PAR T FIVE The Legacies of IPY 2007–2008 and Future of Polar Research Coordinating Editors: Igor Krupnik and Volker Rachold Reviewers: Anders Karlqvist and Oran Young Introduction Chapter 5.1 Early Science Outcomes of IPY 2007–2008 Chapter 5.2 Broadening the Cross-Disciplinary Impact of IPY Research Chapter 5.3 Engaging Asian Nations in IPY: Asian Forum for Polar Sciences (AFoPS) Chapter 5.4 Connecting to New Stakeholders in Polar Research Chapter 5.5 IPY and Expanding Partnerships in Coordination of Polar Research Chapter 5.6 Shaping the Future EPILOGUE l e g a ci e s 523 PART FIVE: T H E L EGACIES O F IPY 2007–2008 A ND FU TURE O F P O LAR R E SEARCH Introduction Igor Krupnik Reviewers: David Hik and Colin Summerhayes he five major sections of the JC IPY Summary much more convincingly bipolar. It left several lasting are structured to provide detailed answers to legacies, including the creation of the first permanent a set of strategic questions related to the or- research stations in Antarctica (the ‘peopling’ of the ganization and implementation of IPY 2007– last continent); the establishment of the World Data T2008. Part 1 explains why IPY was launched, and how Centers; the beginning of the space research era and it was designed and implemented. Part 2 examines the use of satellites, as well as a greater appreciation what has been learned in IPY by reviewing its key sci- of the upper atmospheric structure; and the new ence activities in major fields and disciplines, and Part regime of science partnership that eventually led 3 explores how this was achieved via the multitude to the establishment of the Antarctic Treaty (Table of IPY observational and data-management efforts. 5.0-1, see summaries in Berguño and Elzinga, 2010; Part 4 explains how this new knowledge was dissemi- Dodds et al., 2010; Elzinga, 2009; Summerhayes, nated to the polar science community, educators and 2008; Chapter 1.1). Furthermore, IGY stimulated the students, and the general public, and how the next development of a whole range of long-term daughter generation of polar researchers was involved in IPY. programs – not an obvious legacy from the first two Part 5, the concluding section, addresses two more IPYs (Summerhayes, 2008; Chapter 1.1) strategic questions related to IPY, namely, “Who These and other legacies of the previous IPY learned it” and “What is next?”. It explores the initiatives were clearly on the mind of the organizers broader scientific and societal legacies of IPY 2007– of IPY 2007–2008 since the very start of the planning 2008 and the impact it has had or may eventually have process in 2003–2004. It is no accident that the first upon various stakeholders – scientists and students, Science Outline for IPY 2007–2008 produced in 2004 polar residents, national research planners, science (Chapter 1.3) used the term ‘legacy’ more than 20 times managers, policy-makers and public at large. (Rapley et al., 2004). At that early stage, IPY 2007–2008 was aimed to pave the way to: • A new era of scientific progress in knowledge and Securing IPY 2007–2008 Legacies – The understanding of the polar regions JC Perspective • Vital legacy of sustained observing systems Each previous IPY/IGY created a monumental • Increased international research coordination and legacy that outlived its planners and participants, collaboration often by many decades. The main legacy of the first IPY • Stronger links between researchers across different of 1882–1883 was the realization of Carl Weyprecht’s disciplinary fields proposal for concerted, if not fully coordinated • Reference datasets for comparison with the future observational programs by several nations to address and the past common goals with common methods across the • Development of a new generation of enthused polar regions (Elzinga, 2010a; Chapter 1.1). The main polar researchers legacy of the Second IPY in 1932–1933, besides its • Full engagement and understanding of the public many scientific, observational and technological and decision-makers worldwide in the purpose and achievements, was to solidify the ‘International Polar value of polar research Year’ as a multi-disciplinary collaborative program • Increased participation of Arctic residents, includ- to be successfully replicated every 50 (or 25) years ing indigenous peoples, in polar science at all lev- (Elzinga, 2010b). The International Geophysical Year els to enable future research to make maximum of 1957–1958 was a much larger endeavour and use of indigenous knowledge and for indigenous 524 IPY 2007–2008 communities to benefit from scientific advances • A new understanding of the operation of the polar (Rapley et al., 2004). climate. In 2006, upon completing the review of the The Joint Committee continued to discuss the IPY