Documents

SCAR XXX WP11ii: SCAR Data and Information Strategy 2008 – 2013

Executive Summary

International, Antarctic-based research is loosely coordinated under the auspices of the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research (SCAR), which is an inter-disciplinary committee of the International Council of Scientific Unions (ICSU). SCAR is governed by an Executive Committee, National Delegates and an Executive Director, and operates via Scientific Standing Groups. ICSU and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) are responsible for coordinating the 2007-09 International Polar Year (IPY), a globally coordinated set of science projects with the capacity to significantly advance human understanding of earth systems. SCAR is contributing directly to the management of the IPY 2007-09, which is the fourth in a set of International Polar Years that began in 1882. Each International Polar Year left a global legacy. The third IPY became known as the International Geophysical Year (IGY) of 1957-58. One part of the legacy of the IGY was the creation of SCAR in 1958, to continue the coordination of Antarctic research begun during the IGY. Another part of the legacy of the IGY was the creation of the World Data Centre System. Post 2008 it is hoped that IPY will leave a series of long-lived, global observing systems capable of monitoring and detecting changes in the behaviour of the oceanic, atmospheric, cryospheric and biospheric elements of the overall Earth System. The need for such observatories has never been more important in the history of mankind given recent consensus on the existence of human-induced climate change and its potential impact on society and natural systems.

Sustained and effective global observing systems will be collaborative ventures shared by nations and under-pinned by professional data management, agreed data and information standards, and shared data and information infrastructure. This infrastructure will require planning, a coordinating framework, governance and appropriate resourcing. In addition to being able to draw upon national research programs, SCAR members are fortunate in having already put in place collectively some of the elements of the infrastructure required for supporting these sustainable observing systems.

In 1992 SCAR presented a proposal (No. WP5) at the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting (ATCM XVII) for development of an Antarctic Data Management System which was agreed to by all Parties. By 1998 SCAR and the Council of Managers of National Antarctic Programs (COMNAP) reported to ATCM (XXII) that they had established a Joint Committee of Antarctic Data Managers (JCADM) to pursue development of the system. More recently a SCAR group of experts providing advice and services related to building an Antarctic Spatial Data Infrastructure (AntSDI) was elevated to become a SCAR Standing Group (the Standing Group on Antarctic Geographic Information – SC-AGI). JCADM has been in operation for over 10 years and has been successful in raising the profile of data management within the SCAR community, but its work to date has not been supported by a comprehensive Strategy that defines how an effective Antarctic Data Management System (ADMS) could be implemented. Similarly, SC-AGI has developed a range of quality products that could be used to build components of a spatial data infrastructure, but they are not in wide use within the Antarctic community and there is no roadmap detailing how an AntSDI could be developed. Recognising these deficiencies, the SCAR Executive called for JCADM to develop a SCAR Data and Information Strategy. In 2006 COMNAP, co-sponsor of JCADM, reported to the SCAR Executive Committee that it would be withdrawing financial support for JCADM activities in June 2008 stating that “The group now showed maturity and seemed to have reached the point where it could sustain itself”. Accordingly, from July 2008 JCADM will seek to become a Standing Committee of SCAR.

Theses pages describe a SCAR Data and Information Strategy. The Strategy recommends that the number and alignment of the current, loosely federated system of independently operating National Antarctic Data Centres (NADCs), be upgraded and augmented to create a sustainable and network-based infrastructure capable of meeting the data and information management challenges that accompany the technological advances which we now enjoy at the beginning of 21^st Century. It also provides the larger and currently missing context for existing data and information bodies like JCADM and SC-AGI, each of which addresses a part of the overall picture – but currently in a relatively uncoordinated way. An important constraint applied throughout the Strategy is that a SCAR Antarctic Data Management System should be interoperable with other existing global infrastructures and initiatives, particularly with the reform of the ICSU World Data Centre System, and should leverage existing and emerging global standards and protocols wherever possible.

