- Email: [email protected]
National research efforts in analytical chemistry, 1981–1985
316
chemistry at the undergraduate level? Some will say that we must wait for the natural evolutionary process to prevail in academe. Neither the students of the immediate future nor the discipline itself can afford that approach. There must be a concerted effort to define the fundamental principles of chemical measurements, to write new teaching references which utilize the clear definition, to develop a new laboratory approach for a novice’s experience with the basic methodologies, and to illustrate through the actual undergraduate laboratory problems the systems and processes in which these methodologies are applicable. None of the above resembles
in any way the present curricular scheme consisting of an introduction to chemical equilibrium and a relatively sterile concatenation of all the instrumentation we use in the chemical sciences - i.e., the present approach in most of the undergraduate chemistry programs in the U.S.A. In all of our collegial discussions within the analytical chemistry community we are talking about achieving a definite, effective response to one aspect of educational crisis. The solution to the problem is not to be found in quantitative curricular expansion as a function of the accumulation of man’s knowledge or the industrial needs for meeting every single challenge in international competition. The focus of a new effort in
trendsinanalyticalchemistry,vol. 8, np 9,1989
the U.S.A. must be on pedagogically sound methods for advancing a relatively inexperienced student from ignorance about chemical measurements to a reasonably thorough understanding of the principles and methods which pertain to real systems and analytical challenges. This must be accomplished within a context of time constraints and fundamental goals appropriate for attainment of a baccalaureate degree. More extensive understanding of every possible mutation would, of necessity, await further study at the graduate level in our system or practical experience gained through solving actual problems in the workplace. The challenge is clear. The effort to meet the challenge is going to require all hands on deck, even those who are out walking their wits and wringing their hands. Furthermore, the effort must be fully supported in principle and means by the funding agencies, foundations and industries who purport an abiding interest in improving the quality and effectiveness of an undergraduate’s experience in chemistry. References 1 H. L. Pardue and J. Woo, J. Chem. 2
Educ., 60 (1984) 409. Symposia: (a) ‘Teaching Analytical Chemistry: When, What and How?’ Eighth Biennial Conference on Chemical Education, Storrs, CT, 1984, re-
National research efforts in analytical chemistry, 19814985 T. Braun, W. Gltinzel and A. Schubert Budapest, Hungary
Introduction In our previous contribution to this section, we presented a panoramic view of national performances in analytical chemistry research between 1981 and 1985l. Performance was interpreted as the functional effectiveness of research as reflected in the citation impact of publications gener-
ated by it. In this article we extend the investigation to the mapping of the national effort that different countries devote to analytical chemistry research. We consider that, in a certain sense, national effort can be equated to national publication productivity and the indicators derived
ported in J. Chem. Educ., 62 (1985)’ 18. (b) ‘Implementing the Analytical Aspects of the Pimentel Report in the Chemistry Curriculum, Especially That For Analytical Chemistry’, Pittsburgh Conference, Atlanta, GA, spring, 1989. 3 A. J. Bard, CHEMTECH, June
(1985) 331. 4 R. F. Hirsch, J. Chem. Educ.,
64
(1987) 438. 5
P. T. Kissinger, Trends Anal. Chem., 8 (1989) 122.
6 7
R. W. Murray, Talanta, 36 (1989) 11. W. F. Pickering and D. E. Ryan,
Trends Anal. Chem., 8 (1989) 119. 8 E. Albee, ‘Who’s Afraid of Virginia Wool” Act I, Atheneum Press, New York, 1962. Alice J. Cunningham (B.A., University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, U.S.A.; Ph.D., Emory University, Atlanta, GA, U.S.A.) is the William Rand Kenan, Jr. Professor of Chemistry at Agnes Scott College, Decatur, GA, U.S.A. She has served as an officer of the American Chemical Society’s (ACS) Division of Analytical Chemistry and has recently completed three three-year terms as a member of the ACS Committee on Professional Training, which she chaired during the most recent revision of the Committee’s Guidelines (I 986-88). Professor Cunningham is now an appointed consultant to the ACS Committee on Professional Training. Currently she is also chairing the Undergraduate Subcommittee of the Division of Analytical Chemistry’s Education Committee and she is the ViceChair of an ACS Commission on Science Task Force on Research and Teaching.
