IGU International Geographical Union

Union Géographique Internationale UGIIGU E-NEWSLETTER
Quarterly
URL: http://www.homeofgeography.org/
e-mail: g.bellezza@homeofgeography.org

New Series 8

October2013

Editor: Giuliano BellezzaThis Newsletter is circulated to more than 1500 individuals and bodies. Announcements,
information, calls for participation in scientific events, programmes and projects arewelcome. Please send them to giuliano.bellezza@uniroma1.it

CONTENTS OF THIS ISSUE
1) Remarks from IGU President Vladimir Kolossov
1.a) Geography of the IGU
1.b) San Francisco Declaration
2) Reports from Conferences and Meetings2.a) 8th Japan-Korea-China joint Conference on Geography, Fukuoka, Kyushu
University, July 31 to August 4, 20132.b) IGU Regional Conference, Kyoto, 2-9 August 20132.b1) English Version
2.b2) Version Française par Yves Boquet
2.c) EUGEO 2013, Rome, 4-6 September 2013
3) Canada Denies IGU President Visa
4) Intergovernamental Panel on Climate Change: from the 5th Report5) New Springer Series on Geographical and Environmental Sciences(Communication from R.B. Singh, IGU VP)
6) Forthcoming events
6.1) Region-2013: Optimal Development Strategy: International Conference,
Karkhiv, 6-8 November 20136.2) Eau: Resource, risque et dévelopment durable, Fès (Maroc) 27-28 November
6.3) Global Congress on Intelligent Systems and Global Congress on Intelligent
Systems Hong Kong, 3-4 December
6.4) ISPRS-IGU-ICA Workshop on Borderlands Modeling and Understanding for
Global Sustainability, Beijing, 5-6 December
6.5) CISP-BMEI 2013, Hangzhou 16-18 December
6.6) 12th International Asian Urbanization Conference, Varanasi, 28-30 December
6.7) L'Information Géographique et le Monde Changeant, Sfax, Faculté deLettres, 27-28 Janvier 2014

1) REMARKS FROM IGU PRESIDENTVLADIMIR KOLOSSOVDear Colleagues,in the preceeding IGU e-newsletter the draft minutes of our Regional Conference in Kyoto,
have been published. KRG has been the major event in the activity of the international
geographical community in 2013, so I like to express some comments. In my opinion, it
was very successful: firstly, because the scientific programme was so interesting anddiverse; it included sessions organized by 39 of the 40 IGU Commissions as well as
meetings held on the initiative of separate groups, key lectures and special sessions devoted
to the perspectives of our Union and to the main IGU interdisciplinary projects(International Year of Global Understanding and Our Sustainable Cities). The Conference
proved again how important it is to build joint projects and to develop cooperation within
and between IGU Commissions. As Claude Bernard once said, “Art means “I”, Sciencemeans “We”. So, in coming together at such large conferences, we become stronger, we
realize how large is the global geographical community, how influential it can and should
be. The Conference in Kyoto gathered about 1600 participants, and a great number of themcame from the Asian-Pacific region, which justifies the very idea of regional conferences.
Our days in the ancient Japanese capital were filled with an intense and rich dialogue - a
dialogue between geographical sub-disciplines, human and physical geography, geography
and other sciences, between researchers and practitioners, between different generations ofgeographers, between East and West, North and South and, perhaps, most importantly ofall, a dialogue between colleagues and good friends.
Secondly, the August days in Kyoto showed that IGU, facing new challenges, was able tofind new directions and forms of activity. I refer to new ideas approved at the meeting ofCommissions’ Chairs and the IGU Executive (see the minutes of the EC session in Kyoto

the preceeding issue), the initiatives concerning a broader involvement of young scholars in
IGU activities, particularly through the contacts with the association of Young Earth
Scientists (YES), the preparation of the extraordinary International Geographical Congresson the occasion of the IGU centennial in 2022, the relations with ICSU, ISSC and otherglobal scientific organizations. We also welcome new national geographical communities
which have recently applied for membership in IGU or updated it.
The Conference marked a step in the promotion of geographical education in bothsecondary schools and universities. In many countries we observe an attempt to replace
geography by “synthetic” courses of natural or social disciplines or simply to remove itfrom school curricula altogether. The declaration signed by IGU, Eugeo and Eurogeo inearly September in Rome (see below, in this newsletter) is a direct result of our meetings in
Kyoto.
I particularly appreciated the special session on the status of geographical journals, theissues of their ranking and open access. The presentation by Professors Christian
Vandermotten, Mike Meadows and Ton Dietz at this session demonstrated that the abuse ofcitation indices by those who evaluate our activity is a serious threat to the future ofgeographical departments and can undermine the personal careers of many scholars. It wasagreed that IGU should endorse the San Francisco Declaration (see following point 1.b) andthat IGU should develop recommendations on the matter to national research and education
governmental institutions.
Thirdly, and last but not at all the least, the Conference in Kyoto was so successful due tothe exemplary work of its local organizing committee. We all noticed the rapid andefficient registration facilities, the tireless work of volunteers, always active, friendly andhelpful, a user friendly programme handbook, a memorable opening ceremony and many
more highlights. We would like to thank again our Japanese colleagues for havingorganized for us this wonderful geography ‘holiday’. We understand that these hot Augustdays were the culmination of their long and hard work, that it was not easy to makeeverything run so smoothly, exactly on schedule, and how difficult it was to accommodate
all our requests and interests. These tremendous efforts surely paid off.
Vladimir Kolosov
President of IGU

1.a) GEOGRAPHY OF THE IGU:
Distribution of the Steering Committees’ Chairs and members by countries
By mid-2013, IGU had 39 Commissions, and the number of their Steering Committees’
members made up 410. An analysis of their distribution by macro-regions and countries isof interest because it is a ground of the IGU ambitions to keep its status as truly globalorganization and because it shows the results of its efforts to involve geographers from low
income countries to its activity.

In total, 72 national geographical communities
were represented in the Steering Committees(SC). This figure is close to the number of IGU
countries members. But, of course, therepresentation of different countries is very
uneven. (fig at left). Only 16 countries coulddelegate 10 and more persons to the SCs. The top
five countries are the US (32 members), the UK(28), Japan (22), Australia (21) and Germany(19). Other leading countries have 10 to 15
representatives. Interestingly, this distribution in
general matches the annual fee paid by to IGU bynational geographical associations, though there
are the countries which seem to be “under-“ or“over-represented”. The Brazilian geographicalcommunity unfortunately does not contribute lastyears to the IGU budget but is relatively well
represented in the SCs.
Europeans almost absolutely dominate among themembers of the SCs: they account for 47.6% ofthem (the share of West, North, and South Europe
makes up about 40%, East Europe – theremaining 7.6%).
There are very few African geographers in theSCs (5.1%), and most of them are from the South
African Republic. Respectively, according to theofficial UN classification, 74.4% of the SCs’ members live in developed countries, 21.5% in developing ones, and he remaining 4.1% work in transition countries.

