Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-568f69f84b-tcbk7 Total loading time: 0.38 Render date: 2021-09-19T01:06:00.050Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

Article contents

Through the lens of the polar years: changing characteristics of polar research in historical perspective

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 October 2009

Aant Elzinga*
Affiliation:
Department of History of Ideas and Theory of Science, University of Gothenburg, Sweden (aant.elzinga@theorysc.gu.se)

Abstract

The four polar years are used as windows for highlighting changes in the character of polar research over the past 125 years. The approach taken may be seen as one of an archaeology of knowledge. As such it fixes on four separate strata in the history of science and seeks to lay bare distinctive features in each of these. To simplify, the focus is selective, mainly presenting three types of aspect for each year. The first is the character of the instruments and research technologies employed in each, and the second is the kinds of problems tackled, while the third is the associated view or ideal of science that stands out. The latter aspect has to do with epistemology. The paper suggests that whereas work during the first International Polar Year (IPY) reflected an empirical inductivist philosophy of science, during the second IPY a mix of problem oriented, and hypothesis driven, approaches existed alongside inductivism. By the time of the International Geophysical Year (IGY) the theoretical foundations of polar research had grown stronger and much of the focus had shifted to larger scale geophysical processes. Finally, today's ambition to develop an integrated Earth system science reflects an ideal that is systemic, constructivist and predictive. Such epistemological features are evident in some of the most advanced forms of computer aided analysis of Arctic and Antarctic processes, as well as in visualisation methodologies used to interpret and present data, concepts, models and theories. This latest approach is evident in some of the planning and agenda setting documents generated under the auspices of the current IPY.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

ACIA (Arctic Climate Impact Assessment). 2004. Impacts of a warming Arctic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
ACIA (Arctic Climate Impact Assessment). 2005. Arctic Climate Impact Assessment – Scientific Report. 2005. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Althoff, W.F. 2007. Drift station: Arctic outposts of superpower science. Dulles Virginia:Potomac Books Inc.Google Scholar
Andrée, S.A. 2008. Svenska fysikaliska-meteorologiska expeditionen till Spetsbergen juli 1882-september 1883. S.A. Andrées dagbok från deltagande I det första internationella polaråret. Grenna: Stiftelsen Grenna (Museum skriftserien 7).Google Scholar
Anon. (Anonymous).1982. An interview with Dr F.W.G. Baker, executive secretary of ICSU. WMO Bulletin 31: 187196.Google Scholar
Appleton, E.V. 1932. Letter to B.D. La Cour. 7 August 1932. Copenhagen: Danish National Archive (Meteorologisk Institut Polarkommissionen box 4, letter 24).Google Scholar
Appleton, E.V. 1934. Radio exploration of the ionosphere. Nature 133 (3369): 793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Appleton, E.V. 1947. The ionosphere. Nobel Lecture, December 12, 1947. In: Lindqvist, S. (editor), 1992. Nobel lectures in physics 1910–1971. Stockholm: World Scientific Publishing Company: 7986.Google Scholar
Appelton, E.V., Naismith, R., and Ingram, L.J., 1937. British radio observations during the second International Polar Year 1932–1933. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society Series A 236 (764): 191259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arktowski, H. 1905. Projet d'une exploration systématique des régions polaires. Bruxelles: Vanderauwere and Cie. (Association Internationale pour l'Ètude des Régions Polaires).Google Scholar
Bacon, F. 1905. The new Atlantis. In: The essays or counsels civil and moral and the New Atlantis of Francis Lord Verulam (The English works of Francis Bacon vol. 1). London: Methuen (Methuen's Standard Library).Google Scholar