The Strategy indicates that several obstacles must be overcome to build a better data management capability in support of SCAR science. There are significant implications for both JCADM and SC-AGI.

Inadequate resourcing of the JCADM Executive and JCADM/SC-AGI activities severely limits the development of data and information management services for SCAR’s science. The Strategy recommends that:

• SCAR examines the feasibility of staffing the JCADM Chair role with someone able to devote the majority of their time to implementing the Strategy. Possible mechanisms for doing so are outlined in Section 5.2.3.
• it should be SCAR Policy that Membership entails the establishment of an NADC. If retrospectively applied, this would bolster national resources committed to participation in SCAR data management activities. Section 5.2.2 of the Strategy discusses this issue and its implications.
• a closer working relationship be fostered between SCAR science programs, NADCs and JCADM, through an obligation on endorsed SCAR science programs to submit a data management plan as part of the SCAR proposal and endorsement process. By getting adequate data management factored into science proposals there is a greater chance that data management aspects of the science projects will be better resourced and funded. JCADM should be called upon to assist in developing such Plans and to provide a template to ensure consistency in the matters that should be addressed. Section 5.2.1 elaborates on why data management plans are recommended and the benefits that they could bring.

To date SCAR data management has mainly been undertaken as the marginal cost of doing science. The task has been accomplished largely through voluntary labour provided by Members, particularly where shared infrastructure services have been developed. Many of the more mature national programs are now experiencing decreases in their program budgets making it difficult to continue substantive voluntary contributions that primarily support the common good, as opposed to national interests. A focus on national interests neglects the benefits that can accrue through taking a pan-Antarctic approach. Now is the time to start seeking external funding sources to support some of the key data management activities required to develop the pan-Antarctic Data Management System (ADMS) from which all Members should benefit. Section 5.4.2 makes this case and also posits that linking with a small number of well-resourced, emerging data networks would give SCAR a kick-start in terms of leveraging some existing core capability.

There is still a strong culture amongst scientists NOT to share data, despite Treaty Parties agreeing to make scientific data public under Article (III).(1).(c) of the Treaty. This culture is being reinforced by existing reward and recognition systems operating within national science programs. Section 5.3 discusses this issue and suggests that a recognised data citation system, that operates similarly to a publication citation system, could influence scientists to publish more data. The SCAR Executive, possibly through IPY activities, or in conjunction with an appropriate peak library or publication body, is in a position to explore the development of a SCAR data citation system that would encourage scientists to publish data by providing recognition.

The data products and services already developed by SC-AGI members at considerable cost and effort on the part of national contributors are not being effectively exploited. A closer partnership between SC-AGI members, who develop these products, and potential consumers, such as JCADM’s NADCs, should be formed to better utilise these tools. Such a partnership would provide an excellent mechanism for fine-tuning these tools to meet actual user needs and for weeding out developments that are not operationally robust or useful. The need for closer cooperation between these two SCAR groups is outlined in section 5.4.1.

The restricted nature of available resources to undertake development work related to building data systems will require an incremental approach to building an ADMS encompassing a Spatial Data Infrastructure (SDI). As core capability grows over time, more users and developers should be attracted to assist in growing the capability further because of the intrinsic rewards that are more likely to be obtainable from participating in the development of a functioning system. To start this approach, the Strategy suggests setting up a series of well-bounded pilot projects that could begin to build the necessary components of an ADMS, ideally centred around developing virtual observatories to support observing networks. Section 5.5 discusses this concept and provides examples of the types of activities that might be pursued.

Building the foundation data layers of the proposed AntSDI could be greatly facilitated by closer cooperation amongst those nations with an active national Antarctic mapping program. As a first step, obvious gaps in data availability should be identified and agreed upon. Secondly, forecasts of likely mapping activity by national programs should be sought to assess how these gaps might be best filled. SC-AGI members should be able to readily assist in these exercises given information that they already have at hand and because of their links into national mapping programs. Once this information is available, SC-AGI should provide advice to SCAR, on possible mechanisms to fill key gaps. This issue is also discussed in more detail in Section 5.5.

