IMU Secretary An: Ec@Mathunion.Org; CC: Betreff: IMU EC CL 05/07: Vote on ICMI Terms of Reference Change Datum: Mittwoch, 24

Home , Alexander Lubotzky, Hans Freudenthal, Yuri Manin

Appendix 10.1.1

Von: IMU Secretary An: [email protected]; CC: Betreff: IMU EC CL 05/07: vote on ICMI terms of reference change Datum: Mittwoch, 24. Januar 2007 11:42:40 Anlagen:

To the IMU 2007-2010 Executive Committee

Dear colleagues,

We are currently experimenting with a groupware system that may help us organize the files that every EC member should know and improve the voting processes. Wolfgang Dalitz has checked the open source groupware systems and selected one that we want to try. It is more complicated than we thought and does have some deficiencies, but we see no freeware that is better.

Here is our test run with a vote on a change of the ICMI terms of reference.

To get to our voting system click on http://www.mathunion.org/ec-only/

To log in, you have to type your last name in the following version: ball, baouendi, deleon, groetschel, lovasz, ma, piene, procesi, vassiliev, viana Right now, everybody has the same password: pw123

You will immediately get to the summary page which contains an item "New Polls".

The question to vote on is: Vote-070124: Change of ICMI terms of reference, #3, see Files->Voting->Vote- 070124 for full information and you are supposed to agree, disagree or abstain by clicking on the corresponding button.

Full information about the contents of the vote is documented in the directory Voting (click on the +) where you will find a file Vote-070124.txt (click on the "txt icon" to see the contents of the file). The file is also enclosed below for your information.

Once you have read this information you should be able to cast your vote.

This is our trial run. If you have difficulties, please tell me what you do not understand. In case you feel that this is too complicated, please also let me know and cast your vote by e-mail to me.

The advantage of the system we are going to set up is that we will have, in the future, a sound documentation of what we have done, voted on, which decisions were made, and so on. At present, the situation is relatively chaotic. The minutes, for instance, I sent to you last night have not been available to all EC members, and although they are termed final, I am not sure whether these are really the approved minutes or not. (Linda said these are the final versions.)

The IMU office in the past was run by e-mail exchanges, often with no official final results reported, and it is hard to reconstruct in some cases what was decided how and what not. The poll today, the inconsistencies in the budget that I mentioned last night are results of that.

We will also make mistakes in the future, but I hope with a document management system we will be able to keep the number of mistakes low.

Please cast your vote!

Best regards

Martin

FILE Vote-070124 ======Vote on the change of Item 3 in the "ICMI Terms of Reference"

The current ICMI Terms (2002) can be found at http://www.mathunion.org/Organization/ICMI/index.html

The 2002 item 3 reads as follows:

3. The Executive Committee of the Commission consists of the following members. Elected by IMU: Nine members, including the four officers, namely, the President, two Vice-Presidents, and the Secretary-General. Ex-officio members: The outgoing President of ICMI, the President and the Secretary of IMU. Co-opted members: In order to provide for missing coverage or representation, the ICMI Executive Committee may co-opt up to two additional members.

ICMI proposed the following change:

3. The Executive Committee of the Commission consists of the following members. (a) Elected by the ICMI General Assembly: Nine members, including the four officers, namely, the President, the two Vice-Presidents, and the Secretary-General. The President shall serve for one, non-renewable, term. (b) Ex-officio members: The immediate Past President of ICMI, the President and the Secretary of IMU. (c) Co-opted members: In order to provide for missing coverage or representation, the ICMI Executive Committee may co-opt up to two additional members.

The (previous) EC did decide that it was not necessary for the GA to approve these changes, but the previous EC itself did not approve them either.

The new EC, therefore, has to decide on these changes.

Starting date of the poll: January 24, 2007 Closing date of the poll: February 7, 2004

Any vote not cast by the closing date will be assumed to be "I agree".

Appendix 10.1.1

Von: IMU Secretary An: [email protected]; CC: Betreff: IMU EC CL 09/07: result of vote on ICMI terms of reference change, voting system Datum: Sonntag, 11. Februar 2007 11:44:20 Anlagen:

To the IMU 2007-2010 Executive Committee

Dear colleagues,

This is a brief report on the EC vote on the change of ICMI terms of reference, see the circular letter "IMU EC CL 05/07: vote on ICMI terms of reference change" of January 24, 2007 - plus some questions on the new voting and groupware system.

Five of the ten voting members of the EC (the past president has no voting right) have cast their vote before February 7, 2007, the closing date of the poll. All voted for the change. One EC member entered the voting page but did not cast his or her vote. Four members did not open the voting system at all.

As I stated on the page describing the poll: " Any vote not cast by the closing date will be assumed to be "I agree"." I can now declare that the propsed change has been accepted by the EC and will inform ICMI about the result.

On our voting and groupware system ======This was a test of the voting system, and I do not know whether I should call it successful or not. I would like to know your opinion about this way of handling formal EC matters. Further EC votes are comimg up, in particular about IMU membership and group changes. Shall we continue with this way of voting or should we give up?

Some questions to those who did not vote: Was it too cumbersome to go to the voting page, was my description of the voting mechanism unclear, are there too many technicalities involved? Would you prefer to answer by e-mail? Please let me know!

We are currently working on extensions of the groupware system. I do know that nobody wants to read technical instructions. So I will refrain from sending long e-mails describing what the system can do for the EC work. Instead, I am planning to give a "hands-on demonstration" at the EC meeting in Oslo, unless the EC decides to give up this project.

Please recall how to enter the group ware system for the IMU EC. Go to http://www.mathunion.org/ec-only/

To log in, you have to type your last name in the following version: ball, baouendi, deleon, groetschel, lovasz, ma, piene, praeger, procesi, vassiliev, viana In the beginning we assigned the same password: pw123 to everybody. Use this, unless you have changed it (as I have done, for instance, by clicking on "settings" and following the instructions for password change).

You may notice that we have added more material to this Web site such as all previous circular letters, the minutes of the EC meetings since 1991, further Reports on GAs, budgets and IMU officers - all material I obtained from Suely Lima who worked for Jacob Palis during his term as IMU Secretary.

Best regards

Martin

Appendix 4.4.1 / 10.3.1 The International Commission on Mathematical Instruction What? Why? For Whom?

Hyman Bass and Bernard R. Hodgson

Mathematics is an international—even universal— Our focus here is the International Commission discipline, and this aspect finds institutional ex- on Mathematical Instruction (ICMI), the mathe- pression every four years in the International Con- matics education counterpart to the IMU. gress of Mathematicians (ICM), where a world community of mathematicians assembles to re- A Brief Bio of the ICMI port progress on shared problems and with a com- The International Commission on Mathematical mon technical language. But these things, which we Instruction2 was founded at the fourth ICM held in now take for granted, were not always so. The “in- Rome in 1908.3 It was initiated to support a then ternational movement” in mathematics took hold widespread interest among mathematicians in only at the end of the nineteenth century, the first school education. The Rome Congress adopted a res- congress being the 1897 ICM in Zürich. The body olution, submitted on the initiative of the American that now provides the international infrastructure mathematician, teacher-educator, and historian of for mathematics—for example, sponsoring the mathematics David Eugene Smith (1860–1944), cre- ICM’s—is the International Mathematical Union ating an international commission with the initial (IMU),1 an international nongovernmental and non- mandate of making “a comparative study on the profit scientific organization with the purpose of methods and plans of teaching mathematics at sec- promoting international cooperation in mathe- ondary schools” (quoted in [5, p. 13]). The idea of matics. The members of the IMU are not individu- such an international commission had in fact been als but countries, and the adhering (membership) formulated by Smith himself three years earlier in entity in each member country is typically its Acad- the newly established journal L’Enseignement emy of Sciences or a professional organization of Mathématique (L’EM) in his response to a survey pro- mathematicians. The IMU is known to mathemati- posed by the editors on the “conditions to be sat- cians mainly indirectly through the publicly visi- isfied by a complete—theoretical and practical— ble expressions of its work, like the ICM’s and the teaching of mathematics in higher institutions” [2]. awarding of the Fields Medals. The birth of the ICMI was not modest. The great German mathematician Felix Klein (1849–1925), Hyman Bass is the president of the ICMI and Roger Lyndon for whom mathematics education was a deep Collegiate Professor of mathematics and mathematics and career-long interest, became its founding education at the University of Michigan. His email address is [email protected]. 2Historical information about the ICMI can be found in the Bernard R. Hodgson is the secretary-general of the ICMI ICMI 75th-anniversary paper [3] by Howson as well as in and professeur titulaire of mathematics at Université Lehto’s recent book [5] on the history of the International Laval, Québec. His email address is bhodgson@ Mathematical Union. mat.ulaval.ca. 3So we are close to the first centenary of the ICMI, to be 1http://www.mathunion.org/. celebrated in Italy in 2008.

JUNE/JULY 2004 NOTICES OF THE AMS 639 president, while the first secretary-general was significant number of mathematicians. (More on Henri Fehr (1870–1954) from Switzerland, one ICME-10 below.) of the co-founders of L’EM .4 The initial ICMI mandate, an international comparative study, ultimately Connecting Mathematics and Mathematics became a massive six-year project producing 187 Education volumes containing 310 reports from 18 countries Mathematics education and mathematics, though [5, p. 14]. Later ICMI presidents—thus far always obviously linked, are fundamentally different as research mathematicians—include such figures as domains of practice and scholarship. Their main Jacques Hadamard (from 1932 to the war), historical intersection has been the induction and Marshall H. Stone (1959–62), André Lichnerowicz advanced mathematical preparation of mathe- (1963–66), Hans Freudenthal (1967–70), Hassler matical researchers and scientists, a small but now Whitney (1979–82), and Jean-Pierre Kahane growing fraction of the population served by school (1983–90), and Miguel de Guzmán (1991–98).5 So education, and this primarily at postsecondary the interest and productive engagement of serious levels. While most mathematicians teach, mathe- research mathematicians with school mathematics matics education treats teaching much more seri- education, even at the international level, has a ously as a professional practice, requiring dedicated long and substantial, albeit uneven, history. training and certification. Theories of learning and A small but significant place for mathematics ed- of assessment play much more prominent roles, as ucation was reserved at the ICM’s, in a section ini- does curriculum analysis. And these have become tially called “Teaching and History of Mathematics”. as well multidisciplinary domains of mathematics It was in this section at the 1900 ICM in Paris education research, using a variety of methods, that David Hilbert gave the talk “Mathematical many of them unfamiliar to most mathematicians. problems” that shaped much of twentieth-century So how are mathematics and mathematics edu- mathematics. As the history of mathematics later cation, as domains of knowledge and as commu- acquired a section of its own, the name changed nities of practice, now linked, and what could be to “Teaching and Popularization of Mathematics” the most natural and productive kinds of connec- and most recently to “Mathematics Education and tions? The ICMI represents one historical, and still Popularization of Mathematics”, reflecting the evolving, response to those questions at the inter- broader nature of the field. national level. First of all, the ICMI, now formally Over time, as the mission of general education constituted as a commission of the IMU (see the expanded (more advanced knowledge, for more next section), is thus structurally tied to mathe- people), the needs and complexity of mathematics matics. In fact, nominally and in terms of gover- education grew as well, leading to the develop- nance, the ICMI is subordinate to mathematics. ment in due course of corresponding communities (Recall, for example, where the presidents of the of both practicing professionals and scholars. The ICMI have come from.) This is, on the one hand, a small venue afforded by the one section of the unique and potentially invaluable resource. Else- ICM’s became inadequate for the communication where in mathematics education—for example, in of problems and ideas in this expanded domain. the fields of practice and in the institutional This led ICMI president Hans Freudenthal to orga- arrangements within universities—mathematics nize the first International Congress on Mathe- and mathematics education exist in different worlds matical Education (ICME) in Lyon in 1969. These that rarely communicate with each other and most ICME’s have since evolved into quadrennial con- often not well when they do. Yet history teaches gresses in years divisible by four,6 the next one to us that there is a tradition of healthy interest and be ICME-10 in Copenhagen, July 4–11, 2004, where engagement of (some) mathematicians in mathe- we expect some 3,500 participants, including a matics education, and current experience indicates strongly that mathematicians have vital things to 4An initial aim of the “international journal” (to use its contribute, in multidisciplinary settings, to math- own description) L’Enseignement Mathématique, launched ematics education, a potential not always suffi- in 1899, was “to associate the world of teaching to the ‘great ciently appreciated by mathematics educators. On movement of scientific solidarity’ which was emerging the other hand, mathematicians sometimes lack a at the end of the 19th century” [1, p. 11]. From the very sufficient knowledge and/or appreciation of the beginning of the ICMI, L’EM was adopted as its official complex nature of the problems in mathematics organ, which is still the case today. The other current education, and they often tend to see issues of channels of communication of the commission are the ICMI Bulletin, published twice a year, and the ICMI web- 6The successive ICME’s, from ICME-2 in 1972 to ICME-9 site, http://www.mathunion.org/ICMI/. in 2000, were held respectively in Exeter (UK), Karlsruhe 5It is with great sadness that we report the untimely pass- (Germany), Berkeley (USA), Adelaide (Australia), Budapest ing of Miguel de Guzmán on April 14, 2004. Information (Hungary), Québec (Canada), Sevilla (Spain), and Tokyo/ about his life and work can be found at http://www. Makuhari (Japan). The ICMI has recently accepted the in- xena.ad/lcf/fev2002/guzman.htm. vitation received from Mexico to host the 11th ICME in 2008.

640 NOTICES OF THE AMS VOLUME 51, NUMBER 6 mathematical integrity and rigor of the curricu- The Structure of the ICMI Today lum as the beginning and end of the story. (See the Structurally the ICMI now exists as a member of the Notices article by Tony Ralston [6] for an insight- IMU family. After interruptions of activity around ful recent commentary on this cross-boundary the two world wars, the ICMI was reconstituted in behavior.) This kind of stance and disposition 1952, at a time when the international mathemat- presents problems when it infects positions of ical community was being reorganized, as an offi- authority and policy setting in mathematics edu- cial commission of the International Mathematical cation. In particular, this exposes a latent danger Union.7 This still defines the formal position of the in the inherited governance arrangements of the ICMI today. Thus, the Terms of Reference of the ICMI, completely under IMU control. Many in the ICMI are established by the General Assembly of ICMI community argue for greater ICMI autonomy, the IMU, which is also responsible for the election yet still within the IMU environment. of the Executive Committee, the administrative ICMI vice president Bent Christiansen argued leadership of the ICMI. Furthermore, the vast main 1982 that (see [5, p. 260]) the ICMI should not jority of the funding of the ICMI comes from the decide what are proper or relevant solutions to IMU. Once these election and budget matters are problems in mathematics education, but should settled, the ICMI works with a large degree of provide a structure under which interaction and autonomy. exchange of views could be facilitated. It should As is the case for the IMU, members of the ICMI provide the type of leadership and structure re- are not individuals, but countries—namely, those countries which are members of the IMU and other sponsive to the needs and interests of the grow- countries specifically coopted to the commission. ing mathematics education community and do so There are currently eighty-one members of the under the auspices of the IMU. He also revoiced the ICMI, sixty-five of which are also members of the frequently expressed need of a permanent secre- IMU. Each member of the ICMI appoints a repre- tariat for the ICMI. sentative and may create a subcommission for the Jean-Pierre Kahane, in his 1990 Farewell Message ICMI. Such a subcommission serves the dual pur- as president of the ICMI, gave the reasons for the pose of (a) providing an organized local (national) ICMI being a commission of the IMU, in terms of forum for dealing with issues of mathematics ed- …the intimate link between mathemat- ucation and for exchange of information, and (b) ics and its teaching. In no other living offering a link between the local and international science is the part of mise en forme, mathematics education communities. There are transposition didactique, so important at currently fourteen such subcommissions. a research level. In no other science, The ICMI’s organizational outreach includes five however, is the distance between the permanent so-called Affiliated Study Groups, each taught and the new so large. In no other 7 science has teaching and learning such Through the IMU, the ICMI thus belongs to the Interna- tional Council for Science (ICSU). This implies that the social importance. In no other science is ICMI is to abide by ICSU statutes, one of which establishes there such an old tradition of scientists the principle of nondiscrimination and free circulation of committed to educational questions scientists. Lehto’s book [5] vividly testifies to the importance ([4, p. 6]; see also [5, p. 262]). of this rule in the life of both the IMU and the ICMI.

JUNE/JULY 2004 NOTICES OF THE AMS 641 focusing on a specific field of interest and study ing working groups and study groups that have in mathematics education consistent with the aims structured meetings throughout the congress and of the commission. The Affiliated Study Groups are that may well produce published reports for the neither appointed by the ICMI nor operate on congress proceedings. behalf or under the control of the ICMI. They are ICME-10 in Copenhagen in July 2004 (see the next thus independent of the ICMI for their work, also section) will also feature the first awarding of two in terms of finances, but they collaborate with the medals in mathematics education research, re- ICMI on specific activities, such as the ICMI Stud- cently inaugurated by the ICMI. The Felix Klein ies or components of the program of the ICME’s. Medal for lifetime achievement will be awarded to They present reports on their activities to the Gen- Guy Brousseau from France. The Hans Freudenthal eral Assembly of the ICMI. The current ICMI Affil- Medal for a major program of research will be iated Study Groups, with their year of affiliation, awarded to Celia Hoyles of the UK. Information are: about these awards and citations of the work of the • HPM—The International Study Group on the laureates can be found on the ICMI website, Relations between the History and Pedagogy of http://www.mathunion.org/ICMI/.8 Mathematics (1976), A second major ICMI program is the series of • PME—The International Group for the Psychol- ICMI Studies, a most successful set of activities ogy of Mathematics Education (1976), launched in the mid-1980s. Each study focuses on • IOWME—The International Organization of a topic or issue of prominent current interest in Women and Mathematics Education (1987), mathematics education. Its International Program • WFNMC—The World Federation of National Committee (appointed by the ICMI) first drafts a Mathematics Competitions (1994), and “discussion document” that articulates the theme • ICTMA—The International Study Group for Math- and purpose in great detail. This is widely dis- ematical Modelling and Applications (2003). seminated to solicit papers from the field. From According to its Terms of Reference, the com- these submissions, invitations are issued to about mission is “charged with the conduct of the eighty participants in an international conference, activities of IMU, bearing on mathematical or the results of which are synthesized into a research scientific education and [takes] the initiative in volume presenting a state-of-the-art expert report inaugurating appropriate programs designed to on the study theme. This process typically stretches further the sound development of mathematical over a period of about three years per study. These education at all levels, and to secure public appre- studies have acquired a growing importance and ciation of its importance.” This is clearly reflected influence on the field. Here is a chronological list in the objectives and activities of the ICMI, which of past and current studies and their conference have considerably expanded over the years. sites.

Activities of the ICMI 1. The Influence of Computers and Informatics on The ICMI’s objective today could be globally Mathematics and Its Teaching (Strasbourg, described as offering researchers, practitioners, France, 1985) curriculum designers, decision makers, and others 2. School Mathematics in the 1990s (Kuwait, 1986) interested in mathematical education a forum for 3. Mathematics as a Service Subject (Udine, Italy, promoting reflection, collaboration, exchange and 1987) dissemination of ideas, and information on all 4. Mathematics and Cognition (book prepared by aspects of the theory and practice of contemporary PME, an Affiliated Study Group of ICMI) mathematical education, as seen from an interna- 5. The Popularization of Mathematics (Leeds, UK, tional perspective. How does the commission 1989) achieve such aims? We now discuss some of its 6. Assessment in Mathematics Education (Calonge, current major activities and programs. Spain, 1991) The ICMI’s primary responsibility is to plan for 7. Gender and Mathematics Education (Höör, the ICME’s, which entails choosing from among Sweden, 1993) host country bids, appointing an international pro- 8. What Is Research in Mathematics Education and gram committee to form the scientific program What Are Its Results? (College Park, USA, 1994) and select presenters, and overseeing progress of 9. Perspectives on the Teaching of Geometry for the the congress preparations. But the practical and 21st Century (Catania, Italy, 1995) financial organization of an ICME is the indepen- 10. The Role of the History of Mathematics in the dent responsibility of a local (national) organizing Teaching and Learning of Mathematics (Luminy, committee. This parallels to a large degree what the France, 1998) IMU does for the ICM’s. However, the format of an ICME differs interestingly from that of an ICM in 8An announcement about the ICMI medals appears in that it tends to be much more interactive, involv- “Mathematics People” in this issue of the Notices.

642 NOTICES OF THE AMS VOLUME 51, NUMBER 6 11. The Teaching and Learning of Mathematics at basis. For instance, the ICMI is currently collabo- University Level (Singapore, 1998) rating with UNESCO on an international exhibition 12. The Future of the Teaching and Learning of on the theme “Why Mathematics?” aimed particu- Algebra (Melbourne, Australia, 2001) larly at young people, their parents, and their 13. Mathematics Education in Different Cultural teachers. This exhibition will be launched at the 4th Traditions: A Comparative Study of East-Asia European Congress of Mathematics in Stockholm and the West (Hong Kong, 2002) in June 2004. It will then be shown at ICME-10 14. Applications and Modelling in Mathematics in Copenhagen and will later travel to various Education (Dortmund, Germany, February 2004) places. 15. The Professional Education and Development of A major aim of the commission is to support the Teachers of Mathematics (Águas de Lindóia, development of mathematics education in less- Brazil, May 2005) affluent regions of the world. To this end, the ICMI 16. Challenging Mathematics in and beyond the initiated in the 1990s a Solidarity Program in Math- Classroom (Trondheim, Norway, June 2006) ematics Education based on a twofold approach. 17. Technology in Mathematics Education (2006) The first component of this program is the ICMI Solidarity Fund, established by the ICMI in 1992 at The themes of these studies illustrate some of the the suggestion of its president, Miguel de Guzmán. many domains of mathematics education in which The overall objective of the Solidarity Fund is to mathematicians, among other expert professionals, increase, in a variety of ways, the commitment and have crucial knowledge and expertise to contribute. involvement of mathematics educators around the The study volumes for the first five studies were world in order to help the progress of mathemat- published by Cambridge University Press. Since ics education in those parts of the world where Study 6, the study volumes appear in the New ICMI there is a need for it that justifies international Study Series (NISS) published by Kluwer Academic assistance and where the economic and socio- 9 Publishers under the general editorship of the political contexts do not permit adequate and president and secretary-general of the ICMI. autonomous development. This initiative thus Another component of ICMI activities comprises aims to foster solidarity in mathematics education the so-called ICMI Regional Conferences. Despite between well-defined quarters in developed and the international nature of its position and role, less-developed countries. Particular emphasis is the ICMI from time to time lends its name to a placed on projects that enable the activation of a variety of regional conferences on mathematics self-sustainable infrastructure within mathemat- education, primarily in less affluent parts of the ics education in the region, country, or province at world. A number of ICMI Regional Conferences issue. Central to this program of international have thus been held over the years. These meetings assistance was the establishment of a fund to pro- are supported morally by the ICMI and sometimes vide financial support for the approved projects. The with modest financial contributions as well. Recent Solidarity Fund is based on voluntary donations and forthcoming ICMI Regional Conferences from individuals and organizations and is kept include: separate from the ICMI’s general funds. SEACME-8—8th South East Asian Conference on • The second component of the ICMI Solidarity Mathematical Education (Quezon City, Philip- Program aims at having a balanced representation pines, 1999) from all over the world among the presenters and • All-Russian Conference on Mathematical Educa- the general participants in activities such as the tion (Dubna, Russia, 2000) ICMI Studies or the ICME’s. In support of this goal, • ICMI-EARCOME-2—Second ICMI East Asia the ICMI has implemented, starting with ICME-8 in Regional Conference on Mathematics Education 1996, a general policy of forming for each ICME an (Singapore, 2002) ICME Solidarity Fund established by setting aside • XI-IACME—11th Inter-American Conference on 10 percent of the registration fees in order to pro- Mathematics Education (Blumenau, Brazil, 2003) vide grants to congress delegates from nonafflu- • EMF 2003—Espace mathématique francophone 2003 (Tozeur, Tunisia, 2003) ent countries. At each of the recent ICME’s, some 100 to 150 participants from economically chal- • ICMI-EARCOME-3—Third ICMI East Asia Regional Conference on Mathematics Education (Shanghai, lenged regions of the world have thus been given China, 2005) financial support to facilitate their presence at the congress. • EMF 2006—Espace mathématique francophone 2006 (Sherbrooke, Canada, 2006) In the same spirit, efforts are made by the In addition to the above activities of a regular organizers of each ICMI Study to find financial nature, the ICMI takes other initiatives on an ad hoc resources so as to facilitate the participation in the Study Conference of a substantial delegation 9http://www.wkap.nl/prod/s/NISS. from nonaffluent countries.

JUNE/JULY 2004 NOTICES OF THE AMS 643 An Invitation to ICME-10 A congress such as ICME-10 provides a unique The 10th International Congress on Mathematical opportunity to learn about recent developments in Education, ICME-10, will be held in Copenhagen on mathematics education around the world and to be the campus of the Technical University of Den- introduced to innovations and recent research on mark on July 4–11, 2004. A distinctive flavor of the teaching and learning of mathematics at all ICME-10 is the fact that it is being hosted, not by levels, from primary to tertiary education. The a single country, but by the ensemble of the Nordic scientific program aims to provide food for thought countries—Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and and inspiration for practice to all, from the estab- Sweden. The congress is expected to gather around lished mathematics educator to the novice in the 3,500 participants, including mathematicians with field, and to all with an interest in mathematics ed- an interest in education, researchers in mathe- ucation. It is structured so as to allow plenty of matics education, and teachers from all over the choice while encouraging exchange and contacts world. The International Program Committee, between participants. chaired by Mogens Niss10 (Denmark), proposes a In a context where the debate over the state of structure combining the best from the ICME tra- mathematics education at all levels, from primary dition with a number of innovative elements and school to graduate school, is becoming more intense features. The program, whose details can be found and vigorous than ever, ICME-10 provides unpar- alleled access to expert knowledge in the field. on the congress website,11 includes the following ICME-10 can surely play a significant role in facil- events: itating the exchange of ideas and experiments • 8 plenary activities, among which are Plenary within and between the mathematics and mathe- Lectures by Hyman Bass (USA), Erno Lehtinen (Fin- matics education communities and contribute to land), Andreas Dress (Germany), and Ferdinando the improvement of mathematics education all Arzarello (Italy); and reports from so-called sur- around the world. vey teams that will present the state of the art with respect to themes such as reasoning, pro- References fessional development of teachers, testing, or [1] DANIEL CORAY and BERNARD R. HODGSON, Introduction, One technology, with particular regard to identifying Hundred Years of L’Enseignement Mathématique: and characterizing important new knowledge, Moments of Mathematics Education in the Twentieth recent developments, new perspectives, and Century (Daniel Coray et al., eds.), Monographies de emergent issues; L’Enseignement Mathématique, No. 39, L’Enseigne- • 80 regular lectures, covering a wide spectrum of ment Mathématique, Geneva, 2003, pp. 9–15. topics, themes, and issues; [2] The Editors, Note de la Rédaction sur les réformes à accomplir dans l’enseignement des mathématiques, • 29 Topic Study Groups, some being organized Enseign. Math. 7 (1905), 382–383. according to educational levels, others accord- [3] A. GEOFFREY HOWSON, Seventy-five years of the Interna- ing to content-related issues, and the rest to tional Commission on Mathematical Instruction, overarching perspectives and meta-issues; Educational Stud. Math. 15 (1984), 75–93. • 24 Discussion Groups focussing on the exami- [4] JEAN-PIERRE KAHANE, A farewell message from the retiring nation and discussion of issues that can be dealt president of ICMI, Bull. Internat. Commiss. Math. with in different ways depending on experiences, Instruction 29 (1990), 3–8. values, norms, and judgments; [5] OLLI LEHTO, Mathematics without Borders: A History of the International Mathematical Union, Springer-Verlag, • a thematic afternoon with 5 parallel miniconfer- New York, 1998. ences: Teachers of mathematics, Mathematics [6] ANTHONY RALSTON, Research mathematicians and math- education in society and culture, Mathematics and ematics education: A critique, Notices Amer. Math. mathematics education, Technology in mathe- Soc. 51 (2004), 403–411. matics education, and Perspectives on research in mathematics education from other disciplines; • special sessions of the 5 ICMI Affiliated Study Groups and reports on the 3 most recent ICMI Studies; • various sets of activities, such as workshops, Sharing Experiences Groups, poster exhibitions, paper presentations, or round-table sessions; • national presentations from the Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Swe- den), Korea, Mexico, Romania, and Russia.

[email protected]. 11http://www.ICME-10.dk/.

644 NOTICES OF THE AMS VOLUME 51, NUMBER 6 Appendix 10.4.1

ICME-10 report on IMU funds

The Local Organising Committee for ICME-10 expresses its gratefulness for the funds given by IMU as a general support to the congress.

It turned out to be extremely difficult to raise funds for an international congress on mathematics education at least in Denmark and the IMU fund was therefore highly appreciated.

A particularly prominent contribution made possible by the IMU funds was the plenary lecture on the “Structure formation in nature as a topic of mathematics” made by professor Andreas Dress. With this lecture ICME-10 followed the ICME tradition of giving some insights into a contemporary research field in mathematics that may have implications for the understanding mathematics as a research discipline and for the teaching of mathematics.

