Supplementary material to “Status and Progress of the International Polar Year”
Ian Allison, Australian Antarctic Division and Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems Cooperative Research Centre, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Michel Béland, Environment Canada, Montreal, Quebec
David Carlson, International Programme Office for the International Polar Year, Cambridge, UK
Citation:
Allison, A., M. Béland, and D. Carlson (2008), Status and progress of the International Polar Year, Eos Trans. AGU, 89(34), 313—314. [Full Article (pdf)]
THE MID-TERM STATUS AND PROGRESS OF THE INTERNATIONAL POLAR YEAR 2007-08
The International Polar Year 2007–08 (IPY) was launched on 1 March 2007, with an observing and field work period between then and 1st March 2009. Although some IPY activities commenced before or will continue after these dates, the programme is now halfway through the official period. Here we review the progress and achievements of IPY to date, and provide an outlook to the eventual outcome of the programme. In doing this we assess IPY progress against similar criteria to those that were used to endorse IPY projects (Rapley et al., 2004), and particularly try to establish the extent to which IPY has catalyzed a level of research and advance which would not have otherwise occurred.
The IPY, which is co-sponsored by the International Council for Science (ICSU) and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), was planned as an intensive, internationally coordinated campaign of high quality research and observations in the polar regions. It introduces a unique research concept, with an emphasis on interdisciplinary collaboration, and advances observations and research across the broad spectrum of science disciplines. As a result, active inclusion of earth, life and social sciences has been achieved, for the first time in the 125-year history of Polar Year initiatives. This broadened range of IPY research topics has been organized into six major "themes" developed through a consultation process with representatives of the scientific community. These are to determine the present environmental status of the polar regions; to quantify and understand, past and present natural environmental and social changes in both polar regions; to better understand the links between the polar regions and the rest of the globe; to investigate frontiers of science in polar regions; to use the polar regions as unique vantage points; and to investigate the cultural, historical, and social processes that shape the sustainability of human societies in polar regions.
The IPY 2007–2008 is coordinated by an international Joint Committee (JC), appointed by ICSU and WMO, and supported by an International Programme Office (IPO). Sub-committees to the JC are responsible for observations, data management and education and outreach components of the programme. Compared to its predecessors, IPY 2007–2008 has been developed as a true bottom-up venture that is designed and driven primarily by the polar science community and is implemented mainly via competitive project/program funding across the participating nations. As a result of this innovative design, according to one independent assessment (Stirling, 2007), IPY 2007–2008 has "a robust organisational structure ……… with a well-managed executive office" and that "the light-touch organizational structure with low level bureaucracy has found widespread favour" in the research community. It makes "effective use of existing polar organisations, avoiding duplication of the roles of those organisations, yet providing the required additional coordination and oversight that provide a means to influence major stakeholders while seeking to adapt and link to existing plans in innovative ways." The inclusion of political representatives, from the Antarctic Treaty and from the Arctic Council, in the JC meetings has opened new opportunities for the intersection of science and policy. Many international polar science organizations, particularly the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research (SCAR), the International Arctic Science Committee (IASC) and the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC), have developed increasing collaboration, innovation and flexibility during IPY.
The response from the polar research community to the IPY concept has been overwhelming. A comprehensive, worldwide, coordinated set of research projects has been established, and observations and measurements that address key polar issues and urgencies are underway (Allison et al., 2007). After a process in which over 1000 expressions of intent (EoI) and initial project proposals were evaluated, 231 IPY projects were finally endorsed, all working with international collaboration across different disciplines. Of these 171 are science, 59 are education and outreach, and 1 is integrated data management. On the recommendation of the JC, and through the active "match-making" role of the IPO a number of separately submitted EoIs and proposals were amalgamated to make a whole that is greater than the sum of the parts. Examples include the extensive integrated IPY programmes in hydrology, glaciology, advanced weather forecasting, biodiversity and human health. IPY also explores new formats for collaboration between science and Arctic indigenous peoples, with several international projects initiated by indigenous researchers and institutions and with community monitoring as an integral element of observational networks.
The individual projects within IPY operate with autonomy under the direction of steering or oversight committees and with their own Project Coordinators. These volunteers provide essential leadership, in some cases across multiple projects that were merged on the advice of the JC. As a result, many Project Coordinators have taken on far greater workloads than anticipated to manage personal and national research commitments as well as to coordinate international activities.
