Documents

SCAR EXCOM 2013 WP01: Agenda

SCAR EXCOM 2013 WP02: Annotated Agenda

SCAR EXCOM 2013 WP03: List of Papers

SCAR EXCOM 2013 WP04: Timetable

SCAR EXCOM 2013 WP05: Report of SSG Physical Sciences

Executive Summary

Title: SSG Physical Sciences

Authors: D. Bromwich, M. Candidi

Introduction/ Background:

The structure of SSG/PS is detailed in the SCAR web site.  Several groups will be reported upon to EXCOM individually and are therefore omitted here. These are the SRP’s (AAA and AntClim21), several Expert and Groups that have grown enough to deserve independent status (ISMASS and Oceans-SOOS), and those groups that are cross-SSG and have been assigned to the partner SSG; they will be dealt with in the partner SSG report (ECA, ATHENA, Acoustics, ICED, and Remote Sensing).

Important Issues or Factors:

None of relevance.

Recommendations/Actions and Justification: 

Ocean Acidification:

• identify assistance for the editing and publication of the final report.
• a communication team made up of SCAR and members of the AG should be set up by Easter  2014 to develop a communication strategy for the efficient dissemination of the key findings and the scientific report.
• the AG also requests a special session at the SCAR OSC in New Zealand in 2014.

SCOSTEP: M. Candidi has resigned from the position of SCAR representative in the SCOSTEP bureau; SSG/PS suggests that Dr. Annika Seppala be nominated to that position, for a term of four years, to ensure that Antarctic perspectives be included in the overall Solar Terrestrial Physics programs.

Expected Benefits/Outcomes: 

Ocean Acidification:

A final report on the group activity will be launched at the SCAR OSC in 2014

International Partnerships in Ice Core Sciences (IPICS):

A special joint journal issue of Climate of the Past/The Cryosphere based on the Giens meeting.

GRAPE (GNSS Research and Application for Polar Environment):

The  Annals of Geophysics GRAPE Special Issue, sponsored by SCAR, is in publication.

Partners:

all the groups operating within SSG/PS have wide connections to similar organisms within and outside SCAR; in particular we note:

Budget Implications:

IPICS and GRAPE request additional funding for their activities.

SCAR EXCOM 2013 WP06: Report of the SCAR Standing Scientific Group on Life Sciences (SSG-LS)

Executive Summary

Title: SSG Life Sciences

Authors: Graham Hosie (CO), B . Danis, M. Hindell, Y. Ropert-Coudert, K. Takahashi, R. Cavanagh, N. Johnston, J. Ayton, M. Shepanek, P. O’Brien, H-U. Peters, D. Bergstrom, G. Capodaglio

Introduction/Background:

EG-ABI is seeking to improve the management, discovery, exploration, analysis and presentation of biodiversity data. It is still at the early stages but has been making significant progress for the SCAR community. EG-BAMM has been strengthening links with ABI, APECS and the new Action Group on Remote Sensing. The BAMM and Remote Sensing groups will increase our capacity to monitor bird and mammal populations and species by using satellites to count animals. BAMM is working on improving its databases, especially for bird and mammal tracking data in collaboration with ABI. The SO-CPR database is also being redeveloped through the support of the Australian Antarctic Data Centre to provide easier access and distribution of plankton data. SO-CPR Survey is now an endorsed programme of SOOS. It is taking a leadership role in the new Global Alliance of CPR Surveys (GACS) plankton monitoring programme. It continues to expand into new regions with South Africa and France joining the Survey. Korea plans to join soon. EG-CPR has supported capacity building training workshops for new personnel from Brazil, France and Korea. ICED is developing its core activities on food web modelling, data synthesis, fieldwork, policy information and E&O. Links are being strengthened with SOOS, APECS, IPCC and CCAMLR. Additional workshops are planned to address important issue relating to Antarctic and the EU, as well as improving E&O. EG-HB&M has merged with its COMPNAP counterpart and is continuing to work with IASC and APECS. The new JEGHBM is seeking to enhance tele-medicine, tele-health, research and associated databases.

Important Issues or Factors: 

SCAR EG-HB&M and the COMNAP Medical Network have merged to form the Joint Expert Group Human Biology and Medicine (JEGHBM).

A new observing system is being proposed “Antarctic Near-Shore and Terrestrial Observing System (ANTOS)”, which is expected to be supported by an expert group within the SSG-LS. A full proposal which will be presented at the SCAR Business Meeting, Auckland 2014.

Recommendations/Actions and Justification:

AG-Acoustics should be abolished as its work is deemed complete and future requests should be handled by SCATS, as occurred in 2011-2012.

Expected Benefits/Outcomes:

The RAATD will lead to the production of habitat usage maps for bird and mammals and identify multi- species areas of ecological significance. EG-CPR participation in GACS will allow us to place our observed changes in Antarctic plankton in a global context. Continued engagement with other partners, workshops and training enhances our knowledge exchange, capacity building and E&O.

Partners:

In addition to supporting SRPs (e.g. AnT-ERA and AntEco), and national programmes, LS groups work with and contribute to SOOS, CCAMLR, GACS, IPCC, GBIF, OBIS, APECS, CEP. ANTOS aims tot provide a platform for current and future SCAR Life Sciences programmes (e.g. AnT-ERA, AntEco)., as well as national Antarctic programmes

Budget Implications:

An Export Group for ANTOS will have funding implications but not until the 2015-16 budget period.

SCAR EXCOM 2013 WP07: Report of the SCAR Standing Scientific Group on Geosciences (SSG-GS)

Executive Summary

Title: Standing Scientific Group on Geosciences Report to the Delegates, EXCOM, July 2013

Authors: W. Berry Lyons, Jesús Galindo-Zaldivar, Naresh C. Pant

Introduction/Background: Progress of work, future plans and highlights of work was presented by Prof. A. Capra after introduction by Y-D. Kim to the delegates during July 2012 XXXII Delegates meeting at Portland, USA. . Necessity of stronger linkages between PS, GS and LS groups was brought out. Efforts to have inclusion of more palaentologists in the programmes is to be made and more sessions in the next ISEAS to be invited from them.

