The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences.

The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Robert M. White is president of the National Academy of Engineering.

The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I. Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine.

The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. Robert M. White are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.

With a worldwide increase in the awareness of, and concern for, environmental issues that face Planet Earth has come a growing awareness of the role that the polar regions play in the global environment. A quite natural accompaniment has been the growing recognition by the general public and by organized environmental groups of the especially pristine nature of the Antarctic, the southern polar region of the planet. Of course, the Antarctic has always been considered a special place by those nations that established, more than three decades ago, the Treaty System that has kept the continent free from human conflicts and that has preserved it as a unique locale for scientific research. Now, with the number of Consultative Parties to the Treaty more than double the original 12 and far more nations actively interested in environmental matters for the welfare of their citizens, the place of the Antarctic in international science has grown even more visible, especially for those research areas that require global perspectives.

Antarctica itself is no longer viewed as the sole object of the scientific research conducted there. Studies of marine living resources are placed in a global context of food stocks and of local and global ecosystems. The study of algae and bacteria in Antarctica's desert lakes and streams provides insight on microbial systems of the early Earth and the possibility of life on Mars. Studies of the evolution of life history phenomena in extreme environments, the physiological adaptations that accompany these phenomena, and species interactions have provided significant insights on ecosystem structures and functions. Undisturbed benthic habitats, in which marine communities have been isolated for perhaps 20 million years, provide a unique opportunity for studies of evolution. The explosion-generated acoustic signals that bounce off the rock at the bottom of an ice sheet not only yield data on the ice itself but also provide insights into the stability and future of the sheet under conditions of global atmospheric change. Machine-driven augers drilling deep into the ice caps produce cores that tell us of past climates on Earth and of the atmo-

spheric conditions that existed in those ancient times. Geologic and fossil discoveries made by geologists working under the most difficult conditions have been essential for understanding continental drift and the place of the Antarctic in it.

Humankind's influence on the stratospheric ozone layer was first discovered and then understood through measurements and experiments made on, and above the continent. The balloon-borne payloads that majestically circle the entire continent in a week or more relay data on the conditions of the upper atmosphere, the near-space environment, and the Sun, all of great importance for understanding global climate and weather. Sensitive ground-based instruments emplaced across the continent monitor signals that are crucial for understanding, and even predicting, the weather conditions where spacecraft that circle the planet fly. The antarctic ice sheet has collected and harbored a vast number of meteorites, some of which are of lunar origin, and some few of which are likely to be the only samples of the surface of the planet Mars that we have on Earth. Thus, research in the Antarctic has become essential for progress in many areas of global geosciences and biological sciences.

In meetings in Madrid and Bonn in October of 1991, a Protocol on Environmental Protection was developed for the Antarctic Treaty. The Protocol designates Antarctica as a natural reserve devoted to science and peace and establishes important environmental standards for the Antarctic. Its Annexes contain detailed mandatory rules for certain specific activities and areas. Compliance with the Protocol will require implementing legislation in the United States.

The scientific community recognizes the need for strong measures for environmental protection in the Antarctic. At the same time, there is reasonable concern that the implementation of the Protocol could harm the science required for environmental protection, including scientific monitoring. There are also questions as to whether the traditional primacy of scientific excellence as the principal determinant of the research to be pursued might be superseded by other criteria.

Humans and their activities cause the need for environmental oversight in the Antarctic. It is commonly believed that the scientific population in the Antarctic likely will grow little for some time. In many areas of research, projects will rely more and more on automated instrumentation and remote sensing from spacecraft. Such trends should be strongly encouraged. At the same time, however, tourism will likely continue to grow. And tourists will want to visit not only fixed scientific bases in order to understand the work in progress, but also continental areas of significant scientific importance. These developments raise concerns about the environmental aspects of such tourism, and its impacts on scientific research.

At the request of the U.S. Department of State, the Polar Research Board of the National Research Council (NRC) established the Committee on Antarctic Policy and Science (CAPS) to evaluate the possible impacts of policy decisions on scientific programs in Antarctica. The evaluation had four major goals:

• To identify the possible impacts on science from expanding human activities in the Antarctic.

• To evaluate the possible impacts on science projected from various political, institutional, and organizational scenarios being considered for managing human activities in the Antarctic.

• To provide an independent evaluation of U.S. policy options and their possible effects on the structure and functioning of science within the Antarctic Treaty System and within the United States.

• To provide specific policy recommendations on the role of the antarctic scientists in the policy process.

The Committee first met in December of 1992 and proceeded thereafter on a very rapid schedule to carry out its charter. In addition to four extensive meetings at which directions were established and issues debated and settled, the Committee convened a workshop to examine the governmental, environmental, and scientific issues raised by the Protocol. More than 70 interested individuals from government, universities, and nongovernmental organizations attended. The growth of mutual understanding and awareness among the attendees from differing backgrounds was most evident during the course of the workshop, and afterwards.

This report is the result of the Committee's deliberations and hard work. I would like to thank the members of CAPS and the NRC staff for the intensity of their participation and for the genuine collegiality demonstrated throughout our deliberations. The members have defined the issues and recommended actions that can be commended to all those concerned for the preservation of this unique continent on Planet Earth.

Louis J. Lanzerotti, Chair

Committee on Antarctic Policy and Science