Interagency 

Arctic Research 

Policy Committee

2015 Biennial Report

IARPC envisions a prosperous, 

sustainable, and healthy Arctic 

understood through innovative 

and collaborative research 

coordinated among Federal 

agencies and domestic and 

international partners.
Interagency Arctic

Research Policy 

Committee

2015 BIENNIAL REPORT

Committee on Environment, 

Natural Resources, and Sustainability

National Science and Technology Council

DECEMBER 2015
About the National Science 

and Technology Council 

The National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) is the 

principal means by which the Executive branch coordinates 

science and technology policy across the diverse entities that 

make up the Federal research and development enterprise. A 

primary objective of the NSTC is establishing clear national 

goals for Federal science and technology investments. The 

NSTC prepares research and development strategies that 

are coordinated across Federal agencies to form investment 

packages aimed at accomplishing multiple national goals. 

The work of the NSTC is organized under five committees: 

Environment, Natural Resources and Sustainability; 

Homeland and National Security; Science, Technology, 

Engineering, and Math (STEM) Education; Science; 

and Technology. Each of these committees oversees 

subcommittees and working groups focused on different 

aspects of science and technology. More information is 

available at www.WhiteHouse.gov/administration/eop/ostp/

nstc

About the Office of 

Science and Technology Policy

The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) 

was established by the National Science and Technology 

Policy, Organization, and Priorities Act of 1976. OSTP’s 

responsibilities include advising the President in policy 

formulation and budget development on questions in which 

science and technology are important elements; articulating 

the President’s science and technology policy and programs; 

and fostering strong partnerships among Federal, State, 

and local governments, and the scientific communities in 

industry and academia. The Director of OSTP also serves as 

Assistant to the President for Science and Technology and 

manages the NSTC. More information is available at www.

WhiteHouse.gov/administration/eop/ostp

About the Interagency Arctic 

Research Policy Committee

The Arctic Research and Policy Act of 1984 (ARPA), Public 

Law 98-373, July 31, 1984, as amended by Public Law 101-

609, November 16, 1990, provides for a comprehensive 

national policy dealing with national research needs and 

objectives in the Arctic. The ARPA establishes an Arctic 

Research Commission (ARC) and an Interagency Arctic 

Research Policy Committee (IARPC) to help implement the 

Act. IARPC was formally created by Executive Order 12501. 

Its activities have been coordinated by the National Science 

Foundation (NSF), with the Director of the NSF as chair. 

On July 22, 2010, President Obama issued a Memorandum 

for the Director of OSTP making NSTC responsible for IARPC 

with the Director of the NSF remaining as chair of 

the committee. 

About this Document 

This report was developed by the IARPC Collaboration 

Teams as a summary of accomplishments since the release 

by the NSTC of the Arctic Research Plan: FY2013-2017. It 

is intended to inform the NSTC, Congress, and the public 

about progress in implementing the research plan. This 

report is published by OSTP.

Copyright Information 

This document is a work of the United States Government 

and is in the public domain (see 17 U.S.C. §105). Subject to 

the stipulations below, it may be distributed and copied with 

acknowledgment to OSTP. Copyrights to graphics included 

in this document are reserved by the original copyright 

holders or their assignees and are used here under the 

government’s license and by permission. Requests to use 

any images must be made to the provider identified in the 

image credits or to OSTP if no provider is identified. Printed 

in the United States of America, 2015.

Cover: A fishing boat passes in front of an iceberg calved from Jakobshavn Glacier, Ilulissat, Greenland (Photo: Nick Salava). Top Left: Anthropologist Stephen J. Langdon 

with George Ramos Sr., Tlingit elder and science project adviser, en route to visit traditional seal camp locations in Disenchantment Bay, neat Yakutat, Alaska. (Photo: 

Aron Crowell, Copyright 2011, Smithsonian Institution). Researchers prepare for an early spring snowmobile traverse (Photo: UMIAQ, LLC). The USCGC R/V HEALY works 

alongside the Canadian Coast Guard cutter Louis S. St-Laurent (Photo: USCG). Walruses near Svalbard Archipelago, Norway (Photo: Roy Stehle).

Blank, back of letter
Table of Contents

Section 1: Setting a Coordinated Research Agenda ..............................................................................1

Section 2: Addressing Scientific Challenges through Collaboration .............................................7

Section 3: Building Networks for Observing, Data, and Modeling ...............................................15

Section 4: Strategic Application Networks ..............................................................................................23

Section 5: Developing International Research Networks .................................................................27

Section 6: Looking Forward ...........................................................................................................................31

Acknowledgements

Simon Stephenson, Executive Director IARPC, defined 

the vision for this report and inspired the team’s efforts 

to communicate it. Brendan C. Kelly, Former Executive 

Director IARPC, provided guidance from 2010 to 2014. NSF 

Division of Polar Programs provided financial support for the 

development and printing of this report.

Sincere thanks are due to the IARPC team members for 

their contributions to enhancing interagency research 

collaborations and also to the IARPC team leads who helped 

focus the considerable energy produced by collaboration 

team activities. Named writers within this document 

generated and reviewed content.

Editorial team: Sara Bowden, Executive Secretary IARPC; 

Sandy Starkweather, Implementation Scientist IARPC; and 

Anjuli Bamzai, Program Director, Climate and Large-Scale 

Dynamics, Geosciences Directorate, NSF

Additional writing, editing and conceptual development: 

Penelope (Kip) Rithner

Graphic design: Stacie McMullen, Edge Design Studio, Inc., 

with contributions from Mark Lesh Design
Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee 2015 Biennial Report

I

n the 2 years since Dr. Holdren,1 Director of the White 

House Office of Science and Technology Policy, called 

for “strong, coordinated research efforts” in the Arctic, 

scientists have gained new understanding of rapid Arctic 

change—and of the “tremendous implications” thereof. 

The Arctic Report Card for 20142 describes significant 

1

 This plan was developed by the Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee, 

which reports to the NSTC Committee on Environment, Natural Resources, and 

Sustainability (CENRS), Office of Science and Technology Policy, Executive Office 

of the President. 

2

 “The Arctic Report Card: Update for 2014.” www.arctic.noaa.gov/reportcard

climate and environmental change in the Arctic: for 

example, increases in air and sea temperatures, with 

accompanying changes in sea ice cover. The report includes 

impacts to animals adapted to living in the polar habitat.

Implications for people living in the changing Arctic are, 

not surprisingly, significant. Some living south of the Arctic 

Circle may perceive the region as a beautiful and isolated 

place, a closed landscape with little impact on theirs. The 

distance allows the Arctic to become “like a snow globe 

on a shelf,” as Senator Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) offered in a 

IARPC: Setting a Coordinated 

Research Agenda

The Arctic environment is undergoing rapid transition as sea and land ice diminish, 

with tremendous implications for natural environments, human well-being, national 

security, transportation, and economic development. The United States and the other 

Arctic nations require strong, coordinated research efforts to understand and 

forecast changes in the Arctic.

—John P. Holdren, Letter to Congress presenting Arctic Research Plan: FY2013–20171

1

For centuries, Alaskans have navigated coastal waters in skin-covered boats called umiaqs, hunting for sea life. How is the warming Arctic 

changing marine ecosystems, and what impacts can be expected for Arctic communities that rely on these waters for sustenance? IARPC 

encourages research collaborations to advance Arctic knowledge. Better understanding may help people predict and prepare for the future. 

Photo: Faustine Bernadac
1: Setting a Coordinated Research Agenda

2 2015 Biennial Report Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee

recent article encouraging economic 

development for Arctic states.3

 But 

the scientific consensus suggests that 

the Arctic system is part of a global 

system—and so what happens in the 

Arctic impacts us all on time scales of 

days to decades (FIGURE 1).

Federal agencies providing national 

security, resource management, 

human services, and scientific 

discovery are challenged by the 

prevailing shift to a warmer, icediminished Arctic. They are galvanized 

by rapid environmental changes 

to accelerate the pace of research 

and knowledge growth through 

cooperation, data sharing, and the use 

of a variety of methods and tools. 

Promoting such cooperation is 

the aim of the Interagency Arctic 

Research Policy Committee, or 

IARPC. Congress created IARPC to 

3

 www.adn.com/article/20141119/lisa-murkowskialaska-must-lead-us-takes-arctic-councilchair

strategically enhance the effectiveness 

of Federal Arctic research efforts 

through interagency collaboration and 

cooperation with the state of Alaska 

and other relevant participants. IARPC 

is composed of principal members 

from 16 Federal agencies or offices4

working in the Arctic. Through 

meetings, webinars, workshops, and 

an interactive website, IARPC provides 

a forum to leverage resources and 

maximize research outcomes. 

IARPC helps the Federal 

Government coordinate a response to 

4 These agencies are: Office of Science and 

Technology Policy (OSTP), Department of Commerce 

(DOC), Department of Defense (DOD), Department 

of Energy (DOE), Department of Health and Human 

Services (HHS), Department of Homeland Security 

(DHS), Department of Interior (DOI), Department of 

State (DOS), Department of Transportation (DOT), 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Marine 

Mammal Commission (MMC), National Aeronautics 

and Space Administration (NASA), National Science 

Foundation (NSF, Chair), Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB), Smithsonian Institution (SI), and United 

States Department of Agriculture (USDA). United States 

Arctic Research Commission (USARC), ex-officio.

emerging opportunities in the Arctic. 

The United States chairmanship 

of the Arctic Council, lasting from 

May 2015 until April 2017, is one 

such opportunity. The Council was 

created in 1996 as a forum to promote 

cooperation and dialogue among the 

eight countries whose territories extend 

into the Arctic (Canada, Denmark [via 

Greenland], Finland, Iceland, Norway, 

Russia, Sweden, and the United States). 

The Arctic Council primarily focuses on 

fostering environmental stewardship 

and sustainable development. 

Chairmanship from 2015 to 2017 gives 

the United States a unique opportunity 

to shape the agenda and direction of 

the Arctic Council’s work. 

This biennial report describes 

how IARPC-enabled activities have 

addressed research ranging from 

coordinated field deployments to data 

sharing and interoperability. These 

activities generate knowledge that will 

inform key national priorities such 

as homeland security; energy, water, 

and food security; transportation 

infrastructure maintenance; and 

natural resources protection. 

This report presents current 

progress on implementing a crossagency Arctic research plan, developed 

by IARPC. The plan is informed by 

the 2013-2014 U.S. Arctic Research 

Commission’s5

 Goals Report,6 which 

focuses on the following goals: 

1. Observe, understand, and respond 

to environmental change

2. Improve Arctic people’s health

3. Understand natural resources

4. Advance civil infrastructure 

research

5. Assess indigenous languages, 

identities, and cultures

Published by the Office of Science and 

Technology Policy (OSTP) in February 

2013, IARPC’s Arctic Research Plan 

FY13-177

 describes a vigorous research 

agenda to understand the Arctic’s most 

vulnerable systems. 

5

 www.arctic.gov/index.html

6 www.arctic.gov/reports_goals.html

7

 www.WhiteHouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/

ostp/2013_arctic_research_plan.pdf

FIGURE 1

A GLOBAL SYSTEM 

Big temperature differences between the mid-latitudes and the Arctic keep a cold air current circling the 

North Pole in winter, locking cold air over the pole. Scientists are studying whether warming temperatures 

in the Arctic can weaken that stream, causing it to wobble and spill frigid air into lower latitudes, as 

indicated by dark blue and purple areas, above. Low temperature records in the United States during 

the winter of 2014—including over 50 such records on January 6 alone—may have been caused by the 

dipping jet stream. SOURCE: NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center
1: Setting a Coordinated Research Agenda

Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee 2015 Biennial Report 3

Who’s Participating in IARPC Implementation?

Collaboration 

Team

Participating U.S. Federal Agencies NonFederal

Partners DHS DOC DOD DOE DOI DOS DOT EPA HHS MMC NASA NSF OSTP SI USARC USDA

Arctic Communities 1 3 1 7 2 1 2 4 1 4 4 29

Arctic Data 7 4 1 14 1 6 3 1 2 2 15

1 7 3 2 11 2 3 1 1 Arctic Observing

Systems 29

Atmosphere 9 1 3 1 1 6 2 1 13

18 4 1 10 1 3 2 1 2 Chukchi & 

Beaufort Seas 15

9 5 5 1 4 2 1 2 Distributed 

Biological Observatory 14

Glaciers & Fjords 2 1 3 1 3 5 1 8

Human Health 6 1 1 2 1 7 2 2 1 1 12

Modeling 7 2 4 6 1 6 2 1 2 9

Sea Ice 1 16 7 2 3 3 3 1 19

1 1 3 11 5 2 1 Terrestrial 

Ecosystems 16

Wildfires 2 1 1 9 3 1 1 1 9

NON-LEAD AGENCY LEAD AGENCY

FIGURE 2

TEAM EFFORTS 

IARPC’s 12 collaboration teams focus on research areas identified in the 5-year plan that involve interinstitutional and interdisciplinary cooperation. To achieve the 

richest perspective available, IARPC welcomes diverse input from State, local, and tribal entities, as well as academia, nongovernmental institutions, and industry. 