Baker, F.W.G. 1982. The first International Polar Year, 1882–83. Polar Record 21 (132): 275285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barr, W. 1983. Geophysical aspects of the first International Polar Year 1882–1883. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 73 (December): 463484.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barr, W. 2008. The expeditions of the first International Polar Year 1882–83. Calgary: Arctic Institute of North America at Calgary University.Google Scholar
Barry, R.G.,1983. Arctic ocean ice and climate: perspectives on a century of polar research. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 73 (December): 485501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartels, J. 1932. Terrestial-magnetic activity and its relation to solar activity, Geophysical Research. 37: 152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartels, J. 1942. Dan La Cour (Obituary). Die Naturwissenschaften, Jahrgang 30, Heft 43 (Oktober): 649–650.Google Scholar
Behr, S., Coen, R., Warwick, W.K., Wiggens, H., and York, A.. 2007. IPY history reflects progress in science and society. Witness to the Arctic. Chronicles of the NSF Arctic Science Division 12 (2): 14.Google Scholar
Berger, F., Besser, B., and Krause, R.A.. 2008. Carl Weyprecht (1838–1881). Seeheld, Polarforscher, Geophysiker. Vienna: Austrian Academy of Science Press.Google Scholar
Berkner, L.V., and Wells, H.W.. 1934. Report on the ionospheric investigations at the Huancayo magnetic observatory (Peru) during 1933. Proceedings of the Institute of Radio Engineers 22:11021123.Google Scholar
Berkner, L.V. 1959. International Geophysical Year. Washington, DC: Industrial College of Armed Forces, (Publication no. L59–97).Google Scholar
Berkner, L.V., and Odishaw, H. (editors). 1961. Science in space. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company Inc.Google Scholar
Bones, S. 2007. Norway and the past international polar years – a historical account. Polar Research 26 (2): 195203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breit, G., and Tuve, M.A.. 1926. A test of the existence of a conducting layer. Physical Review 28: 554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buijs, G., and van Zuylen, P.. 2008. Jaap van Zuylen. A Dutchman in east Greenland 1932–1934. Leiden: Digital Publications of the National Museum of Ethnology (URL: www.rmv.nl).Google Scholar
Bulkeley, R. 2008. Aspects of the Soviet IGY. Russian Journal of Earth Sciences 10 (ES 1003 online): 117. ES1003, doi/10.2205/2007ES000249. URL: http://elpub.wdcb.ru/journals/rjes/v10/2007ES000249/8.shtml.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berguño, J. in press. The search for an organizational framework for Antarctic research (1948–1985). Columbus, Ohio: Byrd Polar Research Centre (paper presented at the 3rd workshop of the SCAR history action group. Byrd Polar Research Centre, Columbus, Ohio 25 October 2007).Google Scholar
Cannegieter, H.G. 1963. The history of the International Meteorological Organization 1872–1951. Annalen der Meteorologie, Nue Folge 1.Google Scholar
Carpine-Lancre, J., and Barr, W.. 2008. The Arctic cruises of Prince Albert I of Monaco. Polar Record 44 (228): 114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chamberlin, T.C. 1897. The method of multiple working hypotheses. Journal of Geology 5: 837848. (Reprinted 1931 in Journal of Geology 39: 155–165).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapman, S. 1930. A theory of upper atmospheric ozone, Memoirs of the Royal Meteorological Society 33: 106125.Google Scholar
Chapman, S., and Ferraro, V.C.A.. 1930. A new theory of magnetic storms. Nature 126: 129130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapman, S., and Ferraro, V.C.A.,1931. A new theory of magnetic storms Part I. Terrestrial Magnetism and Atmospheric Electricity 36: 171186;CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapman, S., and Ferraro, V.C.A.. 1933. A new theory of magnetic storms. Part II Terrestrial Magnetism and Atmospheric Electricity 38: 8196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapman, S. 1933. The effects of a solar eclipse on the Earth's magnetic Field. Terrestrial Magnetism and Atmospheric Electricity 38: 175183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapman, S. 1934. Radio exploration of the ionosphere, Nature 133 (3372): 908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapman, S. 1935. A mechanical-optical method of reduction of pairs of aurora plates. Terrestial Magnetism and Atmospheric Electricity 39: 299303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapman, S. 1959a. An introduction to the history of the first International Polar Year. Annals of the International Polar Year 1: 35.Google Scholar
