|
National Committee for Mathematics
IMU General Assembly, 1998 |
|
Preamble Saturday the 15th Sunday the 16th Concluding commentary |
The 13th General Assembly of the International Mathematical Union (IMU) took place in Dresden on the 15th and 16th August, 1998. Alan Carey, Alf van der Poorten and Derek Robinson represented Australia. The formal minutes of the meeting will no doubt appear on the IMU Webpage . The following informal commentary is a set of impressions of the Australian delegation together with some reflections on the impact of the assembly. |
The Assembly consisted of the IMU Executive, a 9 man
committee (it does not contain any women) and approximately 130
representatives of the national committees of the member nations.
The meeting was held in a large room of the stately Hotel Bellevue
on the right bank on the Elbe.
The room, which was originally a ballroom, was long and rectangular.
It determined the configuration of the assembly and this in turn affected
the dynamic of the meeting.
The executive sat at a table on a raised dias across the head of the room
and the delegates sat on each side of three long tables stretching the length
of the room.
The seating of the delegations was ordered alphabetically so Australia
was close to the head of the first table preceded only by the Argentine and
Armenia.
The German and Russian delegations were prominent at the heads of
the other tables.
The dimension of the room and the lexicographic ordering then combined
to relegate the French, the Polish and the United States to the
far end of the room with the Canadians, Israelis and Spanish strategically
placed toward the centre.
(The dynamics of the situation could have been quite different
if the USA had been described as America and the Netherlands
had been classified as Holland.)
The acoustics of the room were not particularly good but this was compensated
for by a good sound system.
There was a microphone beside each table, positioned approximately at the centre
of the room, and delegates who wished to speak moved to the appropriate
microphone.
The executive had their own individual microphones.
Another factor affecting the meeting was the large number of delegates
attending their first IMU general assembly.
Consequently few attendees were conversant with the opaque and paternalistic
practises of the union.
These led to a number of points of dissension in the subequent debate.
The
previous General Assembly of the IMU took place
in Luzern, Switzerland, on the 31st of July and the 1st of August 1994.
Several resolutions of that meeting were to impinge on the Dresden meeting.
Resolution 2 requested the Executive Committee to proceed with the
planning of activities for the World Mathematical Year 2000.
Resolutions 3, 4 and 5 addressed reforms of the program of the ICM
and Resolution 6 asked the Executive Committee to redraft
the electoral procedures for the Executive.
General procedures
On first reading the agenda of the assembly appeared to consist largely
of formal matters, reports and reviews, with very few items likely to lead to
discussion.
Saturday's business was indeed rather routine.
After an opening address by the President, which partially foreshadowed
some of Sunday's discussion topics, the assembly agreed to the recommendations
of the executive on the appointment of various committees.
These committees were transient bodies created to facilitate the business
of the following day.
`Formed like butterflies to pass a moment of glory fluttering in the light
before fading away on their second day of life' as one delegate observed.
The committee memberships were initially recommended by the executive
and the committee responsibilities were to review and endorse
the propositions of the executive.
For example the Resolutions Committee was given responsibility
for the final formulation of the resolutions to be presented to the assembly
on the Sunday and the Nominating Committee reviewed the recommendations of
the executive for the subsequent elections.
The responsibilities of the Credentials Committee, to which Alan Carey was
appointed, were never clarified!
After the committee structures were agreed, several other reports were
presented.
Some points mentioned were
ICM 2002
Two proposals were received for the congress in 2002, one from Norway
and one from China.
These proposals had been considered by the executive at its meeting
in Berlin in May and they recommended acceptance of the Chinese proposal to
hold the congress in Beijing.
The latter proposal was documented by a well presented brochure which
was distributed to all delegates.
This brochure described the Chinese background in mathematics, the attractions
and features of the country and the facilities available to the congress.
A variety of special interest meetings in neighbouring centres
were also proposed in the document including a meeting in Tibet, which was
clearly designated as part of China.
