ESA Summer 2024 GB Meeting Minutes Ecological Society of America Long Beach, CA and Zoom Meeting August 3–4, 2024

Abstract

Sharon Collinge, Peter Goffman present Day 2.

President Naeem presiding, meeting called to order at 9:00 a.m. PDT

I. Roll Call and Agenda (Naeem)

Motion carries (all aye).

A. Adopt Agenda

Motion to Adopt Agenda:

Move to adopt meeting agenda.

Motion moved by Shahid Naeem and motion seconded by Emilio Bruna. Motion carries (all aye).

B. Acknowledgment of Email Votes

The Governing Board voted by OnBoard and email (8 ayes) on June 27, 2024 to approve the minutes from the May 2024 meeting.

II. Reports

A. Report of the President (Naeem)

President Naeem thanked the Interim ED and members of the ESA staff for their assistance during the ED's sabbatical. He summarized some of the recent ESA highlights, including the number of successful regional meetings and the highly anticipated meeting in Long Beach. He expressed gratitude for the opportunity to learn about the challenge of serving as ESA President, the power of ESA's collective approach decision making, and the tremendous support of the ESA staff.

B. Report of the Interim Executive Director and Staff (Biggs and Staff)

The Interim ED reminded the GB members that thorough staff reports are available in the meeting board book. An update to the reports was provided by Teresa Mourad, who informed the GB of a recently awarded a 3-year grant from National Park Service to support six Science Communication fellows and provide Science Communication training. Alison Mize answered questions from members of the GB about the Policy Affairs programs, including the ESAs joining of amicus briefs and issuing statements on such issues as the SCOTUS decisions related to the Chevron Doctrine and DEI Programs, College Admissions, etc. Members of the GB pointed out that in some states, recent legislation makes it difficult or even illegal faculty at state institutions to advocate or implement programs on these issues, so scholarly societies are the best option for them to do so.

C. Discuss Financial Status

Unfortunately, Wileys revenue for the most recent 6 months is down $500 K, which means ESA's is down $300 K. This decrease in revenue is primarily in the OA space, specifically due to decreases in number of papers published that require the authors to pay Article Processing Charges (APCs). Subscriptions and transitional agreements are flat. CFO Biggs noted many organizations are in a similar position. Rich Wallace pointed out that the numbers for submission and acceptance are good, but there is a delay between acceptance and publication. Projections are based on published articles, not accepted articles, so having identified this delay and adding a staff member to assist with getting accepted manuscripts to publication means this will hopefully be a more positive outlook soon. Interim ED suggested this and other publishing issues influencing finances are likely to be an important topic for discussion at the November Board Meeting, along with any necessary revisions to the budget (Wiley will have provided an updated financial report by that meeting).

The fiscal year that ended June 30 was excellent (operational budget), though worth pointing out this does not include realized or unrealized stock market gains, so surplus will be even higher after the update. This surplus was due to a $500 K payment from Wiley resulting from additional revenue for the calendar year. (Their original payment was based on an underestimate of income). That resulted in a $300 K surplus for publication revenue for last calendar year. CFO Biggs also reminded the GB that the briefing book includes a report of income and expenditures by program.

VP Finance Cavender-Bares reported that overall the ESA is doing well financially including a 12.36% increase for the Merrill Lynch account, which is where most of the ESA's investments are found. The account with Townley holding most of ESAs endowments is ~2.85 million and this is also up ~12%. She suggested it would be worth considering recalibrating the investment portfolios at Merrill Lynch, currently at 63% equities, to~70% equities to take advantage of the positive outlook of the stock market. Socially responsible investments, which have been much discussed by the GB, have also increased. After much discussion (with Merrill Lynch), they are currently about 5% of that portfolio. They are ~25% of the Townley portfolio. VP Cavender-Bares concluded by answering questions from the GB about some of the complications surrounding “green” investment portfolios.

III. Discussion/Action Items

A. FY 2024–2025 ESA Budget (Biggs)

CFO Biggs and Teresa Mourad discussed the new EEE Scholars Endowment. The goal is $400 K for EEE Scholars and other similar activities, and there is now a challenge match program for this endowment seeded with $100 K from P. Taylor available to match future contributions.

B. Audit Committee Appointments (Biggs)

Kelly Ramirez is rotating off the Audit Committee, which requires two GB members, plus the chair. After a discussion of the responsibilities, Angee Doerr volunteered to serve on the committee.

Motion to Appoint New Audit Committee Member:

Move to appoint Angee Doerr to serve 2-year term on Audit Committee.

Motion moved by Jeannine Cavender-Bares and motion seconded by Jen Funk. Motion carries (all aye).

