The Australian ice core programme: history, context, and bibliometric analysis

ABSTRACT

East Antarctic ice cores are key to Australia’s Antarctic science objectives. Australia is internationally recognised for its climate contributions relating to impurities, greenhouse gases, and water stable isotope studies. These factors make the Australian ice core programme an effective case study to demonstrate the usefulness of bibliometric studies in understanding the broader impacts of scientific research. This work presents a bibliometric analysis of Australian-authored and/or funded ice core publications from within the Australian Antarctic Territory over the programme’s 50 years (1972–2022). This work also discusses the history and chronology of Australia’s ice core programme to contextualise the results of the bibliometric analysis. These are illustrated by examining the key drilling locations, such as Law Dome, and the resultant research which establishes Australia as a global leader in producing high-resolution ice core records from coastal East Antarctic sites. This article demonstrates the applicability of bibliometric studies to identify themes of research that are intended to inform international and domestic policies for the betterment of society.

KEYWORDS:

• Ice cores
• Australia
• East Antarctica
• bibliometric analysis
• science impact

Introduction

As Radivojević highlights in the film Utuqaq, ‘Ice has memory’.¹ Until recently, this memory has eluded much Western scientific scrutiny. Today, ice is both recognised and valued by scientists as an important archive of this planet’s history. Currently, the oldest ice core record dates back nearly 800,000 years.² Ice provides a ‘deep-time’ archive of climatic changes transposed over natural and human events.³ The shift came with technological advancements allowing greater analysis of contemporary oceanic and atmospheric conditions trapped in the ice.⁴ Ice – and ice cores – is therefore a valuable reference point for helping us to understand the past and future of our planet.

Articles that address the history of ice cores have a culture of discussing the success of campaigns in terms of the depth of the drilling.⁵ This reflects the evolution of ice core research which has been male dominated,⁶ even in an Australian context. Yet depth is not the only, nor the most useful, metric for impact. In exploring Australia’s history in ice core research, bibliometric analysis is used as an example of measuring elements of research impact. Research impact is defined broadly as research that benefits society, including improvements to physical and social environments, delivery of national policy priorities, or changes to behaviours.⁷

Australia has been a global leader in Antarctic research, with its ice core programme often used as an example of its excellence in leadership and science.⁸ The programme has evolved into varied topics, including greenhouse gas influences on global warming,⁹ solar activity on past and present climate variability,¹⁰ and regional climate reconstructions in the Southern Hemisphere.¹¹ The resultant data has a range of applications for both scientists and policy-makers.

Australia is now embarking on its most ambitious project to secure an ice core that dates back one million years.¹² The project proposes that the ‘million-year ice core’ will provide vital climate information around the transition in glacial cycles during the mid-Pleistocene transition.¹³ This will provide more information about climate change and future uncertainties relating to greenhouse gases and temperature changes.¹⁴ Investment in the million-year ice core has seen a cost of $45 million AUD dedicated to traverse logistics and the drill.¹⁵ Such investment of public funds must be justified by tangible outcomes.

This article seeks to establish the context around the development of Australia’s ice core research by highlighting research decisions across the programme’s history. This history and resulting research decisions contextualise the bibliometric analyses of 239 Australian authored and/or funded publications relating to ice core studies in the Australian Antarctic Territory (AAT) across the programme’s 50-year lifespan. This analysis provides statistical insights into Australian ice core research and its ability to address nationally relevant policies and priorities while acting as an Antarctic Treaty Consultative Party. Such information can help justify investment in ice cores – or any other type of research to which the method is applied – on a long-term basis.

Defining an ice core

Ice-sheet formation from snowfall layers results in a natural archive, preserving a chemical record of the Earth’s global climate over hundreds to thousands of years.¹⁶ Chemical information can be obtained by drilling into the ice sheet and collecting an ice core.¹⁷ For this study, an ice core is defined as a continuous cylinder of ice. The width and length of extracted cores are constrained by the core barrel, a drilling component, and must be handled carefully to avoid damage and contamination.¹⁸ Over the lifetime of the Australian ice core programme, several drills have been used (See Supplementary Material). This reflects the increasingly complex engineering required to extract good quality cores with increasing glacial depth. Once extracted, cores are transported to laboratories for the chemical and physical analysis of climate signals.

Climate information contained in ice cores depends on the drilling location.¹⁹ Inland and coastal sites have different atmospheric pathways, deposition styles, and accumulation rates.²⁰ However, the physical transition of snow to ice, occurring from compression over time, preserves these important climate signals.²¹

Snow forms when water vapour freezes in the atmosphere.²² Thermodynamics influence the type of isotopes in water molecules (δ¹⁸O/¹⁶O) that become frozen.²³ Fluctuations in air temperature, pressure, and humidity continue to influence the frozen water during snowfall.²⁴ These fluctuations deform snow over time, allowing impurities to bond onto the surface of ice grains becoming trapped in the snowfall layer.²⁵ Ongoing snowfall causes compaction from the constant overlying pressure. This compaction process deforms the ice grains and eventually traps atmospheric air bubbles between ice boundaries at an average depth of 80 m.²⁶ Together these three components – water stable isotopes, impurities, and air bubbles – reflect global climate changes, and are fundamental to reconstructing palaeoclimates.²⁷

The processing of these ice core components usually begins by cutting the core into varying shapes, which are then used in different analyses.²⁸ The type of analysis also dictates the equipment required to obtain specific data. Examples include nuclear techniques,²⁹ and gas extraction.³⁰ Samples can also be transported to international laboratories. This achieves scientific outcomes from joint funding, logistics, or access to specialised analytical equipment.

Historically, Australia has undertaken discrete analysis for glacial-chemical species and stable water isotope studies.³¹ However, the Million Year Ice Core (MYIC) project will use a Continuous Flow Analysis system.³²

Methods

A bibliometric analysis was undertaken using a database of Australian-authored and/or funded ice cores studies within the AAT across the programmeme’s 50-year lifespan. Establishing the programme’s chronology was important for determining the years that papers were published. This allowed papers to be contextualised within the research priorities and decision-making structures of the study period (1972–2022).