proposals for prospective IPY projects, the IPY Joint legacies at each of its subsequent meetings, most Committee at its third meeting in Cambridge, U.K., notably at JC-5 (March 2007, Paris), JC-6 (October 2007, identified key anticipated long-lasting ‘successes’ of Quebec; Carlson, 2007), JC-8 (February 2009, Geneva IPY 2007–2008 as follows (JC-3 Minutes, 20-22 April – Allison et. al, 2009), JC-9 (June 2010, Oslo), as well as 2006, p. 18, Table 5.0-1): at the IPY Opening Ceremony in Paris (March 2007)1 • A new regime for access to the Arctic and the IPY ‘Celebration’ in Geneva (February 2009). • Integration of local communities and social sciences Also, several other groups and bodies involved in IPY, • (New) Observing systems in the Polar Regions such as the Arctic Council, ATCM, SCAR, IASC, HAIS • Changing the data management and data center (Heads of the Arctic/Antarctic IPY Secretariats) and culture others have addressed the issue of the IPY legacy (or Table 5.0-1. Changing IGY 1957–1958 achievements JC-3, 2006: expected results JC-8: planned results JC-9: Achievements by June 2010 Vision on Major (JC-3, 2006; Summerhayes 2008) (JC-3 Minutes, p.17) (State of Polar Research, p.8-10) IPY 2007 –2008 Discovery of Van Allen belts New understanding of the Major science advances in many disciplinary and ‘Achievements’ (science) operation of polar climate six integrative IPY themes (science – Chapter 5.1; (Legacies): 2006 (science) Part 2) –2010 “Peopling of the Antarctic” Integration of local Cross-disciplinary New integrative framework for polar research, (broad science advance) communities and social collaboration, synthesis, and global connections, cross-disciplinarity, social sciences (broad science integration (broad science issues and biodiversity (broad science advance – advance) advance) Chapter 5.2 ) Use of satellites and rockets for Observing systems at the Poles Observational systems, New long-term observing systems targeted to polar research (observations, (observations) facilities and infrastructure many stakeholders (observations – Part 3) science technology) (observations) The establishment of data Changing data management Reference data (data and data New strategic approaches to data and centers (data management) and data center culture (data management) information management, including creation of management) the Polar Information Commons (Chapter 3.11) The eventual establishment New regimes for access to the Scientific and political Development of new ‘bipolar’ vision, of the Antarctic Treaty system Arctic (political cooperation) cooperation (cooperation) partnerships, and institutions (cooperation, (political cooperation) science vision – Chapter 5.5) Establishment of SCAR (science New generation of polar New mechanism (APECS) to advance recruitment structure) scientists and engineers in polar research and to ensure the launch of the (societal implications) next IPY in 25 or 50 years (science structure – Chapter 4.2) Broad public interest and Education and outreach networks to disseminate participation (societal IPY results established (societal implications – implications) Chapter 4.1) Engaging Arctic residents, Bringing new stakeholders, i.e., polar residents, including indigenous people indigenous people, non-polar nations to (societal implications) polar research, science planning, and data management (societal implications – Chapter 5.4) l e g a ci e s 525 ‘legacies’) starting as early as 2006. As a result, scores • Observational systems, facilities and infrastructure of articles and discussion papers were produced • Scientific and political cooperation in assessing various aspects of post-IPY legacy, IPY • Cross-disciplinary collaboration, synthesis and science synthesis and integration (Arctic Council, integration 2008; Baeseman, 2008; Dickson, 2009; Goodison, 2008; • Reference data Hik, 2007; Hik and Church, 2007; Hik and Kraft Sloan, • A new generation of polar scientists and engineers 2007; Kraft Sloan, 2006; Krupnik, 2009; LeDrew et al., • Broad public interest and participation 2008; Sarukhanian, 2008; Kraft Sloan and Hik, 2008; • Engagement of Arctic residents, including Summerhayes, 2007; 2008 Summerhayes and Rachold, indigenous peoples. 2007). The most recent assessment of the prospective Some of those legacies of IPY 2007–2008 outlined IPY legacies was produced in July 2010 following the by the JC have already been covered in earlier chapters joint AC-ATCM workshop conducted during the Oslo of the volume, such as IPY observational initiatives IPY Science Conference (Winther and Njåstad 2010). and reference data (Part 3), new generation of polar In addition, the 2008 OECD Global Science Forum scientists (Chapter 4.3), and the engagement of the released an earlier report assessing