from that raw productivity can be used for comparative assessments. Methodology The database and computational methods are similar to those described in our previous article’. From the raw data we have built the following indicators: Activity index (AI)
The AI is defined as: AI = (a country’s share in global publication output in analytical chemistry)/(a country’s share in global publication output in all science fields)
317
trends in analyticalchemistry, vol. 8, no. 9, I989
I
I
Activity
)
2
1 index
Fig. 1. Relational chart displaying citation share (CSI) vs. activity (AI) indices.
or equivalently: AI = (the proportion of analytical chemistry publications in the national scientific publication output)/(the proportion of analytical chemistry publications in global scientific publication output) The AI characterizes a country’s relative research activity in analytical chemistry. AI = 1 indicates that the country’s research activity in this field corresponds exactly to the world average; AI > 1 reflects an above average and AI < 1 a below average research activity. As no country will show high AI values in all scientific fields, by definition the average of the AI values over the different scientific fields must be equal to one for each individual country. Citation share index (CSZ)
The CSI is defined as: CSI = (national share in citations to analytical chemistry publications)/(national share in citations to all scientific publications) or equivalently: CSI = (analytical chemistry’s share in all national scientific publication citations)/(analytical chemistry’s share in all international scientific publication citations) The CSI characterizes the relative recognition achieved by publications in analytical chemistry from any one country. as reflected in their number of citations. CSI = 1 indicates that the number of citations corresponds
exactly to the world average; CSI > 1 refects an above average and CSI C 1 a below average number of citations. It follows from the definition that any country can only have high CSI values in analytical chemistry at the expense of lower CSI values in other fields. Although both the AI and the CSI can be used independently, their real significance is revealed by displaying both of them on a two-dimensional relational chart (Fig. 1). The vertical and horizontal dashed lines represent the unit level (the world average) of relative research activity and citation reward, respectively; points to the right of the vertical or above the horizontal dashed line reflect above average activity and rewards. However, for evaluative purposes, the most relevant question is the ‘input-output balance’, i.e. whether the research activity in analytical
chemistry (or, more precisely, the number of publications) has sufficient return in terms of citations. This is revealed in the relational chart by the position of the point (corresponding to the country in question) relative to the main diagonal (solid line). For example, point A in Fig. 1 represents a country whose share in its analytical chemistry citation ‘income’ is much higher than its share in analytical chemistry publication ‘input’. Therefore, although both its relative activity and reward are below the world average, analytical chemistry in that country deserves distinction and support. The relative citation reward obtained by country B, though higher than the international average, does not compensate for the even higher relative publication effort. For estimating the statistical reliability of AI and CSI let us consider
TABLE I. AI and CSI indicators of analytical chemistry research effort in 35 countries, 1981-1985 Country
AI
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35.
9.03 5.36 4.19 3.64 3.17 3.06 2.91 2.69 2.22 1.91 1.78 1.72 1.56 1.50 1.46 1.30 1.14 1.07 1.04 1.04 1.04 0.99 0.97 0.95 0.93 0.90 0.82 0.75 0.82 0.73 0.73 0.66 0.64 0.58 0.55
Iraq Spain Egypt Poland Czechoslovakia Hungary Yugoslavia Romania Bulgaria Greece Belgium Austria India Japan The Netherlands Argentina Italy Finland Sweden F.R.G. G.D.R. Brazil Norway France China Switzerland Australia Canada South Africa U.S.A. U.S.S.R. New Zealand U.K. Denmark Israel
Test statistic (t) 10.14 32.56 15.02 25.20 20.53 15.98 10.39 7.54 7.69 6.01 10.43 7.76 14.19 20.60 9.29 2.67 3.83 0.53 0.99 1.72 0.67 -0.17 -0.40 -2.22 -1.07 -2.36 -5.69 -11.42 -2.88 -37.24 -16.43 -5.55 -25.60 -9.57 -12.16
CSI 15.53 3.81 5.40 4.53 6.75 3.71 3.26 3.08 3.37 3.60 1.82 2.23 2.19 1.53 1.81 1.56 1.45 1.42 1.37 1.01 1.45 1.45 1.36 1.19 1.98 0.97 1.10 0.93 1.03 0.76 0.56 1.25 0.75 0.76 0.50
Test statistic (t) 7.06 18.60 10.27 19.11 19.85 13.39 7.66 5.05 6.67 7.26 8.99 8.28 14.78 17.02 11.70 2.97 7.93 4.04 5.99 0.25 4.32 2.47 2.95 5.22 4.53 -0.54 2.01 -2.21 0.30 -27.11 -13.91 1.82 -13.27 -3.50 -11.60
318
trends in analytical chemistry,
vol. 8, no. 9,1989
,
.