Bibliometric analyses are a relatively new way of analysing the impact of research outside of traditional academic citation count metrics like h-indexes and journal impact factors.³³ The ability to analyse research operations and contexts more deeply has been facilitated by greater data collection by large academic databases such as Web of Science and Scopus. Such analyses sort publications and provide statistics on various classes of affiliation, such as funding, nationality, or degree of collaboration.³⁴

Delving into a statistical analysis of a research theme or programme’s performance based on collaborations, funding, and affiliations can help understand collaborative impacts, geopolitical trends (or the defiance of) and other insights beyond the scientific activity itself.³⁵ For instance, this analysis can provide more significant information about institutional abilities to deliver and address nationally relevant priorities.

This paper will focus on the bibliometrics available from traditional academic sources such as Web of Science and Scopus, with future research focusing on measuring uptake into policy-relevant spheres.

Establishing the chronology

Establishing a chronology of the Australian ice core programme was done by looking at historical records, including books and media releases (Trove), policy documents (Australian Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting documents; Australian Antarctic Strategies; Australian Antarctic Programme (AAP) reporting), parliamentary minutes, research articles, and Australian Antarctic Division (AAD) blogs and magazines. All documents were publicly available and obtained via Google. Once these records were collected, they were used to cross-reference publication release dates. This helped provide the chronology but also the decision making behind publications and drilling locations.

Bibliometric database

The chronology helped determine that the first publication was in 1972.³⁶ Therefore, Digital Object Identifiers (DOI) were consolidated after this key date. The cut-off for publications was 2022. Allowing the dataset to cover 50 years. The data parameters for publications in the bibliometric analysis were that they must be continuous ice core studies that were Australian-authored and/or funded within the AAT from 1972–2022.

DOI consolidation began with using Harzig’s Publish or Perish (PoP). PoP is a free software programme that enables users to obtain information on publications and observe basic citation metrics using keyword searches.³⁷ Using PoP, the Google Scholar database was searched using Boolean operators and the keywords: ‘ice core’ AND ‘East Antarctica’ AND ‘Australia’. This process generated many publications that fit within the publication data parameters. Additional PoP searches were done by refining Boolean and keyword searches to target individual Australian authors, as well as key East Antarctic ice core sites (e.g. ‘Law Dome’ AND ‘DSS1617’).

Further DOI consolidations were achieved by searching the AAD project database³⁸ for individual authors and project numbers. University and national library datasets, were used to search for historical Australian Antarctic research notes and field logs. Historical books³⁹ relating to Australia’s Antarctic activities and presence were used to capture most of the early ice core work. Citations used within the collected DOIs were investigated to ensure that as many Australian ice core publications were found. This additional analysis resulted obtaining a further 28 publications.

Further publications may be missed as the keywords may not be mentioned in the title, the publication was old, or the publication used published ice-core data in a mass dataset. It was assumed that the potential contributions made from any missing publications would be minimal to the bibliometric analysis.

The publication database consists of 239 publications using this method of DOI consolidation. The publication DOIs were then run through Web of Science, Scopus, and Dimensions. These established academic software services give various information relating to citation counts, journal titles, research themes, institutions, and funding. They are also the services that many institutions use to measure and quantify their research impact. Using the databases helped to minimise gaps when comparing against the 1972–2022 database. It also showed the similarities and limitations between the bibliometric services, which might be misleading institutions undertaking impact studies.

History of Australia’s ice core programme

Ice core research from the 1957–1958 International Geophysical Year (IGY), established new means to measure and detect past changes in the Earth’s climate,⁴⁰ and demonstrated their importance in defining the Holocene.⁴¹ However, it wasn’t until after the IGY and into the late 1960s that Australian-led ice core research began.⁴² This delay was due to the lack of glaciologists and drilling capabilities. The US assisted Australia in developing its ice core programme by sharing its unpublished IGY glaciology results.⁴³ The data allowed Australia to develop field capabilities, modify drilling equipment, train maths and physics specialists in glaciology, and undertake observational field studies.⁴⁴ This preliminary work took time, and almost ten years after the IGY, Australia led its first major drilling project on the Amery Ice Shelf in 1968.⁴⁵

This drilling project, along with the inheritance of Casey Station (formerly Wilkes) from the US in 1959, which is close to the Law Dome ice cap, allowed Australia to become a recognised member of the glaciology community.⁴⁶ This was supported by Australia being integral in establishing the International Antarctic Glaciology Project (IAGP) from 1969–1986.⁴⁷

IAGP was represented by Australia, France, the UK, the US, and USSR. It focussed on open access to physical and chemical glaciological data collected from East Antarctica.⁴⁸ Australia’s contribution to IAGP was detailed traverse surveys across East Antarctica. These identified potential deep drilling sites⁴⁹ and produced a number of ice core records.⁵⁰ IAGP contributions laid the foundation for Australia becoming a leader in East Antarctic ice core research.

Today Australia remains a global leader in ice core research after close to six decades through regular contributions to scientific communities such as Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research (SCAR), the International Partnerships in Ice Core Sciences (IPICS), and Past Global Changes (PAGES). Understanding the overall impact and decisions of the programme provides a comprehensive background contextualing the bibliometric analysis.

Australian ice core locations

Australia has drilled various ice cores across the AAT (Figure 1). Due to logistical challenges and proximity to Australian stations, these cores are along the coast. The sites consistently returned to (i.e. Law Dome) under the AAP indicate the types of high-resolution analysis in which Australia has developed its skills. The sites discussed help contextualise collaborations and funding statistics presented in the bibliometric analysis.

Figure 1. Australian ice core sites within the AAT. The locations for these cores were collected from the 1972–2022 publication database. Additional cores were found using the Australian Antarctic data centre, university theses, and the Bureau of meteorology. Note that due to the proximity of cores at some sites (e.g Law Dome), individual names of cores may not be indicated. These individual cores can be found in the supplementary material.