The general distribution of Commissions’ Chairs (including co-Chairs and associate
Chairs) almost perfectly mirrors this picture (fig. 2): 53.8% of them are from Europe,
20.5% - from Asia and 18.8% from North America, no Africans. Almost exactly the same
percentage as among the members represents developed (74%) and developing countries(21%), while the share of transition countries accounts for 5%. But the order of countries isdifferent: four Chairs of 39 are from Germany; Italy and the US are represented by three
Chairs each, China, Japan, Mexico, Switzerland, the Netherlands and the UK – by two
Chairs each.

The conclusions from this simple analysis are clear: firstly, despite of the unequal
representation of different countries, IGU is a global organization; secondly, a larger
involvement of geographers from the so called developing countries remains one of its
priorities.
The “old continent” is followed by Asia (21.2%) and North America (18.8%). The UN
division of the world into regions is used.

1.b) SAN FRANCISCO DECLARATION ON RESEARCH ASSESSMENT
Putting Science int the assessment of research
There is a pressing need to improve the ways in which the output of scientific researchis evaluated by funding agencies, academic institutions, and other parties.
To address this issue, a group of editors and publishers of scholarly journals met
during the Annual Meeting of The American Society for Cell Biology (ASCB) in San
Francisco, CA, on December 16, 2012. The group developed a set ofrecommendations, referred to as the San Francisco Declaration on Research
Assessment. We invite interested parties across all scientific disciplines to indicate theirsupport by adding their names to this Declaration.
The outputs from scientific research are many and varied, including: research articles
reporting new knowledge, data, reagents, and software; intellectual property; andhighly trained young scientists. Funding agencies, institutions that employ scientists,and scientists themselves, all have a desire, and need, to assess the quality and impactof scientific outputs. It is thus imperative that scientific output is measured accurately
and evaluated wisely.
The Journal Impact Factor is frequently used as the primary parameter with which tocompare the scientific output of individuals and institutions. The Journal Impact
Factor, as calculated by Thomson Reuters, was originally created as a tool to help
librarians identify journals to purchase, not as a measure of the scientific quality of
research in an article. With that in mind, it is critical to understand that the Journal
Impact Factor has a number of well-documented deficiencies as a tool for researchassessment. These limitations include: A) citation distributions within journals arehighly skewed [1–3]; B) the properties of the Journal Impact Factor are field-specific:
it is a composite of multiple, highly diverse article types, including primary research
papers and reviews [1, 4]; C) Journal Impact Factors can be manipulated (or “gamed”)
by editorial policy [5]; and D) data used to calculate the Journal Impact Factors areneither transparent nor openly available to the public [4, 6, 7].
Below we make a number of recommendations for improving the way in which thequality of research output is evaluated. Outputs other than research articles will growin importance in assessing research effectiveness in the future, but the peer-reviewed
research paper will remain a central research output that informs research assessment.
Our recommendations therefore focus primarily on practices relating to research
articles published in peer-reviewed journals but can and should be extended byrecognizing additional products, such as datasets, as important research outputs.
These recommendations are aimed at funding agencies, academic institutions,journals, organizations that supply metrics, and individual researchers.
A number of themes run through these recommendations:
 the need to eliminate the use of journal-based metrics, such as Journal Impact
Factors, in funding, appointment, and promotion considerations;
 the need to assess research on its own merits rather than on the basis of thejournal in which the research is published; andthe need to capitalize on the opportunities provided by online publication (such as
relaxing unnecessary limits on the number of words, figures, and references inarticles, and exploring new indicators of significance and impact).
We recognize that many funding agencies, institutions, publishers, and researchers are
already encouraging improved practices in research assessment. Such steps are beginning
to increase the momentum toward more sophisticated and meaningful approaches toresearch evaluation that can now be built upon and adopted by all of the key
constituencies involved.
The signatories of the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment support the
adoption of the following practices in research assessment.
General Recommendation
1. Do not use journal-based metrics, such as Journal Impact Factors, as a surrogate
measure of the quality of individual research articles, to assess an individual scientist’s
contributions, or in hiring, promotion, or funding decisions.
For funding agencies
2. Be explicit about the criteria used in evaluating the scientific productivity of grantapplicants and clearly highlight, especially for early-stage investigators, that thescientific content of a paper is much more important than publication metrics or theidentity of the journal in which it was published.
3. For the purposes of research assessment, consider the value and impact of all
research outputs (including datasets and software) in addition to research
publications, and consider a broad range of impact measures including qualitative
indicators of research impact, such as influence on policy and practice.
For institutions
4. Be explicit about the criteria used to reach hiring, tenure, and promotion decisions,clearly highlighting, especially for early-stage investigators, that the scientificcontent of a paper is much more important than publication metrics or the identityof the journal in which it was published.
5. For the purposes of research assessment, consider the value and impact of all
research outputs (including datasets and software) in addition to research
publications, and consider a broad range of impact measures including qualitative
indicators of research impact, such as influence on policy and practice.
For publishers
6. Greatly reduce emphasis on the journal impact factor as a promotional tool, ideallyby ceasing to promote the impact factor or by presenting the metric in the context ofa variety of journal-based metrics (e.g., 5-year impact factor, EigenFactor [8],SCImago [9], h-index, editorial and publication times, etc.) that provide a richer
view of journal performance.
7. Make available a range of article-level metrics to encourage a shift toward
assessment based on the scientific content of an article rather than publication
metrics of the journal in which it was published.
8. Encourage responsible authorship practices and the provision of information
about the specific contributions of each author.
9. Whether a journal is open-access or subscription-based, remove all reuse limitations
on reference lists in research articles and make them available under the Creative
Commons Public Domain Dedication [10].
10. Remove or reduce the constraints on the number of references in research articles,
6and, where appropriate, mandate the citation of primary literature in favor of reviewsin order to give credit to the group(s) who first reported a finding.
For organizations that supply metrics
11. Be open and transparent by providing data and methods used to calculate all
metrics.
12. Provide the data under a licence that allows unrestricted reuse, and provide
computational access to data, where possible.
13. Be clear that inappropriate manipulation of metrics will not be tolerated; be
explicit about what constitutes inappropriate manipulation and what measures will betaken to combat this.
14. Account for the variation in article types (e.g., reviews versus research articles),and in different subject areas when metrics are used, aggregated, or compared.
For researchers
15. When involved in committees making decisions about funding, hiring, tenure, or
promotion, make assessments based on scientific content rather than publication
metrics.
16. Wherever appropriate, cite primary literature in which observations are firstreported rather than reviews in order to give credit where credit is due.
17. Use a range of article metrics and indicators on personal/supporting statements, asevidence of the impact of individual published articles and other research outputs[11].
18. Challenge research assessment practices that rely inappropriately on Journal
Impact Factors and promote and teach best practice that focuses on the value andinfluence of specific research outputs.
References
1. Adler, R., Ewing, J., and Taylor, P. (2008) Citation statistics. A report from theInternational
Mathematical
Union,
inwww.mathunion.org/publications/report/citationstatistics0
2. Seglen, P.O. (1997) Why the impact factor of journals should not be used forevaluating research. BMJ 314, 498–502.
3. Editorial (2005). Not so deep impact. Nature 435, 1003–1004.
4. Vanclay, J.K. (2012) Impact Factor: Outdated artefact or stepping-stone to journal
certification. Scientometric 92, 211–238.
5. The PLoS Medicine Editors (2006). The impact factor game. PLoS Med 3(6): e291
doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0030291.
6. Rossner, M., Van Epps, H., Hill, E. (2007). Show me the data. J. Cell Biol. 179,
1091–1092.
7. Rossner M., Van Epps H., and Hill E. (2008). Irreproducible results: A response toThomson Scientific. J. Cell Biol. 180, 254–255.
8. http://www.eigenfactor.org/
9. http://www.scimagojr.com/
10. http://opencitations.wordpress.com/2013/01/03/open-letter-to-publishers
11. http://altmetrics.org/tools/
The complete list of 155 Original Indivdual Signers and 78 Original Association Signers can befound in www.homeofgeography.org/news2013/June.
72) REPORTS FROM CONFERENCES AND MEETINGS
2a) 8TH JAPAN-KOREA-CHINA JOINT CONFERENCE ON GEOGRAPHY,KYUSHU UNIVERSITY, FUKUOKA, JULY 31 TO AUGUST 4, 2013
The Japan-Korea-China Joint Conference on Geography intends to provide Asian geographers,
mainly young geographers from these three countries, with a venue for facilitating a lively
discussion, and an opportunity to build and expand the network of scholars that will persist for
the future. The Conference is held annually in Japan, Korea, or China.
The Conference of this year, which was held at Kyushu University from Wednesday, July 31,
2013 to Sunday, August 4, 2013, was the eighth Conference (hereinafter called the 8th
Conference). The number of participants of this Conference was the highest ever, with 144
participants not only from Japan, Korea and China, but also from India, Austria and Vietnum(Photo 1). It indicates that the Conference represented diverse viewpoints existing within Asia
more than ever.
The theme of the 8th Conference was “One Asia/Thousand Asias: Toward the Construction of
New Crossroads.” The organizing committee put the following wishes into this theme. They are:to share a vision of Asia as a pursuer of the “crossroads” of interwoven diversity and cooperation,in contrast with globalizing economies and societies; and to contribute to the development of thevarious regions and societies coexisting in Asia.