where N and M are the number of national analytical chemistry publications and citations, respectively, and S and T the number of national publications and citations, respectively, in all scientific fields. If analytical chemistry represents only a small fraction of the scientific endeavour of the country in question (l/N >> l/S), then the above relations can be reduced to: d AI = AI/m Fig. 2. Relational chart of CSI vs. AZ values for 3.5 countries.
the second of the definitions of AI and CSI, respectively. Of the two proportions, that in the numerator is the main source of statistical error. The denominator, which is based on international aggregate data, is obviously loaded with a much smaller error than the contribution of a single country. The relative errors in AI and CSI are therefore taken to be as large as that in their numerator. We now need the error bounds within which the observed share of analytical chemistry publications (respectively citations) can be considered as an estimation of the probability that a randomly drawn item will fall into the subfield of analytical chemistry. We use the error formula of the binomial distributions:
LlCSI = cs1/* and one can rely on the rule of thumb that to stay within 10% error bounds, a sample of publications (respectively citations) in analytical chemistry requires at least 100 items. A simple test statistic to decide whether an AI or CSI value differs significantly from 1 can be defined as: tAI = (AI-l)/dAI tCSI= (CSI-l)/LlCSI
This statistic is a random variable of Student’s t-test, which can be approximated by a standard normal distribution. Thus, e.g., if ItI c 2, the indicator does not differ significantly from 1 at the 0.95 significance level. The test statistic can also be used for assessing the reliability of cross-national comparisons of AI and CSI. The required test statistics are constructed as follows:
d AI = AI d l/N-l/S t=
LlCSI = CSI u l/M-l/T
AI,-AI, ~(AI,-~)~I<+(AI,-~)~/~
Environmental analytical chemistry (incl. metal speciation) A report on the 19th IAEAC Annual Symposium on Environmental Analytical Chemistry, and on the 5th Metal Speciatidn Workshop in Groundwaters, held in Jekyll island, GA, U.S.A., 22-26 May, 1989.
This was the 19th symposium in a series of conferences which were organized by Professor Roland W. Frei, the International Association of Environmental Analytical Chemistry (IAEAC), EPA and the Universities of Georgia and Philadelphia (Drexel). The 20th symposium, dedicated
and t=
CSI,-CSI, ~(csI,-1)2/+
(csI,-l)rIt
Results and discussion Table I and Fig. 2 present AI and CSI values for 35 countries. As can be seen in the figure the countries cluster in five more or less clearly definable groups: (I) Czechoslovakia, Poland, Egypt, Spain, Iraq; (II) Greece, Hungary, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Romania; (III) India, Austria, The Netherlands, Belgium Argentina, Japan; (IV) G.D.R., Finland, Italy, Brazil, Norway, France, F.R.G., New Zealand, Australia, Sweden, Switzerland; (V) Canada, Denmark, U.K., U.S.A., U.S.S.R., Israel, South Africa. Except for those in group V, all countries have an above average research activity in the field of analytical chemistry. Whether this can be considered a positive achievement in the overall scientific development of these countries is a moot question.
References 1 T. Braun, W. Glanzel, A. Schubert, Trends Anal. Chem., 8 (8) (1989)281. Dr. Braun is at the Institute of Inorganic andAnalytical Chemistry, L. Eiitviis University, P.O. Box 123, 1443 Budapest Hungary and at the ISSRU. Drs. W. Ghinzel and A. Schubert are at the Information Science and Scientometric Research Unit (ISSRV), Libary of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, P. 0. Box 7, 1361 Budapest, Hungary.
