years, it has become clear that the Arctic is expe- approved IASC project (see Appendix 6.3). Some riencing large scale changes (e.g., the recession of reports have also inspired the initiation of related sea ice) that are more dramatic than those occur- projects. ring on other parts of the planet. While clear-cut documentation of this phenomenon would take an- In the final analysis, the value of ICARP I is reflected other decade, ICARP I put Arctic science on track to in the decision to repeat this exercise on a decadal document key changes as they unfolded. And third, scale. ICARP II took place in Copenhagen in 2005; ICARP I played an important role in stimulating a it is expected that ICARP III is being organized for sense of community among scientists working on 2015. Arctic issues. What saw its start at the December 1988 Leningrad meeting became a reality in Ha- Reference nover in December 1995. 1 Another way of measuring the success of ICARP I would be to compare the “List of IASC Projects” with the ten conference working group reports, which shows that nine of the reports have resulted in an Summer melt session is coming, late May, Greenland Sea Photo: Iñigo Garcia Zarandona 43 00 02 IASC Initiatives IASC (1996). Executive Summary, Arctic Systems: Nat- ural Environments, Human Actions, Nonlinear Processes. IASC Report No. 3. Oslo: IASC; and IASC (1996). Final Report, Arctic Systems: Natural Environments, Human Actions, Nonlinear Processes. IASC Report No.4 (Julia Lloyd Wright and Carol W, Sheehan eds.). Oslo: IASC.