Amery Ice Shelf

The 1968 Amery Ice Shelf expedition, was Australia’s first deep drilling campaign.⁵¹ It obtained a good quality core (Amery68) down to 327 m.⁵² Amery68 made substantial scientific contributions by generating a temperature profile from the oxygen isotope record, establishing an ice mass balance for the Amery ice shelf.⁵³

From 1999–2005, the Amery Ice Shelf Ocean Research (AMISOR) project drilled at several sites.⁵⁴ AMISOR collected discontinuous boreholes to study sea ice and ocean interactions,⁵⁵ as opposed to ice-sheet atmospheric interactions. These cores were not included in this study.

Lambert Glacier

The Lambert Glacier basin contains the Amery ice shelf.⁵⁶ A multi-year study from 1986–1995 helped determine local glaciological properties, mass budget, and regional climatology.⁵⁷ Traverses in this study led to the extraction of several shallow cores.⁵⁸

The Lambert Glacier traverses are noted for the collaboration between Australia and China,⁵⁹ who shared expeditions, data, and skill sets to comprehensively study the region.⁶⁰ This is reflected in the authorship of subsequent publications.⁶¹

Mount Brown

The Wilhelm II Land region, containing Mount Brown, was traversed between 1998–1999.⁶² It was hypothesised that Mount Brown could generate high-resolution ice core results similar to those at Law Dome.⁶³ Twenty-one shallow cores were extracted, resulting in a detailed spatial distribution of ice core data across the region.⁶⁴ Publications show well-defined annual layers recording local climate signals.⁶⁵

In 2017–2018, a new expedition investigated Mount Brown South (MBS) after a comprehensive site selection process.⁶⁶ Several shallow cores and a 295 m deep ice core (MBS1718) were extracted.⁶⁷ This recent drilling campaign is still undergoing analysis and interpretation. Early results,⁶⁸ show the MBS cores have site-specific attributes potentially useful for reconstructing regional rainfall variability over Australia.

Mill Island

Mill Island was chosen due to its location between Wilhelm II Land and Law Dome, as the local climate dynamics in this area were poorly understood.⁶⁹ Mill Island records were expected to address data sparsity issues by providing new climate insights into the differences between other East Antarctic ice cores.⁷⁰ However, results showed the area was heavily influenced by the Southern Ocean, causing uncertain trace chemistry and lost seasonality making the records difficult to interpret.⁷¹

Wilkes land

Wilkes Land, 750 km east of Casey Station, includes Australia’s most heavily researched site Law Dome (See Supplementary Material). Early 1980s surveys of the region were part of Australia’s contribution to IAGP.⁷² These surveys collected several cores and were used to pinpoint the eventual Law Dome DE08 and Dome Summit South (DSS) Main drill sites.⁷³

In the 2000s, additional surveys were incorporated into the International Trans-Antarctic Scientific Expeditions (ITASE). ITASE was formed to address the need for more records of climate variability focusing on the last 200-years of increased human activity.⁷⁴ In 2003–2004, a 147 m core titled GD17 was drilled. GD17 aimed to understand the Southern Ocean atmospheric influences on ice sheet topography, snow accumulation and the eastward transition across Wilkes Land.⁷⁵ It was difficult to find anything pertaining to scientific publications using GD17. However, some results were published in an honour’s thesis.⁷⁶

Law Dome

Law Dome is 120 km inland from Casey Station.⁷⁷ It was selected in the 1980s to investigate atmospheric gas concentrations due to the site’s accessibility, high accumulation rate, and extensive Wilkes Land surveys.⁷⁸ A 234 m core (DE08) extracted in 1986 confirmed the site’s suitibility for preserving atmospheric gases and glacio-chemicals.⁷⁹ DE08’s success sparked Australia’s most ambitious project to drill to bed rock at Law Dome. Another DE08 core (DE08–2) was extracted to gather further information on atmospheric gases and pinpoint the site for the deep drilling to bedrock.⁸⁰

From 1988–1993, Australia succeeded in drilling DSS Main, a 1200 m core, just 40 m shy of bedrock.⁸¹ DSS Main was considered Australia’s most unique core at this time, as it provided the global climate community with the first detailed coastal ice core record.⁸² DSS Main extends back almost 90 000 years.⁸³ It provided information on climate variability and ice sheet changes over the last ice age,⁸⁴ including differences between inland and coastal ice core sites.⁸⁵

After the success of the DE08, DE08–2, and DSS Main, shallow core studies were undertaken in a westerly direction away from the DSS summit (i.e. DSSWK).⁸⁶ The DSSWK cores investigated the differences in accumulation rates and deposition mechanisms across the summit.⁸⁷

In 1997, the 270 m DSS97 was drilled to overlap with the damaged upper 177 m sections of DSS Main.⁸⁸ While multiple studies have used DSS97, due to its high quality, it was not deep enough to overlap with compromised sections of DSS Main.⁸⁹ This led to the extraction of DSS99 in 1999.⁹⁰ Some of Australia’s most significant ice-core publications have used DSS Main, DSS97, and DSS99 (See Supplementary Material).

Law Dome remains a consistent site in Australia’s glaciology programme and has been drilled regularly since the 2000s (See Supplementary Material). This consistency has led to globally recognised greenhouse gas records,⁹¹ and a good-quality seasonal glacio-chemical record which was recently updated.⁹² However, only the annual averages of stable water isotope data are available,⁹³ and access to seasonal isotope data, which has wider use for Southern Hemisphere studies, is restricted.⁹⁴

Law Dome has contributed immeasurably to international palaeoclimate databases such as PAGES.⁹⁵ Australia’s work on Law Dome is arguably the reason for its stronghold in the ice core community.⁹⁶

Aurora Basin North (ABN)

ABN was ambitious in terms of logistics and potential scientific outputs.⁹⁷ It was a large collaborative effort between Australia, France, the US, Denmark, Germany, and China.⁹⁸ ABN aimed to deliver another 2000-year East Antarctic record.⁹⁹ The record would then be compared against Law Dome and Dome C to observe the transitions across the ice sheet contributing to IPICS and PAGES 2K ice core array.¹⁰⁰ It was also anticipated to help explore hemispheric links to Australia, sea ice reconstructions using methanesulphonic acid, and reconstructions of regional Antarctic climates.¹⁰¹