Photo 1 Group photo in front of the main venue of the 8th Conference

8The 8th Conference commenced on July 31, with a keynote speech entitled “Thinking from Japanbeyond the Four “D”s, Concerning with Social Capital―Diversity, Disparity, Depopulation and
Deprivation―” by TSUTSUMI Kenji (Osaka University).
On August 1 and 2, the participants delivered 63 oral and 25 poster presentations, which
generated vigorous discussions. A couple of short trips were organized on August 1. One is avisit to the new campus of Kyushu University, and another is a tour to observe urban
development in the center of Fukuoka City. After some presentations on August 2, closing
ceremony was held to confer the “Young Geographer Awards” to the following young
researchers whose presentations at the Conference were excellent: YIN Guanwen (graduate
student, Kyushu University), SHIRAISHI Natsuko (graduate student, Kyoto University) and
WUZHATI Yeerken (graduate student, Chinese Academy of Sciences). The 8th Conference also
launched the “Impressive Presentation Awards” to honor memorable and interesting oral orposter presentations. The following awardees were chosen by anonymous voting: PARK
Sookyung (Sangmyung University), LI Gang (Northwest University) and LI Nana (graduate
student, Nara Women’s University). The Conference also conferred “Welcome Awards” to twopresenters who were not from Japan, Korea, or China.

Photo 2 A scene of the joint session at Kyoto RC
A field trip was conducted on August 3 to further understanding in industrial modernization andthe post-industrial society in Fukuoka. The first destinations of the trip were Tagawa City Coal
Mining Historical Museum and the site of Yahata Steelworks, followed by Kitakyushu Eco-town,
which was observed from the wheel window. The final visit was to Mojiko Retro District. Those
who were to joiningin the IGU 2013 Kyoto Regional Conference (Kyoto RC) spent the night
traveling by ferry from Shin-Moji Port to Kobe Port through Seto Inland Sea. They visited Korea
Town in Tsuruhashi District, Expo ’70 Commemorative Park, and the National Museum of
Ethnology in Osaka on August 4 before proceeding to Kyoto.
On August 5 at Kyoto RC, a joint session entitled “Regional diversity and a possibility ofcollaboration in East Asia – a contribution from young geographers –” was held jointly with the
Kyoto RC organizer. The seven presenters were ENDO Nao (Kochi University), KONNO Ena(Tokyo University of Agriculture), CHOI Haeok (Tsinghua University), ZHANG Yan et al.
(Beijing Union University), TSURUSHIMA Daiki (graduate student, Tohoku University),
9

KIENER Johannes (graduate student, Osaka City University), and LU Shan (Northeast Normal
University). These young scholars from East Asia engaged in an active debate with the audience
to explore the ways in which geographical studies should be conducted, including dimensions
unique to juniors, such as urban-rural space, physical-human field, and micro-macro scale. The
joint session gave us a chance to appeal our accomplishments over the past eight years to both
domestic and international geographic communities.
The 9th Conference is scheduled from July 6 to 9, 2014 at Pusan National University, Korea.
KONNO Ena and NORITO Takashi
Secretaries-General of the 8th Conference Organizing Committee

2.b) IGU REGIONAL CONFERENCE, KYOTO, 5-9 AUGUST
2.b1) English Version
Report of Kyoto Regional Conference
The IGU Kyoto Regional Conference (KRC) held at the Kyoto International Conference Center(ICC Kyoto) August 4–9, 2013, was successfully concluded.
The conference was well attended: The total number of participants, including both preregistration and on-site registration, but excluding those who did not come to the conference
venue, was 1,431 persons from 61 countries/regions. Such an attendance is more than we had
previously expected, and it seems fairly high for an IGU Regional Conference. We were very
honored that so many participants attended the KRC. Moreover, the reputation of the KRC wason the whole very good; in particular, most participants rated the conference management as very
effective. It was our great pleasure to receive such a favorable evaluation.

