IUGG XXI Comptes Rendus	Top	Prev.	Next	End
Search:
Contents

International Association of Meteorology and
Atmospheric Sciences

I have been involved in a number of activities on your behalf over the last few years. Rather than give a list of these I will give a few comments on how IUGG and IAMAS have worked and how they might develop in the future.

As you know, IUGG is composed of seven Associations. In shortened form, their areas of interest are geodesy, seismology, volcanology, aeronomy and geomagnetism, hydrology, meteorology and oceanography. The first three have their focus on the solid Earth, the last three on the fluid Earth and IAGA has a bit of both. There had previously been a move to split the fluid Earth Associations off from IUGG. However, we felt no necessity to pursue this. Under the guidance of the current President of IUGG there was a very positive spirit in the Executive Committee, and amongst the Association Presidents in particular. The inter-disciplinary argument is now stronger for IUGG than ever before.

There is no doubt that the Associations are very different from one another in the way they function. The solid Earth Associations are the international organising bodies for observation and theory in their areas. This contrasts with the IAMAS situation where WMO, WCRP and IGBP play a large role in our subject. The hydrologists, perhaps because of their contact with engineering, have a very formal, structured organization and run a large publication business.

In addition to the Associations, IUGG has an Inter-Union Commission on the Lithosphere with the Union for Geological Sciences. IUGG also has two Inter-Association Commissions, Studies of the Earth's Deep Interior and the Committee for Mathematical Geophysics.

The Association Presidents have been concerned that, in recent years, less than half of IUGG funds have been passed through to the Associations, the majority being retained for Union business and the Inter-Union and Inter-Association bodies. The trend has now been reversed and we expect this reversal to continue. The non-Association bodies have been placed under close scrutiny. The Committee for Mathematical Geophysics, for example, has been supported in its move to cover the fluid earth sciences, and urged to input into our Assemblies rather than subtract from them.

There has also been a move away from funding the Associations on a historical basis and towards a more rational basis which includes measures of activity. This will be beneficial for IAMAS.

There have been many discussions on changing the executive structure of IUGG. One of the drivers for this has been to give a higher profile to the Associations. At this time the only tangible result is the agreement by Council that the Past-President should no longer have a vote on the Executive Committee.

Another item that has concerned some is to seek for a focus or for themes that will help produce a unity in IUGG. I see such themes as just cutting the cake different ways. To me the one theme or focus for IUGG is the desire to produce a scientific understanding of the world around us. IUGG exists to enable research towards this theme. In particular, it should enable interactions between the Associations, between scientists from around the world, and with other international organizations and programmes.

Turning to IAMAS, the first thing to say is that at last this is our official title. The changing of "Physics" to "Science" recognises the importance of chemistry, and the interaction of physics and chemistry in our subject.

IAMAS is in many ways a smaller scale version of IUGG. Its essential ingredients are seven Commissions. These Commissions differ widely on their levels of activity, their formulae for symposia and their involvement in international programmes. If we were starting from scratch we would not decide on the division of our subject encapsulated in them. However, they have grown used to dealing with their boundaries and overlaps, and my aim has been to help their activities rather than to redefine them.

One of the crucial aspects which has concerned me as well as previous Presidents is the role of IAMAS, given the existence of the WMO, WCRP, and IGBP. The mission of the WMO is clearly to provide the necessary international collaboration for meteorological services. It is often a co-sponsor of IAMAS symposia and there is a positive relationship. Our role vis-a-vis the two international programmes WCRP and IGBP is certainly important. I believe that IAMAS, through its Commission and Scientific Symposia should provide the link between relevant activities in the Programmes and the scientists on the ground. This should be a two-way link. Discussion of the Activities should provide the stimulus for young scientists to work on the relevant problems. Equally it should enable new ideas to be fed into the evolving development of the Activities. The Commissions of IAMAS should also provide the mechanism for developing new Activities for the International Programmes.

I know that these interactions already occur. Many of our Scientific Symposia are related to and co-sponsored by the International Activities. In the recent past, the SPARC (Stratospheric Processes and their Role in Climate) Programme of WCRP was initiated through IAMAS. This year the IGAC Programme of IGBP, which was itself initiated through IAMAS, has been broadened to cover more aerosol physics by an IAMAS initiative. A significant part of GEWEX has originated through IAMAS.

In order to make the links even stronger, I am encouraging all the Commissions to seek a liaison person on the Scientific Steering Groups in the relevant International Activities. Both WCRP and IGBP have given their warm support to this approach.

My final thoughts are on the subject of communication in IAMAS. There is no doubt that IAMAS would work better if the President and Secretary General could have an easy dialogue with the Bureau and with the Commission Presidents and Secretaries, and if they in turn had fast communication with those involved in their Commission Activities. At one time IAMAS had a Newsletter, and its revival has often been discussed but then rejected because of the work and expense involved. However, electronic communication possibilities have now totally altered the situation. IUGG aims to set up a World Wide Web page which the Associations will be able to use. IAMAS must take advantage of this. The Commissions must have e-mail address lists so that direct communication with IAMAS scientists around the world is possible. In this development it must, however, be recognised that scientists in some countries will, for a time, need postal communication to make sure that they are not marginilised.

I believe that IAMAS has an extremely important role in world atmospheric science. By increasing our liaison with the international programmes and using modern communication, we can make sure that we perform this role even better in the future.

B. Hoskins

IUGG XXI Comptes Rendus	Top	Prev.	Next	End
Search:
Contents