Chapman, S. 1959b. The IGY. The year of discovery. Ann Arbor: Michigan University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Close, C., De Margerie, M.E., Chapman, S., Walker, G., Hill, H.R., Davis, J.K., Brunt, D., Goodenough, W., Bonacina, L.C.W., and Simpson, G.C.. 1929. Meteorology of the polar regions: discussion. The Geographical Journal 74 (3): 263270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colwell, R.R. 1993. Some views on Antarctic research. In: Elzinga, A. (editor). Changing trends in Antarctic research. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers: 140149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corby, G.A. 1982. The first International Polar Year 1882/83. WMO Bulletin. 31: 197222.Google Scholar
Craddock, C. 1982. Antarctica and Gondwanaland. In: Craddock, C. (editor.). Antarctic Geoscience. Madison Wisconsin: The University of Wisconsin Press. (IUGS series B 4): 313.Google Scholar
Crewe, M.E. 2002. Meteorology and aerial navigation, London: Royal Meteorological Society (occasional papers on meteorological history 4).Google Scholar
Daniel, H. 1973. One hundred years of international co-operation in meteorology. Geneva: WMO (report 345).Google Scholar
Dansgaard, W. 2004. Frozen annals. Greenland ice cap research. Copenhagen: Copenhagen University, Niels Bohr Institute for Astronomy, Physics and Geophysics.Google Scholar
Davis, W.M. 1926. The value of outrageous geological hypotheses. Science New series 63 (1636): 463468.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dietrich, D. (editor). 1969. Atlas of the hydrography of northern Atlantic Ocean based on the polar front survey of the International Geophysical Year, Winter and Summer 1958. Charlottensund Slot: ICES Publication.Google Scholar
DMI (Danish Meteorological Institute). 1972. Meteorologisk Institut gennem hundrede år 1872–1972. Copenhagen: Danish Meteorological Institute.Google Scholar
Doel, R.E. 1997. The earth sciences and geophysics. In: Krige, J., and Pestre, D. (editors). Science in the twentieth century. Amsterdam: Harwood Academic Publishers: 391416.Google Scholar
Doel, R.E. 2003. Constituting the postwar environmental sciences: the military influence on the environmental sciences in the USA after 1945. Social Studies of Science 35 (5): 635666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dodds, K. 1997. Geopolitics in Antarctica. Views from the Southern Ocean rim. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Dodds, K. 2008. Icy politics. Guest editorial. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 26: 16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Drewry, D.J. 1989. Guest editorial. Antarctic Science 1.Google Scholar
Edwards, P.N. 2004. Beyond the ivory tower: ‘a vast machine’: standards as social technology. Science 304 (5672): 827828.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edwards, P.N. 2006. Science, technology, and globalization. Meteorology as infrastructural globalism. Osiris 21: 229250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Egedal, J. 1934. On the propagation of magnetic storms. Terrestrial Magnetism and Atmospheric Electricity 39: 321323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ehrhart, S.B. 1902. Die Verteilung der Temperatur und des Luftdruckes auf der Erdoberfläche im Polarjahre 1882/1883. Stuttgart: Vereins-Buchdruckerei (inaugural dissertation).Google Scholar
Eklund, C.R. 1959. Life history and distribution of the South Polar skua. Baltimore: University of Maryland, unpublished PhD dissertation.Google Scholar
