Lisa McNeill

Disclaimer

This transcript is based on a video-recorded interview deposited at MarE3, JAMSTEC (Yokosuka, Japan).

The transcripts of the research project Oral Histories of Scientific Ocean Drilling are polished representations of oral conversations, and are intended solely for the purpose of preserving and documenting personal accounts and memories. They are not a literary product, and are not intended to exhibit literary qualities.

The primary goal of this transcript is to capture the spoken words and memories of the interviewee as accurately as possible. Minor editing and polishing works have been performed to enhance clarity and readability while maintaining the authenticity of spoken discourse, including non-standard grammar, inconsistencies, repetitions, and pauses.

The reader must be aware that memories of an event can vary between individuals and may evolve over time due to various factors, such as subsequent experiences, interactions with others, and personal emotions.

Use and citation

This transcript is the property of JAMSTEC and is subject to its regulations. Quoting, reproducing, or distributing this transcript for non-commercial purposes is allowed with due attribution.

Please cite the interview as:

Interview of Lisa McNeill by Beatriz Martinez-Rius on 2025 December 16, Ernest N. Morial Convention Center (New Orleans, USA). [link]

Beatriz Martinez-Rius (BMR): Today is December 16 of 2025. I’m Beatriz Martinez-Rius, historian of science at JAMSTEC, and I’m at the Ernest N. Morial Convention Center during AGU 2025 in New Orleans with Lisa McNeill. Thank you so much.

Lisa McNeill (LMN): It’s nice to see you, Beatriz.

BMR: Can you tell me your name, affiliation and current position?

LMN: I’m Lisa McNeill, and I’m a professor of tectonics at the University of Southampton in the UK.

BMR: What are your research interests, broadly speaking?

LMN: I’m interested in active tectonics, and I work on subduction zones and rift settings, amongst other places. I’m interested in natural hazards like earthquakes and tsunamis, and I’m also interested in the interactions between tectonics, sedimentation and climate and environment.

BMR: I will ask you chronologically, starting from your early life, and then we’ll move into how you got into this. Where did you grow up, and what kind of childhood did you have?

LMN: I’m from a place about an hour north of London. I grew up in small towns or villages. I went to school in the main town of the county, and I was quite lucky to go to a grammar school for my secondary school which was quite heavily focused on science, among other things; and encouraging girls to go into science and engineering. That was really good. Quite a lot of us were interested in science.

My parents were also scientific. My dad was an electrical engineer, and my mum was a physiotherapist. So, medical. They both had interest in science. I was interested in lots of different things, but there were some things that were maybe pushing me towards a scientific future.

BMR: How common was for women to do something related to science, at the time?

LMN: At that time – it was interesting. I think my school maybe was a bit of an anomaly. It was a girl’s school for my secondary education and, as I said, they did encourage us to get into science and engineering. That was probably anomalous relative to the country, at the time. But, you know, when I went on to the university, there were still a lot of women who were doing science; much less so in engineering, which is not what I studied, and hopefully that has improved quite a bit. So, my experience might not have been exactly that of others in the country, but I would say it was definitely very positive.

BMR: And how did you get interested in Earth sciences?

LMN: As a child, I was definitely interested in the outdoors and collecting things. I was interested in rocks and fossils, but I don’t think I really thought about it as something I would study or do as a job. Actually, when I went to university, I really wasn’t sure what I wanted to do, because I think I was interested in lots of different things. I kind of went from thinking I might want to do architecture, because I quite liked art as well, so kind of combining the two; and then I thought, “No, I don’t think I want to do that. I want to do chemistry”. Actually, when I went to university, I was expecting to do chemistry, and I did a Natural Sciences degree. It’s quite broad. Amongst those subjects that I studied in the first year, as well as chemistry was geology, Earth sciences. That’s really the first time I started thinking, “Oh, actually, maybe I should study this more completely”. I transferred my interest and my study focus, after doing that for a year.

BMR: Was there any fieldwork involved?

LMN: Yeah. I think that was very attractive, exactly (laughs).

BMR: It’s quite common.

LMN: There was a field trip to Scotland. It did rain a lot, but I did have a good time. And I think for a lot of us, that was one of the reasons why we switched from chemistry, or physics, or biology, to earth science. I was quite lucky that where I studied that was a possibility, because in a lot of places it might be harder to switch between those subjects.

BMR: Which university was that?

LMN: It was at Cambridge University. Earth science is all taught within a Natural Science degree program. You do 3 or 4 different subjects in the first year. It’s a little bit more like the American system, in some ways.

BMR: Was there someone influential in those years? You can also include your master’s and PhD.

LMC: Yeah. When I came closer to the end of the degree, I think two people had some influence there. For all of the geology students in the UK, we have to do a mapping project. We go away for 5 or 6 weeks with a few other people, and we work in a pair and map an area. I went to the Spanish Pyrenees to do that, and my supervisor was Barbara John, who was quite involved in ODP and IODP as well, but she was based at Cambridge at that time. I think that I really enjoyed the project and that sort of research aspect. I think that was important, and her support during that.