Each collaboration team is headed by a Federal agency or agencies, which report(s) back to the IARPC on progress. Some teams (Chukchi & Beaufort, DBO, and 

Wildfires) are co-chaired with external parties. The number of people from each agency participating on a team are shown in the boxes. These numbers indicate 

participation as of January 2015; they change as collaboration teams gain new people. 
1: Setting a Coordinated Research Agenda

4 2015 Biennial Report Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee

The report focuses on seven 

research themes: sea ice and marine 

ecosystems; terrestrial ice and 

ecosystems; atmospheric studies 

of surface heat, energy, and mass 

balances; observing systems; regional 

climate models; adaptation tools for 

sustaining communities; and human 

health. Instead of describing all 

federally funded research in the Arctic, 

the IARPC plan includes efforts that 

benefit most from collaboration. In 

addition to describing urgent research 

needs, the plan specifies the network of 

agency activities that will support them. 

To assure rapid implementation, 

in 2013 IARPC created an association 

of 12 collaboration teams (FIGURE 2), 

each led by an IARPC member agency. 

In 2014, the teams opened to nonFederal partners such as universities 

and private agencies. This collaboration 

structure reflects the mandate of 

IARPC’s enabling legislation8 and 

provides a means for harnessing 

the talent of the broader scientific 

community. It creates a virtual public 

commons where a growing network of 

Federal funders, Federal researchers, and 

outside partners discover information, 

develop new research ideas, and build 

strategic alliances (FIGURE 3). 

These research efforts support 

IARPC’s vision of a prosperous, 

sustainable, and healthy Arctic 

understood through innovative and 

collaborative research coordinated 

among Federal agencies and domestic 

and international partners. They 

reflect our growing grasp of the vast 

network of activities and individuals 

with a stake in Arctic research. Thus, 

whether they are land managers, 

Alaska infrastructure planners, global 

environmental change researchers, 

8 “Arctic Research and Policy Act of 1984, as 

amended,” www.nsf.gov/geo/plr/arctic/iarpc/arc_

res_pol_act.jsp

indigenous hunters, or taxpayers, all 

Arctic stakeholders may find evidence 

in this report of the progress made 

by IARPC and its new collaboration 

structure.

With IARPC encouragement, scientists representing diverse disciplines collaborate on Arctic research. Photo: Stan Wullschleger

16

12

7

145

IARPC by the numbers

Federal agencies 

provide principal leaders 

Collaboration Teams 

focus on an area of 

study supporting...

major research themes 

milestones to organize 

Collaboration Team 

activities
Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee 2015 Biennial Report 5

1: Setting a Coordinated Research Agenda

Who’s Talking to Whom?

A Visualization of Federal Arctic Research Coordination

FIGURE 3

IARPC COLLABORATIONS

When IARPC Federal agencies team with knowledge leaders from Alaska, indigenous organizations, 

academic institutions, nongovernmental organizations, the Arctic Council, and international partners, 

results equal more than the sum of the parts. Synergies, connections, data exchange, and resource 

coordination: all of these help focus our efforts to advance understanding of the Arctic. Source: Sandy 

Starkweather, IARPC. Compiled from information contained on the IARPC Collaborations website as 

of November 2014.

Department 

of Defense

TK 

Participants

Environmental 

Protection Agency 

TK Participants

U.S. Arctic Research 

Commission

TK Participants

Office of Science and 

Technology Policy

TK Participants

Department of 

Agriculture

Department of Health 

and Human Services 

Department of 

Homeland Security 

(U.S. Coast Guard) 

Department 

of State 

Department of 

Transportation

Marine Mammal 

Commission

Smithsonian 

Institution

Office of Science and 

Technology Policy

Department 

of Defense

Department 

of Energy

U.S. Arctic Research 

Commission

National 

Aeronautics 

and Space 

Administration 

PARTICIPATION INTENSITY

1-4

5-8

9+ 

Environmental 

Protection Agency 

LOW MEDIUM

HIGH

SHARED TEAMS

National Science 

Foundation (chair)

Department of 

Commerce 

Department of 

Interior 
6 2015 Biennial Report Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee

Distinctly Innovative Ways of Doing Business, Not Business as Usual

The website is an experiment in new ways to “do” science, an effort 

to help funders and researchers work together across agencies, 

sectors and disciplines. Users can post their own content about IARPC 

collaboration team activities, as updates, documents, and events. Users 

also can comment on posts about the research being done, opening the 

conversation to new talent that may be missing on established email lists. 

IARPC Collaborations takes the best part of social media—the ability to connect people—and leverages it to:

•	 Let new people contribute to the conversation—unlike email or phone calls

•	 Help users keep the community updated—no waiting for the webmaster

•	 Provide access to information all in one place—go beyond Google!

•	 Keep people connected through contact information, user profiles, and topical groups

•	 Track progress on NSAR milestones

•	 Filter milestones by agency—see each agency’s work!

IARPC Collaborations: Join the conversation!

 IARPC Toolbox

IARPC Collaborations www.iarpccollaborations.org

In January 2015, President Obama issued an Executive Order*

establishing an Arctic Executive Steering Committee (AESC)

to augment Arctic policy coordination across the Federal

Government. OSTP Director John Holdren chairs the committee,

which includes Deputy Secretary or equivalent personnel with

Arctic interests from all quarters of the Federal Government.

This body provides cohesive guidance to Federal departments

and agencies, and it also seeks to enhance collaboration 

with State, local, and Alaska Native organizations and tribal

governments, academic and research institutions, and the 

private and nonprofit sectors. IARPC contributes to the AESC in

areas related to coordination of federally funded research in 

the Arctic. 

	 The AESC calls attention to the President’s priorities,

as described in the National Strategy for the Arctic Region

(NSAR):** advancing U.S. security interests; pursuing

responsible Arctic region stewardship; and strengthening

international cooperation. The importance of IARPC’s

efforts is recognized in the implementation plan for the

NSAR. The IARPC research plan is fully embedded in the

NSAR implementation plan, ensuring that IARPC efforts are

contributing to the overall Federal Arctic effort. A working

group reviewed ongoing Federal activities to identify possible

areas of overlap or gaps in implementation; this group’s

recommendations will help to maximize resource investments

(e.g., expert talent, dollars, and activities).

*

 “Executive Order: Enhancing Coordination of National Efforts in the Arctic.” The 

White House, Office of the Press Secretary. January 21, 2015, www.WhiteHouse.

gov/the-press-office/2015/01/21/executive-order-enhancing-coordinationnational-efforts-arctic

** National Strategy for the Arctic Region. Office of the President of the United 

States. May 2013, www.WhiteHouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/nat_arctic_

strategy.pdf

Arctic Executive Steering Committee

1: Setting a Coordinated Research Agenda

President Barack Obama visited Alaska, including areas north of the 

Arctic Circle, in late summer 2015. Photo: Jonathan Ernst/Reuters

IARPC’s Communication Tools Encourage Cooperation
Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee 2015 Biennial Report 7

2: Addressing Scientific 

Challenges through Collaboration

Understanding Sea 

Ice, Glacier-Ocean 

Interactions, and 

Marine Ecosystems 

Diminishing sea ice cover and increasing open water in 

the summertime Arctic Ocean raise questions about 

the region’s future—and the severity of global impacts. 

Some speculate that changes will bring more commercial 

activity in the Arctic: offshore oil and gas development, 

mining, shipping, fishing, and tourism.9

9 For more on potential increases in commercial activities in the Arctic, see:

Clement et al (2013). “Managing for the future in a rapidly changing Arctic. A 

report to the President.” Interagency Working Group on Coordination of Domestic 

For Arctic coastal community members whose 

traditional way of life depends on sea ice, changes present 

both challenges and opportunities. The rapid pace of 

environmental change has ramifications for homeland and 

national security, public policy, and decision-making at all 

levels of government.

In this section, efforts to address a number of scientific 

questions laid out in the 5-year plan are reported: a series of 

experiments in the Marginal Ice Zone (MIZ) north of Alaska; 

field investigations in Greenland to better understand marineterminating glaciers; and the launch of an IARPC-inspired 

Marine Arctic Ecosystem Study. These topics require large, 

coordinated efforts to examine complex components of 

the Arctic system (FIGURE 4). IARPC collaboration teams 

successfully contributed to research on these issues.

Energy Development and Permitting in Alaska (D. J. Hayes, Chair). www.doi.gov/

sites/doi.gov/files/migrated/news/upload/ArcticReport-03April2013PMsm.pdf

Scientists study melt-water channels ribboning Greenland’s ice cap as part of a broader effort to understand regional warming and the complex 

ways in which the Arctic is changing. IARPC’s collaboration teams help focus our efforts and resources to accelerate knowledge gain—and, 

ultimately, future preparedness. Photo: Sarah Das, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
2: Addressing Scientific Challenges through Collaboration

8 2015 Biennial Report Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee

The Arctic System

Understanding the connections between physical, biological, chemical, and human processes

plan describes urgent research needs2

and specifies the network of agency 

activities that will support that research. 

The National Science and 

Technology Committee3

 (NSTC) 

published IARPC’s most recent 5-Year 

Plan for Arctic Research FY13-17 in 

February 2013. The plan describes an 

aggressive research agenda targeted 

vulnerable systems and its greatest 

opportunities. To assure the rapid 

implementation of this plan, IARPC 

created an association of 12 topical 

teams to address more than 140 

milestones listed in the plan. In early 

2014, IARPC modified primarily 

Federal-agency-based teams to add 

nonFederal partners (ieuniversities

Arctic Research FY13

exciting and produc

has created a virtual 

where a growing ne

funders, Federal rese

outside partners disc

and build strategic a

Collaboration Teams

help Arctic research 

Section 1

FIGURE 4 

COMPLEX INTERACTIONS 

This schematic describes the Arctic system and demonstrates the interconnections among components. Important changes in one 

component may influence other parts of the system. To accurately predict how the Arctic system will evolve with a changing climate, 

the linkages and feedbacks among systems must be understood. IARPC coordinates activities of U.S. Federal agencies to maximize the 

science investment in progressing toward this goal. Source: Study of Environmental Change (IARC, 2014).
Marginal Ice Zone 

Research

Declining summer sea ice extent off 

the northern coast of Alaska is leading 

to the emergence of a full MIZ, an area 

where consolidated pack ice meets 

the open ocean and has increased 

exposure to waves and swells. The 

MIZ is a complex and dynamic region 

of interactions and feedbacks among 

the atmosphere, ice, ocean, and ocean 

surface waves that affect the rate of ice 

advance and retreat. 

Scientists must understand physical 

processes in the MIZ to explain the 

observed decline in sea ice extent and 

to improve sea ice prediction. This 

knowledge is critical for agencies 

operating in the maritime Arctic and for 

weighing potential risks and benefits of 

increased ship traffic in the region. 

The MIZ is an inherently challenging 

place to conduct traditional field work 

due to unstable ice, wave action, and 

poor weather. The IARPC Sea Ice Collaboration Team has coordinated multiagency sea ice research and technology 

demonstrations focused on the MIZ to 

increase knowledge, understanding, 

and predictive capabilities.

MIZOPEX

In the summers of 2012 and 2013, NASA 

and National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration (NOAA) researchers 

collaborated on a field program called 

The Marginal Ice Zone Observations 

and Processes Experiment (MIZOPEX). 

The main aim of the program was to 

evaluate unmanned aerial systems 

(UAS) or “drones” for science in the MIZ 

of the Beaufort Sea off the northern 

coast of Alaska. These systems have 

the potential to greatly expand 

observational capabilities in the MIZ, 

complementing in situ instruments 

and remote sensing from space.

Based from Oliktok Point, Alaska, 

the MIZOPEX team launched a variety 

of UAS, including a tiny drone that 

could land on a surface and collect 

ground-based information. Each 

UAS was equipped with instruments, 

including visible and infrared cameras 

and a lightweight synthetic aperture 

radar (SAR). These instruments 

collected information on sea ice 

surface topography, melt pond size 

and distributions, and ice floe size 

and number (FIGURE 5). The UAS was 

also outfitted to drop small buoys to 

measure salinity and temperature in the 

uppermost ocean layer. 

MIZOPEX demonstrated that UAS are 

a viable means to collect detailed data on 

multiple points of interest in an Arctic 

marine setting. This work also showed 

that pairing air-dropped instruments 

drifting in the ocean with high-resolution, 

repeated satellite coverage, is a powerful 

approach to investigating ice-ocean 

interactions in the dynamic MIZ.

ONR Marginal Ice Zone 

Departmental Research 

Initiative (MIZ DRI)

In 2014, the United States Department 

of the Navy’s Office of Naval Research 

(ONR) led a 6-month Beaufort Sea 

MIZ field study. The experiment was 

part of a multi-institution, multi-nation, 

5-year (2012-2016) investigation to 

improve understanding of the physics of 

atmosphere-ice-ocean-wave interactions 

and feedbacks in the summer MIZ. The 

research team also planned to develop 

and demonstrate new robotic networks 

Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee 2015 Biennial Report 9

2: Addressing Scientific Challenges through Collaboration

Ice reflects solar radiation, isolates water from wind currents, and calms waves, processes 

that can break up ice. MIZ research can help people make knowledge-based decisions to 

prepare (for example) for increased vessel traffic resulting from a more open ocean. Photo: 

US Fish & Wildlife Service 

FIGURE 5

SAR IMAGERY

Water (dark tone) and ice floes (lighter tones) are 

shown in the MIZ taken from a Sierra UAS during 

MIZOPEX. Source: Jim Maslanik, University of 

Colorado Boulder
for making observations in environments 

that present severe challenges for peoplecentric field investigations.