Capacity-building will be crucial to develop the work force and to spread the work-load, currently predominantly carried by the more mature SCAR contributors. Section 5.4.4 outlines a range of possibilities for training and mentoring activities.

The Strategy concludes by anticipating that both JCADM and SC-AGI will develop comprehensive work-plans derived from guidance presented in this Strategy and will regularly work together to review progress and adapt this Strategy to fit emerging opportunities or changes that will inevitably occur in SCAR’s operating contexts.

The overall vision pursued by this Strategy is provided in the form of two hypothetical testimonials which immediately follow this Executive Summary.

SCAR XXX WP11iii: Joint Committee on Antarctic Data Management (JCADM) Review 2008

Overview

Highlights:

The external review of JCADM (attached) is very positive. Significant progress has been made in the past 2 years. JCADM’s membership has increased to 31 SCAR Member nations. There has been a 20% increase in metadata datasets submitted to the Antarctic Master Directory (AMD), and downloads from the AMD have increased to from 500 per month to 3000 per month. In addition JCADM is far more engaged than it was with the scientific community, and has developed a strategic plan to paint a picture of what is possible in Antarctic data management. These are all highly commendable developments. JCADM is carrying out an essential task.

Shortcomings:

The external review points to some key shortcomings.

• SCAR needs to work more closely with operators and National Antarctic Data Centres (NADCs) to pursue adequate funding for Antarctic data management by all Members, so that all Members become effective stewards of Antarctic data – for the benefit of the entire scientific community. The Executive Director wrote to National Committees and Delegates about this by e-mail on 25/10/2006, but with little evident result.
• There is a need for JCADM to work with the AMD and operators of NADCs to improve the AMD system so that access to metadata on the AMD leads in all cases to national data sets (recognising that the disconnect is a problem not with JCADM but at the national level).
• The removal of COMNAP funds is a serious blow, and it is hoped that SCAR can make up the difference ($3300/year).
• Implementing the data and information management strategy will require resources from SCAR or elsewhere. It is suggested that SCAR Members work amongst themselves to find a person to post to the SCAR Office to work on implementing the data and information strategy.

SCAR XXX WP12i: King George Island Science

Summary

Recommendations for improving the coordination of science between national operators on KGI have been made over a number of years, to little effect. There is now a broad view of the breadth of science carried out, and the main topic headings. However, we still lack the detailed information on who is doing what, and where, which is required as the basis for improving coordination, and we still lack any mechanism for improving coordination.

To address these shortcomings, a workshop on the coordination of King George Island (KGI) science will be held as part of XXX SCAR in St Petersburg. It will take place in Room B on the 10^th floor of the Pribaltiskaya Hotel, for a maximum of 20 people, from 0900-1300 on July 6^th. Delegations will be asked to nominate attendees.

The main business will be:

• To agree on how to complete the inventory of KGI scientific activities and contact points;
• To explore ways in which scientific coordination between national operations on KGI can be improved so as (a) to benefit all national operators, (b) to avoid duplication of effort, and (c) to benefit all SCAR programmes through more coherent and integrated inputs of data from KGI activities to SCAR activities;
• To consider the benefits of holding a workshop on KGI to explore the practicalities of different models for improved scientific coordination (such as a management coordination mechanism and a regular scientific workshop programme).
• To consider the benefits of making a senior level SCAR visit to KGI in the coming southern summer season to explore these various possibilities with operators on the ground;
• To devise a report through SSG-PS to the Delegates with recommendations on the above topics.

The report will help Delegates to decide on the most appropriate way forward for the coordination of KGI science insofar as it affects the interests of SCAR programmes.