Ellsworth, L., and Smith, E.H.. 1932. Report of the preliminary results of the Aeroarctic expedition with Graf Zeppelin, 1931. Geographical Review 22 (1): 6182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elzinga, A 1992. The interplay of research and politics: the case of Antarctica. In: Svedin, U., and Anisansson, B.H. (editors). Society and the environment: a Swedish research perspective. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers: 257283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elzinga, A.,1993a. Antarctica: the construction of a continent by and for science. In: Crawford, E., Shinn, T., and Sörlin, S. (editors). Denationalizing science. The context of international scientific practice. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers (Sociology of the Sciences yearbook 1992): 73106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elzinga, A. (editor). 1993b. Changing trends in Antarctic research. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elzinga, A. 2004. Otto Nordenskjöld's quest to internationalize south-polar research. In: Elzinga, A., Nordin, T., Turner, D., and Wråkberg, U., (editors). Antarctic challenges. Historical and current perspectives on Otto Nordenskjöld's Antarctic expedition 1901–1903. Göteborg: Royal Society of Arts and Sciences in Göteborg: 262290.Google Scholar
Elzinga, A.,2007. Swedish non-participation in the Antarctic leg of IGY 1957–58. Berichte zur Polar und Meerforschung 560: 142162.Google Scholar
Elzinga, A. in press – a. Geopolitics, science and internationalism during and after IGY. Punta Arenas: Chilean Antarctic Institute (paper presented at the 2nd SCAR action group on the history of Antarctic science, Santiago (Chile) 21–22 September 2006).Google Scholar
Elzinga, A. in press – b. A history of ice core drilling and science with some early roots in the Cold War – from Camp Century to EPICA. Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University, Byrd Polar Research Center (paper presented at the 3rd SCAR action group on the history of Antarctic science, Byrd Polar Research Center, 25–26 October 2007).Google Scholar
Elzinga, A., and Bohlin, I.. 1989. The politics of science in the polar regions. Ambio 18 (1): 7176.Google Scholar
Farish, M. 2006. Frontier engineering. From the globe to the body in cold war Arctic. The Canadian Geographer 50 (2): 177196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fleming, J.A., and Laursen, V.,1949. International Polar Year 1932–1933. Temporary commission on liquidation of polar year 1932–1933. Science 11 (2856): 308309.Google Scholar
Fogg, G.E. 1992. A history of Antarctic science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Friedman, R.M. 1982. Constituting the polar front 1919–1920. Isis 73 (2): 343362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fuchs, V., and Hillary, E.. 1958: The crossing of Antarctica: the Commonwealth Trans-Antarctic expedition, 1955–8. London: Cassell and Co.Google Scholar
Fütterer, D.K., Damaske, D., Keinschmidt, G., Miller, H., and Tessensohn, F.. 2006. Antarctic. The road to Gondwana via the early SCAR symposia. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Gilmor, S. 1981. Wilhelm Alter, Edward Appelton, and the magneto-ionic theory. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 126 (5): 395440.Google Scholar
Goldberg, F. 2003. Drama in the Arctic. S.O.S. ‘Italia’. A diary and postal history. Lidingö: Fred Goldberg Publications.Google Scholar
Gramelsberger, G. 2008. Computersimulationen – Neue Instrumente der Wissensproduktion. In: Mayntz, R., Neidhardt, R., Weingart, P., and Wengenroth, U. (editors). Wissensproduktion und Wissenstransfer. Wissen im Spannungsfeld von Wissenshaft, Politik und Offentlichkeit. Bielefeld: Transcript Verlag: 7595.Google Scholar
Greenaway, F. 1996. Science international. A history of the Council of Scientific Unions. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
Hacquebord, L. 1995. Nederlandse poolkringen. Hondertvijftig jaar Nederlands onderzoek in poolgebieden. Groningen: Inaguerell rede Rijksuniversiteit Groningen.Google Scholar
Hacquebord, L. in press a. Beset in the ice of the Kara Sea. In: Barr, S., and Lüdecke, C. (editors). From pole to pole, vol. I: the history of the IPYs. Berlin: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
Hacquebord, L. in press b. The Dutch contribution to the second International Polar Year (1932–1933). In: Barr, S., and Lüdecke, C. (editors). From pole to pole, vol. I: the history of the IPYs. Berlin: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
Hall, C.M., and Hansen, T.L.. 2003. 20th century operation of Tromsø iosonde. Advances in Polar Upper Atmosphere Research 17: 155166.Google Scholar