ABN drilling was initially proposed for 2008–2009. However, operational restrictions meant the project was modified, and cores were instead recovered from Law Dome, Mill Island and the Totten Glacier.¹⁰² The project was re-established in 2013–2014, where the 303 m ABN1314 core was extracted.¹⁰³ However, resulting publications from ABN are minor,¹⁰⁴ and data only recently released.¹⁰⁵

Totten Glacier

Studies of the Totten Glacier have mainly been undertaken through the Investigating the Cryospheric Evolution of the Central Antarctic Plate (ICECAP) Project.¹⁰⁶ ICECAP has provided the fundamental background for determining future ice core drilling sites, including ABN, Law Dome, and Dome C.¹⁰⁷ As ICECAP is an aerogeophysical project it will not be discussed in detail. ¹⁰⁸

Dome C

Dome C is an inland ice-cap near the French-Italian Concordia station.¹⁰⁹ This site is known for the European Project for Ice Coring in Antarctica (EPICA), which retrieved a core dating back 800,000 years.¹¹⁰ Currently, the Beyond-EPICA – Oldest ice project is underway by European institutions to drill million year ice.¹¹¹

In 2016, Australia proposed its own million-year ice project in the vicinity of the EPICA site.¹¹² The MYIC will be the most profound drilling project ever proposed by Australia. It aims to extract nearly 3 km of ice and provide a comparable record to Beyond-EPICA.¹¹³ The site was chosen by Australia and the Europeans due to extensive surveys indicating appropriate accumulation to achieve a million-year record.¹¹⁴

In the 2022–2023 season, preliminary drilling started only 5 km away from the Beyond EPICA site.¹¹⁵ While Australia had minor liaison and advisory contributions to the original EPICA project and still works cooperatively with Beyond EPICA, through SCAR’s co-sponsorship of IPICS,¹¹⁶ the MYIC project is often framed nationally as a distinctly Australian project. For example, language used in national media portrays the project as the ‘holy grail of climate science’.¹¹⁷ This language was supported by Australian Minister Greg Hunt in 2016 stating that, ‘if the ice core is to be found, it will be found in Australia’s Antarctic Territory’.¹¹⁸ The emergence of Australia’s MYIC project raises potential questions about the geopolitical nature of obtaining deep ice cores.¹¹⁹

East Antarctic International Ice Sheet Traverse (EAIIST)

The EAIIST Project was inspired by ITASE’s focus on increasing the number of ice core generated climate records. A collaboration between France, Italy, and Australia, saw cores drilled 650 km south of Dome C at the Megadunes and Palaeo sites.¹²⁰ The results from EAIIST are still being investigated and are proposed to assist in interpreting the Beyond EPICA-Oldest ice.¹²¹

Bibliometric analysis

The publication database covers 1972–2022 and contains 239 publications. These are Australian authored and/or funded publications. These publications relate to ice cores studies within the AAT. This provided information about affiliations, collaborations, funding instances, and drilling locations. Together, this data was used to investigate institutional contributions and research themes within the Australian ice core programme.

The publications were searched within established metric software programmes. Dimensions picked up 239 publications. Web of Science picked up 213 publications. Scopus identified 224 of those publications, which were then exported to Scopus’s SciVal where it reduced the it to 92 publications.

Affiliations and collaborations

Every author has an institutional affiliation, assisting to determine the primary organisation and country that contributed to publications. This shows preferences in working relationships, can highlight the potential geopolitical nature of Antarctic ice core research, and provides the background for investigating affiliations and collaborations.

The database was used to group institutions based on their affiliated country to understand Australia’s main collaborators. Main Australian collaborations were observed between international Antarctic programmes and universities. SciVal showed 73.9% of the 92 publications were international collaborations. The result is expected and consistent with international partnerships who work in this logistically expensive environment, and reflects scientific data being openly available under the Antarctic Treaty.

The outputs from these international collaborations are often combined into proxy datasets related to global climate variability to define changes during the Holocene. Again, this is consistent with the international ice core community, following the advice of PAGES led by major SCAR contributors.¹²² The 1972–2022 database showed Australia’s top 10 international collaborators are the United states (US), Denmark, the United Kingdom (UK), China, Germany, France, Italy, New Zealand, Canada, and Japan. This was consistent with the SciVal dataset, generating the same top 10 counties.

International collaborations

US collaborations are through government and academic affiliations. Top partnerships from the 1972–2022 database are the University of California, the University of Maine, the National Ocean and Atmospheric Administration, the University of Colorado, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The higher proportion of university collaborations may reflect how the US research system operates. The collaborative publications focus on global applications of atmospheric histories, greenhouse gas trends, the ICECAP project, natural climate forcing, and anthropogenic trends.

Denmark, Germany, and France are European Union (EU) countries with well-established polar research programmes in the Arctic and Antarctic. For example, the early work by Danish scientist Dansgaard,¹²³ put Denmark at the forefront of ice core studies. Ongoing collaboration with the Danish through the University of Copenhagen is expected because of their accessibility to the Greenland ice sheet for ice core studies. These studies are necessary to understand global climate influences, confirmed by trends matched in Arctic and Antarctic ice cores. Germany’s Alfred Wegner Institute and France’s National Centre for Scientific Research are both key European collaborators and reflect not only France’s bordering Antarctic claim but also the necessity of working with countries with polar experience and expertise.