SCAR XXX WP12ii: Report of the Workshop on Coordination of King George Island Science

SCAR XXX WP14: Report on Antarctic Climate Evolution (ACE)

Rationale for ACE

ACE facilitates research in the broad area of Antarctic climate evolution over a variety of timescales. The programme links geophysical surveys and geological studies on and around the Antarctic continent with ice-sheet and climate modelling experiments. ACE is designed to determine both climate conditions and climatic changes during the recent past (i.e., the Holocene prior to anthropogenic impacts, as well as at the last glacial maximum and other Quaternary glacial intervals, when temperatures were cooler than at present) and the more distant past (i.e., the pre-Quaternary, when global temperatures were several degrees warmer than today). This new cross-disciplinary approach, involving climate and ice sheet modellers, geologists, and geophysicists will lead to a substantial improvement in the knowledge-base on past Antarctic climate, and our understanding of the factors that have guided its evolution. This in turn will allow us to build hypotheses, examinable through numerical modelling, as to how Antarctic climate is likely to respond to future global change. Equally important, the development of data-driven models for Antarctic climate will allow us to extend our results to the analysis and prediction of global climate variability.

Following the SCAR28 meeting in Bremen, ACE (Antarctic Climate Evolution) became a full Scientific Research Programme of SCAR. Since 2004 ACE has delivered outputs commensurate with its SRP status, and these are reported in this paper.

SCAR XXX WP15: Report on Antarctica and the Global Climate System (AGCS)

The Rationale for the Programme

AGCS is a cross-disciplinary science programme that focuses on the atmospheric, oceanic and cryospheric linkages between the Antarctic and the rest of the Earth system. It uses a very wide range of observations from the Antarctic continent and the Southern Ocean to investigate natural climate variability and possible anthropogenic signatures of change. The in-situ meteorological and oceanic observations provide high quality data for recent decades, but these are supplements with proxy data from deep and shallow ice cores that extend the records back into the pre-instrumental period. The programme also uses a range of satellite data and the output of climate and numerical weather prediction models to investigate the mechanisms of change and how climate signals are transferred to and from mid-latitudes and the tropics to the Antarctic. Our focus is on climate change over roughly the last 10,000 years, although we work closely with the ACE programme, which is looking deeper into the past.

AGCS consists of four science themes concerned with:

1. Decadal time scale variability in the Antarctic climate system
2. Global and regional climate signals in ice cores
3. Natural and anthropogenic forcing on the Antarctic climate system
4. The export of Antarctic climate signals.

This document reports on progress with the implementation of the programme since our report to the SCAR Executive in July 2007. It provides details of progress with the science and lists outputs.

SCAR XXX WP16: Report on Evolution and Biodiversity in the Antarctic (EBA)

Rationale

Evolution and Biodiversity in the Antarctic: the Response of Life to Change (EBA) was endorsed by SCAR in October 2004 and became operational from January 2006. The overall aim of the EBA programme is to understand the evolution and diversity of life in the Antarctic, to determine how these have influenced the properties and dynamics of present Antarctic and Southern Ocean ecosystems, and to make predictions on how organisms and communities will respond to current and future environmental change.

This programme involves an explicit integration of work on marine, terrestrial and limnetic ecosystems. The science in this programme thus extends over an entire biome on Earth. By comparing the outcome of parallel evolutionary processes over the range of Antarctic environments, fundamental insights can be obtained into evolution and the ways in which life responds to change, from the molecular to the whole organism level and ultimately to biome level. Most national programmes individually cannot attempt a study on such a bold scale, whereas the collaborative spirit of the Antarctic science community provides a mechanism for achieving outstanding scientific success.

EBA has established five Working Packages to cover the intended areas of research:

• Work Package 1: Evolutionary history of Antarctic organisms
• Work Package 2: Evolutionary adaptation to the Antarctic environment
• Work Package 3: Patterns of gene flow and consequences for population dynamics: Isolation as a driving force
• Work Package 4: Patterns and diversity of organisms, ecosystems and habitats in the Antarctic, and controlling processes
• Work Package 5: Impact of past, current and predicted future environmental change on biodiversity and ecosystem function

SCAR XXX WP17: Report on Inter-hemispheric Conjugacy Effects in Solar-Terrestrial and Aeronomy Research (ICESTAR)

Four Year Report to the SCAR Executive on the Scientific Research Programme Overall Programme Duration: 2005 – 2009

The primary goal of the ICESTAR Programme is to create an integrated, quantitative description of the upper atmosphere over Antarctica, and its coupling to the global atmosphere and the geospace environment. This document highlights selected progress with the implementation of ICESTAR since inception in 2005. For complete details, please visit the ICESTAR website (link obsolete).