Furthermore funds were used to partly cover travel expenses for some of the participants, who had significant contributions to the scientific programme but did not qualify for support from the ICME-10 solidarity fund, but who nevertheless were depending on financial support. These travel grants were typically sufficient to cover half of the flight expenses. Please refer to the list below for the specific amounts granted.

As can be seen form the overall balance, ICME-10 came out with a deficit of close to 50.000 USD. Just one more reason to be grateful for the support from IMU.

Sincerely yours,

Morten Blomhøj Chair, Local Organising Committee

Travel grants

First name Last name DKK USD Soledad A. Ulep 4.500 776 Charita Abao Luna 3.500 603 Maxima J. Acelajado 2.000 345 Marta Anaya 5.000 862 Kiril Bankov 4.000 690 LIM Chap Sam 4.000 690 Alexandr Chumak 1.400 241 Vera de Spinadel 4.087 705 Verónica Díaz 2.000 345 Lázaro S. Dibut Toledo 400 69 Nguyen Dinh Tri 5.000 862 Suwattana Eamoraphan 5.000 862 Cristina Esteley 2.000 345 John Francisco 2.500 431 Munirah Ghazali 2.400 414 Svetoslav Jordanov Bilchev 2.600 448 Fathima Khan 2.400 414 Herbert Khuzwayo 5.500 948 Gelsa Knijnik 5.000 862 Alexander Kolgatin 1.400 241 Janet Kaahwa 1.900 328 George L. Ekol 6.500 1.121 Yuwen Li 1.290 222 Víctor Martínez Luaces 1.400 241 Rex Matang 2.500 431 Willy Mwakapenda 2.400 414 Tatyana Oleinik 2.000 345 Alvaro Poblete Letelier 2.000 345 Vladimir Protassov 3.000 517 Clayde Regina Mendes 2.500 431 Ildar Safuanov 1.500 259 K. Subramaniam 2.972 512 Bhadra Man Tuladhar 2.500 431 Justin Valentin 4.000 690 Emiliya Velikova 2.500 431 Gerard Vergnaud 1.932 333 Mónica Villarreal 2.000 345 Martha Villavicencio 4.900 845 Sri Wahyuni 2.400 414 Sun Xuhua 3.000 517

Total 117.881 20.324

The total balance of the congress is listed below:

ICME-10 Denmark 2004

DKK USD Conference Participants 7.765.061 1.338.804 Sponsors 812.677 140.117 Funding 4.174.522 719.745 Exhibitors 625.058 107.769 Non-commercial 76.906 13.260 Income total 13.454.224 2.319.694

Venue facilities 2.197.987 378.963 Personnel 543.360 93.683 Entertainment 166.000 28.621 Transportation / shuttle busses 778.347 134.198 Other during conference 74.673 12.875 Publications 1.904.173 328.306 Mail and shipment 252.272 43.495 Grants 939.822 162.038 Organising meetings and secretariat 2.446.601 421.828 Congress Secretariat 894.976 154.306 VAT and other financial cost 407.169 70.202 Tour day 1.124.498 193.879 Social events and participants materials 2.008.408 346.277 Expenses total 13.738.286 2.368.670

Balance -284.062 -48.976

Appendix 10.4.2

Symposium for the Rome 08 ICMI Centennial

The First Century of the International Commission on Mathematical Instruction (1908-2008): Reflecting and Shaping the World of Mathematics Education.

March 5-8 at the Accademia dei Lincei (Wednesday to Friday) and Istituto dell’Enciclopedia Italiana (Saturday)

International Program Committee: Hyman Bass (USA, ICMI president), Bernard R. Hodgson (Canada, ICMI general secretary), Michele Artigue (France),Gert Schubring (Germany), Renuka Vithal (South Africa), Mogens Niss (Denmark), Lee Peng Yee (Singapore), Gilah Leder (Australia), Jeremy Kilpatrick (USA), Marcelo Borba (Brazil), Jo Boaler (United Kingdom), Daniel Coray (Switzerland, editor of the magazine L’Enseignement Mathematique), Ferdinando Arzarello (Italy, IPC president), Marta Menghini (Italy), Livia Giacardi (Italy), Fulvia Furinghetti (Italy). Local Organising Committee: Mario Barra, Marta Menghini, Giuseppe Accascina (“La Sapienza" University of Rome), Bruno D’Amore (University of Bologna), Ferdinando Arzarello (University of Turin), Giovanni Margiotta (Ministero Istruzione).

PLENARY LECTURES PL0 [Opening Plenary] Moments of the life of ICMI. It requires contributions from many people and is based on the materials collected for the web – site. There are 3 types of main actions to develop within it in order to arrive to the final plenary: a) (video-taped) interviews b) cameos c) documents (history of the affiliated study groups, list of ICMI studies, past Congresses, papers concerning ICMI, ...) The main idea is that a group of people collaborate to the realisation of the huge work necessary for the web-site and for this plenary (which includes more than the strict work for the plenary). The names are the following: a) M. Artigue, F. Furinghetti and B. Hodgson as institutional advisors, make the project for the interviews (4-5 interviews among people in the following list [in square brackets the name of the interviewer]: Castelnuovo [FF], Revuz [MA], Choquet [MA], Howson [BH], Fletcher [BH],...). b) F. Furinghetti, L. Giacardi, H. Gispert, G. Schubring and H. Bass & B. Hodgson as institutional advisors make and realise the project for the cameos. c) D. Coray will be the responsible for the site with the collaboration of L. Giacardi, F. Furinghetti, G. Schubring.

PL1: Jeremy Kilpatrick (USA), The development of mathematics education as an academic field In this lecture the speaker will trace the development of mathematics education as a field of study and practice distinct from mathematics. After 1908, but especially after 1969, ICMI has been both a mirror of that development and a stimulus for new directions. As the community of people who identify themselves as mathematics educators has grown, it has increased in diversity, in part because of the growing multi-disciplinarity of the field. There is also diversity across countries in the way mathematics education is institutionalized and how it is related to mathematics. How has ICMI dealt with these issues? reactor: J. L. Dorier (FRA)

PL2: Dina Tirosh and Pessia Tsamir (ISR) Rigor and Intuition in Mathematics Education A perennial theme in mathematics education in general and in the work of ICMI in particular is the balance that has to be struck between, on the one hand, rigor and formalism and, on the other hand, intuition and heuristics. This pertains both to concept formation and understanding as well as to reasoning and justification in mathematics. The emphasis on either of these two dimensions of mathematics education has varied a lot throughout history, sometimes even taking the form of tension, thus reflecting the difficulty of finding an adequate balance between them. The purpose of this talk is to review the development of this issue in the history of ICMI and the way it has been addressed by the various communities concerned with mathematics education, and to identify significant moments in this development. reactor : Aldo Brigaglia (Italy)

PL3 : Mogens Niss (Dan) The balance between applications & modelling and “pure” mathematics in the teaching and learning of mathematics The need to have mathematics be useful outside the mathematics classroom has always been present in the history of organised mathematics education. Very often this need has given rise to tensions between the role to be devoted to pure mathematics and applications, respectively. More recently, the active building of mathematical models, beyond established applications of mathematics, has entered the discussion. This talk will examine from a historical perspective the evolution of the balance between extra-mathematical applications and modelling, and the study of disciplinary mathematics. Significant moments in the development of this balance from an ICMI perspective will be highlighted. reactor: Toshi Ikeda (Jap)

PL4: Jo Boaler (UK) The mutual impact of research and practice in mathematics education While the ultimate goal of mathematics education research is to help improve the teaching and learning of mathematics, the historical development of the field shows the difficulties of having research impact in an effective way. This difficulty is particularly noticeable when considering the transition from small-scale / experimental settings to large-scale classroom implementation. Moreover, concrete questions from practice can seldom find clear, direct, or definitive answers from research. In this lecture emphasis will be placed on describing and reviewing the role of ICMI in shaping the relationship between research and practice so as to strengthen the mutual impact between the two. reactor: Joao Da Ponte (POR)

PL5: Gert Schubring (GER) The origins and early incarnations of ICMI This lecture will outline the movement toward international cooperation and the establishment of a working network, and will present the key figures in this story. The work of the national subcommittees will also be described, as well as obstacles to cooperation, and the political pressures of WWI, which effected the dissolution of ICMI at that time. The work achieved in the early years of ICMI will be described, for example: inquiries; thematic and national reports; newsletters and personal correspondences; broadening interest beyond secondary education; etc.

No reactor

PL6: F. Arzarello, F: Furinghetti, L. Giacardi, M. Menghini ICMI Renaissance: the Emergence of new Issues in Mathematics Education The International Congresses on Mathematical Education were inaugurated at the end of the 1960s, alongside the launching of journals related to mathematics education research. The purpose of this talk is to examine the development of mathematics education over the last half century as reflected in the structure, themes and emphases of the ICMEs. The talk will also identify significant moments in the history of ICMI and the ICMEs, both in terms of the structure and activities of ICMI (new initiatives such as the ICMI Studies, the establishment of new ICMI Affiliated Study Groups, ICMI Regional Conferences, …), and in terms of themes and focal points that have gained importance within the field.

No reactor

PL7: Benvenido Nebres (PHIL) Centres and peripheries in mathematics education In the ICMI of today strong attention is being paid to the presence of diverse countries, voices, perspectives and concerns. This has not always been the case over the last 100 years of ICMI. This plenary will first explore ICMI’s past to describe and understand ICMI and the ICMEs in their current forms. Then the plenary will examine the challenges ICMI continues to face to strengthen its current organisation and scientific activities to be more inclusive of the mathematics education communities (variously described as developing, emerging, poor, marginalized) that still remain on the periphery. reactor: Gelsa Knijnik (BRA)

PL8: Michèle Artigue (FRA) Closing Plenary

Panel: ICMI’s challenges and future. Mamokgethi Sekati (South Africa) and Morten Blomhøj (NOR) An important part of the Symposium is devoted to an in-depth analysis of what ICMI has achieved since its etablishment in 1908, trying to better understand what historical circumstances, structures, actions and persons made these achievements possible. All along these years, ICMI has addressed what it perceived as the most important challenges raised by the teaching and learning of mathematics worldwide. What are those we have to face now and what can be learnt from ICMI’s past for facing them ? In this session, two members of the mathematics education community from different cultural backgrounds will be asked to present their personal vision of the main challenges to be faced today and of what could be expected from ICMI as regard these in the future .

WORKING GROUPS

WG1: Co-chairs: Bill Barton (NZ), Frederic Gourdeau (CAN) Disciplinary mathematics and school mathematics The mathematics taught and learned in school is a selection from and a transformation of the subject that mathematicians have taken as their discipline over the course of time. This working group will consider the ways in which ICMI has addressed school mathematics. For example, how do (should) the goals of school mathematics reflect the nature of disciplinary thinking and practice? How can (should) high-level mathematics be made accessible to all students?

WG2: Co-chairs: Deborah Ball (USA), Barbro Grevholm (SWE/NOR) The professional formation of teachers This working group will focus on the historical evolution of conceptions of the various forms of knowledge and skills for mathematics teaching practice, and the role of ICMI in this domain. This includes the opportunities to acquire such knowledge and skills. The Working Group will examine, in particular, the traditional dichotomy between content knowledge and pedagogical knowledge. It will also trace how the standing of the teacher as a professional has evolved over time.

WG 3: Co-chairs: Robyn Zeevenbergen (AUS), Hilary Povey (UK) Mathematics Education and Society ICMI has played an important role in giving impetus and space for emergence and growth of the study of social, cultural, political and economic issues in mathematics education. These have spawned diverse areas of scholarship such as gender, class, ethnomathematics, critical mathematics education, equity and social justice, which have found expression in the scientific activities and programmes of ICMI. The working group will explore a selection of these with respect to how they have found expression and the new directions they suggest for curriculum and policy.

WG 4: Co-chairs: Marcelo Borba (BRA), Mariolina Bartolini Bussi (ITA) Resources and technology throughout the history of ICMI Technology has long been a theme open for debates within the mathematics education community, and has been reflected in the work of ICMI even before the first ICME (Lyon, 1969). More recently, information and communication technology (ICT) has played an increasing role in the events organized by ICMI. Debates around ICT bring to light that other resources and technologies have been introduced throughout the last 100 years. The Working group will deal with how artefacts and materials (e.g. paper and pencil, memorisation and calculators, Dienes blocks, mathematical machines etc.) have been used over these 100 years of ICMI’s history.

WG 5: Co-chairs: Gilah Leder (AUS), Luis Radford (CAN) Mathematics Education: an ICMI perspective It can be argued that ICMI’s impact on the field of mathematics education is both defined and reflected through the affiliated groups (to be listed) that it has recognized (and in some cases incubated) and through the ICMI studies it has spawned. What has been gained and lost by the mathematics education communities through the choices made? For example, what has been the influence of psychology, philosophy, history, ethnography, anthropology, … on mathematics education. Have their approaches been adopted? Have some been privileged over others?

SHORT TALKS: Coordinators: Lee Peng Yee (Singapore), Alan Bishop (AUS) (4 – 5 parallel 1 hour - sessions of 2-3 short presentations each) Possible themes (approved by the IPC in Rome): Special “moments” in the history of ICMI; particular activities (e.g. competitions) influenced by ICMI; impact of ICMI events on particular countries or regions or fields of work or social/political issues; smaller/regional historical narratives; etc. Examples: - The impact on a country of hosting a congress/regional meeting - The archives left by D. E. Smith or other important ICMI figures - Etc. This session will offer an opportunity for some other people to participate, people who otherwise might not be involved.

Structure of ICMI 100th Symposium: Time Wed Thur Fri Sat 9h Opening P3 45' P5 45' Summaries of Reaction 20' Discussion 25' WGs 5 x 15' 10h Plenary (P0) 1h Discussion 25' P6 45' 10h 30 Coffee Break Discussion 25' Panel 2 x 30' 11h Coffee Break P4 45' Discussion 30' Reaction 20' Coffee Break 11h 30 P1 45' Discussion 25' P8 Closing Plenary Reaction 20' Short 1h Discussion 25' Presentations Closing 2 x 30' (5 parallel sessions) 13h Lunch time 15h WGs 2h 30' Italian WGs 5 x 2h 30' Excursion (5 parallel afternoon (5 parallel 17.30 sessions) sessions) 17.45 Coffee Break Coffee Break P2 45' P7 45' Reaction 20' Reaction 20' Discussion 25' Discussion 25'

Appendix 11.1.1

Von: IMU Secretary An: [email protected]; CC: Betreff: IMU EC CL 13/07: : ICSU and Human Heatlh Datum: Montag, 19. März 2007 13:06:18 Anlagen: Healthscopereport-15-3-07.pdf

To the IMU 2007-2010 Executive Committee

Dear colleagues,

In the attachment you will find the "Final Draft Report of an ICSU Scoping Group on Human Health " with the title "Towards a Systems Analysis Approach to Health and Wellbeing in the Changing Urban Environment". Carthage Smith, the ICSU Deputy Executive Director, asks IMU to submit any comments on this report by 13 April, 2007.

I read the report and do not see that, at this point in time of the development, mathematics can play a role. I think that the report is on a too global and too soft level that the strength of mathematics can be utilized.

The report suggests that an "ICSU health initiative should: - be international (relevant to more than one region) and interdisciplinary; - build on the synergies between existing activities and interests of the ICSU membership; - add value to other ongoing or planned activities; - fulfill a unique niche that other international initiatives do not address; - incorporate links with pertinent international bodies and/or networks outside the ICSU family, as necessary; - generate new scientific insights of significant relevance to health (and other) policies, with the policy audience(s) clearly defined at the outset; - focus primarily on population health/disease prevention and promotion of health and wellbeing rather than medical treatment and cures; - fit within the context of the Millenium Development Goals and the broader agenda of science for sustainable development" and finally concludes that

"The aim of an ICSU initiative would be to develop, test and refine an overall systems analysis framework for modeling the urban environment at the city level and, in so doing, to generate information to effectively inform policies that improve the health and wellbeing of urban populations. This could build on the methodological approaches already being developed in disciplines such as ecology and geography. Moreover, it could draw on the existing expertise and interests within the ICSU community, including many of the Unions and the ESSP." with the goal:

"The overall vision, with a 50-year perspective, is to make a significant contribution to increasing the average lifespan and wellbeing of all those living in an urban environment."

The suggestion for initial action is:

"Three initial actions are considered necessary by the Scoping Group in order to achieve the short–term goals and develop an appropriate systems analysis model framework: 1. Commission a study to define key policy issues and concerns: a qualitative survey of key urban policy stakeholders, including local authorities, industry and NGOs 2. Commission an academic analysis/review of the relationships between key drivers and sectoral factors (annex 2) 3. Convene a modelers meeting to develop an inventory of existing (sub-system) models These three activities might be overseen by a small Planning Group that would be charged with developing the terms of reference for 1 and 2 and organising 3. This Group might also be charged with exploring future funding options."

It is my opinion that the scope of activities is outside mathematical expertise and propose that IMU simply does not act on this issue. Unless I hear other suggestions from EC members by April 1, 2007 I will write to Carthage Smith that the current phase of this activity does not require mathematical expertise and contributions and that IMU refrains from making comments to the draft report of the scoping group.

It may be that this report will be an issue at the inter-GA session of ICSU's Unions’ meeting on 23-24 April 2007 in Rome. Claudio Procesi will represent IMU at this meeting, and Manuel de Leon will most likely also attend.

Best regards

Martin

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Carthage SMITH [mailto:[email protected]] Gesendet: Freitag, 16. März 2007 15:58 An: [email protected]; Cc: Rohini RAO Betreff: ICSU and Human Heatlh

To : Union Secretary Generals and Interdisciplinary Bodies

Re. Report an ICSU Scoping Group on Human Health

Find attached, for your consideration, the final draft report of an ICSU ad hoc Scoping Group. This report was considered by the Committee on Scientific Planning and Review in February and will be going to the ICSU Executive Board on 25 and 26 April. The CSPR viewed the report positively and recommended that, depending on the views of Members, this work should continue into the proposed planning phase.

Your are invited to submit any comments that you might have on the report by 13 April (to [email protected]). I appreciate that this is a relatively short time period but what is important at this stage is to have some measure of the degree of support and interest from Members for the proposed focus of a potential new initiative in this area.

Best wishes,

Carthage

------

Carthage Smith, PhD

Deputy Executive Director

International Council for Science (ICSU)

51 boulevard de Montmorency

FR-75016 Paris, France

Tel. +33 1 45 25 03 29

Fax. +33 1 42 88 94 31

Web www.icsu.org

Final Draft Report ICSU Scoping Group 15-3-07 Appendix 11.1.1

Towards a Systems Analysis Approach to Health and Wellbeing in the Changing Urban Environment: report of a CSPR ad hoc Scoping Group on Human Health

Summary

This scoping exercise was carried out to assess the possibilities for making use of the particular strengths available to ICSU to respond to important global scientific challenges relating to human health and wellbeing. A number of Unions and Interdisciplinary Bodies are already exploring diverse aspects of human health and so this was seen as a very timely opportunity to draw on their ideas and motivation. The aim at the outset was to try to define a unique niche and not to duplicate the many well-funded activities outside ICSU that address the prevention and treatment of specific global health emergencies, such as the AIDS pandemic, or national research programmes directed at medical diagnosis and treatment within primary or secondary health care systems.

Taking into account the ongoing activities and interests of the ICSU community, the Scoping Group has identified what it considers to be a potentially important niche in the current lack of understanding of how patterns of population health are shaped by complex systems of external influence often at the global level, which are themselves subject to change by human interventions and natural phenomena. Different diseases, nutritional status, water supplies, macro and micro environments, transport and infrastructure, and social and political perturbations all interact to influence each other often with health consequences which differ from one age group or social group to another.

These interactions are particularly concentrated in urban areas, which are rapidly expanding and becoming the focal points of the search for environmental and social sustainability. The prevailing approach to studying urban environmental influences on human health is predominantly piecemeal and reductionist. This has served us well in linking individual causal factors to specific disease outcomes but has severe limitations when extrapolated to the realities of urban living and the complexity of factors influencing population health and wellbeing. There is increasing recognition of the need to develop a more ‘ecological’ approach that takes account of longer causal chains and complex, non-linear, interactions between various different processes and factors. Not least, from the policy maker perspective, there is an urgent need for good scientific evidence that addresses the complex matrix of issues that influence human health and wellbeing in our cities.

1 Final Draft Report ICSU Scoping Group 15-3-07

It is proposed that ICSU explore the potential interest and usefulness of a systems analysis approach to population health and wellbeing in the changing urban environment. Such a systems approach, at the scale of individual cities, would be aimed at providing new scientific insights that can effectively inform sociopolitical policies. It would build on the ongoing interests and projects of the Unions and Interdisciplinary Bodies in both urbanization and health. Moreover, it could be considered as a logical extension for ICSU of its scientific synthesis and integrated assessment approaches used so successfully in other areas, most notably global environmental change. It should similarly expose important issues regarding population health on which reliable scientific understanding is particularly lacking and thus make an important contribution to setting the future global health research agenda.

…………………………….

Background: ICSU and human health

ICSU has not been a major player in international health research and with some justification in that there are many other national and international bodies that focus on health research. At the same time, there is a growing awareness that human health is inextricably linked to the health of our planet and environmental change (areas in which ICSU has undoubted strengths). Similarly, it is difficult to envisage an integrated scientific approach to sustainable development that does not include human health issues. There is a wealth of expertise within the ICSU family on various aspects of health research, which needs to be more fully incorporated into ICSU’s existing activities. There is also a need for new partnerships with the clinical research community. [ICSU Strategic Plan, 2006-2011]

Health was also recognized in the report of the Scientific and Technological community to the World Summit on Sustainable Development in 2002, as an area where existing scientific information was not being optimally exploited (ICSU, 2002). The need to integrate this information into the broader concept of, and scientific approaches to, sustainable development was highlighted. It was also recognised in ICSU’s own preparations for the Summit, that whilst health research is certainly being conducted by ICSU Members, this is largely restricted to single or closely-related disciplines and there is no clear mechanism or focus for bringing this together.

Since 2002, a number of ICSU’s Scientific Unions and Interdisciplinary Bodies have been developing an initiative on Science for Health and Wellbeing (SHWB). They submitted a successful grant application to ICSU for $50k to organize meetings and workshops to further advance this initiative in 2006. Whilst being impressed by the commitment from a large number of Unions, the Committee on Scientific Planning and Review (CSPR) had some concerns about the scope of the proposal. As a condition of the funding award it was stipulated that the proposers should liaise with an ad hoc CSPR Scoping Group to help define a more specific integrated programme.

In parallel to the Union-led activity, the Earth Systems Science Partnership (ESSP) has been developing a new project on Global Environmental Change and Human

2 Final Draft Report ICSU Scoping Group 15-3-07

Health (GEC-Human Health). This also has been partially supported by the ICSU grants programme with a grant in 2004 to carry out a rapid assessment of Biodiversity Health and the Environment. GEC-Human Health also takes into account the Health Synthesis of the recently completed Millenium Ecosystem Assessment (MA). This specific synthesis was prepared by WHO, with ICSU being an institutional partner in the overall assessment. The final proposal for a GEC-Human Health project was launched at the ESSP Open Science meeting in November 2006 (Beijing).

The ICSU Regional Office for Africa has identified Human Health and Wellbeing as its highest priority and began the planning for a regional science programme in this area in April 2006. Several Interdisciplinary Bodies (IBs) also have specific activities relating to human health. For example, the Scientific Committee on Problems of the Environment (SCOPE) has carried out several assessments of the health and environmental risks of specific toxic chemicals.

ICSU strategy and the ad hoc Scoping Group

Human Health is an identified priority in the ICSU Strategic Plan 2006-2011 with the overall goal (p32-33):

“to ensure that health considerations are duly taken into account in the planning and execution of future activities by building on the relevant strengths of Scientific Unions and Interdisciplinary Bodies.”

And the associated specific action:

 ICSU will establish an ad hoc Scoping Group to more clearly define how it might contribute to science for human health taking into account the ongoing development of two new research initiatives (SHWB and GEC-Health –see above)

The establishment of a CSPR ad hoc Scoping Group on Human Health is the first step in defining a potential role for ICSU in a complex area, which is considered to be a very high priority by many Members. This Group had a dual role: 1. to liaise with and ensure coordination, as necessary, of the major health initiatives that are already being developed within the ICSU community, and: 2. to identify additional areas or approaches where ICSU might add value to these initiatives (see annex 1 for the full Terms of Reference and membership). The expert Scoping Group was selected to ensure representation from the key initiatives, as well as disciplinary and geographical balance. It met on 2 occasions, for 2 days each, in Paris in June 2006 and January 2007. The Chairman and several other member of the Group also met with the Executive Committee of the SHWB Initiative in between the first and second Scoping Group meetings.

Key ICSU criteria

ICSU’ role in planning and coordinating research is built around international and interdisciplinary collaboration and focuses on major scientific challenges of importance to society. Developing effective linkages between scientific knowledge and policy making is an integral part of the Council’s vision. There is considerable

3 Final Draft Report ICSU Scoping Group 15-3-07 overlap between the mission and aims of ICSU and those of its individual Members and Interdisciplinary Bodies. However, there are also significant differences, for example the Scientific Unions approach issues mainly from a single disciplinary perspective and the IBs have there own limited thematic focus. Thus, it is reasonable to expect that potential ICSU interests in human health will not coincide completely with those of all of its individual Members and IBs. This was clearly acknowledged by the Scoping Group from the outset – there are many important health-related activities within the ICSU community that do not require any additional support or input from ICSU. At the same time it was recognized that there were likely to be some areas of shared interest where ICSU’s involvement could be beneficial.

In responding to the SHWB proposal from a number of Scientific Unions and IBs, the ICSU Committee on Scientific Planning and Review (CSPR) had already defined a number of broad criteria for ICSU involvement. The Scoping Group further refined these to develop its own criteria for defining areas of health science of potential interest to ICSU.

An ICSU health initiative should:  be international (relevant to more than one region) and interdisciplinary;  build on the synergies between existing activities and interests of the ICSU membership;  add value to other ongoing or planned activities;  fulfill a unique niche that other international initiatives do not address;  incorporate links with pertinent international bodies and/or networks outside the ICSU family, as necessary;  generate new scientific insights of significant relevance to health (and other) policies, with the policy audience(s) clearly defined at the outset;  focus primarily on population health/disease prevention and promotion of health and wellbeing rather than medical treatment and cures;  fit within the context of the Millenium Development Goals and the broader agenda of science for sustainable development.

Given that ICSU does not have an established track-record or ‘name’ in the international health arena, it was also recognized that the rapid development of a major new research programme was unlikely and that a more cautious step-wise, iterative, approach was more realistic. Short, medium and long-term goals and actions for any new initiative should all be defined a priori. It was noted that ICSU’s financial resources are limited and that, as in other areas, the main role for ICSU was in planning and initiating activities and not directly funding substantive new research.

A systems analysis approach

Considering both the ongoing and planned activities within the ICSU community and the defined criteria for ICSU involvement, the Scoping Group identified one area where ICSU might potentially make a unique contribution: a systems analysis approach to human health and wellbeing. This fits well with some of the ideas in the GEC-Health programme proposal and some of the individual SHWB project descriptions and could also be used to integrate the scientific knowledge coming from individual disciplines or areas of research. Such an approach was considered to be

4 Final Draft Report ICSU Scoping Group 15-3-07 relatively novel in the population health/ health promotion area (and is quite distinct but complementary to the burgeoning field of health systems analysis). Moreover, it is consistent with ICSU’s established role in integrated assessments and synthesis of scientific knowledge to assist policy-makers.

Definition of Systems Analysis

For the purposes of this scoping report, systems analysis is defined as mathematical modeling of a complex system on the basis of a good understanding of key contextual factors and in such a way that it addresses the needs of an audience that has been defined a priori. Such analysis involves the mapping of processes and relationships and how they affect measurable end points. It brings out clearly the interactivity between variables and the processes, which are shaped by multiple factors. An appropriate systems analysis model should permit the integration of existing (and new) data and information and lead to new insights as well as the identification of gaps in current knowledge. It should enable reasonable scenario projections which can be tested and refined experimentally. A complex system may be made up of several sub-systems each of which might also be modeled separately and the appropriate linking of several models, based on an understanding of sub-system interactions, can give insights into the system as a whole.

The Group considered that there is potentially an important role for ICSU to play in leading the international scientific community in developing a systems analysis approach for addressing complex public health challenges. Such an approach would, by definition, build on a broad range of existing scientific information to generate new knowledge and insights. In addition to providing relevant information for a range of policy audiences, who deal with complex systems, it would also identify gaps in scientific knowledge. The development of a systems analysis approach would in itself involve trans-disciplinary collaboration building on the strengths of ICSU, e.g. the transfer of complex systems approaches from ecology to health science.

Urbanization as a theme

Taking into account the established criteria and the ongoing activities within the ICSU Unions and IBs, one particular subject was identified as a potential theme for a systems analysis approach: Urbanization, i.e. health and wellbeing in the changing urban environment.