Australia has a long-established history of working with the UK. The UK’s Antarctic programme, the British Antarctic Survey, is the primary affiliation associated with collaborative outputs. China, Japan, and South Korea reflect Australia’s regular collaboration policies with Asia.¹²⁴ For example, Australia and China have joint memorandums and arrangements focused on collaborative Antarctic partnerships.¹²⁵ The 1972–2022 publication database supports these collaborative trends between China and Australia.¹²⁶ This relationship goes back to the early 1980s as China expanded its Antarctic capabilities. Australia played a key role in supporting these early capabilities by sharing personnel, logistical support, environmental conservation, and scientific skills.¹²⁷ One of the scientific capabilities was glaciology, where countries worked together successfully during the Lambert Glacier traverses (1989–1995), AMISOR (1999–2000), and Chinese National Antarctic Research Expedition’s Zhongshan to Dome A traverses (2002–2005).¹²⁸ It is noted that China is also aiming to obtain a million-year ice core, and this is being drilled at Dome A.¹²⁹

While China and Australia remain strong in their academic ties to Antarctic research together, collaborations over recent years have been through Chinese student exchange programmes.¹³⁰ This helps maintain China and Australia’s Antarctic partnership and introduces a potential new era of collaboration where Australia plays a key role in training and supporting China’s early career researchers.

National collaborations

The SciVal breakdown showed 21.7% of 92 publications were national collaborations between Australian universities and federally-funded organisations. SciVal listed the top 10 Australian affiliations as the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO, Aspendale), UTAS, the AAD, Cooperative Research Centres (CRC) in Australia, the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO, Lucas Heights), Curtin University, Australian National University, University of Melbourne, and University of Newcastle.

The 1972–2022 database showed that out of 910 authors, 354 are affiliated with Australian organisations. From these Australian authors, the top five affiliations were UTAS (0.34%), the AAD (0.11%), CSIRO at Aspendale (0.08%), Curtin (0.06%), and ANSTO at Lucas Heights (0.05%). Note that the Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems Cooperative Research Centre (in its various iterations) was calculated as UTAS numbers. Many AAD personnel were also dually affiliated with this CRC.

Figure 2 shows the high proportion of AAD and UTAS collaborations reflecting Hobart, Tasmania, as an Antarctic gateway city.¹³¹ The remaining organisations are located across mainland Australia reflecting established research partners and associated students using different technologies available at separate institutions. It is important to note that some of these collaborations, for example, Curtin University, have ceased due to concluded funding or employment contracts over the 50 years.

Figure 2. Locations of national collaborators based on affiliations determined by the 1972–2022 publication database, with each circle denoting an institution.

The 1972–2022 database also shows the scientific contributions made by each institute. For example, UTAS and the AAD specialise in trace ion chemistry and water-stable isotopes,¹³² CSIRO (Aspendale) in trapped atmospheric air bubbles,¹³³ Curtin University in impurities such as black carbon,¹³⁴ and ANSTO (Lucas Heights) in solar activity proxies.¹³⁵ This means the same data can lead to different understandings about the world coming out of different institutions due to the range of specialisations, and the multiple ways in which ice cores can be processed to yield data.

Recent collaboration trends between national institutions show how ice core research is being investigated for use in domestic applications. For example, the University of Newcastle¹³⁶ and Queensland University¹³⁷ do not process ice cores but use published ice core proxy datasets to investigate the applicability of the data in Australian water management. This highlights the potential for Antarctic research to shape and influence domestic policies, demonstrating how existing data sets can inform decision making while reducing the carbon footprint through additional field work and drilling.¹³⁸

Funding

Determining who funds ice core research within the AAT provides insights into the research priorities that may have applications to international and domestic policies. Funding grants were obtained from the acknowledgement section of the papers. In early papers, before the 1990s, the acknowledgement section was either non-existent or provided minimal details. In these cases, the author affiliations were assumed as the key institutions funding the publication.

Funding was expected to reflect collaborations and provide further evidence of ongoing national and international partnerships. It was also hypothesised that Australia would be the primary funding organisation due to the 1972–2022 database parameters. Note that this analysis does not consider the quantum of funding because that information is unavailable.

The 1972–2022 database showed that the top 10 funders were the US, Australia, China, the UK, the EU, Japan, France, South Korea, Switzerland, and Germany (Figure 3). This was further supported by Scopus and Web of Science, which had the same top 10 funders. This reflects traditional Antarctic partners and the collaborative nature of groups such as IPICS. Note that some countries, such as France and Germany, have dual funding roles contributing to research as individual countries and as members of international partnerships, such as the EU.

Figure 3. Instances of funding, not a quantum. Funding instances were collected from the acknowledgement sections, and where instances were not mentioned, authors’ affiliations were the assumed funding institutions. Funding instances reflect the 1972–2022 publication database and do not necessarily reflect the current funding trends in ice core research across the AAT.

The national distribution of Australia’s funding comes from two institutions: government-led Antarctic programmes via the AAD and Antarctic-related CRCs. Australian Research Council (ARC) funding schemes were often included in those calculations. ARC grants are predominately awarded to researchers affiliated with academic institutions. Further government institutions (e.g. ANSTO) are often additional funders as they provide access to the specialised equipment for ice cores analyses (e.g. accelerator mass spectrometry).

The US has funded marginally more Australian-affiliated ice core research within the AAT than Australia (Figure 3). Unlike Australia, which primarily uses the AAD for logistics and research, the US uses multiple institutions to fund its contributions to Antarctic science collectively.

These main institutions within the US are the National Science Foundation’s Office of Polar Programmes and Geosciences, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. This results in multiple funders for a single publication and reflects the US different funding structures. This funding also supports ongoing collaboration between Australia and the US,¹³⁹ due to their long-standing relationship, which grew from the IGY.¹⁴⁰ It makes sense that once a working relationship is established, if successful, to continue that partnership.

Funding from the UK primarily comes from the UK’s Research and Innovation’s National Environment Research Council, of which British Antarctic Survey is a component. This is followed by funding from UK academic institutions such as the University of Bristol and the University of East Anglia.

Funding from China, Japan, and South Korea was reflected in the analysis.¹⁴¹ China’s funding was mostly through the government institutions Chinese Academy of Sciences, the Ministry of Science and Technology, and the National Natural Science Foundation of China. This funding supported the transitional partnership with Australia over the last 50 years, which started by assisting China in developing its glaciology programme.¹⁴²

Japan’s funding contributions are predominately from government branches such as the National Institute of Polar Research and the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science. Additional funding was through academic institutions such as Tohoku University and Hokkaido University. South Korea’s contributions are funded through the government-led Korean Institute of Polar Research, and the National Research Foundation of Korea. Additional funding was through several academic institutions, such as Kyungpook National University and Seoul National University.

