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.