The Fields Institute Turns Twenty-Five 170725 Final book with covers | Page 97

Public Resources
75
strengths and quirks of the mathematical sciences community,
as well as a profile of many of the personalities. Observed
from the inside, the Canadian institutes differ significantly
and operate in quite different ways. The Fields Institute is
very ambitious: while its principal contributors are members
of the Canadian mathematical sciences community, indeed
principally from Ontario universities, it can accept proposals
for activities from any mathematical scientist internationally.
And the Institute’s scope is broad; scientific activities that
have some mathematical component, broadly speaking, are
considered to be appropriate, as long as the scientific quality is
high. While most events that we organize are on topics in core
mathematics, applied mathematics, and statistics, the result of
this breadth is that many physicists, biologists, economists and
financial engineers, ecologists, and others have participated in
our events. A favourite quote is from Ken Melville, a physical
oceanographer from the Scripps Institute in San Diego, who,
coming to Fields for a conference on ocean wave dynamics,
exclaimed to me “You get to work here?”
Another thing that characterizes the Fields Institute
governance is the independence of its Board of Directors and
the international stature of the Scientific Advisory Panel.
Indeed, they can be a challenge for the Institute Director.
But the high quality of our activities is a result of the fact
that program proposals undergo a serious vetting. Sometimes
this can be disconcerting for potential organizers. My antidote
for those organizers who are asked to edit and resubmit their
proposals is that, in my own turn, I was told by the SAP
that we couldn’t invite Louis Nirenberg for a distinguished
lecture, we had to have Jean Bourgain instead. I served on
the Institute Board of Directors (2009–12 and again 2015–16,
after my Directorship). During that time, John Gardner was
Chairman of the Board. While the Board essentially deferred
scientific decisions to the SAP, under John’s leadership it was