Hamblin, J.D. 2000. Science in isolation: American marine geophysics research, 1950–1968, Physics in Perspective 2 (3): 293312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamblin, J.D. 2005. Oceanographers and the cold war: disciplines of marine science. Seattle: University of Washington Press.Google Scholar
Hamblin, J.D. 2007. Motley of landscapes and seascapes. Science at the strategic poles during the International Geophysical Year. In: Rozwadowski, H., and Benson, K. (editors). Extremes: oceanography's adventures at the poles. Sagamore Beach: Science History International/USA Publishers.Google Scholar
Heathcote, N.H. de V., and Armitage, A.,1959. The first International Polar Year. Annals of the International Geophysical Year 1: 6104.Google Scholar
Hoinka, K.-P.,1997: The tropopause, discovery, definition and demarcation. Meteorologische Zeitschrift, Neues Folge 6 (6)281303.Google Scholar
International Council of Scientific Unions (ICSU) and World Meteorological Organization (WMO) Joint Committee for the IPY 2007–2008. 2007. The scope of science for the International Polar Year 2007–2008. Geneva: World Meteorological Organization (WMO/TD-no. 1364).Google Scholar
International Polar Heritage Committee (IPHC). 2004. Cultural heritage in the Arctic and Antarctic regions. Oslo: IPHC.Google Scholar
International Polar Year Commission. 1908. Session of 1908. Brussels: Royal Academies of Belgium (proceedings of the meetings).Google Scholar
Kell, D.B., and Oliver, S.G.. 2003. Here is the evidence, now what is the hypothesis? The complementary roles of inductive and hypothesis-driven science in the post-genomic era. BioEssays 26 (1): 99108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirby, S., Berkner, L.V., Gilliland, T., and Norton, K.,1934: Radio observations of the Bureau of Standards during the solar eclipse of Aug. 31, 1932. Proceedings of the Institute of Radio Engineers 22: 247264.Google Scholar
Korotkevich, E.S. 1982. The polar regions in world geophysical programmes. WMO Bulletin 31: 231234.Google Scholar
Krige, J. 2006. American hegemony and the postwar reconstruction of science in Europe. Cambridge, Ma: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Laclavére, G.R. 1961. Le traite de l'Antarctique. ICSU Review 3 (4): 159163.Google Scholar
La Cour, D.B., and Laursen, V., 1930. Le variomètre de Copenhague, Copenhagen: Danish Meteorological Institute (communication magnetiques 11).Google Scholar
La Cour, D.B. 1933a. Letter to J. A. Fleming (Carnegie Institution of Washington). 22 November 1933. Copenhagen: Danish National Archive (Meteorologisk Institut Polarkommissionen box 17, letter 2565).Google Scholar
La Cour, D.B. 1933b. Letter to Sir H. Lyons (Secretary General of the International Council of Scientific Unions). 29 December 1933. Copenhagen: Danish National Archive (Meteorologisk Institut Polarkommissionen box 17, letter 2582).Google Scholar
La Cour, D.B. 1934a Letter to J. Valenzuela, (Director of the Meteorologicval Office in Chile) 8 January 1934. Copenhagen: Danish National Archive (Meteorologisk Institut Polarkommissionen box 17, letter 2592).Google Scholar
La Cour, D.B. 1934b Letter to Adolf Schmidt. 4 January 1934. Copenhagen: Danish National Archive (Meteorologisk Institut Polarkommissionen box 17, letter 2589).Google Scholar
La Cour, D.B. 1934c. Letter to W.E. Tisdale (Rockefeller Foundation). July 13 1934. Copenhagen: Danish National Archive (Meteorologisk Institut Polarkommissionen box 17, letter 2696).Google Scholar
Laktionov, A. 1960. Nordpolen. ur polarfärdernas historia. Moskva: Förlaget för främmande språk.Google Scholar
Langway, C.C. Jr. 2008. The history of early polar ice cores. Hannover NH: US Army Engineer Research and Development Center of the Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory (ERDC/CRREL) (TR08-1).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lauridsen, E.K., and Abrahamsen, N.. 1998. The history of astatic magnet systems and suspensions. Centaurus 40 (2): 135169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laursen, V. 1932. Det internationale polaraar 1932–33. Geografisk Tidskrift 35: 2235.Google Scholar
Laursen, V. 1951. Bibliography for the second International Polar Year 1932–33. Copenhagen: Horsholm Bogtrykkeri.Google Scholar
Laursen, V. 1982.The second International Polar Year (1932/33). WMO Bulletin 31: 214231.Google Scholar
