362 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Williams, M., Cornford, D., Bastin, L., Pebesma, E.: Uncertainty markup language (UncertML). OpenGIS Discussion Paper 08-122r2. Open Geospatial Consortium Inc. (2009)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Skön, J., Kauhanen, O., Kolehmainen, M.: Energy consumption and air quality monitoring system. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Intelligent Sensors, Sensor Networks and Information Processing, pp. 163–167 (2011)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rönkkö, M., Kolehmainen, M.: Titimake final report. In: Rönkkö, M., Kolehmainen, M. (eds.) University of Eastern Finland (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Berlund, R., Kotovirta, V., Sein, A.: A system for icebreaker navigation and assistance planning using spaceborne sar information in the baltic sea. Canadian Journal of Remote Sensing 33(5), 378–387 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kotovirta, V., Toivanen, T., Tergujeff, R., Huttunen, M.: Participatory sensing in environmental monitoring experiences. In: The Sixth International Conference on Innovative Mobile and Internet Services in Ubiquitous Computing, IMIS 2012 (2012) (accepted for publication)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Environmental ScienceUniversity of Eastern FinlandKuopioFinland
  2. 2.VTT Technical research Centre of FinlandFinland

Personalised recommendations