Urban areas are expanding rapidly, and in many cases seemingly uncontrollably, in all regions of the World. In the past two centuries the proportion of humans living in cities or large towns has increased from approximately 5% to 50%. This social transition has, not surprisingly, been accompanied by a changing pattern of human health risks and consequent illness and disease. Numerous studies, from both natural and social sciences, have provided considerable insights into to what these changes are and why they are occurring. Thus far, however, it could be argued that science has generally failed to take account of the complexity of the urban environments. In so doing it has also failed to consistently provide useful evidence for the policy makers, who have to grapple with urban challenges on a daily basis. A systems

5 Final Draft Report ICSU Scoping Group 15-3-07 analysis approach, specifically designed to take into account the complexity of urban environments and the needs of policy makers, could help to redress this.

The main reasons for identifying Urbanization, both as an issue in itself, and as a priority for ICSU can be summarized as follows:

 conventional simplistic, ‘cause and effect’, approaches are largely insufficient to effectively inform policies;  a ‘complete’ systems modeling approach would be novel and could reasonably be expected to provide important policy insights;  it is a major concern in both developed and developing countries in all regions of the world;  it requires a trans-disciplinary approach (basic sciences, medicine/health, engineering, behavioural and social sciences, economics);  a very considerable amount of scientific data and information already exists to be incorporated into a systems analysis framework;  a systems analysis approach would also help to identify future policy-relevant research priorities;  it is explicitly linked to sustainable development, which is a major priority for ICSU;  it brings together parts of GEC-Health, IHDP and SHWB (and African regional interest) and needs all of them to contribute.

However, urbanization is also a complex topic that can be considered on a number of different scales from the global and regional down to the city, community or street level. In order to limit the complexity but maximize the relevance to potential policy audiences (see below) it is suggested that the primary focus should be at the level of the city.

The Audience(s)

As mentioned above, one of the major reasons for focusing on urbanization is the need to provide scientific information in a way that can effectively inform the various actors involved in managing urban environments.

The selection of cities as the units of analysis allows one to define specific policy audiences including, elected municipal representatives and officials, town planners, service providers etc. These should be the primary audience for the systems analysis. Their major concerns and challenges need to be defined a priori and addressed in the development of the overall systems framework. The outcome of any analysis should be fed back to these policy stakeholders in such a way that it can usefully inform their future decisions. There are a number of potential partners in this context, including for example, the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI), which is a network representing more than 475 cities worldwide with an interest in sustainable development.

Secondary, but also important, audiences are the private sector and NGOs, who have a major responsibility and interest in many aspects of urban development and healthy environments. The World Business Council on Sustainable Development (WBCSD) is already a partner with ICSU in relation to the Commission on Sustainable

6 Final Draft Report ICSU Scoping Group 15-3-07

Development (CSD) and there are various other NGO groupings involved with CSD that have a strong interest in the urban environment and health.

Having solicited input from these audiences, the overall aim would be to develop a systems analysis approach that is appropriate at the city level to inform policies and actions that enable Management of the Urban Environment to improve Human Health and Wellbeing.

Developing a systems analysis approach to health and the urban environment

The aim of an ICSU initiative would be to develop, test and refine an overall systems analysis framework for modeling the urban environment at the city level and, in so doing, to generate information to effectively inform policies that improve the health and wellbeing of urban populations. This could build on the methodological approaches already being developed in disciplines such as ecology and geography. Moreover, it could draw on the existing expertise and interests within the ICSU community, including many of the Unions and the ESSP.

A conceptual framework

A preliminary conceptual framework for modeling a ‘typical’ city system is sketched out at annex 2. This complex system is influenced by a several key external driving forces and made up of a number of distinct major sectors or sub-systems (for which some models already exist). The combination of external forces and sectoral factors generates risks for human health and wellbeing and the level of these risks dictates health outcomes. Some of these various factors are listed below, from which it can be seen that there is a complex interplay between them. By incorporating this complexity, using a systems analysis approach, the aim is to elucidate the essential steps where policy intervention can ameliorate health outcomes in a specific contextual context.

External driving Major urban Risk factors Health outcomes forces sectors Population growth Water pollution Dehydration, poisoning Migration Nutrition Poor diet Obesity/diarrhea Climate change Health care infection Infectious diseases access Economic pressure transport accidents Physical disablement Technological housing overcrowding Psychological wellbeing development Waste disposal Education

7 Final Draft Report ICSU Scoping Group 15-3-07

Indicators and Measures

A large amount of information is already available on burden of disease and cost- effectiveness of interventions and much of this has recently been brought together in the context of the WHO Disease Control and Priorities Project (http://www.dcp2.org/main/Home.html ). It would be important to assimilate this into both the design and testing of the systems models. However, measures of health and wellbeing need to extend beyond simple disease incidence and prevalence. A number of recognized and widely accepted measures for mental, physical and social wellbeing, e.g. Daily Adjusted Life Years (DALYs), already exist and the development of new measures was not considered by the Scoping Group to be an immediate priority. Likewise, existing economic and social indicators, from GDP per capita to crime rates, should be largely adequate. The challenge and novelty is to combine these various measures and indicators into a complete systems model.

Contextual factors: importance of social sciences and economics

Human perceptions and social interactions are central to health and wellbeing in the urban setting. The social and institutional/political environment is a major determinant of how the urban environment is constructed and developed and how urban populations evolve. Any relevant systems analysis and modeling approach must factor in these issues. This requires expertise and insights from social sciences, including political science, policy studies, human geography and urban planning. However, these diverse perspectives must be included within the central paradigm of a quantitative systems analysis approach.

The importance of social factors in determining health and wellbeing has been recognised by governments, with WHO having established a Commission on the Social Determinants of Health (http://www.who.int/social_determinants/en/) in 2005. The Commission brings together leading scientists and practitioners to provide evidence on policies that improve health by addressing the social conditions which people live and work. Potential links with the work of this Commission should be explored.

The economic base of a city, whether it is growing or shrinking or changing, and its multiple effects on peoples livelihoods, is a critical contextual factor that needs to be incorporated into a systems analysis approach. Economics is also an important as a reality check, i.e. economics puts restraints on proposed models and policy interventions. Economic realities are critical to any consideration of different policy options.

Vision, goals and actions required

The overall vision, with a 50-year perspective, is to make a significant contribution to increasing the average lifespan and wellbeing of all those living in an urban environment.

Achieving this entails a step-wise approach that focuses on specific goals.

8 Final Draft Report ICSU Scoping Group 15-3-07

Short-term goals (3/07-10/08)

. Define key policy questions to be addressed in systems modeling (and also by specific substantive research) . Develop an overall systems analysis model framework that addresses policy concerns

Medium-term goal (10/08-10/11)

. Adapt and test the overall model framework for specific cities1, providing answers to policy questions and defining further substantive research gaps

Long-term goals (10/11-)

. To define critical variables and best practices in different urban environments . To provide the evidence for all stakeholders to enable the design and development of more healthy urban environments

Initial actions

Three initial actions are considered necessary by the Scoping Group in order to achieve the short–term goals and develop an appropriate systems analysis model framework:

1. Commission a study to define key policy issues and concerns: a qualitative survey of key urban policy stakeholders, including local authorities, industry and NGOs

2. Commission an academic analysis/review of the relationships between key drivers and sectoral factors (annex 2)

3. Convene a modelers meeting to develop an inventory of existing (sub-system) models

These three activities might be overseen by a small Planning Group that would be charged with developing the terms of reference for 1 and 2 and organising 3. This Group might also be charged with exploring future funding options.

The aim should be to make significant progress on these activities prior to the ICSU General Assembly in 2008. Each of the activities should in itself produce valuable outputs that should be published. Combining these and making significant subsequent progress towards the medium-term goals will depend on GA support and on whether substantive financial support can be secured.

1 The suggested approach, is to define a limited number of cities, 3-5, that have broadly similar characteristics (population size and growth-rate, demographics, policy challenges) which will allow them to be included in a comparative analysis. These would be used as the basis for a developing a generic analysis framework, although a specific model would have to be tailored for each different setting.

9 Final Draft Report ICSU Scoping Group 15-3-07

Relationship with existing health initiatives within the ICSU community

Scientific Unions and SHWB Considerable efforts were made to liaise with the Unions SHWB Initiative, which slowly organised its leadership but did not develop a substantive action plan during the course of the scoping exercise. In particular it appeared that little progress was being made by the Unions themselves in developing an integrated or collaborative programme. Potentially an ICSU initiative, based around a systems analysis approach, could help many of the Unions to combine their expertise. An initial meeting of the Scoping Group with the SHWB Executive Committee also indicated some enthusiasm for an ‘umbrella’ focus on the urban environment. A further meeting of the SHWB committee is planned for April 2007.

Several Unions have systems modeling expertise and could make important contributions to the design of the systems analysis model framework. Other Unions have expertise in defining the contextual issues that need to be considered in developing a systems analysis approach to the urban environment.

The initial stakeholder survey will almost certainly identify specific topics, where substantive scientific research is immediately required. Likewise the application of a a systems analysis model will identify knowledge gaps, where new research is required. Unions can play an important role in addressing these research needs – combining their bottom-up scientific interests with identified policy concerns.

ESSP Urbanization and Human Health is one of several themes in the new GEC-Health programme, which was approved in November 2006 but is not yet underway. The primary focus for this programme is the global system and environmental change. This is distinct but complementary to the proposed ICSU initiative whose focus would be on policy concerns at the level of individual cities. An ICSU initiative might also help to accelerate ESSP activities in this area. There are also several ongoing ESSP projects that have adopted a systems approach to global environmental change and food security (GECAFS), or water (GWSP) and which could inform (and be informed by) the proposed ICSU initiative.

IHDP The International Human Dimensions Programme launched a core project on Urbanization and Global Environmental Change in 2005. This addresses, mainly from a social sciences perspective, the roles of environmental change as both a driver and a product of urbanization. This is an important contextual aspect of the proposed ICSU initiative. IHDP also works with a number of urban policy stakeholders. Whilst the core project does not use a quantitative systems analysis modeling approach nor does it address human health and wellbeing, it is potentially an important source of information and expertise for an ICSU initiative.

African Regional Plan for Health Whilst the final African Regional Health Plan was not available to the Scoping Group, one of the members (VT) was part of the regional planning exercise and a preliminary report on priorities for Africa was provided for the Group. Urbanization and its

10 Final Draft Report ICSU Scoping Group 15-3-07 consequences for human health and wellbeing is recognized as a very pertinent topic for the continent which is witnessing an accelerating migration of its population from rural to urban areas.

One specific topic which has been prioritized in Africa is traditional knowledge and medicine. ~70% of health care in Africa is via traditional medicine and traditional practices are also prevalent in other sectors such as water and nutrition. There is a major challenge for African science to define what is effective and what is not with regards to these different treatments and practices. There is potentially an important role for the Scientific Unions in working with African scientists to address this (see ahead). In the specific context of a systems analysis approach to cities, it will also be important to factor in traditional knowledge as it relates to key sectors such as health service provision or nutrition.

Other topics/issues for ICSU

In carrying out its preliminary scoping, the Group identified (but did not consider in detail) three additional areas, where ICSU potentially has a important role to play in supporting science for health and wellbeing:

 Access to health information  Traditional medicine (validation, quality control etc)  Funding advocacy

These areas arose out of the planning exercise that was being conducted in parallel by the Regional Office for Africa and they are a particularly high priority for many developing countries. They are all areas where ICSU and its Members have already done some work and should be prepared to support the efforts of the Regional Offices where possible.

11 Final Draft Report ICSU Scoping Group 15-3-07

Preliminary Timetable

Feb 07 report to CSPR 23-26/4/07 EB and Unions meeting 9-10/07 Commission stakeholder survey and analysis of ‘key drivers and urban sectors’ ?/08 methodological/planners workshop to establish a systems framework and guidelines 20-24/10/08 Report on progress to ICSU General Assembly

Resources

2007 Funding would be required for two planning group meetings (2x15k€) and the survey and analysis work (2x 20k€).

2008 A further Planning Group meeting would probably be necessary (~15k€) and some support for a ‘modelers workshop’, although IIASA may be willing to host the later event.

Institutional Partnerships In additional to any initial seed funding that ICSU can allocate from its core resources, it will be important to rapidly develop partnership with appropriate academic institutions to lever additional human and financial resources. In this regard, both the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) and the home academic institutions of some of the individuals involved in the scoping exercise are potential partners.

12 Final Draft Report ICSU Scoping Group 15-3-07

Annex I: Terms of Reference

1. To liaise with the coordinating committee for the Union initiative on Science for Health and Well-being (SHWB) and advise the Unions on the development of a specific integrated interdisciplinary programme.

2. To liaise with the developing ESSP joint project on Global Environmental Change and Human Health (GEC-Human Health) and advise, if appropriate, on potential links to Union interests and activities.

3. In the light of 1 and 2 above to advise CSPR as to what future involvement, if any, ICSU should have in the SHWB initiative.

4. To advise CSPR as to any other actions that might be appropriate to address ICSU’s agreed strategic goal in relation to Human Health.

In relation to its liaison roles, 1 and 2, the Group is not asked to explicitly review the scientific quality of these proposals but rather to assess and offer advice on strategic direction and/or links to other activities within the ICSU community.

Membership

Chair: Dai Rees (Ex-CSPR, Biochemistry) [UK] Anders Kallner (IUPAC, Clinical Chemistry) [Sweden] Tony McMichael (GEC-Human Health, Epidemiology) [Australia] Kari Raivio (CSPR, Pediatrics) [Finland] Pierre Ritchie (CSPR, Psychology) [Canada] Marvalee Wake (IUBS and named contact for SHWB) [USA] Vincent Titanji (ICSU African Regional Health Initiative, Biochemistry) [Cameroon]. Edgar Gutierrez-Espeleta (SCOPE, wellbeing and indicators) [Costa Rica] Indira Nath (medicine, immunology and society) [India]

Invited guests (meeting 2 only): Andy Haines (London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine) [UK] Landis MacKellar (International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis) [Austria]

13 Final Draft Report ICSU Scoping Group 15-3-07

Annex 2: Preliminary conceptual framework for a systems analysis approach to Urbanization, Health and Wellbeing

NB this model to be further refined at the proposed methodological workshop, e.g. to include other factors such as Education and peri-urban agriculture

Environmental Change Technology

Energy

Transport

Migration Population Growth

14 Appendix 11.1.1

Von: Martin Groetschel An: [email protected]; CC: Betreff: IMU EC CL 14/07: ICSU dues and ICSU liaison Datum: Donnerstag, 22. März 2007 18:54:04 Anlagen: ICSUDuesReportTo EB070320.pdf

To the IMU 2007-2010 Executive Committee

Dear colleagues,

One more note about ICSU (I promise not bother you with ICSU issues soon again).

I first would like to report that Manuel de Leon has agreed to serve as the IMU liaison officer to ICSU for the term 2007 - 2010. Manuel will from now on handle every ICSU related matter. He will also attend, in addition to Claudio, ICSU's Unions meeting in Rome. Manuel, thanks for accepting to do this job!

John Ball asked me last year to serve on the Working Group to Review ICSU's Dues Structure which was charged with the task to come up with a proposal for a new ICSU dues system. Due to ICSU's complicated structure this turned out to be a real challenge.

The Working Group has now finished its job and passed its report to the ICSU Executive Board. I attach the report for your information. If the proposed change will be accepted by the ICSU GA, IMU's ICSU dues will drop from the current 6002 Euros to 2500 Euros in 2012.

Best regards

Martin

Appendix 11.1.1

Report to the ICSU Executive Board of the Working Group to Review ICSU's Dues Structure Dr Steve Thompson, New Zealand, Chair 20 March 2007

Contents: Introduction ...... Page 1 Terms of Reference...... Page 1 Background ...... Page 1 Working Group Membership...... Page 2 1. Definition of the Problem, and Working Group Objective ...... Page 2 2. Alternative Models and Proposals for Determining Dues ...... Page 4 3. Transition to a New System ...... Page 7 4. Dues, Voting and Influence in ICSU...... Page 7 5. Value for Money ...... Page 8 6. Summary of Recommendations ...... Page 10 Appendix 1: Working Group Contact details...... Page 11 Appendix 2: Current and Proposed National Member Dues...... Page 12 Appendix 3: Current and Proposed Union Dues...... Page 14

Introduction The Executive Board (EB) of the International Council for Science (ICSU) proposed to its 28th General Assembly, held in China in October 2005, that a review of ICSU’s dues structure be conducted over the next triennium, with a view to presenting a proposal to the next General Assembly for a revised structure. It was noted that such a review should include a full consultation with members. Members unanimously supported the proposal and stressed the urgency of the review. The formal decision of the General Assembly was:

“To request the EB to establish a Working Group, in full consultation with members, to consider the member dues structure. The Working Group shall report back to the EB as soon as possible. The EB shall then submit the report and the EB`s recommendation to the members for a vote by whatever means it determines to be expeditious”

In the light of this decision, the Executive Board developed the following terms of reference for the review:

Terms of Reference 1. To fully define the problems with the current dues structure from the perspective both of ICSU and its members (to include issues such as equity, transparency and sustainability); 2. to consider potential alternative models for determining dues, taking into account what other international governmental and non-governmental organizations do; 3. to propose a more appropriate mechanism for establishing the level of dues for a) National members, b) Unions and c) Associates; 4. To propose, as necessary, a mechanism for ensuring the transition from the current structure to the proposed new structure.

In this report, items 2 and 3 are presented together, for conciseness.

Background ICSU member dues are currently paid on the basis of voluntary adherence to one of 51 nominal categories. In practice, what category National and Union members find themselves in is largely governed by history and, in many cases it no longer reflects either economic or scientific strength. In contrast to ICSU, most international organizations link their dues structure to an objective indicator,

Interim Report of the Working Group to Review ICSU's Dues Structure, December 2006 Page 1 of 14 such as GDP for a member nation or total budget for a member organization. Index-linking in this way increases both the stability and the transparency of the funding structure.

In recent years some members have begun to question the dues structure of ICSU and some have changed their payment categories. Such decisions have not necessarily been based on value for money assessments but rather have reflected other financial and policy considerations within the member organizations. Such cases illustrate the vulnerability for ICSU of the current voluntary mechanism. However, it is also recognized that switching to an index-linked mechanism could result in a request for significant increases in subscriptions for some members. Such a change would need to be carefully planned and could only be introduced after full consultation with members. The Table below gives a snapshot of the size of ICSU’s budget, which shows the contribution coming from members at just over 60% of total.

Table 1: ICSU’s 2005 Budget 2005, in Euros Total Income 3,033,468 Income from Membership Dues 1,898,771 Membership Dues as a % of Total Income 62.59%

Working Group Membership Members of the Working Group, appointed by ICSU, are:

Ian Cooper (UK) Roger Elliott (ICSU Treasurer [UK]) Jan Joep De Pont (IUBMB [Netherlands]) Martin Groetschel (IMU [Germany]) Bryan Henry (Chair, ICSU Committee on Finance [IUPAC, Canada], unable to attend October meeting) John Jost (IUPAC [USA]) invited to attend October meeting by Chair Joseph O. Malo (Kenya) Wataru Nishigahiro (Japan) Yves Petroff (IUPAP [France]) Donald Saari (USA) Thomas Rosswall (ICSU Executive Director [(Sweden]) Steve Thompson (Working Group Chair, New Zealand)

Working Group members are appointed in their personal capacities, rather than as representatives of Unions or National members.

1. Definition of the Problem, and Working Group Objective

ICSU’s terms of reference ask the Working Group to define problems with the current dues structure from the perspectives both of ICSU and its members (to include issues such as equity, transparency and sustainability).

The overall objective is for ICSU’s income to cover its approved budget to carry out its strategic plan and activities. Group members raised a number of issues which they saw as needing to be addressed. Early in the discussions, several members raised the possibility of voting weighted by amount of dues paid. Several members also expressed a wish to see some measures of “value for money” developed. Neither of these issues is listed in the group’s terms of reference, but the group did consider dues formulae which would be compatible with weighted voting as one form of equity (TOR 1). Discussions around voting/influence in ICSU, and “value for money” are seen as complex and important issues in their own right and are addressed in sections 4 and 5 of this report. Other aspects of problem definition included:

1.1. An Objective Basis for Calculation of Membership Dues 1. Should more transparency imply a mechanism whereby each ICSU member understands and agrees how the dues are computed?

Interim Report of the Working Group to Review ICSU's Dues Structure, December 2006 Page 2 of 14 2. Should payment in-kind or voluntary additional payments be recognized when calculating the full support provided to ICSU by members? 3. Should dues payments be simplified into “bands” or “steps” (there are 51 such bands in the current system)?

1.2. Equity and Transparency in Membership Dues 4. A concern was discussed concerning the Union and National member balance. Dues from the Unions account for some 8% of the ICSU income, but votes in ICSU’s General Assembly are weighted to assign them 50% of the voting power. The importance of the Unions justifies a weighting of voting power, but should it be 50-50? 5. Current ICSU data show a trend-line whereby many smaller National members pay more than if their share were prorated to GDP, and large members pay less. 6. Is it equitable that about two-thirds of ICSU’s income comes from the dues (plus a voluntary contribution from the USA) paid by six National members, but their voice in decisions through votes is less than 4%? 7. Current national funding cycles, and national methods of funding ICSU members may limit a National member’s ability to change its future dues payments with any rapidity. 8. Which is the best method of calculating dues? Three which come to mind are: Pro-rating to GDP; pro-rating to “science expenditure”, or payment by “value for money”. While some form of “value for money” pricing might ideally reflect market forces, its measurement would be the least transparent. Linking dues to science expenditure is attractive in principle, but difficult to measure1. GDP figures are widely available, but not necessarily the best theoretical basis.

1.3. Sustainability of ICSU and its Budget 9. Does a system of voluntary dues create potential budgetary instabilities for ICSU? Should any new system be voluntary or compulsory? In addition to equity and transparency, there is the problem of sustainability of the dues structure, of the ICSU budget, and of members finding support for their dues. 10. Should any “banded” system of dues payments encourage or allow for voluntary over-payments 11. Should a cap be set on contributions from those paying the highest contributions, or a minimum from those paying the lowest contributions? How would caps and minima affect ICSU’s budget?

1.4. Working Group Objective The main objective arising from the issues examined above was defined as:

Achieving long term equity in the dues structure, according to some measure of economic or scientific “weight” of members.

Subject to the new system being:

• Able to meet ICSU’s approved budget requirements. • Acceptable to current members. • Simple in its calculation and application. • Predictable, so that members could calculate their future payments with some certainty. • Stable, so that year-to-year variability would be minimised. • Phased in at a rate that would allow members’ adaptation and budgeting. • Not a radical departure from the current system.

1 For example: can a transparent and predictable approach be devised using some sort of science index? Might the level of National dues best be correlated with whom the National body represents within ICSU? Should a country’s expenditures for military and commercial development, for instance, be included if they do not contribute to the National body?

Interim Report of the Working Group to Review ICSU's Dues Structure, December 2006 Page 3 of 14 2. Alternative Models and Proposals for Determining Dues

ICSU’s terms of reference 2 and 3 ask the Working Group to consider alternative models and to propose a mechanism for determining dues, taking into account what other international governmental and non-governmental organizations do. One of the models available is of course the status quo, and any new model will need to show clear advantages over the current system. It was agreed that the following factors would be examined:

1. A compulsory or voluntary system? 2. A compulsory minimum amount? 3. An option or incentive to pay more than the minimum? 4. How should Unions’ votes relate to those of the National members? 5. Are different mechanisms needed for Unions and National members? 6. Should in-kind support also be considered and encouraged (eg. secondments, voluntary contributions)? 7. Should any voting be weighted according to category of payment? 8. Should the new system reflect some measure of the economic or scientific “weight” or influence of a member? 9. Should indicators be derived from quantitative data that are generally available and “objective”? 10. The model derived from these indicators should be clear and robust. 11. Should there be caps or minima on dues from high and low-dues members? 12. Can the new model take the existing model and transition arrangements into account? 13. How can we ensure that no member is inequitably disadvantaged by a new structure?

For national members, two versions of “weight” were given serious thought: a financial indicator and a scientific indicator. Various models for the calculation of dues were explored as follows:

National Members: 1. Dues based on a financial indicator a. raw (or ppp) GDP b. attenuated GDP - UN Assessments

2. Dues based on a scientific indicator eg. OECD Governments’ expenditures on R&D with assumptions for those not covered by OECD figures. - For stability, figures to be based on a rolling period (eg. Y-2 to Y-7)

2.1 National Members:

Dues Based on a Financial Indicator: This implies that dues should reflect the financial ability of a member to contribute to ICSU. Thought was given to using the budget situation of a national member’s institution as an indicator, but it was quickly realized that the national institutions are so different that financial data from these institutions cannot form the basis of the desired dues system.

The group considered that acceptable objectivity can be reached by basing national dues on some measure representing the size of a national economy, for example, gross domestic product (GDP). GDP data are easily available for all countries and are accurate for the major contributors to ICSU.

An issue arising here is whether or not “raw GDP” should be employed, or GDP at purchasing power parity (ppp), or whether a UN model, eg. its “assessed payments” includes debt burden and low per capita income should be used. Another UN example is where some countries contribute high proportions of the costs, hold a permanent seat on the Security Council and staff many UN committees. We understand that Japan is currently pushing for a readjustment of UN dues to more accurately reflect a country's status within the UN. Other examples include differential voting within the EU, within different international unions, and bicameral legislatures designed to reflect population differences. The group decided to use raw GDP. The ppp and UN

Interim Report of the Working Group to Review ICSU's Dues Structure, December 2006 Page 4 of 14 alterations to the raw GDP reflect compromises that mean more to economic specialists than to ICSU. Test calculations showed that formulae based on UN assessments produce outliers that are not easy to deal with.

Dues Based on a Scientific Indicator: We investigated making a “scientific” index as a basis for an ICSU dues system. Eventually we shelved the idea due to the unavailability of reliable quantitative data. An example elucidates the difficulties here. One possible way to estimate scientific expenditure is to add the expenditures on Higher Education R&D (HERD) and GOVERD (Government expenditures on R&D) data. For Finland this gives 1.1% of GDP. But Finland is a research intensive country, spending about 3.5% of its GDP on R&D in 2005. In other words, ignoring industrial R&D expenditures in Finland could provide a skewed picture of Finland’s scientific weight. A more serious problem is that, for more than half of ICSU’s members, HERD and GOVERD data are not available. This would make judgment of their scientific weight a guess at best.

A Rolling Period: To enhance predictability and stability for ICSU members when calculating their dues, the group discussed use of GDP figures based on a rolling historic period. For example, for dues to be set in 2008, a rolling average of GDP figures available for 2004, 05 and 06 might be used. We reviewed whether the average should be rolled over 3 or 5 years, or some other period, and concluded that a 3-year rolling average would suffice.

Banded Payments: The group examined a dues system which pro-rates national members’ dues to their GDP. However, this could result in inconsequentially small payments for some, and in radically increased dues for others. To achieve simplicity and transparency, the group examined a banding approach. In our view, such banding should be viewed as determining lower bounds. There was some discussion of the willingness of high-paying members to maintain their present rates, rather than reduce to the minimum allowed in their band. As a working model, the group examined 10 categories of member countries, to replace the current 51 bands.

Capping Dues: A cap on dues, which is standard in the UN system, was discussed as a possibility, and this notion was eventually incorporated into a banding system for dues. Discussion took place around the level of dues that would be ascribed to the United States. The Working Group discussed a cap on this highest contribution, which might otherwise rise substantially. Moreover, this contribution should be regarded as the sum of its compulsory dues and voluntary payments.

Recommendations - that: 1. Dues be based on a model based on raw GDP figures. The GDP figures would be the average of the latest 3 years available (the Working Group used only 2005 GDP figures in their example calculations). 2. 10 bands be used, rather than the current 51. 3. A minimum payment of €1,000 be required. 4. A cap be placed on the top band amount (currently paid by the United States2). 5. In-kind contributions to ICSU be encouraged and recognised in some way.

Implications for National Members Worked examples of the implications for ICSU National members are shown in Appendix 2. This shows a member’s current dues (col A), what it would pay (col E) if its share of ICSU’s budget were pro-rated by GDP, and what it would pay if these shares were “rounded” into 10 bands of membership dues (col H). The rounded dues totalling from this banded structure also happen to give ICSU a slight windfall gain. Note that the banding is done by reference to GDPs as a percentage of total GDP, rather than by actual GDP values in any one year. This prevents the need for frequent re-assessment of band boundaries. Whenever the actual payments in each band are reviewed, they will still need to be calculated so that, in total, they provide sufficient income to fuel ICSU’s approved budget.

2 Note that the US already makes a voluntary contribution which brings its total payment in 2007 up to €480,999

Interim Report of the Working Group to Review ICSU's Dues Structure, December 2006 Page 5 of 14

Two examples, drawn from Appendix 2, would see Japan pay in a band of €200,000, up from its current €181,628; while Poland would pay €13,000, down from its current €13,472 – unless it voluntarily maintained its higher rate. More extreme rises are seen in the case of Mexico, Korea and Indonesia, while Russia, Sweden and Finland would see large decreases if they wanted to take advantage of them.

