Review of the Earth System Science Partnership (ESSP)
Background | Terms of Reference | Process | Membership

back to summary

Background

ICSU is a sponsor of the four global environmental change programmes:  the World Climate Research Programme (WCRP; together with WMO and IOC), the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme (IGBP), the International Human Dimensions Programme on Global Environmental Change (IHDP; together with ISSC) and DIVERSITAS – An International Programme on Biodiversity Science (together with UNESCO, SCOPE and IUBS).

In 2001 at the first Global Change Open Science Conference in Amsterdam the 1400 participants (from more than 100 countries) signed the Amsterdam Declaration on Global Change. The declaration called for strengthening the cooperation amongst the global environmental research programmes, for greater integration across disciplines, environment and development issues and the natural and social science. It also called for greater collaboration across national boundaries and for intensified efforts to enable the full involvement of scientists from developing countries.

In response to the declaration, DIVERSITAS, IGBP, IHDP, and WCRP joined together to form the Earth System Science Partnership (ESSP). The ESSP brings together researchers from diverse fields, and from across the globe, to undertake an integrated study of the Earth System:

• its structure and functioning;
• the changes occurring to the System;
• the implications of those changes for global sustainability.

The interactions and feedbacks between the component parts of the Earth System exhibit multi-scale temporal and spatial variability. Understanding of the System's natural dynamics has advanced greatly in recent years, and now provides a sound basis for evaluating the effects and consequences of human-driven change.

General reviews of the ICSU Global Environmental Change Research Programmes, as well as the global observing systems and all other relevant ICSU Interdisciplinary Bodies and Joint Initiatives, were conducted in 2002-2003 within the Priority Area Assessment on “Environment in Relation to Sustainable Development” as a component of the development of an ICSU Strategic Plan 2006-2011.

A specific review of the Global Environmental Change Research Programmes is specifically called for in the Strategic Plan 2006-2011: “ICSU will conduct individual reviews of its global environmental change research programmes.  Special attention will be given to the development of the Earth System Science Partnership, which brings together the four programmes to address issues that are integral to sustainable development.  The links between this Partnership and other ICSU Interdisciplinary Bodies and Members will be considered as part of these reviews.”

Review of the Global Environmental Change Research Programmes in 2007-2009

The four Global Environmental Change Research Programmes have been reviewed in the past:

• DIVERSITAS; management review by IGFA in 2003;
• IGBP in 1987, 1991 and 1996;
• IHDP in 2005; and
• WCRP in 1995.

ICSU will review DIVERSITAS, IGBP, WCRP and ESSP in the period 2007-2009 through the appointment of individual Review Panels.  ICSU has suggested to the International Group of Funding Agencies for Global Change Research (IGFA) that reviews be conducted by the two organizations jointly.  In addition, other co-sponsors must also be involved in the reviews for DIVERSITAS (IUBS, SCOPE and UNESCO) and WCRP (IOC/UNESCO and WMO).

The reviews should be both reflective and forward-looking.  They should evaluate past performance of the Programmes, review operational structures and assess future plans.  The reviews will thus help guide the scientific research, which is vital for advancing our understanding of the functioning of Planet Earth.  Such understanding is essential if we are to predict future trends in the development of the Earth as a system. 

Research findings underpin many international Assessments such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) and the planned biodiversity assessment (IMoSEB).  Through such assessments, scientific research is supporting several global conventions such as the UN Convention on Climate Change (FCCC), the UN Convention on Biodiversity (CBD) and the UN Convention to Combat Desertification (CCD).  Thus, global change research provides excellent examples of policy relevant science.

The WCRP has existed since 1980, IGBP since 1987, DIVERSITAS in its current form since 2002, and IHDP in its current form since 1996.   During this period, the world has changed and political interest is today primarily on other issues than reducing the scientific uncertainties in relation to global change processes.  The interest within the policy community has, for example, shifted to the Millennium Development Goals and the outcomes of the World Summit on Sustainable Development. The discussion currently centres on how research could help to alleviate poverty. 

The Earth System Science Partnership (ESSP) has taken on the challenge of truly integrating natural and social sciences around common research questions and educating a new generation of scientists to address complex issues outside of disciplinary research structures.  In doing so, it is hoped that a new generation of scientists can be trained to tackle complex, multidisciplinary issues.

The International Group of Funding Agencies for Global Change Research (IGFA) and ICSU have identified the need to more effectively bring the global change community together with the development community.  Thus, a conference was organized in 2005 that brought the two communities together to discuss common interest and possibilities for increased collaboration.  Reference is made to the presentation by Sara Farley at the IGFA Annual Meeting 2005 on “Rethinking Global Change & Development Research” and sessions during the ESSP Open Science Conference (November 2006).  A major challenge for ESSP will be to try to build bridges between the global change and development communities.

top of page

Terms of Reference

ICSU and IGFA will conduct a review of the Earth System Science Partnership (ESSP), through the appointment of a Review Panel, to address issues that are integral to sustainable development and to build the science structure necessary to investigate coupled human-environmental systems.  The components of ESSP are Joint Projects (currently addressing food, water, health and carbon), Integrated Regional Studies (currently MAIRS) and the Global Change System for Analysis, Research and Training (START).

The review will focus on both internal and external interactions.  The major questions to be considered by the review are given below.  The overriding objective should be to evaluate the extent to which the character of ESSP adds value to its priority areas of research and the national programmes that contribute to them.

The primary question that the review should answer is:  “What do scientists, sponsors and the end-users get out of participating in and supporting the ESSP that they could not get from participation in the individual Programmes (DIVERSITAS, IGBP, IHDP, WCRP)?”.

Additional questions to be considered are listed below.  In addressing the questions, the review should go beyond providing simple “yes” or “no” answers and give the reasons for conclusions reached and, where appropriate, recommendations for improvement.

1. Scientific aspects

1.1    Is the scientific mandate of ESSP clearly stated, is it distinct from the mandates of the four sponsoring Programmes, and, if so, how?

1.2    Has the existence of ESSP added significant new approaches and components that could not have been part of the four Programmes?

1.3    How were the topics for Joint Projects developed and what strategic considerations were used to set priorities?

1.4    Do the scientific and implementation plans developed by the ESSP components (Joint Projects, Integrated Regional Studies and START) address key issues perceived as priorities by the scientific community?

1.5    Does the ESSP seek to achieve balance between natural and social sciences and, if so, what is the nature of this balance and is it appropriate?

1.6    Do the Joint Projects seek to achieve balance between global and regional approaches and, if so, what is the nature of this balance and is it appropriate?

1.7    The need to link global change and development research has been discussed.  Has ESSP, or its components, developed in such a way that it could provide a platform for involving both the global change and development communities?

1.8    Do the ESSP Joint Projects, Integrated Regional Study and START receive input and benefit from the four Programmes?

1.9    Does the ESSP plan for syntheses and integration of results from its components, both within ESSP and with the four Programmes?

2. Policy relevance

2.1    Do the ESSP Joint Projects, Integrated Regional Study (MAIRS) and START address issues perceived as priorities by the policy communities?  How have they interacted with the assessment and policy communities?  Is it necessary to strengthen the policy relevance of the research and, if so, how? 

2.2    Has ESSP developed a strategy for ensuring that its components are relevant to the Millennium Development Goals and Science for Sustainable Development?  Has such relevance been clearly demonstrated to the user communities?  Have the policy and other stakeholder communities made attempts to engage ESSP?

2.4    Is a specific forum necessary to enable ESSP and policy, as well as other stakeholder, communities to have a closer ongoing dialog and, if so, what might such a forum be?

3. Organization and Governance

3.1    The four Programmes are currently discussing substantive changes in the governance of ESSP.  Does the proposed governance structure ensure appropriate mechanisms for priority setting and efficient coordination?

3.2    Has the ESSP made efforts to ensure long-term financial stability of its planning and coordination activities and, if so, have these efforts been effective? Has ESSP been important in fund-raising for the components?

4. Visibility and communication

4.1    Do the ESSP’s visibility and communication efforts stimulate the international science, development and donor communities to contribute to the ESSP and are the various stakeholders cognizant of its activities?

4.2    Does ESSP involve the scientific communities in all parts of the world and, if so, to what extent??

5. Capacity Building

5.1    Have ESSP components been able to attract the interest of young scientists and to foster a new generation of scientists working in a more interdisciplinary research environment?

5.2    To what degree has START been instrumental in developing capacity for scientists in developing countries to participate in ESSP?  Has this effort been successful and, if so, are there any lessons to be drawn from this?   Should the Joint Projects and Integrated Regional Studies capacity-building activities be done in cooperation with START or independently, or both?  If both, what activities are appropriate for START and what can the Joint Projects and Integrated Regional Studies better do themselves?

6. Resources

6.1    Recent information received from national and international funding agencies indicate that they are facing constraints on their budgets for global change research and for its planning and cooperation.  Have planning, cooperation, and implementation of the ESSP been impacted by limited funding and, if so, what has the impact of such limitations been and what might such impacts be in the future?

6.2    Are the transaction costs of planning and coordination of ESSP reasonable?

6.3    Has the funding community been receptive to the transaction costs of increased coordination and multidisciplinarity in the ESSP activities that are in addition to the transaction costs of the four Programmes and its Core Projects?

top of page

The review process

During the first meeting, the Panel will agree on the conduct of the review, the information necessary to perform the review and the division of work.  The Panel should also decide on the balance between review of ESSP relative to its component parts.  It may be necessary to design an interview/questionnaire process for collection of views of ESSP leadership, Joint Projects, Regional Studies and START as well as individual participating scientists.  The policy relevance should be assessed through interviews/questionnaires with representatives of various international assessments, UN framework conventions, relevant UN organizations and others (e.g., ICSU bodies) with an interest in the results from ESSP.

At its second meeting the Panel would review the collected material and prepare a first draft of its report.  This draft would then be circulated to ESSP and its components and the four Programmes with the opportunity for them to provide factual corrections and comments.  During a teleconference the Panel would review the comments received, and decide how the report should be amended before circulating the second version of the report to a wider audience (i.e., including ICSU bodies and IGFA members).

The final assessment report would be finalized at the Panel’s third and last meeting and shortly thereafter submitted to ICSU and IGFA.

The Review Panel will be assisted by Dr. Leah Goldfarb, ICSU Science Officer, Environment and Sustainable Development.

top of page

Membership

Chair: Louise Fresco (The Netherlands)

Members:

• Adrian Fernandez Bremauntz (Mexico)
• Lidia Brito (Mozambique)
• Dawn Conway (Canada)
• Nicolas Gruber (Switzerland)
• Göran Hyden (USA)
• Walter Reid (USA)
• Johan Rockström (Sweden)
• Meryl Williams (Australia)
• Hans Joachim Schellnhuber (CSPR, Ex Officio, Germany)
• IGFA Observer

Contact:

Leah Goldfarb,
ICSU Science Officer, Environment and Sustainable Development.
leahicsu.org