The virtues and attractions of the Chinese proposal were then expressed
by the Chinese delegation.
In contrast delegates did not receive any documentation concerning
the Norwegian proposal and no details were available.
The Norwegian delegate did, however, speak and explain that the proposal
was motivated by the bicentennial of the birth of Abel and that a conference
would in any case be held in Oslo in the year 2002 to celebrate this event.
Various delegates expressed unease with aspects of the Chinese proposal.
The principles of free circulation were raised, the availability of entry
and exit visas was questioned.
Doubts were voiced about the Chinese promises in these respects.
Several supporters of the proposal gave clarifying explanations but
each of these appeared to obscure the situation.
Finally a vote was proposed.
The President first suggested a show of hands but this was resisted
and a secret ballot was instituted.
The Chinese proposal was then adopted although the
undocumented Norwegian proposal received significant support, 23 votes,
and there were half a dozen abstentions.
This division was a hint of things to come.
The meeting adjourned at 3.30 to allow the committees to prepare for the
following day.
General procedures
Day two of the IMU assembly began slowly with a couple of committee
reports but it livened up later.
The general mood of the meeting seemed to have changed overnight with a
certain twitchiness in the air and a lesser feeling of acquiescence.
The early business consisted of the reports.
Financial summary
The financial basis of the IMU is provided by the subscriptions of the
national delegations.
The latter are classified in five groups and the subscription is an increasing,
non-linear, function of the size of the group.
The proportionality factors for the groups being
1, 2, 4, 7 and 10.
The financial position of the IMU appears healthy with reserves corresponding
to approximately two year's income.
One positive use of funding was the support programs for mathematicians
from developing countries and mathematicians from Eastern Europe to attend the
1998 International Congress in Berlin.
The only problems of note concerned defaulting delegations.
These difficulties were largely confined to nations who had suffered
severe political or social upheavals and it was decided to treat these
problems with patience and sympathy.
Program committee
The program committee is one of the most important and the most sensitive
of the IMU.
It is responsible for recommending the session and speakers for the ICM.
In the past its procedures have been `discreet and confidential' or `closed and
secret' according to the point of view of the observer.
Committee procedures were criticized at the previous IMU General Assembly in 1994
in Luzern and it was suggested that
these criticisms had been met by various
reforms.
The membership of the program committee had been fixed by the Executive
at its
39th meeting on the 11th and 12th of May, 1995 at the
Collège de France.
Phillip Griffiths, the Chair of the program committee, reported on his
public role in receiving suggestions concerning sections and speakers.
Resolutions
The resolutions committee presented several resolutions on behalf of the
Executive.
Most of these were quite anodyne thanking the organizers of the assembly etc.
The only resolution to attract a considerable amount of debate was one originating
with the American delegation.
This was a social responsibility resolution which encouraged the IMU to pay
special attention to minority groups in its procedures and in particular in the
formation of its committees.
The American formulation was abbreviated by the executive and the shortened form
adopted by the resolutions committee.
This subsequently caused considerable confusion.
The official resolution was an amendment of the American resolution but when
the American delegation reintroduced their resolution it had to be viewed
as an amendment of the official resolution.
Subsequently two votes took place.
The first was to decide whether the official resolution, i.e., the amendment,
should be replaced by the amendment, i.e., the original.
The second was to decide whether the resolution should be adopted.
A third possibility that no resolution should be considered was ruled out on
procedural grounds.
The last decision caused some disquiet.
The principal argument against a resolution was that both versions
implied that previous practises had been delinquent (although there
is considerable evidence that this is the case).
This in itself caused considerable debate.
The position was further obscured by the wording of the official resolution
which contained ill-defined terms such as `smaller countries'.
(Australia and Holland have similar sized populations but vastly different
geographic parameters. Is one or both a small country?)