A Note on Alternatives Following the group’s initial calculations, shown in Appendix 2, some alternatives were suggested by individual members. The options they presented can be summarised as:

1. Move Japan from band 2 (€200,000) to band 3 (Germany, China, UK and France) at €180,000, but maintain 10 bands by simultaneously… 2. splitting band 8 into 8b (Malaysia to Peru, [≥ 0.10%] paying €4,000; and 8a (Ireland to Portugal), [≥ 0.15%] paying €8,000 3. Reduce band 3 (Germany, China, UK and France) from €180,000 to €150,000 (to be nearer to the band average of $101,390) 4. Increase band 4 (Italy) from €120,000 to 128,000 and band 5 (Spain, Canada) from €50,000 to €64,000 5. Reduce band 5 (Brazil to Netherlands) from €35,000 to €32,000 6. Move Greece and South Africa from band 6 (€13,000) to band 7 (€8,000) 7. Reduce band 7 dues from €8,000 to €5,000 8. Move Serbia&Montegro to Lebanon from band 9 (€1,500) to band 10 (€1,000)

The group considered these alternatives, and those group members expressing an opinion preferred the recommendations as set out in Appendix 2. While changes of this nature should indeed be considered, care should be exercised to avoid lobbying and fine tuning which, in the end, could destroy the original intent of banding. It should also be noted that implementing such changes will alter (though not in a major way) the total sum accruing to ICSU.

2.2 ICSU Union Members:

The group also examined a similar banded system with 4 categories for scientific unions. Currently dues paid by Unions are set by the voluntary selection by each Union of a membership category. The Working Group concluded that the operating expenses of the Unions were an appropriate objective measure of ability to pay dues to ICSU. The group examined a system based on operating expenses (excluding "pass through" money) over a rolling period of years according to each Union's own internal cycle of activity (eg. triennial conferences). Unions would be asked to inform ICSU into which band they fell.

Recommendations - that: 6: Four bands be created for Union dues, as above, and 7: Unions select their appropriate band based on their declared operating expenses over a rolling period of years according to each Union's own internal cycle of activity.

Implications for Unions Appendix 3 shows the 2006 dues for each Union in Euros and as a % of total, Column C shows the operating expenses for each Union as reported to ICSU. The operating expenses of the Unions should not include so-called “pass through” or “restricted” expenses ie. funds granted by a third party that are only administered by the Union.

The appendix shows a member’s current dues (col A), what it would pay (col E) if its share of ICSU’s budget were pro-rated by its operating expenses, and what it would pay if these shares were “rounded” into 4 bands of membership dues (col H). The dues totalling from such a banded structure would also give ICSU a slight loss from overall Union dues – unless Unions voluntarily maintained their higher rates.

Column F is the difference between the dues currently paid by each Union and the dues calculated from the operating expenses. The group concluded that rather than setting dues based

Interim Report of the Working Group to Review ICSU's Dues Structure, December 2006 Page 6 of 14 on the exact individual calculations, these calculations should be used to determine a number of bands, where each Union in a given band would pay the same amount. The bands were set as ≥ €1,000,000, ≥ €400,000, ≥ €100,000, and < €100,000. Assignment of Unions to these bands is shown in column J. It is also proposed that Unions would select their appropriate band based on their declared operating expenses rather than being assigned to a band based on the information available to the ICSU Secretariat.

2.3 Scientific Associates: Scientific Associates have paid US$500 each since their introduction in 1990. In 2007 this will be paid in Euros. The group agreed the idea of one flat rate, but increased to a new minimum of €1,000 to cover ICSU’s administrative expenses.

Recommendation 8: That the dues for Scientific Associates, be set at a new minimum level of €1,000.

2.4 Voluntary or Compulsory Dues? Each member should pay at least as much as its category dues, but it is invited to maintain its old dues rate if it has paid more in previous years and to consider making in-kind contributions to ICSU. A lower bound on membership dues will increase the stability of ICSU’s income. In the current system, every National member can choose its category unilaterally, and some members have decided to pay less than their share pro-rated by GDP. Members should no longer be able to downsize their dues payment, or take advantage of “free rides”.

Recommendations - that: 9. The new dues structure be regarded as a “lower bound” by each member, with higher voluntary payments being encouraged. 10. Members may voluntarily move to a higher subscription band.

3. Transition to a New System

ICSU’s terms of reference ask the Working Group to propose, as necessary, a mechanism for ensuring the transition from the current structure to the proposed new structure.

The group believes that, once adopted, one 3-year GA cycle should be sufficient to allow successful transition for most members. We briefly examined crawling pegs, limits on the percentage change per period, and limits on the absolute change per period for each member. All succumbed to the need for a transparent and easily-understood transition system. In the end we felt that, if any member wished to make a case to ICSU for special arrangements, then it would be free to present its reasoned arguments.

Recommendation 11: That the new mechanisms for National members, Unions and Associates become operative from 2012.

4. Dues, Voting and Influence in ICSU

Early in our discussions, the possibility was raised of voting or influence within ICSU weighted in some way by amount of dues paid. While this issue lay strictly beyond the terms of reference, it does of course have implications for equity in ICSU.

Influence within ICSU could be achieved in several ways, for example by permanent seats on Executive Board, appointments to committees and working groups, or when expressing a view during ICSU’s triennial General Assembly. Direct influence can also be expressed during General Assembly voting, where the current system allows for one National Member = one vote, and one Union = one

Interim Report of the Working Group to Review ICSU's Dues Structure, December 2006 Page 7 of 14 vote, subject to a weighting so that National Members and Unions match each other in a 50:50 balance. Thus, voting is an accepted part of ICSU’s procedures.

Nevertheless, voting related to dues payment has not been the norm within ICSU, neither was development of a voting scheme part of the terms of reference of this Working Group. The possibility does link to a dues structure in terms of equity, and most (not all) group members proposed that any proposed dues structure should couple voting (and influence within ICSU) with dues levels. Several group members did not wish to see one part of the proposal to be separated from the other.

During the Working Group’s discussions, individual members made the following points:

1. Most, but not all, group members thought that the number of votes assigned to each National member should be correlated in some way with level of dues paid. It also was recognized that care must be exercised. With a linear correlation between dues and votes, for instance, the National member making the largest contribution would have 400 times more votes than some small members. This was viewed as unacceptable, so one challenge was to find ways to combine the number of assigned votes with non-voting ways to increase the “influence” of those members making larger contributions.

2. Several saw weighted voting as essential, while others saw it as a possible option. ICSU’s highest paying members needed a value-added incentive (more influence in ICSU matters). However the weighting would not be linear. A weighted voting system might also encourage over-contributions’ ie. members could voluntarily decide to pay over their scale fee and have consequent additional voting power.

3. It was noted that connecting the number of votes and level of dues might help gain support, hopefully sustainable support, from funding agencies.

4. Each band would carry an equivalent voting power ie. band ten – the highest band would carry ten votes and the minimum payment, band one – one vote.

5. The group also proposed that votes be assigned based on the amount of Union dues paid. A simple assignment of four votes to the highest band and one less vote to each lower band was proposed.

6. Such a banded system for National members and Unions would change the balance of GA votes from the current 50:50 to approx 70:30, which the group felt merited debate, given the ratio of 92% to 8% in income received from dues from the two groups of members.

The system outlined in points 4, 5 and 6 above is one possible way of correlating votes with the proposed dues structure. Other weightings are of course possible, but may interact with the band structure proposed, so that changes would be necessary in both.

The question of voting/influence is one with major implications in an organization like ICSU, and one which deserves study beyond that which this group was able to achieve in the time available while pursuing its main remit as defined by its terms of reference.

While changing a dues structure has financial implications for ICSU members, the notion that a revolutionary change in the fibre and nature of ICSU should be brought to a committee and not to the Executive Board directly by concerned members, seems surprising.

This group was formed by, and reports to, the Executive Board. There is no doubt that a majority of the members who expressed their views on the subject are committed to the view that dues and voting are inseparably linked. This report therefore brings the matter to the attention of Executive Board for their views on the issue, and by what process might it best be addressed.

Recommendation 12: That the Executive Board give serious consideration to the Working Group’s views on voting, and determine by what process the issue might best be addressed.

Interim Report of the Working Group to Review ICSU's Dues Structure, December 2006 Page 8 of 14

5. Value for Money

Value for money can be seen from one standpoint as the chance to influence the workings of an organization, such as some of the items mentioned above: places on committees, voting power, moral suasion influence and the like. It can also be seen as ensuring that a methodology is in place to show how members benefit from membership of ICSU and how ICSU could demonstrate value for money to its members. The notion might also arise as to how members might best use and support ICSU as their voice in the international arena.

Financial support for National members to pay their dues may come from various sources; eg. competitive grants submitted to research funding agencies. Success in such competitions requires a more general appreciation about the value added through affiliation with ICSU. Thus, closely related to the dues question are issues about the role, value, level of visibility, and the evaluation of ICSU.

In recent years, ICSU has negotiated and put in place its first strategic plan. A natural progression from such a plan is its evaluation, and strategic plans are often followed by performance indicators and evaluations. Such evaluations, with regular reporting back to members and the General Assembly would provide the necessary accountability link from ICSU to its “shareholders”.

The Working Group appreciates that indicators are notoriously difficult to pin down, and even more difficult at the international levels of general influence that ICSU works at. Nevertheless, the group does recommend that ICSU secretariat develop and propose a methodology for approval by its Executive Board and adoption by the General Assembly.

Recommendation 13: That ICSU secretariat develop and propose a methodology to monitor and evaluate implementation of its strategic plan, for approval by its Executive Board and adoption by the General Assembly.

Interim Report of the Working Group to Review ICSU's Dues Structure, December 2006 Page 9 of 14 6. Summary of Recommendations

Thirteen recommendations are made to ICSU’s Executive Board, that:

National members: 1. Dues be based on a model based on raw GDP figures. The GDP figures would be the average of the latest 3 years available (the Working Group used only 2005 GDP figures in their example calculations). 2. 10 bands be used, rather than the current 51. 3. A minimum payment of €1,000 be required. 4. A cap be placed on the top band amount (currently paid by the United States). 5. In-kind contributions to ICSU be encouraged and recognised in some way.

Unions: 6. Four bands be created for Union dues 7. Unions select their appropriate band based on their declared operating expenses over a rolling period of years according to each Union's own internal cycle of activity.

Associates 8. The dues for Scientific Associates be set at a new minimum level of €1,000.

All Members 9. The new dues structure be regarded as a “lower bound” by each member, with higher voluntary payments being encouraged. 10. Members may voluntarily move to a higher subscription band.

Transition: 11. The new mechanisms for National members, Unions and Associates become operative from 2012.

Voting and Influence: 12. The Executive Board give serious consideration to the Working Group’s views on voting, and determine by what process the issue might best be addressed. Value for Money: 13. ICSU secretariat develop and propose a methodology to monitor and evaluate implementation of its strategic plan, for approval by its Executive Board and adoption by the General Assembly.

Interim Report of the Working Group to Review ICSU's Dues Structure, December 2006 Page 10 of 14

Appendix 1: Working Group Contact details are:

Working Group members are appointed in their personal capacities, rather than as representatives of Unions or National members.

Mr. Ian Cooper, the Royal Society of London, 6-9 Carlton House Terrace, London SW1Y 5AG United Kingdom Phone: +44 (0)20 7451 2503 Fax: +44 (0)20 7925 2620 Email: [email protected]

Professor Jan Joep De Pont, Department of Biochemistry, Radboud University, Nijmegen Medical Centre, 6500 HB Nijmegen, Netherlands Phone: +31 24 3614260 Fax: +31 24 3616413 Email: [email protected]

Professor Martin Groetschel, Konrad-Zuse-Zentrum fuer Informationstechnik (ZIB), Takustrasse 7, 14195 Berlin- Dahlem, Germany Phone: +49 30 84185 210 Fax: +49 30 84185 269 Email: [email protected]

Professor Bryan Henry, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, Canada Email: [email protected]. Replaced for October 2006 meeting by John W Jost, Executive Director of IUPAC Email: [email protected]

Professor Joseph O. Malo, Kenya National Academy of Sciences, 8th floor, Room 812, Utalii House, Utalii Street, P.O. Box 39450-00623, Nairobi, Kenya Phone: +254 20 311 714 Fax: +254 2 311 715 Email: [email protected], [email protected]

Dr. Wataru Nishigahiro, Director-General, Science Council of Japan, 22-34 Roppongi, 7-Chome, Minato-ku, Tokyo 106- 8555, Japan Phone: +81 3 3403 1091 Fax: +81 3 3403 1982 [email protected]

Professor Yves Petroff, Polygone Scientifique Louis Neel, BP 220, 38043 Grenoble, France Phone: +33 (0) 4 76 88 20 17 Email: [email protected]

Professor Donald Saari, Director, Institute for Mathematical Behavioral Sciences, SSPA 2119, University of California, Irvine, CA 92697-5100, USA Phone: +949 824 5894 Fax: +949 824 3733 Email: [email protected]

Dr. Steve Thompson (Chair), the Royal Society of New Zealand, PO Box 598, Wellington, New Zealand Phone: +64 4 472 7421 Fax: +64 4 473 1841 Email: [email protected]

Professor Roger Elliott, Treasurer, ICSU, Theoretical Physics, University of Oxford, 1 Keble Road, Oxford OX1 3NP, United Kingdom Phone: +44 1865 273 997 Fax: +44 1865 273 947 Email: [email protected]

Professor Thomas Rosswall, Executive Director, ICSU, Executive Director, 51 Boulevard de Montmorency, 75016 Paris, France Phone: +33 (0) 1 45 25 03 29 Fax: +33 (0) 1 42 88 94 31 Email: [email protected]

Supported by Tish Bahmani Fard, Assistant Executive Director, International Council for Science (ICSU), 51 Boulevard de Montmorency, FR-75016 Paris, France, Phone: +33 1 45 25 03 29 Fax. +33 1 42 88 94 31 Email: [email protected]

Interim Report of the Working Group to Review ICSU's Dues Structure, December 2006 Page 11 of 14 Appendix 2: Current (col A) and Proposed (col H) National Member Dues

Column:- A B C D E F G H I J Difference Lower Dues if Difference Member between band pro-rated between Dues GDP GDP Proposed current and Boundary to GDP current Band Member 2007 Dues as % of (recent as % of Dues, proposed - as and fitted and pro- Average total year total 10 Bands dues GDP % to ICSU rated example) (Column of total - budget Dues I – A) (Col D) US$ % % % € billion € € € € € USA 238,9993 12.86 12,455 29.19 542,359 303,360 542,359 440,0004 201,001 ≥ 20 Japan 181,628 9.78 4,506 10.56 196,211 14,583 196,211 200,000 18,372 ≥ 10 Germany 181,628 9.78 2,782 6.52 121,139 -60,489 101,390 180,000 -1,628 ≥ 4.5 China: CAST 62,051 3.34 2,229 5.22 97,056 35,005 180,000 117,949 United Kingdom 181,628 9.78 2,193 5.14 95,475 -86,153 180,000 -1,628 France 181,628 9.78 2,110 4.95 91,889 -89,739 180,000 -1,628 Italy 117,444 6.32 1,723 4.04 75,030 -42,414 75,030 120,000 2,556 ≥ 3 Spain 27,762 1.49 1,124 2.63 48,931 21,169 48,746 50,000 22,238 ≥ 2 Canada 62,051 3.34 1,115 2.61 48,561 -13,490 50,000 -12,051 Brazil 62,051 3.34 794.1 1.86 34,579 -27,472 32,315 35,000 -27,051 ≥ 1 Korea, Republic of 7,538 0.41 787.6 1.85 34,297 26,759 35,000 27,462 India 62,051 3.34 785.5 1.84 34,203 -27,848 35,000 -27,051 Mexico 1,000 0.05 768.4 1.80 33,462 32,462 35,000 34,000 Russia 62,051 3.34 763.7 1.79 33,256 -28,795 35,000 -27,051 Australia 13,472 0.73 700.7 1.64 30,511 17,039 35,000 21,528 Netherlands 24,464 1.32 594.8 1.39 25,899 1,435 35,000 10,536 Switzerland 24,464 1.32 365.9 0.86 15,935 -8,529 13,355 13,000 -11,464 ≥ 0.5 Belgium 24,464 1.32 364.7 0.85 15,882 -8,582 13,000 -11,464 Turkey 4,682 0.25 363.3 0.85 15,820 11,138 13,000 8,318 Sweden 56,996 3.07 354.1 0.83 15,420 -41,576 13,000 -43,996 China: Taipei 27,762 1.49 346.0 0.81 15,067 -12,695 13,000 -14,762 Saudi Arabia 1,605 0.09 309.8 0.73 13,489 11,884 13,000 11,395 Austria 13,472 0.73 304.5 0.71 13,261 -211 13,000 -472 Poland 13,472 0.73 299.2 0.70 13,027 -445 13,000 -472 Indonesia 1,000 0.05 287.2 0.67 12,507 11,507 13,000 12,000 Norway 13,472 0.73 283.9 0.67 12,363 -1,109 13,000 -472 Denmark 24,464 1.32 254.4 0.60 11,078 -13,386 13,000 -11,464 South Africa 18,531 1.00 240.2 0.56 10,457 -8,074 13,000 -5,531 Greece 11,275 0.61 213.7 0.50 9,306 -1,969 13,000 1,725 Ireland 4,682 0.25 196.4 0.46 8,552 3,870 5,647 5,000 318 ≥ 0.15 Iran 1,000 0.05 196.3 0.46 8,550 7,550 5,000 4,000 Finland 27,762 1.49 193.2 0.45 8,412 -19,350 5,000 -22,762 Argentina 13,472 0.73 183.3 0.43 7,982 -5,490 5,000 -8,472 Thailand 1,000 0.05 176.6 0.41 7,690 6,690 5,000 4,000 Portugal 4,682 0.25 173.1 0.41 7,537 2,855 5,000 318 Malaysia 1,000 0.05 130.1 0.31 5,667 4,667 5,000 4,000 Israel 15,891 0.86 123.4 0.29 5,375 -10,516 5,000 -10,891 Czech Republic 9,297 0.50 122.3 0.29 5,328 -3,969 5,000 -4,297 Colombia 1,605 0.09 122.3 0.29 5,326 3,721 5,000 3,395 Singapore 1,000 0.05 116.8 0.27 5,085 4,085 5,000 4,000 Chile 11,275 0.61 115.2 0.27 5,019 -6,256 5,000 -6,275

3 Does not include current US voluntary payment of €242,000 4 Would include US voluntary payment

Interim Report of the Working Group to Review ICSU's Dues Structure, December 2006 Page 12 of 14 Pakistan 1,000 0.05 110.7 0.26 4,822 3,822 5,000 4,000 Hungary 7,538 0.41 109.2 0.26 4,753 -2,785 5,000 -2,538 New Zealand 3,583 0.19 109.0 0.26 4,748 1,165 5,000 1,417 Nigeria 1,000 0.05 98.95 0.23 4,309 3,309 5,000 4,000 Romania 6,002 0.32 98.56 0.23 4,292 -1,710 5,000 -1,002 Philippines 1,000 0.05 98.31 0.23 4,281 3,281 5,000 4,000 Egypt 2,043 0.11 89.34 0.21 3,890 1,847 5,000 2,957 Ukraine 1,000 0.05 81.66 0.19 3,556 2,556 5,000 4,000 Peru 1,000 0.05 78.43 0.18 3,415 2,415 5,000 4,000 Bangladesh 1,000 0.05 59.96 0.14 2,611 1,611 1,542 1,500 500 ≥ 0.05 Morocco 1,000 0.05 51.75 0.12 2,253 1,253 1,500 500 Slovak Republic 4,682 0.25 46.41 0.11 2,021 -2,661 1,500 -3,182 Croatia 1,605 0.086 37.41 0.088 1,629 24 1,500 -105 Luxembourg 1,605 0.086 33.78 0.079 1,471 -134 1,500 -105 Serbia and 1,000 0.054 27.06 0.063 1,178 178 1,500 500 Montenegro5 Bulgaria 1,605 0.086 26.65 0.062 1,160 -445 1,500 -105 Lithuania 1,000 0.054 25.50 0.060 1,110 110 1,500 500 Sri Lanka 1,000 0.054 23.48 0.055 1,022 22 1,500 500 Lebanon 1,000 0.054 22.21 0.052 967 -33 1,500 500 Kenya 1,000 0.054 17.98 0.042 783 -217 343 1,000 0 < 0.05 Latvia 1,000 0.054 15.77 0.037 687 -313 1,000 0 Panama 1,000 0.054 15.47 0.036 674 -326 1,000 0 Uzbekistan 1,000 0.054 13.67 0.032 595 -405 1,000 0 Estonia 1,000 0.054 13.11 0.031 571 -429 1,000 0 Iraq 1,000 0.054 12.60 0.030 549 -451 1,000 0 Tanzania 1,000 0.054 12.11 0.028 527 -473 1,000 0 Ethiopia 1,000 0.054 11.17 0.026 487 -513 1,000 0 Ghana 1,000 0.054 10.70 0.025 466 -534 1,000 0 Jamaica 1,605 0.086 9.696 0.023 422 -1,183 1,000 -605 Bolivia 1,000 0.054 9.334 0.022 406 -594 1,000 0 Nepal 1,000 0.054 7.346 0.017 320 -680 1,000 0 Mauritius 1,000 0.054 6.447 0.015 281 -719 1,000 0 Macedonia 1,000 0.054 5.762 0.014 251 -749 1,000 0 Armenia 1,000 0.054 4.903 0.011 214 -786 1,000 0 Zimbabwe 1,000 0.054 3.364 0.008 146 -854 1,000 0 Togo 1,000 0.054 2.203 0.005 96 -904 1,000 0 Mongolia 1,000 0.054 1.880 0.004 82 -918 1,000 0 Cuba 1,000 0.054 - 0.000 - -1,000 1,000 0 Monaco 1,000 0.054 - 0.000 - -1,000 1,000 0 Montenegro4 1,000 0.054 - 0.000 - -1,000 1,000 0 Vatican City 1,000 0.054 - 0.000 - -1,000 1,000 0 1,858,039 2,136,000 1,858,039 ( = current (new (current Total 100% 42,669 100% income income 277,961 income from from from members) members) members) NOTE: Alternates suggested include: 1. Move Japan from band 2 (€200,000) to band 3 (Germany, China, UK and France) at €180,000, but maintain 10 bands by simultaneously… 2. splitting band 8 into 8b (Malaysia to Peru, [≥ 0.10%] paying €4,000; and 8a (Ireland to Portugal), [≥ 0.15%] paying €8,000 3. Reduce band 3 (Germany, China, UK and France) from €180,000 to €150,000 (to be nearer to the band average of $101,390) 4. Increase band 4 (Italy) from €120,000 to 128,000 and band 5 (Spain, Canada) from €50,000 to €64,000 5. Reduce band 5 (Brazil to Netherlands) from €35,000 to €32,000 6. Move Greece and South Africa from band 6 (€13,000) to band 7 (€8,000) 7. Reduce band 7 dues from €8,000 to €5,000 8. Move Serbia&Montegro to Lebanon from band 9 (€1,500) to band 10 (€1,000)

5 See both “Serbia and Montenegro” and “Montenegro”

Interim Report of the Working Group to Review ICSU's Dues Structure, December 2006 Page 13 of 14 Appendix 3: Current (col A) and Proposed (col H) Union Dues

Column:- A B C D E F G H I J

Difference Operating Dues in € Difference Lower Dues Union between 2007 Expenses if pro-rated between Band Proposed Band Union as % Operating current Dues as % of to current and Average Band Boundary of total Expenses and new total Operating pro- rates Dues (see Col C) Expenses band € % € % € € € € € € IUCr 6,002 4.0% 3,227,834 28.1% 42,715 36,713 28,664 30,000 23,998 ≥ 1,000,000 IBRO 2,043 1.3% 1,663,286 14.5% 22,011 19,968 30,000 27,957 IUPAC 24,464 16.1% 1,606,995 14.0% 21,266 -3,198 30,000 5,536 IAU 11,275 7.4% 787,867 6.9% 10,426 -849 8,307 7,000 -4,725 ≥ 400,000 IUFRO 2,043 1.3% 467,558 4.1% 6,187 4,144 7,000 4,957 IUPAP 13,472 8.9% 375,063 3.3% 4,963 -8,509 2,539 2,500 -10,972 ≥ 80,000 IUNS 2,043 1.3% 315,980 2.8% 4,181 2,138 2,500 457 IUGG 13,472 8.9% 303,308 2.6% 4,014 -9,458 2,500 -10,972 IUBMB 3,583 2.4% 301,016 2.6% 3,983 400 2,500 -1,083 IUBS 9,297 6.1% 293,686 2.6% 3,886 -5,411 2,500 -6,797 IMU 6,002 4.0% 291,029 2.5% 3,851 -2,151 2,500 -3,502 IUGS 9,297 6.1% 278,446 2.4% 3,685 -5,612 2,500 -6,797 URSI 4,682 3.1% 231,463 2.0% 3,063 -1,619 2,500 -2,182 IUPHAR 1,605 1.1% 225,121 2.0% 2,979 1,374 2,500 895 IUPAB 3,583 2.4% 125,813 1.1% 1,665 -1,918 2,500 -1,083 ISPRS 2,704 1.8% 122,874 1.1% 1,626 -1,078 2,500 -204 IUPsyS 2,704 1.8% 112,425 1.0% 1,488 -1,216 2,500 -204 IUPS 4,682 3.1% 107,177 0.9% 1,418 -3,264 2,500 -2,182 IUFoST 2,043 1.3% 107,084 0.9% 1,417 -626 2,500 457 INQUA 4,682 3.1% 102,363 0.9% 1,355 -3,327 2,500 -2,182 IUSS 2,704 1.8% 94,494 0.8% 1,250 -1,454 2,500 -204 IUTAM 2,704 1.8% 89,983 0.8% 1,191 -1,513 2,500 -204 IUMS 2,043 1.3% 86,024 0.7% 1,138 -905 2,500 457 IUTOX 1,605 1.1% 82,264 0.7% 1,089 -516 2,500 -895 IUMRS 3,583 2.4% 32,297 0.3% 427 -3,156 193 1,600 < 80,000 IUPESM 1,605 1.1% 22,777 0.2% 301 -1,304 1,600 -5 IUHPS 1,605 1.1% 14,531 0.1% 192 -1,413 1,600 -5 IUAES 1,605 1.1% 3,404 0.0% 45 -1,560 1,600 -5 IGU 4,682 3.1% - 0.0% - -4,682 1,600 -3,082

Total 151,814 100% 11,472,162 100% 151,814 -0 159,500 -3,097

Interim Report of the Working Group to Review ICSU's Dues Structure, December 2006 Page 14 of 14 Appendix 11.3.1

SOME REMARKS AFTER THE ROME ICSU MEETING

IMU should foster the collaboration with ICSU and its different unions. The first step could be to initiate contacts with those unions more close to mathematics, like IUPAP, IUTAM or IAU. IMU could appoint some names for the different ICSU activities involving mathematics even if these persons do not belong to the IMU-EC or their committees; they could identify the mathematics therein and recommend actions for IMU and ICSU.

The mathematicians prefer to maintain themselves in their own territories; this is good to do nice mathematics, but not to get more public appreciation.

ICSU has postponed its Grants Program in 2006. The plan is to revise the success of the past programs, how to implement these grants in the new ICSU Strategic Plan, and to look for new financial sources (the current supporters are ISCU core, UNESCO and US). Two main aspects will be considered: capacity building and emerging issues.

An important issue for IMU: 2008 will be the Africa Year of Science. It would be a great occasion to promote mathematical activities there. The ICSU General Assembly will take place in Maputo (Mozambique), next October 2008.

Another major issue for IMU: We should stress the main role of mathematics in two different aspects:

• Education, where mathematics is a pillar; the ICSU goals in cooperation should put mathematics as an essential tool (that was appointed by the Latin America and Caribbean Regional Office). • Mathematics as a key technology; it is clear that ICSU needs to incorporate mathematics to its different programs, so the collaboration with IMU is crucial.

Of course, the WMDL is a project which fits well is ICSU goals; we could call the attention of ISCU to it.

Appendix 14.2.1

Von: Laszlo Lovasz An: Max Karoubi; CC: Martin Groetschel; Betreff: Re: Fields medals Datum: Freitag, 4. Mai 2007 10:35:00 Anlagen:

Dear Professor Karoubi, thank you for your message. These are concerns that have come up repeatedly, and deserve serious weighing. We'll discuss your suggestion at the EC meeting later this month, and I'll reply to you after the meeting.