It is far too early to assess the major science advances resulting from IPY – only history will judge that. The quantity of research will depend on the enhanced provision of funding for polar research during IPY, which is still not fully resolved in some nations, but already IPY has elicited substantial new money. Over US$400M of new science funding from 19 national and regional programmes has been allocated for IPY activities. However there is heterogeneity within the overall funding envelope and new research funding has not been as great as was hoped in some countries. In addition to this new science funding, some $800M of perennial polar funding is being directed specifically to IPY science activities over the two years, and substantial new infrastructure funding has been provided from many nations for resources such as research stations and transport systems to support this science. Most of the logistical needs have been secured for the duration of IPY, and there has been substantial development of Agency portfolios to provide IPY with satellite data and products such as meteorological analyses.
The quality of IPY science will depend on the outcomes from the investigators and on the extent to which they use international collaboration to extend and enhance their research. IPY includes most of the leading polar researchers, many of them in active international collaborations. Preliminary results are available from a number of IPY projects and several projects are already complete. Examples of some of the exciting IPY reports include the almost daily discoveries of new organisms during the Census of Antarctic Marine Life cruises, the remarkably rapid drift of the icebound R/V Tara across the Arctic and the ongoing rapid erosion of multi-year ice in the Arctic basin, the discovery of uncharted seamounts beneath the Southern Ocean, the careful observations of changing relationships between predators and prey along the Arctic coast, and the engagement with multiple communities across the Arctic to assess local needs and options for adaptation to climate change. Many more examples of early research outcomes from IPY can be found at www.ipy.org.
Altogether, scientists from 62 countries are involved in IPY projects, including a number from countries not traditionally involved in polar science. The interdisciplinary breadth of IPY science portends a truly comprehensive approach to the polar regions, and sets an example for future international science. IPY has also been remarkably successful in engaging and informing Arctic residents, including indigenous people in many distant rural communities, about new interdisciplinary research. A talented, energetic and self-motivated group of early career researchers, inspired by IPY objectives, have crossed national and disciplinary boundaries to form the Association of Polar Early Career Scientists. (APECS). The establishment of APECS forms the basis of strong networks for future researchers post IPY.
Perhaps the most important legacy of IPY 2007-2008 will be the preservation and availability of IPY data and sustained observing systems into the future. Information management, particularly preservation after the formal termination of the IPY, has been recognised from the earliest days of the programme, and all investigators have agreed to the IPY data policy as part of the endorsement process. However building an integrated data set from the broad range of IPY research activities is a daunting challenge. IPY benefits from the advice of data experts with clear vision, many of whom play leading roles in defining future plans for display and access of scientific data. Component systems, providing modern access capabilities and crossing disciplinary boundaries, are available within national, disciplinary and existing programmes. We have unprecedented bandwidth for real-time data communications and we work at the forefront of geobrowser technologies.
However there is inconsistent understanding of the IPY data policy amongst many investigators, and although identification of IPY data is in progress, it is slow. Of 80 endorsed projects that were recently surveyed, 40% have no information regarding their data management plans and have not responded to the data survey. The IPY data sub-committee aims to educate and provide advice to investigators in order to gather all metadata by June 2009.
Enhancing the level of support from national funding agencies for IPY data management is a major challenge. National funding agencies are also key to achieving data policy compliance, as only they have mechanisms of enforcement. Long-term archiving of data is another critical issue and there is an urgent need to create new archives, and to increase awareness and action on data issues at top levels of governments. There is currently a lack of clear archive options for IPY data and little prospect for a modern, friendly, integrated IPY data and information system that will enhance access and encourage compliance.
IPY has promoted the development of strong networks between polar researchers, although there are yet no long-term resources for the preservation of these. There has been wide-scale publicity and public awareness of IPY through many forms of media. Outreach to the polar community is particularly strong, whereas communication with the broader global community could still be reinforced. IPY gets quoted broadly in many locations and formats, emphasizing its substantial and still-growing potential to represent science to policy-makers, governments, and the public at large as an accessible activity. IPY Science Days, organised every three months to highlight a specific aspect of polar research, attract interest and participation from teachers and students in many countries. A new consortium of higher education institutions with programmes focussed on Antarctica (the International Antarctic Institute) has started, and developed coordination and joint programmes with a similar institution (University of the Arctic) in the north.