Operating from two small ice camps 

with fixed-wing aircraft and helicopter 

support in March 2014, the ONR team 

deployed an initial array of over 50 

autonomous instruments and platforms 

on, in, and under the multiyear pack ice 

of the eastern Beaufort Sea. The array 

included automatic weather stations; 

ice-mass-balance, wave and ocean-flux 

buoys; ice-tethered profilers; polarprofiling floats; and acoustic sources. The 

acoustic sources provided navigation and 

communication services for Seagliders 

and polar-profiling floats deployed in July. 

The initial array was supplemented 

during two summer field operations. In 

late July, scientists deployed Seagliders, 

Wavegliders, and a moored wave buoy 

and free-drifting wave floats from a 

small research vessel, the Ukpik, out 

of Prudhoe Bay. Then, in mid-August, 

an international collaboration with the 

Korea Polar Research Institute (KOPRI) 

allowed the deployment of additional 

weather stations, ice mass balance and 

wave buoys, and an ice-tethered profiler 

from the R/V Araon. An early result of 

this project was the discovery of an 

underwater acoustic channel between 

50 m and 200 m below the ice in which 

acoustic signals travelled as much as 

500 km to serve the Seagliders and Polar 

Profiling Floats and provided underwater 

positioning accuracy of 100 m. This has 

exciting implications for future sustained 

autonomous observing under the Arctic 

pack ice.

As the ice-based instrument array 

(FIGURE 6) drifted westward through 

the Beaufort Sea, it was imaged 

regularly from space by SAR10 and, in an 

unprecedented Arctic collaboration with 

the intelligence community, by National 

Technical Means (NTM).11 Scientists

10 The ONR array was seen by RADARSAT-2 and 

TerraSAR-X.

11 Declassified visible band NTM images are publicly 

available at the United States Geological Survey 

(USGS) Global Fiducials Library www.gfl.usgs.gov

2: Addressing Scientific Challenges through Collaboration

10 2015 Biennial Report Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee

A wave buoy sits on the sea ice. It was deployed from the R/V Araon (in the background) 

of the Korea Polar Research Institute (KOPRI). Photo: Martin Doble (Villefranche 

Oceanographic Laboratory, France) 

studying the SAR data and the 2014 NTM 

high-resolution, electro-optical image 

collections are measuring ocean surface 

waves, ice floe size, melt pond size and 

number, and ice fractures. 

Additional campaigns

NASA’s Operation IceBridge and the 

European Space Agency’s CryoVEX 

projects placed scientists on the ice 

in March 2014 to take advantage of 

the ONR MIZ camps in the eastern 

Beaufort Sea. The scientists measured 

snow depth and ice thickness in situ, 

while aircraft overhead measured the 

same properties remotely. The data will 

improve algorithms for deriving sea ice 

information from instruments aboard 

the CryoSat-2 and ICESat-2 satellites. 

NASA’s Operation IceBridge also sped 

up its data delivery by developing a 

quick-look snow depth and ice thickness 

product available as soon as possible 

after data collection from the National 

Snow and Ice Data Center. Such 

rapid data access allows the research 

community to assess the response

of the pack ice to the 2014 summer 

minimum extent and to project pack ice 

behavior as it retreats in the upcoming 

summer. The experiment will improve 

computer models simulating ice 

advance, retreat, extent and volume.

NASA returned to the Beaufort and 

Chukchi seas in September 2014 when 

the ARISE (Arctic Radiation and IceBridge 

Sea and Ice Experiment) project flew a 

C-130 to investigate Arctic sea ice change 

and cloud radiative properties. ARISE 

will improve our understanding of the 

regional energy budget (i.e., how much 

energy is received from the Sun, and how 

much is reflected and radiated back into 

space). An October NOAA/ONR project 

used a P-3 research aircraft to investigate 

the impact of the advancing pack ice 

on ocean-to-atmosphere heat transfer, 

atmospheric temperature and pressure 

fields, and atmospheric circulation. The 

2014 campaign repeated measurements 

made in the same region the previous fall. 
Greenland Ice 

Sheet Studies

Global sea level is rising due to the 

expansion of ocean water as it warms, and 

the melting of mountain glaciers and ice 

sheets.12 Sea level rise has consequences 

for the 123 million people in the United 

States who dwell along the coasts, and for 

many more coastal residents around the 

globe. Should some sea-level predictions 

bear out, many Americans may be 

displaced or subject to increasing stormrelated flooding and other associated 

problems. In addition, the release of 

freshwater into the Arctic Ocean and 

subarctic seas due to glacier and ice sheet 

melting will impact ocean circulation and 

climate.

To prepare for this future, scientists 

need to understand the processes by 

which ice is lost, and also how much is 

being lost, from the Greenland Ice Sheet 

and Arctic glaciers. DOE, NASA, and 

NSF are supporting research projects, 

field campaigns, satellite missions, and 

modeling to answer these questions and 

improve estimates of current and future 

contributions from Arctic land ice to sea 

level rise. A key uncertainty is the fate of 

12 NOAA’s State of the Coast. www.stateofthecoast.

noaa.gov

marine-terminating Arctic outlet glaciers 

that transport ice from land to the ocean. 

The processes controlling ice transport 

at the ice sheet margins are poorly 

understood and are not well represented 

in current climate models13 (FIGURE 7). 

IARPC’s Glacier-Fjord Collaboration 

Team (GFCT) was formed in 2012 by 

members14 already engaged in efforts to 

coordinate Greenland Ice Sheet research 

via US CLIVAR (United States Climate 

Variability and Predictability Program), a 

Federal interagency effort to coordinate 

U.S. research on global climate variability 

and predictability. 

The US CLIVAR Working Group on 

Greenland Ice Sheet Ocean Interactions 

(GRISO) published recommendations in 

2012 that highlighted the need for research 

on glacier/ocean interactions and became 

a touchstone for the IARPC team’s efforts. 

A key international workshop was held 

in June 2013 in Beverly, MA involving 90 

stakeholders, including 47 U.S. scientists, 

13 Stocker et al. (eds.). Climate Change 2013: The 

Physical Science Basis: Contribution of Working 

Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the 

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 

Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United 

Kingdom and New York, NY, USA 1535 pp, doi: 

10.1017/CBO9781107415324

14 Four IARPC agencies also participate in U.S. 

CLIVAR: DOE, NASA, NOAA, and NSF.

3 Federal agency program officers, and 

40 international experts from 10 different 

countries. The workshop identified ways 

to reduce uncertainties in the ice/ocean/

atmosphere interactions influencing 

the evolution of the Greenland ice sheet, 

including observational, synthesis, and 

modeling strategies; communication, 

coordination, and collaboration between 

diverse communities (e.g., oceanography, 

geology, glaciology, climatology, and 

paleoclimatology); synergies between 

national and international projects; and 

capacity-building with specific focus on 

advanced graduate students and early 

career scientists. Attendees discussed 

plans for a long-term Greenland observing 

system.15 The workshop resulted in one 

funded research project and detailed 

planning for future projects, including 

a meeting in Europe for logistics in 

September, 2014. 

15 Heimbach et al. (eds.). International Workshop on 

Understanding the Response of Greenland’s Marineterminating Glaciers to Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Forcing: Challenges to Improving Observations, 

Process Understanding and Modeling. Report 2014-1, 

US CLIVAR Project. doi: 10.1017/CBO9781107415324. 

www.usclivar.org/sites/default/files/documents/2014/

2013GRISOWorkshopReport_v2_0.pdf

Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee 2015 Biennial Report 11

2: Addressing Scientific Challenges through Collaboration

FIGURE 6

MARGINAL ICE ZONE SENSORS 

This illustration depicts sensors installed in the Marginal 

Ice Zone of the Arctic Ocean. By the end of summer 2014 

the ONR marginal ice zone observing array, consisting of 

almost 100 autonomous instruments and platforms, was 

demonstrating the value of robotic technology for scientific 

investigation of complex processes in a challenging 

environment. Credit: UW Applied Physics Laboratory
Chukchi and 

Beaufort Sea Studies 

As IARPC developed its 5-year research 

plan, members identified the Chukchi 

Sea and Beaufort Sea ecosystems as 

areas of critical importance to U.S. 

national interests that would benefit from 

coordinated, interagency collaboration 

in association with non-Federal entities. 

IARPC’s Chukchi-Beaufort Ecosystem 

Collaboration Team (CBCT) tackled this 

complex issue. 

The Chukchi and Beaufort Seas border 

Alaska’s northwestern and northern coasts 

and comprise the United States’ Arctic 

Ocean holdings. They are biologically 

productive and diverse, as well as important 

to U.S. national security and economic 

interests for oil, and potentially to U.S. 

mineral and commercial fishing. These 

waters represent a vital component of 

traditional life for Alaskan communities 

(e.g., as a source of nutritional, cultural and 

spiritual sustenance). 

Conceptual Development

The CBCT started by organizing a 

workshop16 that involved international 

experts from academia, industry, and 

traditional communities in activities 

aimed at assessing the state of knowledge. 

The CBCT viewed the activity as a first 

step in studying how the Chukchi and 

Beaufort ecosystems may respond to 

climate change. 

To this end, the CBCT encouraged 

development of a “framework document17” to foster and guide the scientific 

collaboration needed to achieve a common 

understanding of the U.S. Arctic marine 

ecosystem and its likely changes in coming 

decades. The CBCT developed a conceptual model that described the physical, 

biological, chemical and human aspects of 

16 “Developing a Conceptual Model of the Arctic 

Marine Ecosystem. April 30 – May 2, 2013, 

Washington, DC.” www.nprb.org/news/detail/arcticconceptual-model-workshop-report-available 

17 www.iarpccollaborations.org/uploads/cms/

documents/framing_arctic_marine_research_

initiatives_report_p2b_lowres.pdf

the Arctic marine ecosystem. 

The framework document brings 

together the thinking of academic and 

industry leaders, indigenous communities, 

conservation organizations, and government scientists to describe an intellectual and organizational approach to the 

research.

The document provides examples of 

ongoing and new affiliations, highlighting their different scopes, approaches and 

durations. It is aligned with several national 

plans, such as the National Ocean PolicyImplementation Plan18 and the Implementation Plan for the National Strategy for the 

Arctic Region.

19 

18 www.WhiteHouse.gov/administration/eop/oceans/

policy

19 www.WhiteHouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/

nat_arctic_strategy.pdf

2: Addressing Scientific Challenges through Collaboration

12 2015 Biennial Report Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee

FIGURE 7 

GLACIER MODELS 

Glaciers that end in the ocean deliver 

both runoff (as do land-terminating 

glaciers) and solid ice, which later melts, 

to the ocean. Greenland has many 

such glaciers—and they are melting 

at accelerated rates. IARPC’s GFC 

team coordinates efforts to accelerate 

our understanding of marineterminating glaciers, a significant area 

of uncertainty for those predicting 

sea-level rise. Source: Straneo et al. 

(2013): “Challenges to Understanding 

the Dynamic Response of Greenland’s 

Marine Terminating Glaciers to Oceanic 

and Atmospheric Forcing.” Bull. Amer. 

Meteor. Soc., 4, 1131–1144. doi: 10.1175/

bams-d-12-00100.1
Marine Arctic 

Ecosystem Study

The Marine Arctic Ecosystem Study is led 

by Bureau of Ocean Energy Management 

(BOEM). MARES scientists aim to identify 

areas of increased productivity and different 

ecosystem dynamics (e.g., inner shelf 

versus outer shelf), and provide a better 

understanding of intra- and intersystem 

feedbacks, an important goal noted in 

IARPC’s 5-year research plan. The CBCT 

provided coordination, ensuring that the 

MARES request for proposals supported 

the high level of integration, cooperation, 

and flexibility required for this complex 

undertaking. 

Once the MARES organizers released 

a request for proposals in mid-June 2014, 

the team moved swiftly and announced an 

award in November. The compressed 

timeline demonstrates the effectiveness 

of the CBCT in coordinating interagency 

activity and illustrates IARPC’s commitment 

to accelerate understanding of the Arctic 

marine environment (FIGURE 8). 

MARES is relevant to the missions 

of many of the IARPC agencies and 

to our National priorities because it 

addresses energy security, climate 

change and monitoring, oil spill risk 

analysis, fundamental scientific questions 

on ecosystem structure and function, 

environmental protection, and exploration 

and discovery. 

Contributing writers: Guillermo Auad, 

Danielle Dickson, Martin Jeffries, 

Bill Wiseman

Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee 2015 Biennial Report 13

2: Addressing Scientific Challenges through Collaboration

NASA-funded researchers collect information on atmospheric, glaciological, and ocean 

processes. To understand how an outlet glacier interacts with the fjord into which it 

terminates, team place global positioning instruments up on the ice sheet for information 

about the glacier’s movement (top panel); install instruments (e.g., the solar-powered tide 

gauge near the glacier’s face) to record information about calving events (middle panel); 

and collect water samples in the fjord as they drift by a melting iceberg (bottom panel). 