The biggest funders from within Europe were the EU, the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique in France, the Alfred Wegner Institute in Germany, and the Swiss National Research Foundation in Switzerland. EU funding instances were from the European Commission and the European Research Council, particularly under their Horizon-2020 programme for investigating an ice core that dates back a million years.¹⁴³ These instances of funding from the EU demonstrate ongoing European partnerships through projects such as EPICA and Beyond EPICA with Australia’s partnership with the EU through programmes such as SCAR and IPICS.

The instances of funding observed from the 1972–2022 database are consistent with Antarctic research being funded by government institutions. This reflects the national-based nature of science, which can operate as the ‘currency’ for maintaining a presence in Antarctica.¹⁴⁴ Prominent funders were countries with well-established and well-resourced Antarctic programmes, illustrating established Antarctic Treaty partnerships that uphold a collaborative ethos of Antarctic research. Alongside these efforts, academic institutions play a key role in Antarctic research funding, often under government grants, such as those awarded by the ARC.

Locations

The AAT sector can be divided into different areas by condensing the location data for specific ice cores within the 1972–2022 database. These cores have been categorised into general areas (e.g. Lambert Glacier, Wilkes Land, Wilhelm II Land) and are presented in the Supplementary Material.

From the 1972–2022 database, Law Dome is Australia’s most successful ice core site based on drilling frequency and publication outputs. Law Dome datasets have been used across a variety of publications and are part of broader databases relating to palaeoclimate reconstructions through PAGES.¹⁴⁵

Some of the cores in Figure 1 are not found in the 1972–2022 publication dataset. This indicates possible poor quality or decision-making behind a core, meaning the resulting data is either impractical or unpublished. This means that Figure 1 may even appear misleading as it makes it look like there are many ice core records available. References for these cores are still supplied, but not used in the 1972–2022 database. While Figure 1 does demonstrate that Australia has traversed widely across the AAT, it does not necessarily mean that the ice cores themselves have been significant to the scientific community.

Conclusions

The article presented the Australian ice core programme as a case study for applying bibliometric analyses to assist in evaluating research beyond citation metric impacts.¹⁴⁶ The extensive bibliometric analysis focused on Australian authored and/or funded publications within the AAT from 1972–2022. The analysis showed identifiable trends and relationships between research fields and institutions across affiliations, collaborations, funding, and drilling locations over the programme’s 50-year lifespan.

From the bibliometric analysis, Australia has demonstrated leadership and excellence in ice-core research through 239 publications. These publications contributed to important international and national climate knowledge around impurities, greenhouse gases, and stable-water isotope studies.

Affiliations show that Australia is acting as an expected Antarctic leader through successful international partnerships and global collaborations between like-minded countries with invested Antarctic interests. This is also signalled by the frequent utilisation of Australian produced Law Dome datasets across multi-national publications. This supports Law Dome as Australia’s fundamental ice core site for advancing Australia’s proficiency in coastal high-resolution ice core studies, vital for advancing Southern Hemisphere climate research.

Funding inferred from the bibliometric analysis, aligns with countries undertaking well-established and well-resourced Antarctic programmes. These programmes are predominately funded by governments, complemented by additional contributions from academic institutions. Within Australia, funding allocations often align with the AAD and UTAS, strengthening Hobart, Tasmania’s role as a national gateway to Antarctica.

Over the 50-years, the patterns in funding underscore the geopolitical nature of Antarctic operations, where the phrase ‘science is the currency’ holds true.¹⁴⁷ This sentiment directly ties to this bibliometric analysis, as it highlights the need to comprehend the multifaceted patterns contributing to research impacts related to scientific endeavours in the Antarctic context.

This comprehensive bibliometric analysis of Australian ice core publications opens new avenues to critically examine the interplay between Australian ice core research and its contributions and applications to global and domestic policies. The methods and software employed hold relevance for investigating the wide array of Australian government-supported Antarctic science programmes.

This article serves as a case study for investigating Antarctic science with national relevance. While the article delves into the Australian context of ice core history and research, future studies in this area will explore how particular research themes are used to inform policies on international and national scales.

Acknowledgments

Thank you to Dr Tessa Vance at the Australian Antarctic Programme Partnership and Dr Anthony Kiem at the University of Newcastle for commenting on this article. We thank the two anonymous reviewers for their kind and thoughtful feedback on this article.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Supplementary material

Supplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/2154896X.2024.2342112.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Australian Governments HDR Scholarship under the University of Tasmania’s Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies and the Australian Government’s Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry’s Future Drought Fund under a Top Up scholarship. Support for accessing software used for the methodology was by the Australian Antarctic Programme Partnership.

Notes

¹ Utuqaq, directed by I. Radivojević, 2021.

² Augustin et al., “Eight Glacial Cycles from an Antarctic Ice Core.”

³ McCormick, “Climates of History.”

⁴ Isberg, “Frozen Archives on the Go,” 267–8.

⁵ Jouzel, “A Brief History of Ice Core Science.”

⁶ Hulbe, Wang, and Ommanney, “Women in Glaciology.”

⁷ Australian Research Council, “Research Impact Principles and Framework.” Australian Government (2022). https://www.arc.gov.au/about-arc/strategies/research-impact-principles-and-framework (accessed March 19, 2023).

⁸ Australian Government, “Update 2022,” 7–15.

⁹ Rubino et al., “Revised Records of Atmospheric Trace Gases.”

¹⁰ Pedro et al., “High-resolution records of beryllium-10”.

¹¹ Vance et al., “Interdecadal Pacific Variability and Eastern Australian Megadroughts over the Last Millennium.”

¹² Pyper, “Traversing Antarctica,” 6.

¹³ Fischer et al., “Where to Find 1.5 Million Yr Old Ice for the IPICS “Oldest-Ice” Ice Core”.

¹⁴ Ibid.

¹⁵ Reilly, “Tractor traverse to support deep field research,” 5.

