Download 11. Minutes of the 11th meeting

11th MEETING OF THE IGBP-SCOR-IOC GLOBAL OCEAN ECOSYSTEM
DYNAMICS (GLOBEC) SCIENTIFIC STEERING COMMITTEE
Honolulu, USA, 23-25 April 2006
Present:
Apologies:
Invited:
Dawn Ashby (IPO), Jürgen Alheit, Manuel Barange (IPO), Kevern Cochrane
Rubén Escribano, John Field, Roger Harris, Eileen Hofmann, Astrid Jarre,
Salvador Lluch-Cota, Olivier Maury, Rosemary Ommer, Ian Perry, Jeff Runge,
Yasunori Sakurai, Svein Sundby, Cisco Werner.
Umit Unluata (IOC), Jim Hurrell
Hal Batchelder (CCCC), Keith Brander (ICES), David Checkley (SPACC), Brad
de Young (Focus 3), Beatriz Balino (IGBP), Dale Haidvogel (US GLOBEC), Julie
Hall (IMBER), Ed Urban (SCOR).
AGENDA
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
11.0
12.0
13.0
14.0
15.0
16.0
17.0
18.0
19.0
20.0
21.0
22.0
23.0
24.0
Opening remarks
Report from the GLOBEC IPO
SPACC
PICES GLOBEC CCCC
Southern Ocean GLOBEC
ICES GLOBEC CCC
CLIOTOP
ESSAS
Report of the Focus 1 WG
Report of the Focus 2 WG
Report of the Focus 3 WG
Report of the Focus 4 WG
News from sponsors
GLOBEC/ IMBER Interactions
4th International Zooplankton Production Symposium
ICES/GLOBEC office
US GLOBEC synthesis
NCAR Climate and Ecosystems future scenarios
Integration and Synthesis
Other Items
Calendar of Integration and Synthesis
SSC membership
Budget 2005-2006
Next meeting
1.0 Opening remarks
CW welcome the SSC, and in particular new members Drs Cochrane, Jarre, Lluch-Cota, Maury
and Sakurai.
2.0 Report of IPO (PowerPoint report at
http://web.pml.ac.uk/globec/structure/ssc/hawaii/presentations/IPO.ppt)
MB reviewed some of the important lines of activity of the programme in the past as well as the
forthcoming year, including:
 The GLOBEC symposium on Climate Variability and Sub-Arctic Marine Ecosystems,
Victoria, Canada, 16-20 May, 2005
Minutes XI GLOBEC SSC meeting. Honolulu, May 2006
-1-
 The PICES-GLOBEC symposium on Climate variability and ecosystem impacts in the
North Pacific: a basin-scale synthesis. Honolulu, USA, 19-21 April 2006.
 The GLOBEC/PICES/ICES 4th International Zooplankton Production Symposium. 28
May- 1 June 2007. Hiroshima, Japan.
 The many workshops conducted along regional lines (SPACC, CCC, CCCC, SO,
CLIOTOP, ESSAS), and along Foci WG lines.
 The publication of 2 GLOBEC Reports, a book on “Climate Change and the Economics of
the World’s Fisheries”, a special issue in Progress in Oceanography and two
Newsletters over the last 12 months. The latter includes special sections on GLOBEC
Germany and Portugal, and will be followed by a GLOBEC Japan issue in September
2006.
 A review of the budget for 2005 and 2006.
He also introduced a pilot programme to offset carbon emissions as a result of GLOBEC travel.
This is a voluntary programme which will be considered by the SSC.
Action:
 The carbon offsets study to proceed on a trial basis.

3.0 Small Pelagic fish and Climate Change (SPACC) (PowerPoint report at
http://web.pml.ac.uk/globec/structure/ssc/hawaii/presentations/SPACC.ppt)
DC reported on news and developments in SPACC, focusing on the SPACC Synthesis workshop
(October 2006) and book. The contents of the book are as follows:
-
-
Chapter 1. Introduction. Juergen Alheit and John Field.
Chapter 2. History of exploitation of small, pelagic fish. Alec MacCall et al.
Chapter 3. Reconstructing interdecadal through centennial variability of small, pelagic fish
habitat from high-resolution depositional histories along continental margins. Tim
Baumgartner et al.
Chapter 4. Interdecadal variability in populations of small, pelagic fish. Juergen Alheit et
al.
Chapter 5. Life histories of stocks and their variation in relation to the environment.
Leonardo Castro et al.
Chapter 6. Habitats of small, pelagic fish. Dave Checkley et al.
Chapter 7. Trophic dynamics: interactions of small, pelagic fish with their planktonic prey.
Carl van der Lingen et al.
Chapter 8. Effects of small, pelagic fish on the ecosystem. Lynne Shannon et al.
Chapter 9. Assessment and management of small, pelagic fish. Manuel Barange et al.
Chapter 10. Global production and economics of small, pelagic fish. Sam Herrick et al.
Chapter 11. Hypothesized mechanisms. Alec MacCall et al. (tentative)
Chapter 12. Predicted effects of climate change on SPACC systems. Pierre Freon et al.
Chapter 13. Challenges for SPACC research in the 21st century. Andrew Bakun et al.
Chapter 14. Synthesis and future. Workshop participants.
Chapter 15. Conclusions. Dave Checkley and Claude Roy
It is possible that Chapter 2 be merged with Chapter 1, freeing Alec MacCall to focus on Chapter
11. DC confirmed that a publisher has not yet been secured, although the editors have entered
into discussions with several. IRD has offered partial funding and requested having their logo on
the cover.
The book outline focused the discussion. The main points discussed were as follows:

SS- The absence of research on predators is a general weakness in GLOBEC
programmes. Are predators included in the book? DC – Lynne Shannon’s chapter is
addressing this.
Minutes XI GLOBEC SSC meeting. Honolulu, May 2006
-2-