PAIS (Past Antarctic Ice Sheet dynamics) following the legacy of ACE (Antarctic Climate Evolution) aims to progress from paleoclimate reconstruction focus to a comprehensive understanding of the ice-sheet geometry in various domains in Antarctica from deep interior to far field records. Solid Earth Response and influence on Cryospheric Evolution (SERCE) approaches modeling of glacial isostatic adjustments (GIA) through geological, geophysical and geodetic measurements. New Action and Expert Groups on Geological Heritage and Conservation (new proposal submitted) and Connecting geophysics with geology: key areas for understanding the building stones of Antarctica aim to broaden the scope of SCAR activities.

Important Issues or Factors: There is a need of increased international participation of young researchers from SCAR member countries especially where the national Antarctic programs are relatively less developed.

Recommendations/Actions and Justification: A quota of one or two seats for participants from SCAR community in National Antarctic programs

Expected Benefits/Outcomes: Two main benefits expected. First, quality and quantity of field data will improve and errors can be better constrained. Second, increased human resource on account of training from collaborative participation.

Partners: Initially from within SCAR

Budget Implications: SCAR can facilitate the collaborative participation through an expert committee. Possibly no additional financial implication other than hosting of this committee.

SCAR EXCOM 2013 WP08: Final Report of EBA (Evolution and Biodiversity in the Antarctic)

Executive Summary

Title: SCAR SRP ‘Evolution and Biodiversity in the Antarctic’

Authors: P. Convey, G. di Prisco (EBA Co-Chairs), J. Xavier, M. Rajanahally (EBA Co-Secretaries)

Relevant URLs or references to other reports: www.eba.aq

Introduction/Background: EBA is the last of the previous portfolio of SCAR SRPs to complete it cycle, ACE and AGSC winding up in 2012. Over that cycle it was the only SCAR programme representing the interests of the very large and diverse biological sciences research community with interests in Antarctica. With the development and adoption of two new biological SRPs by Delegates in 2012, the leaders of EBA agreed to wind up the programme a year earlier than planned originally, not requesting funds for 2013, although extending the time period for use of its existing 2012 funds, not least to take advantage of the 2013 SCAR Biology Symposium (Barcelona) as a timely and high profile ‘wind up’ event for the programme. Work under the auspices of EBA is divided into five ‘workpackages’, each working in both the marine and terrestrial environments of Antarctica.

Important Issues or Factors: Since the Programme’s last Report to Delegates, it has continued to be very active in its primary coordination role, and in science areas previously noted to Delegates; in particular the programme has contributed to the development of robust scientific advice central to informing the CEP and hence ATCM on issues relating to human impacts on the ecosystems of Antarctica, and conservation planning and governance issues. In its final year of active operation the programme members and leaders (1) deliver a themed mini-symposium documenting the ‘state of the art’ and major future challenges in the programme’s science fields at the 2012 SCAR OSC; (2) completed the delivery of planned research workshops or meetings in the remainder of 2012; (3) played an active and central role in the transition to successor SCAR biological and cross- disciplinary research programmes; and (4) used remaining EBA funds as seed money to contribute to specific workshops in this transitional period, in particular to a series of workshops setting the ground for the proposed ANTOS (Antarctic Nearshore and Terrestrial Observing System) activity, contributing to a joint workshop with AnT-ERA on “omics”, and contributing with SSG-LS to an international penguin biology workshop strongly slanted towards the early career scientist community.

Recommendations/Actions and Justification: To note and approve of EBA actions and progress to the end of its formal life cycle.

Expected Benefits/Outcomes: Continued significant publication output (both content and numbers), outreach delivery, advice to stakeholders, enhancement of SCAR profile. Although these direct functions will now be taken over by the new biological SRPs, EBA outputs will clearly continue to enter the public domain, while the legacy of the programme is also the foundation it provides for the new SRPs

Partners: Various outputs involve interactions with CEP, COMNAP, SCAR Expert and Action Groups, IPCC

Budget Implications: No further budgetary or other approval is required for EBA itself.

SCAR EXCOM 2013 WP09: Report on AAA (Astronomy and Astrophysics from Antarctica)

Executive Summary

Title: Astronomy and Astrophysics from Antarctica (AAA)

Authors: John Storey (Chief Officer) with input from the Working Group chairs.

Introduction/Background: The Astronomy and Astrophysics from Antarctica (AAA) SRP was launched in 2010 in recognition of the rapidly growing level of international activity in Antarctic astronomy, and the desirability of improved cooperation and coordination in this field.

The SRP carries out many of its activities on-line, holding a major face-to-face meeting every two years – alternating with the SCAR OSC.

Important Issues or Factors: At the present time AAA is functioning well. There have been a couple of changes to the membership of the Steering Committee, but otherwise there has been little deviation from the original Implementation Plan.

Recommendations/Actions and Justification: No new actions required at this stage.

Expected Benefits/Outcomes: The overarching goals of AAA are to add value to national research programs in Antarctic astronomy and astrophysics, and to maximise productive interaction with other disciplines.

Partners: No formal partners. The IAU (International Astronomical Union) is a Union Member of SCAR.

Budget Implications: Continued funding at the standard SRP level of $20,000 is requested.