Photos: 1&2: Lauren Andrews, UTIG Photo 3: Dustin Carroll, University of Oregon

Collaboration Team Meetings

Through Collaboration Teams, IARPC 

has enabled the engagement of the 

research community, as well as 

leveraged Federal investments through

assocations that maximize scientific

outcomes. Collaboration Teams meet 

regularly to discuss progress towards 

milestones that support the goals 

identified in IARPC’s 5-year plan. Most

meetings are open to the Arctic research 

community. 

 IARPC Toolbox
2: Exploring Scientific Challenges

14 2015 Biennial Report Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee

MARES

An Integrated-Science Approach

A R C T I C 

OCEAN

Beaufort Sea

Mackenzie Bay 

ALASKA YUKON

TERRITORY

NORTHWEST

TERRITORIES

B A N K S 

ISLAND

P R U D H O E 

BAY

BARROW

150 km

Leading up to 2011: 

•	Consideration 

of common and 

complementary 

information needs 

and National 

policies 

2011-2013: 

•	Conceptual 

framework developed

•	 Identify opportunities: 

Integration starts

•	Planning & alignment 

of common 

objectives

2014: 

•	 Identify MARES 

implementation team

•	 Identify procurement vehicle 

•	 Issue request for proposal 

(June)

•	Proposal review panels 

(August/September)

•	 Single award to contractor

2015: 

•	Begin science program

•	Task 1: Determine next 

steps meeting

•	Task 2: Marine tagging 

pilot program

2016 – 2019: 

•	Continue science program

•	 Science review board feedback

•	MARES colleagues feedback

•	Participants jointly develop 

subsequent task orders based on 

current state of knowledge; then 

they negotiate with input from 

MARES contractor

•	Tasks: TBD

2019

•	Results

•	 Identify next 

steps

BIOLOGICAL

Ecosystem structure 

and functioning, 

emerging hotspots, 

resilience and 

sensitivities, ice algae 

studies

PHYSICAL

Circulation, sea 

ice and snow, 

river runoff and 

external drivers

SOCIAL

Subsistence,

traditional 

environmental 

knowledge

CHEMICAL

Ocean 

acidification, 

biogeochemical 

impact of 

Mackenzie River 

Plume

INTEGRATED PERSPECTIVE OF THE 

OCEANIC-ATMOSPHERIC-SEA ICE-LAND 

SYSTEM FEEDBACKS

THE COMMON OBJECTIVE

FIGURE 8 

ACCELERATING RESEARCH 

THROUGH COOPERATION

The Marine Arctic Ecosystem Study 

was organized and championed by 

IARPC because the subject area is:

• Vast – involving most U.S. Arctic 

Ocean holdings north of Alaska

• Complex – involving land, 

ocean, atmosphere, ice, animals, 

traditional communities

• Important – to tribal, Alaska, U.S., 

and international interests

• Precious – one of the most 

biologically diverse and 

productive regions in the world

• Changing – disappearing sea 

ice, changing ecosystems bring 

opportunities and risks

• Difficult – a remote and fragile 

region with little infrastructure, 

dangerous ice cover, changing 

ecosystems that are difficult to 

study without impact

MARES agencies developed the 

science plan using concepts from a 

framework document established by 

the IARPC collaboration team. Refer 

to “The Common Objective” (see 

right). They also defined the process 

by which they would continue to 

advance group goals using a single 

contractor to conduct the work. 

Refer to “Getting it Done: Partnership 

Decision Model” (see below).

G E T T I N G I T D O N E : 

P A R T N E R S H I P D E C I S I O N M O D E L 

PARTNERS + 

CURRENT STATE OF 

KNOWLEDGE = 

 DRAFT TASK 

 PARTNERS NEGOTIATE 

 WITH SUPPORT 

 CONTRACTOR ON TASK 

(WHEN, WHERE, 

 HOW, ETC.)

 AGREEABLE 

 TASK 

The MARES study area
Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee 2015 Biennial Report 15

3: Building Networks for 

Observing, Data, and Modeling

IARPC’s cross-cutting 

efforts promote data 

integrity, exchange, 

and accelerated 

knowledge gain.

The activities within IARPC’s Plan for Arctic Research 

(FY 2013-2017) encourage research integration—that 

is, efforts that cut across science from different fields 

(e.g., atmospheric science, terrestrial ecology, social science); 

geographic contexts (e.g., single field sites to pan-Arctic studies); 

and/or tools and practices (e.g., modeling, field observations, 

satellite observations, physical process studies). Such efforts 

merge what often might be isolated efforts.

There is a need to integrate diverse contributions. IARPC’s 

collaboration teams have focused on enhancing tools that allow 

agencies to combine complementary observing, data collection, 

and modeling efforts. 

In most cases, IARPC collaboration teams build on and 

broaden participation in existing integration efforts, rather than 

create new ones. This section describes IARPC contributions 

to an atmosphere observing portal, an Alaska-focused data 

collaboration, the Sea Ice Prediction Network, and ways to assess 

and access information needed by people living in the Arctic and 

other stakeholders.

The aurora borealis rises over Summit Station on the peak of Greenland’s ice cap. Sponsored by the NSF, Summit is home to year-round, 

long-term measurements for monitoring and investigations of the Arctic environment. In addition to NSF studies, NOAA maintains a suite of 

measurements, as do European collaborators. Photo: Ed Stockard, Blue Marble Photography
3: Building Networks for Observing, Data, and Modeling

16 2015 Biennial Report Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee

Piecing Together 

Atmosphere Studies

DOE, NASA, NOAA, NSF, and many 

international groups collect long-term 

atmospheric observations in the Arctic. 

To advance Arctic atmospheric science, 

researchers must combine all these data 

to test models, establish climatologies, and 

detect change. Automated data discovery 

is critically needed but is impeded by the 

many incompatible standards used for 

describing and archiving data.

IARPC’s Atmosphere Collaboration 

Team (ACT) tackled this challenge by 

encouraging agency participation in 

the International Arctic Systems for 

Observing the Atmosphere (IASOA) data 

portal funded by NOAA and NSF. The 

IASOA portal provides access to metadata 

from a consortium of 10 independently 

funded Arctic atmospheric observatories 

(FIGURE 9). 

 Most IASOA observatories are already 

active participants in global networks with 

robust data management capabilities, 

such as Global Atmosphere Watch and 

the Baseline Surface Radiation Network.20 

IASOA observatories also are funded and 

maintained by sponsor agencies with 

their own long-term repositories. 

Automated data discovery, or 

harvesting, hits roadblocks when 

repositories use incompatible metadata 

formats and keyword vocabularies. IASOA 

worked across global, institutional, and 

project-level repositories to identify and 

20 www.wmo.int/gaw; www.bsrn.awi.de/

IARPC Aids Data-Sharing Among Atmosphere Observatories

Modifying an existing data-access portal improves access for all

ALERT

BARROW

EUREKA

STATION NORD

SUMMIT

NY-ALESUND

PALLAS

SODANKYLÄ

TIKSI

CHERSKII

 BARROW, ALASKA 

 CHERSKII, RUSSIA 

 TIKSI, RUSSIA 

STATION NORD, 

 GREENLAND 

NY-ALESUND, 

 SVALBARD 

 SUMMIT, GREENLAND 

 EUREKA, CANADA 

 ALERT, CANADA PALLAS-SODANKYLÄ, 

RUSSIA 

FIGURE 9 

COMPATIBLE METADATA

As an important step toward scientific collaboration, 

the International Arctic Systems for Observing the 

Atmosphere (IASOA) portal stored information 

about data sets collected by 10 independent Arctic 

atmosphere observatories. But each collection 

had its own identifying information—metadata—

which hampered access and use by others. 

IARPC collaboration team efforts to standardize 

metadata improved access and usability. Further, an 

innovative process developed through the IARPC 

collaboration automates the way information on 

additional data sets is collected, facilitating future 

“crowd-sourced” data collection.
Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee 2015 Biennial Report 17

3: Building Networks for Observing, Data, and Modeling

integrate common descriptors into its data 

harvesting process. A metadata design 

based on the International Standards 

Organization format, ISO-19115, was 

adopted. This was already in use by most 

global networks, though U.S. agencies had 

yet to migrate. 

The IARPC ACT helped IASOA clear 

the roadblocks. NSF funded the initial 

concept design and development of 

IASOA’s data portal. NOAA developed an 

authoring tool for ISO-19115 metadata, 

identifying compatible keyword 

vocabularies and creating 150 structured 

metadata records for its observations. 

DOE’s Atmospheric Radiation 

Measurement (ARM) program and the 

NSF-funded Advanced Cooperative Arctic 

Data and Information Service (ACADIS) 

translated existing metadata into the ISO19115 format. IASOA rapidly assembled 

metadata for nearly 1000 datasets,21 an 

accomplishment that benefits the entire 

Arctic atmospheric science community. 

Alaska Data Integration 

Working Group 

IARPC’s Terrestrial Ecosystems 

Collaboration Team (TECT) adopted an 

existing process that Alaskan managers 

have developed to share metadata for 

information related to Federal research 

activities within the state of Alaska. 

The Alaska Data Integration 

Workgroup22 (ADIwg) was created to 

allow program and project managers 

from participating groups23 to share 

information about their funded activities 

in standard format.

Enabling discussions on project 

tracking and metadata across multiple 

agencies, ADIwg allows participants 

to examine and address technical barriers 

to efficient integration and sharing of data 

within and among member organizations. 

ADIwg then developed a set of dynamic 

tools for data-sharing as well. 

With IARPC’s help, ADIwg developed 

tools to expand the exchange of project 

21 www.esrl.noaa.gov/psd/iasoa

22 www.aoos.org/adiwg

23 North Slope Science Initiative Oversight Group 

(NSSI); Alaska Ocean Observing System Board 

(AOOS); North Pacific Research Board (NPRB); Alaska 

Climate Change Executive Roundtable (ACCER)

and data information throughout 

Alaska. These include broader sharing of 

information on research projects across 

multiple agencies using standardized 

protocols. Like IASOA, ADIwg identified 

ISO 19115-2 International Standard 

for Geospatial Data (2009) to facilitate 

metadata exchange with local and 

international colleagues, to conform 

to metadata trends, and to allow for a 

broader participation from the ADIwg 

organizations 

ADIwg recently developed a set of flexible, open-source tools allowing organizations to generate ISO metadata without 

having to learn the ISO standard. These 

tools will support additional metadata 

standards in the future, such as that of 

the Federal Geographic Data Committee. 

Another tool allows independent researchers to create ISO metadata themselves, 

reducing the delay associated with making 

data broadly available.

Several IARPC collaboration teams, 

including the Arctic Data Collaboration 

Team, adopted ADIwg tools to help 

increase agency involvement in their use.

Coordinating 

Ecosystem Science 

Understanding Arctic ecosystems 

and how they are changing is a 

multidisciplinary challenge involving 

biology, geology, anthropology, chemistry, 

hydrology, and other disciplines. 

Collaboration among agencies leverages 

knowledge, expertise, and capabilities 

and distributes the costs of ecosystem 

research. This is particularly important 

in the Arctic given the logistical difficulty 

and expense of working in remote 

locations. IARPC enables a coordinated 

Federal investment to improve predictive 

understanding of Arctic ecosystems.

Recognizing the need for improved 

coordination, DOE and NASA used the 

IARPC network to exchange information 

and to identify other Federal offices (e.g., 

DOI, USDA, and USGS) with a stake in 

terrestrial ecosystem science. Agencies 

worked together through IARPC to 

coordinate programs such as NASA’s 

Carbon in Arctic Reservoirs Vulnerability 

Experiment (CARVE),24 Arctic-Boreal 

Vulnerability Experiment (ABoVE),25 

and DOE’s Next-Generation Ecosystem 

Experiment-Arctic (NGEE-Arctic).26

NASA’s CARVE and ABoVE programs 

are large-scale activities to study 

ecosystem responses to environmental 

change. CARVE is an airborne campaign 

to collect and quantify greenhouse 

gases in the Alaskan Arctic using new 

remote sensing and improved modeling 

capabilities. CARVE coordinates closely 

with NGEE-Arctic and other Federal 

research activities so that the airborne 

data can be compared with ground-based 

measurements. ABoVE will utilize NASA’s 

field, aircraft, and satellite remote-sensing 

capabilities, coupled with in situ activities, 

to study the vulnerability and resilience of 

ecosystems and society to environmental 

change in the Arctic. An emerging 

NASA campaign that integrates field and 

airborne activities will be carried out over 

an 8-to 10-year period. The initial ABoVE 

science team will be selected in 2015, and 

ABoVE solicitations will emphasize field and 

process understanding of ecosystem and 

societal vulnerabilities to environmental 

change. Airborne campaigns are 

envisioned in 2017 and 2019. 

24 www.science.jpl.nasa.gov/projects/CARVE

25 www.above.nasa.gov

26 www.ngee-arctic.ornl.gov

Launching an instrumented balloon to 

collect weather information. Photo: Kevin 

Hammonds
18 2015 Biennial Report Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee

NGEE-Arctic engages DOE’s modeling 

capabilities to help scientists explore the 

future of permafrost carbon in a warming 

Arctic. NGEE-Arctic combines field and 

laboratory process research to improve 

the representation of ecosystem processes 

in Earth system models. Now completing 

its third year of operation, NGEE-Arctic 

expects to extend for a decade and bring 

unprecedented insights to how climate 

change affects permafrost landscapes—

and how permafrost landscape changes 

are in turn affecting climate (FIGURE 11).