At the completion on the programme in 2009, ICESTAR plans to create an expert group to further develop the subject. Thus, ICESTAR will not propose for a second term as an SRP.

SCAR XXX WP18: Report on Subglacial Antarctic Lake Environments (SALE)

This report contains outputs and deliverables, inputs and future plans of SALE.

SCAR XXX WP19: External Reviews of Scientific Research Programmes (SRPs)

Background – the Review Process

The quality, the progress and success of SCAR’s Scientific Research Programmes (SRPs) is to be reviewed every 2 years in order to determine that SCAR is obtaining good value for its investment and that results are emerging at an appropriate rate. A 4-year review is to include external evaluations. This is time for the 4-year review.

The success of SRPs depends primarily on science carried out, funded and peer-reviewed within national programs and there is no wish to duplicate the scientific review process of national activities. SCAR adds value to national efforts by facilitating international collaboration and communication that might not otherwise occur. An assessment of the extent to which that value has been added through such collaboration is the objective of the review process, providing a basis for prioritizing the many competing demands on SCAR’s limited resources. If an SRP is judged to be deficient in its performance, SCAR will recommend changes to improve performance, or it may redirect funds to other more deserving activities. SRPs are also to be of a finite duration (6 to 8 years) allowing for the renewal and reinvigoration of the SCAR scientific portfolio on a regular basis. Reviews and assessments are used to encourage this replenishment.

The review process is not meant to be unduly burdensome and should be proportional to SCAR-provided funds. SRP leaders report biennially to the meetings of the Standing Scientific Groups and the SCAR Delegates. In the intervening years SRPS report to the Chief Officers of their Standing Scientific Groups who then report to the SCAR Executive Committee. Where feasible, SRP leaders should personally report to the SCAR Delegates. However, it is recognized that time and resources may not allow this, so the SRP reports can be made on behalf of the SRPs by the Chief Officers of the SSGs.

For the 4-year review of progress, the annual report of each SRP will be vetted by an independent external review group. The reviews will be provided to the Delegates meeting, along with the annual reports, to enable the Delegates to take make informed decisions about continued funding of the SRPs.

The plan was for each report to be reviewed by three external reviewers, by 31 May 2008. To the extent possible, reviewers should not be directly involved in the programme but should be knowledgeable about the demands of science in the Antarctic region (SRPs were asked for nominees). Reviewers evaluated the reports based on the evaluation criteria listed in this report. They were asked to comment on the extent to which each SRP has met the Terms of Reference, also given in the report.

SCAR XXX WP20a: Proposals for New SRPs: Proposal of Astronomy & Astrophysics from Antarctica (AAA)

Programme Summary

Astrophysical observations require minimum interference from the Earth’s atmosphere: low thermal background, low absorption, and high angular resolution. The moderate “launch costs” for Antarctic plateau observatories make them an extremely attractive alternative to space.

Astronomy from the Antarctic came of age in the last decade with a cosmological result of major significance. Balloon-borne millimetre observations of the cosmic microwave background from the first BOOMERANG flight led directly to the discovery of the zero- curvature Universe. Submillimetre astronomy has also prospered in the Antarctic: the South Pole Telescope is expected to probe the nature of “dark energy”, the biggest constituent of a “flat” Universe. Optical and infrared astronomy can define the “equation of state” of the Universe, probe the interior structures of stars (including the sun) using time-domain astrophysics, and search for new planetary systems, while particle astronomy answers fundamental questions about the nature of the Universe.

