ASFA Advisory Board Meeting (Gdynia, Poland, 22-25 April 1997)

Summary Report






1. OPENING OF THE MEETING
Back

Professor S. Polanski, Director of the Sea Fisheries Institute (SFI), opened the Meeting and welcomed the participants to the Institute and to the city of Gdynia. He expressed his appreciation at the honour made to SFI by the ASFA Advisory Board in entrusting SFI with hosting the annual Meeting, which he regarded as one of the important events in the 75 year history of the Institute. The importance that SFI attributes to library and scientific information was mentioned, as was the fact that SFI was the first Institute in Poland to subscribe to the ASFA CD-ROM three years ago. He acknowledged that the present Polish input was not large, but hoped that, after gaining more experience and overcoming existing obstacles, the volume would increase. Professor Polanski explained the tradition at the Institute in which all important events are opened with a ring of the bell coming from the famous research vessel 'Profesor Siedlecki'. Mr. D. Ardill (FAO) was given the honour of sounding the bell to open the Meeting. The occasion was commemorated by an entry in the Book of Honour.

Mr. Brzeski, Deputy Mayor of Gdynia, welcomed the participants to the city and expressed his wishes for a successful meeting.

The Meeting was attended by 28 participants from 14 National ASFA Partners, 2 International Partners, 2 Co-sponsors, the Publisher, and 2 observers. The names and addresses of the participants are listed in Annex-1. The abbreviations used in the Report are listed in Annex-2.

2. ADMINISTRATIVE ARRANGEMENTS
Back

Mr. Ganowiak (SFI) provided the information for this Agenda Item.

3. ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON AND RAPPORTEUR
Back

Ms. Beattie (NOAA) was elected to Chair the meeting. Mr. Pepe (FAO) was appointed Rapporteur and Ms. Cameron (DFO) as assistant Rapporteur.

4. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
Back

The Agenda was adopted and is attached as Annex-3 with the following additions: 8.4 Entitlements and 9.1 ASFISIS.

The Board agreed that the paper Percentage Rise in the Value of a Partner's Additional Entitlements and of ASFA Product Prices would be included for discussion under Agenda Item 8.4.

5. ADOPTION OF THE SUMMARY REPORT OF THE 1996 ASFA ADVISORY BOARD MEETING
Back

The Report of the 1996 ASFA Advisory Board Meeting (FAO, Rome) was adopted by the Board.

5.1 Matters Arising (from last ASFA Advisory Board Meeting)

The Decisions and Actions Agreed by the Participants were reviewed by Mr. Pepe (refer to Annex- 32 of the last (1996) Board Report for a list of the Decisions and Actions). The progress achieved is listed below in points 1 - 54:

  1. CSA reported a significant improvement in the CD-ROM delivery schedule, with a reduction in the delivery time of 6-8 weeks (e.g. the December 1996 disk was shipped on 19 February 1997).
  2. BF reported that only a few Partners had responded to the test database question which they formulated and distributed to Partners at the 1995 Board Meeting (Agenda Item 8.1.1).
  3. BF reported that the list of reasons for which ASFA distinguishes itself from other databases was compiled and sent to Dr. Emerson and Mr. Moulder as information for inclusion in their paper on ASFA presented at IAMSLIC (ASFA: Challenges and Opportunities After the First 25 Years, Emerson, C.; Moulder, D.; 22nd Annual Conference of IAMSLIC, 13-18 October, 1996, Monterey, Calif., USA).
  4. NOAA reported no action on the undertaking to follow-up with CSA regarding inconsistencies with the US names appearing in ASFIS-10, Authority List for Corporate Names.
  5. BF reported no action on the International Directory of Serial Titles. FAO stated that the file was now so out-of-date that its updating in CDS-ISIS format would constitute a major undertaking.
  6. FAO reported that a Discussion Group List for ASFA Board Members was established. The list of the subscribers to this Discussion Group was distributed at the Meeting as FAO Information Document-2.
  7. FAO reported that the FAO Trust Fund proposal agreed by the Board in 1995 Review of the database for gaps in the monitoring of Serials by Partners is underway. A preliminary Report is submitted as Annex-2 of the FAO ASFA Secretariat Report to this Meeting (the FAO ASFA Secretariat Report is Annex-4 to this Report). See also Agenda Item 7.
  8. CSA reported that a list of document suppliers, to assist ASFA users, would appear on the next CD-ROM.
  9. FAO reported that PIMRIS was now ready to consider its participation in ASFA, and that they had sent a Trust Fund Proposal regarding the input of their backfile to the Board for consideration (Agenda Items 6.2.2 and 13.2 point 4).
  10. No action was reported from the ASFA Partners regarding searches on other databases to ascertain whether permission has been obtained to use and acknowledge the use of ASFA Tools (such as the Thesaurus, Geographic Authority List, etc.).
  11. FAO reported that, during the inter-sessional period, all Partners who had not been sending input were contacted. At the beginning of 1997, FAO received 99 input sheets from Lithuania. A copy of the Lithuanian Report was distributed at the Meeting.
  12. FAO reported that contact was made with the Partner from Norway, whose representative is present at this Meeting.
  13. NOAA congratulated the Secretariat on its efforts in recruiting the Estonian Marine Institute (Estonia), Instituto De Fomento Pesquero (Chile), International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES), Institute of Marine Research (Sweden), National Centre for Marine Research (Greece) and Centro di Investigaciones Pesqueras (Cuba).
  14. Potential Partners: The Board agreed on increasing geographic and subject coverage of ASFA and suggested the following areas: Côte d'Ivoire, FAO Regional Fishery Bodies in Africa, Southeast Asia, Brazil, Venezuela, the Caribbean, Spain, Denmark, and Egypt. FAO reported that Argentina had joined the Partnership during the inter-sessional period (Agenda Item 6.2.1).
  15. FAO reported that AGRIS was not yet available on the Internet via the FAO Webserver, but that parts of it will be available in the near future. CARIS was already available via the FAO Webserver. NISC reported that they had established a Web site called "Biblioline" and that both the AGRIS and Agricola databases (5.5 million records) were, for the time being, available free of charge. Both these databases contain numerous records relevant to fisheries and aquaculture The URL address is (www.NISC.COM).
  16. FAO reported that the issue of coverage and input of older material on the database would be discussed with regard to the PIMRIS Trust Fund proposal (Agenda Items 6.2.2 and 13.2 point 4) and to the IOC Science and Communication Centre on Harmful Algae proposal to enter pre-1978 records in ASFA (Agenda Item 7 ).
  17. Regarding the issue of how far back Kenya should go in its input of older material, KMFRI reported that it was, at the moment, concentrating its efforts on current material.
  18. FAO and CSA reported that none of the existing ASFA Partners had requested to input pre-1978 material, during the inter-sessional period (Agenda Item 7).
  19. CSA repeated its recommendation to all Partners that they should send their input to CSA by FTP. Seven Partners are using FTP at present.
  20. CSA reported that they were receiving very few records from Partners, which were outside the subject scope of ASFA. When this occurred CSA had notified the Partner.
  21. Regarding the options which Partners would like to see as part of the SilverPlatter ASFA CD-ROM (e.g. thesaurus, sort functions etc.), CSA reported that an e-mail concerning the SORT function was sent out to all Partners directly following last years Board Meeting and that the Thesaurus was added to the CD-ROM.
  22. NISC reported that the ASFA database (1985-current, on the same CD-ROM) is now available from NISC. A display of the CD-ROM was provided during the Meeting.
  23. CSA reported Consumer Price Index figures in their Board Meeting Report (Annex -25).
  24. CSA repeated its request that Partners consider taking their ASFA entitlements in the form of Internet subscription rather than CD-ROMs.
  25. NOAA repeated its offer to supply Partners with information regarding its use of ASFA over the Internet.