Kyoto International Conference Center - Centre International de Conférences (photo G.B.)
Since we have already submitted the more official, detailed report to the IGU Executive
Committees, we will minimize repetitive description in this report and mainly touch on fresh10

impressions rather than basic information such as invitation history, participant numbers, sessions
and presentations, and opening/closing ceremonies.
The special exhibition “Traditional Wisdom and Modern Knowledge presented in Maps” washeld in honor of the IGU Kyoto Regional Conference at the Kyoto University Museum from July
31 through September 1. Kyoto University is famous for its excellent collection of old maps. The
KRC participants were able to enter at no cost by showing their official conference nametags at
the museum entrance. The total number who entered the museum during this period amounted to9,827 persons, although the exact number of entrants with the KRC nametag was not recorded.
A public lecture was held on August 4 at the Kyoto University Clock Tower Centennial Hall.
This lecture was conducted in Japanese, since it aimed to disseminate geographical results toJapanese citizen in honor of the joint-hosting of the IGU Kyoto Regional Conference by the
National Committee of Japan for IGU and the Science Council of Japan. The program also
include a special lecture entitled “Geographical Environment and Language” by the well-known
writer Yang Yi in the morning and lectures by six experts of Geoparks in Japan in the afternoon.
The total number of participants was approximately 130 persons, and questions after the lecturestended to concentrate on how to gain approval of Geoparks.
A cocktail party was held at the banquet hall and the garden of the venue on the evening ofAugust 5. To open the party, Professor Vladimir Kolossov, IGU President, made a short speech.
The Organizing Committee offered the participants a special sake, which was produced in
Kyoto’s Fushimi Ward, a leading sake production area in Japan. Some of the attendants enjoyedrather cool air outside due to the shower before the party.

Left: Professor Vladimir Kolossov, President of IGU, making a toast at the cocktail party
Right: Professor Jean-Robert Pitte giving a speech in a Plenary Session

Gauche, le professeur Vladimir Kolossov, président de l'UGI, prononçant un discours lors dela réception. Droite, le professeur Jean-Robert Pitte (France), conférence plénière du CRK
11

Although the Organizing Committee planned several social programs through the Japan Travel
Bureau, there were not so many applications. Therefore, we decided to put together a tea
ceremony at ICC Kyoto, since the venue has a beautiful Japanese tea ceremony house, called
Hosho-an. Tea masters from Urasenke, the largest traditional tea ceremony school, presided overan authentic tea ceremony. We held a one-hour tea ceremony experience every hour on August 6
and 7. Although this was the first such experience for many of the participants, particularly thosefrom overseas, approximately 160 persons enjoyed this event, and it got very favorable reviews.
In the afternoon of August 6, together with the KRC’s Organizing Committee, Wiley held its first
Geography Roundtable discussion, “Global Voices in Geography.” This invitation-only event
aimed to provide an intimate forum bringing together influential representatives from national,
regional, and international geographical organizations to discuss shared areas of interest andopportunities to facilitate dialogue among scholars, practitioners and researchers around theworld. The thirteen persons on behalf of various geographical associations or National
Committees for IGU attended this interesting event and mainly talked about country-specificgeographical issues. All of the participants acknowledged the significance of this event andengaged in quite active discussions; they shared the opinion that this event should continue in the
future.
The Gala Dinner was held for approximately 300 participants at the Japanese restaurant Ganko
Nijoen Takasegawa, whose location has a long and distinguished history in terms of the historical
geography of Kyoto, on the evening of August 7. At the beginning, Professor Ronald Abler, theformer IGU President, was recognized by the Tokyo Geographical Society. After giving agreeting, Professor Michio Nogami, President of the Society, gave Professor Abler the Tokyo
Geographical Society Medal for his remarkable contributions to the development of geography.
Furthermore, there was also an award ceremony conferring Honorary Membership in the
Association of Japanese Geographers to Professor Abler during the closing ceremony. Professor
Noritaka Yagasaki, President of the Association of Japanese Geographers, presented thecertificate of merit to him.
At this conference, we gave special attention to supporting young researchers. Specifically, we
not only set the registration fee for students lower than half that for standard participants but also
prepared our own grants for 20 young researchers from developing countries. Moreover, four
excellent poster presentations by young researchers registered as students were also recognized.
The award ceremonies for IGU and KRC grant recipients as well as best poster presentation
awardees were held during the closing ceremony. These ceremonies may be the first such eventat an IGU’s RC or IGC.

12

Award ceremony for best poster presentation awardees (left) and for the KRC grant awardees
We hope that every participant had a productive and enjoyable experience during this conference
and enjoyed a pleasant stay in Kyoto, a city with a 1,200-year history. We are looking forward toseeing many of the KRC participants again in Kraków, Poland, in August 2014.
Yoshitaka Ishikawa
Chair, Organizing Committee of the KRC
Keiji Yano
Secretary-General, Organizing Committee of the KRC

Left, sea tourism near the Tsuruga nuclear plant. Right, drums exhibition in the Opening Ceremony
Gauche, tourisme prés du site nuclaire a Tsuruga. Droite, spèctable de tambourineurs (photos G.B.).

Messages from the IGU Grant Awardees
Attending the International Geographical Union’s Regional conference was a great opportunity tomeet geography researchers from all over the world. Furthermore it gave me new knowledge
about geographical research in Asia, and especially Japan. Geography in itself is a field withgreat interdisciplinary potential, and a conference with so many different sub-disciplines
represented is a fantastic platform for interdisciplinary discussion.
Lina Eklund, Sweden

13

Attending the Kyoto Regional Conference itself was also very beneficial to my position as ayoung scholar. It expanded my knowledge of geography and allowed me to gain valuable
feedback and new perspectives, especially regarding my current research.
Minna Hsu, Taiwan
I also discovered some great techniques in the exhibition for preparing myself in GIS and RS
skills. During the actual workshop I had the chance to practice my presentation skills and receive
valuable feedback.
Hoang van Than, Vietnam
The quality of the oral presentations I found to be excellent. I particularly enjoyed and benefitted
from the Health sessions which were most relevant to my area of research. These sessions
exceeded my expectations from both a geography and epidemiological perspective. I plan to usesome of the methods presented in my PhD studies and so it was very informative. Throughdiscussion with other delegates I have also learned of research being carried out in other groups
which I was not previously aware of, so this is extremely valuable to me. The networking
opportunities at the conference were good and I feel I have established connections will bemutually beneficial in the future. Presenting my work to this audience was a positive experience,
which I have gained from through questions and comments in the session and also throughdiscussion it evoked over coffee.
Michelle Morris, United Kingdom
I must say, the conference has a direct impact in enhancing my teaching and research career andin turn will go a long way in promoting my teaching and research in the field of geography ingeneral and social, population and gender geography in particular, in the state of Assam andIndia. To me, a conference as such, gives on a chance to locate one’s own research in the broader
world and truly feel a part of the International Geographical Union.
Madhushree Das, India

Courtyard of the Science Council of Japan,
where the IGU EC was invited for a traditional Japanese dinner (photo G.B.)

