Biogeosciences Perspectives on Integrated, Coordinated, Open, Networked (ICON) Science

Authors

D. Dwivedi, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
A. L.D. Santos, Universidade Federal do Parana
M. A. Barnard, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
T. M. Crimmins, The University of Arizona
A. Malhotra, Stanford University
K. A. Rod, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
K. S. Aho, National Ecological Observatory Network
S. M. Bell, UAB Instituto de Ciencia y Tecnología Ambientales
B. Bomfim, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
F. Q. Brearley, Manchester Metropolitan University
H. Cadillo-Quiroz, Arizona State University
J. Chen, Michigan State University
C. M. Gough, Virginia Commonwealth University
E. B. Graham, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory
C. R. Hakkenberg, Northern Arizona University
L. Haygood, The University of Tulsa
G. Koren, Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development
E. A. Lilleskov, USDA Forest Service
L. K. Meredith, The University of Arizona
S. Naeher, GNS Science
Z. L. Nickerson, National Ecological Observatory Network
O. Pourret, UniLaSalle
H. S. Song, University of Nebraska–LincolnFollow
M. Stahl, Union College, Schenectady
N. Taş, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
R. Vargas, University of Delaware
S. Weintraub-Leff, National Ecological Observatory Network

Date of this Version

3-1-2022

Citation

Dwivedi, D., Santos, A. L. D., Barnard, M. A., Crimmins, T. M., Malhotra, A., Rod, K. A., et al. (2022). Biogeosciences perspectives on Integrated, Coordinated, Open, Networked (ICON) science. Earth and Space Science, 9, e2021EA002119. https://doi.org/10.1029/2021EA002119

Comments

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License,

Abstract

This article is composed of three independent commentaries about the state of Integrated, Coordinated, Open, Networked (ICON) principles in the American Geophysical Union Biogeosciences section, and discussion on the opportunities and challenges of adopting them. Each commentary focuses on a different topic: (a) Global collaboration, technology transfer, and application (Section 2), (b) Community engagement, community science, education, and stakeholder involvement (Section 3), and (c) Field, experimental, remote sensing, and real-time data research and application (Section 4). We discuss needs and strategies for implementing ICON and outline short- and long-term goals. The inclusion of global data and international community engagement are key to tackling grand challenges in biogeosciences. Although recent technological advances and growing open-access information across the world have enabled global collaborations to some extent, several barriers, ranging from technical to organizational to cultural, have remained in advancing interoperability and tangible scientific progress in biogeosciences. Overcoming these hurdles is necessary to address pressing large-scale research questions and applications in the biogeosciences, where ICON principles are essential. Here, we list several opportunities for ICON, including coordinated experimentation and field observations across global sites, that are ripe for implementation in biogeosciences as a means to scientific advancements and social progress.