ASFISIS (items 26-32)

  1. FAO reported that they had sent messages to all Partners not yet using ASFISIS to prepare ASFA input and provided a summary outline on how to get started using ASFISIS. Most of the Partners responded either by sending input or by explaining their reasons for not yet doing so. Only Russia, Mexico and Portugal are still submitting input on paper. Training for Russia is planned, tentatively, for late May or early June. In May, FAO will train the librarian from the FAO Office in Cuba. It is FAO's intentions that she should be able to assist the Cubans with their input and perhaps the Mexicans in changing over to machine readable input (Agenda Items 9 and 10).
  2. FAO agreed to investigate the possibility of providing training to those Partners with major problems using the ASFISIS software (Agenda Item 10).
  3. FAO reported that a manual explaining how to use the utilities programs associated with the ASFISIS software had not been written, but that numerous e-mails had been sent via the ASFA-L Discussion List containing instructions on how to use the ASFISIS utilities. The Secretariat intends to simplify, as much as possible, the use of these utilities in the upcoming release of the ASFISIS software. However, a manual may still be necessary (Agenda Item 9).
  4. CSA reported that there is no need to provide a Help service for ASFISIS via ASFA-L as FAO was already carrying out this task.

ASFISIS Working Group

  1. FAO reported that all of the changes listed under this item (numbers 30(a) - 30(p) below) were included in the Terms of Reference for the next release of the ASFISIS software (Release-3) and that the ASFISIS Working Group would meet during this Meeting (Agenda Item 9).
    1. The FDT-file links should be checked/amended for the missing repeatable field indicators in the Environment, Literary Style and Language Fields.
    2. The FDT-file links should be checked/amended for the 2nd Abstract Field.
    3. The FDT-file links should be checked/amended for the Editor subfield (^b) in the Author (Monogr) Field.
    4. The Degree field (111) should be deleted for AM/AS/ASM worksheets.
    5. The Author Address tag 109 in the M worksheet should be changed to 209.
    6. The Report/Doc. No. Field should be repeatable.
    7. The ISBN field number order should be checked as some Input Centers have problems entering data in this field.
    8. The Conference field tags (121/122/123) for the AM/AS/AMS worksheets should be changed to 221/222/223. (They are not relevant at the Analytic level).
    9. In the Language field, the repeatable bar should not appear after the last entry.
    10. In the strings field, the system should Beep on selection of the wrong category code.
    11. A Field/Subfield should be created for documents in electronic format (e.g. Internet). (Follow-up with Dr. DeSmet and Ms.Thiery).
    12. There should be a Field/Subfield where E-Mail addresses can be entered. (Follow-up with Dr. DeSmet and CSA re @ character).
    13. Corporate Authors should have round (not square) brackets when selected from a pick-list. Dr. DeSmet should make the necessary alterations to the software.
    14. The Help messages for each field should be amended, where possible, to refer to the Section Headings in the Bibliographic Guidelines.
    15. The Help message in the Author field should be amended to incorporate the ^b (editor) subfield.
    16. The ASFISIS/IRIS interface should be modified so that the viewing format can be changed even if only one hit was obtained during searches. (Action Dr. DeSmet)

FAO reported that the following modifications (numbers 30(q) - 30(u)) will be included in the Bibliographic Guidelines which will, most likely, be finalised by the end of this year.

  1. In the Document Type field, it should be decided whether the "physical" type should take precedence over the other selections (e.g. a map on CD-ROM).

FAO suggested two fields: one for input medium and one for document type. PML suggested one field with the possibility of selecting both G (for map) and T (for computer medium). CSA suggested leaving things as are and putting a note in the notes field describing the input medium. Further discussion was considered necessary on this topic.

  1. In the Document Type field, CD-ROMs should be described only by T - computer media. see item 30.q).
  2. The Report/Document Number Field should be described at the different bibliographic levels, instead of all under one heading.
  3. Change the example for the Corporate Author Field.
  4. Delete the commas and spaces from the example on p.30 regarding the Corporate Author.
  1. FAO reported that training in ASFISIS was not planned during this Board Meeting since most Partners are already using the software successfully.
  2. CSA agreed to provide the venue for a training Course later this year for Partners in North America. FAO reported that it had considered organizing a training course in Mexico (at CICH) to facilitate the participation of Chile, Argentina and Cuba. However, both Argentina and Chile have been to FAO for training which reduces the justification for a Training Course in the area (Agenda Item 10).
  3. ASFIS-1, Serials Monitored for the ASFIS Bibliographic Database - (Agenda Item 11.1).
  4. ASFIS-2, Subject Categories and Scope Descriptions (Agenda Item 11.2).
  5. ASFIS-3, Guidelines for Bibliographic Description (Agenda Item 11.3).
  6. ASFIS-4, Abstracting Guidelines (Agenda Item 11.4).
  7. ASFIS-5, Guidelines for Subject Categorisation and Indexing (Agenda Item 11.5).
  8. ASFIS-6, ASFIS Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Thesaurus A Thesaurus Committee Meeting chaired by Ms Cameron was held during the Meeting to deal with the status of (numbers 38(a) - 38(j) below). (Agenda Item 11.6).
    1. There was no reason or need to control the entire work as the consultant who carried out the work was competent and had adequate terms of reference.
    2. Ms. Hudson would send a sample of the Thesaurus to Mr. DeSmet to verify the compatibility with ASFISIS.
    3. Non-preferred terms should be typographically distinguished in the printed version. Action Ms. Hudson
    4. It was agreed that the thesaurus should appear in the ASFISIS picklist with one level. However, the pick-list should automatically take the user to the more specific word block when it exists. Action DeSmet.
    5. It was agreed that the printed version of the Thesaurus should appear with multiple levels and a KWIC index - Action Ms. Hudson
    6. It was agreed that all terms should start with a small letter in the alphabetical list - Action Ms. Hudson.
    7. It was agreed to delete that part of the scope note which says "use as qualifier only". Action Ms. Hudson.
    8. It was agreed to maintain the "historical notes in the "Scope Notes" field. Action Ms. Hudson.
    9. It was agreed that input centres must use the Thesaurus for a period of testing before final publishing. Action All Partners.
    10. Ms. Cameron agreed to communicate the above information to Ms. Hudson, once back in Canada. Action Ms. Cameron.
  9. ASFIS-7, Geographic Authority List (GAL): A GAL Committee Meeting, chaired by Mr. Moulder was held during the Meeting to deal with the status of (numbers 39(a) - 39(c) below) and the NIO proposal for maintaining the List (Agenda Item 11.7).
    1. It was agreed that the Partners should continue to index records using the GAL which is contained in the current ASFISIS software as a pick-list. Action All Partners
    2. Each Partner should communicate changes in their country names to NIO - Action All Partners
    3. The non structured version of GAL in the ASFISIS software contains additional terms with respect to the "original" structured GAL which exits as a CDS-ISIS database. The GAL contained in ASFISIS was produced by CSA using updates from their yearly Geographic indices.
    4. NIO should identify the additions made to the "original" GAL by CSA and circulate these terms to the Thesaurus Committee for review. [Note: later discussions between Tapaswi and Pepe concluded that it would perhaps be more practical if the GAL Committee divided up among themselves the above work-instead of leaving it all up to NIO]. Action GAL Committee.

Once reviewed by the Committee, these terms must be added, by NIO, to the "original" structured GAL which is maintained under CDS-ISIS.

