4. CHANGES IN ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT OF IUPAC'S SCIENTIFIC
WORK
The present structure of the Union precludes the fulfillment of many
of its central scientific functions, as reflected in organizational
fragmentation and resulting hindrance in the inception and conduct
of horizontal interdisciplinary projects. The founders of IUPAC envisioned,
and made provision for, the organization and action of a dynamic Union.
In time, the concept of a changing structure was replaced by the current
system of long-term Commissions, with little opportunity for Divisions
to plan for scientific renewal and growth.
As early as 1953, IUPAC President Tiselius, in his State of the
Union address, recommended setting up new Commissions on a trial basis
and added: "Furthermore, it often seems better to establish a Commission
for a limited time to study a definite problem than to appoint a great
number of more or less permanent Commissions." In 1953, the UK delegation
also made a more specific proposalthat, with rare exceptions, Commissions
be appointed for a lifetime not exceeding four years. In spite of
these proposals, 20 years later, in 1973, President B�nard felt it
necessary to emphasize in his address to Council the need for IUPAC
to adapt to evolution and growth. He said, "Everyone knows that in
an organization like ours, it is easy to obtain general approval for
the creation of new bodies, but that it is difficult to decide to
abandon existing ones." He went on to warn that "An institution that
does not have the strength to renew itself is an institution condemned
at length to sterility."
Certainly in the ensuing 25 years, the Union has made many substantial
alterations in adapting to the changing needs of world chemistry,
but the static nature of our scientific organization has largely persisted.
Two years ago, as you heard in Geneva, the ad-hoc Strategy Development
and Implementation Committee (SDIC) had just begun its work. The SDIC
issued its final report
in April 1998. Parenthetically, I should add, in response to a concern
expressed at Geneva, that the SDIC was then thanked for its work and
dissolved, thus not adding another permanent body to our structure.
The SDIC recommendations were endorsed by the Executive Committee,
were widely circulated within IUPAC, and were discussed extensively.
With additional aspects that were developed by the Committee on Project
Evaluation Criteria under the chairmanship of Professor Gus Somsen,
and with significant changes made as a result of input from Division
Presidents and others, an integrated program was presented to the
Bureau a year ago. I was delighted that the Bureau, in its meeting
in September 1998, approved a policy and an operational program based
on the conceptual framework that the Union represents and serves the
entire world chemistry community. The objective is to improve quality,
relevance, international impact, and effectiveness of the Union's
scientific work. The integrated program constitutes a holistic plan,
which rests on major changes in the responsibilities of the Division
Presidents and Division Committees, in the election procedures on
the Division level, in project evaluation, and in the future function
of Commissions.
The overwhelming final approval by the Bureau--a vote of 20-0 with
two abstentions--reflects the broad consensus eventually achieved
for approving the new program. Some aspects of the program, dealing
with strengthening of Division Committees and the inception of a project-based
system, began immediately.
The features of the integrated program approved by the Bureau are
designed to give clear direction for the Union to:
One of the major objectives of the new program is to solicit ideas
for IUPAC projects from
the worldwide chemistry community and to set up short-term Task Groups
to carry out the projects, with membership open to the entire community.
A consequence of the project-driven system based on short-term Task
Groups is that we will reduce our reliance on the long-term, essentially
permanent Commissions that have assumed a central role in IUPAC's
scientific activities. Although the 37 current Commissions have eminent
scientists as members and have collectively carried out excellent
work over many years, their continuation year after year now has become
an impediment to the development of new approaches within our Divisions.
Moreover, we are now devoting most of our financial resources to support
of these bodies and providing for their regular meetings, irrespective
of the need for meetings or the requirements of their projects.
For many years, the biennial continuation of virtually all Commissions
has become a routine exercise for the Council. Proposals from time
to time for consolidation or termination of a few commissions have
been virtually impossible to implement, because they appear to single
out certain groups unfairly. The problem is not that we have some
"bad" Commissions; the problem is the system itself. The Bureau has
recommended that Council, in exercising its responsibility under Bylaw
4.302, decide at the General Assembly in 1999 not to continue any
present Commission beyond the end of 2001. This step is a crucial
one in the implementation of the integrated program that has been
approved by the Bureau, and I believe that this step must be taken.
It will permit the Divisions to take a fresh look at their programs
and to develop strategies and mechanisms to meet future challenges.
The details of this program and its current status will be discussed
later in connection with agenda
items 16-18. Most parts are well underway. The Division Committees
have been given greatly increased responsibility, and they have responded
in a very positive manner, as you will hear in some of the Division
Presidents' reports to you this morning. A system has been set up
at the Secretariat to receive proposals for new projects, which are
now subject to outside refereeing and rigorous evaluation. A Project
Committee has been set up within the Bureau to handle the review
and funding of larger projects and those that are interdisciplinary.
I would like to thank our former Secretary General, Professor Gerrit
den Boef, for agreeing to chair this important body. Also, an Evaluation
Committee, under the chairmanship of Professor Gerhard Schneider,
an Elected Member of the Bureau, to whom I am grateful, has been formed
to provide retrospective evaluation of each project and thus to provide
an objective assessment of our long-range accomplishments. As we shall
discuss later, Council is being asked to take important additional
steps to enable the new program to operate effectively. By deciding
not to extend the current Commissions beyond the end of 2001, Council
can facilitate the Division's ability to develop strategies for carrying
out their programs and permit each Division to allocate its financial
resources between support of continuing bodies and support of scientific
projects.