Astronomy & Astrophysics from Antarctica will facilitate international astronomical programs in Antarctica. These programs are aimed at understanding the overarching ecological processes in the Universe, from the birth of stars and of planetary systems around other stars, to the return of heavy-element enriched materials to the interstellar medium, and the formation of new molecular clouds.

Astronomy & Astrophysics from Antarctica will add value by fostering international collaboration in order to permit goals to be achieved that are beyond those of single national programs. Some themes for AAA will be site-testing and validation (including potential new sites in the Arctic), organization of scientific goals that involve a multi-wavelength approach and hence multiple facilities, creation of a roadmap for major facilities, and stimulation of international cooperation in the development of these facilities. Cross-disciplinary links outside astronomy will also be forged.

A strong AAA program will also strengthen the accomplishments of SCAR, which exists to promote frontier science driven coordination and collaboration. SCAR can enhance the scientific value of Antarctic astronomy by moving to establish the AAA Scientific Research Programme at this time. The benefits of coordination and international collaboration will be keenly felt.

Once established, AAA will seek endorsement from the International Astronomical Union to have its launch recognized as an activity of the International Year of Astronomy in 2009.

SCAR XXX WP20b: Proposals for New SRPs: Proposal of POLar Earth observing NETwork (POLENET)

Scientific Planning Group Proposal

A SPPG is fostered by SSG-G with the aim to develop and to propose a Scientific Reseacrh program (SRP) titled “POLENET”.

SCAR XXX WP21i: Joint IASC/SCAR Bipolar Action Group (BipAG) – Briefing Note

Joint IASC/SCAR Bipolar Action Group (BipAG) – Briefing Note

BipAG has two main terms of reference.

ToR (1) is to advise the SCAR and IASC Executive Committees on the development of instruments such as workshops, programs and networks to address bipolar issues (i.e. the first priority is to see how and where we could work, more closely together). This briefing note explores possibilities to this end. 

SCAR XXX WP21ii: Joint IASC/SCAR Bipolar Action Group (BipAG) – Meeting Report, July 2008

SCAR XXX WP22: Relationship Between SCAR and IASC

The SCAR and IASC Letter of Agreement was signed in 2006. SCAR and IASC agreed to combine their efforts in selected fields and activities (to be decided by mutual agreement) so as to raise the level of impact of both organizations in terms of making scientific advances and of advising policy makers (for example of the likelihood and likely effects of climate change), as well as to avoid duplication. To facilitate the process, SCAR and IASC agree to a number of procedures, listed in this paper. 

SCAR XXX WP23: Report from the Action Group on SCAR and the ATS in the 21^st Century (AG-SATC)

Action Group on SCAR and the ATS in the 21^st Century (AG-SATC)

SCAR XXX WP24: Report of the Action Group on Antarctic Fuel Spills (AGAFS)

Action Group on Antarctic Fuel Spills (AGAFS)

Update 4/28/08

The largest quantity (by volume) of potential pollutants imported into the Antarctic region is fuel (hydrocarbon-based refined products) used by station and science operations continent-wide. SCAR established a mechanism to provide scientific advice on the fate and effect of releases of fuel in polar environments in 2008. To address a range of potential issues associated with fuel spills in Antarctica, stimulated by the sinking of the MV Explorer, SCAR has established recruited a group oceanographers, ecologists and other specialists that would be available to respond to requests from the Antarctic Treaty Secretariat and/or Antarctic Treaty Parties for assistance or advice – the Action Group on Antarctic Fuels Spills (AGAFS).

AGAFS is tasked with responding when specific advice is requested and operates as an executive committee that directs, facilitates and coordinates responses as needed. AGAFS will be largely quiescent until a specific need arises but when a need is identified or a request for advice is received Terms of Reference will be developed that are specific to the request.  AGAFS response might include developing a white paper, compiling inventories of biological resources, convening a workshop of experts, and/or provision of contact information for experts, for example.