  1. ASFIS-8, Taxonomic Authority List

NOAA agreed to send each Partner a copy of the NOAA (NODC) Taxonomic List on CD-ROM. Ten copies of the revised List were available for distribution at the Meeting. NOAA will continue to send updates of the revised List to all Partners (Agenda Item 11.8).

  1. ASFIS-9, Database User Guide: the Board agreed to discontinue ASFIS-9 and create an Information Leaflet/Brochure (for Partners/Users) describing the specific advantages of ASFA. Ms. Crampton said that a description/guide is provided on the NISC disc regarding the information provided by each database and offered to send a disc to all partners for trial examination.

FAO reported no action. NISC reported no action had been taken, but that now it was prepared to offer to Partners, for a three month free trial period, any one of its three ASFA related CD-ROMs for information and testing.

  1. ASFIS-10, Authority List for Corporate Names

CSA agreed to send annual updates of the List to FAO for incorporation into the ASFISIS software (Agenda Item 11.10)

  1. The Board had in the past considered the inclusion of non-English abstracts on the database as unacceptable if the diacritical characters were missing (Agenda Item 12).
    1. CSA agreed to investigate with ASFA vendors the feasibility of using diacritical characters; CSA will also report further on the addition of a second abstract field to the CSA software (Agenda Item 12).
    2. BF agreed to provide further information about UNICODE (Agenda Item 12).
  2. FAO reported that Annex-4 of last year's FAO Report had been amended to include CSA's 1995 royalty payment [and it was included in last year's Board Meeting Report as Annex-4a].

ASFA TRUST FUND (Items 45-50). See Agenda Item 13 and Annex-4 of the FAO ASFA Secretariat Report (the FAO ASFA Secretariat Report is Annex-4 to this Meeting Report).

  1. FAO reported that the $ 8 000 allocated for the IOC Trust Fund proposal (IOC Study Fund) had been added to the $ 26 000 set aside from the Trust Fund for training purposes. This sum will be carried over to the following year for training for new Centers and existing Partners.
  2. Statistical Analysis of ASFA Database - FAO reported that a modified Trust Fund proposal had been drawn up for discussion under Agenda Item 13.2 point 1.
  3. Trust Fund proposal, ASFA User Survey, NOAA reported that it found no record of the past survey done by Drexel under their auspices. FAO reported that it had acquired the questionnaire from a recently completed user survey carried out by INIS.
  4. Trust Fund proposal: Key Information Sources in Current High Interest Topics: It was suggested that the ASFA Homepage could be used to identify high interest topics of each institution. FAO agreed to continue hosting the Homepage, which was launched last November at the FAO World Food Summit (http://www.fao.org).
  5. Trust Fund proposal: Adaptation of ASFA Thesaurus into French. (Agenda Item-12).
  6. FAO reported no action on $ 6 000 set aside for a manual for ASFISIS software and ASFA data entry from the Trust Fund. (Agenda Items 9 and 13.1 point 2).
  7. FAO reported no action on the competition for an ASFA logo and prize $ 2 500 from the Trust Fund. (Agenda Item 13.1 point 3).
  8. The Board Agreed that increasing the number of Partners and improving quality control were very important and should be kept as priorities in developing the partnership (Agenda Item 6.2).
  9. BF reported that there should be a page on the Internet dealing with the MARSOURCE project.
  10. FAO reported no action on the IUCN International Coral Reef Initiative project and its involvement with ASFA.

6. STATUS OF THE ASFA PARTNERSHIP
Back

6.1 Report on Inter-Sessional Activities of the ASFA Partners

Each Partner presented a summary of his/her Report on inter-sessional activities. Only comments/discussion on the Reports are recorded below. (See Annexes 4 to 25 for Partners' Reports)

6.1.1 UNITED NATIONS CO-SPONSORS

6.1.1.1 FAO - Mr. Pepe presented the FAO Report (Annex-4).

Mr. Ardill described the current FAO financial situation which has resulted in an evaluation of all of FAO's programmes and outputs with regard to relevance to FAO's mandate, to the availability of alternatives and to the competitive advantage FAO had in these fields. The nature of the ASFA programme and the high quality of the information products have kept ASFA high on the list of FAO priority areas. However, to maintain this ranking as the budgetary situation worsens, FAO will have to improve access to developing countries of ASFA information products.

The Board agreed to discuss the issue of making ASFA more widely available under item 8.2.

NISC mentioned its efforts to make ASFA available in southern Africa, but recognised that the distribution was still rather limited in the rest of Africa.

6.1.1.2 UN/DOALOS - Mr. Gruszka presented the UN/DOALOS Report (Annex-5).

6.1.1.3 IOC - Mr. Pepe (FAO) presented the highlights of the IOC Report (Annex-6).

6.1.2 ASFA PARTNERS

6.1.2.1 Sweden (IMR) - Dr. Lindquist presented the IMR Report (Annex-7).

6.1.2.2 Poland (SFI) - Ms. Brzeska presented the SFI Report (Annex-8).

6.1.2.3 ICES - Ms. Ovens presented the ICES Report (Annex-9).

6.1.2.4 France (IFREMER) - Ms. Prod'homme presented the IFREMER Report (Annex-10).

6.1.2.5 Germany (BF) - Dr. Kirchner presented the BF Report (Annex-11).

He also reported on BF's involvement in the EU BalticSeaWeb project to link ASFA geographic terms to latitude and longitude co-ordinates so that they can be used in searching geographically indexed datasets. The Internet Web Site (Balticseaweb) was mentioned as an example of a "clickable" map (http://www.baltic.vtt.fi).

6.1.2.6 United Kingdom (PML) - Mr. Moulder presented the PML Report (Annex-12).

6.1.2.7 Ukraine (YugNIRO) - Dr. Romanov presented the YugNIRO Report (Annex-13).

Dr. Romanov also presented a short description of the history, structure and research functions of YugNIRO.

BF expressed its support for presentation of short profiles by Partners at each meeting, from a personal view, regarding their country or region.

6.1.2.8 Estonia (MEI) - Ms. Kalenchits presented the MEI Report (Annex-14).

6.1.2.9 Greece (NCMR) - Ms. Goulala, presented the NCMR Report (Annex- 15).

6.1.2.10 Japan (JFRCA) - Mr. Mitsuhashi (Fisheries Agency) delivered the JFRCA Report (Annex 16).

Ms. Ikenouye (JFRCA) reported that there was a new Director at the Technical Information Service of JAMSTEC and that their collaboration with JAMSTEC would continue.

6.1.2.11 China (NMDIS) - Mr. Hou Xiusheng presented the NMDIS Report (Annex-17).

6.1.2.12 Kenya (KMFRI) - Mr. Onyancha presented the KMFRI report (Annex-18).

6.1.2.13 USA (NOAA) - Ms. Watts presented the NOAA Report (Annex-19).

6.1.2.14 Norway (IMR) - Mr. Bjoerke presented the IMR Report (Annex-20).

6.1.2.15 IUCN - Ms. Thiery presented the IUCN Report (Annex-21).

6.1.2.16 Canada (NRC) - Ms. Cameron presented the DFO Report (Annex-22).

6.1.2.17 India (NIO) - The NIO Report (Annex-23) was distributed together with the FAO Meeting documents.

6.1.2.18 Lithuania, Ichthyobank (Annex-24)

6.1.2.19 Others

Mr. Pepe provided information for some of National Partners not present at the Meeting:

6.1.2.19.1 Australia, CSIRO Division of Fisheries - CSIRO has secured funding to continue ASFA input which could be expected to resume shortly.

6.1.2.19.2 Chile, Instituto De Fomento Pesquero (IFOP) - The Instituto De Fomento Pesquero (IFOP), Chile, has notified FAO that it will be sending input in the near future.

