|
International Polar Year 2007-2008
From Yvon Csonka, IASSA President <yvon.csonka@greennet.gl> This brief report is a complement to that provided by Joint Committee (JC) member Grete Hovelrud-Broda (nominated by IASSA to represent the social sciences)--see next news entry, below. The OCF was convened immediately after the JC meeting; discussions were moderated by the JC co-chairs and other JC members. Role of the OCF Participants in the OCF JC informed OCF about the outcome of its meeting. Most representatives of national IPY committees and of international organizations made brief presentations of matters relevant to IPY planning in their country or organization. From national committee reports, it emerged that the share of "human studies" IPY projects varied widely from country to country, from none (e.g. France) or very few (e.g. Germany, Russia), to many (Canada holding the record). There seems to be a direct relationship between social science representation in national committees and share of social science projects in EoI (Expressions of Intent), so that the JC urged national committees who hadn't yet done so, to take social scientists on board. Quite a few representatives from Arctic and human issues organizations were in attendance beside IASSA: CAFF, IASC, ICARP, the Arctic Council's Indigenous Peoples Secretariat, UArctic. Together with representatives from national committees and funding agencies from some Arctic countries, they made the point that IPY research in northern Polar regions cannot be carried out without support and involvement from the local communities and indigenous residents, and that education/outreach efforts of IPY should benefit polar residents. It was admitted by all that data management should take into account ethical, intellectual property rights, and confidentiality issues common in "human studies". Links between IPY and ICARP II, as well as between IPY and the upcoming ESF-Eurocores "BOREAS" funding scheme for humanities research, were investigated. The relative roles of national committees and of international organizations in further IPY planning were also debated. Here IASSA could boast of having facilitated the emergence and development of projects meeting IPY criteria, while acknowledging the prerogatives of national committees--and it will continue to serve social science IPY planning over the next few months. As a personal comment, I may conclude by mentioning that social sciences and human issues are well accepted in the IPY planning process, and this beyond anything we might have dreamed of as recently as a year ago. In my view, this is a corollary of the empowerment of Arctic regions, especially indigenous peoples, that has occurred since the last IGY half a century ago, as well as a result of the constant efforts of e.g. IASSA over the past 15 years. With such strong support for human studies, and for the involvement of Arctic communities, one may regret that there is no single representative from these communities on the JC. From Grete Hovelsrud-Broda, IPY 2007/08 Joint Committee Member,<ghb@cicero.uio.no> Igor Krupnik and Grete Hovelsrud-Broda represented the human studies in the IPY-JC. The IPY JC reviewed a total 869 Expressions of Intent (EoI). The EoIs were divided into 9 categories: biology, data management, education, geology, glaciology, human studies, meteorology/climate, oceanography, and space/data/legacy. Initially there were more than 120 EoIs categorized as human studies but after careful consideration 20 of these were moved to the Education, Outreach and Communication and Data management categories. We ended up with 100 human studies EoIs. In addition there were roughly 14 EoIs crosscutting with human studies from other categories. Eight major research areas or missions emerged from the human studies EoIs. They were organized based on the number of EoIs for each area. The EoIs were reviewed according to the criteria outlined in the IPY Framework document (www.ipy.org). Dedicated international collaboration and significant contribution to the International Polar Year 2007/08 in terms of both relevant topics and time period for the planned research were emphasized. It was considered important that the thrust of the research was planned in the IPY time period. There were two major groupings of EoIs in human studies. The first were those with existing international collaboration and a clear potential for developing core projects. This group will be encouraged to synchronize their projects and jointly prepare full proposals for core projects, within the major research areas, to the IPY JC. The second grouping contained more narrow and individual projects with less clear linkages and with little or no international collaboration. This group will be encouraged to find international partners and to develop their projects into core projects in accordance with the IPY criteria. The overall goal is to create fewer, integrated and international core projects. An essential requirement for any project initiative to be nominated as a core project is that it engages many partners, individuals and regional projects from several nations, has a clear time focus associated with the IPY years 2007 -2008 and is managed and/or coordinated by a self-organizing Project Steering Committee. It may be less feasible for the social sciences to create core projects than for some of the other disciplines or areas of research, but it remains imperative for the process that the human studies community communicates, collaborates and coordinates. The applicants will have access to all the EoIs on www.ipy.org, and a list of human studies EoIs grouped in the major research areas will also be available to assist in the preparation. Letters to the EoI project leaders from the IPY JC Co-Chairs are currently being prepared. Next steps: The deadline for full proposals to be endorsed by the IPY Joint Committee is 30 June 2005. There will be no further calls for Expression of Intents before this deadline. Those who did not submit an EoI in January 05 are invited to submit full proposals in June. All full proposals will be subject to the same process regardless of participation in the EoI process. This may, for some, beg the question of why having the EoI process at all? The EoI process was critical for the IPY JC to assess the key areas and issues of highest relevance to the polar sciences community. A more detailed report from the IPY JC meeting will be