14

2.b2) Version Française par Yves Boquet
Rapport sur La Conférence régionale de Kyôto (CRK) de l’UGILa Conférance qui s'est tenue au Centre International de Conférences de Kyôto (CICK) du 4 au 9Août 2013, s'est achevée avec succés.

Kyoto International Conference Center - Centre International de Conférences de Kyôto
La conférence a été bien suivie : le nombre total de participants, pré-inscrits ou inscrits sur place,à l'exclusion de ceux qui ne sont pas venus sur le site de la conférence, s’est élevé à 1431
personnes de 61 pays ou régions. Une telle participation a dépassé nos prévisions, et apparaît
assez élevée pour une Conférence Régionale de l'UGI . Nous avons été très honorés que tant depersonnes aient participé à la CRK. En outre, l’impression donnée par la CRK a été dans
l'ensemble très bonne; en particulier, la plupart des participants ont jugé très efficace la gestion dela conférence. Nous avons été ravis de recevoir une évaluation aussi positive.
Puisque nous avons déjà présenté un rapport détaillé plus officiel au Comité de Direction del'UGI nous allons limiter les descriptions répétitives dans ce rapport et nous intéresser
essentiellement à des impressions fraîches plutôt qu’aux données de base telles que l'historiquede l'invitation, le nombre de participants, les sessions et présentations et les cérémonies
d'ouverture ou de clôture.
L'exposition spéciale “Sagesse traditionnelle et connaissances modernes présentées dans lescartes” a été organisée, en l'honneur de la Conférence régionale de Kyôto de l’UGI, au Musée del'Université de Kyôto du 31 Juillet au 1er Septembre. L’Université de Kyôto est célèbre pour son
excellente collection de cartes anciennes. Les participants à la CRK ont pu entrer sans frais enmontrant leurs badges officiels de la conférence à l'entrée du musée. Le nombre total de visiteurs
du musée au cours de cette période s'élève à 9827 personnes, mais le nombre exact desparticipants à badge CRK n'a pas été enregistré.

15

Award ceremony for the former IGU President Ronald Abler, who received the Tokyo GeographicalSociety Medal from Professor Michio Nogami, President of the Tokyo Geographical Society

Remise de prix pour l'ex-Président de l'UGI Ronald Abler, qui a reçu la Médaillede la Société Géographique de Tokyo des mains du professeur Michio Nogami,
président de la Société Géographique de Tokyo.
Une conférence publique a eu lieu le 4 Août au “Clock Tower Centennial Hall” de l’Universitéde Kyôto. Cette conférence a été menée en japonais, car elle visait à diffuser les recherches
géographiques aux citoyens japonais en l'honneur de l’accueil conjoint de la Conférence
régionale de Kyôto de l’UGI par le Comité national UGI du Japon pour l'UGI et le Conseil dessciences du Japon. Le programme comprenait également une conférence spéciale intitulée“Environnement géographique et langage”, donnée par le célèbre écrivain Yang Yi dans lamatinée, et des conférences données par six experts des Géoparcs au Japon, dans l'après-midi. Le
nombre total de participants a été d'environ 130 personnes, et les questions après les conférences
ont eu tendance à se concentrer sur la façon d'obtenir l'approbation des Géoparcs.
Un cocktail a eu lieu dans la salle de banquet et le jardin de la salle dans la soirée du 5 Août .
Pour ouvrir les festivités, le professeur Vladimir Kolossov, Président de l'UGI, a prononcé unbref discours . Le comité organisateur a offert aux participants un saké spécial, fabriqué dans ledistrict Fushimi de Kyôto, lieu majeur de production de saké au Japon. Certains des participants
ont apprécié l’air plutôt frais à l'extérieur en raison de l’averse avant la réception.
Dans l'après-midi du 6 Août, en collaboration avec le Comité d'organisation de la CRK, lamaison d’édition Wiley a tenu sa première table ronde de la géographie, ” Voix du monde en
géographie”. Cet événement – sur invitation seulement – avait pour but de réunir un nombre
réduit de représentants influents au niveau national, régional et des organisations géographiques
internationales pour discuter des domaines d'intérêt communs et des possibilités de faciliter le16

dialogue entre universitaires, praticiens et chercheurs du monde entier. Treize personnes, pour lecompte de diverses associations géographiques ou comités nationaux de l'UGI, ont assisté à cetévénement intéressant et surtout parlé des questions géographiques spécifiques à chaque pays.
Tous les participants ont reconnu l'importance de cet événement et ont engagé des discussions
très actives ; ils ont partagé l'opinion que cet événement devrait se poursuivre à l'avenir.
-