C. Proposal for New Mentoring Award (Cavender-Bares, Sanders)

Jeanine Cavender-Bares presented a proposal for a new ESA award to recognize individuals that have an outstanding history of mentoring to enhance diversity, inclusion and belonging and advance excellence in ecology. The proposed award would be named after two eminent ESA members, Fakhri Bazzaz and Stewart Pickett. C-B informed the board there are currently ~$20 K in pledges to fund the award; if approved and $40 K in funds were raised within the next 6–8 months, it could be awarded in the next cycle. David Ackerly has volunteered to lead these fundraising efforts. The GB discussed the award and how to proceed with fundraising.

Motion to Establish New Mentoring Award:

Move to adopt recommendation to establish new mentoring award.

Motion moved by Stephanie Hampton and motion seconded by Jen Funk. Motion carries (all aye).

D. GLC Recommendation on Naming Awards (Collinge, Biggs, Sanders)

President Naeem and Adrienne Sponberg summarized the history of the task force charged with recommending a formal policy on named awards, including both what best to do with existing named awards (society-wide, section- and chapter awards) as well as future awards. The task force studied the issue, considered the approaches and decisions of other scholarly societies, and sought feedback from ESAs leadership and members of the ESA community, and provided a series of recommendations. These recommendations were considered by the ESA's GLC, which proposed accepting the recommendations of the task force. The GB discussed the GLC recommendation and its implications.

Motion to Adopt Recommendation on Naming Awards:

Move to adopt awards naming task force recommendation on naming awards.

Motion moved by Kelly Ramirez and motion seconded by Stephanie Hampton. Motion fails (2 aye, 7 nay).

E. Organizational Dues Structure (Pataki, Miller)

Diane Pataki summarized the reasons behind establishing and the recent efforts of the membership task force. A major goal was increasing the number of nonacademic ecologists that join and are engaged with ESA. One of the things the task force focused on was working with organizations ranging from NGOs to those in the private sector that employ ecologists. The task force studied and discussed several options, gathered feedback from the GB and different organizations, and based on their efforts has provided their recommendations.

The GB discussed the proposal for organizational dues structure as well as the process for assessing the risk of potential members.

Motion to Adopt Organizational Dues Structure:

Move to adopt the recommended initial pricing structure and policies for organizational membership.

Motion moved by Emilio Bruna and motion seconded by Jeannine Cavender-Bares. Motion carries (all aye).

F. Council Meeting Preview (Graves)

Chair Graves provided an overview of ongoing activities, which will be carried forward by incoming speaker Diogo Provete. One of the most important upcoming activities is the discussion of the criteria for sections being judged as active/inactive and the increase in dues for section membership.

G. Informational Updates from Public Affairs Office (Mize)

The board received an update on federal environmental policies and administration actions relevant to ESA, including the progress of the National Nature Assessment and the allocation of funds for ecological restoration. This included clarification on the distinction between the National Nature Assessment (NNA) and the Natural Capital Assessment (NCA). The National Nature Assessment is moving along and the first draft available for public comment should come out soon, the final draft will be out late in the fall. Rich Wallace then summarized the ESA Publications efforts surrounding the NNA, including a collection of articles by indigenous authors to complement the NNA. These are likely to appear in the ESA's journal Earth Stewardship. For the first time, the United States will also consider Natural Capital Accounts, which will put a monetary value on “nature.” The Biodiversity and Climate Change Assessment may not be done after the current administration, but the NNA and Climate Change assessment should be.

The GB discussed these issues, a series of panel discussions on related topics at the Annual Meeting, and the establishment of the ESA SPRINT project (spending off of reserves) to investigate the potential of biodiversity credit markets. Lastly, they discussed the need to be aware of differences with the private sector's potential economic definition of biodiversity, noted the upcoming policy statement on carbon offsets, and put forward several questions for the Town Hall with Dr. Lubchenco.

Finally, there was an update on ESA and COP16: ESA has been badged and got official observer status for COP16, and is interested in learning how to engage with the process. A small group from ESA is going, and a small group of ESA members has applied to be credentialed to attend with ESA. The particular interest is in biodiversity credit markets, in which it seems there is potential for an organization could get credits for directly or indirectly being engaged in restoration or conservation. A number of accounting methods for biodiversity credits have been proposed, though many have not had inputs from ecologists and other biodiversity experts. SPRINT funds are being used for activities (e.g., webinars) to educate ESA members about the markets and opportunities for engagement, and for help in identifying how ESA could become a part of this process directly or indirectly (e.g., as a place for others to find experts).

