Minutes of 127th Meeting of Executive Committee
24-25 March 2000, San Franscisco, California, USA

---

20. USNC/IUPAC YOUNG OBSERVER PROGRAM
Dr. Przybylowicz reviewed the history of this program. The original programs to send young Observers to the General assembly were begun by the UK NAO and the US NAO in 1977. The US program has been active over the years with varying amounts of support. The reports for the participants at the Berlin General Assembly had been useful in providing an outsider's view of IUPAC activities. The USNC plans to bring Observers to the Brisbane meeting. An additional proposal to use the program to promote contacts with host country scientists had been made. The USNC had assigned an American mentor to each participant, but it was felt that in the future the mentor should be someone on the IUPAC body being observed, regardless of nationality. Dr. Przybylowicz noted that the program at Berlin had not had as much industrial participation as in the past, but that will be corrected in future recruitments.
Dr. Ohtaki reported that the Science Council of Japan had supported four Observers at Berlin and planned to support again four AM/Observers to attend the Brisbane GA. The subsequent discussion noted that other NAOs had similar programs, but at a lower level. The Executive Director was asked to write to the NAOs asking if they had a Young Observer program.
The group felt that a more general scheme of this sort should be promoted. It was noted that after Brisbane the opportunities for Observers would be limited since only Division Committees and Standing Committees would be meeting at the GA. The question was raised if there was any useful connection between this program and the program to bring young scientists to the Congress. The need for a new name was discussed. One alternative was Invited Observer rather than Young Observer.
Dr. Buxtorf suggested that a fund be set up for this purpose to encourage Observers from NAOs without the financial resources to operate programs of their own. Dr. Hayes suggested that a letter be written to Company Associates suggesting that their scientists who plan to attend the Congress might also participate in meetings at the GA.

21. CONFERENCES AND SYMPOSIA

21.1 NEED FOR IUPAC POLICIES ON ORGANIZATION AND FINANCIAL SUPPORT Dr. Becker noted the wide variety of conferences sponsored by IUPAC, from the Congress to specialized symposia and workshops. Since conferences add up to a major IUPAC activity, a policy is required as to what conferences should be supported by IUPAC funds. In particular, the question has arisen as to what types of "workshops" should be funded as projects. He asked the EC to discuss the issues briefly in preparation for a more detailed presentation to the Bureau. The discussion noted that while financial support of conferences would be useful the conferences supported should have a relation to some specific IUPAC goal. It was also noted that for most conferences the value of IUPAC sponsorship lies in the ability to use the IUPAC name. The comment was made that IUPAC sponsorship is also important in promoting the free circulation of scientists.
Prof. Jortner suggested a hierarchy of IUPAC sponsored conferences. He proposed the following hierarchy:

Conferences in categories 1, 2, and 3 are supported under current policies. Conferences in category 4 can be supported by Division funds, while conferences in categories 5 and 6 should not be supported financially.
Prof. Sydnes commented that IUPAC should use sponsored conferences to develop ideas for new projects. Funds should be provided only if a conference has a session to brainstorm for new project ideas. With regard to support via the project mechanism, he felt that holding a conference should not be the only purpose of a project. Dr. Hayes proposed that the Division Presidents and the Chairmen of the Operating Standing Committees be involved in developing a policy. The Committee agreed that the subject should be put on the agenda of the next Bureau meeting.

21.2 NEW DIRECTIONS IN CHEMICAL SCIENCES COMMITTEE
The Committee agreed that the second in this series of conferences should again be devoted to Advanced Materials, with future conferences covering other important topics. Dr. Hayes was asked to appoint a Program Committee for the next conference in consultation with Prof. Jortner and Dr. Becker.

21.3 CONFERENCES IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
Dr. Becker noted that one issue remained to be decided in the process for implementing this program. Should applications be submitted through the NAO? It was decided that all applications should be sent to the IUPAC Secretariat with a copy to the NAO. The Executive Committee approved a Selection Committee for this program consisting of Dr. Becker. Prof. Ohtaki, and Prof. Steyn (and possibly others?).

21.4 SHOULD ENGLISH BE REQUIRED AS THE OFFICIAL LANGUAGE OF ALL IUPAC SPONSORED SYMPOSIA
The Committee approved a recommendation that English should be one of the official languages of all IUPAC sponsored conferences.

21.5 REVISION OF THE ADVANCE INFORMATION QUESTIONNAIRE
Dr. Jost reported that a Working Party of Division Presidents was still developing a revised AIQ.

21.6 QUESTION FROM CZECH NAO REGARDING SOLICITATION OF FUNDS FOR IUPAC SPONSORED CONFERENCES
The Committee agreed to keep the current requirement in the letter granting sponsorship that the NAO be informed of solicitation for funds in their country. The Executive Director was asked to write a letter to the Czech NAO informing them of this decision.

21.7 PRIZES FOR POSTERS AT IUPAC SPONSORED CONFERENCES
The Committee approved the proposal to award copies of a suitable IUPAC book to the winners of prizes for best posters at IUPAC sponsored conferences.

21.8 RATIFICATION OF SPONSORSHIP OF SYMPOSIA
The Committee approved the sponsorships of conferences made since the last Bureau meeting.

22. GENERAL ASSEMBLIES AND CONGRESSES

22.1 FOLLOW-UP FROM BERLIN
Dr. Jost reviewed the situation with respect to the IUPAC bank account in Berlin and the claim made to the GDCh for reimbursement of the costs of renting the hall for the Council meeting and the Council reception. It was suggested that the list of requirements for the General Assembly sent to NAOs should include offices for the IUPAC Officers and for a climate controlled lecture hall for the Council meeting.

22.2 PLANS FOR BRISBANE, 2001
Dr. Jost reported that planning for the Brisbane meeting was proceeding on schedule. He will visit Brisbane early in 2001 to confirm that the plans conform to the requirements. Dr. Becker reviewed the proposals of the Danish NAO for the agenda of the Council. The items regarding the VPCA and IDCNS have been taken care of. The remaining proposal is to have presentations to the Council by candidates for Officer and the Bureau. After some discussion, the Committee concluded that presentations would be disadvantageous to non-English speakers. It was decided to have the candidates introduced to the Council on the first day of the meeting. It was also agreed that a Bulletin Board should be prepared with pictures and CVs of the candidates.

23. CHEMICAL HERITAGE FOUNDATION

23.1 PRESENTATION BY DR. ARNOLD THACKRAY, PRESIDENT, CHF
Dr. Thackray reviewed the history and programs of the Chemical Heritage Foundation. The Committee felt that greater contacts with the CHF should be considered. The suggestion was made that a workshop on the preservation of the Chemical Heritage be set up at the Brisbane Congress. This should help foster contacts between IUPAC members and the CHF.

---

< Back to Index

> Next Section