Other attempts to clarify the situation with terms
such as `traditionally under-represented groups' only led to further
confusion.
(Member nations have a wide variety of traditions.)
Finally one vote preferred the official resolution by a small majority
and a second vote agreed to its adoption.
Electronic developments
The second item to attract considerable debate was the executive's
proposal to form an ad hoc committee to advise on the creation of a
Commission on Electronic Information and Communication (CEIC).
The importance of electronic communication and the development of
electronic publishing was not questioned.
The IMU has recently developed a website and ICM98 has also gone electronic.
On the other hand the IMU publications such as the World Directory of
Mathematicians does not have an electronic version although the
Australian entry
is available.
It was felt important that the IMU take a higher profile in these
developments.
The necessity to develop guidelines and standards for electronic
publication was discussed and this was thought to be appropriate
business for the IMU.
Alf van der Poorten spoke of the difficulties of defining an electronic
publication, or a refereed electronic publication, and the problems of
archiving such publications. (Hardcopy publications are durable products
but electronic technology can leave even recent files unreadable.)
The enormous commercial aspects of scientific publications mean that control
of electronic standards is a particularly is a particularly important and
sensitive matter.
The sensitivity of commercial aspects was emphasised by the French
delegation.
The latter stressed that although it was of the
utmost importance to consult with commercial interests
it was not appropriate to have them represented on IMU committees.
Consequently the membership of the proposed ad hoc committe was modified.
After modification the proposed committee was accepted by the assembly
and asked to report within the year.
Executive elections
The last and most confusing item of business was the election of the new
Executive Committee of the IMU.
The
new procedures formulated after discussion at the previous general assembly
had been followed:
Unfortunately the Executive Committee did not chose to circulate
the full list of nominations received from the National Committees
either for the Executive or for the other commissions.
This was the principle cause of the considerable confusion that prolonged the
assembly.
The principle points of confusion were the following:
The election of the Officers caused no particular concerns but the general
members of the committee were a different matter.
The election procedures had not been prepared in advance and hence considerable
time was used in preparing the ballot papers and counting the votes.
These procedures also raised new concerns as the ballot paper was presented with
the `official' candidates in a block separated by the `opposition' candidates.
Nevertheless the election proceeded with the ballot counting taking about an hour and
a half.
The end result was not very surprising, the official slate was elected with one
exception, the German nominee of the National Committee was preferred to the
alternateve nominee of the Executive.
Nevertheless the voting was close with the final count
The Australian delegation came away from the Dresden assembly with mixed feelings.
The meeting was very instructive and illuminating but not necessarily for
the right reasons.
The overall impression was of an organization firmly rooted in the nineteenth
century positioning itself nervously to edge into the 21st century.
In particular the IMU has been slow to grapple with the problems of the electronic
age.
It is essential that it should come to terms with the problems of electronic
publication and the opportunities presented by electronic communication.
The disquiet expressed at the Lausanne meeting over the democratic structures
and the election procedures have not been adequately addressed and much remains
to be done.
From an Australian point of view the lack of representation of the Asia--Pacific
region is of concern and from a mathematical point of view the lack of representation
of applied and computational mathematics is troublesome.
It is hoped that these matters will be addressed by the assembly preceeding the
ICM 2002 in Beijing.
Finally the the organization of Dresden meeting, the accommodation and the organized
tours were all excellent and a tribute to the local organizers.
There was also a preliminary discussion of the opportunities
and challenges of electronic communication and publication.
Australian interest in these matters was expressed by Alf van der Poorten
and an ad hoc committee to consider procedures was mooted.
Further discussion was postponed until Sunday.
Then the one substantive item of the Saturday's business was considered,
the siting of ICM 2002, the International Congress in the year
2002.
Similar procedures were followed for nominations to the other IMU commissions
on Education, on History and on Development.
The effects of these points of confusion were
An election then followed.
and the principal protest vote consolidating behind Robinson with 68 votes.