6.1.2.19.3 Cuba, Centro di Investigaciones Pesqueras (CIP) - FAO reported that the Centro di Investigaciones Pesqueras had sent its first batch of input to FAO for checking.

6.1.3 ASFA PUBLISHER (CSA) REPORT

Ms. Hitti presented the CSA Report (Annex-25).

6.1.4 OBSERVERS' REPORTS

6.1.4.1. NISC (South Africa) Report - Ms. Crampton presented the NISC report (Annex-26). She reported that the report on the survey of aquatic science related CD-ROMs was not yet finished, but agreed to distribute copies to all Partners when it was available.

6.2 New and Potential ASFA Partners
Back

Mr. Pepe reviewed the status of the new and potential Partners.

6.2.1. Admission of new Partners

The Board approved the admission of the new Partner from Argentina (Instituto Nacional de Investigacion y Desarrollo Pesquero (INIDEP)).

The criteria for the recruitment and approval of new Partners and for the removal of existing Partners not fulfilling their responsibilities were discussed. FAO agreed to prepare a paper on these subjects for discussion at the next Meeting. The Board agreed that no new Partners would be admitted until the next Board Meeting when these criteria have been reviewed.

6.2.2. Consideration of potential Partners

FAO reported that PIMRIS has expressed interest in joining ASFA and had submitted a request for a Trust Fund project to prepare their backfile [of bibliographic references] for inclusion in the ASFA database (Agenda Item 13.2 point 4 and Annex-31). While PIMRIS's intention to join ASFA was not dependent on the approval of the Trust Fund proposal, PIMRIS is, nonetheless, very interested in assistance to get some or all of this backfile into ASFA.

Considerable discussion followed on the inclusion of backfiles which might contain records already in ASFA. (Agenda Item 7).

The Board agreed that when and if PIMRIS signs the Partnership Agreement, its membership will be approved.

The need to recruit Latvia as a Partner was discussed, since other Baltic states are already participating.

Regarding the lack of ASFA Partners in Arab regions, FAO mentioned the SIPAM (information system for promotion of aquaculture in the Mediterranean) and Mr. Moulder agreed to maintain contacts with the 6 Gulf States that he visited, with the idea of identifying a potential institute for development as an ASFA Partner.

6.3 Co-operation with AGRIS
Back

FAO reported that software has been developed to facilitate the exchange of records between the AGRIS input software, AGRIN, and ASFISIS. This has not yet been distributed to ICLARM for testing because changes in ASFISIS (release-3) software will need to be reflected in this utility.

CSA reported on the subset that it receives from AGRIS and its plans to make it available free of charge to ASFA Internet subscribers.

NISC reported that the aquaculture records sent to them by AGRIS are included on their Aquatic Biology, Aquaculture & Fisheries Resources CD-ROM. NISC is also offering the combined AGRIS and AGRICOLA databases under AGROBASE through their Webserver (www.nisc.com).

The question of the compatibility of the AGRIS and ASFA records came up for discussion regarding Thesaurus terms. FAO agreed to discuss with AGRIS possibilities of increasing compatibility.

7. ASFA SCOPE, COVERAGE, MONITORING and TIMELINESS
Back

IOC Science and Communication Centre on Harmful Algae

There was discussion around the question of duplicate records on the request of the Centre to enter its backfile of records into the ASFA database.

The Board welcomes unique and current (i.e. 1997 onwards) records from the Centre, for which IOC/Unesco would presumably accrue the entitlement credits. A monitoring list will be developed by the Centre and FAO. It will be the responsibility of the Centre to ensure it does not send duplicate records into the system. Back files 1975-1977

BF did not want backfiles covering the period 1975 to 1977 to be entered into ASFA until they had been checked for possible duplicate records which BF had already keyed. FAO agreed to investigate, together with BF, the means of creating a Master ASFA database (including the 1975-1977 records) which is consistent and where possible clean of any systematic errors which were introduced in the past. The eventual creation of such a file would be made available to the general Partnership.

The importance of older material was stressed by various Partners, but the Board agreed that priority must continue to be given to the processing of current material.

BF suggested that a separate file should be set up for back records and any other material coming from outside regular input preparation. These would be matched or checked against the existing ASFA database once a year (preferably December) to weed out duplicates before merging.

The Board agreed that FAO should examine the possibility of entering the records into the machine readable database from the period 1971-1974, which, at present, exist only in the printed ASFA journal. Possibilities to be investigated include scanning and OCR or keyboarding. Trust Funds might eventually be employed for the conversion of this file.

NOAA brought up the subject of indexing and pointing to visual images and multimedia on the Internet, a topic of increasing importance in the future. Review of Monitoring of Serials by Partners for Gaps in Input - Preliminary Report

FAO introduced this item by reviewing the Preliminary Report by Ms. Helen Wibley contained in Annex-2 of the FAO ASFA Secretariat Report (the FAO ASFA Secretariat Report is Annex-4 to this Report). It was stressed that the final reports sent to each Partner would contain individual lists which would indicate which journal and issue had not been monitored.

Mr. Moulder and Mr. Emerson mentioned the last IAMSLIC Meeting in which the questions of gaps and timeliness were raised. On these issues, the general feeling of the IAMSLIC group was that ASFA was making concrete efforts to improve the database quality, and that this was highly appreciated.

8. ASFA PRODUCTS AND SERVICES
Back

8.1 Quality of Outputs

8.1.1 ASFA Journals, CD-ROM, and Database

Mr. Romanov (YugNIRO) mentioned that the information on the SilverPlatter CD-ROM regarding the Partners was not up to date, and that it should be revised at least once a year. CSA agreed to follow-up with SilverPlatter regarding a previously sent update which has not yet appeared on the CD-ROM.

YugNIRO and PML mentioned missing IC (Input Centre Codes) on the CD-ROM and CSA agreed to follow up on the matter.

Reference was made to the test database question formulated by BF and circulated to Partners at the 1995 Board Meeting. BF did not think that it was useful to continue with this exercise of comparing different implementations of the ASFA databases. BF mentioned that a limited survey would not yield significant results and the costs of a more detailed survey could not be justified at a moment when funds could be better spent on improving the backfile.

8.2 New Outputs and Services
Back

ASFA on Internet: Ms. Beattie (NOAA) reported that many of their users are searching ASFA using the CSA Internet Database Service, but they have noticed that without some training in the formulation of search strategies and the use of simple Boolean operators their users were not benefiting from the full potential of the database.

Widening the distribution of ASFA: Mr. Ardill opened discussions regarding FAO's need to increase the availability of the ASFA information products in developing countries, and requested the Partners for their suggestions. Numerous suggestions were put forward (e.g. donation of excess entitlements by Partners, networking of libraries, the FAO intranet, etc,)

CSA mentioned that they and SilverPlatter make ten CD-ROMs available to developing countries at half price.

FAO reported that even considering the discounted prices, it could not afford to supply CD-ROMs to institutes in all the Low Income Food Deficit Countries (LIFDCs).

FAO suggested that another approach might be to distribute the ASFA CD-ROM "free of charge" for a period of at least 5 years to the LIFDCs (perhaps beginning with the 41 LIFDCs located in Africa), which have the need and the ability to use it. During the 5 year period, it could be expected that the Institute would develop a need for the product by using it to provide information services. Gains from the use of the CD-ROM could be used by the Institute to offset the costs of future subscriptions.

The Board agreed that a small working group chaired by Ms. Watts (FAO, Ms. Thiery, Ms. Hitti, Dr. Emerson, Mr. Gruszka, Ms. Crampton) would draw up a list of approaches that could be used to increase the distribution of the ASFA information products in developing countries.

NISC demonstrated the new NISC CD-ROM (ASFA Parts 1 to 3, 1985 to current).