AGAFS membership is intentionally small as the group will co-opt appropriate expertise as needed depending on the issues under discussion. AGAFS is poised to address issues related to fuel spills such as:

• What ecological resources are at risk within the vicinity of a release?
• Are there specially protected or vulnerable species in the area that need special attention to prevent damage?
• How and where will the local prevailing oceanographic conditions disperse the released fuel?
• What will be the chemical and biological fate of the fuel once released?
• Are there natural processes at work that will mitigate the fate and effects of a release and can these be augmented?
• What are the toxicological properties of the fuel release?
• Are there special considerations that responders should be aware of related to releases of fuel in polar climates?
• What technologies are available that are most effective for spill clean-up in the special circumstances of polar climates?

AGAFS will work closely with SCAR’s Standing Committee on the Antarctic Treaty System (SC-ATS) and, on the technical issues of fuel spill response, with the Council of Managers of National Antarctic Programs (COMNAP).  The AG may also coordinate its activities with other scientific organizations in order to assemble best expertise available on each issue as it arises.

SCAR XXX WP25: Report on New SCAR Legal Status

Report on SCAR’s New Legal Status (entire report)

ICSU requires that all of its subsidiary bodies acquire independent legal status. To establish SCAR as a legal entity with charitable status in the UK required that SCAR be transformed into a Company Limited by Guarantee, and approved by the Charity Commissioners. This required that the Constitution and some of the Rules of Procedure be converted into a Memorandum of Association and Articles of Association.

Delegates to XXIX SCAR approved the Memorandum and Articles of Association in principle, but identified some specific points that need to be examined in relation to the status and powers of the Directors of the Limited Company. An inter-sessional ad hoc Working Group chaired by F. Davey (NZ) was formed to work with the Executive Director to examine the proposed Memorandum and Articles of Association in relation to the present Constitution and Rules of Procedure, so as to advise the Executive Committee what changes if any were needed to the documents. The advice was provided to the Executive Committee for consideration at its meeting in Washington DC. The Committee accepted the advice and instructed the Executive Director to work with the lawyers to finalise SCAR’s legal and Charity status by 1 January 2008. Working Paper WP 25 reports on the outcomes of the actions by the law firm.

The Memorandum and Articles of Association are to be found on the SCAR web site at https://www.scar.org/about-us/governance/ (updated link).

SCAR became a UK Company Limited by Guarantee on April 14^th 2008. Under the Memorandum and Articles of Association, SCAR Officers and the Executive Director become Directors of the Company.

The legal advisors then submitted the papers to the UK Charity Commissioners, in order for SCAR to become a UK Charity. The Charity Commissioners acknowledged receipt of the papers on June 10^th and promised to try to deliver their response prior to the Delegates meeting. It is hoped that SCAR will be operating as a Charity by the end of July 2008.

SCAR XXX WP26: Rules of Procedure (Revised)

(July 16, 2008)

SCAR XXX WP27: Report of SCAR Standing Committee on Antarctic Geographic Information (SC-AGI)

Background

All work in Antarctica relies on a consistent geographic framework, and the main function of the new Standing Committee on Antarctic Geographic Information (SC-AGI) 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.

At the XXIX SCAR meeting in Hobart 2006, the Expert Group on Geographic Information (EGGI) was repositioned from within the Standing Scientific Group for the Geosciences to become SC-AGI. SC-AGI is the direct descendant of the SCAR Working Group on Cartography, formed in 1958.

Building on the work done by its predecessor EGGI, SC-AGI continues to deliver a range of up to date Geographic Information products through its various projects. These products include the SCAR Composite Gazetteer of Antarctica, the Antarctic Digital Database, the SCAR King George Island GIS Database, SCAR Map Catalogue and SCAR Feature Catalogue.

SC-AGI integrates topographic and names information received from national Antarctic programs into the SCAR ADD and SCAR Composite Gazetteer of Antarctica. SC-AGI promotes an open standards approach to support free and unrestricted data access and develops the respective specifications including the SCAR Feature Catalogue and Symbology.

The Chair of SC-AGI is Henk Brolsma. For further details see the Antarctic Spatial Data Infrastructure (AntSDI) website.