Lewander, L. 2007. The Norwegian-British-Swedish expedition (NBSX) to Antarctica 1949–52 – science and security. Berichte zur Polar und Meerforschung 560: 123141.Google Scholar
Lewis, R.S., and Smith, P.M.. 1973: Frozen future. A prophetic report from Antarctica. New York: Quadrangle Press.Google Scholar
Light, R.U. 1966. Antarctica seven years after the IGY. United States Scientific Support Activities 1964–1965. Geographical Review 56 (1): 98111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lüdecke, C. 1995. Die deutsche Polarforschung seit der Jahrhundertwende und der Einfluß Erich von Drygalskis. Berichte der Polarforschung (Bremerhaven): 158.Google Scholar
Lüdecke, C. 2001. The Belgian attempt to institutionalize polar research (1905–1915) and the German view. In: Decleir, H., and de Broyer, C. (editors). The ‘Belgica’ expedition centennial. Perspectives on Antarctic science and history. Brussels: VUB Press (proceedings of the Belgian centennial symposium, 14–16 May 1998): 161169.Google Scholar
Lüdecke, C. 2004. The first International Polar Year. A big experiment with small science equipment. Proceedings of the International Commission of Meteorology 1 (1): 5564.Google Scholar
Lüdecke, C. 2007. Über die globale Verteilung von Luftdruck und Temperatur am Beispiel des 1. Internationalen Polarjahres 1882/1883. Hamburg (paper presented at the German-Austrian-Swiss meteorological meeting 2007. URL: http://meetings.copernicus.org/dach2007/download/DACH2007_A_00400.pdfGoogle Scholar
Lüdecke, C. 2008. From the bottom to the stratosphere. Arctic climate features seen from the first International Polar Year (1882–1883) until the end of World War II. In: Brönnimann, S., Luterbacher, J., Ewen, T., Diaz, H.F., Stolarski, R.S., and Neu, U. (editors). Climate variability during the past 100 Years. Berlin: Springer Verlag: 2945.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marrs, H.B.,1932. Seasonal variations in magnetic storms. Physical Review 39: 504514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mountevans, Lord (E.R.G.R. Evans). 1957. From husky to sno-cat. A short survey of polar exploration yesterday and today. London: Staples Press Ltd.Google Scholar
NAS (National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council). 1961a. Science in Antarctica. Part I The life sciences in Antarctica. Washington: NAS/NRC (publication 839).Google Scholar
NAS (National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council). 1961b. Science in Antarctica. Part II The physical sciences. Washington: NAS/NRC (publication 878).Google Scholar
Needell, A.A. 2000. Science, cold war and the American state. Lloyd V. Berkner and the balance of professional ideals. Amsterdam: Harwood Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Newitt, L.R., and Dawson, E.. 1984. Magnetic observations at international polar year stations in Canada. Arctic 37 (3): 255262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nicolet, M. 1982. The International Geophysical Year 1957/58. WMO Bulletin 31: 222231.Google Scholar
Nilsson, A.E. 2007. A changing Arctic climate. Science and policy in the Arctic climate impact assessment. Linköping: Linköping University (Studies in Arts and Science no. 386).Google Scholar
NSF (National Science Foundation). 2007. Setting a course for Antarctic Integrated System Science. Arlington VA: National Science Foundation (based on a workshop held in Arlington, Virginia, 13–15 June 2007). URL: http:/www.scar.org/information/aissreport.pdf.Google Scholar
Olsson, H. 1933. Med svenskarna på Spitsbergen under polaråret 1932–1933. Stockholm: Åhlén and Söner Förlag.Google Scholar
Petrov, V. 1957. Soviet participation in the Geophysical Year. Professional Geographer 9 (3): 710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robin, G. de Q. 1961. Five years of Antarctic research. ICSU Review 3 (4): 153158.Google Scholar
Rossby, C-G., and Weightman, R. H.. 1926. Applications of the polar-front theory to a series of American weather maps. Monthly Weather Review 54 (12): 486496.2.0.CO;2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rozwadowski, H., and Bension, K. (editors). 2007. Extremes: oceanography's adventures at the poles. Sagamore Beach, Ma: Science History Publications/USA.Google Scholar
SCAR (Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research). 1988. SCAR Bulletin 90 In: Polar Record 24 (150): 261265.Google Scholar