SCAR EXCOM 2013 WP10: Report on AntEco (State of the Antarctic Ecosystem)

Executive Summary

Title: State of the Antarctic Ecosystem (AntEco)

 Introduction/ Background: Biological diversity is the sum of all organisms that determine how ecosystems function, and underpins the life-support system of our planet. AntEco will be focusing on past and present patterns of biodiversity in the Antarctic, sub-Antarctic and Southern Ocean regions, to enhance scientific knowledge on biodiversity that, when coupled with increased knowledge of species biology, can be used for the conservation and management of Antarctic ecosystems. The new challenges are to distinguish the impact of present processes from historical signals, and to develop scenarios of potential future states through interdisciplinary approaches. Key scientific questions include:

• How has Antarctic biodiversity evolved in response to past environmental change and what does this tell us about its capacity to respond to future change?
• What are the systematic and environmental geographic features of Antarctic biodiversity, and what mechanisms underpin the current distribution and abundance of biodiversity?
• Given the evolved geographic distribution of diversity and forecast threats, what conservation actions are required for mitigation of, and adaptation to, change?

The principal role of AntEco is to promote the use of established and innovative technologies in research and collaborations that will enable the synthesis and integration of biological, physical and temporal data at different resolutions in order to better understand the nature of Antarctic ecosystems.

Important Issues or Factors: AntEco is newly formed in 2013, and will develop its operational structure throughout this year.

Recommendations/Actions and Justification: To function effectively, it is important that both the existence and the purposes of the AntEco SRP are rapidly and widely communicated across the global Antarctic scientific community. AntEco therefore requests the assistance of SCAR and its instruments in establishing a comprehensive database of national Antarctic programs and contacts.

Expected Benefits/Outcomes: The following are projected outcomes of AntEco activities:

• Potential linkages between SRPs
• Publications (research publications and reviews)
• Preparation of relevant strategy and advisory documents
• Population of relevant databases with spatially significant population datasets
• Presentations at appropriate scholarly meetings, workshops and conferences
• Training and graduation of post graduate students (MSc and PhD)
• Presentations at public (non-scientific) forums
• Establishment of new public interaction sites (web pages etc.)
• Media activities

Partners: AntEco activities will interface closely with new SCAR-sponsored programs (such as AnT-ERA, PAIS and AntClim21) and with existing peripheral SCAR programs (such as CCAMLR and ICED) [see Appendix 1]. AntEco activities will also provide valuable inputs to a range of international databases such as biodiversity.aq (incorporating SCAR-MarBIN and ANTABIF), SCAR Antarctic Biodiversity Database and Barcode of Life Database. At the research level, AntEco activities (workshops, etc.) are expected to stimulate collaborations and partnerships between international research groups. Such collaborations will naturally evolve through mutual interests, complementary and unique skills, coordinated logistics, and other synergistic drivers of research linkages.

Budget Implications: Estimated SCAR funding required over the total program lifetime (in US$): $160, 000 over 8 years = $20, 000 per year

SCAR EXCOM 2013 WP11: Report on AnT-ERA (Antarctic Thresholds – Ecosystem Resilience and Adaptation)

Executive Summary

Title: Antarctic Thresholds – Ecosystem Resilience and Adaptation (AnT-ERA)

Author: Julian Gutt

Introduction/ Background:

Stresses on Antarctic ecosystems result from global climate change, including extreme events, and from other human impacts. Consequently, Antarctic ecosystems are changing, some at a rapid pace while others are relatively stable. A cascade of responses from molecular through organismic to the community level are expected.

The differences in biological complexity and evolutionary histories between the polar regions and the rest of the planet suggest that stresses on polar ecosystem function may have fundamentally different outcomes from those at lower latitudes. Polar ecosystem processes are therefore key to informing wider ecological debate about the nature of stability and potential changes across the biosphere.

The main goal of AnT-ERA is to facilitate the science required to examine changes in biological processes, from the molecular to the ecosystem level, in Antarctic and Sub-Antarctic marine, freshwater and terrestrial ecosystems. Tolerance limits as well as thresholds, resistance and resilience to environmental change will be determined.

AnT-ERA will be classified into 3 overlapping themes: (1) molecular and physiological performance, (2) population processes, (3) ecosystem functions and services.

Recommendations:

As a SCAR program AnT-ERA lives from the contributions of the scientific community, the national programs and closely linked third party funded projects. Thus, we need full support in promoting AnT-ERA through the SCAR Delegates.

Justification:

Exchange of experience and ideas within a truly global scientific community.

Exchange of experience and ideas independent of competition for research funds.

Expected major Outcomes and Milestones:

Integration of early career scientists and new national programs.

Support of scientific publications, especially reviews.

Dissemination of results.

Communication between and coordination of research activities including trans-disciplinary projects.

Action recommendations especially in the context of natural variability and anthropogenic environmental change.

Contributions to overarching reports, especially “Antarctic Climate Change and the Environment”.

Presentations at influential Antarctic-specific symposia.

Presentation of results to the broader scientific community.

Leading of, and participating in, major workshops, which support both the development of long-term observation networks (weather, ocean, lakes and streams or terrestrial) and an integration of ecological information into interdisciplinary models.

Providing mini-grants for early career scientists, members of newly emerging national programmes and contributors to reviews for traveling.

Planned achievements:

The following events mark potential milestones in communication within the AnT-ERA community and will provide a platform for exchange with a broader scientific world:

2012      Begin implementation of specific science, management and outreach plans

2013      Kick-off AnT-ERA workshop at the XI Biology Symposium, Barcelona

2014      Mini joint AnT-ERA – ICED workshop at the XXXIII SCAR and Open Science Conference

2015      AnT-ERA workshop: capacity building to train the next generation of specialists for biological process studies

2016      Joint AnT-ERA – AntEco – AntClim21 Syntheses-workshop at the XXXIV SCAR and Open Science Conference

2017      Meeting to structure and draft reviews for each scientific level

2019      Meeting to plan the future of AnT-ERA

2020      Final workshop (SCAR OSC).

Partners: AntClim21, EGBAMM, AntEco, IASC, APECS, IWC, ICED, ATCM, SOOS, CCAMLR, SPRP, INDEEP, ANTOS, GACS, EcoFinders

Budget Implications: $ 20,000 per year

Chief offers and SC:

LLOYD PECK, British Antarctic Survey, UK; CINZIA VERDE, Institute of Protein Biochemistry, National Research Council, Italy; BYRON ADAMS, Brigham Young University, USA; DIANA WALL, Natural Resources Ecology Laboratory, Colorado State University, USA; AKINORI TAKAHASHI, National Institute of Polar Research, Japan; VONDA CUMMINGS, The National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA), New Zealand; CRAIG SMITH, Department of Oceanography, University of Hawaii at Manoa, USA; ENRIQUE ISLA, Institut de Ciències del Mar-CSIC, Barcelona, Spain; IRENE SCHLOSS, Dirección Nacional del Antartico, Argentina & Institut des sciences de la mer de Rimouski, Canada; JOSÉ XAVIER, Institute of Marine Research, Department of Life Sciences, University of Coimbra, Portugal;

Liaison officer to PS SSG, especially AntClim21: T. Bracegirdle (British Antarctic Survey, BAS); to IASC: R. Gradinger (School of Fisheries and Ocean Science, Fairbanks, Alaska); to ICED: E. Murphy (BAS); to ANTOS: D. Wall. APECS representative: C. Suckling (BAS) & T. McIntyre (AWI).

Implementation plan: See appendix

SCAR EXCOM 2013 WP12: Report on AntClim 21

Executive Summary

Title:  AntarcticClimate²¹

Authors: Nancy Bertler

Introduction/ Background:

Antarctica and the Southern Ocean have been an important modulator of global climate for the past 100 million years. Due to anthropogenic modification of the climate system, aspects of Antarctica and the Southern Ocean are changing rapidly, however, critical mechanisms, responses and potential feedbacks remain poorly understood.

Climate model simulations predict that over the coming decades there will be declining sea ice extent, weakening bottom water formation, and an intensification of the zonal winds. Observations confirm ice shelf collapse, strengthening zonal winds, a rapid increase in net contribution to sea level rise in particular from West Antarctica, substantial warming of the mid troposphere over Antarctica, and rapid warming of the Antarctic Peninsula and sub-Antarctic Islands, an increase in temperature and acidification of the Southern Ocean, regional decrease and increase in sea ice, a freshening of the Ross Sea, and a decrease of bottom water formation. However, these time series are short and inter-model variability suggests physical processes are not yet fully captured or understood.

Paleoclimate records extend observational data for past climates that provide relevant analogues to future projections. The comparison of model performance with known past climate variability provides an important tool for validation of models and their ability to provide future projections. For recent decades both observational data from Antarctic stations and satellite systems have allowed reconstruction of modern climate conditions, in particular the establishment of meaningful reanalysis data sets, such as NCEP/NCAR, ERA-40, ERA-interim, Merra, CFSR, and JRA-55 data sets. The improved re-analysis data sets allow for the development of transfer functions to convert proxy data into quantitative climate records.

To reconstruct and understand climate and ocean variability with a frequency longer than seasonal to sub-decadal or to use past analogues of future climate conditions, paleoclimate archives provide critical information. In the Antarctic region, such records are principally derived from ice and marine sediment cores, and some terrestrial records from small pockets of ice-free areas. We will focus primarily on the reconstruction of the past 2,000 years, where the availability of high resolution (annual to sub-decadal) climate proxy records will allow us to extent observational data with near instrumental quality. In addition, we will take advantage of records and model outputs of earlier key periods as they may become available, in particular the mid-Holocene, glacial terminations, warm interglacials, and the mid-Pliocene.

Well dated, high resolution proxy data reconstruction will help to improve our understanding of natural climate variability, climate drivers, the onset and quantification of recent trends that are poorly captured in current climate models. Furthermore, we will utilise these records to provide data for climate model verification. In addition to published work, we will synthesise data and results from existing initiatives to reconstruct high resolution climate data sets, such as the International Trans-Antarctic Scientific Expedition (ITASE) and the 2,000 year array of the International Partnerships on Ice Coring Sciences (IPICS).

Reconstruction of time periods representing substantial climate transitions (for example the Medieval Warm Period – Little Ice Age, and potentially the mid-Holocene, and glacial terminations) provide an opportunity to investigate the magnitude of responses, feedback mechanisms, and model sensitivity to these drivers. Model outputs of past warm climates (Medieval Warm Period, and potentially Marine Isotope Stage 5 & 11, the mid-Pliocene) are useful analogues for possible futures. In Table 1, atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration and changes in temperature are summarised for these time periods:

Table 1: Atmospheric CO₂ concentration and temperature deviation during key past climate transitions

There are three important components involved in simulating future environmental changes, namely forcing scenarios, physical models, and biological models. Forcing scenarios are storylines of possible futures which cover a wide range of plausible anthropogenic emissions pathways. These depend on factors such as economic development, adoption of renewable energy and land use. In preparation for the upcoming IPCC AR5 a set of scenarios were produced. These comprises four Representative Concentration Pathways (RCPs), RCP2.6, RCP4.5, RCP6 and RCP8.5 (where the numbers represent the approximate change in radiative forcing in W/m²). RCP4.5 represents a “medium” mitigation scenario and RCP8.5 is a “high” emissions scenario. In addition to the new future scenarios, the IPCC has defined a set of baseline paleoclimate simulations. Paleoclimate simulations were not defined as part of the AR4 modelling effort and this represents one of the most significant new components in AR5. The paleoclimate simulations are designed to assess the response and performance of models under forcing conditions that differ significantly from the present day. The IPCC define three different run types: the Last Millennium (850-1850), the Mid-Holocene (6kyr BP), and the Last Glacial Maximum (18 kyr BP).

The physical models used for assessing future climate change vary in complexity. Most of the current generation of physical models are climate “simulators” in the sense that they attempt to represent the observed background climate as realistically as is practical (in this document the term climate model is used in reference to those that fall into this climate simulator category). The climate models that have been run for AR5 fit into this category and are global in scale. These mathematical representations of the atmosphere, ocean, ice and land surface use a large amount of computing resources and are therefore limited in spatial resolution.

The horizontal grid spacing in global climate models is generally in the range 100 km to 200 km in the atmosphere and around 50 km in the ocean. Regional climate models are used to “downscale” the low resolution data of global climate models to be more realistic at smaller grid sizes, which can be of particular importance in regions of steep mountains and complex coastlines such as the Antarctic Peninsula. Global climate models are also generally limited in their representation of ice sheets. In particular they do not represent the flow of glaciers and ice streams, which are a potentially important factor in future sea level change. Currently there is a large amount of work being carried out to address this issue by using regional climate models to force ice sheet models in regions of potentially large impact such as the Pine Island Glacier.

A key aspect of producing reliable projections of future climate is the assessment of skill of the models. Model skill was not assessed rigorously in AR4 with regard to Antarctic climate and this may continue with AR5 as more attention is likely to be directed towards the Arctic. Therefore it is unlikely that the IPCC report alone will provide the detailed best estimates of Antarctic climate change that are required by the SCAR community.

The new paleoclimate runs that are being made available as part of AR5 (and were not available as part of AR4) will provide an exciting opportunity to assess climate model and earth system simulations of a wide range of climatic conditions. This will facilitate a new possibility to assess models’ ability to capture responses to changes in orbital forcing and greenhouse gas concentrations. In addition to responses to “external” forcings, these longer-term runs will provide an opportunity to assess the ability of the models to reproduce climate variability, which is important for assessing the significance of changes over the 20^th and 21^st centuries.

Assessment of the ecosystem impacts of climate change requires output from the physical models on how key parameters are expected to change. For large-scale studies of the Southern Ocean the direct output from global climate models is adequate. However, for terrestrial, marine and benthic studies along coastlines, fjords and valleys downscaling of the climate model output is required. This is a challenging area of Antarctic research that is in its infancy and requires significant multidisciplinary collaboration in the future. This initiative will collaborate with AntEco and Ant-ERA to synthesise advances made.

Important Issues or Factors:

The composition of the Steering Committee is characterized by an excellent range of scientific expertise. However, our national representation is rather limited. We are in the process of inviting and recruiting representatives from developing countries and new Antarctic nations to join the steering committee.

Recommendations/Actions and Justification:

We ask the SCAR Delegates and SSGs to provide continued support to AntarcticClimate²¹

Expected Benefits/Outcomes:

We believe that this proposed programme will strengthen SCAR’s position as the leading authority on Antarctic climate change and its local and global impacts. Antarctica and the Southern Ocean do not have a high enough profile in IPCC, and SCAR is well placed to provide the detailed assessment that is required by policymakers and the broader scientific community.

Partners:

Important partners of AntarcticClimate²¹ include: Ant-ERA, AntEco, ISMASS, PAIS, SOOS,. Relevant representatives of these groups have been identified. We are in negotiation with Ant-ERA on a combined mini-symposium and/or workshop. Outside SCAR we will engage in particular with IPICS, PAGES, ITASE, and the Arctic research community.

Budget Implications:

A total of $24k ($20k + $4k of contingency funds) of SCAR funding are committed. No additional funds are requested. 

SCAR EXCOM 2013 WP13: Report on PAIS (Past Antarctic Ice Sheet Dynamics)

Executive Summary

Title:  Past Antarctic Ice Sheet Dynamics (PAIS)

Authors: C. Escutia, R. DeConto, K. Gohl, R. Larter, R. Powell, L. De Santis, M. Bentley

Introduction/ Background:
The overarching goal of PAIS is to improve confidence in predictions of ice sheet and sea level response to future climate change and ocean warming. For this, PAIS aims to improve understanding of the sensitivity of East, West, and Antarctic Peninsula Ice Sheets to a broad range of climatic and oceanic conditions. PAIS builds on the success of SCAR-ACE (Antarctic Climate Evolution), but with a new focus on the ice sheet rather than palaeoclimate reconstructions. Study intervals span a range of timescales, including past “greenhouse” climates warmer than today, and times of more recent warming and ice sheet retreat during glacial terminations. The PAIS research philosophy is based on data-data and data-model integration and intercomparison, and the development of “ice-to-abyss” data transects, extending from the ice sheet interior to the deep sea. The data-transect concept will link ice core, ice sheet-proximal, offshore, and far-field records of past ice sheet behaviour and sea level, yielding an unprecedented view of past changes in ice sheet geometry, volume, and ice sheet-ocean interactions. These integrated data sets will enable robust testing of a new generation of coupled Glacial Isostatic Adjustment-Ice Sheet-Atmosphere-Ocean models that include new reconstructions of past and present ice bed topography and bathymetry. PAIS will accomplish its objectives by: 1) facilitating the planning of new data-acquisition missions using emerging technologies; 2) encouraging data sharing and integration of spatially targeted transect data with modelling studies; and 3) initiating/expanding cross linkages among Antarctic research communities.

Important Issues or Factors: PAIS continent-to-abyss transects build on ongoing and planned projects and therefore guaratee continuous deliverables. 

Recommendations/Actions and Justification: Support and input from EXCOM on PAIS plans for the next two-three years of the Programme.

Expected Benefits/Outcomes: Significant publication output (both in content and numbers). Publications and science relevant to “Big- science” programmes and policy makers, enhancement of SCAR profile.

Partners: ANDRILL, AntECO, APECS, IGBP-PAGES, IODP, IPICS, ISMASS, SCADM, SCERCE, SHALDRIL and other SCAR Expert and Action Groups.

Budget Implications: Request for confirmation of SCAR science programme funding at current level until the internal progress review in two years.

SCAR EXCOM 2013 WP14: Report on SERCE (Solid Earth Response and influence on Cryospheric Evolution)

Executive Summary

Title:  Solid Earth Response and influence on Cryospheric Evolution  (SERCE)

Authors: Terry Wilson

Introduction/ Background:

The Solid Earth Response and influence on Cryospheric Evolution (SERCE) SRP targets new understanding of solid earth – cryosphere interactions at a crucial time in earth history when global change is driving changes in mass balance of the polar ice sheets.  SERCE promotes integration of new earth science data sets into modeling of ice mass balance, ice dynamics, and solid earth responses to mass change.

Important Issues or Factors:

• Success of initial SERCE activities = indicator of timeliness of this SRP focus
• Steering Committee membership
• Planned activities requiring support

Recommendations/Actions and Justification:

• Suggestions for, and approval of, SERCE steering committee
• Approval of budget requests; required to implement programme plans
• Advice on ensuring bi-polar participation in appropriate planned activities

Expected Benefits/Outcomes:

• Finalizing the Steering Committee will achieve critical mass, appropriate diversity, and energy to plan and implement SERCE activities
• Funding will ensure SERCE activities are implemented appropriately and successfully
• Establishing the path for SCAR-IASC (and other) collaboration will aid in realization of the integrated bi-polar science that the SERCE programme requires

Partners:  

SERCE will seek international partners to leverage each activity.  Partners that have been identified in initial planning are:

• IASC Cryosphere Working Group
• Upper Mantle Dynamics and Quaternary Climate in Cratonic Areas (DynaQlim) – an International Lithosphere Progamme group
• International Association of Geodesy
• EGU Training School funding scheme
• U.S. National Science Foundation (training schools)
• APECS

Budget Implications:

Funding of $25,000 for 2014 and $20,000 for 2015 are requested to support SERCE activities.

SCAR EXCOM 2013 WP15: The SCAR Science Horizon Scan

Introduction

At the 2012 SCAR Delegates Meeting it was agreed that an Action Group (AG) be formed to begin planning for an Antarctic and Southern Ocean Science Horizon Scan (SHS). The rationale for the AG and Terms of Reference are detailed in XXXII SCAR Delegates’ Meeting Working Paper 28b. The membership of the AG was agreed and the first meeting of the Action Group was held at the SCAR Secretariat in Cambridge, UK from December 19-21, 2012. A detailed meeting report is available. The first meeting included opportunities for community consultation by on-line questionnaire, personal appearances, and electronic discussions via Skype.

The AG’s Terms of Reference were to:

1. develop a clear vision of the intended audiences, objectives and outcomes for the horizon scanning activity –  complete;
2. identify the steps necessary for the activity to be successful and define these steps within a framework of pre-activity planning and preparation, the process to be followed during the activity itself, post-activity consultation procedures and report drafting, and production of final deliverables  – complete;
3. define the processes/mechanism to be utilized before and during the activity to ensure that the participants are fully engaged and time is effectively managed complete;
4. develop a list of preliminary resources that should be assembled to support the activity – complete;
5. estimate a budget for the activity – complete;
6. suggest a strategy for fund raising to support the activity – complete;
7. assemble a list of the types of people that should be invited and begin to gather a shortlist of invitees – in  progress; and
8. develop a list of partner organizations that should be asked to send representatives – complete.

The aim of the Science Horizon Scan (SHS) is to convene a representative subset of leading scientists and professionals to identify the most important, emerging scientific themes for research to be conducted in and from Antarctica and the Southern Ocean over the next two decades.  The SCAR 2011-2016 Strategic Plan calls for initiation of a “Horizon Scanning” activity to be held every 4 or 5 years. To support SCAR’s mission of leadership in Antarctic and Southern Ocean science and assist in future strategic planning. The SHS is also a community-building exercise. From SCAR’s Strategic Plan:

“To sustain a position of leadership, SCAR must maintain a continually evolving vision of frontiers and emerging directions in Antarctic and Southern Ocean science. To this end, SCAR will sponsor a regular assessment of scientific frontiers. The objective will be to assemble the world’s leading experts to scan the horizons for emerging frontiers in Antarctic and Southern Ocean science and identify gaps in knowledge. This gathering will draw on data and information from SCAR conferences, symposia, workshops, meetings and other scientific gatherings; the outcomes of SCAR’s Action, Expert and Program Planning Groups; National Antarctic Program planning and strategic documents; outcomes of SCAR’s Scientific Research Programs; and reports of SCAR’s Cross-linkages Meetings. The assessment will produce a 5- and 10- year vision of future directions and grand challenges in Antarctic science. These assessments will inform SCAR leadership and members as it evaluates its scientific portfolio, concludes programs and approves new ones.”

The definition of Antarctica and the Southern Ocean historically adopted by SCAR is used:

 “…Antarctica, the offshore islands of Antarctica, the surrounding ocean including the Antarctic Circumpolar Current, the northern boundary of which is the Subantarctic Front, and the Subantarctic islands lying south of the Subantarctic Front as well as those which lie north of the Subantarctic Front but fall ….within the area of interest, namely Ile Amsterdam, Ile St Paul, Macquarie Island and Gough Island….”

In parallel, complementary activities are underway that are addressing SCAR’s scientific advisory mission – the Antarctic Conservation Strategy (ACS) and the Antarctic Environments Portal (AEP) projects. The Science Horizon Scan (SHS) focuses on future directions and emerging frontiers in pure/basic science. The ACS and AEP focus on providing access to policy-ready science. All three of these activities are mutually beneficial and synergistic but each has its own independent timeline, goals, leadership, and processes. This report summarizes progress on organizing and funding the Science Horizon Scan is summarized.

SCAR EXCOM 2013 WP16: Report on ISMASS (Ice Sheet Mass Balance and Sea Level)

Executive Summary

Title: Report on ISMASS activities since SCAR XXXI (13-25 July 2013, Portland, OR, USA) and related immediate actions

Authors: Francisco Navarro, Frank Pattyn and Edward Hanna

Introduction/Background: ISMASS, initially established in 1993 became, with the reorganization of SCAR, an Expert Group of the SCAR Physical Sciences Standing Scientific Group. Co-sponsorship by IASC was approved by the Cryosphere Working Group of IASC on 13 January 2011, and endorsed by the IASC Council. On 14 July 2012 an ISMASS workshop was held in Portland, OR, USA, within the frame of SCAR XXXI. On 21 May 2013, WCRP-CliC formally presented a request of co- sponsorship of ISMASS, which should be considered as tacitly accepted in light of the MoA between CliC, IASC and SCAR of 16 April 2013. Nonetheless, a formal endorsement is requested to SCAR EXCOM.

The Portland workshop covered both scientific and organizational aspects. A new Steering Committee (SC) was partially appointed (but not completed). The complete new SC is here presented to SCAR-EXCOM, with the request of formal endorsement.
This new SC will hold its first meeting in Sheffield, UK, on 7 Oct. 2013. The main tasks will be to define updated terms of reference for ISMASS, the strategy of ISMASS and the next steps to be undertaken, as well as clearly define some organizational aspects. Partial funding (total funding to be shared by IASC and CliC) is requested to support this meeting.

Important Issues or Factors: The importance of the subjects to discuss, looking towards a revitalization of ISMASS, recommends a face-to-face meeting.

Recommendations/Actions and Justification: Endorsement of the co-sponsorship of ISMASS by WCRP-CliC. Justification: Wider co-sponsorship of ISMASS activities. Fits perfectly into the MoA signed by CliC, IASC and SCAR on 16 April 2013. Endorsement of the new steering committee of ISMASS. Justification: having formal endorsement of newly appointed committee.

Expected Benefits/Outcomes: Well defined framework and action plan of ISMASS for the forthcoming years.

Partners: IASC and WCRP-CliC (co-sponsors of ISMASS expert group).

Budget Implications: Budget is required for the first meeting of the newly appointed Steering Committee, to be held at the University of Sheffield, UK, on 7 Oct. 2013. It will involve travel and subsistence (including 2 hotel nights) for 8 people (2 travelling from the UK, 4 from continental Europe and 2 from the USA). The cost will be shared by SCAR, IASC and CliC, so a cost of no more than 9,000 € is budgeted, 3,000 € per organization.

SCAR EXCOM 2013 WP17: Report from the SCAR Social Sciences Group

Executive Summary

Title: Report of the SCAR Social Sciences Action Group

Authors: D. Liggett, J.F Salazar, K. Bastmeijer, P. Berkman, S. Chaturvedi, E. del Acebo Ibáñez, A.D. Hemmings, M. Lamers, E. Leane, G. Steel, E. Stewart & other members of the steering group

Introduction/Background: Increasingly, Antarctic institutions and stakeholders acknowledge the costs and benefits of human activities in Antarctica not merely from an economic perspective but also from environmental, social and cul­tural points of view. The coverage (in the media and in policy discussions) of the many aspects of human endeavour in the Antarctic asks policy-makers, educators, scientists and the wider public to weigh multiple costs and benefits (that is to say, values) against one another. Understanding the extent and nature of the values that human beings place on Antarctica has large-scale and very serious implications for human engagement with and activity in the Antarctic in the future and significant public-relations implications in relation to the wider social acceptability of even traditional forms of Antarctic activity.

Important Issues or Factors: Social scientists and humanities researchers have the expertise and tools to lead an academic assessment of Antarctic values.  The Social Sciences AG (hereon “the group”) was established to carry out research targeted at understanding the range of values underpinning human engagement with Antarctica.  As shown in this report (including its appendices), this research effort has progressed considerably.  At the same time, it has become clear that a thorough exploration of human values associated with Antarctica is a complex task that requires continued efforts.  This research project promises considerable benefits in the long run, especially with regard to understanding decision-making in an Antarctic context and developing alternative strategies for environmental management.

Recommendations/Actions and Justification: We request that the group’s term be extended to 2015 to maintain the momentum established through the Antarctic values research project and to enable a thorough examination of the complexities associated with Antarctic values and their implications. 

Expected Benefits/Outcomes: The group will continue to raise the profile of SCAR in the public realm and in social science and humanities research communities by demonstrating that SCAR supports multi-disciplinary research efforts outside the realm of the natural sciences.  An examination of Antarctic values through this group will also help SCAR to root its scientific advice in a thorough understanding of the drivers of human engagement with the Antarctic.  Finally, a range of academic publications resulting from this research effort will bolster SCAR’s scholarly record.

Partners: The group has established contact with representatives of the IASC Social and Human Sciences Working Group and is in regular communication with the International Arctic Social Sciences Association (IASSA).  The group also collaborates with the SCAR History EG as highlighted by the latest joint SCAR History and Social Sciences workshop, held in Cambridge from 1-5 July 2013.

Budget Implications: The group would like to continue operating with the current budget of $3000 per year.

SCAR EXCOM 2013 WP18: Report from the SCAR History Group

Executive Summary

Title: History Expert Group

Authors: Cornelia Lüdecke

Introduction/ Background:

The Expert Group was founded as an Action Group in 2004, with 24 individuals present at the first meeting in Germany in 2005. Since then the Group has flourished and membership of the Expert Group has steadily increased, as has the geographical and disciplinary diversity of the participants. The Group’s meetings continue to serve as a valuable discussion space for junior and senior members alike. Meetings have been held across four continents, permitting the core group of academic historians to be joined by local researchers who would likely not otherwise have joined the Group. With more than 70 attendees, the last meeting in Portland (USA) was the largest and most diverse yet – a sign of our ongoing vitality. Rather than just passively sharing their findings, the SCAR Expert Group provides a unique and irreplaceable site for scholars to exchange ideas and develop historical research related to the Antarctic. The group’s dynamism has been demonstrated by collaborative research projects undertaken by group members.

Important Issues or Factors:

Previously rare early published sources are becoming globally available, and members of the Expert Group are contributing to their publication through forums such as the South African National Antarctic Program’s online database;

More and more documents held in restricted archives are being released, including in the former Soviet Union, but also from national archives elsewhere;

New methods of social and archaeological investigation are being developed and resources created;

Opportunities for collaboration between historians and scientists are increasing.

Recommendations/Actions and Justification: 

We wish to continue the SCAR History Expert Group in its current form.

Expected Benefits/Outcomes:

The current high level of publications by Group members will continue, both individually and through collective forums such as special journal issues and a planned edited volume.

Partners:

The SCAR Social Sciences Action Group as well as the history group of the International Arctic Science Committee (IASC).

Budget Implications:

US$5000 as support of the annual workshops for travel support for PhD students and scholars of low income.

SCAR EXCOM 2013 WP20: Report on SCAGI (Standing Committee on Antarctic Geographic Information)

Executive Summary

Title:  Standing Committee on Antarctic Geographic Information (SCAGI)

Authors:  Adrian Fox and Jean-Yves Pirlot, SCAGI co-Chief Officers

Introduction/ Background:  
All work in Antarctica relies on a consistent geographic framework, and the main function of the Standing Committee on Antarctic Geographic Information (SCAGI) is to manage and improve the geographic framework not only for Antarctic scientific research but also for other activities including operations, environmental management and tourism. SCAGI continues to deliver, and actively develop, a range of Geographic Information products through its various projects. These products include: the SCAR Composite Gazetteer of Antarctica, the SCAR Antarctic Digital Database, and the SCAR Map Catalogue. The usage statistics included in the report below show that these are active products that are used and valued by the Antarctic community.

SCAGI integrates topographic and names information received from national Antarctic programmes into the SCAR ADD and SCAR Composite Gazetteer of Antarctica. In keeping with Article III.1.c of the Treaty that Scientific observations and results from Antarctica shall be exchanged and made freely available, SCAGI promotes an open standards approach to support free and unrestricted data access and develops the respective specifications.

Important Issues or Factors:
Most of the effort in SCAGI comes from a few committed members.  To ensure maximum effectiveness for SCAR, SCAGI is focusing its limited resources on delivering the three main SCAR-SCAGI products: Composite Gazetteer of Antarctica (CGA), Antarctic Digital Database (ADD), SCAR Map Catalogue (MapCat).

The SCAR products can only be as good as the data that are in them. It is critical for the continued relevance and utility of the SCAR-SCAGI products that SCAR members contribute all new maps, topographic data, and place-names information to the ADD, MapCat and CGA in a timely manner.

The SCAR Composite Gazetteer of Antarctica is a key product for SCAGI that is widely used by the Antarctic community (see usage statistics below). It has for many years been managed by Roberto Cervellati and Chiara Ramorino, of the Italian National Antarctic Research Programme (PNRA). Both Cervellati and Ramorino have done outstanding work on the CGA, but are both now retired and wish to step back from this role. There is uncertainty (June 2013) about whether PNRA Italy is able to continue to manage the CGA and the identity of successor staff. This needs to be resolved soon to ensure continued provision of this important SCAR product.

Recommendations/Actions and Justification:  Delegates should ensure that they are familiar with the work that SCAGI does and encourage their national representatives to become involved with and contribute all new data to SCAGI products. Delegates should ensure that retiring national representatives are replaced with a successor national representative and that the SCAGI co-Chairs are informed of this change.

Expected Benefits/Outcomes:  Wider engagement by the Antarctic community would help SCAGI to continue to develop, and deliver effectively, reliable relevant Geographic Information Services to the Antarctic science and operations communities. Maintaining the position of SCAR as the source of Geographic Information Services such as the ADD and CGA supports the SCAR Strategic Plan objective of an international leadership role for SCAR.

Partners: SCADM, SCAR member countries, other organizations with an interest in Antarctic geographic Information such as COMNAP, CCAMLR, Antarctic Treaty System, IHO, NASA, Google.

Budget Implications: For the SCAR CGA and SCAR ADD to be improved, it requires that, either SCAGI members take on the necessary work or the work is outsourced. Continuation of $4k a year allocation.

SCAR EXCOM 2013 WP21: Report on Bipolar Issues

Executive Summary

Title: Bipolar Issues

Authors: M Sparrow 

Introduction/ Background: In pursuit of its Vision and Mission, SCAR often forms partnerships as an efficient means to achieve its goals and objectives.  Our partnership with the International Arctic Science Committee (IASC) is an example of a key partnership that both works efficiently and is mutually beneficial.

Important Issues or Factors: SCAR recently held a joint EXCOM meeting with IASC in Krakow, Poland April this year and re-signed jointly with IASC agreements with APECS, IACS and CliC (see WP22). It was decided that the Bipolar Action/Advisory Group was no longer required and that a joint workshop, convened every few years, would be sufficient to identify bipolar science needs.

Recommendations/Actions and Justification:  This paper summarises recent developments with regards SCAR’s partnership with IASC. The Delegates are asked to comment as appropriate.

Partners: IASC

Budget Implications: N/A