8.3 Public relations activities and marketing
Back

Dr. Lindquist (IMR) suggested that FAO promote the ASFA CD-ROM through its Regional Organizations and Offices, and at COFI Meetings.

FAO announced its PowerPoint presentation (available in English, French and Spanish) on ASFA and offered to supply copies to Partners who requested it.

FAO mentioned the establishment of its ASFA Homepage on the FAO Web Server and invited Partners to check their entries, to make suggestions for improvements and to send them the address of the "hot" links to their own Homepages.

8.4 Partner Entitlements
Back

Discussion of this Agenda item was based on the paper tabled by Mr. Moulder entitled Percentage Rise in the Value of a Partner's Additional Entitlements and of ASFA Product Prices (Annex-12a). According to the figures presented, a decline in the UK entitlement to ASFA products could be foreseen in the near future, even with the same UK input. He requested the Board to take concrete steps to rectify this situation or the UK would have to reconsider its participation in ASFA, since it would be difficult to justify the costs of the input without adequate entitlements.

CSA reminded the Partners that they had a 25% discount on the list prices for all products.

CSA explained that the percentage rise in the Partners entitlement (the credit given for each abstract, now $ 11.30) was determined by a formula contained in the Publishing Agreement between FAO and CSA.

The Board agreed that the formula contained in the Publishing Agreement to calculate the Partner's entitlement or "purchasing power" should be negotiated between FAO and CSA at the next renewal of this agreement in two years' time.

The Board agreed to set up a working group (Ms Watts (NOAA), Ms. Cameron (DFO), Mr. Moulder (PML) to assist FAO in negotiating the Publishing Agreement.

9. PROGRESS WITH MACHINE READABLE INPUT
Back

This agenda item began with a demonstration, by Dr. DeSmet, of the ASFISIS (Release-3) software (i.e. the new features were explained and demonstrated (Annex-27). Dr. DeSmet answered questions regarding the software and also presented a short discussion/demonstration of CDS/ISIS in the Windows environment.

Dr. DeSmet listed some of the outstanding questions that still needed to be addressed by the ASFISIS Technical Committee (e.g. no-level fields, continuation with ASFISIS, and the need for the Windows version of ASFISIS?).

The ASFISIS Technical Committee met and discussed the following:

  1. The letter from the UK network regarding difficulties in using ASFISIS - The Committee agreed that the software did not constitute any real problems and that some of the problems noted by the UK users were due to lack of knowledge regarding some aspects of the software, computers or network set-up.
  2. Help functions: ASFISIS (release-3) will contain some maintenance menus to help system managers in running the software.
  3. Development of additional ASFA input software: FAO noted that there was nothing to stop a Partner from developing input software outside of the ASFISIS environment, but that the Secretariat would not maintain other software.
  4. Switch to ASFISIS under Windows: the Committee decided that it would be advisable to start considering this possibility and agreed that the Trust Fund could be used for such a development. Dr. DeSmet was requested to do a feasibility study regarding the cost of such a switch for eventual proposal as a Trust Fund project (Agenda Item 13.2, point 5).
  5. Help Desk and FAQ list: the Committee agreed that the solution to many of the problems found using ASFISIS could be easily solved through the services of a Help Desk and a frequently asked question listing. The Board agreed that Dr. DeSmet could be responsible for such a Help Desk (e-mail) and that he should provide an estimate for the cost of such a service for consideration as a Trust Fund project (Agenda Item 13.2, point 6).
  6. Spell checker: Dr. DeSmet described a spell checker that he has developed and which could be made part of ASFISIS, but which needed additional testing. BF agreed to test the spell checker.
  7. No-level fields: the Committee agreed that the introduction of "no-level fields" could have an impact on the database producer CSA and spinners (e.g. BF).

Dr. DeSmet agreed to send the ASFISIS field definition tables to CSA to study the eventual consequences of such a change. Should there be a need to revert back to "levelled fields" Dr. DeSmet will have to send FAO another version of ASFISIS (Release-3) for testing.

BF asked CSA if they could accept ASFA input from the Partners containing HTML coding for special characters instead of the present CSA coding. CSA said that they could in theory, but did not wish to do so until they had considered all of the possible consequences. Dr. DeSmet mentioned that the present codes can be hidden in any eventual output while the HTML codes cannot be hidden.

BF also mentioned the need for a wider variety of print formats to be included in ASFISIS.

10. REPORT ON ASFA TRAINING ACTIVITIES
Back

A Training Course in ASFA input methodology was held at FAO during the week which followed the 1996 Advisory Board Meeting in Rome. Ten people attended, five of which were funded from the ASFA Trust Fund (see Annex-7 of the FAO ASFA Secretariat Report for a report on the training course, the FAO ASFA Secretariat Report is Annex-4 to this Report). FAO also reported that two small training courses were held during the inter-sessional period.

Immediately following this Board Meeting, FAO will train the Librarian from the FAO Representative's Office in Cuba. It is envisaged that this Office will be able to assist the Secretariat, when necessary, in the training of the Cuban and other Latin American Partners.

11. STATUS OF ASFIS REFERENCE SERIES PUBLICATIONS
Back

Mr. Pepe introduced this item.

11.1 ASFIS-1, Serials Monitored for the ASFIS Bibliographic Database

FAO reported that it was still maintaining this file and that it relied on the input of Partners to do so.

FAO suggested that the printed version be produced from time to time in small runs. NOAA agreed that when substantial changes had been incorporated, it constituted a new edition and needed to be designated as such.

The Board agreed that there was still no need to produce the printed version, and that an up-to-date file should be included on the ASFA Homepage.

BF suggested that all of the ASFA reference tools should be included on the Homepage. FAO agreed and reported that this would be done in the future as tools were updated.

CSA announced that they were also preparing a monitoring list for inclusion on their Homepage, but that it would not be identical to the FAO list. This will have a different name as well as many more titles, as it included titles which only yielded the occasional reference relevant to ASFA. NISC reported that the Monitoring List was included on their CD-ROM.

11.2 ASFIS-2, Subject Categories and Scope Descriptions
Back

FAO has drafted the scope descriptions for the two new Aquaculture subject categories (they are attached to the FAO ASFA Secretariat Report). However, the two new categories can only be used in the preparation of ASFA input when they appear in the ASFISIS software which will not occur for another few months. All the 3 digit subject category codes appearing in ASFIS-2, Subject Categories and Scope Descriptions have been amended to conform with the 4 digit ASFISIS codes. This publication should be finalised and published by the end of the year.

PML reported that the ASFA subject categories which are used to describe research workers in the IOC Online Global Directory may not be sufficient to classify all scientists specialities. This is based on comments that IOC has been receiving directly from the scientists signing up to this list.

The Board agreed not to introduce any new subject categories, but would keep the matter under consideration.

11.3 ASFIS-3, Guidelines for Bibliographic Description
Back

In February 1996, FAO sent a provisional version of the Guidelines to all Partners with a request for comments. To date, no comments have been received, but numerous in-house modifications have been made. Finalising of the guidelines should wait for release of ASFISIS (release-3) which will affect them to some extent.

11.4 ASFIS-4, Abstracting Guidelines
Back

In May 1996, FAO sent a provisional version of the Guidelines to all Partners with a request for comments. To date, only a few comments have been received. Finalising of the guidelines should wait for release of ASFISIS (release-3) as the introduction of two abstracts will affect them.

11.5 ASFIS-5, Guidelines for Subject Categorisation and Indexing
Back

In May 1996, FAO sent a provisional version of the Guidelines to all Partners with a request for comments. To date, no comments have been received. Finalising of the guidelines should wait for release of ASFISIS (release-3) which will affect them to some extent.