La cérémonie du thé comme programme social - Tea ceremony as a social programLe dîner de gala a été organisé pour environ 300 participants au restaurant japonais Ganko Nijoen
Takasegawa, dont l'emplacement a une histoire longue et distinguée en termes de géographie
historique de Kyôto , dans la soirée du 7 Août. Au début de la soirée, le professeur Ronald Abler,ancien président de l'UGI, a été honoré par la Société géographique de Tokyo. Après avoir
délivré un message d'accueil, le professeur Michio Nogami, président de la Société, a remis au
professeur Abler la médaille de la Société géographique de Tokyo pour ses contributions
remarquables au développement de la géographie. En outre, il y eut aussi une cérémonie
conférant au professeur Abler le titre de membre honoraire de l'Association des Géographes
Japonais, lors de la session de clôture. Le professeur Noritaka Yagasaki, président del'Association des Géographes Japonais lui a remis le certificat.
Nous espérons que chaque participant aura eu une expérience productive lors de cette conférence
et aura apprécié un agréable séjour à Kyôto, une ville avec une histoire de 1200 ans. Nousespérons revoir de nombreux participants du CRK à Cracovie, en Pologne, en Août 2014.
Yoshitaka Ishikawa
Président du Comité d’organisation du CRK
Keiji Yano
Secrétaire général du Comité d'organisation du CRK172c) IV EUGEO CONFERENCE, ROME, 4-6 SEPTEMBER 2013
The IV Eugeo Conference started the night of 4th September, with a nice surprise for the invited
key-note speakers: a visit in the center part of the City, animated by a jazz band (and this was areal amusements) on a normal tram, along normal tram-lines .
The real, scientific, Program started on 5th September, with several Parallel Sessions in theclassrooms of the Faculty of Humanities of the University of Roma “La Sapienza”, from 10,30 to
17,00. Soon after the participants have been taken
to the Sala della Protomoteca (Hall of bronze andmarble busts) in the Capitol, where the Opening
Ceremony took place, Chaired by Henk Ottens,
President of EUGEO and and ScientificCommittee Member (SCM), with a Welcome
Address of Franco Salvatori, former President of
SGI and SCM. The first Plenary Session
imediately followed, chaired by Sergio Conti,
President of SGI. Keynote Speakers were (photo atright).: Vladimir Kolossov, IGU President,
Sovereignty, “Stateness” and Contested Borders in the Contemporary GeopoliticalContext, and Anne Buttimer, Former President, Changing Practices of Geography andChallenges of Century XXI. The Ceremony closed with a welcome cocktail.
On 6th September the Parallel Session occurred from 8,30 to 13, when the 2nd Plenary took place,chaired by Gino De Vecchis (President of the Italian Association of Geography Teachers andSCM): keynote speakers were Ron Boschma(Empirical Research in Evolutionary Economic
Geography) and Petros Petsimmeris (Urbantransformations in Europe
and urban
transformation of Europe) (photo at right).
Parallel Sessions again took place, until 16,50, intime for the 3 rd Plenary Session, Chaired by
Franco Farinelli (President of the Association of
Italian Geographers and SCM): keynotes
speakers have been Armando Montanari(International comparative research: experiences and outlooks for European geography) and
Ad De Roo (Changing Water Futures in Europe: which role can geographers play?). Onceagain all the participants could enjoy a bus transfer, this time for a visit and a brief symphonicconcert in the wonderful seat of the Società Geografica Italiana, followed by the Social Dinner.
Parallel Sessions began at 8,30 on 7th September also, until 13,10, when the 4th Plenary Session
took place, chaired by Lidia Scarpelli, President of the Italia Society for Geographical Studies
and SCM: keynote speakers have been Peter Mehlbye, The European territory: New evidence,
dynamics and prospects and Gyula Horváth, The regional structure and decentralization ofscience in Central and Eastern Europe.
The last slots of Parallel Session occurred until 18,30, when Henk Ottens, EUGEO President,
chaired the Closing Ceremony, with a farewell speech.
18

By 10th Nevember 2013 the Congress Program, the Abstracts and the keynotes speeches videos
will be available at www.eugeo2013.com.
(Newsletter editor personal comment:
The really rich and articulated program went on smoothly, with perfect respect of timing, thanks
to the coordination of the Organising Committee, directed by Massimiliano Tabusi (EUGEO
Secretary General) and composed also by Filippo Celata, Sandra Leonardi, Marco Maggioli,
Fiippo Randelli, Alessandro Ricci, Andrea Riggio, Claudia Robiglio. An efficient group of morethan 50 other young volunteer helpers was a kind and valuable support for all the participants.
To be stressed that, thank to the unlimited fantasy of the Committee, if the key-note speakers had thesurprise of the musical-tram-excursion, the participants could enjoy an incredible and very unusual
selection of nice proposals: an Italian wines or foods tasting, in the renewed exibition building called
Eataly, and a choice of very unusual guided excursion, walking, biking, on the river and in underground
Rome (attention: I don’t mean the subway). The efficient group of volunteer helpers has been the outcomeof an initiative of this exceptional Organising Committee: one of the members, teacher in a Technical
School for Tourism, gathered all of her students, and the School recongnised this practical experience aspart of the compulsory apprenticeship).

Left: the highly appreciated Tram-jazz-band;right, the volunteers of the High School for Tourism.

The established athmosphere was so friendly that IGU President Vladimir Kolossov and VPGiuliano Bellezza had no worry at all to realize the wish of the Executive Committe (see IGU
Newsletter, NS 7, IGU ED Meeting draft report, Cooperations and Outreaches), that is an always
growing cooperative attitude of EUGEO and EUROGEO. Both Association were willing to co-19

operate during the 3 Sessions of the Geographical Education Commission, with the help of theConference Coordinator. Eventually, all has been formalised as follows:
The representatives of the Italian Association of Geography Teachers (AIIG), the Association of
Geographical Societies in Europe (EUGEO), the European Association of Geographers(EUROGEO) and the International Geographical Union (IGU), gathered for the congress session“Geography education’s challenges in response to changing geographies”. In this declaration, we
underline clearly and strongly that the teaching of Geography in schools is fundamental for the
future of Europe.

Rome Declaration on Geographical Education in Europe
IV EUGEO Congress 2013
Geographical education provides students with essential capabilities and competences needed toknow and understand the world. Responsible and effective uses of geographical information arevital for the future of Europe. Therefore, all European citizens need to understand how to deal
with it. Geographical education provides them with the knowledge and skills to do this. For
example, an appropriate use of geospatial data and technologies is necessary to help analyse andaddress problems related to water, climate, energy, sustainable development, natural hazards,
globalisation and urban growth. Most of these big issues also have a distinct European
dimension. Geography also deals with the daily living environment of citizens where issues suchas housing, employment, transportation, provision of services and green spaces are important.
These must all be addressed but in an integrated way, which only the study of Geography
provides. Geographical knowledge is indispensible for well informed citizens, successful
businessmen and policy makers.
The representatives of the Italian Association of Geography Teachers (AIIG), the Association of
Geographical Societies in Europe (EUGEO), the European Association of Geographers(EUROGEO) and the International Geographical Union (IGU), gathered for the congress session“Geography education’s challenges in response to changing geographies”. In this declaration, we
underline clearly and strongly that the teaching of Geography in schools is fundamental for the
future of Europe.
With this firm conviction, we are committed to take initiatives in the countries of Europe andwith the relevant European institutions to provide standards and guidelines that will help
authorities develop relevant syllabuses and school curricula, methods and approaches inGeography that: apply geographical knowledge, skills and understanding to the main issues linked withprocesses of change in society, nature and environment at local, national, European andglobal levels; and highlight the educational values and the role of geographical education in a changing
world.
We urge those responsible in European governments and educational systems:- to recognise the educational value afforded by the study of Geography as an essential
school subject; and- to acknowledge its strategic role for realising active citizenship and balanced social,economic and environmental development.
We therefore request that:- sufficient time for the teaching of Geography is allocated in curricula for primary andsecondary schools;20-

the teaching of Geography is limited to teachers with a qualified training in Geography andGeography Education.
Gino De Vecchis, President of the Italian Association of Geography Teachers (AIIG)
Karl Donert, President of the European Association of Geographers (EUROGEO)
Vladimir Kolossov, President of the International Geographic Union (IGU)
Henk Ottens, President of the Association of Geographical Societies in Europe (EUGEO)
Joop van der Schee, Co-chair of the Commission on Geographical Education of the International
Geographic Union (IGU-CGE).
Rome, September 5th 2013