ABoVE will leverage the DOE 

investment in NGEE-Arctic’s Barrow 

location and use DOE’s Earth system 

modeling capabilities, using ABoVE sites 

as test beds for testing NGEE-Arctic’s 

improved representations of Arctic 

ecological processes in Earth system 

models. NGEE-Arctic scientists joined 

the ABoVE Science Definition Team and 

helped develop a science plan synergistic 

with NGEE-Arctic. 

Sea Ice 

Prediction Network

Forecasts of increased economic activity 

in the Arctic are based on recent declines 

and future projections of sea ice extent. 

But sea ice extent varies significantly year 

to year, and model simulations do not 

match recent observations well. There is 

high uncertainty about the future state 

of the sea ice cover, stemming from 

the challenge of modelling complex 

interactions and feedbacks in the 

atmosphere-ice-ocean-waves system. 

Sea ice prediction is needed by a broad 

spectrum of users (e.g., Federal policy 

makers, community leaders, wildlife 

managers, hunters, etc.) for planning 

support and policy-making. Improved 

predictive skill is required on time scales 

ranging from hours to decades, and 

on spatial scales ranging from local to 

regional. How can scientists improve 

predictions to meet these growing and 

varied needs?

The Sea Ice Prediction Network (SIPN) 

is a response to this challenge. Initiated 

in 2013 by IARPC’s Sea Ice Collaboration 

Team and funded by DOE, NASA, NOAA, 

NSF, and ONR, SIPN focuses on seasonal 

prediction. This is particularly challenging 

due to high variability in weather and 

ocean influences, limited instrumental 

observations, current model limitations, 

and an Arctic that is changing in ways 

unseen in recent history (FIGURE 10). 

SIPN organized an open meeting at a 

December 2013, American Geophysical 

Union conference in San Francisco to 

engage the broader research community. 

Attended by 40 people, the meeting 

contributed to a doubling of inputs to the 

2014 SEARCH27 Sea Ice Outlook (SIO).

In April 2014, SIPN organized its first 

workshop, hosted by the National Center 

for Atmospheric Research28 in Boulder, 

Colorado. The meeting planned for 

the 2014 SEARCH Sea Ice Outlook and 

advanced the science of sea ice prediction 

by coordinating model experiments; 

developing data sets for model initialization 

and validation; and improving metrics for 

evaluating model skill.

In June 2014, the National Snow 

and Ice Data Center released a new 

compilation of Arctic Ocean sea ice data 

sets. This valuable product offers scientists 

undertaking sea ice predictions easy access 

to the same data sets, enabling meaningful 

model intercomparisons and evaluations.

A busy year for SIPN culminated in a 

27 SEARCH is the Study of Environmental Arctic 

Change. www.arcus.org/search-program

28 www.ncar.ucar.edu

session at the December 2014 AGU Fall 

Meeting. The session, “Polar Climate: 

Processes and Predictability,” addressed 

the processes that govern seasonal to 

multi-decadal polar climate variability; 

sources of polar climate predictability; 

uncertainty in polar climate prediction; 

model errors related to polar predictability; 

reanalysis data; and links between polar 

climate predictability and mid-latitude 

phenomena (e.g., Arctic amplification of 

climate change and its impact on the polar 

vortex and mid-latitude weather extremes). 

SIPN leverages a decade of 

independently funded agency activities 

and is well-connected to international sea 

ice and polar prediction efforts.29 Through 

SIPN, the Arctic modeling community 

maintains a vibrant and productive 

interchange. SIPN activities advance the 

state of knowledge about Arctic system 

processes that inform regional climate 

models. 

Assessing and 

Sustaining Observations 

in the Arctic

Given the urgent need for improved 

societal resilience to Arctic change, 

strong linkages between information 

providers, interpreters, and users are 

critical. Web-based tools and visualization 

packages make Arctic observations more 

29 An IPY-like effort, the Year of Polar Prediction, is 

discussed in the last section.

FIGURE 10

SIPN PREDICTION SUMMARY

Eighty-four sea ice extent predictions to the year 2100 by 36 different computer models. Clear 

differences between actual observations (black line) and predictions (the blue and yellow lines) 

point to the need to increase observations and process understanding to help improve models. 

Source: M. Jeffries, J. Overland and D. Perovich (2013)

3: Building Networks for Observing, Data, and Modeling
Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee 2015 Biennial Report 19

3: Building Networks for Observing, Data, and Modeling

NGEE team members discuss 

possible field sites.

SCIENTISTS AT WORK COLLABORATION

High school students 

participating in a biology field 

course visit NGEE in Barrow.

ECOLOGY: Harvesting 

plant material from a plot 

to understand species 

composition.

HYDROLOGY: Measuring 

thaw depth in field plots.

GEOPHYSICS: Exploring 

subsurface characteristics 

using ground-penetrating 

radar.

BIOGEOCHEMISTRY: 

Coring tundra samples for 

biomass and carbon-nitrogen 

measurements.

MODELING: An ecosystem 

modeler examines organic 

layers preserved in a 

permafrost core.

LABORATORY STUDIES:

Analyzing permafrost cores 

using computer tomography.

FIGURE 11 

NGEE-ARCTIC

Department of Energy 

(DOE) scientists at 

Oak Ridge National 

Laboratory are leading 

the Next-Generation 

Ecosystem Experiment 

– Arctic Landscapes 

(NGEE-Arctic) project. 

With support from IARPC, 

NGEE-Arctic draws on a 

myriad of talent funded 

by additional agencies, 

including NSF and NASA. 

Together, field and 

laboratory scientists and 

mathematicians develop 

studies to provide new 

information about 

permafrost ecosystems. 

Improved models can 

help community leaders 

and others better 

understand Arctic change 

and how to address 

uncertain futures. 

NGEE-ARCTIC’S TWO 

LINES OF INQUIRY:

THE CARBON DEPOT: 

Frozen plant material 

in permafrost holds 

rich stores of carbon. 

What happens when the 

permafrost thaws? 

LANDSCAPE 

TRANSFORMATION: 

Thawing of Ice-rich 

permafrost can start a 

cascade of interacting 

processes, including 

changes in topography 

(collapsed ground), water 

distribution across the 

landscape (new lakes and 

streams), and impacts on 

plants. These interactions 

will determine the role 

of Arctic ecosystems in 

future climate. What 

are they?

IARPC Enhances Research to Clarify Permafrost Impacts 

in Earth System Models 

The question: How do thawing permafrost and associated changes to the landscape, water, soil, 

and plant community affect the climate system? 

Left: Different research disciplines work on the Barrow Environmental Observatory (BEO). Top right: Polygon wedges like these on the 

BEO are sensitive to permafrost thaw, potentially releasing stored carbon and reshaping Arctic landscapes. Bottom right: A wider view 

showing polygons and water after snowmelt in the spring. All photos on this page: Roy Kaltschmidt, Richard Norby, Cathy Wilson, and 

Stan Wullschleger
3: Building Networks for Observing, Data, and Modeling

20 2015 Biennial Report Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee

accessible to a broad user base, encourage 

collaboration and coordination, and 

help identify areas where stronger 

partnerships are needed to improve the 

delivery to Arctic communities of basic 

and actionable information. Information 

needs include community-based 

monitoring programs to track changes 

in food resources, biodiversity, cultural 

identity, health, language, livelihoods, and 

traditional knowledge.

Building off complementary White 

House efforts (i.e., U.S. Group on 

Earth Observations),30 IARPC’s Arctic 

Observing Systems Collaboration Team 

(AOSCT) developed an Arctic Observing 

Assessment process allowing groups 

throughout the Arctic to identify 

information priorities at local, regional, 

national, and international levels.

This process identified 13 major 

priorities, which form the basis for a 

relational database of existing Arctic 

information. Analysis of this database 

shows how informational needs intersect 

between priorities. For example, common 

information resources serve the goals of 

three of the priorities, i.e., food security, 

ecosystem health, and climate change 

adaptation and mitigation (FIGURE 13). 

Data sources meeting multiple priorities 

are identified, as well as gaps where 

information products are lacking. The 

developing database is available through 

an online search and visualization tool 

located on the Arctic Hub.31

The Arctic Hub also has news, 

opportunities, and collaborative tools 

to advance observing design and 

implementation. The team completed the 

Arctic Observing Assessment in spring/

summer 2015, using metadata techniques 

that support complex user searches and a 

visualization and export interface. Crowdsourcing will support the continued buildout of the assessment and keep it “living” 

for years to come. 

Activities of the Sustaining Arctic 

Observing Network (SAON) coordinate 

pan-Arctic observing systems for 

environmental, social, economic and 

cultural issues. The Arctic Council 

30 www.WhiteHouse.gov/administration/eop/ostp/

nstc/committees/cenrs/usgeo

31 www.arctichub.net

CARVE uses instruments aboard a NASA C-23 Sherpa aircraft to measure air and surface 

conditions and concentrations of greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane, etc.). See page 

17 for a description of the CARVE field campaign. Photo: NASA/Wallops

From Measurements to Process 

Understanding to Modeling

Earth System Models are tools that incorporate our state-of-the-science

understanding of processes operating in nature. The science of climate and Earth 

system modeling has matured through finer spatial resolution, the inclusion of a

greater number of physical and biogeochemical processes, and comparison to a 

rapidly expanding array of observations. Simulations of the Arctic from models have

not converged, however, since different groups approach uncertain model aspects in 

distinctive ways.

	 Ideally, the relationship between model development and field work is symbiotic.

Models are based on knowledge of process understanding from observations. In

turn, models can guide the development of field campaigns to target and gather

crucial observations—which can further advance the fidelity of model simulations.

In practice, the relationship between model 

development and field work has oftentimes been

disconnected. Given the complexity of model

development, there is a need to continue and 

strengthen collaboration amongst model 

developers, and between model developers and 

observational scientists. These opportunities 

include establishing intercomparison projects 

and providing an exchange of knowledge 

between modelers and field scientists.

	 IARPC’s collaboration teams create a space for

symbiotic relationships to develop between these 

groups; this bodes well for the efficacy of our modeling

tools and for the scientific field work that informs them.

MODELS

CRITICALOBSERVAT

OI NS

ECORP

SS
21

3: Building Networks for Observing, Data, and Modeling

In response to the dramatic loss of Arctic summer sea ice in 

2007, the research community initiated the Sea Ice Outlook

(SIO) effort in 2008 under the umbrella of SEARCH.*

On a voluntary basis, each June the science community 

takes available information and populates models to predict 

the size of the lowest extent of sea ice (marked in September

each year), and the lowest extent for the current month. This

exercise is repeated each month through the summer.

	 In April 2014, four SIPN investigators published results of an

analysis of more than 300 contributions to 6 years of sea ice 

outlook calls (Figure 12). The report summarized the findings

as follows:

 Individuals and teams employ a variety of modeling, 

statistical, and heuristic approaches to make these 

predictions. Viewed as monthly ensembles, each with one 

or two dozen individual predictions, they display a bimodal

pattern of success. In years when observed ice extent is 

near its trend [or long-term decline], the median predictions

tend to be accurate, but in years when the observed extent 

is anomalous, the median and most individual predictions 

are less accurate. The latter at least partly reflect weather 

events, such as summer temperatures and wind conditions, 

which are much harder to forecast. Statistical analysis

suggests that year-to-year variability, rather than methods,

dominate the variation in ensemble prediction success. 

Furthermore, ensemble predictions do not improve as the

season evolves.

In other words, a limitation to obtaining accurate sea ice 

predictions is the inherent uncertainty in the prediction of 

atmospheric and oceanic conditions. About a half-dozen

models have evaluated skill in retrospective forecasts prior to 

2007, with a much greater level of success than was found in 

the assessment of SIO contributions. Further, idealized studies

also show much greater promise. More research is needed

to understand whether skill is lower in the SIO contributions

because ice is greatly diminished in recent years or if there is 

another explanation. 

	 A month after the report was published, the first call for

contributions to the SEARCH/SIPN Sea Ice Outlook for 2014

was issued. Between June and August, with contributions 

from 28 different groups, the SIO received a total of 88

outlooks, i.e., predictions of the sea ice extent to occur in 

mid-September 2014. The large number of outlooks and

contributing groups reflects the growing value of the SIO as

a forum for discussion of the challenges of sea ice prediction 

and how to overcome them.

Focus on the Sea Ice Outlook

*Study of Environmental Arctic Change, a multi-agency/institutional 

collaboration formed in 1999 to study system-scale Arctic change.

FIGURE 12 

SEA ICE OUTLOOK

Median and interquartile range (IQR) of Sea Ice Outlook predictions made in 

July compared with observed mean sea ice extent in September. In years when 

observed ice extent is near its trend, the median predictions tend to be accurate 

(2008, 2010, 2011), but in years when the observed extent is anomalous, the 

median and most individual predictions are less accurate (2009, 2012, 2013). 

Source: Stroeve et al. (2014). “Predicting September sea ice: Ensemble skill of the 

SEARCH Sea Ice Outlook 2008–2013,” Geophys. Res. Lett., 41, 2411–2418, doi: 

10.1002/2014GL059388

established two committees to provide 

leadership to implement SAON. The 

Committee on Observations and Networks 

focuses on collecting data and information 

on all observing capabilities, including 

access to platforms and geographical areas 

to present options for long-term funding. 