SS- Important to ensure that the role of anoxia, and of the environment in general, in
affecting pelagic fish ecology and dynamics, needs to be considered (supported by JF)
KC- The relevance of SPACC to management and society at large needs to be
highlighted, perhaps through a new chapter. This comment was followed by suggestions
that a section on the broad social and institutional aspects of climate change and small
pelagics also deserves attention (CW/ AJ/ RO), including the risk of exposure to climate
change from a global fisheries perspective (KB).
On the subject of the audience for the book DC clarified that it is mainly intended for the
academic community, but some publishers have suggested broadening it to increase its
marketability. It was suggested that the book could be followed by a public policy-driven
booklet (BdY).
OM reflected on whether a chapter on modelling was warranted. DC noted that modelling
is part of almost every chapter, and that chapter 12 is specifically looking at modelling
approaches in terms of prediction.
SL asked whether Japanese scientists are involved, as there is no lead author from
Japan. DC assured that there are several Japanese co-authors, and that Dr Wada
declined to lead a chapter. Japanese scientists will attend the workshop (YS).
Actions:
 The synthesis planning workshop has a planned deficit of $5-9k. The IPO to work with
the organisers to bridge this.
 RO/AJ/KC will provide suggestions for a draft structure of a new chapter on the
social/institutional issues related to climate change and small pelagic fish.
4.0
PICES-GLOBEC Climate Change and Carrying Capacity (CCCC) in the
North Pacific (Report at
http://web.pml.ac.uk/globec/structure/ssc/hawaii/presentations/CCCC.ppt)
HB presented information on the CCCC Synthesis symposium, focused on three main topics:
Regime Shifts, Ecosystem Productivity and Structural Responses to Physical Forcing and PanPacific Comparisons. He reflected on the difficulties involved in conducting synthesis and
discussed the plans for the development of a new science programme inside PICES. The new
programme, although yet to be defined, will follow from CCCC closely rather that take a
completely new focus. However, it will include a larger component of scenarios, uncertainties,
responses and social components.
 MB asked whether CCCC can be considered as completed, and if not how will CCCC
expect to wrap up the programme. HB clarified that CCCC will continue as long as a new
programme is not yet in place. For GLOBEC this probably means CCCC will continue
until the end of GLOBEC. On the topic of “synthesis” HB noted that a final PICES and
GLOBEC CCCC Synthesis Report will be published to summarise the findings of the
programme. However, contrary to other regional programmes, CCCC will not have a final
synthesis because the programme was defined in broad terms and thus it is likely to
leave many open questions.
 BdY reflected on how ICES and PICES actually deal with very similar issues but in an
uncoordinated manner, and whether GLOBEC could be the glue between the two. SS
supported this, exemplified by his concern that the concept of regime shifts may be
understood differently in the North Pacific and the North Atlantic communities.
 SL asked whether the new programme will focus on ecosystem carrying capacity, from
the “ecosystem approach” perspective, but this is still unclear.
Actions:
 CCCC convenors to ensure that the final synthesis report is published by both PICES
and GLOBEC
Minutes XI GLOBEC SSC meeting. Honolulu, May 2006
-3-
5.0
Southern Ocean GLOBEC (PowerPoint report at
http://web.pml.ac.uk/globec/structure/ssc/hawaii/presentations/SO.ppt)
EH outlined the main developments in SO GLOBEC. In particular she noted:
- The difficult situation created by the failure to fund any krill synthesis proposals as part of
the last U.S. National Science Foundation’s SO Synthesis Announcement of Opportunity.
As krill are the central species behind SO GLOBEC she reflected on whether there
should be a paper highlighting the need to be consistent in funding through the duration
of major research programmes.
- Reported on the ongoing field campaign of German GLOBEC and on the status of the
planned 2nd volume of SO GLOBEC synthesis, which will have a stronger international
component than the 1st volume.
- Informed of the results of the IWC-SO GLOBEC workshop (Norfolk, November 2005).
In discussion the following was noted:
 There was general support for a paper describing how large programmes are
conducted, as part of the SO GLOBEC legacy. RH reflected that lessons could also
be learned from the poor connectivity between Phases I and II of UK GLOBEC, and
BdY noted similar examples in Canada GLOBEC. KB considered whether this should
not be taken on by IGBP, perhaps through IGFA (JF).
 KC asked about the much politicised debate in relation to the application of the
Ecosystem Approach at the IWC. EH noted that this issue is topical in IWC-SO
circles. For example a draft paper currently circulating advocates that the increases
in minke whales populations may be stopping blue whales from recovering.
 On synthesis EH explained that a workshop to start planning synthesis activities is
likely to be called for the fall 2006. The workshop would consider any synthesis
needs, including the possibility of hosting a final symposium on SO GLOBEC.
Actions:
 EH to consider involving the GLOBEC Executive Committee in a possible position paper
on lessons learned in the application of large research programmes.
 EH to inform the SSC, via the IPO, of plans for the 2006 synthesis workshop.
 EH to inform the SSC, via the IPO, of plans for a possible SO GLOBEC symposium
6.0
ICES GLOBEC Cod and Climate Change (PowerPoint
http://web.pml.ac.uk/globec/structure/ssc/hawaii/presentations/CCC.ppt)
report
at
KB reported on the main outputs of the CCC in recent times and on those forthcoming:
1. The ICES Cooperative Report on Cod Life Histories – now published
2. The special issue in ICES Journal of Marine Science from the 2004 Symposium “The
Influence of Climate Change on North Atlantic fish stocks” – published ICES J. Mar. Sci
62(7): 1203-1542 (2005).
3. The IGBP-GLOBEC Book “Cod in a Changing Climate” – A theme session was held at
the ICES ASC, where the 12 chapters were presented. The current deadline for the draft
is December 2006.
4. The 2005 workshop on “Impact of zooplankton on cod abundance and production” –
Report available on the ICES webpage.
5. The 2006 workshop on “Decline and recovery of cod stocks through the North Atlantic,
including tropho-dynamic effects”, to be held in St John’s, 9-12 May.
He also reported on the status of the 4th IPCC report. The second order draft was sent for
government review at the end of April 2006. He concluded with three questions:
Minutes XI GLOBEC SSC meeting. Honolulu, May 2006
-4-
•
•
•
How can/should information from GLOBEC science be used to improve fisheries and
marine ecosystem management? – we need to deliver now.
How can GLOBEC make its products more prominent in reports such as the IPCC? and
What does GLOBEC have to contribute on biodiversity (including genetic diversity)
issues?
In the discussion KB also noted the need to focus on providing scenarios on future/ potential
impacts of climate change on fisheries, perhaps based on available model outputs that predict
between a 1% decrease and a 8% increase in global primary production (albeit with large
regional differences).
Action:

KB and the SSC to explore the possibility of developing a synthesis activity based on
combining expected distributional changes in ecosystem components (fisheries) with
expected primary production changes, to evaluate potential impacts of climate change at
local vs global level.