The signatories, left to right: Henk Ottens, Joop Van der Schee,
Vladimir Kolossov, Karl Donert, Gino De Vecchis

3) CANADA DENIES IGU PRESIDENT VISAInternational Geographical Union President Vladimir Kolossov was denied a visa to enter Canada
to participate in the 10-12 October 2013 General Assembly of the International Social Science
Council (ISSC) in Montréal. Knowing that visa application processing was lengthy (six weeks),
Kolossov applied for the visa well in advance of his planned journey to Canada. In addition to thepayment of a nonrefundable application fee of €125.00, Kolossov was interviewed at the
Embassy after waiting outside in a lengthy queue for more than two hours.
Kolossov was informed on 2 September that his application was denied. The reason given by the
Embassy for the denial was an alleged lack of evidence that Kolossov would leave Canada at the21

end of his visit, a conclusion allegedly supported by his failure to provide evidence of
employment in Russia and of possessing financial resources sufficient for his expenses in
Canada. I have personally examined the papers Kolossov submitted with his application. They
include a document from the Russian Academy of Sciences (translated into French as required)certifying Kolossov’s employment and salary, and a letter from IGU Secretary General Michael
Meadows certifying that IGU would pay Kolossov’s expenses in Canada. The letter and reasons
for refusing the visa are wholly at odds with the contents of Kolossov’s application.
The IGU and the ISSC mounted a vigorous protest over the visa denial with the assistance andsupport of colleagues in Canada, some of whom enlisted the help of their respective members of
Parliament. The only response of the Canadian Foreign Service was to suggest that Kolossov reapply for the visa, a response that came much too late to be feasible, given the time needed toobtain a visa in Moscow. Hence the IGU was represented at the ISSC General Assembly byformer IGU Vice President Ruth Fincher, a member of the ISSC Executive Committee, the IGU
having withdrawn from the meeting in protest against the Canadian action. The ISSC General
Assembly passed a resolution protesting the denial of a visa for Kolossov that will be transmitted
to Canadian authorities and to other international scientific organizations.
The free exchange of scientists among countries of the world is a fundamental principle
subscribed to by all international scientific organizations, especially the ISSC and theInternational Council for Science (ICSU). The IGU has brought this egregious example of theviolation of that principle to the attention of the ICSU Committee on Freedom and Responsibility
in the conduct of Science (CRFS), in hopes that similar arbitrary and unreasonable denials of freescientific exchange will not recur. The case will also be widely publicized among other member
organizations of ICSU and ISSC.
The IGU is grateful for the energetic assistance of scientists in Canada and elsewhere inprotesting the denial of a visa to Kolossov, and especially the support of Professor Gordon
McBean of the University of Western Ontario, President-Elect of the International Council for
Science. We regret that their efforts appear to have had little or no effect on the Foreign Serviceof Canada, but their collegial solidarity in the cause of the open and free exchange of scientists
and of IGU President Kolossov is deeply appreciated.
Ronald F. Abler, Past President, IGU

4) INTERGOVERNAMENTAL PANEL ON CLIMATE CHANGE, 5TH REPORTIGU VP Qin Dahe is member of the Working Group I of the International Panel on Climate
Change, and as such he is one of the writers of the Group to the IPCC Fifth Assessment
22

Report. The whole Document, equipped with a set of figures, data, graph, tables and figures, isdownloadable from www.pcc.ch. Here is only a short sketch of the arguments dealed with.

Working Group I Contribution to the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report
Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis
Summary for Policymakers
A. Introduction
The Working Group I contribution to the IPCC's Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) considers new
evidence of climate change based on many independent scientific analyses from observations of
the climate system, paleoclimate archives, theoretical studies of climate processes andsimulations using climate models. It builds upon the Working Group I contribution to the IPCC’s
Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), and incorporates subsequent new findings of research. As acomponent of the fifth assessment cycle, the IPCC Special Report on Managing the Risks ofExtreme Events to Advance Climate Change Adaptation (SREX) is an important basis for
information on changing weather and climate extremes.
This Summary for Policymakers (SPM) follows the structure of the Working Group I report. The
narrative is supported by a series of overarching highlighted conclusions which, taken together,
provide a concise summary. Main sections are introduced with a brief paragraph in italics which
outlines the methodological basis of the assessment.
The degree of certainty in key findings in this assessment is based on the author teams’
evaluations of underlying scientific understanding and is expressed as a qualitative level ofconfidence (from very low to very high) and, when possible, probabilistically with a quantified
likelihood (from exceptionally unlikely to virtually certain). Confidence in the validity of afinding is based on the type, amount, quality, and consistency of evidence (e.g., data, mechanistic
understanding, theory, models, expert judgment) and the degree of agreement1. Probabilistic
estimates of quantified measures of uncertainty in a finding are based on statistical analysis ofobservations or model results, or both, and expert judgment2. Where appropriate, findings arealso formulated as statements of fact without using uncertainty qualifiers. (See Chapter 1 andBox TS.1 for more details about the specific language the IPCC uses to communicate
uncertainty).
The basis for substantive paragraphs in this Summary for Policymakers can be found in thechapter sections of the underlying report and in the Technical Summary. These references are
given in curly brackets.
B. Observed Changes in the Climate System
Observations of the climate system are based on direct measurements and remote sensing fromsatellites and other platforms. Global-scale observations from the instrumental era began in the
mid-19th century for temperature and other variables, with more comprehensive and diverse setsof observations available for the period 1950 onwards. Paleoclimate reconstructions extend somerecords back hundreds to millions of years. Together, they provide a comprehensive view of thevariability and long-term changes in the atmosphere, the ocean, the cryosphere, and the land
surface.
B.1 Athmosphere
B.2 Ocean
B.3 Cryosphere23

