International Polar Year 2007–2008 - WMO

52
IPY 20 07–20 08
ICSU and WMO Processes Gain Steam:
September–December 2003
During the short intermission between the ICSU-
WMO meeting and the second gathering of the ICSU
Planning Group in December 2003, both parties worked
hard to build momentum for their respective planning
processes. The Rapley-Bell letter of 3 September 2003
that was circulated by Rosswall generated a large
number of responses: by December 2003, over 130
inputs had been received (ICSU PG, 2003c). Bell made
a presentation on the new IPY at the 9th International
Earth Sciences symposium in Potsdam, Germany (8-
12 September 2003); she also spoke to a much larger
constituency about the ICSU planning at the AGU
meeting in San Francisco on 10 December 2003 (Bell et
al., 2003). The AGU meeting featured two sessions on
IPY with over a dozen invited papers 5 , a massive poster
session and an IPY ‘town-hall’ meeting (in lieu of the
one that did not materialize eight months earlier at
the AGU/EGU gathering in Nice, France). Papers were
also given on the IHY (by Davila and his team) and
on the eGY (by D.N. Baker and the eGY team), but the
three planning processes were presented to different
audiences in different disciplinary fields.
In September 2003, the U.S. IPY planning team of
20 members under the National Academies started
its work on the IPY science overview document (NRC,
2004). Connected through Bell, Bindschadler and
Elfring to the ICSU Planning Group, the U.S. team
became a strong ally and a valuable testing ground to
many ideas developed by the ICSU planners. During
the final months of 2003, several nations – Canada,
Denmark, Germany and the U.K. – moved to form
their national IPY committees in addition to those
already present in the U.S. and Russia. By February
2004, 14 countries had established their national IPY
committees or points of contact (Chapter 1.6).
Several key endorsements were also secured. On 14
October 2003, the UNESCO General Assembly referred
to the “desirability of joint action in relation to the
International Polar Year (2007–2008)” (http://unesdoc.
unesco.org/images/0013/001320/132068e.pdf, p. 52).
On 23–24 October 2003, the Arctic Council’s Senior
Arctic Officials (SAO) meeting in Svartsengi, Iceland
discussed the IPY planning and decided to invite ICSU
planners to give a presentation at the next meeting in
May 2004 (see below). The IASC Executive Committee
held its own discussion about IPY in November 2003
(Chapter 1.4). Lastly, the Russian IPY team proposed in
October 2003 to hold a meeting of the international
group of ‘experts’ on IPY in January 2004. Leaders of
the ICSU Planning Group (Rapley and Bell), as well
as representatives of the WMO, Arctic Council, IASC,
SCAR and other major polar agencies were invited to
participate.
PG-2: December 2003
The second PG meeting took place on 17–19
December 2003, again, at the ICSU headquarters in
Paris. It was the first gathering of the expanded Planning
Group (with 17 people in attendance - see minutes at
http://classic.ipy.org/international/documents/) 6 and
also the first since the Call for IPY Ideas had been issued
in September 2003. Altogether, 135 ‘research ideas’
for IPY activities had been submitted in about three
months from 22 countries by individual scientists,
research institutions, national and international
groups, a clear demonstration of huge enthusiasm for
IPY among the polar science community. Hence, the
meeting primary aims were to review the submitted
ideas and to assign tasks to prepare a report to ICSU by
January 2004, in maintaining an aggressive timetable
of necessary actions.
Initially, the PG considered a presentation on the
WMO position on IPY made by Vladimir Ryabinin
from the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP
– Chapter 1.4). Ryabinin outlined the WMO interest in
a joint WMO/ICSU initiative for IPY and also in inviting
IOC participation. WMO suggested a strong joint
proposal for IPY, to be prepared in collaboration with
the PG that would recommend establishment of a
Joint Steering Committee, supported by program
offices at each of the organizations. That Joint
Committee would then develop the Science Program
and Implementation Plan for IPY to be presented to
the WMO, IOC and ICSU Executive Committees for
approval by June 2004.
After considerable debate the PG agreed (without
complete consensus) to recommend to ICSU and WMO
that they jointly co-sponsor IPY 2007–2008 and that
WMO have minority representation on the Planning
Group. Overall, the PG members welcomed the WMO
approach, but they made it clear that the full spectrum
of disciplines, in both physical and social sciences,