proactive at the national level in stimulating your
Arctic and Antarctic Research
committee, promoting the outcome at IASC Coun-
Both Polar Regions have some common research
cil meetings, and reporting back to your national
interests. Some research groups that were active in
body and pointing to opportunities you may have
both Polar Regions have cooperated. However, for-
observed at the Council meeting. Member countries
malizing and increasing this cooperation, i.e., a part-
that have done that job properly will succeed. Re-
nership between IASC and its southern hemisphere
grettably, some Council members have served only
counterpart SCAR, actually occurred during the last
as ‘seat warmers.’
IPY. Cooperation with SCAR resulted in various bipolar
science activities and led to the formation of a joint
Engaging Young Scientists
Action Group. Another joint conference, 10 years
Well-established scientists tend to be nominated
after the SCAR/IASC Open Science Conference
for all sorts of tasks both at national and inter-
2008 in St. Petersburg, is being discussed. As a
national levels. Their experience and wisdom is
science organization, IASC should stimulate and
respected and highly valued. However, the dilemma
finance scientific cooperation on the level of the
is that they are over-committed and hence short
working groups of both organizations.
on time. It was for this reason that IASC, from the
very beginning, included and actively recruited
young scientists to participate in its activities. This
approach is proving to be very effective, as young
scientists took the burden of reporting and adding new ideas, whereas older scientists served as
councilors or mentors. Young brains can also bring
new views and knowledge to a group, and thereby
challenge ‘old truths.’ Where possible, Council membe