1 / 8

International Arctic

International Arctic. Research Center. Vision: IARC will serve our nation and the arctic research community by building an integrated understanding of the Arctic, as a system, with clear and accurate conceptualization of the role of the Arctic in the broader global system. Mandate:

tariq
Download Presentation

International Arctic

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. International Arctic Research Center

  2. Vision: IARC will serve our nation and the arctic research community by building an integrated understanding of the Arctic, as a system, with clear and accurate conceptualization of the role of the Arctic in the broader global system. Mandate: IARC serves as a focal point of excellence for international collaboration and provides the arctic research community with an unprecedented opportunity to share knowledge about science in the Arctic, with an emphasis on global change research.

  3. Mission: The primary mission of the IARC is to nurture, integrate and synthesize research being conducted internationally by individuals and groups in order to reduce the uncertainty of arctic climate predictions. We approach this goal by attempting to quantify past and future environmental variability, by attributing the environmental changes to the inherent drivers, and by entraining the broader arctic research communities into synthesis activities that foster progress toward IARC’s scientific goals.

  4. Subject: Panel comments and phone callFrom: "Wiseman, William J. Jr." <wwiseman@nsf.gov>To: "Larry Hinzman" <lhinzman@iarc.uaf.edu> Dear Larry: We have received the final panel summary approval from all members of the panel with which you met in Arlington two weeks ago.  This document provides quite a bit of advice to NSF concerning your proposal.  I have attached a copy for your study. The panel was impressed by many aspects of both the proposal and IARC operations.  They recognized the need for the sort of organization described in the proposal.  They recognized the scientific achievements of IARC scientists with prior funding, as well as the successes and impacts of the organization with respect to outreach and education.  They were impressed with the forward-looking approach of the IARC administration in refocusing near-term IARC goals.  At the same time, though, they identified many issues with the proposal, and the plan outlined therein, that caused them serious concern.  They have provided the NSF with a series of recommendations on how to address these issues.  Within OPP, we share your perception of the great community benefits that could accrue from having an international Arctic research center that can act as a catalyst and focus for national and international arctic science.  Given this shared interest and the advice we received, we would like to hold a conference call with you on Friday.  Our goal would be to have a conversation discussing how to address productively the advice we received from the panel, within the collaborative framework of a Cooperative Agreement.  If the timing is good for you and John, we could schedule the call for 2 P.M. EDT on Friday.  I believe that this is 10 A.M. your time.  Please let me know if this works for you. Best wishes, Bill

  5. NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATIONPanel Summary ReviewProposal:0652838 PI Name:Hinzman, Larry The proposed work rightly recognizes the importance of climate change in the Arctic and builds on prior observational and modeling work conducted by IARC and its collaborators. The accomplishments highlighted in the ‘results from prior support’ section of the proposal and during the reverse site visit discussion, particularly the new understanding of sub-surface water mass transformations in the Arctic Ocean and the quantification of permafrost degradation in Siberia, are very good. The proposal recognizes that the organizational model formerly employed for IARC must evolve in a rapidly changing Arctic research landscape and re-organizes the work to be performed under the CA into four new, more integrative themes. In principle, this forward-looking approach, along with the plan to build on these themes toward a predictive understanding of the Arctic as a system, through the development of an Arctic system model and the synthesis activities, is viewed as a positive change in philosophy and direction for IARC.

  6. NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATIONPanel Summary ReviewProposal:0652838 PI Name:Hinzman, Larry Despite these general positive aspects, the proposal has several critical weaknesses: (1) The Panel views the proposed work on the Arctic system model as immature and not fully developed or described. The IARC is not viewed as ready to undertake this very ambitious enterprise. Specifically, the critical elements of the Arctic System Model have not been clearly defined. The advantages and disadvantages of candidate component models have not been adequately investigated. The implementation plan has not been carefully developed in the proposal and there are no concrete milestones or a timeline (although recognition of the need for a phased approach became apparent during the discussion with the PIs).

  7. NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATIONPanel Summary ReviewProposal:0652838 PI Name:Hinzman, Larry Despite these general positive aspects, the proposal has several critical weaknesses: (1) …. Also, there do not appear to be sufficient resources allocated for the development of the system model at IARC. Specifically, the coupling of the individual system model components is not a trivial task, and the proposal does not describe how this challenge will be met. In fact, the PIs recognize the immense challenge posed by the coupling of the elements of an Arctic system model, but nevertheless might have underestimated the risk of failure to successfully complete the proposed task in view of the existing in-house capacity.

  8. NSF does plan to fund our currently submitted bridge proposal (Sept - December) and asked us to get a revised workscope and budget in for 1 or 2 years of additional bridge funding by Sept 15.OPP wants to implement all of the review team's recommendations (on a time frame to be defined by us, 1, 1.5 or 2 years). (1) An implementation plan for the model, guided by a workshop with broad international participation (2) Clarification of IARC's synthesis activities in the context of other synthesis plans and ongoing community synthesis activities through an open workshop (3) Conduct a comprehensive self-study, undertaken within the first six months of the bridge funding, that results in:        A detailed strategic plan, including clear statements of vision, mission and goals        A detailed management and governance plan        A more robust plan for community involvement        An analysis of strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and risks        A statement from the university, explaining in detail its current and ongoing commitment of financial resources and academic positions to the continued development of IARC. (4) An external review of IARC and its strategic plan, led by the VCR (5) A new proposal submission to NSF after these tasks are complete.

More Related