¹⁶ Baker, “Microstructural Characterization of Snow, Firn and Ice.”

¹⁷ Budd, “The Antarctic Ice Sheet,” 335–6.

¹⁸ Talalay, “Perspectives for Development of Ice-Core Drilling Technology.”

¹⁹ Legrand and Mayewski, “Glaciochemistry of Polar Ice Cores.”

²⁰ Ibid.

²¹ Bartels-Rausch, “Ten Things We Need to Know about Ice and Snow.”

²² Libbrecht, “The Formation of Snow Crystals.”

²³ Dansgaard, “Stable Isotopes in Precipitation.”

²⁴ Legrand and Mayewski, “Glaciochemistry.”

²⁵ Bartels-Rausch, “Ten Things We Need.”

²⁶ Arnaud et al., “Modelling of the Densification of Polar Firn.”

²⁷ ACE CRC, “Position Analysis,” 8.

²⁸ See Vance et al., “An Annually Resolved Chronology for the Mount Brown South Ice Cores, East Antarctica.”

²⁹ Smith et al., “A New Capability for ANTARES.”

³⁰ Rubino et al., “Revised Records of Atmospheric Trace Gases.”

³¹ Jong et al., “2000 Years of Annual Ice Core Data from Law Dome, East Antarctica.”

³² Australian Antarctic Programme Partnership. “AAPP Progress Report January-June 2022”. Australian Antarctic Programme Partnership (2022). https://aappartnership.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/AAPP-Progress-Report-Jan-Jun2022_submitted_Teams.pdf (accessed 2 March 2023).

³³ Waltman, “A Review of the Literature on Citation Impact Indicators.”

³⁴ Donthu et al., “How to Conduct a Bibliometric Analysis.”

³⁵ See Lee et al., “Many Papers but Limited Policy Impact.”

³⁶ Morgan, “Oxygen Isotope Evidence for Bottom Freezing on the Amery Ice Shelf.”

³⁷ Harzig, “Publish or Perish.”

³⁸ Australian Antarctic Division, “Search Projects,” (2023): https://antapps.aad.gov.au/public/projects/ (accessed 23 March 2023).

³⁹ See Budd, “The Antarctic Ice Sheet.”

⁴⁰ Clarke, “A Short History of Scientific Investigations on Glaciers.”

⁴¹ Isberg, “Frozen Archives,” 268.

⁴² Ibid.

⁴³ Ibid.

⁴⁴ Ibid.

⁴⁵ Ibid.

⁴⁶ Budd, “The Antarctic Ice Sheet,” 311–35.

⁴⁷ Australian Government, “Department of Science Annual Report 1976–77.”

⁴⁸ Ibid.

⁴⁹ Australian Government, “Department of Science Annual Report 1985–86.”

⁵⁰ See Budd and Jacka, “A Review of Ice Rheology for Ice Sheet Modelling.”

⁵¹ Budd, “The Antarctic Ice Sheet,” 325–8.

⁵² Morgan, “Oxygen Isotope Evidence.”

⁵³ Budd, “The Antarctic Ice Sheet,” 325–8.

⁵⁴ Craven et al., “Initial Borehole Results from the Amery Ice Shelf Hot-Water Drilling Project.”

⁵⁵ Ibid.

⁵⁶ Budd, “The Antarctic Ice Sheet,” 320–1.

⁵⁷ Australian Government, “Department of the Arts, Sport, the Environment, Tourism and Territories.”

⁵⁸ Allison, “Surface Climate of the Interior of the Lambert Glacier Basin, Antarctica.”

⁵⁹ Zhao and Allison, “Some Aspects of Chinese-Australian Cooperation in Antarctic Research over the Past Forty Years.”

⁶⁰ Ibid.

⁶¹ See Jiawen, Dahe, and Allison, “Variations of Snow Accumulation and Temperature over Past Decades in the Lambert Glacier Basin.”

⁶² Smith, van Ommen, and Morgan, “Distribution of Oxygen Isotope Ratios and Snow Accumulation Rates in Wilhelm II Land.”

⁶³ Ibid.

⁶⁴ Vance et al., “Optimal Site Selection for a High-Resolution Ice Core Record in East Antarctica.”

⁶⁵ Smith, van Ommen, and Morgan, “Distribution of Oxygen Isotope Ratios’; Foster et al., ‘Covariation of Sea Ice and Methanesulphonic Acid in Wilhelm II Land.”

⁶⁶ Vance et al., “Optimal Site Selection.”

⁶⁷ Crockart et al., “El Niño Southern Oscillation Signal in a New East Antarctic Ice Core, Mount Brown South.”

⁶⁸ Ibid.

⁶⁹ Roberts et al., “Borehole Temperatures Reveal a Changed Energy Budget at Mill Island.”

⁷⁰ Inoue, “A Glaciochemical Study of the 120 m Ice Core from Mill Island.”

⁷¹ Ibid.

⁷² Budd, “The Antarctic Ice Sheet,” 328–9.

⁷³ Ibid.

⁷⁴ van Ommen, Goodwin, and Smith, “Climate Variability in Eastern Wilkes Land.”

⁷⁵ Ibid.

⁷⁶ Wong, “Investigation the Dominant Source of Sea Salt to Antarctica.”

⁷⁷ Jong et al., “2000 Years.”

⁷⁸ Budd, “The Antarctic Ice Sheet,” 322–42.

⁷⁹ Etheridge, “Scientific Plan for Deep Ice Drilling on Law Dome.”

⁸⁰ Ibid.

⁸¹ Etheridge et al., “Natural and Anthropogenic Changes in Atmospheric CO₂ over the Last 1000 Years from Air in Antarctic Ice and Firn.”

⁸² Budd, “The Antarctic Ice Sheet,” 348–52.

⁸³ ACE CRC, “Position Analysis,” 12.

⁸⁴ Budd, “The Antarctic Ice Sheet,” 348–52.

⁸⁵ Etheridge et al., “Natural and Anthropogenic Changes.”

