1. 1 WCRP – Quo vadis? SPARC – Quo vadis? Monday – Open SSG Session 14:00 2. WCRP UPDATE 2.1 WCRP Updates/WCC-3 Outcomes (30 min) G. Asrar/V. Ryabinin 2.2 JSC/SPARC perspectives (30 min) T. Shepherd/T. Peter 15:00Coffee break 15:30 Update on the Regional Workshop and overview M. Shiotani Japanese Research Projects (30 min) 16:00General discussion on WCRP/SPARC perspectives (60 min) All Wednesday – Joint SPARC/IGAC Day 15:305.7 Discussion on SPARC/IGAC Programmatic Issues All

2. 2 Report on the 30 th Session of the Joint Scientific Committee of the World Climate Research Programme 6-9 April 2009, Maryland, USA N. McFarlane, T. G. Shepherd, T. Peter, V. Ryabinin  2008 external review of the WCRP, commissioned by its Sponsors and the International Group of Funding Agencies of Global Change Research.  WCRP structural issues were the main overarching theme.  WCRP accomplishments report: Single lead-off presentation covering 2005-2008 on behalf of all projects, panels, and working groups by Jim Hurrell (CLIVAR) and Ted Shepherd.  Lessons to be drawn from the WCRP experience over the last 2 decades  Core projects and the International Project Offices (IPOs) carry lion’s share of the WCRP program.

3. 3 Report on the 30 th Session of the Joint Scientific Committee of the World Climate Research Programme  Value of focused objectives and targeted activities, and the importance of and value in engaging young scientists in ways that ensure that WCRP activities are key elements of their own research careers.  Financial situation of the WCRP has improved and this will allow more effective support for WCRP workshops and meetings, thanks to Ghassem Asrar.

4. 4 Report on the 30 th Session of the Joint Scientific Committee of the World Climate Research Programme  Key issues raised in the WCRP review were summarized by Antonio Busalacchi, pointing out the importance of addressing these as part of the planning for the near future (up to 2013) and longer-term activities:  WCRP lacks visibility within key communities, notably user communities, and particularly within developing countries.  Fundamental research role of WCRP was pointed out as important particularly for the major science funding agencies (e.g. NERC, NOAA, NSF).

5. 5 Report on the 30 th Session of the Joint Scientific Committee of the World Climate Research Programme  Post-2013 WCRP structure, tentative proposal hat emerged from the 29 th JSC meeting, with further elaborations within the JSC:  Small number of panels that would be oriented along methodological themes: (a) Earth system observations, analysis and data, (b) Earth system modelling, and (c) Earth system prediction, predictability, and applications.  Discussion: many questions about the implications for a major reorientation of WCRP programs, and the effect that departing from the more topical themes-orientation of the existing projects might have on the scientific communities.

6. 6 Report on the 30 th Session of the Joint Scientific Committee of the World Climate Research Programme  SPARC Plans assuming that SPARC will continue as an identifiable project within the WCRP to 2013 and beyond:  Legacy document: While several activities within SPARC are likely to continue into the far future, 3 were identified as key elements: (a) chemistry-climate model validation, (b) assessment of key uncertainties in measurements, (c) linking various scientific communities.  Atmospheric Chemistry and Climate (AC&C) WCRP/IGBP cross-cutting activity: jointly led by SPARC/WCRP and IGAC/IGBP. A. Ravishankara has stepped down as the SPARC Co-chair for this activity. Recently Martyn Chipperfield has agreed to become the Co-chair on behalf of SPARC. Phil Rasch remains as the Cochair on behalf of IGBP.

7. 7 Report on the 30 th Session of the Joint Scientific Committee of the World Climate Research Programme  Future of the WCRP as discussed in 3 breakout groups:  Tasked to consider the same three questions: (1) What should be the function of WCRP? (2) What should be the main themes of WCRP? (3) What should be the structure of WCRP?  Result: Framework for restructuring WCRP beyond 2013:  Central structured activities analogous to the current core projects.  Broad disciplinary themes that recognize major couplings and processes in the climate system: Land /Atmosphere, Ocean/Atmosphere, Cryosphere, Stratosphere/Troposphere.

8. 8

9. 9 Report on the 30 th Session of the Joint Scientific Committee of the World Climate Research Programme  Future of the WCRP  Broad disciplinary themes that recognize major couplings and processes in the climate system: Land /Atmosphere, Ocean/Atmosphere, Cryosphere, Stratosphere/Troposphere.  Ambitious scientific agenda that would engage the next generation of scientists.  Advantage of straightforward connections to IGBP and to GCOS, key partners for WCRP, which are organized similarly.  Applications, communications, and outreach will be addressed through a major interdisciplinary cross-cutting actvity that will also be a distinct structural feature of the future WCRP.  Stratosphere/Troposphere activity would be the natural evolution of SPARC, and a recognition that the stratosphere is an integral part of the climate system while having its own distinct character.

10. 10 Report on the 30 th Session of the Joint Scientific Committee of the World Climate Research Programme  Future of the WCRP  From a SPARC perspective, this development concerning the future of WCRP is seen to be a very positive one, which provides stability for future planning.  Past achievements of the WCRP should be treasured, and structural change per se will not automatically improve efficiency. This appreciation for the role and operation of the WCRP was also shared by representatives from the WCRP international sponsors.  Optimistic note: all participants felt energized to continue the work on defining the future of WCRP over the coming year.  31 st JSC Session: Antalya, Turkey, in February 2010, in conjunction with 15 th Session of the WMO Commission for Climatology.

11. 11 WCRP – Quo vadis? SPARC – Quo vadis? Potential points for discussion: SPARC needs to “encompass the troposphere“! Does SPARC need to change its name? A central issue will be a good coordination with IGAC! Should we reconsider a merger IGAC&SPARC? Need a home for lab studies, in particular chemical kinetics! AC&C: Intensify interaction between SPARC and IGAC! To this end benefit from the CCMVal and achieve real collaboration between CCMVal modelers and tropospheric modelers!

12. 12

13. 13