Best regards,

Laszlo Lovasz

Max Karoubi wrote: > Dear Professor Laszlo Lovasz, > > I dont know if you have received my previous message below. I insist > that my proposition is very serious and I would like to know your > opinion about it. > > Best regards, > > Max Karoubi > > > > > > Dear Professor Laszlo Lovasz, > > As a member of the French Math. Society, EMS and AMS, I would like to > make a suggestion concerning the nomination of Fields medalists. > > It is an old tradition that the Fields medalists should not be more than > 40 in order to "encourage research". > > My suggestion is to raise this age limit for many reasons, both human > and scientific > > 1) This limit is a discrimination against women who have no time both to > take care of a family and produce a significant amount of work before > 40. No woman received the Fields medal till now. > > 2) There is a life factor : the progress of health and medicine has > augmented our life expectancy for at least 10 years (more for women) > since the 30's. Therefore, raising the age limit (to 50 for instance) of > the Fields medalists seems appropriate. Moreover, this measure would > permit to include mathematicians who have their best production around > 40-50 but not before (like Andrew Wiles for instance). > > 3) The Fields medal is no longer an encouragement to research. > You can notice that the Fields medalists are very bright before 40 (in > order to receive the medal...) but that some have a psychological crisis > few years later : one possible explanation is that they want to prove to > themselves and others that they really deserve the medal ! In my opinion > this is a loss for the mathematical community. > This situation is less likely to occur for more mature mathematicians. > > May be you can discuss my suggestion at a next meeting of the Executive > Committee of the IMU ? > > Best regards, > > Max Karoubi > > > PS. On the occasion of the European Mathematical Congress which I > created for the first time in 1992, we decided to give also prizes but > they are of a very different nature : 10 prizes are less competitive > than 2 or 4. Moreover, the age limit is around 32 and therefore these > prizes are really an encouragement to research (for men and women), > which is no longer the case for the Fields medals. > > > > > Appendix 14.2.2

Fields Medal Sponsorship – Items for Discussion

Scotiabank and the IMU are in preliminary discussions regarding a sponsorship opportunity associated with the prestigious Fields Medal. To facilitate these discussions, we have drafted the following initial list of items for negotiation.

1. Sponsorship Donation • Scotiabank will donate CAD$5million to a Foundation that will fund a financial award to accompany the Fields Medal. This will allow the financial award for each Medal recipient to be increased to CAD$250,000.

2. Naming Rights • Naming Rights – Scotiabank and the IMU to agree on an appropriate Name to recognize the Scotiabank sponsorship. • Scotiabank to have complete rights to use the Name including, but not limited to, marketing materials, presentations, meetings, Scotiabank websites, etc.

3. Scotia Marketing/Branding • The official Name to be used in all promotional communications, press releases, websites, publicity, events, etc. issued by Scotiabank or the IMU. Scotiabank to approve all documents issued by the IMU that include the Scotiabank name. • Scotiabank to be able to use a derivative of the Name for Canadian initiatives, subject to IMU approval (i.e. Scotiabank Junior Canadian Fields Medal - for Cdn high schools). • Scotiabank to participate in the redesign of the Medal Website. Future changes to the Medal Website subject to IMU and Scotiabank approval.

4. IMU Awards Ceremony • Scotiabank to be involved with redesign of Medal casing (i.e. packaging around the Medal) to include a Scotia trademark. • Scotiabank to present the cash award at the Award’s Ceremony. • Scotiabank to be named as the sponsor of the cash prize at the time of the Award presentation. • Scotiabank to receive a specified number of tickets to the Awards ceremony/dinner. • Scotiabank to be able to post marketing materials at the Awards Ceremony.

5. Access to Medal Winners • Each prize winner to attend and provide presentations at one event during the four year period following the medal award as specified by Scotiabank. This would be a condition of the prize winner accepting the monetary prize.

6. Corporate Governance Clauses • Termination clauses for: (i) changes to the Medal criteria, (ii) change to administering organization of the Medal (i.e. IMU), (iii) reputational risk issues, etc. • Receipt of IMU Board minutes, financial statements, etc. • Contract to be drafted under Ontario Law

Appendix 14.2.2 Scotiabank celebrates its 175th Anniversary

2007 celebrates the 175th anniversary of Scotiabank, recognizing a success that began in a single office in Halifax, Nova Scotia, in 1832. Scotiabank’s Global Platform

Scotiabank is one of North America’s premier financial institutions and Canada’s most international bank.

With close to 57,000 employees, Scotiabank Group and its affiliates serve approximately 12 million customers in 50 countries around the world, offering a diverse range of products and services, including personal, commercial, corporate and investment banking. Three strong, diversified growth platforms

Breakdown of 2006 Net Income available to common shareholders

Scotia 30% Capital 36% (domestic and international) Domestic Banking

Other 4%

International Banking 30% Domestic Banking

972 branches 100 Wealth Management offices 21,351 employees 2,750 ABMs Businesses Retail, small business Wealth Management – Mutual Funds – Brokerage (ScotiaMcLeod & ScotiaMcLeod Direct Investing) – Scotia Private Client Group Commercial Banking International Banking

Caribbean Asia Dominant bank, with 11 countries with 24 Mexico extensive presence in locations throughout Significant presence with 19 countries the region (including more than 400 branches China and India). and more than 7,000 employees Central America Only large foreign bank in four of the seven countries – South America Panama, Costa Rica, Belize Full operations in Chile and and El Salvador Peru, affiliate in Venezuela, representative office in Brazil Scotia Capital

Globally, Scotia Capital provides full service capabilities across North America and Mexico and offers niche offerings across Europe and Asia

Vancouver Calgary Portland Dublin London Denver Montreal Toronto Halifax San Francisco Chicago Boston New York Houston Atlanta Gibraltar Monterrey Guadalajara Dubai Mexico City Hong Kong Mumbai

Kuala Lumpur SingaporeSingapore

Scotia Capital ScotiaMocatta (Precious Metals) Scotia Waterous (O il & Gas M&A) Scotiabank Sponsorships

The Scotiabank Giller Prize is the richest literary award in the country awarding the winner $40,000 and runners-up $2,500 each (www.scotiabankgillerprize.ca). Literature is the cornerstone for arts and culture in Canada, and Scotiabank is proud to support and celebrate the literary accomplishments and aspirations of Canadian writers, by becoming co-sponsor of the Scotiabank Giller Prize. Scotiabank Sponsorships

Scotiabank Nuit Blanche invites Torontonians to encounter the city in a unique way and rediscover Toronto through public art commissions, all-night exhibitions, live performances and creative programs featured throughout the city (www.ccca.ca/nuitblanche/). The Fields Medal and Scotiabank - Proposal

Scotiabank will donate CAD$5million to a Foundation that will fund prize money for the Fields Medal. Each recipient will receive CAD$250,000. The Fields Medal and Scotiabank - Proposal

Naming Rights – Scotiabank and the IMU to agree on an appropriate Award Name. – Scotiabank to have complete rights to use the Name including, but not limited to, marketing materials, presentations, meetings, Scotia websites, etc.

Scotiabank Marketing/Branding – The award would be called by its Name in all promotional communications, press releases, websites, publicity, events, etc. issued by Scotiabank or the IMU. Scotiabank to approve all documents issued by the IMU that include the Scotiabank name. – Scotiabank to be able to use a derivative of the Medal name for Canadian initiatives, subject to IMU approval (i.e. Scotiabank Junior Cdn Fields Medal - for Cdn high schools). – Scotiabank to be able to participate in the redesign of the Medal Website. Future changes to the Medal Website subject to IMU and Scotiabank approval. The Fields Medal and Scotiabank - Proposal

IMU Awards Ceremony – Scotiabank to be involved with redesign of Medal Presentation casing (i.e. packaging around the Medal) to include a Scotiabank trademark. – Scotiabank to present the cash award at the Award’s Ceremony. – Scotiabank to receive a specified number of tickets to the Awards Ceremony/dinner. – Scotiabank to be named as the sponsor of the cash prize at time of Awards. – Scotiabank to be able to post marketing materials at the Awards Ceremony.

Access to Medal Winners – Each prize winner to attend and provide presentations at one event during the four year period following the medal award as specified by Scotiabank. This would be a condition of the prize winner accepting the monetary prize. The Fields Medal and Scotiabank - Proposal

Corporate Governance Clauses – Termination clauses for: (i) changes to the Medal criteria, (ii) change to administering organization of the Medal (i.e. IMU), (iii) reputational risk issues, etc. – Receipt of IMU Board minutes, financial statements, etc. – Contract to be drafted under Ontario Law. The Fields Medal and Scotiabank – Next Steps

Scotiabank to propose potential award Names to the IMU

Scotiabank to prepare draft agreement to use as a discussion paper with the IMU Scotiabank Contacts

Mike Durland Managing Director and Co-Head, Scotia Capital Markets Group 416-866-4705 [email protected]

John Doig Senior Vice-President, Marketing, Scotiabank 416-723-4377 [email protected]

Sandy McRae Director – Business Development , Scotia Capital Markets Group 416-945-4402 [email protected] Appendix 14.4.1

Von: Martin Groetschel An: [email protected]; CC: Betreff: IMU EC CL 03/07: Plans for establishing an Ito fund Datum: Sonntag, 21. Januar 2007 18:49:55 Anlagen: Ito-fund_070122.pdf Ito-fund_070122.doc Math 06-7.doc 07Math-PhysPR.doc

To the IMU 2007-2010 Executive Committee

Dear colleagues,

Kyosi Ito, the recipient of the first Gauss Prize, has decided to donate the monetary award to IMU. In his acceptance speech Ito said: "I hope you allow me to donate the monetary award of the Gauss Prize to the IMU scholarship funds for young mathematicians so that they can be encouraged to pursue their own interests, as I was allowed to do more than sixty years ago."

At the International Congress in Madrid several persons came up with ideas to create one or several "IMU funds" in order to support some of the activities of IMU. As usual, whenever such plans are made, many people are enthusiastic, but when it comes to making plans real it is not so easy to find sustainable support. The most difficult issue is to start such a campaign successfully.

The donation announced by Ito (the German Mathematical Society has transfered the monetary award of 10,000.00 Euros already to the IMU account) is an excellent opportunity to get started. Some colleagues have already begun to approach potential donors, in particular in Japan's "financial world".

John Ball, Laci Lovasz, and I have prepared a flyer to support this search for potential donors, see attachment. We have not yet drafted the precise conditions of what we would like to call the "Ito fund" since the initial donors may have special wishes and requests and we would like to be able to react flexibly (in case of really significant donations).

This circular letter is meant to inform you about the plans. John Ball is currently contacting potential donors via some friends and colleagues in Great Britain and Japan. I have started to investigate how one can create a fund in Germany to which tax deductible donations can be made. It may be necessary to create such funds also in other countries (such as Japan and the USA) since tax deductions by donations accross borders may be difficult due to national tax laws.

You can help to foster this plan, by suggesting and possibly approaching potential donors, and by proposing good ideas how to develop this plan further. Before you approach somebody, please let me know in order to avoid contacts of a person from several EC members.

Please find in the attachment the announcement of the decision of the Jury and the Press Release for the 2007 Wolf Prizes in Mathematics and Physics. The mathematics Wolf Prize goes to Stephen J. Smale and Harry Furstenberg. The IMU president has congratulated the awardees on this prize.

Best regards

Martin

Appendix 14.4.1

International Mathematical Union President Prof. L. Lovász President Prof. L. Lovász, Secretary Prof. M. Grötschel www.mathunion.org

Plans for establishing an Itô fund

The International Mathematical Union (IMU) has established, together with the German Mathematical Society (DMV), the Carl Friedrich Gauss Prize for Applications of Mathematics, to be awarded for outstanding mathematical contributions that have found significant practical applications outside of mathematics. This prize was awarded for the first time at the opening ceremony of the International Congress of Mathematicians in August 2006 in Madrid, Spain. The first recipient was Professor Kiyosi Itô, one of the pioneers of probability theory, and the Former IMU President Sir John Ball presents the Gauss Medal to Prof. Itô, September 14, 2006. originator of Itô Calculus. First published in 1942 in Japanese, this epoch-making theory of stochastic differential equations describes nondeterministic and random evolutions. The so- called Itô formula has found applications in many branches of mathematics as well as in various other fields including, e.g., conformal field theory in physics, stochastic control theory in engineering, or population genetics in biology. Itô’s work had its most recent and probably most significant impact in economics. Modern mathematical finance is unthinkable without his contributions. Itô Calculus forms, for instance, the backbone of the analysis and risk management of derivatives.

In his acceptance speech Prof. Itô stated: “I hope you allow me to donate the monetary award of the Gauss Prize to the IMU scholarship funds for young mathematicians so that they can be encouraged to pursue their own interests, as I was allowed to do more than sixty years ago.”

Starting with Prof. Itô’s generous donation, the IMU is now exploring possibilities to establish an Itô fund to make Itô’s dream come true. The plan is to set up a fund with which the independent mathematical work of young mathematicians can be supported - the world over. This support could be in the form of travel grants, scholarships, or contributions to special activities. The fund will be set up in such a way that donations can be deducted from tax.

IMU is ready to discuss the precise conditions of the usage of the funds with the initial donors.

Infos about the Gauss Prize: http://www.mathunion.org/General/Prizes/2006/ http://www.mathunion.org/General/Prizes/Gauss/index.html

Contact: Prof. Dr. Martin Grötschel Secretary International Mathematical Union c/o Konrad-Zuse-Zentrum, Takustr. 7, D-14195 Berlin, Germany E-mail: [email protected] Appendix 14.4.1

Von: John Ball An: IMU Secretary; Laci Lovasz; CC: Betreff: FW: Ito Fund Datum: Samstag, 5. Mai 2007 16:34:08 Anlagen:

______

John Ball Mathematical Institute 24-29 St Giles' Oxford OX1 3LB U.K. tel +44 (0)1865 273577 fax +44 (0)1865 273586 Sec. +44 (0)1865 273543 email [email protected] URL http://www.maths.ox.ac.uk/~ball ______

-----Original Message----- From: KUSUOKA Shigeo [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 05 May 2007 07:09 To: John Ball Subject: Ito Fund

Dear John,

I asked about the Ito Fund to some people and they showed the following problems and their opinions.

1. Target money amount of the Ito fund

We have to show the concrete amount how much we need.

2. Purpose and how to use the fund

In Purpose, we have to explain the grant for young mathematicians is necessary and it contributes to the public society and the world. We think that this is a unique explanation for companies.

Also, the rule about the Ito Fund which shows that who can get the grant, how they are chosen, how much grant is given, how manage and invest the fund, etc.

3. Report to companies which contribute and Method to publish names of firms who contribute.

Probably the best method is to make a HP about Ito Fund in IMU HP and show names (and contributed amounts?) of firms and how the fund is used.

4. Whom we ask donations.

There is an opinion that we must ask donation not only to companies but also to individuals and that unit amount of donation should be low for this purpose (e.g. 1,000 dollars or 100 dollars). (I do not know whether the idea of unit amount exists in Europe.)

5. Who receives the donation for the Ito Fund in Japan (or in other countries).

A lot of people whom I talked to thinks that Japanese firms in Japan may not give donation to IMU directly, because they may not think that IMU is a legal organization. If so, we have to choose a legal organization in Japan as a branch of the Ito Fund. I got in a contact with the president of Math. Soc. Japan, and he had an affirmative opinion for that MSJ becomes a kind of branch.

We have a special problem in Japan

There are some foundations or corporations which have a privilege to give tax reduction to firms which give donation. Maybe London Mat. Society has such a privilege. Unfortunately MSJ does not have such a privilege. I looked for a foundation related to mathematics with such a privilege. I thought that a certain foundation has such a privilege and help us. But it turned out that this foundation gave up such a privilege some years ago. So there is no way to give tax reductions or income reductions to firms about donation to Ito Fund in Japan.

A professor in Economics Department in Keio Univ. helps me very well. He knows Prof. Ito individually and has a strong connections with firms. But he is afraid that if we try to collect donation and it is not successful, it stains the name of Prof. Ito. This idea is quite natural in Japan.

So we decide to get in contact with executives of some firms unofficially in summer after IMU decisions and try to estimate how much we can collect in Japan. If we are convinced that we can collect enough donation, then we will start fund campaign officially. But if not, we may not start it. I am sorry.

This is a situation in Japan at the moment.

We do not predict the reaction of firms. People around me are rather pessimistic, but they will help for Ito Fund.

I hope that you have a good news from Nomura. with my best wishes,

Shigeo Kusuoka

Appendix 14.5.1

Von: Martin Groetschel An: [email protected]; CC: Betreff: IMU EC CL 20/07: IMU Prizes Datum: Freitag, 4. Mai 2007 09:06:50 Anlagen: chern medal concept.doc ChernMedal029.pdf

To the IMU 2007-2010 Executive Committee

Dear colleagues,

I would like to report about some exciting, very recent developments concerning IMU Prizes that we will have to discuss in Oslo.

1. Chern Medal In a sequence of negotiations in which Phil, John and Laci were/are involved on the IMU side, it turned out that May Chu, the daughter of S.S. Chern, proposes to create a new prize, to be called Chern Medal, which she is willing to endow with 1 million US$. In addition, Jim Simons has promissed to add 2 million US$ to the initial endowment. The IMU representatives have, together with May Chu, worked out a concept for the Chern Medal that creates a prize that is not in competition with the current prizes and complements our portfolio very well.

You can find the details in the e-mail below and in the attachments.

2. Fields Medal Those who have been on the previous EC may remember that there were various (unfortunately failed) attempts in the past years to increase the endowment of the Fields Medal. There is again such a drive, coordinated by Barbara Lee Keyfitz, the director of the Fields Institute. It looks so promissing that I will fly to Toronto this weekend in order to get into touch with the bank that is considering a donation and start the final negotiation about the terms.

Best regards

Martin

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: Laszlo Lovasz [mailto:[email protected]] Gesendet: Donnerstag, 3. Mai 2007 07:52 An: may chu Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Betreff: Re: Chern Medal

Dear Mrs. Chu, thank you very much for sending us the "Concept" and the pledge of the Simmons Foundation. The Executive Committee will discuss this later this month, and I'll get back to you with the results of this discussion.

Best regards,

Laszlo Lovasz

may chu wrote: > Dear Professor Lovasz: > > Enclosed please find the proposal to establish the Chern Medal to be > overseen by the International Mathematics Union (IMU) and to be > presented at its next quadrennial Math Congress. The Medal, if approved > by the IMU, will be funded by an endowment of US$ 3,000,000 to be > composed of a contribution of US$ 1,000,000 from the S. S. Chern > Foundation for Mathematical Research and US$ 2,000,000 from the James > and Marilyn Simons Foundation. As president of the Chern Foundation, I > pledge that amount if the Chern Medal comes to fruition. A pledge > letter from the Simons Foundation is also attached. > > Please let me know if there are additional information which you require. > > Best regards, > > May Chu Appendix 14.5.1

CHERN MEDAL

CONCEPT AND PROPOSAL May 2007

The S. S. Chern Foundation for Mathematical Research (Foundation) proposes to establish the Chern Medal (Medal) to be given by the International Mathematics Union (IMU) at its next International Congress of Mathematicians in 2010. The recipient is to be recognized for his or her lifelong contribution to the field of mathematics. In addition, there will be a requirement that half of the award be donated to an organization of the recipient’s choice to support research, education, outreach or other activities to promote mathematics.

Rationale

Professor S. S. Chern devoted his life to mathematics, both in active research and education, and in nurturing the field whenever the opportunity arose. In recognition of his life, the Foundation proposes to establish a medal in his honor. The Foundation will contact the IMU to determine whether the IMU is willing to sponsor this medal. Currently, the IMU bestows three prizes: the Fields Medal for outstanding mathematical achievement under the age of 40, the Nevanlinna Prize for distinguished achievements in mathematical aspects of information science, and the Gauss Medal for outstanding mathematical contributions that have found significant applications outside of mathematics. The addition of the Chern Medal will complement the range of awards given by the IMU and, since the IMU is the premier international association of mathematicians, it is the ideal institution to grant the Chern Medal.

Mode of Operation

A non-profit organization will be established in the U.S. to manage the endowment for the Chern Medal. The IMU will establish a committee to choose the recipient.

Resource Requirements and Budget

The Foundation will donate $1 million to establish the endowment. These funds will be matched 2-for-1 by the James and Marilyn Simons Foundation resulting in an initial endowment of $3 million. Using required Internal Revenue Service standards for distributions, 5% (or $150,000) of the assets must be distributed annually. Since the Medal will be presented once every four years, there will be $600,000 accumulated to fund each award. It is proposed that the prize be $500,000 leaving $100,000 to the IMU for its expenses related to the Medal. In addition, there will be a philanthropy requirement that the recipient donate half of this award to promote mathematics. Professor Chern was generous during his lifetime in his personal support of the field and it is hoped that this philanthropy requirement for the promotion of mathematics will set the stage and the standard for mathematicians to continue this generosity on a personal level.

Appendix 14.5.1 Appendix 14.8.1

Von: ? ? An: [email protected]; CC: Betreff: RE: AW: Hello, this letter is a recommendation. Datum: Sonntag, 1. April 2007 17:12:45 Anlagen:

Dear Mr. Groetschel

Thank you very much for your reply.

Thank you also for kindly offering to put my proposal to the IMU EC meeting's agenda.

The ultimate goal or such a proposal, as being raised in my letter, is to provide female mathematicians around the world with a more favorable environment. So, I will appreciate it too, if you and the Union deem that there will be more effective and feasible way to achieve this goal.

Best regards,

yours sincerely Huang yi

From: "IMU Secretary" To: "'? ?'" CC: , , , Subject: AW: Hello, this letter is a recommendation. Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2007 17:35:42 +0200 >Dear Huang Yi, > >The Executive Committee of the International Mathematical >Union has two female members whom I have consulted concerning >your suggestion. The remarks below are a composition of parts >of their replies. > >"There is already a prize for women mathematicians, the Ruth Lyttle >Satter Prize, see: >http://www.ams.org/prizes/satter-prize.html >Though awarded by the AMS, it is an international prize (maybe not very >well known). Maybe IMU could help publicize this prize, rather than >create yet another one, which in some sense would compete with this >one. We already have the Emmy Noether Lecture at the ICM, and we >could discuss how to develop this, e.g. by more publicity and more >arrangements around it at the congress. I do not think it would be a >good idea to have a "women's Fields Medal"! And it is certainly very >encouraging that last year's Ramanujan Prize was awarded to a woman. > >But there is a problem. There is something "structural" about the >Field's Medal rules that disadvantages women -- the age limit. >We should as an IMU EC do something. Not a Women's Field's Medal. But >equally, it's not enough if a National Society has such a Prize. >Perhaps develop the Noether lecture; perhaps seek further input." > >Having to disuss IMU Prizes at the forthcoming IMU EC meeting >in May 2007 anyway, I will add the issue you raised to our >agenda. > >Thank you for your proposal. > >Martin Groetschel > > >+------+ >| Martin Groetschel | >| Secretary of the | >| International Mathematical Union (IMU) | >| URL: http://www.mathunion.org | >| e-mail: [email protected] | >+------+ >|Postal Address: |Telecommunication: | >|Zuse Institute Berlin|Tel: +49 30 84185 210| >|Takustr. 7 |Tel: +49 30 314 23266| >|D-14195 Berlin |FAX: +49 30 84185 269| >|Germany |Sec: +49 30 84185 208| >+------+ >| personal URL: www.zib.de/groetschel | >+------+ > > > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > Von: ? ? [mailto:[email protected]] > > Gesendet: Freitag, 23. März 2007 11:07 > > An: [email protected] > > Betreff: Hello, this letter is a recommendation. > > > > Dear Sir or Madam: > > > > I am a Chinese student majoring in mathematics. I am writing > > this letter to recommend that the Union grant a special prize > > for female mathematicians. For reasons I list below: > > > > First, women are facing markedly more difficulties than man > > in the pursuit of mathematics. Beside the mental and physical > > ordeals an individual of both genders must bear before > > entering the rarified world of math, female mathematicians > > are actually suffering more because of being women. In every > > day life, women may have to take more family > > responsibilities, and in working place, they may have to bear > > the ungrounded suspicion of their abilities to do > > mathematical research. As long as the stereotype of woman > > exists, female mathematician will go on to sacrifice more for > > the same accomplishment than do a male mathematician. > > Although the Fields Prize is said to be established to > > recognize outstanding mathematical achievement of the both > > genders, however, it is a fact that not a single woman had > > been awarded this prize since 1924. It is seemly equal for > > women and men to compete for the same prize but, considering > > the extra difficulties female mathematicians must confront, > > the competition is essentially unfair for women. > > > > Secondly, there are two compelling reasons for establishing a > > new prize especially for female mathematician. 1. It is a > > well known to ecologists that diversity is an assurance for > > both the health development and long existence of living > > things, the same is true also for the field of mathematics. I > > tend to acknowledge the presence of differences between man > > and woman in the structure and functioning of their brains, > > and up to now no one can say definitely brains of which > > gender is assuming absolute superiority in a particular field > > human endeavor. So, one thing may be accomplished by the > > establishment of such a prize could be finding out what > > female mental faculty could contribute to the development of > > mathematics should it be exploited to its utmost capacity, > > which may prove beneficial for the development of > > mathematics. 2. The establishment of such a prize would > > undoubtedly help expunge the prejudice for woman > > mathematicians. Young female mathematicians will also find > > encouragement and confidence from female mathematicians > > awarded by the prize resulting in more and more of them may > > go further in the pursuit of mathematics without dropping out > > half way. The two reasons are not mutual independent, but in > > a word, a prize for female mathematician solely will do good > > to woman mathematicians as well as to the field of mathematics per se. > > > > Considering the relatively small number of female > > mathematician right now, such a prize is not necessarily > > follow the constitution of the Fields Prize and could either > > be awarded to less person (say one to two each time) or > > assume a longer span between two awards. > > > > > > > > Thanks very much for reading. > > > > Best wishes, > > > > > > Yours sincerely Huang Yi > > > > PS: 'Huang' is my surname, and 'Yi' is my given name. > > > > > > ______> > > > Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! MSN Messenger > > Download today it's FREE! > > >

Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! MSN Messenger Download today it's FREE! Appendix 15.1

INTERNATIONAL MATHEMATICAL UNION

STATUTES

2006 (Approved by the 2006 General Assembly, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.)∗

I. Objective of the Union

1. The objectives of the International Mathematical Union, hereinafter designated as Formatiert: Nummerierung und the Union, are: Aufzählungszeichen

(a) To promote international cooperation in mathematics; (b) To support and assist the International Congress of Mathematicians and other international scientific meetings or conferences; (c) To encourage and support other international mathematical activities considered likely to contribute to the development of mathematical science in any of its aspects, pure, applied, or educational.

2. In the pursuit of its objectives the Union is explicitly, but not exclusively, Formatiert: Nummerierung und empowered: Aufzählungszeichen

(a) To adhere to the International Council for Science; (b) To organize international mathematical meetings and conferences; (c) To engage in or support the publication and distribution of scientific material in the field of mathematics, provided that any expenses thereby incurred shall be treated as items of special expenditure under article 30; (d) To engage in mathematical activities of an international character or to advise and assist other international organizations engaging in such activities, provided that any expenses thereby incurred shall be treated as items of special expenditure under article 30; (e) To promote and facilitate the international exchange of mathematicians and students of mathematics for scientific purposes; (f) To publish and distribute information concerning the organization and the activities of the Union.

II. Membership

3. A country adheres to the Union through an Adhering Organization, which may be Formatiert: Nummerierung und its principal academy, a mathematical society, its research council or some other Aufzählungszeichen institution or association of institutions, or an appropriate agency of its government. The adhering countries are designated hereinafter as the members of the Union.

∗ Revised version of May 21/22, 2007 (editorial changes only).

4. The term "country" is to be understood as including diplomatic protectorates and Formatiert: Nummerierung und any territory in which independent scientific activity in mathematics has been Aufzählungszeichen developed, and in general shall be construed as to secure the broadest and most effective participation of mathematicians in the scientific work of the Union.

5. In each case, the Adhering Organization shall form a Committee for Mathematics and its adherence to the Union shall not become effective until the composition of the Committee has been reported to and recognized by the members of the Union. The Committee shall act as adviser to the Adhering Organization in matters concerning the Union. The Adhering Organization may, if it wishes, delegate some of its power to the Committee for Mathematics. The Committee for Mathematics shall communicate to the Secretary of the Union the name of its Chair or Secretary.

6. When an application is made for membership in the Union, the Executive Committee shall examine the application and shall make a recommendation thereon to the members of the Union by correspondence or at a meeting of the General Assembly. The members shall accept or reject the application in the light of this recommendation and of any other considerations before them either by correspondence or at a meeting of the General Assembly. The adherence of a country is in one of the five groups I-V with corresponding voting powers and contributions as set out in articles 19 and 25. A country may change its classification with the approval of the members of the Union upon recommendation of the Executive Committee.

III. Associate Membership

7. To encourage a country to become a Member of IMU, a country may adhere to Formatiert: Nummerierung und the Union as an Associate Member through an Adhering Organization as Aufzählungszeichen described in article 3.

8. The Adhering Organization of an Associate Member shall form a Committee for Mathematics as described in article 5.

9. When an application is made for Associate Membership of the Union, the Executive Committee shall examine the application and make a recommendation thereon to the members of the Union by correspondence or at a meeting of the General Assembly. The members shall accept or reject the application in the light of this recommendation and of any other considerations before them either by correspondence or at a meeting of the General Assembly.

10. A country that has previously been a member of the Union is not eligible to apply for Associate Membership.

2 11. Associate Membership is for a period of four years from the date of election, renewable for one further period of four years on request to the Secretary of the Union. Associate Members are normally expected to apply for membership of the Union beginning no later than eight years from the date of election.

12. Extensions of Associate Membership beyond a period of eight years from the date of election may be granted for further periods of four years at a time. A request for such a four-year extension must be made to the Secretary of the Union. The Executive Committee shall examine the request and make a recommendation thereon to the members of the Union by correspondence or at a meeting of the General Assembly. The members shall accept or reject the application in the light of this recommendation and of any other considerations before them either by correspondence or at a meeting of the General Assembly.