KB and Ken Drinkwater encouraged to complete the “cod book” by the end of 2006.
Discussions between the editors and the IGBP are also encouraged to ensure that the renegotiation of the IGBP-Springer contract does not affect the publication of the book.
7.0
Climate Impacts on Oceanic Top Predators (CLIOTOP) (PowerPoint report at
http://web.pml.ac.uk/globec/structure/ssc/hawaii/presentations/CLIOTOP.ppt)
OM described CLIOTOP as a unique opportunity for a 10-year, large-scale comparative analysis
of open ocean ecosystem functioning in the three oceans (Atlantic, Indian and Pacific), supported
by the remarkable correspondence between the scales and resolution of current 3D
oceanographic models (OGCM, NPZD) and the scales relevant for top predator study and
modelling. Highlighting recent events he noted:
- The WG1 (Early life history) workshop in Málaga, Spain, December 2005 – report on
GLOBEC website
- The proposed WG2 (Physiology, behaviour and distribution) workshop in Sete, France,
December 2006.
- The 2nd workshop of WG3 (Trophic pathways in open ocean ecosystems) planned for
September 2006 in Noumea, New Caledonia, on "Comparing trophic models".
- The WG4 (Synthesis and Modelling) workshop in San Diego, USA, November 2005 –
report on website
- The 2nd workshop of WG5 (Socio-economic aspects and management activities), to be
hosted at NCAR, Boulder, USA in July 2007.
He also mentioned two possible cross-cutting workshops on:
- Automatic sampling tools (February 2007) and
- Giant squid range extension (December 2006)
And plans for the 1st CLIOTOP Symposium in La Paz, Mexico, 3-7 December 2007
In discussion RH asked about the tuna-focus of CLIOTOP and the engagement of, for example,
the marine bird research community. KC mentioned possible links and overlaps with the
Convention on migratory species (www.cms.int KC : is this the convention you refered to ?). JA
was supported by the SSC in congratulating OM for the great start of the project.
Actions :

CLIOTOP SSC to continue planning of the Symposium in coordination with the IPO

IPO and Executive Committee to discuss support for CLIOTOP activities in 2007
Minutes XI GLOBEC SSC meeting. Honolulu, May 2006
-5-
8.0
Ecosystem Studies of Sub-Arctic Seas (ESSAS) (PowerPoint report at
http://web.pml.ac.uk/globec/structure/ssc/hawaii/presentations/ESSAS.ppt)
AJ reported on the highlights of the year for ESSAS:
 The GLOBEC-ESSAS Symposium on Climate Variability and Sub-Arctic Marine
Ecosystems, held in Victoria, Canada, 17-19 May, 2005 – the Proceedings will appear in
Progress in Oceanography as a special 4 volume issue in December 2006.
 The ESSAS Implementation Plan Workshop, held in Victoria, Canada, 20 May 2005.
 The appointment of a SSC (one member from Russia still to be identified).
 The endorsement of the following programmes: - Bering Ecosystem Study (BEST),
Norwegian ESSAS (NESSAS), Japanese ESSAS (J-ESSAS), Norway-Canada
Ecosystem Comparison (NORCAN), EcoNorth Symposium (Tromsø, Norway, 12-15
March 2007). These were described in some detail.
AJ discussed activities related to the selection of ESSAS as a lead in the IPY Arctic Ecosystem
Consortium (named ESSAR, Ecosystem Studies of Subarctic and Arctic Regions). ESSAR has
now 20 separate projects from 12 countries.
On behalf of ESSAS, AJ requested seed funding for the 2007 SSC meeting and for the EcoNorth
Symposium.
In discussion BB asked whether Russians were well connected through ESSAS and ESSAR,
while JA asked a similar question regarding Germany. RO was pleased with the way social
science aspects of ESSAS were handled at the Victoria 2005 symposium. The SSC then debated
whether ICES and PICES should be more formally involved in ESSAS. HB noted that
intellectually this is already the case, but formally it would pose problems to PICES because of
financial overstretch. MB noted that at the time stronger links between ESSAS and PICES raised
concerns over interfering with the development of the new PICES science programme.
At a later stage the SSC debated the request for funding EcoNorth, and suggested that funding, if
at all, be specific (e.g. to support travel of Russian scientists) rather than generic.
Actions:

Executive to consider funding request for an ESSAS SSC meeting in 2007 (10k)

IPO to contact EcoNorth organisers to agree to use GLOBEC as a sponsor of the
symposium, and to discuss conditions of funding 1