⁸⁶ MacFarling Meure et al., “Law Dome CO₂, CH₄ and N₂O Ice Core Records Extended to 2000 Years BP.”

⁸⁷ van Ommen and Morgan, “Snowfall Increase in Coastal East Antarctica Linked with Southwest Western Australian Drought.”

⁸⁸ Jong et al., “2000 Years.”

⁸⁹ Ibid.

⁹⁰ Ibid.

⁹¹ Rubino et al., “Revised Records of Atmospheric Trace Gases.”

⁹² Jong et al., “2000 Years.”

⁹³ Ibid.

⁹⁴ Moy, “Glacial Isotopic Composition from Dome Summit South, 2016–2017 Season.”

⁹⁵ ACE CRC, “Position Analysis,” 7, 23.

⁹⁶ Emile-Geay et al., “A Global Multiproxy Database for Temperature Reconstructions of the Common Era.” 24.

⁹⁷ Curran, “Australian Antarctic Science Projects 1172, 1224, 3025, 4075.”

⁹⁸ Pyper, “Hard Core Science,” 3.

⁹⁹ Morgan, “Solving an Ice Age Mystery with a Million Year Old Ice Core,” 8.

¹⁰⁰ Morgan, “Solving an Ice Age Mystery’; Pyper, ‘Getting to the Core of Climate,” 1.

¹⁰¹ Pyper, “Getting to the Core,” 2.

¹⁰² Curran, “Ice Coring 2008–2009 (Law Dome W10k, Mill Island PICO, Totten PICOs): ASAC 3025.”

¹⁰³ Curran, “Projects 1172, 1224, 3025, 4075.”

¹⁰⁴ See Servettaz et al., “Snowfall and Water Stable Isotope Variability in East Antarctica Controlled by Warm Synoptic Events.”

¹⁰⁵ See Curran and Moy, “Aurora Basin North, Glacial Isotopic Composition Data.”

¹⁰⁶ Warner and Roberts, “Seeing through the Deep Ice,” 24.

¹⁰⁷ Ibid.

¹⁰⁸ Ibid.

¹⁰⁹ Pyper, “Traversing Antarctica,” 6.

¹¹⁰ Augustin et al., “Eight Glacial Cycles.”

¹¹¹ Alfred-Wegener-Institut, “Beyond EPICA Oldest Ice.”

¹¹² Silom, “Australia on Track to Find the World’s Oldest Antarctic Ice.”

¹¹³ Pyper, “Traversing Antarctica,” 6.

¹¹⁴ Fischer et al., “Where to Find 1.5 Million Yr Old Ice.”

¹¹⁵ Australian Antarctic Programme, “Ice Mission Success into Deep Antarctica.” https://www.antarctica.gov.au/news/2023/million-year-ice-core/ (accessed 16 February 2023); Pyper, “Traversing Antarctica,” 6.

¹¹⁶ SCAR. “A History of SCAR, 2004–2010.” 37–8.

¹¹⁷ Norman, “What Is The “Holy Grail of Climate Science” and How Will Scientists Find It?” ABC News, (2016). https://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-12-12/what-is-the-million-year-ice-core/8102552 (accessed 05 March 2023).

¹¹⁸ Quoted in Dodds, “Awkward Antarctic nationalism.”

¹¹⁹ Elzinga, “Geopolitics, Science and Internationalism during and after IGY,” 71–8.

¹²⁰ Savarino, “An Overview of the EAIIST Project.”

¹²¹ Ibid.

¹²² PAGES, “Past Global Changes.”

¹²³ Dansgaard, “Stable Isotopes in Precipitation’; The Abundance of O18 in Atmospheric Water and Water Vapour.”

¹²⁴ Australian Government, “Priority Partner Countries.” Department of Education. https://www.education.gov.au/international-education-engagement/priority-partner-countries (accessed 19 February 2023).

¹²⁵ Zhao and Allison, “Some Aspects of Chinese-Australian Cooperation in Antarctic Research.”

¹²⁶ Jiawen, Dahe, and Allison, “Variations of Snow Accumulation”; Zheng et al., “Extending and Understanding the South West Western Australian Rainfall Record.”

¹²⁷ Zhao and Allison, “Some Aspects of Chinese-Australian Cooperation in Antarctic Research.”

¹²⁸ Ibid.

¹²⁹ Zhao et al., “Where Is the 1-Million-Year-Old Ice at Dome A?”

¹³⁰ Zheng et al., “Extending.”

¹³¹ Nielsen, Lucas, and Leane, “Rethinking Tasmania’s Regionality from an Antarctic Perspective.”

¹³² See Jong et al., “2000 Years”; Morgan, “Oxygen Isotope Evidence.”

¹³³ See Etheridge et al., “Natural and Anthropogenic Changes.”

¹³⁴ See Edwards et al., “Iron in Ice Cores from Law Dome, East Antarctica.”

¹³⁵ See Pedro et al., “High-resolution records.”

¹³⁶ Kiem et al., “Learning from the Past.”

¹³⁷ Croke et al., “A Palaeoclimate Proxy Database for Water Security Planning in Queensland Australia.”

¹³⁸ Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research, “SCAR Data Policy (2022).”

¹³⁹ See McConnell et al., “Antarctic-Wide Array of High-Resolution Ice Core Records Reveals Pervasive Lead Pollution Began in 1889 and Persists Today.”

¹⁴⁰ Budd, “The Antarctic Ice Sheet,” 317.

¹⁴¹ Australian Government, “Priority Partner Countries.”

¹⁴² Ibid.

¹⁴³ Fischer et al., “Where to Find 1.5 Million Yr Old Ice.”

¹⁴⁴ McGee, Edmiston, and Haward, “Scenario Analysis and the Classical View of Antarctic Geopolitics,” 98, 172.

¹⁴⁵ Emile-Geay et al., “A Global Multiproxy Database.” 24.

¹⁴⁶ Donthu et al., “How to Conduct a Bibliometric Analysis”; Lee et al., “Many Papers”.

¹⁴⁷ McGee, Edmiston, and Haward, “Scenario Analysis,” 98172.