The inside story of the Group of Scientific Experts and its key role in developing the CTBT verification regime

Q2 Social Sciences Nonproliferation Review Pub Date : 2020-01-02 DOI:10.1080/10736700.2020.1764717
O. Dahlman, F. Ringdal, Jenifer Mackby, S. Mykkeltveit
{"title":"The inside story of the Group of Scientific Experts and its key role in developing the CTBT verification regime","authors":"O. Dahlman, F. Ringdal, Jenifer Mackby, S. Mykkeltveit","doi":"10.1080/10736700.2020.1764717","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article provides an inside view of the sustained effort by the Group of Scientific Experts (GSE) which was key to the development of the international seismic network included in the 1996 Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT). Over the course of the GSE’s twenty-year-long journey, part of which was at the height of the Cold War, the GSE went from being a little-known entity that reviewed and encouraged research to designing and testing elements of a seismic verification system. Their work eventually included full-scale testing of the seismological component of the final global system that is now implemented by the Preparatory Commission of the CTBT Organization. The other three monitoring networks comprised in the treaty—radionuclide, hydroacoustic, and infrasound—are modeled after the seismic network. The article identifies some key conditions that made GSE a successful endeavor. Prime among these was the strong engagement among scientists and scientific institutions in many countries that contributed large resources. The formal work at the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva was just the tip of the iceberg, but very important. This official intergovernmental framework provided a connection to the political community, and a frame for organizing extensive global development and testing activities. GSE was given long-term mandates and self-determination of management and leadership, facilitating a sustained and goal-oriented process. Based on their leadership experience in the GSE and the CTBTO Preparatory Commission Verification Working Group, the authors also provide some reflections on how the concept of scientific expert groups and new scientific developments could prove useful in future efforts toward nuclear-disarmament verification.","PeriodicalId":35157,"journal":{"name":"Nonproliferation Review","volume":"27 1","pages":"181 - 200"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10736700.2020.1764717","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nonproliferation Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10736700.2020.1764717","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

ABSTRACT This article provides an inside view of the sustained effort by the Group of Scientific Experts (GSE) which was key to the development of the international seismic network included in the 1996 Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT). Over the course of the GSE’s twenty-year-long journey, part of which was at the height of the Cold War, the GSE went from being a little-known entity that reviewed and encouraged research to designing and testing elements of a seismic verification system. Their work eventually included full-scale testing of the seismological component of the final global system that is now implemented by the Preparatory Commission of the CTBT Organization. The other three monitoring networks comprised in the treaty—radionuclide, hydroacoustic, and infrasound—are modeled after the seismic network. The article identifies some key conditions that made GSE a successful endeavor. Prime among these was the strong engagement among scientists and scientific institutions in many countries that contributed large resources. The formal work at the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva was just the tip of the iceberg, but very important. This official intergovernmental framework provided a connection to the political community, and a frame for organizing extensive global development and testing activities. GSE was given long-term mandates and self-determination of management and leadership, facilitating a sustained and goal-oriented process. Based on their leadership experience in the GSE and the CTBTO Preparatory Commission Verification Working Group, the authors also provide some reflections on how the concept of scientific expert groups and new scientific developments could prove useful in future efforts toward nuclear-disarmament verification.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
科学专家组的内幕及其在制定《全面禁试条约》核查制度方面的关键作用
本文提供了科学专家组(GSE)持续努力的内部观点,这是1996年《全面禁止核试验条约》(CTBT)中国际地震台网发展的关键。在GSE长达20年的历程中,其中一部分是在冷战的高峰时期,GSE从一个鲜为人知的审查和鼓励研究的实体发展到设计和测试地震验证系统的元素。他们的工作最终包括对目前由全面禁试条约组织筹备委员会实施的最终全球系统的地震部分进行全面测试。条约中包含的其他三个监测网——放射性核素监测网、水声监测网和次声监测网——都是以地震监测网为模型的。本文确定了使GSE成功的一些关键条件。其中最主要的是提供大量资源的许多国家的科学家和科学机构的积极参与。日内瓦裁军谈判会议的正式工作只是冰山一角,但非常重要。这一正式的政府间框架提供了与政界的联系,并为组织广泛的全球发展和试验活动提供了框架。GSE获得了长期的授权和管理和领导的自主权,促进了持续和面向目标的进程。根据他们在GSE和禁核试条约组织筹备委员会核查工作组的领导经验,作者还就科学专家组的概念和新的科学发展如何在未来的核裁军核查工作中证明有用提供了一些思考。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Nonproliferation Review
Nonproliferation Review Social Sciences-Political Science and International Relations
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
期刊最新文献
Poisonous affairs: Russia’s evolving use of poison in covert operations The evolution and future of Israeli nuclear ambiguity Who would trust a nuclear umbrella? Results from an original survey on public confidence in future nuclear guarantees in Morocco BWC assurance: increasing certainty in BWC compliance God isn’t dead: religion, nuclear norms, and the Middle East
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1