H. Emerging Ecological Issues Committee (Sponberg, Hampton)

Diane Pataki provided the GB an overview of the origin and challenges of the EEI committee. In general, there is interest in the committee's objectives, but it was challenging to identify how to fund potential activities (workshops, reports) and the diversity of the committee's membership. There was consensus of the need for a group to do what the EEI Committee was intended to do, that a Task Force might be a good mechanisms, and that the President should prepare for GB approval a proposal for a task force that would put forward options for how best to proceed (including identifying funding sources for potential horizon scans, working groups, etc).

Motion to Sunset Emerging Ecological Issues Committee:

Move to sunset Emerging Ecological Issues Committee.

Motion moved by Shahid Naeem and motion seconded by Kelly Ramirez. Motion carries (8 aye, 1 nay).

I. Meetings Program and Annual Meeting Update (Nam)

Christi Nam summarized the organizational status of the upcoming meeting, including number of registrants, vendors, etc. It appears this year's meeting exhibit and sponsorship income will exceed that of previous ones. The GB and staff discussed how the ability to organize and respond to meeting-related issues differed between cities and how that would shape meetings going forward. Finally, Nam summarized the process for identifying cities for the 2027 ESA meeting, including the criteria for site selection, site visits, and offers from potential convention venues. Toronto was recommended based on a number of factors, including the large number of flights from hub cities, an exceptional offer from the proposed meeting venue, and an abundant housing options at a wide range of price points.

Motion to Approve 2027 Annual Meeting Site:

Move to adopt Meetings Committee recommendation that Toronto, Canada be the 2027 Annual Meeting site.

Motion moved by Kelly Ramirez and motion seconded by Jen Funk. Motion carries (all aye).

J. November Governing Board Meeting Retreat Format and Agenda (Hampton)

The GB identified a number of topics to be discussed at the November GB meeting, which will be the first one held with the new “retreat” format. These include issues surrounding publications, how to make ESA more nimble, clarifying what “extending the tent” would look like in 15 years, and the role of ESA in building community. GB members also expressed interest in having more interaction between staff and GB members at this meeting. Other topics mentioned included a further conversation about our awards program and how to publish socioecological research without compromising identity.

President Naeem resumed the meeting at 8:30 a.m. PDT.

K. State of Wiley (Wallace, Wiley Staff)

Director of Publications Rich Wallace introduced the EiCs of the ESA journals and guests from the ESA's publishing partner Wiley. There have been a number of structural changes at Wiley, including turnover in leadership and corporate restructuring that overlapped with the end of ESAs contract with Wiley. After an open RFP, the decision was made to renew the relationship with Wiley in 2022. Since the restructuring, which included the addition of Pernille Hammelsø and Maggie Donnelly to the team, communication with Wiley has been much improved. What has remained a concern is the changes in Wiley staffing that have made it difficult to carry out peer review efficiently and launch the new ESA journals. This is what led to the request to have a meeting with Wiley to have an update on the restructuring and relationship going forward.

Maggie Donnelly summarized motivations for the restructuring, which included that the scope and complexity of what was required of individuals had gotten too large. In response, Wiley split up the individual responsibilities and move to a “teams of teams” model to allow for greater specialization (contracts, promotion, research integrity, etc). Natalia Ortuzar explained her team's responsibility with operations and management of the journal, including user experience and the Peer Review Desk (Team) which offers peer review support to Editors. A Molina then provided an overview of Wiley's current financial health, about which she feels optimistic. She emphasized that Wiley is associated with having a highly positive reputation, and that the acquisition of Hindawi has been a learning experience that will ultimately be successful. They are aware of the peer review support still being a challenging area and it is their hope that this has been improving.

The members of the GB asked questions about how Wiley was moving forward from the problems with Hindawi, as well as about new tools and technology to discover misconduct and fraud. They also highlighted the “pain points” in article submission and review and asked the Wiley representatives for information on the changes being made to improve the user experience.

The EiCs of the journals provided an overview of what they saw as the strengths and weaknesses of journal operations, as well as ways to improve the author experience with submission and peer review. All acknowledged the invaluable efforts and contributions of the publications staff. The GB asked the Editors for their perspectives on topics ranging from the quality of submissions to how the emergence of new journals influenced the ESA portfolio.

M. Editor-in-Chief Review: Jean-Phillipe Lessard

This item has been tabled until the next board meeting.

President Naeem summarized the major topics discussed at the GB meeting, and asked GB members to follow-up with any suggested items to discuss at the next GB meeting.

Motion to Adjourn Meeting:

Motion to adjourn Summer 2024 Governing Board Meeting. The board will next convene on November 12.

Motion moved by Stephanie Hampton and motion seconded by Jeannine Cavender-Bares. All aye.