to the late president and founder of the IAEAC will be held in Strasbourg, France, 17-20 April, 1990. Global climate changes McFarland (DuPont) spoke on the history of chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) monitoring, (in 1973 the first warning was given by Molino and Rowland; in 1978 CFC-aerosols were banned in the U.S.A., in 1985 evidence was presented of ozone depletion over Antarctica, and in 1988 the
chemistry at the undergraduate level? Some will say that we must wait for the natural evolutionary process to prevail in academe. Neither the students of the immediate future nor the discipline itself can afford that approach. There must be a concerted effort to define the fundamental principles of chemical measurements, to write new teaching references which utilize the clear definition, to develop a new laboratory approach for a novice’s experience with the basic methodologies, and to illustrate through the actual undergraduate laboratory problems the systems and processes in which these methodologies are applicable. None of the above resembles
in any way the present curricular scheme consisting of an introduction to chemical equilibrium and a relatively sterile concatenation of all the instrumentation we use in the chemical sciences - i.e., the present approach in most of the undergraduate chemistry programs in the U.S.A. In all of our collegial discussions within the analytical chemistry community we are talking about achieving a definite, effective response to one aspect of educational crisis. The solution to the problem is not to be found in quantitative curricular expansion as a function of the accumulation of man’s knowledge or the industrial needs for meeting every single challenge in international competition. The focus of a new effort in
trendsinanalyticalchemistry,vol. 8, np 9,1989
the U.S.A. must be on pedagogically sound methods for advancing a relatively inexperienced student from ignorance about chemical measurements to a reasonably thorough understanding of the principles and methods which pertain to real systems and analytical challenges. This must be accomplished within a context of time constraints and fundamental goals appropriate for attainment of a baccalaureate degree. More extensive understanding of every possible mutation would, of necessity, await further study at the graduate level in our system or practical experience gained through solving actual problems in the workplace. The challenge is clear. The effort to meet the challenge is going to require all hands on deck, even those who are out walking their wits and wringing their hands. Furthermore, the effort must be fully supported in principle and means by the funding agencies, foundations and industries who purport an abiding interest in improving the quality and effectiveness of an undergraduate’s experience in chemistry. References 1 H. L. Pardue and J. Woo, J. Chem. 2
Educ., 60 (1984) 409. Symposia: (a) ‘Teaching Analytical Chemistry: When, What and How?’ Eighth Biennial Conference on Chemical Education, Storrs, CT, 1984, re-
National research efforts in analytical chemistry, 19814985 T. Braun, W. Gltinzel and A. Schubert Budapest, Hungary
Introduction In our previous contribution to this section, we presented a panoramic view of national performances in analytical chemistry research between 1981 and 1985l. Performance was interpreted as the functional effectiveness of research as reflected in the citation impact of publications gener-
ated by it. In this article we extend the investigation to the mapping of the national effort that different countries devote to analytical chemistry research. We consider that, in a certain sense, national effort can be equated to national publication productivity and the indicators derived
ported in J. Chem. Educ., 62 (1985)’ 18. (b) ‘Implementing the Analytical Aspects of the Pimentel Report in the Chemistry Curriculum, Especially That For Analytical Chemistry’, Pittsburgh Conference, Atlanta, GA, spring, 1989. 3 A. J. Bard, CHEMTECH, June
(1985) 331. 4 R. F. Hirsch, J. Chem. Educ.,
64
(1987) 438. 5
P. T. Kissinger, Trends Anal. Chem., 8 (1989) 122.
6 7
R. W. Murray, Talanta, 36 (1989) 11. W. F. Pickering and D. E. Ryan,
Trends Anal. Chem., 8 (1989) 119. 8 E. Albee, ‘Who’s Afraid of Virginia Wool” Act I, Atheneum Press, New York, 1962. Alice J. Cunningham (B.A., University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, U.S.A.; Ph.D., Emory University, Atlanta, GA, U.S.A.) is the William Rand Kenan, Jr. Professor of Chemistry at Agnes Scott College, Decatur, GA, U.S.A. She has served as an officer of the American Chemical Society’s (ACS) Division of Analytical Chemistry and has recently completed three three-year terms as a member of the ACS Committee on Professional Training, which she chaired during the most recent revision of the Committee’s Guidelines (I 986-88). Professor Cunningham is now an appointed consultant to the ACS Committee on Professional Training. Currently she is also chairing the Undergraduate Subcommittee of the Division of Analytical Chemistry’s Education Committee and she is the ViceChair of an ACS Commission on Science Task Force on Research and Teaching.