The committee will also develop a set of 

early warning indicators—the indicators 

network—initially focusing on climate 

change. This network will use existing and 

ongoing assessments to provide a status of 

the health of specific natural and human 

systems in the Arctic.

The Committee on Information and 

Data Services focuses on ensuring free 

and easy access to data and information 

in the SAON network. The Circum-Arctic 

Information System is responsible for 

integration and dissemination of data 

and information with guidance from the 

Committee. Through these and other 

activities, SAON will continue to develop 

the network of observations and make 

these observations available and applicable 

to environmental and societal issues.

Contributing writers: Kathy Coon, Renée 

Crain, Martin Jeffries, Erica Key, Mike 

Kuperberg, Sandy Starkweather, Stan 

Wullschleger

Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee 2015 Biennial Report
3: Building Networks for Observing, Data, and Modeling

22 2015 Biennial Report Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee

FIGURE 13

THREE KEY PRIORITIES

How will hunting, gathering, and harvesting 

activities, depicted in seasonal context for 

communities in Alaska’s interior, be impacted 

by changing seasonality? While completing her 

Ph.D. dissertation at University of Alaska, scientist 

Shannon McNeeley (Colorado State University) 

developed this wheel with community members 

from Hughes, Huslia, and Koyukuk, Alaska, to 

help scientists understand local observations and 

understanding of seasons and seasonal change. 

The wheel demonstrates the 

interconnectedness of three key priorities 

identified in the Arctic Observing Assessment: 

food security, ecosystem health, and climate 

change adaptation and mitigation. Information 

such as this can inform research to make it more 

salient to the needs of local people. Source: “The 

Koyukon. Seasonal Round,” Original artwork by 

Shannon McNeeley, Travis Cole, and Michael 

Shibao. Seasons out of Balance: Climate Change 

Impacts, Vulnerability, and Sustainable Adaptation 

in Interior Alaska: A Dissertation. Shannon 

McNeeley, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, August, 

2009, page 61

The Changing Seasonal Wheel 

Knowledge of Traditional Subsistence Activities Can Enhance Observations of Changing Seasonality 
Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee 2015 Biennial Report 23

4: New Tools to Support Arctic 

Research and Community Resilience 

A young resident of Shishmaref, Alaska, enjoys some outdoor play during recess. Photo: “Kanigruaq” courtesy of Alaska Teacher/flickr/CC BY 2.0 

IARPC helps policy 

makers, community

leaders, and residents 

adjust to the new 

Arctic. 

Traditional Arctic communities are tied closely to the 

polar environment. In the past, these communities 

have adapted to change through age-old practices, for 

example, relocating or hunting different wildlife. But rapid 

Arctic change may challenge these communities in ways 

that require new adaptive responses. More broadly, State and 

Federal agencies will need resources with which to make 

knowledge-based decisions about transportation, resource 

management, and infrastructure as these are affected by the 

changing Arctic.

One of IARPC’s focus areas is to provide the basic 

scientific knowledge necessary for community leaders and 

government agencies to develop sustainable pathways for 

successful adaptation amid rapid environmental change 

and a variety of other stressors—all while juggling diverse 

Federal, State, and local interests. 

In this section, several examples are offered of how 

the IARPC has helped develop tools that provide decision 

support to policy makers and community leaders as they 

help residents adjust to the new Arctic. 

Monitoring Ecosystem Health

Climate change is altering the incidence of disease among 

people and wildlife in the Arctic. Higher temperatures 

increase risks of disease from food poisoning; contaminated 

water; illness passed between humans and animals; and 
4: Strategic Application Networks

24 2015 Biennial Report Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee

health” approach to public health—an 

interdisciplinary collaboration between 

medical providers (i.e., doctors, nurses, 

osteopaths, dentists, etc.) and experts 

in other health and environmental 

sciences-related disciplines—to sustain 

the health and resilience of landscapes, 

seascapes, wildlife, and human 

inhabitants.33

To help advance this approach, 

IARPC’s Human Health Collaboration 

Team (HHCT) participates in Alaska’s 

One Health working group. The group 

was formed in 2013 and is hosted by the 

Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium 

and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control 

and Prevention (CDC). Participants 

include public health officials, 

veterinarians, farmers, environmental 

managers, wildlife harvesters, 

researchers, and resource managers. 

HHCT meets quarterly to share updates 

on activities, to discuss emerging issues, 

to consider events that are indicative of 

environmental and climate change, and 

to provide a forum for identifying areas 

of common interest. 

The Alaska One Health Working 

Group uses interagency, interdisciplin33 The broader definition of One Health is based on 

the premise that human health is connected with the 

health of the environment and that of wildlife and 

livestock health. 

ary, and community-based collaborations to monitor the impacts of climate/

environmental change and environmental contaminants on human health 

in the Arctic, and to implement adaptive 

measures. 

Elements of the approach include: 

•	 Conducting community health

assessments

•	 Initiating training and deployment

of monitoring technology

•	 Developing a web-based

monitoring network to assess 

environmental and health impacts 

and to provide feedback and 

adaption strategies to tribal leaders, 

tribes and tribal organizations

•	 Developing, deploying, and

assessing a surveillance and 

response toolkit to promote 

community-based adaptation 

planning for climate change

The group uses a Google mapping 

tool to review and share recent 

environmental health events. Map 

posts include articles scanned from 

Alaska news media, observations 

provided by community-based 

members of the Local Environmental 

Observer (LEO) Network, as well as 

Case Study: Local Environmental Observer Network

While harvesting a bearded seal, a Shishmaref resident noticed

the animal had suffered unusual hair loss. The resident took a 

picture and reported the event. 

	 Her photo and observation were posted to a public map

on the Internet, and the observer was directed to the marine 

mammal stranding coordinator in Nome for more information.

	 That’s Alaska’s Local Environmental Observer (LEO)

Network in action.

	 The LEO network provides rural communities with tools

to improve monitoring for events such as extreme weather, 

damage to infrastructure, invasive species, and outbreaks of 

illness in wildlife included in subsistence diets (such as the

bearded seal with hair loss in this example).

	 Through LEO, Alaskans become reporters bearing witness

to change when they contribute their observations via a simple 

webpage maintained by LEO.

	 LEO distributes these reports to traditional knowledge

experts, scientists, and others (in

this case, NOAA and the SeaGrant

Marine Advisory Program specialists)

who then provide information and 

resources about the event to the 

original reporter via a monthly 

Google Map tool.

	 LEO archives the reports and

the expert feedback to provide 

a lasting record. In addition to 

documenting change across 

Alaska, the LEO network improves

communication and connects local 

environmental and health managers 

with organizations that can provide technical assistance and

resources. 

“Bearded Seal” courtesy of 

Gonzalo Malpartida/flickr/

CC BY 2.0

accelerated mobilization and biological 

amplification of toxic chemical 

contaminants such as mercury, 

and persistent organic pollutants 

circulating within terrestrial and 

aquatic ecosystems. 

Because disease can spread 

through the food chain, traditional 

subsistence communities—i.e., those 

which hunt, harvest and produce 

most of their own food instead of

purchasing it from grocery stores32 —

are particularly vulnerable to changes 

in wildlife resources and in the shared 

environment. 

In addition to disease transmitted 

from animals or caused by contaminants, 

important emerging challenges include 

the overall health, abundance and 

availability of subsistence resources. 

Food security is becoming a challenge 

in much of the North. While traditional 

foods are nutritional and integral to 

healthy lifestyles, store-bought foods 

meant to augment or replace subsistence 

diets can be costly, highly processed, 

and/or nutrient-poor. All of these issues 

cause concern. 

They also make the Arctic a 

region uniquely suited to a “one 

32 Subsistence goes beyond food provision to include 

important resources for living, cultural activities, and 

local economy.
Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee 2015 Biennial Report 25

4: Strategic Application Networks

content provided by One 

Health group members 

themselves.

These inputs result 

in a tracking system for 

current and emerging 

events: a comprehensive 

environment, wildlife, 

and public health 

information fusion 

tool; and a constructive 

network for raising 

awareness and 

enhancing interagency 

collaboration.

Documenting 

Endangered 

Languages

Alaska is home to about 

20 distinct indigenous 

languages primarily 

belonging to 1 of 2 main 

language branches: 

Eskimo-Aleut and Athabascan-EyakTlingit (FIGURE 14). Except for Central 

Alaskan Yup’ik, only a small number 

of Alaskan children learn to speak a 

language other than English.34 Because 

traditional communities tend to 

pass culture, subsistence practices, 

and language through story-telling 

and song, many of the indigenous 

languages are endangered. To 

support preservation, IARPC’s Arctic 

Communities Collaboration Team 

(ACCT) is working with Federal and local 

agencies to develop tools that Arctic 

and Alaska Native communities can use 

to develop new indigenous language 

preservation strategies. 

The ACCT promotes activities that 

support all cultural aspects of Arctic 

societies. Specifically for language 

preservation, the team focuses on 

encouraging the Documenting 

Endangered Languages (DEL) program, 

a partnership between the National 

Endowment for the Humanities, the 

Smithsonian, and the NSF to develop 

and advance knowledge concerning 

34 Alaska Native Language Center, University of Alaska, 

Fairbanks. www.uaf.edu/danl/about/index.xml?__

noframe=2882

endangered human languages. 

The DEL program uses information 

technologies and supports a range of 

field work and other activities to record, 

document, and archive endangered 

languages. Activities include preparing 

lexicons, grammars, text samples, and 

digital databases. 

A unique achievement for Arctic 

language preservation is the development 

of a digital repository providing access to 

a world-renowned collection of Native 

American language documentation 

housed at the University of Alaska, 

Fairbanks’ Alaska Native Language 

Archive. ACCT discussions on Arctic 

languages helped to focus Federal agency 

efforts on this topic and encouraged 

funding for the archiving project. 

When completed, the digital archive will 

provide the foundation for a new era 

of language and culture scholarship in 

the Arctic. To date, digitization efforts 

have already been undertaken in tandem 

with build-out of the necessary digital 

repository infrastructure. A local digital 

mass storage server resides at the Alaska 

Native Language Archive35 hosted by 

the Arctic Region Supercomputing 

Center. The University of Alaska’s Office 

35 www.uaf.edu/anlc

of Information Technology hosts and 

maintains a web-based catalog and 

document-retrieval interface. 

High-Resolution 

Digital Elevation 

Models for Alaska

Collaboration with the state of Alaska 

is called out in IARPC’s enabling 

legislation. One area of successful 

collaboration is acquisition of highresolution digital elevation models for 

Alaska. In early summer 2012, Federal 

and State experts met to review and 

address the state of Alaska’s mapping 

documents. Because maps inform 

many government interests (e.g., land 

management, air and marine traffic 

control, resource development, etc.), 

agency managers wanted to assess 

best approaches to updating the largely 

outdated inventory. 

To help address the issue, the IARPC 

Terrestrial Ecosystem Collaboration 

Team is working with members of the 

Alaska Mapping Executive Committee, 

which draws on members from State 

and Federal departments and agencies 

including Executive Office of the 

President, DHS, DOE, DOI, DOT, EPA, 

FIGURE 14

TWO MAIN BRANCHES

Map showing indigenous language distribution in Alaska. Source: University of Alaska, Fairbanks
4: Strategic Application Networks

26 2015 Biennial Report Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee

NOAA and USDA. The committee 

intends to develop improved mapping 

for Alaska, producing high-resolution 

Digital Elevation Models for the entire 

state, including the coastal areas. 

The Alaska Mapping Executive 

Committee coordinated the collection 

and purchase of new statewide 5-meter 

resolution digital-elevation data 

for Alaska using radar technologies 

that can penetrate the cloud cover 

persistent in many areas of Alaska. The 

data products include a Digital Terrain 

Model portraying the bare surface 

of the Earth, a Digital Surface Model 

depicting the highest features on the 

landscape (such as trees), and a terraincorrected radar reflectance image. 

This enhanced data collection 

greatly improves the existing Alaska 

statewide National Elevation Dataset,

at 60-meter resolution, which was 

created from information on 1950sand 1960s-era topographic maps.

The digital elevation models provide 

a baseline for current elevations and 

thus, are important data for use in better 

understanding coastal erosion, storm 

surges, vegetation communities, and 

sea-level rise—all of which are expected 

consequences of climate change. Digital 

elevation models can be used to delineate 

coastlines for maps, and, if repeated at 

time intervals, can elucidate changes 

in coastline. These data can be used to 

anticipate inundation and high elevation 

areas during storm surges and are 

helpful in tracking changes in flora and 

fauna communities, as well as impacts 

to human settlements. Additionally, 

the models are valuable to baseline 

vegetation mapping, and have been 

used in wetland mapping on the Seward 

Peninsula by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service, National Wetlands Inventory. 

As of September 2014, 5-meter 

resolution elevation data was funded 

for over 50 percent of Alaska, including 

over 113,000 square miles of the Arctic 

(FIGURE 15). In line with the Alaska 

Mapping Executive Committee’s 3- 

year plan, near-term elevation data 

acquisitions and purchases will most 

likely continue to concentrate on the 

Arctic and southeast Alaska, moving 

to south-central and southwestern 

Alaska in subsequent years.