forthcoming in early April. From the Canadian International Polar Year (IPY) Steering Committee (http://www.ipy-api.ca), by Ludger Müller-Wille <ludger.muller-wille@mcgill.ca> It is of interest to the members of IASSA that the Canadian research and science policies towards the IPY have been inclusive and encompassing bringing all interests together across the sciences, peoples, and regions. For the social sciences and humanities this approach had the result that of the 19 members 8 are social scientists representing the ‘human dimension' in polar research (there are several IASSA members on the CSC). Thus a positive balance has been struck to develop a strong science program that will be cutting across the wide-ranging scientific interests. For Canada, this is a reflection of its geographic location as a major player in the arctic region. As a member of SCAR, Canada makes its contribution to Antarctic research through its own national research group. In order to achieve these goals the CPC and the CSC have engaged in a consultation process by visiting communities in northern Canada to raise the awareness of IPY and to attain participation in this Year by northern institutions, aboriginal peoples and their governmental bodies. The CSC has joined the efforts of the Joint Committee of IPY for the call of pre-proposals by asking for submissions from within Canada by early December. At its last meeting in Edmonton on December 15 and 16, 2004 the CSC had received a large number of pre-proposals; of these some 30% were in the social and health sciences, education and outreach as well as humanities. These pre-proposals have been ‘bundled' into interrelated themes to further cooperation among the researchers and their organizations. It was felt that the solicitation process has been successful by attracting proposals from across the sciences as well as from northern communities and aboriginal organization. This process is still ongoing, however, with the clear goal in mind to submit the Canadian proposals to the Joint Committee and its Office in Cambridge by the January deadline. Please peruse the website of the Canadian IPY Secretariat which holds detailed information as well as a wide range of documents (http://www.ipy-api.ca). This site and the IASSA site are linked! From Cynan Ellis-Evans, Interim Executive Director, IPY International Programme Office The EoI template is a one off for Jan 14 as we recognise that big logistic-heavy projects will not have the level of detail to submit a full proposal in Jan. All subsequent deadlines will be for full proposals. IASSA will be free to submit proposals anytime after Jan 14 and these will simply be accumulated at the IPY Programme Office for each following deadline. All proposals are to come through the IPY Programme Office but we will be delighted if you can cast an IASSA eye over them to group them together as possible - we need them internationalized and coordinated if we are to get the greatest added value. All projects will send their proposals to the relevant national IPY committees as we want the NC's to coordinate IPY at the national level. The projects themselves will coordinate internationally and the IPY joint Committee will provide oversight and hopefully a light touch to proceedings. From the United Kingdom National IPY Committee, by Michael Bravo In the United Kingdom, Professor Tim Ingold and I have written to the Economics and Social Science Research Council (ESRC), alerting them to IPY, and asking them to consider what funding mechanisms can be created to best assist our efforts. Our national efforts are very much assisted by IASSA’s regular communications to its members, as well as its IPY facilitation. Since most UK researchers already work in collaboration with scholars from other northern (and southern!) countries, we are likely to focus our efforts on developing our expressions of intent through broad based, international projects. I would also draw attention to the importance of the Education and Outreach Initiative. Although it is freestanding, it is closely related to Theme Six in the Outline Science Plan, and provides one of the clearest indications that this IPY can depart significantly from previous IPY events, and speak to the aspirations championed by IASSA. From the Swedish National IPY Committee, by Sverker Sörlin The Polar Committee decided to commission to the chair, the secretary of the committee, and to myself to draft a letter to the Swedish Research Council to argue the case for a specially designated IPY budget covering the period 2005 to 2008. The letter should be with the research council soon to be on its table for their meeting on December 15. The existing network of some 25-30 humanists and social scientists working on polar issues are being made aware of the IASSA website and IASSA's facilitating role and I have also taken steps (through the research council and its newsletters) to see to it that the entire research community in the country is receiving news on the IASSA website. From the U.S. National IPY Committee, by Igor Krupnik ICSU has posted the final report of the ICSU Planning Group, called a "Framework for IPY," at www.ipy.org The US IPY Committee has distributed the ICSU-WMO Call for Expressions of Interest to ArcticInfo, Answer, and the IPY Friends list. The ICSU-WMO cover letter, and a Word version of the Expression of Interest Form are also posted on the US IPY website at http://us-ipy.org People are strongly encouraged to complete their Expressions of Interest on-line at the ICSU website. The current membership of the US National Committee for the IPY 2007-2008 (Mary Albert, Chair) has been extended for another 6 months, until June 2005. The list of the current US National Committee of 16 members and 4 ex officio members can be seen at http://us-ipy.org . Igor Krupnik and Richard Glenn from Barrow are serving on the current US committee to represent polar social scientists and local residents, respectively. The full text of the US National Committee 96-page report, "A Vision for the International Polar year 2007-2008" published earlier this year, can be downloaded from the US NC website at http://us-ipy.org Further Information For further information about the IASSA IPY facilitation initiative, please go to www.uaf.edu/anthro/iassa/ipysubmitform.htm
Questions? Contact Anne Sudkamp at <fyiassa@uaf.edu>. [Home page]
[Contact
IASSA] [About IASSA]
[Membership]
[Ethical Principles]
|