from that raw productivity can be used for comparative assessments. Methodology The database and computational methods are similar to those described in our previous article’. From the raw data we have built the following indicators: Activity index (AI)
The AI is defined as: AI = (a country’s share in global publication output in analytical chemistry)/(a country’s share in global publication output in all science fields)
317
trends in analyticalchemistry, vol. 8, no. 9, I989
I
I
Activity
)
2
1 index
Fig. 1. Relational chart displaying citation share (CSI) vs. activity (AI) indices.
or equivalently: AI = (the proportion of analytical chemistry publications in the national scientific publication output)/(the proportion of analytical chemistry publications in global scientific publication output) The AI characterizes a country’s relative research activity in analytical chemistry. AI = 1 indicates that the country’s research activity in this field corresponds exactly to the world average; AI > 1 reflects an above average and AI < 1 a below average research activity. As no country will show high AI values in all scientific fields, by definition the average of the AI values over the different scientific fields must be equal to one for each individual country. Citation share index (CSZ)
The CSI is defined as: CSI = (national share in citations to analytical chemistry publications)/(national share in citations to all scientific publications) or equivalently: CSI = (analytical chemistry’s share in all national scientific publication citations)/(analytical chemistry’s share in all international scientific publication citations) The CSI characterizes the relative recognition achieved by publications in analytical chemistry from any one country. as reflected in their number of citations. CSI = 1 indicates that the number of citations corresponds
exactly to the world average; CSI > 1 refects an above average and CSI C 1 a below average number of citations. It follows from the definition that any country can only have high CSI values in analytical chemistry at the expense of lower CSI values in other fields. Although both the AI and the CSI can be used independently, their real significance is revealed by displaying both of them on a two-dimensional relational chart (Fig. 1). The vertical and horizontal dashed lines represent the unit level (the world average) of relative research activity and citation reward, respectively; points to the right of the vertical or above the horizontal dashed line reflect above average activity and rewards. However, for evaluative purposes, the most relevant question is the ‘input-output balance’, i.e. whether the research activity in analytical
chemistry (or, more precisely, the number of publications) has sufficient return in terms of citations. This is revealed in the relational chart by the position of the point (corresponding to the country in question) relative to the main diagonal (solid line). For example, point A in Fig. 1 represents a country whose share in its analytical chemistry citation ‘income’ is much higher than its share in analytical chemistry publication ‘input’. Therefore, although both its relative activity and reward are below the world average, analytical chemistry in that country deserves distinction and support. The relative citation reward obtained by country B, though higher than the international average, does not compensate for the even higher relative publication effort. For estimating the statistical reliability of AI and CSI let us consider
TABLE I. AI and CSI indicators of analytical chemistry research effort in 35 countries, 1981-1985 Country
AI
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35.
9.03 5.36 4.19 3.64 3.17 3.06 2.91 2.69 2.22 1.91 1.78 1.72 1.56 1.50 1.46 1.30 1.14 1.07 1.04 1.04 1.04 0.99 0.97 0.95 0.93 0.90 0.82 0.75 0.82 0.73 0.73 0.66 0.64 0.58 0.55
Iraq Spain Egypt Poland Czechoslovakia Hungary Yugoslavia Romania Bulgaria Greece Belgium Austria India Japan The Netherlands Argentina Italy Finland Sweden F.R.G. G.D.R. Brazil Norway France China Switzerland Australia Canada South Africa U.S.A. U.S.S.R. New Zealand U.K. Denmark Israel
Test statistic (t) 10.14 32.56 15.02 25.20 20.53 15.98 10.39 7.54 7.69 6.01 10.43 7.76 14.19 20.60 9.29 2.67 3.83 0.53 0.99 1.72 0.67 -0.17 -0.40 -2.22 -1.07 -2.36 -5.69 -11.42 -2.88 -37.24 -16.43 -5.55 -25.60 -9.57 -12.16
CSI 15.53 3.81 5.40 4.53 6.75 3.71 3.26 3.08 3.37 3.60 1.82 2.23 2.19 1.53 1.81 1.56 1.45 1.42 1.37 1.01 1.45 1.45 1.36 1.19 1.98 0.97 1.10 0.93 1.03 0.76 0.56 1.25 0.75 0.76 0.50
Test statistic (t) 7.06 18.60 10.27 19.11 19.85 13.39 7.66 5.05 6.67 7.26 8.99 8.28 14.78 17.02 11.70 2.97 7.93 4.04 5.99 0.25 4.32 2.47 2.95 5.22 4.53 -0.54 2.01 -2.21 0.30 -27.11 -13.91 1.82 -13.27 -3.50 -11.60
318
trends in analytical chemistry,
vol. 8, no. 9,1989
,
.