Another important legacy of the IPY will be to convert the burst of observational programmes into sustained observing capabilities. There are various obstacles to implementing such systems, but IPY offers an important, indeed singular, opportunity for progress. It provides public and political attention; vision and, in some cases, plans; and organizational infrastructure. An example of a proposal that may lead to enhanced and more sustainable observing networks is the Global Cryosphere Watch, an integrated observing approach for this under-sampled domain in the climate system. The WMO Congress has endorsed this proposal, and is exploring the possibility of creating a long-term system. In addition, the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO, with numerous partners, is working towards sustaining both Southern Ocean and Arctic Ocean Observing Systems as regional components of the Global Ocean Observing System and tangible legacies of the IPY. Substantial community efforts, organized under SCAR for the Antarctic and under the label SAON (Sustained Arctic Observing Networks) for the Arctic, are beginning to define the needs and explore the solutions for sustained observational systems in both polar regions. The SAON will include geophysical, ecological, and social observational networks, integrated to meet interdisciplinary challenges such as the atmospheric transport of persistent organic pollutants and their subsequent impacts on polar ecosystems and polar residents. In the North, the IPY Arctic Human Health Initiative brings together many groups with plans for continued and enhanced pan-Arctic health surveillance systems. The AHHI also promotes the IPY open access policies through its use of free on-line journals (Parkinson, 2008).
New observational technologies developed for or applied during IPY include airborne remote sensing systems, underwater and under-ice fixed and mobile systems, genomic and proteonomic probes and assays, and a host of analytical advances. There are also preliminary discussions on launching Molnyia orbit satellites over both poles, as quasi geostationary platforms. These and other technological developments, and the latest results in polar science, will receive attention at IPY-endorsed international and interdisciplinary conferences in 2008 (the SCAR-IASC IPY Open Science Conference in St Petersburg), 2010 (the IPY Early Science Conference in Oslo), and 2012 (a probable IPY Impacts and Assessment conference in Canada).
In summary, IPY is off to a very successful start. It has stimulated international cooperation, enthused a next generation of polar researchers, engaged new national partners, crossed the disciplinary boundaries of polar research, and engaged with the public. These achievements are due in large part to the enthusiasm and efforts of the research community, and to the organizational and financial support from the sponsors, ICSU and WMO, from the UK Natural Environment Research Council, and from several nations to the work of the Joint Committee, the IPO, and the IPY subcommittees. There remain however issues needing serious attention to ensure the complete success of IPY. Foremost of these is increased attention to, and resources for, data management and archiving. Other issues include ensuring an organizational and observational legacy of IPY, and better engagement with operational and modelling communities.
The rapid pace of scientific advance and our increasing awareness of mankind's impact on the Earth system as a whole suggest that research and data of this IPY will leave a lasting legacy in many fields of polar science. It will advance public understanding of the critical role of polar regions in Earth system science. Perhaps, another International Polar Year will be warranted in 25 years time.
References
Allison I., and co-authors, 2007: The scope of science for the International Polar Year 2007–2008, WMO/TD-No.1364, 79 pp.
Rapley C., and co-authors, 2004: A Framework for the International Polar Year 2007–2008, ICSU, 38 pp.
Parkinson AJ, 2008: The International Polar Year, 2007–2008, an opportunity to focus on infectious diseases in Arctic regions. Emerg Infect Dis. 14(1). http://www.cdc.gov/EID/content/14/1/1.htm
Stirling G.C, 2007: International Scientific Collaboration: International Years of Science and the Launch of the International Polar Year 2007–2008. Report to the OECD Global Science Forum, September 10, 2007.
Author Information
Ian Allison, Australian Antarctic Division and Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems CRC, Hobart, Australia; Email: ian.allison@aad.gov.au; Michel Béland, Environment Canada, Montreal; Email: Michel.Beland@ec.gc.ca; David Carlson, IPY International Programme Office, Cambridge, UK; Email: ipy.djc@gmail.com. Members of the Joint Committee, and their contact details, are listed at http://www.ipy.org/index.php?/ipy/whoswho/