11.6 ASFIS-6, ASFIS Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Thesaurus
Back

A Working Group composed of Ms. Cameron (Chair), Ms. Prod'homme, Ms. Hitti, Dr.Kirchner, Mr. Moulder, Dr. C . Emerson, and Mr. Pepe was held to discuss the revision of the ASFIS Thesaurus.

The Working Group considered three issues: 1) translation of the Thesaurus into other languages, 2) formatting of the Thesaurus for printing, and 3) future maintenance of the Thesaurus. The first two issues were deferred to the next Meeting since the revised thesaurus which will be distributed with ASFISIS (release-3) must be evaluated by input centres before it is translated or printed.

3) Maintenance of the Thesaurus: the Working Group agreed to follow a procedure similar to the previous maintenance routine, that is:

  1. users should fill in a specially designed term recommendation worksheet, which will be made available on paper or Internet (note: the paper worksheet is already designed with instructions for use),
  2. users should send the recommended terms to the Thesaurus manager, who will collate them and send them to the Thesaurus Working Group for approval. Ms Cameron (DFO) volunteered to be the Thesaurus manager for the first year. Once approved, the terms then need to be input into the Thesaurus master file.
  3. Ms. Cameron reported that Ms. Hudson had agreed to maintain the Thesaurus master file which is estimated to involve one weeks' work per year and her fee would be approximately $ 1 500. FAO agreed to formulate a trust Fund proposal for the ongoing maintenance of the Thesaurus for consideration by the Board for the next Board Meeting.

11.7 ASFIS-7, Geographic Authority List
Back

A Working Group composed of Mr. Moulder (Chair), Ms. Prod'homme, Ms. Hitti, Dr. Emerson and Mr. Pepe met to decide on the steps necessary to update the Geographic Authority List and to consider Mr. Tapaswi's (NIO) proposal which is part of the NIO report to the Meeting (Annex -23).

The Working Group decided:

  1. that a list of geographic terms should be produced to be included in ASFISIS as a pick-list.
  2. CSA agreed to provide the list of geographic terms which would consist of terms contained in three years of annual ASFA geographic indexes.
  3. the Committee agreed to divide the list among the members of the Geographic Authority List Committee and to control it for accuracy against a set of guidelines which still needs to be established.
  4. the Committee agreed that there was still an interest and need for the printed version with its displays and hierarchy, but that its eventual updating would have to take second precedence to the pick-list.
  5. the Committee agreed to request Dr. DeSmet to make the geographic terms scroll (or appear) in the pick-list by choosing any of the terms making up the geographic descriptor.

11.8 ASFIS-8, Taxonomic Authority List
Back

FAO announced that the FAO Standard Common Names and Scientific Names of Commercial Species would be included in the ASFISIS (release-3)

11.9 ASFIS-9, Database User Guide -

No action reported.

11.10 ASFIS-10, Authority List for Corporate Names
Back

FAO reported that the latest edition will be included in ASFISIS which was sent to FAO by CSA in April 1997.

11.11 ASFIS-11, Magnetic Tape Specifications and Record Format -

No action reported

12. EXPANDED LANGUAGE CAPABILITY IN ASFA
Back

Discussions on this Agenda item were based on what was agreed at the last Board Meeting (i.e. "the Board considered the inclusion of non-English abstracts on the database as unacceptable if the diacritical characters were missing. (p.20)").

CSA followed up on investigating vendors capability to handle diacritical marks, and reported that none of the bigger vendors (SilverPlatter, Dialog, STN and Medline) include diacritical marks on their CD-ROM products or Online databases.

The Board agreed that it would be preferable to have non-English abstracts without diacritical marks included in the ASFA database rather than no abstract at all.

CSA agreed to accept the Partners' input with diacritical marks even though they would not appear on the CD-ROM or Online databases, as these records could one day be reloaded when the vendors acquired the capability to handle diacritical marks. The CSA database contains diacritical marks, but these are stripped off the files sent to vendors. Current technology would permit printed products and Internet records to hold diacritical marks, but this is not feasible for CD presentation. However, CSA requested Partners not to begin sending non-English abstracts to CSA until the ASFISIS release-3 software was issued.

Dr Lindquist reminded the Board that for the Swedish language (and the other Nordic languages) the problem of diacritical marks was more then just a case of missing accents as it was fundamental to the correct spelling of author's names and original titles.

It was suggested that input centres use ASCII Code Table 850, failing which they should inform CSA of the Code Table used.

13. ASFA TRUST FUND
Back

13.1 Status of the ASFA Trust Fund

FAO reported that the balance in the Trust Fund account is $ 102 256 (see Annex-4 of the FAO ASFA Secretariat Report, which is Annex-4 of this Report). The account incurs no administrative charges. FAO agreed to investigate the situation as regards the accrual of interest.

FAO described the procedure for submitting Trust Fund proposals to the Board as follows: proposals could be sent to the Board Members for approval during the inter-sessional period; proposals could be attached as part of the country reports which are presented at the Meeting and proposals could be verbally presented at the Meeting. All proposals should, when relevant, contain the following information: background and justification, activities, schedule of implementation and estimated budget.

[Note on how the Trust Fund must be administered by FAO: all Trust Fund proposals, approved by the Board, will be processed by FAO as a contractual arrangement between FAO (the contractor) and the Trust Fund recipient (the contractee). On the successful completion of the contract terms, the payment will be made to the contractee by FAO].

The Board agreed to discuss the following proposals:

Past Proposals

  1. Identification of ASFA information users and suppliers in China, sub-project 1 was approved in 1994. However, its implementation was awaiting the completion of another Chinese Trust Fund proposal entitled ASFA Human Capacity building in China, sub-project 2. This is completed and both FAO and IOC have been provided with a report of the two training courses held. This report was made available by FAO for information at the Meeting. Therefore, China can now proceed with carrying out sub-project-1.
  2. Manual on ASFISIS software data entry: FAO explained that it did not take action on this item, one reason being the planned release of ASFISIS (release-3) which would have rendered parts of the manual out of date. Based on discussions held during the ASFISIS Technical Committee, the Board agreed that the manual was still needed and that the $6 000 (already committed) should be kept for this purpose.
  3. Competition for ASFA Logo - FAO reported action blocked on this proposal due to questions of Copyright which might involve the name "ASFA". The Board agreed to proceed with the development of a logo which did not incorporate this term by recruiting an artist who would create at least three proposals for the Board. The Board agreed to entrust IOC with the task of finding a suitable artist for the task. FAO agreed to consult the Legal Counsel on copyright implications arising from the use of a logo commissioned from an artist.
  4. Statistical Analysis of ASFA database: FAO reported on the background of this proposal, the purpose of which was to provide the Board with a statistical report on the contents of the database (e.g. by subject category, year, language etc.). CSA agreed to carry out the analysis using their database and, if possible, the DIMDI database (for records from 1975-1977). Dr. Emerson will co-ordinate this analysis and will communicate with the partners via e-mail for suggestions on the type of information Partners would like to see in the final Report. If necessary, the Board agreed to allocate up to $7 000 to assist CSA in this analysis (See 6.2.2).
  5. ASFA User Survey: FAO reported little action on this proposal, and NOAA was not able to locate sufficient information on the costs and modalities of the previous survey carried out by Drexel.

One member suggested that CSA carry out the survey. CSA replied that for the last survey Drexel designed the questionnaire and analysed the replies. CSA did not have the expertise for this, but would assist whoever eventually did the survey.

NOAA agreed to provide an estimate on the cost of designing the questionnaire and carrying out the survey and to submit it by e-mail to partners for approval by 1 July 1997. CSA and NISC agreed to investigate the possibility of providing their mailing lists for the purposes of the survey. FAO agree to provide NOAA with two sample questionnaires designed by INIS (for end and intermediate users) as information.