IV. Affiliation

13. For the purpose of facilitating jointly sponsored activities and jointly pursuing the objectives of the IMU, multi-national mathematical societies and professional societies can be affiliated with the Union.

14. The members of the Union shall elect the affiliate members by Postal Ballots* or at meetings of the General Assembly upon recommendation of the Executive Committee. The affiliation may be terminated by the same procedure.

15. Affiliate members have the right to participate in the General Assembly but shall have no voting rights.

16. Such affiliate members have the right to submit proposals for joint activities to the General Assembly and to the President and Secretary for consideration of the Executive Committee.

17. The Executive Committee, with the support of the Adhering Organizations and Committees for Mathematics, shall look for ways to keep close relations with the affiliated organizations and to enhance mathematical activities in their regions and fields of interest. They shall receive the Bulletin of the IMU and be kept informed of all activities relevant to them.

IV. Administration

18. The authority of the Union derives from the members and is exercised either by correspondence or at a meeting of the General Assembly. The Union is administered by the Executive Committee, which, in accordance with these Statutes and subject to the direction and review of the members, shall conduct the business of the Union.

3 19. The General Assembly of the Union consists of delegates appointed by the Adhering Organizations, together with the members of the Executive Committee. For each General Assembly, each IMU Member Adhering Organization shall appoint and certify to the Secretary of the Union a delegation, which shall have the number of votes corresponding to the Group in which it adheres, as follows:

Group I II III IV V

Number of Votes 1 2 3 4 5

provided that the number of delegates shall not exceed the corresponding number of votes. Any Adhering Organization which desires to ensure its full quota of representatives at meetings of the General Assembly by the appointment of alternates for its regularly named delegates may do so, provided that no such alternate shall be permitted to participate in the work of the General Assembly until such delegate has been duly certified to the Secretary of the Union as assuming the powers and duties of the delegate he or she has been designated to replace. No person shall be a member of the delegation of more than one country. Each Adhering Organization of an Associate Member of the Union shall appoint and certify to the Secretary of the Union one delegate, who shall have no voting rights.

20. Voting by the General Assembly shall be by delegations, provided that each delegation shall be free to cast the votes to which it is entitled either as a unit or divided in such a manner as it may determine. The members of the Executive Committee shall have no votes as such in the General Assembly. Any Adhering Organization not represented at a meeting of the General Assembly may forward its votes by registered mail to the Secretary of the Union; and such votes shall be valid, if received two weeks prior to the beginning of the General Assembly, and if the original question has not been modified by substantial amendments. Voting by correspondence shall be in such a way that each member of the Union casts its votes as a unit, counted as many times as the group indicates. The majority of votes cast shall be decisive unless a specific provision to the contrary is contained in these Statutes.

21. The General Assembly may establish By-Laws on any matters not covered by these Statutes.

22. The Officers of the Union are a President, two Vice-Presidents and a Secretary, all elected by the General Assembly by written ballot. The President and the Vice- Presidents shall hold office for a term of four years, shall assume office on the first day of the calendar year following that in which they have been elected and shall not be eligible for immediate re-election to the same office. The Secretary shall hold office for a term of four years, shall assume office on the first day of the calendar year following that in which he or she has been elected and shall be

4 available for immediate re-election for one additional term. Members–at-Large shall hold office for a term of four years and shall assume office on the first day of the calendar year following that in which they been elected. No Members- at- Large can serve three or more consecutive terms. In the event of death, incapacity or resignation of the President, the Executive Committee shall choose one of the Vice-Presidents to carry on the functions of the President until a new President has been elected by the members of the Union for the unexpired term. In the case of any other office being vacated, the Executive Committee shall be empowered to fill the vacancy until the members of the Union shall have elected a successor for the unexpired term. These elections may be made at a meeting of the General Assembly or by Postal Ballot.

23. The Executive Committee of the Union consists of ten voting members, namely: the four Officers of the Union as designated in article 22, together with six Members-at-Large, elected by the General Assembly for terms of four years each, commencing on the first day of the calendar year following the year of their election. In addition, the retiring President shall be an ex-officio member without vote, for a period of four years. In the case of a vacancy among the Members-at- Large, the procedure shall be the same as designated in article 22.

24. The General Assembly shall normally meet once in four years, at a place and date determined by the members either at a meeting of the General Assembly or by postal ballot and arranged so far as possible to coincide with the International Congress of Mathematicians. Special meetings of the General Assembly shall be held upon the call of the Executive Committee at such times and such places as the Committee may designate. At the request of a majority of the total number of votes assigned to the members, the Executive Committee shall within six months call a special meeting of the General Assembly.

VI. Finance

25. Each Adhering Organization of a member of the Union shall pay an annual subscription in accordance with the Group in which it adheres, as follows:

Group I IIIII IV V

Number of Unit 1 2 4 8 12 Contributions

Associate Members of the Union pay no dues.

26. The Unit Contribution shall be determined by the General Assembly.

5 27. The Union may accept gifts, legacies and subventions, subject to the approval of the Executive Committee, and shall maintain a roll of benefactors on which shall be inscribed annually the names of those individuals or institutions that have contributed.

28. The Secretary of the Union shall act also as its Treasurer, unless the Executive Committee appoints one of its Members-at-Large for that purpose.

29. The legal domicile of the Union shall be located at the offices of the Secretary.

30. The financing of special projects of the Union shall be kept distinct from general expenditure, and an Adhering Organization shall be pledged only for the annual subscription in respect of general expenditure.

31. The Adhering Organizations shall be responsible for the payment of their respective annual contributions in accordance with the Groups in which they adhere. Subscriptions are due and payable on the first day of the calendar year to which they apply.

32. Any Adhering Organization which is in arrears with its contributions for two years shall be warned and shall be deprived of its voting rights. Any Adhering Organization which is in arrears for four years shall cease to be an adherent of the Union. In any case, before taking action, the Executive Committee shall submit the question to the members of the Union by correspondence or at a meeting of the General Assembly who under special circumstances may waive these provisions by a two-thirds majority of the total number of votes assigned to the members.

33. Any Adhering Organization, which shall withdraw from the Union or shall cease for any reason to be an adherent thereof, shall forfeit claims upon the funds of the Union.

34. In the event of the dissolution of the Union, the settlement of its indebtedness shall be chargeable to general expenditure; and any surplus remaining after such settlement shall be disposed of by the General Assembly on recommendation of the Executive Committee, in such manner as may then be deemed most likely to aid the development of mathematical science.

VII. Statutes

35. Changes in the Statutes may be proposed by the Executive Committee or by any of the Adhering Organizations. Notice of changes so proposed shall reach the Secretary of the Union at least four months before the meeting of the General Assembly at which action is to be taken. No change shall be made in the Statutes except at a meeting of the General Assembly and with the approval of the two- thirds majority of the total number of votes assigned to the members. Statute

6 changes become effective on the day following the close of the General Assembly, unless otherwise stipulated in the proposed Statute change.

VIII. Duration of the Union

36. The Union shall not be dissolved except at a meeting of the General Assembly, and with the approval of a two-thirds majority of the total number of votes assigned to the members.

*Postal Ballots may include communication via the post, Internet or fax as deemed appropriate by the Secretary.

BY – LAWS

I. Administration

37. The General Assembly shall meet as provided in the Statutes. Notice of special meetings shall be dispatched to the Adhering Organizations at least six months in advance.

38. The Executive Committee, the Adhering Organizations, and the Commissions of the Union may propose business to be transacted at meetings of the General Assembly. Such proposals shall reach the Secretary at least four months before the meeting at which they are to be considered.

39. The agenda for a meeting of the General Assembly shall be dispatched by the Executive Committee to the Adhering Organizations at least three months before the meeting at which they are to be considered. A question which has not been put upon the agenda may be discussed, but shall not be put to the vote unless a proposal to that effect be approved by a majority of the total number of votes assigned to the members.

40. The President with the approval of the Executive Committee may invite any person to participate in a meeting of the General Assembly for purposes of consultation upon specific items on the agenda, but such an invited participant shall have no vote.

41. The General Assembly shall

a. Admit or reject organizations in the manner laid down in the Statutes; b. Elect the Officers of the Union and the Members-at-Large of the Executive Committee; c. Establish the Commissions of the Union, determine their terms of reference and elect their Chair; and elect also representatives of the Union on Joint Commissions formed in cooperation with other international organizations;

7 d. Examine and establish the regular budget and propose the projects which shall be financed independently of general expenditure, in accordance with the Statutes of the Union; e. Receive and consider reports from the Executive Committee and from Commissions of the Union; f. Determine the calendar of its ordinary meetings; g. Prescribe rules under which the Executive Committee may initiate and conduct postal ballots among the members of the Union during periods between meetings of the General Assembly; h. Prescribe rules for the representation of the Union on the International Council for Science; i. Take such other actions as are necessary in the exercise of its authority under the Statutes and these By-Laws.

42. The Executive Committee shall present an annual report on its activities and those of the Union to each Adhering Organization and shall also report on its activities and those of the Union at each ordinary meeting of the General Assembly. The report to the General Assembly shall be dispatched by the Secretary to the Adhering Organizations at least two months before the meeting at which it is to be received.

43. The Executive Committee shall meet on the call of the President. The quorum for the transaction of its business shall consist of five voting members. The Executive Committee may conduct its business by Postal Ballot.

II. President and Vice-President

44. The President is Chair of the General Assembly and of the Executive Committee. In the President’s absence, one of the Vice-Presidents will chair the General Assembly. The President is an ex-officio member of all Commissions of the Union. In specific cases the President may delegate this responsibility to some other member of the Executive Committee.

III. Secretary

45. The Secretary is responsible for conducting the ordinary business of the Union and for keeping its records and shall act as Treasurer subject to the proviso of Statute 28. At least once every four years the members of the Union shall obtain from the Executive Committee an audit of the accounts.

IV. Commissions of the Union

46. The Commissions of the Union which may from time to time be established by the members of the Union by postal ballot or at a meeting of the General Assembly, may co-opt additional members, and shall generally have full freedom in arranging their own internal structure and work within the framework of the

8 Statutes and By-Laws of the Union. If special funds are provided for their use, they may make their own financial arrangements, subject to the approval of the Executive Committee.

47. The Chair of each Commission, or in the case of Joint Commissions one representative designated for that purpose, shall forward records of all meetings of the Commission to the Secretary and shall report on the activities of the Commission to the General Assembly. The reports of Commissions to the General Assembly shall reach the Secretary at least three months before the meeting at which they will be received and shall be dispatched by the Secretary to the Adhering Organizations at least two months before that meeting.

V. Finance

48. The Executive Committee shall prepare financial reports and budget estimates for the consideration of the General Assembly at each of its ordinary meetings, covering in its reports the period between the immediately preceding ordinary meeting and the meeting at which they are to be received, and covering in its estimates the period between the meeting at which they are received and the next following ordinary meeting. These reports and estimates shall be dispatched by post or by e-mail to the Adhering Organizations at least three months before the meeting at which they are to be received.

9 Appendix 15.1

INTERNATIONAL MATHEMATICAL UNION

STATUTES

2006 (Approved by the 2006 General Assembly, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.)∗

I. Objective of the Union

1. The objectives of the International Mathematical Union, hereinafter designated as the Union, are:

2. In the pursuit of its objectives the Union is explicitly, but not exclusively, empowered:

II. Membership

3. A country adheres to the Union through an Adhering Organization, which may be its principal academy, a mathematical society, its research council or some other institution or association of institutions, or an appropriate agency of its government. The adhering countries are designated hereinafter as the members of the Union.

∗ Revised version of May 21/22, 2007 (editorial changes only).

4. The term "country" is to be understood as including diplomatic protectorates and any territory in which independent scientific activity in mathematics has been developed, and in general shall be construed as to secure the broadest and most effective participation of mathematicians in the scientific work of the Union.

III. Associate Membership

7. To encourage a country to become a Member of IMU, a country may adhere to the Union as an Associate Member through an Adhering Organization as described in article 3.

8. The Adhering Organization of an Associate Member shall form a Committee for Mathematics as described in article 5.

10. A country that has previously been a member of the Union is not eligible to apply for Associate Membership.

IV. Affiliation

15. Affiliate members have the right to participate in the General Assembly but shall have no voting rights.

16. Such affiliate members have the right to submit proposals for joint activities to the General Assembly and to the President and Secretary for consideration of the Executive Committee.

IV. Administration

Group I II III IV V

Number of Votes 1 2 3 4 5

21. The General Assembly may establish By-Laws on any matters not covered by these Statutes.

VI. Finance

25. Each Adhering Organization of a member of the Union shall pay an annual subscription in accordance with the Group in which it adheres, as follows:

Group I II III IV V

Number of Unit 12 4 8 12 Contributions

Associate Members of the Union pay no dues.

26. The Unit Contribution shall be determined by the General Assembly.

28. The Secretary of the Union shall act also as its Treasurer, unless the Executive Committee appoints one of its Members-at-Large for that purpose.

29. The legal domicile of the Union shall be located at the offices of the Secretary.

33. Any Adhering Organization, which shall withdraw from the Union or shall cease for any reason to be an adherent thereof, shall forfeit claims upon the funds of the Union.

VII. Statutes

6 changes become effective on the day following the close of the General Assembly, unless otherwise stipulated in the proposed Statute change.

VIII. Duration of the Union

36. The Union shall not be dissolved except at a meeting of the General Assembly, and with the approval of a two-thirds majority of the total number of votes assigned to the members.

*Postal Ballots may include communication via the post, Internet or fax as deemed appropriate by the Secretary.

BY – LAWS

I. Administration

37. The General Assembly shall meet as provided in the Statutes. Notice of special meetings shall be dispatched to the Adhering Organizations at least six months in advance.

41. The General Assembly shall

II. President and Vice-President

III. Secretary

IV. Commissions of the Union

8 Statutes and By-Laws of the Union. If special funds are provided for their use, they may make their own financial arrangements, subject to the approval of the Executive Committee.

V. Finance

9 Appendix 16.1.1

Proposed changes May 14, 2007 1 Gelöscht: August 18 Gelöscht: 6 Scientific Program of the International Congress of Mathematicians (ICM)

Guidelines for the Program Committee (PC) and the Organizing Committee (OC)

1. General purpose of ICMs

International Congresses of Mathematicians are the most important IMU activity and need correspondingly careful preparation. Every ICM should reflect the current activity of mathematics in the world, present the best work being carried out in all mathematical subfields and different regions of the world, and thus, point to the future of mathematics. The invited speakers at an ICM should be mathematicians of the highest quality who are able to present current research to a broad mathematical audience.

2. Responsibilities of the Program Committee

2.1 The PC is responsible for the preparation of the Scientific Program of the ICM. It decides

• the structure of the program (e.g. the sections and their precise definition, the kind of lectures, their number, their purpose, and their arrangement, whether to have short communications and poster sessions); • the list of invited plenary and sectional speakers.

It is understood that all decisions about the ICM structure use the programs of previous ICMs as rough guidelines, but that innovations are, of course, not ruled out.

2.2 In its decision making with respect to the selection of panel chairs and members, and in particular, with respect to the plenary and sectional speakers, the PC should take into account appropriate

• gender balance ∗ • geographical/regional distribution (including smaller countries as appropriate) Gelöscht: ∗ • representation of developing countries Gelöscht: • representation of subfields of mathematics

as long as these considerations do not compromise mathematical quality. Here a Formatiert: Block, Einzug: Links: person represents the country that he or she lives and works in. 35,45 pt, Erste Zeile: 0 pt

Proposed changes May 14, 2007 2 Gelöscht: August 18 Gelöscht: 6 2.3 The privilege of sending the invitations belongs to the Organizing Committee (OC) of the ICM. Recommendations about the quality of the presentation and the expected audience of the lectures (see 3.1 for plenary lectures) are to be emphasized in the letters of invitation. The invited speakers should also be Gelöscht: tactfully expressed informed about technical equipment available in the lecture rooms and receive hints about making best use of these.

2.4 In addition to carrying out its task detailed in 2.1, the PC may make further recommendations to the OC and/or to the Executive Committee (EC) of the IMU, concerning the arrangement of the program, that will, in their opinion, enhance the prospects of success of the ICM as a continuing institution.

2.5 The IMU hopes that every PC member will make every effort to attend the Congress.

3. Plenary, sectional, special, and other lectures, further activities at the ICM

3.1 Plenary lectures

Plenary lectures are invited one-hour lectures to be held without other parallel activities. When choosing the speakers, the PC should take into account that diversity of themes is most desirable. If two lecturers are likely to have a partial overlap, it is the duty of the PC to make sure that the OC brings this to the Gelöscht: bring attention of the lecturers concerned. The lectures should be broad surveys of recent major developments, aimed at the entire mathematical community. Plenary Gelöscht: Plenary speakers should be given a precise indication by the PC of speakers should be outstanding mathematicians and good lecturers. It is the what is expected from them. privilege of the PC to select the plenary speakers. The PC may ask the sectional Gelöscht: They panels for advice but is not bound by such suggestions.

3.2 Sectional lectures and sectional panels

Sectional lectures are invited 45-minute lectures. Several sectional lectures are scheduled in parallel. The number of parallel sections will depend on the number of sections and sectional speakers chosen. The PC appoints a sectional panel that provides a (possibly) ordered list of suggested speakers. The panel should propose about 50% more speakers than the number of speakers allotted to the section so that the PC has some flexibility, e.g., to meet the goals of 2.2. The PC is free to negotiate with a panel on its suggestions. In case of conflicts the PC has the final decision.

3.3 Lectures associated with the IMU Prizes, media coverage

Since the names of the winners of the IMU Prizes will only be made public at the opening ceremony of the ICM it is not possible to precisely schedule lectures of the Fields Medal and Rolf Nevanlinna Prize winners in advance, and the number of such additional lectures needed will vary. For example, it may happen that a Gelöscht: extra Proposed changes May 14, 2007 3 Gelöscht: August 18 Gelöscht: 6 prize winner is already giving a plenary lecture. The OC should thus schedule five open one-hour slots for possible prize lectures (4 for Fields medalists, 1 for the Nevanlinna Prize winner), some of which may not be needed. In addition, two more such slots are needed for the Gauss Prize and the Chern Medal lecture. Reports on the work of the Fields medalists and Rolf Nevanlinna Prize winner are to be provided for at the beginning of the Congress, if possible on the first day. The speakers are appointed by the medals and prize committees and are not to be made public before the meeting. An account of the work of the Gauss Prize winner will be provided in the Gauss Prize Lecture. This lecture should aim at the general public. It is to be scheduled, if possible, on the second day of the meeting. The speaker of the Gauss Prize Lecture will be determined by the Gauss Prize Committee. The speaker’s name should only be made public during the opening ceremony. An account of the work of the Chern Medal winner will be provided in the Chern Medal Lecture. This lecture should aim at the general public. It is to be scheduled, if possible, on the second day of the meeting. The speaker of the Chern Medal Lecture will be determined by the Chern Medal Committee. The speaker’s name should only be made public during the opening ceremony. The practical arrangements are the responsibility of the Organizing Committee. Arrangements for media coverage are the joint responsibility of the OC and the Formatiert: Block IMU. The President of IMU will communicate the names of the prize winners, speakers, and prize committee members to the chair of the OC in sufficient time for necessary arrangements (for example, travel and accommodation, naming of committees in the printed programs, media coverage) to be made. This will in turn entail that a small number of OC members will also need to know confidential information, and it is the responsibility of the chair of the OC to do everything possible to ensure that there is no leakage of this information.

3.4 Short communications, poster sessions, unscheduled mathematical activities

It has become customary throughout the world that granting travel support often depends on the delivery of a lecture or presentation of a poster. The OC is requested to provide – depending on the available facilities – space and time for such presentations. It should discuss and possibly coordinate its activities in this direction with the PC. The contributed presentations need review to avoid the presentation of obviously wrong, or trivial, results. The review of contributed presentation is a demanding task and can only be done by the OC. Unscheduled mathematical activity, by small groups of people acting on their own initiative by organizing small seminars or the like, should be encouraged. The OC should take into account that such requests may arise spontaneously during the Congress.

3.5 Emmy Noether Lecture

Proposed changes May 14, 2007 4 Gelöscht: August 18 Gelöscht: 6 The series of Emmy Noether Lectures honours women who have made fundamental and sustained contributions to mathematics. The Emmy Noether Lecturer shall be chosen by a committee appointed by the IMU EC. The committee is advised to make its final choice after the PC has decided on the list of ICM speakers.

3.6 Other activities

The General Assembly has repeatedly recommended the scheduling of some less formal scientific events of broad interest during the Congress for ICM participants and/or the general public such as lectures for a broader audience, round tables, Gelöscht: . The PC may suggest such activities. However, the responsibility for video or software demonstrations, exhibitions, etc. The PC may suggest such events like activities, but the responsibility for organizing them lies with the OC. Gelöscht: lies in the hands of the OC.

4. Dissemination and publication of ICM contributions

4.1 Responsibility for all decisions in this matter belongs to the OC. The PC can, however, make recommendations:

• If possible, the invited plenary and sectional lectures should be published before the Congress in printed form or electronically. • Abstracts of all plenary and sectional lectures should be made available at the Congress in printed form. The OC is requested to also provide an abstract booklet of the contributed presentations. • It has become customary to print a Daily ICM Newsletter that informs the congress participants of highlights of the day, special activities, and program changes. The OC is asked to consider the dissemination of such information.

4.2 The OC is responsible for providing precise guidelines as to how abstracts and papers should be submitted, and decides on the form of publication and on the publisher. The IMU strongly supports open access to mathematical material. The OC should make sure that free electronic access is granted to the Congress Proceedings, if necessary after a grace period, and that copyright agreements are signed accordingly.

5. Composition and appointment of the PC

5.1 It is the privilege of the IMU President to select the chair of the PC. The chair should be chosen before the EC meeting in Year 1 of the EC term. At this first EC meeting, all other PC members are appointed by the EC in consultation with the Gelöscht: after discussion PC chair. It is desirable that PC members have ICM or IMU experience, e.g., as Gelöscht: an invited speaker of a previous ICM.

Proposed changes May 14, 2007 5 Gelöscht: August 18 Gelöscht: 6 5.2 The PC should have at most 12 members with at least one member nominated by the host country. The name of the PC chair will be made public upon appointment via IMU-Net. The names of all other PC members are to be kept secret until the Congress, when all names will be made public.

5.3 In choosing the membership of the PC the EC should ensure that there is appropriate subfield, gender and geographical balance, including membership Gelöscht: ject from those working in developing countries.

5.4 The selection of the PC members needs coordination with the selection of the members of IMU prize committees. It is advisable to appoint prize committees first and to inform the PC chair of their composition. Members of prize committees should neither be PC members nor members of sectional panels. Prize committee members have to be informed about this side constraint in their letter of invitation.

6. Guidelines for the work of the PC

6.1 The PC chair should be invited to the EC meeting where the other PC members are chosen. In that meeting the PC chair and the EC should agree on general targets to be met concerning the number of sections, the number of plenary and sectional speakers, the composition of panels, and the issues mentioned under 2.

6.2 The PC should start its work in Year 1 of the EC term by defining the sections of the ICM. Next the PC should also appoint, for each section, the panel chairs and Gelöscht: In Year 1 set up the sectional panels that will suggest plenary and sectional speakers. The PC chooses the panel chair and panel core members (usually 3-4). Then the core members plus the chair select the rest of the panel (total of about 6-8). The PC must complete the lists of plenary and sectional speakers one year before the beginning of the ICM. The PC has full responsibility for the decisions, but is advised to communicate with the IMU President before final decisions are made, in particular those concerning description of sections, panel composition, and lists of speakers. It is especially advisable to seek consensus with the EC whenever conflicts of interest occur.

6.3 The following rules should be applied:

• The composition of the panels should reflect gender balance and geographical spread. • No PC member should be a plenary or sectional speaker. • Members of the sectional panels should not be selected as speakers in their section, but may be chosen as invited speakers if proposed by another sectional panel.

Proposed changes May 14, 2007 6 Gelöscht: August 18 Gelöscht: 6 The invitation letter to join the PC or a panel should contain these guidelines, and the rules of item 6.3 should be pointed out in particular.

6.4 A member of the OC may be a plenary or sectional speaker, unless he or she is a PC member. A member of the OC being a member of one sectional panel may be a plenary or sectional speaker if proposed by another sectional panel.

6.5 For the section on "Mathematics education; popularization of mathematics", the PC should consult with the ICMI president when choosing the panel chair. Two of the core members of the panel should be nominated by the ICMI EC. For the section on "History of mathematics", ICHM should be involved in the choice of panel members.

6.6 The final lists of plenary and invited speakers should be sent to the president of the OC, who has the privilege to send the invitation letters on behalf of IMU.

6.7 The PC’s responsibility for the plenary and sectional lectures ends with the submission of the speaker list. Communication with the lecturers, requests for abstracts and the written texts belong to the task of the OC. If invited speakers reject the invitation and if the substitution process defined by the PC was not successful the OC has to contact the PC chair to decide on alternate invitations.

7. Suggested timeline for the work of the PC and OC

7.1 Year 1 PC chair’s name is made public after appointment via IMU-Net by the Secretary. Formatiert: Block, Einzug: Erste Zeile: 35,45 pt After first EC meeting: IMU secretary informs Adhering Organizations and Formatiert: Block, Einzug: Links: mathematical societies that the PC has been appointed. Suggestions for ICM 35,45 pt program structure are invited. The same is done electronically via IMU-Net. Coordination with the PC chair is necessary concerning the deadline for proposals. September: Decide on the structure of the scientific program of the ICM (including revision and update of the description of the sections), decide on short communications and poster sessions, other sessions (e.g. mathematical software), decide on eventual modification of number of speakers. September-December: First PC meeting should take place, suggest panel chairs Formatiert: Block and core panel members.

7.2 Year 2 January: Appoint panel chairs. January-February: Appoint additional 2–4 core members of each sectional panel. February-May: The panel chairs and core members appoint the remaining panel members in consultation with the PC chair (see 8.1 and 5.4). Proposed changes May 14, 2007 7 Gelöscht: August 18 Gelöscht: 6 After ICM program structure has been fixed IMU secretary invites proposals from Adhering Organizations and mathematical societies for invited plenary and sectional speakers. The same is done electronically via IMU-Net. May-December: Collect suggestions for plenary and sectional speakers from the Gelöscht: ( panels, from individuals and organizations considered suitable.. The PC may steer Gelöscht: and also interaction between some panels, in particular, if there are overlapping Gelöscht: and societies, and from PC) suggestions.

7.3 Year 3 January: All suggestions should be received. January-March: Final PC meeting should take place, finalizing the choices in Gelöscht: e consultation with the IMU President (see 6.2). April: Send final list of speakers and alternates to OC and President of IMU. August: OC receive acceptance from all invited speakers (or alternates). Gelöscht: R September: OC posts the list of speakers on the ICM web pages.

7.4 The deadlines of this timeline should be firmly kept. The PC chair is requested to remind and strongly encourage the colleagues involved to deliver the results in time.

8. Guidelines for the sectional panels

8.1 The panel chair and the core members choose the remaining panel members and subject to approval by the PC chair, in view of 5.4.

8.2 The following rules apply:

• No person should serve on two sectional panels. • Experience and tradition need to be transported to panels. Therefore, at least one core member should have some IMU/ICM experience, e.g., former EC member, previous panel member, former plenary or sectional ICM speaker, or former PC member. However, the number of persons serving on a panel twice should be kept low in order to include in the decision-making process large parts of the scientific community and to avoid "closed shops". • For some sections it may be advisable to seek nominations for panel members from international mathematical societies representing the areas covered. Examples could be the Bernoulli Society for stochastics and the Mathematical Programming Society for optimization and control theory.

8.3 The names of all panel chairs and members are to be kept secret until the Formatiert: Block, Einzug: Links: 0 Congress, when all names will be made public. The PC chair instructs all panel pt, Hängend: 36 pt chairs that all panel members have to be sworn to secrecy concerning their work Formatiert: Nummerierung und Aufzählungszeichen for the ICM program.

Proposed changes May 14, 2007 8 Gelöscht: August 18 Gelöscht: 6 9. Financial issues

9.1 IMU covers the expenses for meetings of the PC and the Prize committees. Before making financial commitments the committee chairs have to contact the IMU secretary concerning the budget available. All other financial matters are the responsibility of the Organizing Committee of the Congress.

9.2 A large-scale activity such as an ICM cannot be organized without the voluntary contribution of many individuals of the mathematical community. It is therefore understood that PC, panel members and invited speakers do not receive a honorarium. The OC is, however, asked to waive the registration fee for all invited speakers, the PC members, and all Prize Committee members. Gelöscht: and Gelöscht: itself 9.3 The OC should be prepared to help some of the invited speakers and PC members Formatiert: Block, Einzug: Links: 0 if they have difficulties to receive financial support or to pay for their ICM pt, Hängend: 35,45 pt, Mit Gliederung + Ebene: 2 + attendance by covering part of the local and/or travel expenses. Nummerierungsformatvorlage: 1, 2, 3, … + Beginnen bei: 1 + 9.4 It has become a tradition to make particular efforts that groups of mathematicians Ausrichtung: Links + Ausgerichtet an: 0 pt + Tabstopp nach: 39,6 pt + who have insufficient financial means, such as young mathematicians from Einzug bei: 39,7 pt, Tabstopps: developing countries, are partly supported to make their ICM attendance possible. 35,45 pt, Listentabstopp + Nicht an Who is supported, in what way and how the selection is made depends on local 39,6 pt circumstances, available funds, and the location of the ICM. The OC and IMU Gelöscht: ¶ Gelöscht: <#>The IMU reimburses the should negotiate on these issues and reach a consensus very early in the travel and accommodation costs for the preparation phase so that application processes can be opened in time. The OC meetings of the PC.¶ and IMU similarly negotiate how to handle the financial support (registration fee, Formatiert: Nummerierung und local and/or travel expenses) for prize winners and persons delivering Aufzählungszeichen reports/lectures on their work.