Contributing writers: Mike Brubaker, 

Roberto Delgado, Alan Parkinson 

FIGURE 15

IMPROVED MAPS TO TRACK LANDSCAPE CHANGES

The status of Alaska interferometric synthetic aperture radar (IfSAR) Elevation Data Collection as of September, 2014 (left); Alaska Mapping Executive 

Committee IfSAR Elevation Data Collection showing areas covered by the 3-year Aquisition Plan as of July 2014.

Kivalina, Alaska, is located on a barrier island. Loss of sea ice has exposed the coast to 

bashing waves during storms, and threats to the community are worsened by sea-level 

rise. If not relocated, Kivalina likely will be inundated by 2025. Photo: “Kivalina, a village 

facing coastal erosion” courtesy of ShoreZone/flickr/CC BY 2.O

Alaska 5-Meter Ifsar

DEM Acquisition

Status

Acquired

 Flown, available for 

acquitision

 Flown, partial 

funding, available for 

acquitsition

Not flown

3 Year Plan Estimated Cost

FY2015 $9.8M

FY2016 $9.3M

FY2017 $12.5M
Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee 2015 Biennial Report 27

5: Developing International 

Research Networks 

By promoting 

international 

activities, IARPC helps 

accelerate progress 

on issues of common 

concern through 

scientific research and 

traditional knowledge.

Many of the accomplishments described in this 

report draw on international cooperation. For 

example, atmosphere observatory network 

IASOA could not provide pan-Arctic observations without 

the participation of our Canadian, Danish, Greenlandic, 

Norwegian and Russian colleagues. Others, such as the 

MARES project or the SIPN, are now expanding international 

collaboration elements to enrich their activities. In this 

section, an activity critically dependent on international 

associations is described: the Distributed Biological 

Observatory (DBO) of the Pacific Arctic.

The Distributed 

Biological Observatory

Among IARPC’s science themes is a commitment to 

advance research related to the influence of sea ice and 

other physical parameters on marine ecosystems. Over the 

last 2 years, IARPC has focused on enabling the DBO36 of the 

international Pacific Arctic Group (PAG).

36 www.arctic.noaa.gov/dbo

Spectacled eiders use openings in sea ice cover in the northern Bering Sea to reach clam populations on the sea floor. These birds are listed as 

threatened species under the Endangered Species Act. Photo: Matt Sexson, USGS
Early efforts

In 2009, in response to significant 

physical changes in the region, notably 

record seasonal sea ice retreats, 

ocean freshening, and warming, an 

international group of researchers 

formed the DBO. Their goal is to make 

sustained and consistent observations 

of the biophysical environment in five 

regions extending from the Northern 

Bering Sea to the Beaufort Sea 

(FIGURE 16). 

Through coordinated planning, 

systematic observations, and 

data-sharing, the DBO pilot study 

(2010-2014) focused on five “hot 

spots” of high productivity and 

rich biodiversity along a latitudinal 

gradient in the Pacific Arctic. The 

scientific community vetted the 

DBO concept; subsequently, multiple 

Federal agencies, including BOEM, 

NASA, NOAA, and NSF, sponsored the 

activities. Internationally, Canadian, 

Chinese, Japanese, Korean and Russian 

agencies contributed as well, via the 

PAG and national agency support. 

After a successful start, IARPC 

included the DBO in its 5-year plan 

in 2012, forming a collaboration team 

from among participating agencies. 

In 2012, the NSF Arctic Observing 

Network (AON) program awarded a 

5-year collaborative grant.37 Since 

forming, the IARPC DBO collaboration 

team has held regular teleconferences 

to achieve the overarching goal of 

routine sampling in all five DBO 

regions by 2015.

Interagency Collaborations 

and Achievements

The DBO collaboration team 

has received strong support and 

collaboration from a number of U.S. 

agencies and academic 

institutions (FIGURE 17). 

37 www.arctic.cbl.umces.edu/#_DBO 

This website describes the DBO, lists the 

collaborators, and links to the NSF award page.

5: Developing International Research Networks

28 2015 Biennial Report Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee

NSF/AON

NASA BOEM

NOAA AOOS

Academic

UMCES

WHOI

Clark U

DBO 

CT

FIGURE 16

FIVE HOT SPOTS

The Distributed Biological Observatory (DBO) focuses multidisciplinary sampling at 

oceanographic stations across a latitudinal gradient from the northern Bering Sea 

to the Beaufort Sea; map is updated from Grebmeier 2012.

FIGURE 17

IARPC COLLABORATORS

U.S. agencies and academic allies comprising the DBO Collaboration Team.
Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee 2015 Biennial Report 29

5: Developing International Research Networks

Participants at academic institutions 

and Federal agencies38 provide a 

synergistic flow of data and expertise. 

Examples of key contributions include:

•	 Annual ship-based sampling

and the provision of a physical 

oceanographic data portal (WHOI) 

to enhance data access and 

coordination

•	 Development of a DBO specific

portal by NASA to facilitate 

researcher access to regional 

satellite products39

•	 Sampling during the RUSALCA40 

program (the only program to 

sample in Russian waters), and 

coordination of national and 

international contributions to the 

DBO, via the PAG

•	 Contribution to sampling during

various multidisciplinary research 

programs in the Chukchi Sea

•	 Provision of web-based assets

mapping and a password-protected 

data workspace, and an open-web 

data portal

The DBO provides a framework to 

focus and coordinate standardized 

sampling and analytical efforts that link 

biological changes to physical drivers. 

A key DBO science achievement 

has been the ability to track shifts 

in benthic community biomass and 

structure concomitant with measures 

of annual sea ice persistence in the 

five DBO regions. These observations 

build upon research initiated in the 

1980s, where decadal patterns, shifts in 

species composition, and northward 

faunal range were identified.41 In 

addition, scientists are observing an 

east-to-west gradient in zooplankton 

38 These institutions include Clark University (Clark 

U); University of Alaska, Fairbanks (UAF); University 

of Florida (UF); University of Maryland, Center for 

Environmental Science (UMCES); University of Texas 

(UT); and Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution 

(WHOI).

39 www.neptune.gsfc.nasa.gov/csb/index.

php?section=270

40 Russian-American Long-term Census of the Arctic. 

www.arctic.noaa.gov/aro/russian-american

41 Grebmeier, J.M. “Shifting Patterns of Life in the 

Pacific Arctic and Sub-Arctic Seas.” Annual Review 

of Marine Science, Vol. 4 (2012): 63-78. doi: 10.1146/

annurev-marine-120710-100926

populations that vary with water mass 

type through the season,42 and more 

frequent occurrence of temperate 

whale species in DBO region 3.43

An important physical 

oceanographic achievement through 

observation of the DBO5 (Barrow 

Canyon) line (FIGURE 16) has been 

to observe the seasonal seawater 

freshening and warming of water 

transiting northward on the eastern 

and surface layers of the Chukchi 

Sea, with the maximum temperature 

observed in September.44 Upwelling 

events are observed roughly one-third 

of the time (7 of 24 occupations), which 

significantly alter hydrography in the 

canyon.

42 Pomerleau et al. (2014). “Spatial Patterns in 

Zooplankton Communities and Stable Isotope 

Ratios (13C and 15N) in Relation to Oceanographic 

Conditions in the Sub-Arctic Pacific and Western 

Arctic Regions during the Summer of 2008.” Journal 

of Plankton Research. doi: 10.1093/plankt/fbt129 43 Clarke et al. (2014). “Subarctic Cetaceans 

in the Southern Chukchi Sea: Evidence of 

Recovery or Response to a Changing Ecosystem.” 

Oceanography 26(4): 136-149. doi: 10.5670/

oceanog.2013.81

44 Nobre et al. (2014). “Evolution of Water Masses in 

Barrow Canyon during Summer/Fall.” AGU Ocean 

Sciences Meeting, Honolulu HI

International and 

Industry Collaborators 

The PAG is a consortium of institutions 

and individuals having a Pacific 

perspective on Arctic science. 

Organized under the International 

Arctic Science Committee (IASC), the 

PAG has as its central mission to serve 

as a Pacific Arctic regional organization 

to plan, coordinate, and cooperate on 

science activities of mutual interest. 

The four principal science themes of 

PAG are climate, contaminants, human 

dimensions, and structure and function 

of Arctic ecosystems. 

With reference to the fourth 

theme, the PAG assumed a leadership 

role in coordinating international 

contributions to DBO sampling during 

the pilot-study program, including 

linking projects for sampling the DBO 

lines. These international contributions 

to DBO sampling provide an 

unprecedented capability to track 

inter- and intra-annual variability in 

DBO regions (FIGURE 18). An annual 

listing of DBO cruises undertaken 

through the PAG network is available 

on the PAG and DBO websites.

The DBO International Network

COUNTRY	 	 SHIP NAME

Russia

Korea

China

Japan

Canada

USA

Shell, ConocoPhillips

Professor Khromov

Araon

Xueeˆ Lóng

Oshoru-Maru, Mirai

Sir Wilfrid Laurier, Louis S. St-Laurent, 

Amundsen

HEALY, Oscar Dyson, Aquila, Annika Marie

INDUSTRY Norseman ll, Westward Wind

FIGURE 18 

SHIP SUPPORT

Summary of international entities coordinated through Pacific Arctic Group (PAG) and industry agencies 

working on the Distributed Biological Observatory (DBO) program.
5: Developing International Research Networks

30 2015 Biennial Report Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee

Future Directions 

The DBO CT is now focused on compiling data from the pilot study sampling 

period, to demonstrate the value of this 

national and international shared-data 

approach to the investigation of biological responses to a rapidly changing 

Arctic marine ecosystem. 

Three goals included in both 

the DBO CT activities table, and the 

National Strategy for the Arctic Region 

work plan45 are to publish an updated 

national/international DBO concept 

plan for decadal-scale implementation 

by the end of 2015; prepare periodic 

assessments on the physical and 

45 www.WhiteHouse.gov/sites/default/files/docs/

nat_arctic_strategy.pdf

ecological state of the Pacific Arctic 

marine environment; and integrate 

DBO data with that from collaborating 

agencies and other sources by the end 

of 2016.

The DBO CT is on track to 

accomplish these goals, drawing upon 

outcomes of international meetings 

such as discussions of the DBO held 

at the 2014 Arctic Science Summit 

Week in Helsinki, Finland, and the 

second DBO Data Workshop in October 

2014. Expanding from the Pacific 

Arctic sector, the DBO also serves as a 

framework for international research 

coordination via the Arctic Council 

Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring 

Program, and is recognized as a task 

of the pan-Arctic Sustaining Arctic 

Observing Network program. 

Additional discussions are ongoing 

to expand the DBO concept to the panArctic scale as part of the Norwegian 

Strategic Initiative-Arctic for placing 

DBO-transect lines in the northern 

Barents Sea and through National 

Oceanographic Partnership Program 

for placing additional DBO-transect 

lines in both the U.S. and Canadian 

Beaufort Sea.

Contributing writers: Jacqueline 

Grebmeier, Sue Moore

The Pacific Arctic: 

Why it Matters

The region is home to animals thought 

vulnerable to sea ice loss, notably 

walruses, ice seals, polar bears, and 

ocean-going bird species, which feed

and breed on sea ice. Sea ice habitat loss

impacts both walrus and diving sea ducks 

who use it as a resting platform between 

feeding periods. These animals lose more 

energy in the ocean than they do when 

resting on ice. Seasonal sea ice loss in the

region increases access for ships and for 

those seeking natural resource extraction. 

Given these potentially competing

interests—and the unknown potential 

for cascading impacts—scientists seek 

to understand the relationships between 

physical and biological systems in the 

Pacific Arctic. Improved understanding

of the marine ecosystem would support 

information-based decisions for local,

State, and Federal managers.

A herd of walrus rest on patchy sea ice. Photo: Karen Frey, Clark U 
Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee 2015 Biennial Report 31

The best scientists in the world are all telling us that our activities are changing the climate, 

and if we do not act forcefully, we’ll continue to see rising oceans, longer, hotter heat waves, 

dangerous droughts and floods, and massive disruptions that can trigger greater migration, 

conflict, and hunger around the globe. The Pentagon says that climate change poses 

immediate risks to our national security. We should act like it.

—President Barack Obama, State of the Union Address. January 20, 2015

6: Looking Forward 

IARPC’s expanding 

collaborations will help 

policy-makers develop 

informed approaches 

to meet challenges and 

opportunities arising 

in the new Arctic.

I

ARPC’s next course is an exciting one, with challenges 

and opportunities centered around people. Arctic 

residents must adapt to rapid change in social and natural 

systems. People living below the Circle are increasingly 

aware of the linkages between the region and their weather, 

water supply, the changing prices of food, fuel, and other 

goods, and of issues such as coastal vulnerability and wildfire 

expansion. Rapid change may also alter people’s perceptions 

of the Arctic itself—its innate beauty, and the indigenous 

heritage Arctic Nations share. 