13.2 New Trust Fund Proposals and Decisions on Proposals to be Supported
Back

  1. Analysis of Database for Scope and Coverage with eventual recommendations for improvement (Annex-28). The Board agreed to this proposal.
  2. Extension of ASFA potential in Ukraine (Annex-29). The Board agreed to this proposal in view of YugNIRO's past performance regarding the preparation of ASFA input. The Board agreed to increase the total sum for the project to $ 3 000.
  3. Provision of ASFA Centres in the former USSR with reference materials for input (Annex-30). The Board agreed to this proposal of YugNiro ($ 2 500), but the implementation will have to wait until FAO has completed the English versions of the Guidelines so as to incorporate any changes made necessary by ASFISIS release-3. It was noted that the translation of the guidelines into Russian could also be of benefit to other Russian speaking countries in the area.
  4. Input of backfile records by Pacific Islands Marine Resource Information System (PIMRIS) (Annex-31). Note: PIMRIS must still sign the Partnership Agreement to join ASFA. The Board agreed in principle to this proposal and to allocate an initial sum of $ 3 500 for a first batch of 500 records. The first 50 records should be sent to FAO for checking and approval. The Board agreed that it would approve a second proposal from PIMRIS for a further 500 records on the successful completion of the first batch. See Agenda Item 6.2.
  5. Feasibility Study for implementation of Windows version of ASFISIS: The Board agreed that Dr. DeSmet should prepare a study on the eventual costs to prepare a Windows version of ASFISIS. The estimate should be submitted to the Board for eventual approval.
  6. Help desk services for ASFISIS: The Board approved this proposal in principle and requested from Dr. DeSmet an estimate of the costs for such a service for a one year period. On receipt of the estimate the Board will vote its approval.
  7. Financial support to attend ASFA Board Meetings (Annex-32). The Board agreed that it may allocate up to $ 6 000 to support participation at the Board Meeting by participant(s) from economically developing countries or from countries in transition to a market economy. The allocated sum will be subject to review each year. The Board agreed that FAO should decide on the eventual candidates to benefit from this fund.

14. OTHER BUSINESS
Back

It was proposed that the paper by Dr. Emerson and Mr. Moulder, ASFA-Challenges and Opportunities after the First 25 Years, might be included either on the FAO or IOC Homepages. Mr. Moulder agreed to check with IAMSLIC regarding any eventual copyright restrictions on its use. FAO agreed to follow up on the possibility of it being included on the FAO Homepage.

On behalf of the participants, Mr. Moulder thanked Prof. Polanski and all the staff of SFI for their efforts in making a great success of this year's ASFA Advisory Board Meeting. In view of Dr. Ganowiak's upcoming retirement, the Board thanked him for his untiring interest over the years in ASFA.

The Board also expressed its appreciation to the Chair, the Rapporteur and the Assistant Rapporteur for their efforts.

15. PLACE AND DATE OF THE NEXT MEETING
Back

The Board accepted with gratitude the offer of FAO to host the next ASFA Advisory Board Meeting in Rome in June 1998. FAO agreed to confirm the exact dates of the Meeting.

Annex 1

Back
List of Participants

Co-sponsoring ASFA Partners

Mr. David Ardill
Chief
Fishery Information, Data and Statistics Unit
Fisheries Department
Food and Agriculture Organization of
the United Nations (FAO)
Viale delle Terme di Caracalla
00100 Rome, ITALY Tel: (39)(6) 570 52160
Tlx: 825852 FAO I/610181 FAO I
Fax: (39)(6) 5705 3605
EMail address: [email protected]

Mr. Richard Pepe
Fishery Information Officer
Fishery Information, Data and Statistics Unit
Fisheries Department
Food and Agriculture Organization of
the United Nations (FAO)
Viale delle Terme di Caracalla
00100 Rome, ITALY Tel: (39)(6) 570 56380
Tlx: 610181 FAO I
Fax: (39)(6) 5705 3605 EMail address: [email protected]

UN/DOALOS

Mr. R. Gruszka
Senior Ocean Affairs & Law of the Sea Officer
United Nations Secretariat
Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea (UN/DOALOS)
Office of Legal Affairs, Room DC2-414
2 U.N. Plaza
New York, NY 10017, USA Tel: (1) (212) 963-3926
Fax: (1) (212) 963 5847
EMail address: [email protected]

International ASFA Partners

ICES
Ms. Michala Ovens
International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES)
Palaegade 2
DK 1261 Copenhagen K, DENMARK Tel: (45) 33 15 42 25
Fax: (45) 33 93 42 15
E-Mail address: [email protected]

IUCN
Ms. Cecile Thiery
Librarian
IUCN, The World Conservation Union
Rue Mauverney 28
CH 1196 Gland, SWITZERLAND Tel: 41 22 999 00 01
Fax: 41 22 999 00 02
EMail address: [email protected]

National ASFA Partners

Canada
Ms. Heather Cameron
Library Policy and Services
Fisheries and Oceans Canada
200 Kent Street
Ottawa, Ontario K1A OE6, CANADA Tel: (613) 993-2926
Fax: (613) 990-4901
EMail address: [email protected]
for: National Research Council Canada

China
Mr. Hou Xiusheng
Chief of Library
National Marine Data and Information Service (NMDIS)
State Oceanic Administration (SOA)
93 Liuwei Road, Hedong District
Tianjin 300171, CHINA Tel: (86)(22) 2430 52 13 ext. 3901
Tlx: 23138 NODC CN
Fax: (86)(22) 2430 44 08
EMail address: [email protected]

Estonia
Ms. Maria Kalenchits
Librarian
Estonian Marine Institute
Lai Str. 32 Tel: 372-2-411-748
EE0001 Tallin, ESTONIA Fax:372-6-313-004
E-mail address: [email protected]

France
Ms. J. Prod'homme
Institut Francais de Recherche pour l'Exploitation de la Mer (IFREMER)
Service de la Documentation
Bibliotheque Centre de Brest
B.P. 70
29280 Plouzane, FRANCE Tel: (33) 98224019
Fax: (33) 98224586
EMail addresses: [email protected]
[email protected]

Germany
Dr. Wulf-Peter Kirchner
Bundesforschungsanstalt für Fischerei (BF)
Informations und Dokumentationsstelle
Palmaille 9
D22767 Hamburg, GERMANY Tel: (49)(40) 38 90 51 40
Fax: (49)(40) 38 90 52 61
EMail address:[email protected]

Greece
Ms. Sofia Goulala
Head Librarian
National Centre for Marine Research
GR. 16604 Hellenikon
Athens, GREECE Tel: (301) 9653520-22
Fax: (301) 9653522
E-Mail address: [email protected]

Japan
Mr. Toru Mitsuhashi
Senior Officer, Research Division
Fisheries Agency, MAFF
21 Kasumigaseki 1
Chiyodaku Tel: 81 3 3501 3864
Tokyo 100, JAPAN Fax: 81 3 3591 5314

Ms. Masako Ikenouye

Research Coordinator
Japan Fisheries Resource Conservation Association (JFRCA)
Tokyo Suisan Bldg. 6F
418 Toyomicho, Chuoku
Tokyo 104, JAPAN Tel: 81 3 3534 0681
Fax: 81 3 3534 0684
E-Mail address: [email protected]

Kenya
Mr. Kennedy Ochego Onyancha
Librarian
Kenya Marine and Fisheries Research Institute (KMFRI)
P.O. Box 81651
Mombasa, KENYA Tel:(254) (11) 475151/2/3/4/5 and 471129/472527
Fax:( ) +254.11.472215
E-Mail address: [email protected]

