|
Items in cart [1] |
Questions? Call 888-624-8373 |
| Copyright © 2009. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Terms of Use and Privacy Statement |
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 90
Appendix B
Comments on Projects in the Science
Priority Elements of the FY 1991
USGCRP
As part of its assessment, members of the Panel to Review the FY
1991 USGCRP reviewed brief descriptions of each of the projects identified
in the Appendix of the F Y 1991 version of Our Changing Planet published
in January 1990. The reviews considered several aspects of the projects,
including relevance to the goals of the USGCRP, readiness of the scientific
community, and international linkages. The materials provided by the
CEES for this review were of uneven quality and scope. The panel's
reviews were consequently limited and should not be construed as either
comprehensive or definitive. Brief summaries of the reviews, organized by
science priority elements, are given below.
CLIMATE AVID HYDROLOGIC SYSTEMS
The FY 1991 plan for the USGCRP establishes important new ac-
tivities that address critical aspects of climate and hydrologic systems. As
yet, however, no area within this science priority is comprehensively or
adequately defined. Not addressed, as yet, are effects of the hydrologic
cycle on climate and on other elements of the earth system.
Significant new initiatives dealing with the management of global
change data constitute a major budget element, particularly for NOAA
and NASH Some diversity is desirable in data handling, but the degree of
coordination in the plans available suggests there may be excessive duplica-
tion and inadequate communication between agency laboratories carrying
out similar functions.
~0
OCR for page 91
91
Approaches to climate and hydrological systems in the USGCRP are
largely process oriented or regional and applied only near the United States.
The only identified observational initiatives with a global perspective are
the oceanographic studies WOCE and JGOFS. No global approaches or
climate initiatives are identified in the area of land-climate interaction.
There are new initiatives in oceanography from several agencies but many
are regional. A comprehensive approach to polar issues is also lacking. In
this science element, international planning has been quite productive, and
the WCRP has developed several programs which reflect broad scientific
input. Nevertheless, there are few apparent connections with the interna-
tional programs of the WCRP or IGBP. U.S. involvement GEWEX and
accelerated funding for WOCE would help remedy this deficiency.
Two agencies, DOE and NASA, are making efforts to address the issue
of the role of clouds in the earth's radiation and heat budget. Within NASA
the role of clouds is addressed under several initiatives. These include the
production of global data sets in the Earth Radiation Budget Experiment,
which are crucial for this question, the continuation of the ISCCP program
of cloud global data sets, and the First ISSCP Regional Experiment program
of cloud-radiation process studies, which has been demonstrably successful
but is in need of further support. The DOE effort in this area is focused
on developing a network of surface observations. It was not clear to us
how this effort is to develop the necessary parameterizations for cloud
radiation in climate models, which are needed to improve confidence in
model projections of future climate change. We concluded that there are
still major gaps in the approach to clouds in the USGCRP, even though
this is the top priority in the program as presently defined.
NOAA plans exemplify mechanisms for coordinating agency efforts
with other agencies and with the academic community. The TOGA program
is a very successful example of coordination with the academic community
and joint funding with the National Science Foundation. NOAA has been
innovative in enlisting a broader community in formulating the plans for
this important agency project. There are promising plans to expand this
coordination in GEWEX, WOCE, and JGOFS. Some programs included
in the Climate and Hydrologic Systems science element by other agencies
show a lack of balance and focus that might well be remedied by involving
a wider community in their formulation.
BIOGEOCHEMICAL DYNAMICS
The emerging field of biogeochemical dynamics is among the better
developed in the global change effort, and many projects have now been
developed over the past five or ten years. Most of them are directly relevant
to meeting the high priority needs of the USGCRP; they are included
OCR for page 92
92
in the FY 1991 budget and deserve strong support. Into areas require
additional emphasis. One is atmospheric chemistry modeling directed at the
troposphere on regional and continental scales. Such models complement
climate models and must be developed in parallel with them. The second
is marine chemistry, of both surface and deep water, to augment efforts
that currently address only CO2.
For many projects in this science element, space-based observations are
crucial for proper calibration, coverage, and data assimilation. A strong
Earth Probes program would help to meet these needs, as would EOS,
given its more comprehensive set of sensors and longer duration.
In many areas in biogeochemical dynamics, as in other fields of global
change research, there are serious limitations in human resources. The
full spectrum of proposed grant, workshop, and post-doctoral support is
needed to build the necessary cadre of workers. More important is the
assurance of a sustained commitment to global change research to make
careers in this area attractive.
International collaboration is crucial for most research projects dealing
with biogeochemical dynamics. The USGCRP should encourage these
linkages, through IGAC and JGOFS, and with particular attention to
Africa and Asia where participation of countries from these continents are
currently lacking. Such links could be immediately fruitful through the joint
development of emission inventories.
ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS AND DYNAMICS
The highest priority element in this area (Long-ltrm Measurements
of Structure and Function) is poorly addressed by current and proposed
programs. The NSF LTER program, included in the FY 1991 USGCRP
budget, was established with long-term monitoring in mind, but it will be
difficult to use data from a small number of sites to synthesize information
on regional or global changes. The goal of the current LTER program
to provide long-term monitoring is subverted by emphasis on process-level
experiments and intersite comparisons. Nor do the established LTER sites
sample areas of greatest change. The adaptation of the LTER network to
needs of the USGCRP is a critical problem which should be addressed by
a thorough, external review.
In Priority 2 (Response to Climate and Other Stresses), USDA has a
very good program in response to changes in ultraviolet light, and a good
track record in understanding response to changes in temperature. More
work on plant respiration is needed. Priority 3 (Interactions of Physical
and Biological Processes) has been funded through the Ecosystems Studies
Program at NSF. Although the track record is excellent, the program is now
harmfully short of funds to support a healthy research community. Within
OCR for page 93
93
Priority 4 (Models of Interactions, Feedbacks and Responses) and Priority 5
(Productivity/Resource Models), the future plans in NSF Ecosystem studies
and DOE CO2 research programs seem promising.
The most promising programs are those offered by NOAA, EPA,
and DOE. DOI elements are only vaguely defined, with the exception
of streamwater quality. Within the USDA, programs to assess system
response are well-founded, while those offered by the Soil Conservation
Service reflect conventional interests, such as soil classification, with little
apparent effort to modify anything to the particular needs of the USGCRP,
such as the interaction of soils with vegetation.
As in other areas, a critical shortfall of scientists and technicians needed
for research can be foreseen, and it must be prevented if the USGCRP is
to be sustained into the next century.
EARTH SYSTEM HISTORY
The projects included here involve mainly data archiving initiatives
and paleoenvironmental studies (chiefly paleoclimatic and paleoecologi-
cal). The data archiving efforts are important for example, the plans
within NOAA to double the funding for its efforts in this area because
determining data quality and temporal resolution are critical in recon-
structing the past. Examples are the reconstructions developed through
CLIMAP, COHMAP, and SPECMAP. However, a realistic assessment and
better definition of where efforts should be concentrated require more in-
formation than was available to us on how the activities related to earth
system history are funded outside of the USGCRP. For example, NSF funds
a great deal of Quaternary paleoclimatic study within programs that are
not included in the FY 1991 budget for the USGCRP.
A question repeatedly raised regarding this science priority is "What
is included and what is not?" The IGBP effort in Past Global Changes
(PAGES program) has identified two domains of temporal emphasis: the
last 2000 yrs; and the late Quaterna~y period that embraces the major
glaciations and the abrupt changes of climate (occurring over periods of
10 to 1000 yrs) that have punctuated past glaciations and interrupted
glaciaLpost-glacial transitions, such as the Younger-Dryas event. The forth-
coming report of the CGC addresses similar needs for the USGCRP science
element on earth system history, with added attention to the changes of
the more distant past that may yield information on fundamental processes
in the earth system that could apply to anticipated, contemporary change.
The addition seems to us a healthy one. It is still true, however, that in
reviewing the projects included in this science element, as with those in
the Solid Earth Process priority element, the more recent history of the
earth system (i.e., chiefly the Quaternary) is probably the more important
OCR for page 94
94
for understanding the global changes that are anticipated in the next 100
years.
We also note that the United States is being asked to play a special role
in this area of the international program by co-sponsoring, with Switzerland,
the Core Project Office for the PAGES program in Bern. We see this as an
opportunity to strengthen U.S. science in the area at a minimal investment.
HUMAN INTERACTIONS
The human interactions component of the USGCRP introduces many
complexities, mainly because it demands linkages between the natural and
social sciences that have not existed in the past, and because within the
social sciences, experience and development in this field of endeavor are
not as far along as in other areas of global change research. The projects
in the FY 1991 budget within this science element appropriately include a
number of efforts to establish the base-line data required for understanding
human interactions (e.g., land cover change, emission flux), create accessible
data pools and electronic archives, and develop global emission modeling.
Still, improvements are needed in several areas. Many of the projects
do not focus on the underlying and most central concern, which is the
human forces that drive global change (e.g., land use change, industrial
metabolism, population growth). As a result, what is proposed appears
peripheral to what might be termed the urgent goals of the program.
The danger is that simplistic and aggregate data and assumptions on the
human driving forces of global change, on impacts, and on natural resources
will be used uncritically in other elements of the program. Emphasis must
be placed on global data sets and on studies that link industrial metabolism
and land-use change on regional and global scales in order to develop a
more sophisticated understanding of the societal actions that cause global
change.
The program defined by projects in the F'Y 1991 budget in this area
differs fundamentally from that recommended by the CGC (NRC 1988~.
The recommendations of the latter were for research on the human causes
of global change; the FY 1991 budget for the USGCRP invests chiefly in
the impacts of global change. The program must address both aspects.
The program on human dimensions within NSF is to be commended
for encouraging social scientists to consider global human systems as well
as regional complexities. However, several potential problems should be
watched for as this program develops: (1) much of the "global" research
needed in the first stage is that of synthesis, which runs counter to the
traditional NSF emphasis on original research and consequently may not
fare well in the traditional peer review process; (2) encouraging social
scientists to participate in the effort will bring in many individuals who
OCR for page 95
9s
will require education on global change and nature-society interactions.
This need should be addressed and provided for from the start; and
(3) mechanisms are needed to ensure that on-going relevant work is not
excluded.
In addition, we recommend that particular efforts be undertaken to
strengthen international linkages in the study of human interactions. There
is as yet no established counterpart in the international social sciences
community to the IGBP or the WCRP, although better understanding
about human interactions is widely acknowledged as necessary in meeting
the goals of the programs.
We singled out the Human Dimensions priority as the most critically
underfunded in the FY 1991 budget for the USGCRP, a fact that may
reflect the state of readiness of the field. At the same time it-is unrealistic
to expect the social science community to bend its efforts toward the ends
of the program unless there are funds adequate to sustain participation and
projects identified to channel it. If the FY 1991 budget recommendations
are indicative of what will follow, there is neither enough funding nor
adequate project definition for the human interactions component to keep
abreast of the demands of the program.
SOLID EARTH PROCESSES
The USGCRP has evolved to the point that the two earth science
program areas (solid earth processes and earth system history) can be
reevaluated in light of developments since they were first incorporated in the
program. The element on Solid Earth Processes receives the fourth largest
funding of all the science elements, primarily because NASA activities in
the area account for three-fourths of its funds. We did not have details
on the NASA projects comparable to the information from other agencies,
and it was not possible to assess the relevance of the projects. A feature
of projects within this science element is that several were developed prior
to the USGCRP, and were probably not selected on the basis of what
was most needed for the specific focus of the program. Examples are the
RIDGE and GEODYNAMICS activities included in the NSF budget for
FY 1991. We recommend that these projects be reevaluated with respect
to their qualifications as "focused" projects in the program, and that steps
be taken to establish more uniform standards among agencies as to what
constitutes "focused" and "contributing" projects.
As in several other science priority areas, what appears to be lacking
is a "zero-based" assessment of what the program as a whole requires, as
opposed to an assemblage of what was already there through inheritance.
The lack of initial direction can probably be expected at this stage in the
early implementation of the program. We can hope for a more coordinated
OCR for page 96
96
effort in the program with further development of the Science Priority Task
Group of the CEES. A notable need that is not addressed in this area is the
study of soils, a key component in global change, including the response of
soils to global change and the relationship of soils to the earth system.
SOLAR INFLUENCES
Initiatives in this area are wholly within NASA and NSF; they represent
a reasonable attack on the policy-relevant questions that are included in
the FY 1991 budget description. Whether these are the most appropriate
questions for the specific focus of the USGCRP, or, in the case of the
NSF budget, whether they merely justify previously initiated programs such
as CEDAR and the proposed GEM, calls for review. We recommend
that these be reassessed by the Task Group as to determine if they might
be better classified as "contributing" rather than "focused" projects in the
USGCRP, particularly in light of their emphasis on conditions in "geospace"
and their potential importance as a significant climate driver. The proposed
RISE initiative, directed at specifying variations in the radiative inputs from
the sun, will address more fundamental issues in the area.