B.4 Sea Level
B.5 Carbon and Other Biogeochemical Cycles
C. Drivers of Climate Change
Natural and anthropogenic substances and processes that alter the Earth's energy budget are
drivers of climate change. Radiative forcing14 (RF) quantifies the change in energy fluxes ausedby changes in these drivers for 2011 relative to 1750, unless otherwise indicated. Positive RF
leads to surface warming, negative RF leads to surface cooling. RF is estimated based on in-situ
and remote observations, properties of greenhouse gases and aerosols, and calculations using
numerical models representing observed processes. Some emitted compounds affect theatmospheric concentration of other substances. The RF can be reported based on theconcentration changes of each substance15. Alternatively, the emission-based RF of a compound
can be reported, which provides a more direct link to human activities. It includes contributions
from all substances affected by that emission. The total anthropogenic RF of the two approaches
are identical when considering all drivers. Though both approaches are used in this Summary
emission-based RFs are emphasized.
D. Understanding the Climate System and its Recent Changes
Understanding recent changes in the climate system results from combining observations, studiesof feedback processes, and model simulations. Evaluation of the ability of climate models tosimulate recent changes requires consideration of the state of all modelled climate systemcomponents at the start of the simulation and the natural and anthropogenic forcing used to drive
the models. Compared to AR4, more detailed and longer observations and improved climate
models now enable the attribution of a human contribution to detected changes in more climate
system components.
D.1 Evaluation of Climate Models
D.2 Quantification of Climate System Responses
D.3 Detection and Attribution of Climate Change

E. Future Global and Regional Climate Change
Projections of changes in the climate system are made using a hierarchy of climate models
ranging from simple climate models, to models of intermediate complexity, to comprehensive
climate models, and Earth System Models. These models simulate changes based on a set of
scenarios of anthropogenic forcings. A new set of scenarios, the Representative Concentration
Pathways (RCPs), was used for the new climate model simulations carried out under theframework of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) of the World
Climate Research Programme. In all RCPs, atmospheric CO2 concentrations are higher in 2100
relative to present day as a result of a further increase of cumulative emissions of CO2 to theatmosphere during the 21st century (see Box SPM.1). Projections in this Summary for
Policymakers are for the end of the 21st century (2081–2100) given relative to 1986–2005, unlessotherwise stated. To place such projections in historical context, it is necessary to consider
observed changes between different periods. Based on the longest global surface temperaturedataset available, the observed change between the average of the period 1850–1900 and of theAR5 reference period is 0.61 [0.55 to 0.67] °C. However, warming has occurred beyond theaverage of the AR5 reference period. Hence this is not an estimate of historical warming topresent (see Chapter 2) .
24

E.1 Athmosphere: Temperature
E.2 Atmosphere: Water Cycle
E.3 Atmosphere: Air Quality
E.4 Ocean
E.5 Cryosphere
E.6 Sea Level
E.7 Carbon and Other Biogeochemical Cycles
E.8 Climate Stabilization, Climate Change Commitment and Irreversibility5) NEW SPRINGER SERIES ON GEOGRAPHICAL AND
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES(Communication from R.B. Singh, IGU VP)

Springer’s new book series editor R.B. Singh invites proposals from the IGU Commission Chair,
Chair of the IGU National Committees, geographers, environmental scientists and organisers of
the related international conference/seminars for negotiating a volume under Springer special
book series on Advances in Geographical and Environmental Sciences. The volume will consistof original contributions in the form of 20 to 25 selected papers covering different areas of thegeographical sciences and geography-environment interactive themes. The series aims at
synthesizing dynamic earth and human environment systems, emphasising challenging researchareas relating to land-ocean-atmosphere interactions. It will include Space-borne monitoring,
Land Use/ Land Cover Change (LUCC), problems concerning Urbanization and Megacities,
Climate and Environmental Change, Food Security, Ecohydrology, Forests and Biodiversity, andNatural Hazards and Disasters in order to contribute towards a sustainable future for the earth.
The contributions will range from traditional field techniques, conventional data collection, useof modern remote sensing & Geographical Information Systems to computer-aided techniques
and advanced geostatistical and dynamic modelling.
The series integrates attributes relating to the past, present and future of our environment, based
broadly on biophysical and human dimensions in spatio-temporal perspectives. In the context of a
rapidly changing global environment, the spaceborne monitoring and mitigation of natural
hazards and climate change impacts are considered to be a vital component, especially in theobservation and prediction of climate and water-induced disasters, global warming, urban risks
and human geoscience. Human geoscience also has the responsibility to not confine itself toaddressing current problems but to also develop a framework to address future issues. In order tocreate a 'Future Earth Model' for understanding and predicting the functioning of the climatic
system as a whole, collaboration of experts in the traditional earth disciplines as well as in
ecology, space technology, geoinformatics and human geoscience is essential, through initiatives
sparked by geographers and environmental scientists. It is important to communicate the25advances in geographical and environmental sciences to improve the resilience of society throughcapacity building to mitigate the impacts of natural and anthropogenic hazards and disasters. The
sustainability of human society depends heavily on the homeostatic earth environment, and thus
the development of geo-spatial technology is critical for a better understanding of our living
environment. As such, the outcomes of the series will promote key policy perspectives forcontributing towards sustainability/survivability science, together with future earth initiatives
around the world.
Volumes under Review:
 Livelihood Security in North-western Himalaya
 Climate Change and Biodiversity: Proceedings of IGU Rohtak Conference Vol.1
 Landscape Ecology and Water Management: Proceedings of IGU Rohtak Conference
Vol.2
 Urban Development Challenges, Risks and Resilience in Asian Mega Cities
SERIES EDITOR
R.B. Singh, Vice President, IGU
Head, Department of Geography, Delhi School of Economics,
University of Delhi, Delhi – 110007 (INDIA)(rbsgeo@hotmail.com / rbsgeo2@gmail.com)

6) FORTHCOMING EVENTS(more information in the Home of Geography website, Events 2013)
6.1) REGION-2013: OPTIMAL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY: INTERNATIONALCONFERENCE, KARKHIV, 7-8 NOVEMBER 20136,2) EAU: RESOURCE, RISQUE ET DÉVELOPMENT DURABLE, FÈS (MAROC) 27-28
NOVEMBER 20136.3) GLOBAL CONGRESS ON INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS AND GLOBAL CONGRESSON INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS HONG KONG, 3-4 DECEMBER
6.4) ISPRS-IGU-ICA WORKSHOP ON BORDERLANDS MODELING AND
UNDERSTANDING FOR GLOBAL SUSTAINABILITY, BEIJING, 5-6 DECEMBER
6.5) CISP-BMEI 2013, HANGZHOU 16-18 DECEMBER
6.6) 12TH INTERNATIONAL ASIAN URBANIZATION CONFERENCE, VARANASI, 2830 DECEMBER
6.7) L'INFORMATION GÉOGRAPHIQUE ET LE MONDE CHANGEANT, SFAX,FACULTÉ DE LETTRES, 27-28 JANVIER 201426