where N and M are the number of national analytical chemistry publications and citations, respectively, and S and T the number of national publications and citations, respectively, in all scientific fields. If analytical chemistry represents only a small fraction of the scientific endeavour of the country in question (l/N >> l/S), then the above relations can be reduced to: d AI = AI/m Fig. 2. Relational chart of CSI vs. AZ values for 3.5 countries.
the second of the definitions of AI and CSI, respectively. Of the two proportions, that in the numerator is the main source of statistical error. The denominator, which is based on international aggregate data, is obviously loaded with a much smaller error than the contribution of a single country. The relative errors in AI and CSI are therefore taken to be as large as that in their numerator. We now need the error bounds within which the observed share of analytical chemistry publications (respectively citations) can be considered as an estimation of the probability that a randomly drawn item will fall into the subfield of analytical chemistry. We use the error formula of the binomial distributions:
LlCSI = cs1/* and one can rely on the rule of thumb that to stay within 10% error bounds, a sample of publications (respectively citations) in analytical chemistry requires at least 100 items. A simple test statistic to decide whether an AI or CSI value differs significantly from 1 can be defined as: tAI = (AI-l)/dAI tCSI= (CSI-l)/LlCSI
This statistic is a random variable of Student’s t-test, which can be approximated by a standard normal distribution. Thus, e.g., if ItI c 2, the indicator does not differ significantly from 1 at the 0.95 significance level. The test statistic can also be used for assessing the reliability of cross-national comparisons of AI and CSI. The required test statistics are constructed as follows:
d AI = AI d l/N-l/S t=
LlCSI = CSI u l/M-l/T
AI,-AI, ~(AI,-~)~I<+(AI,-~)~/~
Environmental analytical chemistry (incl. metal speciation) A report on the 19th IAEAC Annual Symposium on Environmental Analytical Chemistry, and on the 5th Metal Speciatidn Workshop in Groundwaters, held in Jekyll island, GA, U.S.A., 22-26 May, 1989.
This was the 19th symposium in a series of conferences which were organized by Professor Roland W. Frei, the International Association of Environmental Analytical Chemistry (IAEAC), EPA and the Universities of Georgia and Philadelphia (Drexel). The 20th symposium, dedicated
and t=
CSI,-CSI, ~(csI,-1)2/+
(csI,-l)rIt
Results and discussion Table I and Fig. 2 present AI and CSI values for 35 countries. As can be seen in the figure the countries cluster in five more or less clearly definable groups: (I) Czechoslovakia, Poland, Egypt, Spain, Iraq; (II) Greece, Hungary, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, Romania; (III) India, Austria, The Netherlands, Belgium Argentina, Japan; (IV) G.D.R., Finland, Italy, Brazil, Norway, France, F.R.G., New Zealand, Australia, Sweden, Switzerland; (V) Canada, Denmark, U.K., U.S.A., U.S.S.R., Israel, South Africa. Except for those in group V, all countries have an above average research activity in the field of analytical chemistry. Whether this can be considered a positive achievement in the overall scientific development of these countries is a moot question.
References 1 T. Braun, W. Glanzel, A. Schubert, Trends Anal. Chem., 8 (8) (1989)281. Dr. Braun is at the Institute of Inorganic andAnalytical Chemistry, L. Eiitviis University, P.O. Box 123, 1443 Budapest Hungary and at the ISSRU. Drs. W. Ghinzel and A. Schubert are at the Information Science and Scientometric Research Unit (ISSRV), Libary of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, P. 0. Box 7, 1361 Budapest, Hungary.
to the late president and founder of the IAEAC will be held in Strasbourg, France, 17-20 April, 1990. Global climate changes McFarland (DuPont) spoke on the history of chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) monitoring, (in 1973 the first warning was given by Molino and Rowland; in 1978 CFC-aerosols were banned in the U.S.A., in 1985 evidence was presented of ozone depletion over Antarctica, and in 1988 the