Executive to consider if stronger ties between ESSAS and PICES/ICES are necessary
9.0 Report of Focus 1 (PowerPoint report at
http://web.pml.ac.uk/globec/structure/ssc/hawaii/presentations/Focus1.ppt)
JA described the plans for the GLOBEC workshop on “Impact of climate variability on marine
ecosystems: a comparative approach“, to be held in Berlin, 4-8 September 2006. Participants to
the meeting have been identified. The workshop will have four working groups:
 Climate variability and teleconnection patterns of marine populations
 Impacts of past climate variability on marine ecosystems (over the past two millenia)
 Mechanisms linking climate variability to marine ecosystems
 Sensitivity of marine ecosystems to climate and human exploitation
1
In following this action Kurt Tande (organiser of EcoNorth) informed that funding support from
GLOBEC may not be needed.
Minutes XI GLOBEC SSC meeting. Honolulu, May 2006
-6-
Each WG will have a number of background papers (completed before the workshop) and will
produce an additional synthesis paper. The background and synthesis papers will be published in
a special volume of the Journal of Marine Systems.
JA also reported on two additional future activities of the Focus 1:
 ICES/GLOBEC Workshop on Long-term Variability in SW Europe, 20-24 November 2006,
Lisbon, Portugal (Chairs: J. Alheit, Germany; F.M. Borges, Portugal; A. Lavin, Spain and
A. Uriarte, Spain) and the
 Theme Session at the ICES ASC in Maastricht, 19-23 September 2006 on Large-scale
changes in the migration of small pelagic fish and the factors modulating such changes.
Conveners: Jürgen Alheit (Germany), Dave Reid (UK), and Yoshiro Watanabe (Japan)
In discussion IP noted that the background papers for the Berlin conference focus on the past
while the discussions would look into the future. JA added that Jim Overland had offered to
extract outputs from specific areas and parameters from the IPCC models to generate visionary
synthesis group papers at the meeting. KB recommended clearing this with the IPCC Data
Distribution Centre. RO reflected that the social impacts and adaptations are not part of the
workshop plan. In discussing ways of sharing the drafts of the paper MB offered a passwordprotected section on the GLOBEC website, although this would not allow the co-editing of papers,
just sharing them. BB noted that the IGBP Webforum could be configured for the purpose of coediting drafts if necessary. HB brought up the issue of GLOBEC data and whether there were
plans to collate all GLOBEC databases towards the end of the programme.
Actions:

Executive to consider a request of $2.4k to support the Lisbon workshop

IPO and Alheit/Perry/Drinkwater to discuss the need for a password-protected section of
the GLOBEC webpage or IGBP webtool to accommodate editing needs in the build-up to
the Berlin workshop.

Executive/ SSC to consider how to provide stewardship of GLOBEC data towards the
end of the programme.
10.0
Report of Focus 2 (PowerPoint report at
http://web.pml.ac.uk/globec/structure/ssc/hawaii/presentations/Focus2.ppt)
RH presented the results of the most recent meeting of the group, which took place at Dartington
Hall, Dartington, UK, 17-19 October 2005, with particular emphasis on the role of the Focus 2
during GLOBEC’s Integration and Synthesis phase. The main points in his presentation referred
to:

The recent GLOBEC/ SPACC workshop on “Image analysis to count and identify
zooplankton”, held in San Sebastian, Spain, 1-3 November 2005. Attended by 60
scientists from 21 nations.

The forthcoming Focus 2/ Focus 3 workshop on “Mathematical modeling of zooplankton
dynamics”, to be held at CIRM, Luminy, Marseille, France, 2-5 May 2006. The workshop
has 5 discussion themes:
o Feeding
o Metabolism and growth (especially their temperature dependence)
o Mortality
o Predator-prey interactions : from encounter rates to patchiness
o Habitat selection including swimming capabilities and ontogenetic
distribution
The main output will be a joint review paper in an international journal.

The intention to publish a multi-author Newsletter article on “GLOBEC `Keystone´ species
under the influence of Global change: State of the art, gaps and visions“.

Developments regarding on-going writing projects:
Minutes XI GLOBEC SSC meeting. Honolulu, May 2006
-7-
o
o
o
o
GLOBEC Process Studies of Small-Scale Biology-Physics
Interactions – Sanae Chiba and David Mackas
Euphausia superba as a key species for small- and mesoscale
processes and population dynamics in Antarctic ecosystems:
The SO-GLOBEC perspective – Uli Bathmann et al.
The significance of gelatinous zooplankton in marine
biogeochemical processes – Ulf Båmstedt
Feeding, Growth, Reproduction, Mortality of Copepods: a GLOBEC
overview – Serge Poulet et al.
He concluded with suggestions to consider, both of which would require funding:

A joint meeting with IMBER in the near future to explore “Key Processes” – food-webs
for the two projects

A meeting of the Focus 2 WG at the Hiroshima Zooplankton Symposium 2007
KC questioned whether key species/ processes are not known after a decade of GLOBEC, and
whether it would not be better to focus on determining specific objectives for the WG and a
process to achieve these. MB responded that what KC was noting was the difficulty of
implementing international science. RH agreed to MB’s suggestion of considering a meeting of
the WG in Hiroshima with the proviso that the current writing tasks be completed. BdY noted that
the goal of the Focus 2/3 meeting in Marseille is not the meeting itself, but the completion of a
review paper.
Actions:

RH to follow up writing tasks of the group over coming months

Executive to consider a request to fund a meeting of the Focus 2 WG in Hiroshima,
June 2007, pending completion of writing tasks (there are 4k currently in the budget for
WG writing tasks for 2006 which could be rolled over to 2007)

Focus 2 to discuss the suggestion to host a GLOBEC-IMBER meeting along the lines
described above
11.0
Report of Focus 3 (PowerPoint report at
http://web.pml.ac.uk/globec/structure/ssc/hawaii/presentations/Focus3.ppt)
BdY reported on activities of the group, with the following highlights:







The forthcoming Focus 2/ 3 meeting in Marseille (described under Focus 2)
A review- writing activity on “Spatial modelling of fish populations: Implementation of the
rhomboid” led by Mike Heath and others (some money for a drafting meeting – US$4Kavailable for 2006).
A vision paper on “Indicators of regime shifts: Detection, Prediction and Management” led
by Brad de Young and others (nearing completion).
An evolving initiative (also named NCAR-Futures at the Rome SSC meeting) on
“Ecosystems and Climate Change“(this will be reported under item 18 of these minutes).
A new activity (possibly a review paper) on “Comparative Ecosystem Analysis”, led by
Eugene Murphy. There is no timetable for this yet.
An intention of collaborating on a possible GLOBEC-wide initiative on “Ecosystems and
Fisheries Management”. This activity could take the form of a special symposium
(“Incorporating marine ecosystem science into fisheries management”) or a session at
the GLOBEC final Open Science Meeting.
The links between the Focus 3 WG and the GLOBEC-IMBER End2End initiative.
In discussion EH noted that Eugene Murphy is trying to kick-start the “Comparative Ecosystem
Analysis” activity as part of ICED. Perhaps CLIOTOP, ESSAS, etc. could come on board too. KC
Minutes XI GLOBEC SSC meeting. Honolulu, May 2006
-8-
requested that assessment and management specialists be involved in this activity from the start.
He also remarked that Bayesian approaches seem to be the solution to the Regime Shift
problem. AJ followed on KC’s comment by reflecting on the need to link GLOBEC’s science with
management-oriented groups such as the European Commission’s BECAUSE programme
(“Critical Interactions BEtween Species and their Implications for a PreCAUtionary FiSheries
Management in a variable Environment - a Modelling Approach”) which uses GADGET, a
modeling approach to understand marine ecosystems in a fisheries management and biology
context. She stressed that GLOBEC would be well remembered if it achieved this connection.
Actions:

SSC and Executive to consider how to activate some of the I+S suggestions above.
12.0
Report of Focus 4 (PowerPoint report at
http://web.pml.ac.uk/globec/structure/ssc/hawaii/presentations/Focus4.ppt)
RO and IP outlined the activities of the group, with emphasis on:


The meeting of the Focus 4 WG in Dunsmuir Lodge, Sidney, Canada, 31 August- 2
September 2005, and the meeting objectives:
o Develop an “appraisal” paper on ‘inter-dependent changes in marine ecosystems
and fishing-dependent human communities’;
o Develop plans for a major symposium on coupled marine ecosystem-human
community interactions in the face of global changes; and
o Develop contacts among members of the Focus 4 Working Group, hopefully
leading to collaborative proposals and activities.
On the 2nd objective planning has begun for a major symposium on “coupled marine
ecosystem – human community interactions in the face of global changes” in Spring
2008. Potential venues are FAO – Rome, IOC – Paris, WorldFish Centre – Penang or
ICES – Copenhagen. Potential session topics include:
o Social and environmental perspectives on successes and failures in global
fisheries
o The social-ecological dimensions of fishery crises: lessons for the future
o Incorporating human dimensions and natural variability in the decision-making
process in fisheries management
o Managing (and modelling?) for social-ecological variability, among others.
JR wondered if GLOBEC could develop an activity that looks at actual solutions from a social
perspective. BB was concerned that this may be spreading GLOBEC too thin. IGBP has
mechanisms that partially address this (START). SS was concerned that Focus 4 is taking a
social science perspective at the expense of economic science. KC argued that this was actually
a strength of the group, moving beyond traditional fisheries economics. However, it may be wise
to bring “economics” into the symposium title. DC reported that in the USA the Committee on
Ocean Policy is developing an “Ocean Research Priorities Plan”. The human dimension of ocean
science is one of the main areas identified. KB voiced the need to develop projections of global
and regional vulnerability to climate change, and suggested this was an area were GLOBEC
could contribute. MB noted that GLOBEC is not a “fisheries” but an “ecosystem” programme,
which should help focus our core delivery.
Actions:


Focus 4 to continue plans for the Symposium in cooperation with the IPO
SSC to consider an I+S activity developing projections of global and regional
vulnerability to climate change.
13.0
News from the sponsors
http://web.pml.ac.uk/globec/structure/ssc/hawaii/presentations/IGBP.ppt
http://web.pml.ac.uk/globec/structure/ssc/hawaii/presentations/SCOR.ppt
Minutes XI GLOBEC SSC meeting. Honolulu, May 2006
-9-
BB updated the SSC with news from the IGBP, in particular the:
 Earth System Partnership Open Science Conference “Global Environmental Change:
Regional Challenges”, Beijing, China, 9-12 November 2006
 4th IGBP Congress “ Managing Change in the Earth System”, March 2008, Cape Town,
South Africa
EU updated us with news from SCOR, specifically on activities of the:
 WG 115 on Standards for the Survey and Analysis of Plankton
 SCOR IOC - EUR-OCEANS-Chaloupe- PROJECT for 2006 (follow up on SCOR IOC WG
119)
 WG 125 on Global Comparisons of Zooplankton Time Series
In discussion GLOBEC expressed concern over the short time allocated to core projects’ SSC
meetings as part of the 2008 Congress (maximum 2 days). As a mature project planning
synthesis this is very limiting- GLOBEC needs three full days to conduct its SSC duties.
Action:

BB to raise with IGBP concerns over time allocated to SSCs as part of the 2008
Congress, and suggest ways to incorporate additional days after or before the Congress.
14.0
GLOBEC/ IMBER Interactions
http://web.pml.ac.uk/globec/structure/ssc/hawaii/presentations/GLOBEC_IMBER.ppt
http://web.pml.ac.uk/globec/structure/ssc/hawaii/presentations/Imber.ppt
http://web.pml.ac.uk/globec/structure/ssc/hawaii/presentations/SO.ppt
http://web.pml.ac.uk/globec/structure/ssc/hawaii/presentations/Summer_School.ppt
http://web.pml.ac.uk/globec/structure/ssc/hawaii/presentations/E2E Task Team.ppt
CW introduced the agreements between IMBER and GLOBEC that were reached at the joint
meeting of the Executives in October 2005 and published in the April 2006 GLOBEC Newsletter.
JH updated the SSC on IMBER news. EH followed with an update of ICED, a new activity
following on from SO GLOBEC and which would be co-sponsored by GLOBEC and IMBER. MB
reported on plans to host the first GLOBEC summer School in Denmark, 8-28 June 2006,
“Identification and modeling controls in marine ecosystems”. He provided the names of
GLOBEC’s sponsored students to the school. SS concluded with a summary of the status of the
End to End common activity. The main novelty is that the group is working on a draft to be
submitted to Nature/ Science defining E2E. In parallel the chairs of the group have requested to
transform the “writing team” into a permanent GLOBEC-IMBER working group. The discussions
that follow were focused on the later presentation.
JA wondered if a working group is the appropriate mechanism for delivery, mostly because its
small size would hamper its ability to advise on field campaigns, for example. SS responded that
they did not see the WG as advisors for field programmes. BdY interjected to discuss if the
Darwinian versus Newtonian approach of the E2E draft paper was too simplistic but a useful
catch for Nature. KC wondered whether this was not a move from a dark room in GLOBEC to an
equally dark room but double in size. He wondered whether it should not have been through the
process of synthesis of GLOBEC that the number of variables would have been reduced in a way
that would have provided some light.
Actions:

Executive to consider setting aside US$10K for a possible new working group on E2E
food webs, co-funded by IMBER, pending results of the drafting team.
15.0
4th International Zooplankton Production Symposium
http://web.pml.ac.uk/globec/structure/ssc/hawaii/presentations/4IZPS.ppt
Minutes XI GLOBEC SSC meeting. Honolulu, May 2006
-10-
RH introduced the PICES-ICES-GLOBEC 4th International Zooplankton Production Symposium,
to be held in Hiroshima, Japan, 28 May- June 1, 2007. The focus of the symposium is “Human
and climate forcing of zooplankton populations”, and the proceedings will be published in ICES
Journal of Marine Science. The first announcement will be distributed soon.
16.0
ICES/GLOBEC office
http://web.pml.ac.uk/globec/structure/ssc/hawaii/presentations/ICES_GLOBEC_Office.ppt
KB reported on the status of the ICES-GLOBEC Office. There is currently a shortage of funding to
cover the cost of the office, which is being addressed by taking on responsibilities in the Marie
Currie training network “Fisheries Induced Adaptive Changes in Exploited Stocks (FishAce) and
as main author of a chapter in the IPCC 4th Report. He also outlined plans to assist with some
SPACC activities. In discussion the importance of keeping the SPACC Executive informed of
ICES-led work on SPACC was emphasised. KB thought it was best for the SPACC Chairs to
contact Pierre Petitgas (France) directly rather than through the ICES-GLOBEC office.
17.0
US GLOBEC synthesis
http://web.pml.ac.uk/globec/structure/ssc/hawaii/presentations/US_GLOBEC.ppt
DH outlined the goals of the synthesis phase of US GLOBEC. He identified some possible
approaches, such as the comparison of the effect of physical processes (stratification, Retention,
upwelling, etc.) on particular target taxa across the four US GLOBEC field regions (Gulf of
Alaska, California Current, Georges Bank and Southern Ocean). He outlined the main modelling
synthesis strategy, based on NCAR global climate models forcing nested ocean circulation
models; these connect to three types of biological models: 3D NPZ, Mass-balance and IBMs. He
announced the first US GLOBEC Pan-Regional synthesis meeting, to be held at NCAR, Boulder,
USA, 27 November- 1 December 2006, and outlined the timing of the US GLOBEC synthesis
activities, summarised as follows:
 Field work to be completed by end 2008
 Pan-Regional synthesis from mid 2008 to mid 2010 – linked to the GLOBEC International
completion
On the expected legacies of US GLOBEC he classified them as follows (the “shiny rocks” as
opposed to “golden nuggets”:
 Data sets
 New generation physical-biological models
 Bridges to climate modelling centres
 Management tools
 Public outreach
 Ecosystem understanding
During discussion DH clarified that he expected a good participation by GLOBEC International at
the Boulder meeting. The importance of coordinating a possible US GLOBEC final symposium
with a GLOBEC International final OSM was discussed. SS noted that the BASIN proposal should
be the most important legacy of GLOBEC. BdY (supported by JR) highlighted the need to link the
plans outlined by DH with other synthesis work happening on the East coast. He also reflected on
the possibility of forging links with GOOGLE-Ocean, as a possible high-impact outreach activity.
Actions:

US GLOBEC Office to establish contacts with the IPO to coordinate US versus
International Open Science Meetings

