Guidelines for IUPAC Projects
1. General Criteria
IUPAC projects should address one of the goals listed in the IUPAC Strategic Plan and satisfy at least one of the following key criteria: 1.1 They should be related to the needs of the chemists in the world, not just in a country or a region. 1.2 They should be related to the role of chemistry for the needs of mankind. 1.3 They should best be approached by an international team such as IUPAC can assemble.
Thus, IUPAC projects can comprise: 2.1 Studies of problems of international nomenclature, symbols, terminology and conventions, as the need develops. 2.2 Large future-oriented projects important for the position of chemistry in the world or for the needs of mankind (CHEMRAWN, teaching of chemistry, problems of publications or of computers, mission-oriented programmes, etc.). 2.3 Compilations with critical evaluation of data best undertaken by an international team, especially compilations of interest to the broader international chemical community (e.g., solubility data, electrode potentials). Data compiled from literature without critical evaluation or obtained experimentally in a single laboratory are less appropriate. 2.4 Unification of “approved” experimental methods (in particular those related to analytical problems, characterization of materials, etc.), establishment of standards and reference materials, recommendations on procedures of interest in many laboratories, in domains where specialized organizations (ISO, EU, NIST) are not active, or in close cooperation with them. 2.5 Divisions and Standing Committees should prioritize their activities to stress those of the greatest importance with the greatest impact and interest to the international chemical community. 2.6 Projects which are inappropriate for IUPAC include review articles, especially those by a single author that might ordinarily be published in the existing review literature (Chem. Rev., Angew. Chem., etc.), purely informational projects (e.g., surveys of methods or materials without critical evaluation), original research studies, experimental studies and recommendations from a single laboratory.
3. Additional Comments
3.1 Only after a proposal is reviewed in detail and approved by a Division Committee or Standing Committee are funds made available to the Task Group formed to carry out the project. 3.2 Project management is the responsibility of the Task Group Chairman, who should report to the Officers of the Committee that approved the project. 3.3. Retrospective evaluations will be carried out within two years after projects are completed.
Click here for a PDF of this web page)