10. Special issues/recommendations

10.1 The previous PC chair should be invited to the first meeting of the new PC.

10.2 The PC chair is supposed to prepare a final report to the EC on the work of the PC, pointing out, in particular, problems that were encountered and suggestions Gelöscht: for improving the work of future PCs and for updating these guidelines.

10.3 All available final PC reports are to be made available (confidentially) to a newly Formatiert: Einzug: Links: 0 pt, appointed PC. Hängend: 36 pt

10.4 The IMU should keep a database of persons who have served on PCs or sectional panels, have been chairs of such committees, or have been plenary or invited speakers.

10.5 Proposal: delete 10.5 in view of 3.2. Although a PC will normally choose a majority of sectional speakers from the (possibly) ordered list of the sectional panel, the PC has the right to make different selections, for instance in order to Proposed changes May 14, 2007 9 Gelöscht: August 18 Gelöscht: 6 meet the targets negotiated and the criteria listed in 2. better. The PC may ask a panel to revise its suggestions, for example so as to obtain a more balanced list according to the criteria in 2.

10.6 The Organizing Committee of the ICM host country has the right to appoint one additional plenary speaker and up to four additional sectional speakers. The PC should negotiate with the president of the OC a mode for nominating the speakers from the host country so that the local choices can be taken into account when the final balancing is made. One possibility could be that the OC provides the PC with a list of nominees, not necessarily ordered, from which the PC can choose one plenary speaker and up to four sectional speakers. This will give the PC some flexibility with respect to the issues mentioned in 2.2.

10.7 Letters for panel chairs and panel members could follow the appended model letters. (Info: needs to be written)

10.8 Panel chairs should know the names of the other panel chairs, so that they may coordinate their selection processes when there are overlapping areas between two or more sections.

10.9 A panel can suggest a joint invitation for one lecture; two mathematicians can be invited together to report primarily on a joint project. In each such case, those invited can decide who will deliver the lecture.

10.10 The IMU Secretary should make sure that the OC sends invitations to the Con- gress to all persons serving on the PC and on sectional panels by making postal and/or e-mail addresses available to the OC.

10.11 These guidelines should be regularly updated.

Abbreviations:

EC Executive Committee of the IMU ICHM International Commission on the History of Mathematics (a commission of the IMU) ICM International Congress of Mathematicians ICMI International Commission on Mathematical Instruction (a commission of the IMU) ICMI EC Executive Committee of the ICMI IMU International Mathematical Union OC Organizing Committee of the ICM PC Program Committee of the ICM Appendix 16.1.1 Proposed changes May 14, 2007 1

Scientific Program of the International Congress of Mathematicians (ICM)

Guidelines for the Program Committee (PC) and the Organizing Committee (OC)

1. General purpose of ICMs

2. Responsibilities of the Program Committee

2.1 The PC is responsible for the preparation of the Scientific Program of the ICM. It decides

It is understood that all decisions about the ICM structure use the programs of previous ICMs as rough guidelines, but that innovations are, of course, not ruled out.

• gender balance • geographical/regional distribution (including smaller countries as appropriate) • representation of developing countries • representation of subfields of mathematics

as long as these considerations do not compromise mathematical quality. Here a person represents the country that he or she lives and works in.

2.3 The privilege of sending the invitations belongs to the Organizing Committee (OC) of the ICM. Recommendations about the quality of the presentation and the expected audience of the lectures (see 3.1 for plenary lectures) are to be Proposed changes May 14, 2007 2

emphasized in the letters of invitation. The invited speakers should also be informed about technical equipment available in the lecture rooms and receive hints about making best use of these.

2.5 The IMU hopes that every PC member will make every effort to attend the Congress.

3. Plenary, sectional, special, and other lectures, further activities at the ICM

3.1 Plenary lectures

Plenary lectures are invited one-hour lectures to be held without other parallel activities. When choosing the speakers, the PC should take into account that diversity of themes is most desirable. If two lecturers are likely to have a partial overlap, it is the duty of the PC to make sure that the OC brings this to the attention of the lecturers concerned. The lectures should be broad surveys of recent major developments, aimed at the entire mathematical community. Plenary speakers should be outstanding mathematicians and good lecturers. It is the privilege of the PC to select the plenary speakers. The PC may ask the sectional panels for advice but is not bound by such suggestions.

3.2 Sectional lectures and sectional panels

3.3 Lectures associated with the IMU Prizes, media coverage

Nevanlinna Prize winner), some of which may not be needed. In addition, two more such slots are needed for the Gauss Prize and the Chern Medal lecture. Reports on the work of the Fields medalists and Rolf Nevanlinna Prize winner are to be provided for at the beginning of the Congress, if possible on the first day. The speakers are appointed by the medals and prize committees and are not to be made public before the meeting. An account of the work of the Gauss Prize winner will be provided in the Gauss Prize Lecture. This lecture should aim at the general public. It is to be scheduled, if possible, on the second day of the meeting. The speaker of the Gauss Prize Lecture will be determined by the Gauss Prize Committee. The speaker’s name should only be made public during the opening ceremony. An account of the work of the Chern Medal winner will be provided in the Chern Medal Lecture. This lecture should aim at the general public. It is to be scheduled, if possible, on the second day of the meeting. The speaker of the Chern Medal Lecture will be determined by the Chern Medal Committee. The speaker’s name should only be made public during the opening ceremony. The practical arrangements are the responsibility of the Organizing Committee. Arrangements for media coverage are the joint responsibility of the OC and the IMU. The President of IMU will communicate the names of the prize winners, speakers, and prize committee members to the chair of the OC in sufficient time for necessary arrangements (for example, travel and accommodation, naming of committees in the printed programs, media coverage) to be made. This will in turn entail that a small number of OC members will also need to know confidential information, and it is the responsibility of the chair of the OC to do everything possible to ensure that there is no leakage of this information.

3.4 Short communications, poster sessions, unscheduled mathematical activities

3.5 Emmy Noether Lecture

The series of Emmy Noether Lectures honours women who have made fundamental and sustained contributions to mathematics. The Emmy Noether Proposed changes May 14, 2007 4

Lecturer shall be chosen by a committee appointed by the IMU EC. The committee is advised to make its final choice after the PC has decided on the list of ICM speakers.

3.6 Other activities

The General Assembly has repeatedly recommended the scheduling of some less formal scientific events of broad interest during the Congress for ICM participants and/or the general public such as lectures for a broader audience, round tables, video or software demonstrations, exhibitions, etc. The PC may suggest such activities, but the responsibility for organizing them lies with the OC.

4. Dissemination and publication of ICM contributions

4.1 Responsibility for all decisions in this matter belongs to the OC. The PC can, however, make recommendations:

5. Composition and appointment of the PC

5.1 It is the privilege of the IMU President to select the chair of the PC. The chair should be chosen before the EC meeting in Year 1 of the EC term. At this first EC meeting, all other PC members are appointed by the EC in consultation with the PC chair. It is desirable that PC members have ICM or IMU experience, e.g., as an invited speaker of a previous ICM.

5.2 The PC should have at most 12 members with at least one member nominated by the host country. The name of the PC chair will be made public upon appointment Proposed changes May 14, 2007 5

via IMU-Net. The names of all other PC members are to be kept secret until the Congress, when all names will be made public.

5.3 In choosing the membership of the PC the EC should ensure that there is appropriate subfield, gender and geographical balance, including membership from those working in developing countries.

6. Guidelines for the work of the PC

6.2 The PC should start its work in Year 1 of the EC term by defining the sections of the ICM. Next the PC should also appoint, for each section, the panel chairs and set up the sectional panels that will suggest plenary and sectional speakers. The PC chooses the panel chair and panel core members (usually 3-4). Then the core members plus the chair select the rest of the panel (total of about 6-8). The PC must complete the lists of plenary and sectional speakers one year before the beginning of the ICM. The PC has full responsibility for the decisions, but is advised to communicate with the IMU President before final decisions are made, in particular those concerning description of sections, panel composition, and lists of speakers. It is especially advisable to seek consensus with the EC whenever conflicts of interest occur.

6.3 The following rules should be applied:

The invitation letter to join the PC or a panel should contain these guidelines, and the rules of item 6.3 should be pointed out in particular. Proposed changes May 14, 2007 6

6.6 The final lists of plenary and invited speakers should be sent to the president of the OC, who has the privilege to send the invitation letters on behalf of IMU.

7. Suggested timeline for the work of the PC and OC

7.1 Year 1 PC chair’s name is made public after appointment via IMU-Net by the Secretary. After first EC meeting: IMU secretary informs Adhering Organizations and mathematical societies that the PC has been appointed. Suggestions for ICM program structure are invited. The same is done electronically via IMU-Net. Coordination with the PC chair is necessary concerning the deadline for proposals. September: Decide on the structure of the scientific program of the ICM (including revision and update of the description of the sections), decide on short communications and poster sessions, other sessions (e.g. mathematical software), decide on eventual modification of number of speakers. September-December: First PC meeting should take place, suggest panel chairs and core panel members.

May-December: Collect suggestions for plenary and sectional speakers from the panels, from individuals and organizations considered suitable.. The PC may steer interaction between some panels, in particular, if there are overlapping suggestions.

7.3 Year 3 January: All suggestions should be received. January-March: Final PC meeting should take place, finalizing the choices in consultation with the IMU President (see 6.2). April: Send final list of speakers and alternates to OC and President of IMU. August: OC receive acceptance from all invited speakers (or alternates). September: OC posts the list of speakers on the ICM web pages.

7.4 The deadlines of this timeline should be firmly kept. The PC chair is requested to remind and strongly encourage the colleagues involved to deliver the results in time.

8. Guidelines for the sectional panels

8.1 The panel chair and the core members choose the remaining panel members and subject to approval by the PC chair, in view of 5.4.

8.2 The following rules apply:

8.3 The names of all panel chairs and members are to be kept secret until the Congress, when all names will be made public. The PC chair instructs all panel chairs that all panel members have to be sworn to secrecy concerning their work for the ICM program.

9. Financial issues Proposed changes May 14, 2007 8

9.3 The OC should be prepared to help some of the invited speakers and PC members if they have difficulties to receive financial support or to pay for their ICM attendance by covering part of the local and/or travel expenses.

9.4 It has become a tradition to make particular efforts that groups of mathematicians who have insufficient financial means, such as young mathematicians from developing countries, are partly supported to make their ICM attendance possible. Who is supported, in what way and how the selection is made depends on local circumstances, available funds, and the location of the ICM. The OC and IMU should negotiate on these issues and reach a consensus very early in the preparation phase so that application processes can be opened in time. The OC and IMU similarly negotiate how to handle the financial support (registration fee, local and/or travel expenses) for prize winners and persons delivering reports/lectures on their work.

10. Special issues/recommendations

10.1 The previous PC chair should be invited to the first meeting of the new PC.

10.2 The PC chair is supposed to prepare a final report to the EC on the work of the PC, pointing out, in particular, problems that were encountered and suggestions for improving the work of future PCs and for updating these guidelines.

10.3 All available final PC reports are to be made available (confidentially) to a newly appointed PC.

10.4 The IMU should keep a database of persons who have served on PCs or sectional panels, have been chairs of such committees, or have been plenary or invited speakers.

10.5 Proposal: delete 10.5 in view of 3.2. Although a PC will normally choose a majority of sectional speakers from the (possibly) ordered list of the sectional panel, the PC has the right to make different selections, for instance in order to meet the targets negotiated and the criteria listed in 2. better. The PC may ask a Proposed changes May 14, 2007 9

panel to revise its suggestions, for example so as to obtain a more balanced list according to the criteria in 2.

10.7 Letters for panel chairs and panel members could follow the appended model letters. (Info: needs to be written)

10.8 Panel chairs should know the names of the other panel chairs, so that they may coordinate their selection processes when there are overlapping areas between two or more sections.

10.11 These guidelines should be regularly updated.

Abbreviations:

Program Committee

Noga Alon Tel-Aviv University, Israel, Chair Douglas Arnold Institute for Mathematics and its Applications, Minneapolis, USA Joaquim Bruna Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain Kenji Fukaya Kyoto University, Japan Vaughan Jones University of California, Berkeley, USA Nigel Hitchin Oxford University, United Kingdom Pierre-Louis Lions Collège de France, Paris, France Gregory A. Margulis Yale University, New Haven, USA Richard Taylor Harvard University, Cambridge, USA S. R. Srinivasa Varadhan Courant Institute, New York University, USA Claire Voisin Institut de mathématiques de Jussieu, Paris, France Enrique Zuazua Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Spain

Sectional Panels

Sectional panels for ICM 2006. The names above the dotted line in each section are the core members.

1. Logic and Foundations

Angus MacIntyre (Edinburgh) Chair Hugh Woodin (Berkeley) Saharon Shelah (Hebrew University) ------Gregory Cherlin (Rutgers) Alexander Kechris (Caltech) Richard Shore (Cornell) Stevo Todorcevic (Paris 7)

2. Algebra

Alexander Lubotzky (Hebrew University of Jerusalem) Chair Robert Griess (U Michigan) Vladimir Voevodsky (IAS) ------William M. Kantor (U. of Oregon, USA) Consuelo Martínez Lopez (Universidad de Oviedo,Spain) Dimitry Orlov (Stekelov Institute, Moskow) Idun Reiten (Oslo, Norway)

3. Number Theory

Hendrik Lenstra (Leiden) Chair Kazuya Kato (Kyoto) Henryk Iwaniec (Rutgers) Gerd Faltings (MPI Bonn) ------Shou-Wu Zhang (Columbia) Haruzo Hida (UCLA) 4. Algebraic and Complex Geometry

Miles Reid (Warwick) Chair Ngaiming Mok (Hong Kong University) Shigeru Mukai (Kyoto) ------Spencer Bloch (Chicago) Fedor Bogomolov (Courant) Rahul Pandharipande (Princeton) Eckart Viehweg (Essen)

5. Geometry

Gang Tian (MIT) Chair Frances Kirwan (Oxford) Leonid Polterovich (Tel Aviv) Francois Labourie (Orsay) Hiraku Nakajima (Kyoto) ------Rick Schoen Robert Bryant

6. Topology

Andrew Casson (Yale) Chair Stephan Stolz (Notre Dame) ------Ronald (Ron) Stern (UC Irvine) Mladen Bestvina (Utah) Michael Hopkins (MIT) Tomotada Ohtsuki (Kyoto)

7. Lie Groups and Lie Algebras

Joseph Bernstein (Tel Aviv) Chair Marc Burger (ETH Zurich) Alexander Eskin (Chicago) Jean-Loup Waldspurger (Paris VII) ------George Lusztig (MIT) Stephen Kudla (University of Maryland) Pavel Etingof (MIT)

8. Analysis

Pertti Mattila (Helsinki) Chair Terence Tao (UCLA) Boris Kashin (Steklov) ------Guy David (Orsay) Ronald De Vore (South Carolina) Hans Martin Reimann (Bern) Yum-Tong Siu (Harvard) 9. Operator Algebras and Functional Analysis

Gilles Pisier (TAMU and Paris VI) Chair Sorin Popa (UCLA) Joachim Cuntz (Munster) Nicole Tomczak-Jaegermann (University of Alberta) ------Uffe Haagerup (Univ. Southern Denmark)

10. Ordinary Differential Equations and Dynamical Systems

Yakov Sinai (Princeton) Chair Jean-Christophe Yoccoz (College de France) Shahar Mozes (Hebrew University) Lai-Sang Young (Courant) John Guckenheimer (Cornell) ------Yulij Ilyashenko Giovanni Forni

11. Partial Differential Equations

Gilles Lebeau (Nice) Chair Luis Caffarelli (University of Texas) Stefan Muller (Leipzig) Sun-Yung Alice Chang (Princeton) (Lawrence) Craig Evans (Berkeley) ------Bressan (Alberto) Giga (Yoshikazu) Perthame (Benoit)

12. Mathematical Physics

Juerg Froehlich (ETH Zurich) Chair Igor Krichever (Columbia) Greg Moore (Rutgers) ------Eugene Bogomolny Institut de Physique Nucleaire, Universite Paris-Sud Giovanni Felder Department of Mathematics, ETH-Zurich Krzysztof Gawedzki Institut de Physique Theorique, ENS-Lyon Sergiu Klainerman Department of Mathematics, Princeton University Israel Michael Sigal Department of Mathematics, Notre Dame, Illinois

13. Probability and Statistics

David Nualart (University of Barcelona) Chair Terence Speed (Berkeley) Terry Lyons (Oxford) ------Peter Hall (Canberra) Shigeo Kusuoka (Tokyo) Michel Ledoux (Toulouse) David Siegmund (Stanford) Ofer Zeitouni (Minneapolis) 14. Combinatorics

Gil Kalai (Hebrew University) Chair Gunter Ziegler (Berlin) Richard Stanley (MIT) Jiri Matousek (Prague) ------Peter Cameron Andrew Odlyzko Lex Schrijver Joel Spencer

15. Mathematical Aspects of Computer Science

Shafi Goldwasser (MIT and Weizmann) Chair Richard Karp (Berkeley) Emo Welzl (ETH Zurich) ------Eva Tardos (Corenll) Peter Shor (MIT) Mike Kearns (UPenn) Madhu Sudan (MIT) Thomas Henzinger (Lausanne)

16. Numerical Analysis and Scientific Computing

Alfio Quarteroni (Ecole Polytechnique Lausanne) Chair Eitan Tadmor (Maryland) Wolfgang Dahmen (Aachen) Leslie Greengard (Courant) ------Lisa Fauci Tang Tao Albert Cohen

17. Control Theory and Optimization

Jean-Pierre Puel (University of Versailles) Chair Eduardo Sontag (Rutgers University) William Cook (Georgia Tech) Jorge Nocedal (Northwestern) ------Ruth F. Curtain (University of Groningen) Steven I. Marcus (University of Maryland) Petar V. Kokotovic (University of California, Santa Barbara)

18. Applications of Mathematics in the Sciences

Olivier Pironneau (Paris VI) Chair Ronald Coifman (Yale) Karl Sigmund (Vienna) ------Jennifer Chayes George Papanicolaou Dave McLaughlin Rolf Rannacher Masahisa Tabata Endre Suli 19. Mathematics education and popularization of Mathematics

Wilfried Schmid (Harvard) Chair Jill Adler (Johannesburg) ------Dan Amir Tel Aviv University Deborah Ball University of Michigan Garth Gaudry Australian Mathematical Sciences Institute Frederick Leung University of Hong Kong

20. History of Mathematics

Karen Parshall (University of Virginia) Chair ------Craig Fraser University of Toronto, Canada Jeremy G. Gray Open University, United Kingdom Jan P. Hogendijk Utrecht University, The Netherlands Michio YANO Kyoto Sangyo University, Japan Appendix 16.2.1

ICM Program Committee 2002 Beijing, China

Yuri Manin Max-Planck-Institut für Mathematik, Bonn, Germany, Chairman John Ball University of Oxford, United Kingdom Franco Brezzi University of Pavia, Italy Gérard Laumon Université de Paris-Sud, France László Lovász Yale University, New Haven, USA Tetsuji Miwa Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan Peter Sarnak Princeton University, Princeton, USA Alain-Sol Sznitman ETH Zentrum, Zurich, Switzerland Gang Tian Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA Michèle Vergne Ecole Normale Supérieure, Paris, France Wen-Tsun Wu Academia Sinica, Beijing, China

ICM Program Committee 1998 Berlin, Germany

Phillip Griffiths Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, USA, Chairman Luis Caffarelli University of Texas, Austin, USA Ingrid Daubechies Princeton University, Princeton, USA Gerd Faltings Max-Planck-Institut, Bonn, Germany Hans Föllmer Humboldt-Universität, Berlin, Germany Michio Jimbo Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan John Milnor SUNY at Stony Brook, Stony Brook, USA Sergei Novikow Landau Institute, Moscow, Russia, and University of Maryland, USA Jacques Tits Collège de France, Paris, France

ICM Program Committee 1994 Zurich, Switzerland

Louis Nirenberg Courant Institute, New York, USA, Chairman Simon K. Donaldson Oxford University, United Kingdom Vladimir Drinfeld FTINT, Kharkov, Ukraine Pierre de la Harpe Université de Génève, Switzerland Richard Karp University of California, Berkeley, USA Hanspeter Kraft Universität Basel, Switzerland Andrew J. Majda Princeton University, USA Michel Raynaud Université de Paris Sud, France Y. Sinai Landau Institute for Theoretical Physics, Moscow, Russia

ICM Program Committee 1990 Kyoto, Japan

Nicolaas H. Kuiper Chairman Vladimir I. Arnold Alain Connes Ronald L. Graham Heisuke Hironaka Masaki Kashiwara Robert P. Langlands Sigeru Mizohata Daniel G. Quillen ICM Program Committee 1986 Berkeley, USA

Friedrich E.P. Hirzebruch Chairman Enrico Bombieri Lennart Carleson David Mumford Louis Nirenberg Michael O. Rabin J. A. Rzanov David P. Ruelle I.M. Singer

ICM Program Committee 1983 Warsaw, Poland

J. P. Serre Chairman M. Atiyah B. Bojarski W. Browder Z. Ciesielski P. Deligne L. Faddeev S. Lojasiewicz S. Winograd Suggestions for PC of ICM'2010 and Prize Committes Appendix 16.2.2 18.05.200714:31

Name Surname Institution City State Adem Díaz de León Alejandro PIMS Vancouver Canada Bahouri Hajer Université de Tunis Tunis Tunisia Bayer Fluckiger Eva EPFL Lausanne Switzerland Bertsimas Dimitris MIT Cambridge, MA USA Bela Cruzeiro Ana Instituto Superior Técnico Lisbon Portugal Caffarelli Luis A. Univ. of Texas at Austin Austin, TX USA Chen Luis H. Y. National Univ. of Singapore Singapore Cuntz Joachim Univ. Muenster Muenster Germany Cowling Michael Univ. New South Wales Sydney, NSW Australia Daqian (Tatsien) Li Fudan University Shanghai China Daubechies Ingrid C. Princeton University Princeton USA Dickenstein Alicia Univ. de Buenos Aires Buenos Aires Argentina Deuflhard Peter Zuse Institute Berlin (ZIB) /FU Berlin Berlin Germany Drinfeld Vladimir Univ. Chicago Chicago USA Dyn Nira Tel-Aviv University Tel-Aviv Israel Ekeland Ivar PIMS, Univ. of British Columbia Vancouver Canada Eisenbud David MSRI Berkeley USA Esnault Hélène Univ. Duisburg-Essen Essen Germany Evans L. Craig University of California Berkeley USA Feireisl Eduard Academy of Science of CR Prag Czech Republic García-Prada Oscar CSIC Madrid Spain Ghys Etienne l'École Normale Supérieure de Lyon Lyon France Goetze Friedrich Univ. Bielefeld Bielefeld Germany Gowers Timothy Univ. Cambridge Cambridge UK Grabowski Janusz Stefan Banach IMC Warsaw Poland Graham Fan Chung UCSD La Jolla USA Hall Peter ANU /MSI Canberra Australia Ilyashenko Yuli S. Indep. U of Moscow/Cornell Univ. James Richard D. University of Minnesota Minneapolis USA Jeltsch Rolf ETHZ Zurich Switzerland Kashiwara Masaki RIMS, Kyoto University Kyoto Japan Keyfitz Barbara University of Houston Houston, TX USA

Seite 1 Suggestions for PC of ICM'2010 and Prize Committes Appendix 16.2.2 18.05.200714:31

Kirwan Frances University of Oxford Oxford UK Koiller Jair Fundação Getulio Vargas Rio de Janeiro Brazil Laptev Ari Royal Institute of Technology Stockholm Sweden Levin Leonid Boston University Boston USA Li Jian-Shu The Hong Kong University Hong Kong Liebeck Martin Imperial College London UK Lin Fang-Hua Courant Institute of MS New York USA Lions Pierre-Louis Collège de France Paris France Loja Fernandez Rui Instituto Superior Técnico Lisbon Portugal Looijenga Edouard Utrecht University Utrecht The Netherlandesl Lubotzky Alex Hebrew University Jerusalem Israel Lyons Terry J. University of Oxford Oxford UK Marsden Jerrold E. Caltech, CDS Pasadena, CA USA Martin Gaven Univ. of Auckland Auckland New Zealand Martinez Servet Chilean Academy of Science Santiago de Chile Chile McDuff Dusa Stony Brook University Stony Brook USA Mimura Masayasu Meiji University Kawasaki Japan Mok Ngaiming Hongkong Univ. Hongkong Montgomery Susan Moeglin Colette Institut de Mathématiques de Jussieu Paris France Mueller Stefan MPI Mathematics Leipzig Germany Palis Jacob IMPA Brazil Parimala R. Emory University Atlanta, GA India/USA Pena, de la Jose Antonio Mexico Pulleyblank William IBM, Center for Business Optimization USA Quarteroni Alfio CMCS, EPFL Lausanne Switzerland Ratiu Tudor EPFL Lausanne Switzerland Ros Antonio Universidad de Granada Granada Spain Ribet Kenneth A. University of California Berkeley USA Roy Marie-Francoise Univ. de Rennes 1 France Samarati Pierangela Univ. of Milano Milano Italy

Seite 2 Suggestions for PC of ICM'2010 and Prize Committes Appendix 16.2.2 18.05.200714:31

Sarnak Peter Princeton University Princeton USA Schaft ,van der Arjan University of Groningen Groningen NL Schramm Oded Microsoft Research USA Schoen Richard M. Stanford University Stanford USA Schuette Christof FU Berlin Berlin Germany Series Caroline Warwick Mathematics Institute Warwick United Kingdom Sigmund Karl Univ. Wien, Biomathematics Wien Austria Siu Yum-Tong Harvard Cambridge, MA USA Soare Robert Univ. of Chicago Chicago USA Spirakis Paul Univ. of Patras Patras Greece Steel Mike Univ. of Canterbury, BRC Canterbury New Zealand Strang Gilbert MIT Cambridge, MA USA Sujatha Ramdorai TIFR Mumbai India Sverak Vladimir University of Minnesota Minneapolis USA Talagrand Michel Universite Paris VI Paris France Tanre Daniel Univ. Lille Lille France Tao Terence UCLA Los Angeles, CA USA Tarantello Gabriella Univ. of Rome Rom Italy Tardos Eva Cornell University , CS Ithaca USA Teicher Mina Bar-Ilan University Ramat-Gan Israel Terracini Susanna Università di Milano Bicocca Milano Italy Tillmann Ulrike Univ. of Oxford Oxford UK Tirao Juan Alfredo Universidad Nacional de Cordoba CORD Cordoba Argentina Titi Edriss S. Univ. of California Irvine USA Tomczak-Jaegermann Nicole Univ. of Alberta Alberta Canada Trudinger Neil ANU Canberra Australia Uhlenbeck Karen University of Texas Austin, TX USA Varadhan S.R.S. CIMS, New York Univ. New York USA Vignéras Marie-France Institut de Mathematiques de Jussieu Paris France Wachs Michelle L. University of Miami Miami USA Weinan E. Princeton University Princeton/Beijing USA/China Wigderson Avi IAS Princeton USA Yuan Ya-xiang Chinese Academy of Science Beijing China

Seite 3 Suggestions for PC of ICM'2010 and Prize Committes Appendix 16.2.2 18.05.200714:31

Email URL Committee http://www.math.wisc.edu/~adem/ PC MV [email protected] PC RP http://alg-geo.epfl.ch/~bayer/ PC or one of Prize C MG [email protected] http://web.mit.edu/dbertsim/www/ Gauss Prize C MG [email protected] http://www.math.ist.utl.pt/~abcruz/ PC ML [email protected] http://www.ma.utexas.edu/users/caffarel/ MV [email protected] http://www.ims.nus.edu.sg/~lhychen/ PC MG, MA [email protected] http://wwwmath1.uni-muenster.de/reine/inst/cuntz/cuntz.html PC + one of Prize C MG [email protected] http://profiles.unsw.edu.au/maths/mcowling1 PC ChPr, http://www.iciam07.ch/scientific_program/li.pdf PC MA http://www.pacm.princeton.edu/~ingrid PC ChPr [email protected] http://mate.dm.uba.ar/~alidick/ PC RP, MG [email protected] http://www.zib.de/deuflhard/ Gauss Prize C MG http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Drinfeld Prize Committee V.V, [email protected] http://www.math.tau.ac.il/~niradyn/ PC RP, [email protected] http://www.pims.math.ca/~ekeland/ Gauss Prize C MG http://www.msri.org/people/staff/de/ MV [email protected] http://www.uni-essen.de/~mat903/helene.html FM, PC SB, [email protected] http://math.berkeley.edu/~evans/ FM, PC SB, [email protected] http://www.math.cas.cz/~feireisl/ PC JB, [email protected] http://www.mat.csic.es/webpages/garcia-prada/ PC ML, [email protected] http://www.umpa.ens-lyon.fr/~ghys/ MV [email protected] http://www.math.uni-bielefeld.de/~goetze/ PC MG http://www.dpmms.cam.ac.uk/~wtg10/ PC MG http://www.impan.gov.pl/~jagrab/ PC ML, [email protected] http://math.ucsd.edu/~fan/ Nevanlinna C SB, [email protected] http://wwwmaths.anu.edu.au/~peter/ PC ChPr, MA, http://www.mccme.ru/~yulijs Prize Committee V.V, [email protected] http://www.aem.umn.edu/people/faculty/bio/james.shtml Gauss Prize C MG [email protected] http://www.sam.math.ethz.ch/~jeltsch/ Gauss Prize C MG [email protected] http://www.kurims.kyoto-u.ac.jp/~kenkyubu/kashiwara/ PC or one of Prize C MA [email protected] http://math.uh.edu/~blk/ PC MG