CW and DH to ensure involvement of GLOBEC International at the Boulder meeting
Minutes XI GLOBEC SSC meeting. Honolulu, May 2006
-11-
18.0
NCAR Climate and Ecosystems future scenarios
http://web.pml.ac.uk/globec/structure/ssc/hawaii/presentations/NCAR_Futures.ppt
http://web.pml.ac.uk/globec/structure/ssc/hawaii/presentations/NCAR_Futures2.ppt
In the absence of Jim Hurrell, CW presented this item. The first presentation introduced the state
of an activity on building links between the climate and the ecosystem impact research
communities, identified by GLOBEC as the “NCAR Future scenarios” synthesis activity (see
minutes of the 2005 GLOBEC SSC meeting). In summary,
 An initial planning meeting was hosted in November 2005 at NCAR – this was used to
prioritise challenges, identify pilot projects and develop short white papers.
 An international workshop will be hosted at NCAR in the Fall 2006 to build bridges with
the marine policy community, identify the goals of coupled climate-ecosystem models and
develop a focused activity linking the axis climate-physics-biology-society together.
 An “Advanced Study Programme”, ASP, colloquium will be conducted in 2007.
The second presentation introduced the principles behind NCAR’s Community Climate System
Model (CCSM 3.0), its configuration (1°x1° resolution in the Ocean domain), and its contributions
to the 4th IPCC Assessment. A special issue of Journal of Climate on the CCSM is available at
www.ccsm.ucar.edu/publications/jclim04.
RO remarked on the importance of including the reciprocal response of humans on the system at
economic and social levels (all scales). SL asked if the resolution of the climate model is
sufficiently detailed so as to interface well with small-scale fisheries activities. CW responded that
the objective is to link CCSM with ROMS to downscale the outputs so that they can be of use in
responding to smaller-scale questions, e.g. coral reefs future. JA reflected on the importance of
establishing a good link between the NCAR Futures activity and the Focus 1 Berlin 2006
workshop.
19.0
Integration and Synthesis
At this point the SSC revised the list of integration and synthesis activities that had been
mentioned/ discussed during the meeting. This list is not complete, including only those activities
specifically requiring SSC stewardship, discussion and or funding. An effort was placed to identify
responsible people to follow them up, outputs, time frames and funding status. The summary of
the discussions is given below.
I+S Activities*
1. Focus 1 workshop “Impacts of Climate
Variability on Marine Ecosystems”
2. Focus 2 synthesis papers – Due by
May 2007
3. Focus 2/ Focus 3 Mathematical
modeling zooplankton dynamics
4. Regime Shift Detection, Adaptation,
Management (Focus3/ SSC vision
paper)
5. Focus 4 Natural/Social Science
Symposium
6. GLOBEC-IMBER Ecosystems End To
End vision paper – due
7. NCAR-SSC Future Scenarios activity
8. GLOBEC-ICES CCC Synthesis Book
9. GLOBEC- SPACC Synthesis Book –
Authors meeting
10. Spatial extension of the rhomboid
model to fish populations (Focus 3)
Status
Funding
Active
In place
Output
Time frame
Responsibility
September
2006
May 2007
JA/ F1
In place
Special
issue
Paper(s)
Active
In place
Paper(s)
May 2006
BdY/F2/ F3
Active
In place
paper
Jun 2006
BdY
2008?
IP/ RO/ F4
Paper
Summer 2006
StJohn/
Moloney
Hurrell
Book
Dec 2006
KB/ Drinkwater
Active
In place
Active
Active
RH/ F2
Active
Almost
Book
Oct 2006
DCh/ Roy
Active
In place
Paper
Jan 2007
Heath/ BdY
Minutes XI GLOBEC SSC meeting. Honolulu, May 2006
-12-
11. Impacts of GLOBEC science on
fisheries management in an ecosystem
context
12. Global vs local ecosystem vulnerability/
risk to climate change
Symp /
Sp. Issue
Heath/ BdY
KB/ SSC
13. Ecosystem functioning comparisons
14. GLOBEC International Synthesis Book
15. GLOBEC Final Open Science Meeting
Active
16. SO Synthesis volume II
17. China-Japan-Korea Symposium
(example of regional synthesis)-
Plans to
EXEC Fall
2006
Active
Review
Paper
Book
2009
Murphy/ F3/
SO
SSC/ IPO
Symp.
2009
SSC/ IPO
Special
Issue
Ms deadline
Summer 2006
Oct 2007
EH
YS
The discussion then moved to brainstorm the possible contents of the synthesis book (item 14 in
the table above). The draft contents, comments and discussion are summarised in Appendix 1
below.
20.0
Other Items
MB asked the SSC to consider whether GLOBEC should join PICES, ICES and the IOC in cosponsoring a major international symposium in May 2008 entitled “Effects of climate change on
the world's oceans", to be held in Gijón, Spain.
Action:

IPO to contact PICES, ICES and IOC to inform of GLOBEC’s agreement to join the list of
sponsors for this symposium
21.0
SSC membership
MB informed the group that Rosemary Ommer’s second term will expire at the end of 2006. CW
thanked Rosemary for her effort during the years in service, hoping that she will remain in the
family through her co-Chair position of the Focus 4 WG. A small memento was presented to her
in recognition of her work.
22.0
Budget 2005-2006
A summary of the funding requests for 2007 was presented and prioritised, according to the table
below. It was discussed that this list exceeds the funding likely to be available. The decision was
deferred to the 2006 Executive Committee meeting.
JANUARY - DECEMBER 2007 (USD)
GLOBEC SSC
GLOBEC Executive
Book drafting team 2006/2007
Focus 1 WG Lisbon Nov2006
Focus 2 WG meeting in Hiroshima
End-to-end food webs (w. IMBER) WG?
Spatial extension of rhomboid to fish populations (F3)
CLIOTOP WG / SSC
CLIOTOP OSM
ESSAS SSC
Top up ESSAS w/shop St Petesb. 2006
EcoNorth Symposium
4th International Zooplankton Symposium
Minutes XI GLOBEC SSC meeting. Honolulu, May 2006
40,000.00
8,000.00
8,000.00
2,400
20,000
10,000
4,000.00
60,000
??
10,000
4,000
4,000
5,000-10,000
-13-
Running Expenses
IPO Running expenses and travel
Printing - Newsletters (x2)
Printing - GLOBEC Reports (x2)
Postage of Reports
22,500.00
19,000.00
14,500.00
4,000.00
Representation
SSC Chair Travel
6,000.00
Action:

PIs and IPO to work on the table of requests so that formal decisions can be taken at the
fall 2006 GLOBEC Executive committee meeting
23.0
Next meeting
The venue of the 2007 SSC meeting was considered. The 2008 SSC meeting is likely to be
hosted as part of the IGBP Congress in South Africa, thus leaving a maximum of 2 or 3 remaining
SSC meetings to be allocated a venue. It is likely that the 2009 meeting (or 2010) will be hosted
as part of the final GLOBEC OSM. It was proposed to host the 2007 meeting in Hiroshima,
Japan, either prior to or following the 4th Zooplankton Production Symposium.
GLOBEC SSC
VENUES
GLOBEC SSC
VENUES
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
Baltimore, USA
Plymouth, UK
Paris, France
Shonan, Japan
Sitges, Spain
Lima, Peru
Qingdao, China
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Banff, Canada
Swakopmund, Namibia
Rome, Italy
Honolulu, USA
Cape Town, South Africa
The SSC discussed the need to start identifying potential venues for the final GLOBEC OSM in
2009/10. It was mentioned that UNESCO (Paris) may be a fitting place, as this was the venue of
the 1st GLOBEC OSM in 1998 (the 2nd was held in Qingdao, China, 2002). SL also proposed
hosting the OSM at La Paz (Mexico).
Actions:



SSC to suggest alternative venues to host the 2007 SSC meeting to the IPO or CW
IPO to poll the SSC for availability prior to or following the 4ZPS
IPO/ SSC to initiate search for an adequate venue for the Final GLOBEC OSM
Minutes XI GLOBEC SSC meeting. Honolulu, May 2006
-14-
Appendix 1 - DRAFT GLOBEC International Synthesis
Book Outline
Global Change and Marine Ecosystems
[Comment: Deliberate not to set it only as climate, but concerns about having to add eutrophication issues
as a result. Suggestion to clarify in introduction. Climate variation and how it differentially affect ecosystems
is what matters]
GLOBEC Goal: To advance our understanding of the structure and functioning of the global
ocean ecosystem, its major subsystems, and its response to physical forcing so that a capability
may be developed to forecast the response of the marine ecosystem to global change.
Purpose of the book/questions addressed:
[Comment: KC-These are not solution-oriented goals but static concepts, particularly the last two]






How do marine ecosystems work in the absence of significant human influence?
What do historical records tell us about the past states of marine ecosystems?
How human-induced and natural variability interact and how do we respond to that?
Can human activities trigger irreversible, abrupt changes in oceanic systems?
What are the reciprocal (RO) feedbacks from the marine system onto human
communities?
How do human communities adapt to ecosystem changes
[Comment: KC- Could we have a matrix that sets how this questions have been answered, how successfully
and in what way? / IP- Are these last two items the same?]
Chapter 1: Introduction (short)
Chapter 2: Historical
Chapter 3: Dynamics of Marine Systems
Chapter 4: Marine Ecosystems under the influence of humans
Chapter 5: Marine Systems as Part of the Earth System
Chapter 6: Human Dimension
[Comment: IP - Maybe group 5 and 6 so that humans are clearly seen as part of the system]
Chapter 7: Projection and future scenarios
Chapter 8: Responsible management
Chapter 9: Summary and next steps toward sustainability
===================================
Chapter 1: Introduction (short)
Oceans’ physics and biology inextricably linked
Natural climate cyles: NAO, PDO, ENSO
Anthropogenic effects: fishing, habitat loss (physical and biogeochemical), climate change
(temperature, stratification/upwelling, etc)
Marine system not isolated from other components of the Earth System (climate-ocean coupling)
Need to respond through management applications that are based on process understanding (not
quick fixes (Comment: KC- This is the right contribution of GLOBEC to mgmt )
Minutes XI GLOBEC SSC meeting. Honolulu, May 2006
-15-
Chapter 2: Historical
Paleo-records, i.e., before significant human effect (deep-sea cores, fish scales)
Recent history (middens, tithings, written records)
Present concerns (collapses, shifts and fisher communities)
Chapter 3: Dynamics of Marine Systems
Natural dynamics/variability
Physics (turbulence to decadal)
Biology (individual organisms, behavior, populations, migrations, biogeography)
Spatio-temporal scales (seconds, millimeters, regime shifts, global)
Interactions/cascades between scales
Ecology/organizing principles
Bottom-up/Top-down/Wasp-waist
Bakun’s Triad
Stable-ocean
Match-mismatch
Retention
Methods of Study [Comment: Maybe a stand alone chapter? KC]
Observational/field
Laboratory
Modeling-observation interactions (IBMs, hindcasts, forecasts)
Chapter 4: Marine Ecosystems after the influence of humans
[Comment: Focus on the last 100 years, which is the period we know (SS)]
Fishery induced changes in abundance, distribution and species composition
Introduced/non-native species
Loss of habitat
Chapter 5: Marine Systems as Part of the Earth System
Climate-Ocean coupling
Changes in atmospheric chemistry, e.g., CO2 and ocean acidification
Changes in land practices and effects on marine environment
African fishery/bushmeat example
Chapter 6: Human Dimension
Vulnerability and resilience of fishing communities
Social structures/adaptations
Scales of response between communities of fish and fishing communities
Fish production and the global food crisis
Chapter 7: Forecasts/future scenarios
What can we expect to predict?
What can’t we predict?
Uncertainties – can we reduce them? How can we incorporate them?
Adapting to change
Chapter 8: Responsible management
What are management needs? (e.g., Ecosystem Based Management/Reykjavik Declaration,
Minutes XI GLOBEC SSC meeting. Honolulu, May 2006
-16-
WSSD, MPAs)
What will be the future management and policy goals?
Which needs and goals can be met?
Social and Economic measures
Chapter 9: Summary and next steps toward sustainability
What have we learned?
What surprised us?
What are the next steps to ensure ecosystem sustainability?
Generic comments raised during discussion, GLOBEC International SSC
 Need more emphasis on zooplankton, small-scale dynamics, etc. (JGF)
 It follows the IGBP model - the emphasis is too much on society etc. and not enough
emphasis on the methodology and research GLOBEC does (BdY) – maybe an issue of
balance, CW thinks that the regional books would focus on that detail. Maybe technical
boxes would help.
 Need to look at JGOFS book as a model. Also focus on the importance of iconic images.
Good accepted terminology re. vulnerability, etc.- has IGBP got definitions for this? KB
 SO GLOBEC could not contribute much to these chapters as they are phrased, although
other CCMLAR-related work. How do we address this? (EH).
 More emphasis on methodology needed, including modeling (SL)
 Need to highlight the changes in people’s perceptions, way of approaching questions,
etc. generated as a result of the international interactions in GLOBEC
 More the original GLOBEC goal- physical/biological interactions (RH)
 Will the book reflect what GLOBCE has done or the state of the art in the specific
sections (thus with science external to GLOBEC included)?
 Who is the audience?
 The academic discourse has been changed by GLOBEC, in terms of natural-social
science interactions (RO), stewardship requirements (for example) rather than
management of ecosystems, etc. Must emphasise this.
 Must improve on the exposure of the book if it is printed as part of the IGBP series
(paperback, PDFs, etc.). Currently the Series is fairly exclusive on price.
Minutes XI GLOBEC SSC meeting. Honolulu, May 2006
-17-