The submission of enquiries to the Forum is closed from July 6th to August 31st 2017. We look forward to receiving your enquiry in September. If your enquiry is related to the right of access to documents as outlined in Regulation 1049/2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents, please contact access.to.documents@eea.europa.eu or see access to documents. We apologise for any inconvenience
Please login or register to participate.
Discussion
.
pagliasofia Jul 17, 2014 01:15 PM
Good Morning, I'm writing you because I am comparing CLC1990 and CLC2000, which have been both previously intersected with NUTS3 areas. I've noticed that some NUTS3 areas display transports areas (roads and railways, ports and/or airports) in 1990, however in 2000 such value is 0. Some examples are: Rheingau-Taunus-Kreis (DE71D) or Oststeiermark (AT224) or Modena (ITD54). (i) Why is it so? (ii) How should I interpret such "disappearence" of transport areas? Thank you very much, sofia p.
Replies (4)
pagliasofia Aug 18, 2014 01:45 PM
Hello, any news regarding my discussion? Thabks a lot, sofia p.
EEA Aug 19, 2014 10:46 AM
Will get back to you as soon as possible (holiday season, not many experts around).
EEA Sep 03, 2014 03:56 PM
Hello, It is not clear whether you are using data or derived statistics but it is natural to have evolutions in land cover; something that in 1990 was open field, can become an airport in 2000 and a bigger airport in 2006. Unless there are holes in the coverage, probably not a cause for concern. In any case, national authorities are responsible for the thematic quality of data; we provide the European dataset by patching what national authorities are providing us with. Hope this clarifies.
pagliasofia Sep 03, 2014 11:39 PM
Hello, I am using CLC surveys for 1990, 2000 and 2006 downloaded in raster and vector version from the EEA website. I agree with your comments, however I was surprised that `transport areas' disappeared to 0, as it logically appears a rather strange land use change... It is then probably due to the thematic quality of the data provided by each national team, as you suggested, however this bears the risks to undermine the validity of the CLC data when NUTS3 levels are examined. I will be waiting for your feedback in case you want to add something. Thanks a lot again, sofia p.
 
Loading