Seite 4 Suggestions for PC of ICM'2010 and Prize Committes Appendix 16.2.2 18.05.200714:31

[email protected] http://www.ma.hw.ac.uk/~ndg/fom/kirwanqu.html FM JB, ChPr, MG http://buscatextual.cnpq.br/buscatextual/visualizacv.jsp?id=K4787951H5 [email protected] http://www.math.kth.se/~laptev/ FM ML http://www.cs.bu.edu/~lnd/ Prize Committee V.V, [email protected] http://www.math.ust.hk/~matom/ PC or Prize C MA [email protected] http://www.ma.ic.ac.uk/~mwl PC ChPr [email protected] http://math.nyu.edu/faculty/linf/ FM or PC JB, http://www.college-de-france.fr/default/EN/all/equ_der/ MV, [email protected] http://www.math.ist.utl.pt/~rfern/ PC ML, [email protected] http://www.math.uu.nl/people/looijeng/ Prize Committee V.V, [email protected] http://www.ma.huji.ac.il/~alexlub/ PC ChPr, [email protected] http://sag.maths.ox.ac.uk/tlyons/ PC MG [email protected] http://www.cds.caltech.edu/~marsden Gauss Prize C MG [email protected] http://www.math.auckland.ac.nz/~martin/ PC ChPr, http://dim.uchile.cl MV [email protected] http://www.math.sunysb.edu/~dusa/ PC ML, [email protected] PC JB, [email protected] http://hkumath.hku.hk/~nmok/ FM, PC SB,

[email protected] http://www.math.jussieu.fr/~moeglin PC RP, CP [email protected] http://www.mis.mpg.de/sm/homepages/mueller.html FM or PC JB, http://w3.impa.br/~jpalis/ MV [email protected] http://www.mathcs.emory.edu/~parimala PC RP, [email protected] http://www.matem.unam.mx/personal/investigadores/jap/curri/ MV http://www-935.ibm.com/services/us/index.wss/summary/bcs/a102 GaussPrize C MG [email protected] http://iacs.epfl.ch/cmcs/AQ/public.htm PC ML, [email protected] http://www.math.ucsc.edu/faculty/TudorRatiu.html PC, ML, [email protected] http://www.ugr.es/~aros/ FM ML, [email protected] http://math.berkeley.edu/~ribet/ FM, PC SB, http://perso.univ-rennes1.fr/marie-francoise.roy/ PC RP, [email protected] http://www.dti.unimi.it/~samarati/ Nevanlinna C ML,

Seite 5 Suggestions for PC of ICM'2010 and Prize Committes Appendix 16.2.2 18.05.200714:31

http://www.math.princeton.edu/CV/SarnakCV.pdf FM SB, [email protected] http://wwwhome.math.utwente.nl/~schaftaj/ Nevanlinna C ML, http://research.microsoft.com/~schramm/ FM, PC SB, [email protected] http://math.stanford.edu/~schoen/ FM, PC SB, [email protected] http://biocomputing.mi.fu-berlin.de/people/christof.html PC MG http://www.maths.warwick.ac.uk/~cms/ PC RP, http://homepage.univie.ac.at/Karl.Sigmund/ PC MG http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yum-Tong_Siu Chair PC SB http://people.cs.uchicago.edu/~soare/ PC MG [email protected] http://www.cti.gr/Paul_Spirakis/ PC MG [email protected] http://www.math.canterbury.ac.nz/~m.steel/ PC MG [email protected] http://www-math.mit.edu/~gs/ PC MG PC JB, [email protected] http://www.math.umn.edu/pacim/sverak.html FM JB, http://www.proba.jussieu.fr/users/talagran/ PC +one of Prize C MG [email protected] http://math.univ-lille1.fr/~tanre/ PC ML, [email protected] http://www.math.ucla.edu/~tao/ FM ML, [email protected] http://www.uniroma2.it/dottorato/TARANTELLO.htm PC CP [email protected] http://www.cs.cornell.edu/people/eva/eva.html PC MG [email protected] http://www.cs.biu.ac.il/~teicher/mina_home.html Prize Committee V.V. [email protected] http://www.matapp.unimib.it/~suster/ PC CP [email protected] http://www.maths.ox.ac.uk/~tillmann/ http://www.conicyt.cl/bases/fondecyt/personas/2/6/26709.html PC MG [email protected] http://www.math.uci.edu/personnel/etiti.html PC ML, [email protected]://www.math.ualberta.ca/Tomczak-Jaegermann_N.html PC RP, [email protected] http://www.maths.anu.edu.au/~neilt/ FM, PC or Abel Prize C JB, CP, [email protected] http://www.ma.utexas.edu/~uhlen/ FM, PC, Abel Prize C JB, SB, http://math.nyu.edu/faculty/varadhan/index.html MV [email protected] http://math.jussieu.fr/~vigneras PC RP, CP [email protected] http://www.math.miami.edu/~wachs/ PC CP [email protected] http://www.math.princeton.edu/~weinan Gauss Prize C MG http://www.math.ias.edu/~avi/ Nevanlinna C SB, [email protected] http://lsec.cc.ac.cn/~yyx/ Gauss Prize C MG

Seite 6 Appendix 16.3.1 ICM Scientific Sections

ICM 2006, Madrid, Spain ICM 2002, Beijing, China ICM 1998, Berlin, Germany

1 Logic and Foundations Logic Logic 2 Algebra Algebra Algebra 3 Number Theory Number Theory Number Theory and Arithmetic Algebraic Geometry 4 Algebraic and Complex Geometry Differential geometry Algebraic Geometry 5 Geometry Topology Differential Geometry and Global Analysis 6 Topology Algebraic and Complex Geometry Topology 7 Lie Groups and Lie Algebras Lie Groups and Representation Theory Lie Groups and Lie Algebras 8 Analysis Real and Complex Analysis Analysis 9 Operator Algebras and Functional Analysis Operator Algebras and Functional Analysis Ordinary Differential Equations and Dynamical Systems 10 Ordinary Differential Equations and Dynamical Probability and Statistics Partial Differential Equations Systems 11 Partial Differential Equations Partial Differential Equations Mathematical Physics 12 Mathematical Physics Ordinary Differential Equations and Dynamical Probability and Statistics Systems 13 Probability and Statistics Mathematical Physics Combinatorics 14 Combinatorics Combinatorics Mathematical Aspects of Computer Science 15 Mathematical Aspects of Computer Science Mathematical Aspects of Computer Science Numerical Analysis and Scientific Computing 16 Numerical Analysis and Scientific Computing Numerical Analysis and Scientific Computing Applications

17 Control Theory and Optimization Applications of Mathematics in the Sciences Control Theory and Optimization 18 Applications of Mathematics in the Sciences Mathematics Education and Popularization of Teaching and Popularization of Mathematics Mathematics 19 Mathematics Education and Popularization of History of Mathematics History of Mathematics Mathematics 20 History of Mathematics

Appendix 18.1.1

Von: IMU Secretary An: [email protected]; CC: Betreff: IMU EC CL 12/07: Committee on "Quantitative assesment of research" Datum: Mittwoch, 7. März 2007 15:04:52 Anlagen:

To the IMU 2007-2010 Executive Committee

Dear colleagues,

Those of you who went to the General Assembly in Santiago de Compostela may remember that, started by the delegates from Belgium, there was some discussion about impact factors and many colleagues stated that they are fearing that impact factors may be used in a way by academic administrators that we do not like. They requested IMU to come up with a recommendation how to deal with journal rankings, impact factors, quantitative measuring of science, etc.

I received a request from Alexei Zhizhchenko from Russia two weeks ago who reported the same problems in Russia and asked me to provide help from the IMU. I heard that similar concerns are coming up in Australia and in the UK.

The Committee on Electronic Information and Communication was asked to look into the issue and did this during its meeting in December. However, the colleagues stated that this is not really an issue of the CEIC. They recommended to find a subcommittee to look at the issue. I quote from the CEIC minutes:

"3. Metric-based-Assessments: It was viewed as desirable to analyze different metrics (citation, minimal publication units) and their impact on mathematicians in various settings. This is clearly pressing in the UK and in Australia particularly, but it was seen as tangential to the CEIC's remit. We suggest that the IMU should aim for an article for distribution (perhaps in the Mathematical Intelligencer) and to produce a report within six months, but this would be best produced by a distinct sub-committee formed between CEIC and EC."

I suggest that we follow this proposal, and here is my suggestion how to handle the matter.

The person who, to my knowledge, is most involved in this issue is the academic director of AMS, John Ewing. I had a telephone conversation with him, and he volunteered to help with preparing a report and recommendation. He suggested to involve the Institute of Mathematical Statistics and ICIAM so that these three international societies representing mathematics could come up with a joint recommendation.

Last week I met Ian Sloan, the president of ICIAM in Santiago de Chile, and he completely agreed with this proposal. He promissed to look for an appropriate person to represent ICIAM in this committee.

If you agree I will call up the president of the Institute of Mathematical Statistics (IMS), Jim Pitmann, to ask for his opinion on this matter. John Ewing informed me that the chair of the IMS publications committee, Robert Adler, has previously been asked by the IMS to address the impact factor question.

I thus would like to ask you to agree that we formally set up a joint IMU/ICIAM/IMS committee on "quantitative assesment of research" and to ask this committee to come up with a report within half a year (after starting the work).

Please respond by March 16, 2007. If there is no opposition I will call Jim Pitmann about the matter, and if he agrees, I will discuss the next steps with him and Ian Sloan and report about the outcome thereafter.

Best regards

Martin

Appendix 18.1.1

Von: IMU Secretary An: [email protected]; CC: Betreff: IMU EC CL 15/07: some decisions Datum: Sonntag, 1. April 2007 12:25:15 Anlagen:

To the IMU 2007-2010 Executive Committee

Dear colleagues,

I would like to report today on the outcomes of some of our recent e-mail discussions and announce an activity to take place in Germany in 2008.

1. EC meeting 2008 ======Let me first thank Laci for his invitation to host the 2008 EC meeting in Budapest. Everybody has agreed to the dates proposed (with one answer still pending), so that I would like to state that the meeting location (Budapest, Hungary) and time frame are determined as follows:

April 18-19 (Friday-Saturday): miniconference (talks by EC members), probably in one of the buildings of the Academy; April 20-21 (Sunday-Monday): EC meeting.

2. Committee on "Quantitative assesment of research", see EC CL 12/07 ======It was agreed that a joint ICIAM/IMS/IMU committee is formed with the tentative title "Quantitative assesment of research". This committee will have three members, one from each institution. The nominated members are as follows - IMU: John Ewing (Providence, USA), - ISM: Robert Adler (Haifa, Israel) - ICIAM: Peter Taylor (Melbourne, Australia) The three committee members are free to invite assistence of other experts.

The (final) name of the committee and the precise charge (terms of reference) will be worked out by the three committee members together with Ian Sloan (ICIAM President), Jim Pitman (IMS President) and Martin Groetschel (IMU Secretary). I have, in the meantime, sent a first draft of the committee charge to all persons involved, and the discussion has started. The terms of reference are subject to approval by the ECs of ICIAM, IMS, and IMU. After the terms have been endorsed by all ECs, the committee shall start its work. The (general) charge of the committee is the production of a document defining the joint position of ICIAM/IMS/IMU on impact factors and other measures meant to assess research. The document is subject to approval of all Executive Committees. If ICIAM, IMS, and IMU find it appropriate, they may invite other mathematical organizations to join and approve the document as well.

3. Membership issues, see EC CL 11/07 ======- The South Korea ballot will be sent out next week. - The North Korea issue will be an item on the Oslo EC agenda. - In case the applications for associate membership (Ecuador, Kyrgyzstan) and the group upgrade from Iran arrive in time we will also discuss them in Oslo.

Some EC members have suggested to handle membership and upgrade applications more formally as up to now by providing, among other things, a list of items that an applicant has to respond to. I propose that this issue be also looked at in Oslo.

4. Mathematical Year 2008 in Germany ======The Federal Minister of Education and Research of Germany, Dr. Annette Schavan, has formally declared the year 2008 as the year of mathematics. There was a meeting with her on Wednesday (at the occasion of the annual DMV conference) where she agreed to sponsor this activity. We had asked the minister to be considered for the year 2009. And we got 2008. A lot of things are still somewhat unclear, but a significant number of German colleagues has immediately started preparations. We expect a budget in the order of 5-7 million Euros and hope that not only some flashy events can be staged (politicians like that) but that we can start various sustainable activities. Guenter Ziegler, who is currently the DMV President, will be in charge of the organization of the mathematical year 2008 in Germany.

Best regards

Martin

Appendix 18.2.1

Joint ICIAM/IMS/IMU-Committee on “Quantitative Assessment of Research" Terms of Reference 31 March 2007

The drive towards more transparency and accountability in the academic world has created a "culture of numbers" in which institutions and individuals believe that fair decisions can be reached by algorithmic evaluation of some statistical data; unable to measure quality (the ultimate goal), decision-makers replace quality by numbers that they can measure. This trend calls for comment from those who professionally “deal with numbers”-- mathematicians and statisticians.

Throughout the world, assessment of research has become increasingly important, and at the same time, of great concern. No doubt, academic achievement, research, and teaching all need to be evaluated in order to guarantee and maintain quality. Comparisons are necessary to define best practices and to set standards. Scholars judge other scholars when they referee articles, write letters of reference, or participate in regular evaluations. Administrators rate scholars when they decide about salaries or promotion. Librarians rank journals or books when they decide on which to spend their budgets. And politicians assess institutions based on many factors, including research output.

Making judgment is hard work. Everybody making judgments would like to be supported by measures that objectively describe “performance” and help to compare and rank whatever is being judged.

There is growing concern about various measures of research performance, especially those using citation data (for example, the “ISI impact factor”). Many of these measures are used in ways for which they were not designed and to make judgments that are unjustified by the data. Many of those defending the use of such measures argue that they are based on sound statistical data and employ transparent mathematical formulas, and hence they are objective. The precision of the formulas and the pretended exactness of the data, though, may only disguise the inappropriateness of the decision-making process.

The International Council of Industrial and Applied Mathematics (ICIAM), the Institute of Mathematical Statistics (IMS), and the International Mathematical Union (IMU), institutions representing the world wide communities of mathematicians and statisticians, are troubled by the possible misuse of mathematical concepts or statistical indicators. As societies representing mathematicians and statisticians, they feel a responsibility to provide a clearer understanding about the proper use of statistical data in assessing research -- especially research in the mathematical sciences.

ICIAM, IMS, and IMU therefore have established the joint committee “Quantitative Assessment of Research" and charged it with the following tasks:

1. To evaluate to what extent the ISI impact factor is a significant indicator for the quality of a researcher, a department, or similar institution in statistics or mathematics. 2. To determine to what extent the ISI impact factor can be used to compare the quality of research in mathematics with that in other disciplines. 3. To determine whether or not the ISI impact factor has any bias with respect to language, region, or length, source or field of publication, interdisciplinary work. 4. To examine these questions for a selection of other recently proposed measures based on citation data. 5. To propose suitable substitutes for these measures based on citations. 6. To list the possible dangers or advantages that the widespread use of impact factors and similar simple measures may have on publication behaviour, recruitment, balance between scientific disciplines, etc.

The committee is asked to create a summary of its finding to be endorsed and publicly distributed by the Executive Committees of ICIAM, IMS, and IMU. It is requested to support its conclusions by examples and statistical data to be provided in additional documents meant to provide evidence and a solid basis for the findings.

Academic achievement is a complicated mix of contributions to research, teaching, and supervision of students, as well as contributions to academic self organization/administration and to the scientific community. ICIAM, IMS, and IMU acknowledge that the evaluation of scientific quality is notoriously difficult, simplistic answers to complicated questions of judgment are unlikely. However, the committee is also asked to investigate whether it sees possible alternatives to measures based solely on citations that may help to evaluate research and academic achievement and indicate quality in a sensible way.

Appendix 18.2.1

Von: IMU Secretary An: [email protected]; CC: [email protected]; Peter Taylor; "John Ewing"; "Jim Pitman"; "Ian Sloan"; Betreff: IMU EC CL 21/07: Charge of the Committee on "Quantitative Assessment of Research" Datum: Samstag, 5. Mai 2007 18:18:00 Anlagen: 070331Charge-draft.doc 070331Charge-draft.pdf

To the IMU 2007-2010 Executive Committee

Dear colleagues,

I refer to my circular letter 12/07 describing the idea to form a Committee on "Quantitative Assessment of Research" that is jointly appointed by the International Council of Industrial and Applied Mathematics (ICIAM), the Institute of Mathematical Statistics (IMS), and the International Mathematical Union (IMU). Each institution has appointed one member to the committee, namely: - Robert Adler (Haifa, Israel) appointed by IMS - Peter Taylor (Melbourne, Australia) appointed by ICIAM - John Ewing (Providence, USA) appointed by IMU

These three persons plus one representative of each of the three institutions (Ian Sloan (ICIAM President), Jim Pitman (IMS President, Martin Groetschel (IMU Secretary)) have agreed on a draft of the terms of reference of this committee. Please find this draft in the attachment (in WORD and PDF).

In the meantime ICIAM and IMS have endorsed the draft. The discussion of the draft by the IMU EC is on the agenda of the Oslo meeting, May 20-22, 2007 (item 18).

Please have a look at the text. I hope that we can handle this issue quickly.

I should add that there was some discussion whether or not the charge is too demanding. If, for instance, some of the conclusions/suggestions can only be backed by "anecdotal evidence", it may be necessary to collect significant data. and this may entail considerable cost. It was agreed that the collection of massive data sets (other than searching for data others have provided) is beyond the charge of the committee.

Indeed, the committee's task is quite ambitious. A big part of the initial job will be to figure out what the limits should be in order to finish the work in a sensible time frame. It was also agreed that the committee is supposed to produce something concrete in a relatively short period of time.

It is entirely possible (perhaps even likely) that the committee will discover in the course of its discussions that a larger and more comprehensive project is needed to fully answer the questions posed in the charge. If that is the case, the committee's task will be to frame that project and estimate what resources will be needed to carry it out -- so that the ICIAM/IMS/IMU can decide whether they want to commission something larger.

I suggest that we refrain from e-mail exchanges about the terms of reference and that we discuss the matter in Oslo. I will be prepared to answer your questions.

Best regards

Martin Appendix 18.3.1

Von: IMS President An: [email protected]; secretary@mathunion. org; CC: Betreff: IMU/ICIAM/IMS cooperation Datum: Samstag, 10. März 2007 18:38:16 Anlagen:

Dear Martin and Ian,

I am extremely supportive of Martin's proposal that IMU/ICIAM/IMS become partners in establishing positions and strategies to deal with various problems that affect all branches of mathematics, such as the abuse of Impact Factors in assessing of the value of mathematical research relative to research in other areas of science.

I would like to see much more extensive IMU/ICIAM/IMS cooperation, and can suggest a number of different projects in which I think such cooperation would be of mutual benefit. These are all projects where IMS has already taken some initiative, and I hope I can persuade you to participate and support. Mainly it is moral support and endorsement I am looking for. Some limited funding, even on the order of $10K por $20K a year from each partner would go a long way too with any of these projects. With that, it should be relatively easy to get further funding for development from govt agencies like NSF and NSA, and long term maintenance costs for all these things are extremely low. The deep systemic problems these projects attempt to address are

-- low visibility of mathematics and statistics in the broader scientific community -- lack of high quality open access online materials at an intermediate professional level which might serve to draw students into careers in math sciences -- current difficulty in navigating between what online resources are available, especially for users outside of major universities, due largely to excessive commercialization of scientific communication

1. Mathematical Sciences Atlas. IMS has made a proposal to NSF with PlanetMath as a partner to develop the PlanetMath infrastructure and IMS experience with Open Journal Systems to create an open access online encyclopedia of mathematical sciences. This is part of a proposal called Next-Generation Integration of Online Mathematical Exposition http://br.endernet.org/~akrowne/planetmath/proposals/nsf_cyberinf_2007/nsf/single- doc/pm_cyberinf_2007.pdf

The idea of the Atlas is to collect authoritative glossary and encylopedia items in math sciences, and make them available with a licence which allows their import to outlets such as PlanetMath and Wikipedia, thence widespread dissemination which should increase the visibility and accessibility of math sciences to the broader scientific community and the general public.

My job with this activity is to obtain institutional support for the Atlas from other professional organizations in mathematics, so let me start by inviting IMU and ICIAM to participate. I appreciate the difficulties of getting large organizations to agree on anything, but I have a constitution in mind for the Math Sci Atlas which I believe avoids the usual pitfalls. I plan to adopt the same constitution we are using to launch the open acess expository journal Statistics Surveys http://www.i-journals.org/ss/policies.php#other_1 Briefly, each of IMS, ICIAM, IMU (and other organizations we may care to invite) would appoint an executive editor responsible for appointing associate editors and setting standards for their contributions of the journal/database. These exec editors form the management ctee, which has power to appoint a coordinating editor. The running cost of the whole operation is fairly trivial, on the order of $10K a year. Development costs may be greater, but should be supported by grants.

2. Survey Journals.

IMS has cooperated with the Bernoulli Society to create open access survey journals in Probability and Statistics. Probability Surveys http://www.i-journals.org/ps/ now running for 3 years and Statistics Surveys, just being launched at url above. I would like to see such survey journals cloned and propagated across all of math sciences. All that is needed is some institutional support from e.g. IMU or ICIAM or other math organizations to create further survey journals. These could be broad in scope, e.g. Mathematics Surveys, Applied Mathematics Surveys, or narrower: Differential Equations Surveys, .... It is just a matter of providing the editorial authority. The infrastructure is cheap, and available from IMS technical contractor VTEX. The cost of running a survey journal is on the order of $5K a year. See http://www.i-journals.org/ for details.

3. Math Subjects and Math People Index.

See http://bibserver.berkeley.edu/proposals/mathweb

The People component is under active development with the support of Jon Borwein's Dalhousie group: see http://bibserver.berkeley.edu/projects/mathpeople.html

4. Support of http://eprintweb.org

This is a high quality mirror of arxiv.org created by the Institute of Physics (IOP). IMS is collaborating with IOP to develop subject-specific views in the fields of mathematics and statistics, with connection to the subject and people indexing efforts mentioned above. IMS/ IOP would welcome IMU and ICIAM as further partners in this venture. The main thing I would ask for is moral support: promotion of the service, encouraging people to deposit their work on arxiv, wherever they may publish it. In return, IMS/IOP will be glad to assist IMU/ICIAM with subject-specific views of interest to IMU/ICIAM members.

More than enough for one email! Anyway, the door is open to IMU/ICIAM cooperation with IMS on all of these ventures. with best regards

--Jim ------Jim Pitman President of the Institute of Mathematical Statistics [email protected] http://imstat.org

Professor of Statistics and Mathematics University of California 367 Evans Hall # 3860 Berkeley, CA 94720-3860 ph: 510-642-9970 fax: 510-642-7892 [email protected] http://www.stat.berkeley.edu/users/pitman

Appendix 19.2.1

To the IMU 2007-2010 Executive Committee

Dear colleagues,

I would like to report today on the outcomes of some of our recent e-mail discussions and announce an activity to take place in Germany in 2008.

April 18-19 (Friday-Saturday): miniconference (talks by EC members), probably in one of the buildings of the Academy; April 20-21 (Sunday-Monday): EC meeting.

Appendix 19.3.1

Von: IMU Secretary An: [email protected]; CC: "Linda Geraci"; "Linda Lee"; "Phillip Griffiths"; Betreff: IMU EC CL 02/07: The new IMU team in Berlin Datum: Freitag, 12. Januar 2007 12:59:05 Anlagen:

To the IMU 2007-2010 Executive Committee

Dear colleagues,

As the IMU office in Berlin is taking up its operation I would like to let you know who is doing what, and how to contact the members of the team working for the IMU secretariat.

IMU Secretariat ======The IMU secretariat is located at the Konrad-Zuse- Zentrum fuer Informationstechnik Berlin (brief English version: Zuse Institute Berlin, or even shorter: ZIB) for the years 2007 - 2010, see http://www.zib.de/

The official postal address for correspondence with the IMU secretariat is as follows:

International Mathematical Union Office of the Secretariat Zuse Institute Berlin Takustr. 7 D-14195 Berlin Germany Fax: +49 30 84185 - 269 E-mail: [email protected]

All letters and fax messages to this address will be read by the IMU administrator, see below, who will handle it directly or ask me if necessary. The e-mails will be directed to my mail account (and to the IMU administrator in case I am travelling).

I have two offices, one at ZIB, and one at TU Berlin. I spend more time at ZIB than at TU, my location during the week is unpredictable, though. When you want to reach me by phone try my ZIB number first. If I do not answer, call Sylwia, see below. My cell phone is usually switched off, unless I want to make a phone call myself. My phone numbers are as follows: ZIB-Tel: +49 30 84185210 TU-Tel: +49 30 31423266 Home-Tel: +49 30 3657329 Mobile: +49 163 5511095 My e-mail address in my capacity as IMU secretary: [email protected] .

IMU Administrator ======When Linda started working as the secretary for IMU issues of the IMU secretary Phil Griffiths, the term IMU administrator was chosen to give her job a name.

The successor of Linda Geraci is Sylwia Markwardt. She has been my secretary for several years and has great organizational and other experiences. She is familiar with IMU work because she handled my IMU correspondence and IMU files during my term as EC Member at Large. Sylwia also attended the General Assembly in Santiago de Compostela and parts of the ICM in Madrid. I believe that most of you have seen and met her. In addition to German, she speaks English and French (my French is very poor).

Sylwia's postal address is either the official IMU office address, or shorter: Konrad-Zuse-Zentrum Takustr. 7 D-14195 Berlin Germany Her phone number is: +49 30 84185-208. Her fax number is: +49 30 84185-269 (same as mine). The best way to communicate with her is to send e-mail to [email protected] .

IMU Technician ======Wolfgang Dalitz is the person who is handling all the electronic and technical business. He also has long-time IMU experience since he was the one who set up the ICM'98 Web site, and ever since, he has maintained the technical part of the IMU Web server. He also runs the IMU mail services and maintains the mailing list for the IMU newsletter IMU-Net. He will take care of the IMU Web server and of the IMU groupware I announced a few days ago.

Wolfgang Dalitz speaks English, his phone number is: +49 30 84185-201. You can reach him by e-mail at [email protected] .

If someone wants a new IMU related mailing list set up, Wolfgang is the person to contact.

IMU Finances ======Finally, Sylke Arencibia is responsible for handling all IMU financial matters. Sylke Arencibia is the head of finance of the Konrad-Zuse-Zentrum and is responsible for the technical part of all financial transactions. We have organized the "finance business" in such a way that every IMU related financial transaction must be signed by Sylwia Markwardt or myself. Sylke Arencibia just executes them technically, maintains all the documents and files, handles the bank, the German tax office, etc., and thus she works only internally. We thus suggest that also all financial issues are communicated to Sylwia Markwardt or myself, and only in emergency cases to Sylke Arencibia. Her personal e-mail address is [email protected], her phone number: +49 30 84185-123. She is the Russian speaking member of our "IMU team".

General Remarks ======Sylwia, Wolfgang, and Sylke are employed at ZIB and are doing the IMU work in addition to their usual ZIB-jobs by working overtime. Since everybody involved has a lot of experience with IMU matters, I found the chosen solution of distributing the IMU administrative work among regular employees of ZIB much better than hiring new people without this experience.

All of us will try to keep our various functions (for IMU, ZIB and other institutions) somewhat separate from each other. That is one of the reasons why we have set up the new e-mail addresses: [email protected] (for me) [email protected] (for Sylwia) [email protected] (for Wolfgang) We will (try to) use them whenever we operate as "IMU representatives" (but, of course, in the beginning we will sometimes forget that). This should make it clear whether you receive, for instance, a personal e-mail from myself (then I would use [email protected]) or whether there is an official e-mail that I am sending in my capacity as IMU Secretary. Sylwia Markwardt will similarly use the e-mail address [email protected] instead of her personal e-mail [email protected].

Moreover, even hard working ZIB employees go on vacation occasionally or get ill every now and then. In such cases the mails sent to the [email protected] addresses will be forwarded to other persons at ZIB who will handle everything that is urgent so that we don't miss anything important. Therefore, I suggest to use the new e-mail addresses for IMU business.

Best regards

Martin