NASA initiatives, including UARS and EOS, more clearly belong in
the "focused" category.
We suggest that CEES seek mechanisms whereby the scientific com-
munity can provide advice on the scientific priorities and research needs
for this science element. For example, the priority is one of two that were
initiated by the CEES without the benefit of definition from the CGC. The
CGC plans to establish an additional Working Group on the subject, which
should be called upon to aid in future program definition.
EARTH SYSTEM MODELING
Efforts to upgrade global climate models or build toward complete
global system models are not yet seriously under way in the United States.
The NOAA initiative in the FY 1991 budget, which proposes a TOGA
center to address seasonal-interannual forecasting and makes significant
efforts toward `'extended range" forecasting, will contribute to meeting
this need. NOAA also plans to focus efforts on developing modeling
capabilities for global change on the time scale of decades to centuries.
Other agencies may wish to join in the latter effort. In order for this
activity to be a major integrating force in the USGCRP, it is also necessary
to ensure that university community involvement is sufficiently large. The
CHAMPP initiative within DOE addresses an important technological issue,
which is the need for much more powerful computational resources and
programming algorithms to make use of these capabilities.
OCR for page 97
97
-
At present, the most advanced modeling centers in this count~y prin-
cipally address the atmosphere; although there are some capabilities for
global ocean modeling. Development of the necessary land component is
only beginning, as is coupling with global tropospheric and stratospheric
chemistry. A number of approaches to modeling ocean biogeochemical
cycles are also under development. There are as yet no significant efforts
to couple terrestrial biogeochemical cycles and ecosystem dynamics in earth
system models. Whether such highly interdisciplinary efforts can build upon
existing major programs i.e., as adjuncts to climate models-or whether
they should be developed ah initio requires further examination.
The CGC is currently developing in its forthcoming report specific
recommendations regarding an overall U.S. strategy for the development
of integrated earth system models. Some of the important issues that need
to be considered are centralization vs. distributed models, the appropriate
roles of university scientists of centers vs. those of federal agencies, the
nature of needed connections with impact studies, and the role of the social
science community in the overall modeling effort. As noted earlier in this
report, a significant need in the USGCRP as defined in the F Y 1991 budget
is definition of the appropriate mechanism for evaluating model results and
impact studies and delivering them to policymakers.
DATA AND INFORMATION SYSTEMS
This component of the USGCRP has contributions from three agen-
cies: NOAA, DOE, and NASA, in which the initiatives of NASA dominate.
NASA elements include both observational and data systems, including
Earth Probes, WARS, TOPEX, and NS CAT, which are all essential near-
term components of the USGCRP. EOS has three parts: the near-term
support of development of the EOS data and information system (EOS-
DIS), support of interdisciplinary studies, and development of spacecraft
hardware for EOS, to be launched toward the end of the decade. An
evaluation of EOSDIS is included in Chapter 8 and Appendix C of this
report.
Within NOAA, the major activities proposed are data management,
climate diagnostics and data base development on upper ocean/marine
surface observations, sea level observations, and development and testing
of measurement technique. As in other areas, it is important that these
efforts involve the user community as much as possible.
DOCUMENTING GLOBAL CHANGE
This area is included in the CEES program for the USGCRP as an
integral part of the effect on Data and Information Systems. A prioritized
OCR for page 98
98
list of the global variables that require sustained, long-term measurement
has yet to be defined with broad consensus in the USGCRP. The NASA
Earth System Sciences Committee presented such a list in its final report
in 1988, which could seine as a starting point for broader and more current
review, if not the final product. The EOS program has since defined, de
facto, a proposed eventual space-based component to be complemented
by measurements in the Earth Probe series, albeit over shorter periods of
time.
We believe that the detection of significant long-term global change is
so central to the goals of the USGCRP, and so clear an obligation to future
scientists, that it should be considered explicitly for added emphasis in the
early stages of the program. The emphasis would ensure that the issue is
addressed directly and in time to make a difference in planning observation
systems, both in space and from the ground and the oceans.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
science priority