Improving knowledge of Arctic systems will remain a 

vital centerpiece of the U.S. research agenda, even as Federal 

budget managers strain to address broad challenges of 

national security, energy independence, food and water 

security, health care, and more. Strong agency coordination 

Next-generation scientists plan their field work in Alaska’s Brooks Range (the opportunity) while garbed in head-nets to protect against swarms 

of mosquitoes (a challenge). Photo: Jason Briner, State University of New York at Buffalo
Section 6: Looking Forward

32 2015 Biennial Report Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee

Arctic field work frequently calls for specialized support (e.g.,

ice-strengthened vessels, ruggedized field gear, and expensive

air support). Sharing logistics resources when possible

allows scientists and Federal funding agencies to stretch

logistics dollars—and pays big benefits in terms of research

collaboration as well.

	 The NSF’s Division of Polar Programs manages the Arctic

research support and logistics (RSL) program, working through

agreements and contracts with a variety of organizations that

provide services and infrastructure to researchers. Through 

economies of scale and efficiencies gained through years

of experience, the RSL program leverages its investment to

provide camps, ships, aircraft, risk management, environmental 

compliance, and proposal estimates. RSL

funds the operation of facilities, including 

Summit Station in Greenland, and Toolik

Field Station on Alaska’s North Slope; and

it maintains the science capability on the 

United States Coast Guard Cutter HEALY.

RSL extends these resources, on a

reimbursable basis, to other agencies 

and organizations. U.S. and international

organizations can and should do more

to share resources, coordinate field

campaigns, and utilize best practices

developed by one another.

	 At a 2013 RSL workshop, stakeholders

and providers met to explore the logistic 

infrastructure that needs to be in place to 

facilitate Arctic research over the next 20 

years. Key workshop themes acknowledged

that science needs must drive logistics 

requirements; that research, and therefore

logistics, needs to be Arctic-wide and yearround; and that logistics capabilities need

to be flexible and agile, leveraging existing 

capabilities, emerging technologies, and 

the desire and willingness of the next 

generation of researcher and logistician to 

learn and succeed.

	 Specifically, workshop participants suggested IARPC

as a forum for U.S. agencies to better coordinate logistics

resources in support of research. NSF is working with other

agencies towards a sustained dialogue regarding logistical 

needs and resources, so as to improve both coordination and 

collaboration. 

At an international level, collaborations continue. The 

Swedish Polar Research Secretariat (SPRS) approached NSF in

2014 to discuss using the Swedish research icebreaker Oden

in the Arctic on a more regular basis. In 2015 and 2017, NSF

and SPRS intend to implement a pilot arrangement to support

projects led by researchers from each country. In winter of 

2015, researchers from both countries attended a workshop to 

discuss potential collaborations that could result in a longterm arrangement. 

The arrangement would allow funding agencies 

to alert the research community in advance of the ship’s

availability so they may propose to use it. If proposals are 

funded through the merit review processes of both countries, 

coordinated cruises would emerge. The discussion is ongoing and will be informed by an NSF-funded research project

onboard Oden in 2015 in the Nares Strait region of Greenland.

RSL is active in the Forum of Arctic Research Operators

(FARO), a body to discuss facilities and infrastructure in

an international setting. FARO meets annually at Arctic

Science Summit Week. RSL has taken the lead in facilitating

information-sharing on field safety risk management in the

Arctic, enabling each country to share best practices and 

possibly share opportunities for field safety training and other

expertise. FARO is an opportunity for each country to discuss

field research plans to improve coordination and collaboration,

particularly among research vessels, ecological research 

stations, and other areas of emphasis, such as the upcoming 

Year of Polar Prediction.

Two small helicopters move scientists to field sites on Alaska’s North Slope. 

Photo: Nancy Brandt

Ride-Sharing in the Arctic
Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee 2015 Biennial Report 33

Section 6: Looking Forward

is more important than ever before, 

not simply from the standpoint of 

leveraging resources, but because the 

problem is complex. This complexity 

moves IARPC forward. 

Year of Polar Prediction

Future internationally coordinated 

activities present opportunities for U.S. 

agencies to cooperate in productive 

ways with other nations. One such 

example is the proposed Year of 

Polar Prediction (YOPP), developing 

under the auspices of the World 

Meteorological Organization’s Polar 

Prediction Project46 , and commencing 

in 2017,’ YOPP is a centerpiece 

activity—similar in nature to the 

International Polar Year47—intended to 

coordinate broad international polar 

observing activities with the aim to 

improve weather and climate model 

predictions for polar environments. 

YOPP has the potential to 

improve weather predictions in polar 

environments by reducing uncertainty 

due to poor process understanding and 

sparse observational networks. The 

research program will also improve 

seasonal forecasts of Arctic sea ice 

concentrations, which would support 

safer transportation and development 

in the region, and help scientists 

understand the polar vortex and coldair outbreaks that wreak havoc with 

mid-latitude winter weather. YOPP’s 

success will rely on well-coordinated 

observations targeted at specific 

model-improvement opportunities.

Well-coordinated U.S. participation 

in YOPP is a challenge because it 

requires both mission-based agencies 

and competitive-funding agencies to 

recognize and support their unique 

roles, while working together in a 

mutually beneficial way. A series of 

planned U.S.-specific discussions will 

lead to more unified U.S. participation 

on the international stage—and IARPC 

will enhance this cooperation 

via collaboration teams and networking tools.

46 www.polarprediction.net/yopp.html

47 A coordinated pulse of polar research activity, 

2007-2008. www.ipy.org 

U.S. Chairmanship of 

the Arctic Council

In May 2015, the United States assumed 

chairmanship of the Arctic Council 

for a 2-year period. The council was 

formed in 1996 as a forum to promote 

cooperation and dialogue among the 

eight countries whose territories extend 

into the Arctic (Canada, Denmark 

[via Greenland], Finland, Iceland, 

Norway, Russia, Sweden, and the 

United States). The council is unique 

as an international forum in that it 

also includes representation from six 

indigenous peoples’ organizations. 

An “observer” category includes nonArctic nations, intergovernmental 

organizations, and nongovernmental 

organizations that have been granted 

accreditation through an application 

process. The most recently accredited 

observers were approved in 2013, and 

included six nations—China, India, Italy, 

Japan, Singapore, and South Korea.

The Arctic Council primarily 

focuses on fostering environmental 

stewardship and sustainable 

development. Chairmanship from 2015 

to 2017 gives the United States more 

opportunity to influence the direction 

of the council’s work while focusing 

on three overarching goals for its term: 

continue strengthening the Arctic 

Council as an intergovernmental 

forum; introduce new long-term 

priorities into the Arctic Council; and 

raise U.S. and global awareness of the 

Arctic and climate change.

Along with these goals, the United 

States will focus Arctic Council 

activities on the following three 

organizational themes:

•	 Improving Arctic Ocean Safety, 

Security, and Stewardship by 

promoting search-and-rescue 

exercises; coordinating marine 

environmental protection research 

and information, including that 

related to oil-spills; enhancing 

activities to develop a Pan-Arctic 

network of marine protected areas; 

and expanding the monitoring 

coverage of ocean acidification in 

the Arctic Ocean. 

•	 Improving Economic and 

Living Conditions for Arctic 

Peoples by demonstrating the 

potential of renewable energy to 

replace expensive diesel sources; 

internationalizing efforts to 

improve access to clean drinking 

NOAA measures key atmospheric indicators of global climate from Greenland’s Summit 

Station. The NSF funds the station in cooperation with the Government of Greenland. 

Photo: Ed Stockard, Blue Marble Photography
Section 6: Looking Forward

34 2015 Biennial Report Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee

water, reliable sanitation and 

freshwater supplies; developing 

telecommunications infrastructure; 

and adapting suicide / mental illness 

prevention research and resources 

to suit the unique circumstances of 

Arctic communities. 

•	 Addressing the Impacts of 

Climate Change by implementing 

efforts to reduce, monitor, and 

study short-lived climate pollutants; 

promoting and evaluating 

recommendations for climate 

adaptation and resilience for Arctic 

residents; and enhancing Arctic 

climate science.

Through its collaboration teams, 

IARPC contributes to the research 

components of these themes and 

ensures coordination across Federal 

agencies. These themes each benefit 

Arctic residents while helping to 

promote a considered approach 

to the new Arctic that emphasizes 

environmental stewardship. Another 

area of focus will be public outreach—

that is, efforts to educate the general 

public about the Arctic, why it matters, 

and how the effects of climate change 

in the Arctic impact other areas of the 

planet. The U.S. chairmanship of the 

Arctic Council provides a seat from 

which the United States can promote 

its strategic national interests in the 

Arctic, as well as make the American 

public aware that these national 

interests exist.

Emerging Science 

Questions and 

Expanding Networks

IARPC set out in 2013 to provide 

guidance on future Arctic research over 

the next 10 to 20 years. Multiple IARPC 

agencies (DOE, NASA, NOAA, NSF, the 

Smithsonian Institution, and USARC) 

sponsored a committee under the Polar 

Research Board (PRB) of the National 

Academy of Sciences to develop and 

issue the report. The resulting study, 

The Arctic in the Anthropocene: 

Emerging Research Questions,

48 was 

issued in April 2014. It addresses the 

urgent need to understand the rapidly 

changing Arctic by defining the current 

state of knowledge and connecting 

the dots among emerging science 

questions to guide future science 

opportunities. The goal: to leverage 

science talent and agency resources, 

thus maximizing opportunities to fill 

in critical knowledge gaps. 

IARPC encouraged contributions 

from the science community, agency 

personnel, international colleagues, 

and Arctic residents. With input from 

this constituency, the report identified 

questions that have arisen as rapid 

change has pervaded the Arctic system, 

questions that have yet to receive the 

48 Available for download on the IARPC 

Collaborations website: www.iarpccollaborations.

org

Barrow, Alaska: a person flings treats to the crowd below as he rides on the blanket toss, a traditional game celebrating a successful 

community harvest. Photo: Faustine Bernadac
New Webinar Series

IARPC webinars often cut across 

teams and themes, acting as a node 

in the network that encourages 

communities to get to know and 

understand potential collaborators’

activities. 

In addition to webinars hosted by 

collaboration teams, IARPC launched 

a series of webinars in 2015 to engage 

and inform people on a broader 

range of topics, including research 

questions, new technologies, and

questions related to science policy.

IARPC encourages the community to 

offer webinar suggestions.

Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee 2015 Biennial Report 35

attention they require, and/or that 

can only now be addressed given 

technological or other advances. 

The report reveals a future Arctic 

research agenda that will challenge 

existing practices to bridge disciplinary 

and functional gaps. In particular, 

the ground for collaboration between 

natural, social, and human health 

sciences will grow as will the need 

to translate scientific knowledge 

into decision-relevant contexts (e.g., 

scientists advancing sustainability 

research working with those planning 

infrastructure development). Research 

sponsorship will need to adapt to 

meet these challenges, and IARPC is 

positioned to lead. 

As the Arctic research 5-year 

plan is updated, IARPC will explore 

opportunities more broadly in the 

context of the National Strategy for 

the Arctic Region, the Arctic Council 

chairmanship, and the new Arctic 

Executive Steering Committee. IARPC 

will work with the state of Alaska, Arctic 

communities, and other interagency 

committees to cooperatively address 

research priorities. With all these 

imperatives, IARPC is well-placed 

to continue and expand its efforts 

to create networks of collaborators 

to tackle urgent research questions 

that must be addressed as the 

Arctic undergoes rapid climate and 

environmental change. 

The call for collaboration points 

back to IARPC’s enabling legislation.49

What happens in the Arctic has 

far-reaching implications for the 

entire planet. Fostering a sense of 

shared purpose among different 

stakeholders—from U.S. Federal, 

State, and international organizations 

to private industry and other nongovernmental entities—to manage 

change is essential. So is a continued 

commitment to study what exists, what 

is emerging, and what awaits us in the 

Arctic through activities that have been 

and will continue to be addressed by 

IARPC and its collaboration teams.

Contributing writers: Sara Bowden, Renée 

Crain, Lauren Everett, Sandy Starkweather, 

Michael Young

49 www.WhiteHouse.gov/sites/default/files/

microsites/ostp/ARPA.pdf

 IARPC Toolbox

Section 6: Looking Forward

Strategies for Addressing Future 

Research Challenges

As described in The Arctic in the Anthropocene

Enhance Cooperation. No single entity can address all Arctic

research topics. Cooperation is essential among researchers, 

between agencies, among nations, across disciplines, between 

Arctic residents and visiting scientists, and within the private sector.

Sustain Long-term Observations. Long-term observational

data are essential for detecting change and for putting 

research findings into context.

Manage and Share Information. Understanding the Arctic 

system will continue to evolve through the ability to compare 

data sets from disparate fields and regions to see connections

and commonalities. 

Maintain and Build Operational Capacity. Technology 

advances allow new approaches to research in many fields.

At the same time, decisions-makers must sustain current

capabilities, including ships, satellites, and research stations.

Grow Human Capacity. Arctic research depends on sufficient

human capacity, including scientists trained in the necessary 

fields who are capable of interdisciplinary collaboration, and

Arctic residents who can offer a great deal to research efforts. 

Invest in Research. Given the emerging research questions,

pressures are growing for comprehensive systems and 

synthesis efforts, research on rapid changes, social science, 

stakeholder-initiated research, international research, and

long-term observations.
Photo: Faustine Bernadac

Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee

Sara Bowden, Executive Secretary

bowden@arcus.org

(703) 447-7828