Norway
Mr. H. Bjoerke
Scientist
Institute of Marine Research (IMR)
Nordnesparken 2
P.O. Box 1870-Nordes
N-5024 Bergen, NORWAY Tel: (47)(55)23 85 00
Tlx: 42297 OCEAN N
Fax: (47)(55)23 85 84
E-Mail address: [email protected]

Poland
Prof. D. Dutkiewicz
Sea Fisheries Institute
ul. Kollataja 1 Tel: +48 58 21 68 30
81-332 Gdynia, POLAND Tlx: 054348 mir pl
Fax: +48 58 20 28 31

Dr. H. Ganowiak
Sea Fisheries Institute
ul. Kollataja 1 Tel: +48 58 21 68 30
81-332 Gdynia, POLAND Tlx: 054348 mir pl
Fax: +48 58 20 28 31

Ms. Z. Brzeska
Sea Fisheries Institute
ul. Kollataja 1 Tel: +48 58 20 17 28 ext.279
81-332 Gdynia, POLAND Tlx: 054348 mir pl
Fax: (058) 20 28 31
EMail address: [email protected]

Ms. J. Zdanowska
Inland Fisheries Institute
Oczapowskiego 10 Tel: (089) 27 31 71
10-719 Olsztyn, POLAND Fax: (089) 27 25 05
Telex: 0512316

Ms. Ewa Szwabe and
Ms.Malgorzata Romanowsua
Institute of Oceanology
Polish Academy of Science Tel: (058) 51 72 81
Poist. Warsaw 55 Fax: 51 21 30
81-712 SOPOT E-mail: [email protected]

Sweden
Dr. Armin Lindquist
National Board of Fisheries
Institute of Marine Research
Box 4
S-453 21 Lysekil, Sweden Tel: (46)(0) 523 187 33
Fax: (46)(0) 523 139 77
E-Mail address: [email protected]

United Kingdom
Mr. David S. Moulder
Head, National Marine Biological Library
Plymouth Marine Laboratory (PML)
Citadel Hill
Plymouth PL1 2PB, UNITED KINGDOM Tel: (44)(1752) 633 266
Fax: (44)(1752) 633 102
EMail address: [email protected]

Ukraine
Mr. E. Romanov
Fishery Information Advisor
Chief, Laboratory of Pacific and Indian Oceans Fish Resources and Fishery Statistics
Southern Scientific Research Institute of Marine Fisheries and Oceanography (YugNIRO)
2, Sverdlov St.
334500 Kerch Tel: 380-6561-29271 and 380-6561-21065
Crimea, UKRAINE Fax:380-6561-21572
E-Mail address: [email protected]

United States
Ms. J. Beattie
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
NOAA Central Library (SSMC3, 2nd floor)
1315 East-West Highway Tel: (1)(301) 713 2607 ext.139
Silver Spring, MD 20910, USA Fax: (1)(301) 713 4598
E-Mail address: [email protected]

Ms. C. Watts
Chief, Library & Information Services Division
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
NOAA Central Library (SSMC3, 2nd floor)
1315 East-West Highway Tel: (1)(301) 713 2607 ext.
Silver Spring, MD 20910, USA Fax: (1)(301) 713 4598
E-Mail address: [email protected]

Publishing ASFA Partner

Ms. Angela Hitti
Cambridge Scientific Abstracts (CSA)
7200 Wisconsin Ave. Tel: (1)(301) 961 67 00
Bethesda, MD 20814, USA Fax: (1)(301) 961 67 20
EMail address: [email protected]

Dr. Craig Emerson
Cambridge Scientific Abstracts (CSA)
7200 Wisconsin Ave. Tel: (1)(301) 961 67 00
Bethesda, MD 20814, USA Fax: (1)(301) 961 67 20
EMail address: [email protected]

Observers

Belgium
Dr. E. DeSmet
University of Antwerp
Universiteitsplen 1 tel: +323 820 2857
B-2610 WILRIJK, BELGIUM Fax: +323 820 2247
E-mail address: [email protected]

South Africa
Ms. Margaret Crampton
National Inquiry Services Centre Pty Ltd. (NISC)
20 Somerset St.
Grahamstown 6140, SOUTH AFRICA Tel: (0461) 29698
Fax: (0461) 29550
EMail address: [email protected]

Annex-2

Back

Abbreviations used in Body of Report

AGRIS - International Information System for Agricultural Sciences and Technology

AM/AS/AMS - refers to worksheets used in ASFA input preparation (AM = analytic-monographic level worksheet, AS = analytic-serial level worksheet, AMS = analytic-mongraphic-serial level worksheet).

ASCII - American Standard Code for Information Interchange

ASFA - Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts

ASFIS - Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Information System

ASFISIS - Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Integrated Set of Information Systems (Micro CDS/ISIS package for preparing ASFA input and for retrieval)

BF - Informations- und Dokumentstionsstelle, Bundesforschungsanstalt fur Fischerei (Germany)

CARIS - Current Agricultural Research Information System

CICH - Centro de Informacion Cientifica y Humanistica (Mexico)

CIP - Centro di Investigaciones Pesqueras (Cuba)

COFI - FAO Committee of Fisheries

CSA - Cambridge Scientific Abstracts (USA)

CSIRO - Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (Australia)

DFO - Department of Fisheries and Oceans (Canada)

FAO - Food and Agriculture Organization

FDT - Field Definition Table (part of Micro CDS/ISIS software)

FISHLIT - Database of fisheries literature produced by JLB Smith Inst. of Ichthyology (South Africa)

FTP - File Transfer Protocol

GAL - Geographic Authority List

HTML - Hypertext Markup Language

IAMSLIC - International Association of Aquatic and Marine Science Libraries and Information Centers

ICES - International Council for the Exploration of the Sea

ICLARM - International Center for Living Aquatic Resources Management

IFOP - Instituto de Fomento Pesquero (Chile)I

IFREMER - Institut Francais de Recherche pour l'Exploitation de la Mer, Service de la Documentation Bibliotheque Centre de Brest (France)

IMR - Institute of Marine Research (Norway)

IMR - Institute of Marine Research (Sweden)

INIDEP - Instituto Nacional de Investigacion y Desarrollo Pesquero (Argentina)

INIS - Internatioal Nuclear Information System

IOC - Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (Unesco)

IPIMAR - Instituto Portugues de Investigaco Maritima (Portugal)

IUCN - The World Conservation Union

JFRCA - Japan Fisheries Resource Conservation Association (Japan)

JAMSTEC - Japan Marine Science and Technology Center (Japan)

KMFRI - Kenya Marine and Fisheries Research Institute

LIFDC - Low Income Food Deficit Countries

MEI - Estonian Marine Institute (Estonia)

NCMR - National Centre for Marine Research (Greece)

NIO - National Institute of Oceanography (India)

NISC - National Information Services Corporation (South Africa)

NMDIS - National Marine Data and Information Service, State Oceanic Administration (People's Republic of China)

NOAA - National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (USA)

NODC - National Oceanographic Data Center

OCR - Optical Character Recognition

PIMRIS - Pacific Islands Marine Resources Information System (Fiji)

PML - Plymouth Marine Laboratory

SIPAM - Information System for Promotion of Aquaculture in the Mediterranean

SFI - Sea Fisheries Institute (SFI) (Poland)

UN/DOALOS -United Nations Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea (UN-Secretariat, NY, USA)

UNEP - United Nations Environment Progamme

VNIRO - All-Russia Research Institute of Marine Fisheries and Oceanography (Russia)

YugNIRO - Southern Science Research Institute of Marine Fisheries and Oceanography (Ukraine)

Annex-3

Back

AGENDA