to understand the effects of water mass variability
during the ‘WOCE era’ in major parts of the
world ocean. We are confident the WHP global
effort will remain one of the major achievements
of WOCE when viewed by future generations of
oceanographers.
Another challenge for the analysis phase of
WOCE is to determine, in some sense, how the
ocean should be surveyed in future. The emphasis
so far has mainly been on quantitative analysis of
ocean circulation, and such strategic questions
have largely been deferred. By the time WOCE
formally comes to an end, we should be in a position to answer such questions as ‘Did we do the
right sections, and in sufficient detail, to address
the WOCE goals?’. Presented with a question such
as ‘How much anthropogenic CO 2 does the ocean
contain, and how is that changing?’, the community must design a sampling strategy that states
how and when the key regions of the ocean should
be sampled. If that strategy is more effective
because of lessons learnt from the WOCE global
survey, then we will continue to reap benefit from
the investment in the WHP for decades to come.
The question arises of what has been achieved
that would not have been achieved without
WOCE? What is the legacy of the shipboard programme? There are two unarguable benefits.
First, the near-global coverage. Obviously the
major institutions of the world would have carried
out a considerable amount of hydrographic work
during the WOCE observational period, 1990–97.
But the work would almost certainly have been
concentrated in the same regions of interest that
had prevailed for the previous hundred years. Portions of the main ocean basins would remain
poorly sampled, or maybe even unsampled with
modern methods and tracers. The opportunity and
achievability of a global survey, not synoptic but
at least concentrated in a few-year period, led
investigators to propose and undertake cruises that
they would not otherwise have contemplated.
Second, the widespread improvement in data
quality. The insistence of WHP planners on setting
the highest standards and publishing them provided an incentive for data gatherers to rethink
their activities and improve their performance
where necessary. Institutions were persuaded to
release the necessary capital resources. Suddenly
no-one wished to fall below what became the recognized standard. The substantial investment has
provided a lasting benefit. The WOCE requirements for measurement accuracy are still considered to be the standard to meet. They have been
widely adopted by oceanographers outside the
community of the WHP. Many groups engaged in
deep-water oceanography for other purposes, such
as fisheries and biochemistry, aspire to meet
WOCE standards at least for CTD data.
The ambitions of a high-quality global hydrographic survey have therefore been largely realized.
A global survey has been completed that bears a
remarkable likeness to the one envisaged in 1988.
The requirements on data quality have been fulfilled. Neither the completeness nor the uniformly
high quality would have occurred without the planning and stimulus of the coordinated shipboard
programme.
Acknowledgements
The authors are pleased to acknowledge the additional comments and suggestions contributed by
the editors and two anonymous referees. In particular one of the referees contributed a number of
observations on the background to the WHP,
which are included in Sections 3.1.1 and 3.1.2.
Jerry Kappa and Dave Muus (WHPO, SIO), Pat
Caldwell (University of Hawaii), Kathy Donohue
(University of Hawaii) and S. Smith (COAPS) provided station positions for Figs 3.1.4, 3.1.6 and
3.1.8, and Penny Holliday (WOCE International
Project Office) prepared many of the figures at
SOC. Roberta Boscolo redrew Fig. 3.1.7.
SECTION 3 NEW WAYS OF OBSERVING THE OCEAN
122
during the ‘WOCE era’ in major parts of the
world ocean. We are confident the WHP global
effort will remain one of the major achievements
of WOCE when viewed by future generations of
oceanographers.
Another challenge for the analysis phase of
WOCE is to determine, in some sense, how the
ocean should be surveyed in future. The emphasis
so far has mainly been on quantitative analysis of
ocean circulation, and such strategic questions
have largely been deferred. By the time WOCE
formally comes to an end, we should be in a position to answer such questions as ‘Did we do the
right sections, and in sufficient detail, to address
the WOCE goals?’. Presented with a question such
as ‘How much anthropogenic CO 2 does the ocean
contain, and how is that changing?’, the community must design a sampling strategy that states
how and when the key regions of the ocean should
be sampled. If that strategy is more effective
because of lessons learnt from the WOCE global
survey, then we will continue to reap benefit from
the investment in the WHP for decades to come.
The question arises of what has been achieved
that would not have been achieved without
WOCE? What is the legacy of the shipboard programme? There are two unarguable benefits.
First, the near-global coverage. Obviously the
major institutions of the world would have carried
out a considerable amount of hydrographic work
during the WOCE observational period, 1990–97.
But the work would almost certainly have been
concentrated in the same regions of interest that
had prevailed for the previous hundred years. Portions of the main ocean basins would remain
poorly sampled, or maybe even unsampled with
modern methods and tracers. The opportunity and
achievability of a global survey, not synoptic but
at least concentrated in a few-year period, led
investigators to propose and undertake cruises that
they would not otherwise have contemplated.
Second, the widespread improvement in data
quality. The insistence of WHP planners on setting
the highest standards and publishing them provided an incentive for data gatherers to rethink
their activities and improve their performance
where necessary. Institutions were persuaded to
release the necessary capital resources. Suddenly
no-one wished to fall below what became the recognized standard. The substantial investment has
provided a lasting benefit. The WOCE requirements for measurement accuracy are still considered to be the standard to meet. They have been
widely adopted by oceanographers outside the
community of the WHP. Many groups engaged in
deep-water oceanography for other purposes, such
as fisheries and biochemistry, aspire to meet
WOCE standards at least for CTD data.
The ambitions of a high-quality global hydrographic survey have therefore been largely realized.
A global survey has been completed that bears a
remarkable likeness to the one envisaged in 1988.
The requirements on data quality have been fulfilled. Neither the completeness nor the uniformly
high quality would have occurred without the planning and stimulus of the coordinated shipboard
programme.
Acknowledgements
The authors are pleased to acknowledge the additional comments and suggestions contributed by
the editors and two anonymous referees. In particular one of the referees contributed a number of
observations on the background to the WHP,
which are included in Sections 3.1.1 and 3.1.2.
Jerry Kappa and Dave Muus (WHPO, SIO), Pat
Caldwell (University of Hawaii), Kathy Donohue
(University of Hawaii) and S. Smith (COAPS) provided station positions for Figs 3.1.4, 3.1.6 and
3.1.8, and Penny Holliday (WOCE International
Project Office) prepared many of the figures at
SOC. Roberta Boscolo redrew Fig. 3.1.7.
SECTION 3 NEW WAYS OF OBSERVING THE OCEAN
122