SCAR (Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research). 1989. The role of Antarctica in global change. Cambridge: ICSU Press/SCAR (prepared by the SCAR steering committee for the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme – IGBP).Google Scholar
SCAR (Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research) 1991. Report 6 (January 1991) Cambridge: ICSU Press/Scott Polar Research Institute.Google Scholar
SCAR (Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research). 1992. The role of the Antarctic in global change: an international plan for a regional research programme. Cambridge: Scott Polar Research Institute (prepared by the SCAR steering committee for the IGBP).Google Scholar
SCAR (Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research). 2004. SCAR strategic plan 2004–2010. Cambridge: Scott Polar Research Insitute/SCAR Secretariat.Google Scholar
Seidenfaden, G.,1938. Modern Arktisk forskning. Stockholm: Åhlén and Söner förlag.Google Scholar
Simpson, G.C. 1929. Meteorology of the polar regions. The Geographical Journal 74 (3): 258262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaw, N. 1924. World weather: a review. Geographical Review 14 (3): 416425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorge, E. 1933. The scientific results of the Wegener Expedition to Greenland. The Geographical Journal 81 (4): 333344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smalheiser, N.R. 2002. Informatics and hypothesis-driven research. EMBO reports 3 (8): 702.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith-Rose, R.L. 1963. Radio and international geophysical research. Nature 199 (4888): 1115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stauning, P. 2002. High precision magnetometers. Copenhagen: Danish Meteorological Institute.Google Scholar
Stauning, P., and Henriksen, S.. 2008. Nordlysets maler. Harald Moltkes malerier på Meteorologisk Institut. Copenhagen: Danish Meteorological Institute (technical report 08–08).Google Scholar
Sullivan, W. 1961. Assault on the unkown. The International Geophysical Year. London: Houghton and Stoughton Ltd.Google Scholar
Summerhayes, C.P. 2008. International collaboration in Antarctica: the International Polar Years, the International Geophysical Year, and the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research. Polar Record 44 (231): 321334.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor, C.J. 1981. First International Polar Year, 1882–83. Arctic 34 (4): 370376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tinbergen, N. 1934. Eskimoland. Rotterdam: D. van Sijn and Zonen.Google Scholar
Tollner, H., Kanitschreiber, R., and Kopf, F.. 1934. Vierzehn Monate in der Arktis. Wien-Innsbruch-München: Verlagsanstalt Tirolia.Google Scholar
Vestine, E.H. 1934. Noctiluscent clouds. Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada 28: 249272, 303–317.Google Scholar
Walker, G.T. 1928. World weather. Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society 54: 7988.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walton, D.W.H. 1987. Antarctic science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wexler, H. 1959. The Antarctic convergence – or divergence? In: Bolin, B. (editor). Rossby memorial volume. The atmosphere and sea in motion. New York: Rockefeller Institute Press: 107120.Google Scholar
Wilczek, J.N., and Weyprecht, C.. 1877. Programme des travaux d'une expedition polaire internationale (translator C.P. Summerhayes). Rome: Second International Meteorological Congress. URL: http.//www.scar.org/ipy/weyprecht_1877.pdfGoogle Scholar
Wiley, S. 2008. Hypothesis-free? No such thing. The Scientist 22 (5): 31.Google Scholar
Wilson, J.T. 1961. IGY. The year of many moons. New York: Alfred Knopf.Google Scholar
12
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Through the lens of the polar years: changing characteristics of polar research in historical perspective
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Through the lens of the polar years: changing characteristics of polar research in historical perspective
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Through the lens of the polar years: changing characteristics of polar research in historical perspective
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *