1. Connecting Geoscience Departments to the Future Where is our Research Going? A Perspective on the next 25 years Eric J. Barron

2. From the Perspective of…. 1.Hiring 2.Societal relevance and the maturity of our disciplines 3.“Sustaining” geoscience departments 4.A vision for an “end game” A caution – this is a discussion of directions and not the importance of a core level of knowledge and capability, the importance of field studies, or the importance of fundamental research

3. From the Perspective of Hiring: Generalizations  We already have significant vision documents that act as guides and are ahead of our accomplishments.  The external funding system and University promotion emphasis on funded research slowly steers both the production of new PhD talent and future research  A new hire may be a 35+ year investment  Difficulties arise when you are too late to the table or attempt to eat before the table is set  Most successful faculty have a “funding window” characterized by early career growth, stability, but eventual decline

4. From the Perspective of Hiring: Conclusions  Hire the best quality available Good people will find a way the system is directional – by creating the research ready talent pool Pace of change allows opportunism and not leaps  Youth is critical to departmental success  Seek individuals pre-disposed to collaboration and interaction (they have more opportunities)  Actively promote faculty success  Sense declines in faculty productivity and promote professional development to revitalize faculty

5. From the Perspective of Societal Relevance and Maturity of our Disciplines : Generalizations  Output and Outcomes are growing as metrics for success New discoveries Value beyond a specific discipline Societal importance or benefit K-12 and informal education  Recognized societal problems are being articulated as “grand challenges”  There is a long-standing pull toward applied problems (useful science) that will likely grow

6. From the Perspective of Societal Relevance and Maturity of our Disciplines : Conclusions  Seek an intersection with the Grand Challenges that have staying power Energy security Water security Environmental stewardship Natural Hazard adaptation and mitigation Climate change Vulnerable regions (e.g. the coast) Developing countries and human capacity building  Watch for the opportunities to foster, recognize, and reward the transition from research to applications  Grand Challenges require collaborative research

7. From the Perspective of “Sustaining” Geoscience Departments : Generalizations  We are increasingly in a tuition-driven economy Low # of students = stagnant hiring or even the recapture of FTEs Difficult case to present to administrators  Attraction to our core curriculum does not sustain a student body – employment perspectives do.  Singular career opportunities cause demonstrated vulnerability

8. Example: Oil and the Geosciences

9. Or National Degree Production (AGI)

10. From the Perspective of “Sustaining” Geoscience Departments : Conclusions  A diverse and engaging research and education portfolio focused on issues of societal importance multiple career paths  Small programs have inherent sustainability problems (implications for small colleges) Consortia? “niche” small universities  Collaborative scientists may promote sustainability

11. From the Perspective of a Vision for an “End Game”: Generalizations  We aren’t even close to achieving Earth System Science  The ability to “anticipate” is what makes knowledge powerful Protect Life and Property Promote Economic Vitality Improve Environmental Stewardship Promote Fundamental Understanding  We are at the start of significant transition in earth sciences research Science in service to society

12. From the Perspective of a Vision for an “End Game”: Generalizations  Elements in the transition: An expansion of the “forecasting” family An expansion in the time and space scales of interest Demand for an integrated system approach  Failure of “cause and effect” approaches  Recognition of role of “multiple stresses” Recognizing science elements as a “service”  Failure of “over the transom” approaches  Recognizing the importance of “user pull”  Recognizing the connection between research, operations, and decision-making

13. From the Perspective of a Vision for an “End Game”: Generalizations  The Future: Earth “Intelligence” Center(s)  The Needs (and also what we lack in trying to develop Earth System Science): A cohesive observation framework A data management and access system that places all information at your finger tips Framework for developing “predictive” models Framework for directed process studies Vigorous connections with decision-makers  A Flexible Framework for Multiple Issues  Likely to be “place-based” and not global

14. From the Perspective of a Vision for an “End Game”: Conclusions  The notion of “interdisciplinary” will be the norm and beyond current perception.  Areas such as computational geosciences, information sciences, policy, etc. move to the forefront of future programs in the Earth Sciences Our future is even more diverse Creates a pull toward youth in hiring  Joint appointments or incentives for partnerships or consortia may become normal  Promote an intersection with socially-relevant Grand Challenges that have staying power

15. From the Perspective of a Vision for an “End Game”: Conclusions  Seek individuals pre-disposed to collaboration and interaction  Watch for the opportunities to foster, recognize, and reward the transition from research to applications

16. A Summary  Hire the best quality available  Youth is critical to departmental research success  Seek individuals pre-disposed to collaboration and interaction (skip the disciplinary snob)  Seek an intersection with the Grand Challenges - that have staying power  Watch for the opportunities to foster, recognize, and reward the transition from research to applications  A diverse and engaging research portfolio is a strength

17. A Summary (continued)  Start to imagine growth/partnerships in areas such as computational geosciences, information sciences, policy, etc.  Joint appointments and unusual partnerships may become normal  Actively promote faculty success (the investment is too large to leave this to chance)  Sense declines in faculty productivity and promote professional development and opportunities to revitalize faculty  Small programs and one-dimensional programs and isolated programs have some inherent sustainability problems – we may witness a future transition