Then, another person at the time and particularly towards the end, when I was really interested in active tectonics, was James Jackson, who was another professor there. He gave some suggestions of people I could contact in terms of where I might go next.

BMR: How did you get involved in scientific ocean drilling?

LMN: Sort of skipping forward… (laughs)

BMR: Okay, I didn’t know it was later.

LMN: Yeah, it was sometime later. I did my PhD in the US, in Oregon on the West Coast, at Oregon State University. I was doing my PhD on the Cascadia subduction zone. That’s where my sort of interest, I suppose, in active tectonics and in subduction zone processes, which is where a lot of my ocean drilling experiences are, have come from. And also, that was my first experience of going to sea. I went on 1 or 2 shortish cruises every year during my PhD. That certainly started my interest in those scientific topics and methods.

 But it wasn’t until I’d been back in the UK – I was first at the University of Leeds and then moved to the University of Southampton – and it was only then, in the sort of early 2000, that I first went on an ocean drilling expedition. In Southampton there’s quite a lot of people who are involved in scientific ocean drilling and have been for some time, so became aware of the program a bit more. I was starting to do more research offshore again… So the opportunity came up to apply for – this was during ODP – to apply for a drilling expedition on the Nankai subduction zone, on the JR [JOIDES Resolution].

BMR: Which expedition was that?

LMN: Expedition 196. In this one we were doing logging data, so that was my first experience with that, as well.

BMR: Maybe because there’s a gap here, I’d like to ask you about your previous experience before getting into ODP. Why did you decide to move to the US for your PhD?

LMN: I wasn’t really sure what to do and I was interested in active tectonics, and thought there you could something different or more variety of options. I asked particularly those two people I mentioned their suggestions, because Bobby John is from the US, and they knew some colleagues. So, yeah, just something a bit different and more opportunities in that area. It was quite different (laughs). And actually, before I went, I hadn’t been to the US before.

BMR: I imagine it was sort of a shock, even though the language is the same.

LMN: Well, in theory, yes (laughs). Although I think I probably spent the first six months not being properly understood. And then, I realized I needed to change how I spoke, and intonation, and the words used, and then it became a bit easier.

BMR: For the Spanish ear is not that different, we struggle with both (laughs).

LMN: I thought it was the same language too, but apparently not (both laugh).

BMR: When you applied for the first time to this ODP expedition in Nankai, then, what kind of things did you know, and what you had to learn?

LMN: If I can remember that far back… (both laugh). But I suppose I had been at sea before, so I knew a bit about what it was like to be on a ship, and to do research, and how shifts work, and how you kind of work as a team on a ship. I knew about that, although this would then be a much bigger ship, and more people. I knew I was seasick, so I knew that was something to worry about (laughs). But one thing that was interesting was the sort of training or the learning curve for some of the techniques you’re going to use, because this expedition and some of the others I was on was quite focused on logging data, and I really didn’t know much about that at all. So, there’s a lot to learn.

BMR: In what kind of science or techniques were you more experienced?

LMN: Before that? The cruises I’d been on when I was doing my PhD, we were collecting… I was working in terms of analyzing datasets… I was working on seismic reflection data, and bathymetry data, side-scan data… And we also had some ROV and submersible dives and data, and some sampling. So, it was geological but using geophysical data. I did do some onshore fieldwork, as well. So, geophysical in terms of the data, but not necessarily in terms of analysis – I felt I was a geologist.

And then, the research cruises were actually side-scan sonar and submersible / ROV cruises. Really interesting. So, I got a chance to go in submersibles. A bit different to the ocean drilling process. I hadn’t done too much work on actual sediment samples or logging data per se. I knew about the theory of these things, particularly the logging data. So, there was quite a lot to learn, and much more about physical properties and mechanical properties; we’re interested in fault zones and how they behave. So, yeah, I learned a lot from that and from the people on board, the other science party members and the technicians, as well. It was a lot to learn. And I think, in theory, you come out at the end and then you go on another expedition and suddenly you’re a logging scientist, which seems ridiculous (laughs).

BMR: In the next one you’re the one teaching, right?

LMN: I know… I’m not sure I’m an expert (both laugh).

BMR: What kind of things do you remember about that first expedition? Any particular memory of the life onboard, the people…?

LMN: Yeah, it was good fun, I think, because of the people. When you said that, I immediately remembered a party where we were all dancing (laughs), very scientific. I met a lot of people that I know well now, and I have been at sea with again,… It was really, really fun. And actually, I’ve seen several of them already in this meeting; people that you still get on with well. Do you remember…? No, I shouldn’t talk about whether it was a dry ship or not (laughs)

BMR: I’ve heard about that before. (laughs)

LMN: Yeah, it was really interesting. I’m sure everybody says some of these things, and a big part of it is the people that you get to know, you make friends for life. We’ve all learned alot. There were some really senior people there who I learned a lot from who, sadly, are no longer with us. But then, there are also people who are a bit more senior than me, and you all kind of advance – or hopefully advance – together and grow together, and you see each other doing different and bigger things. That’s really nice too.

BMR: How did you continue your involvement? This was this was probably in the early 2000…

LMN: 2001, I think.

BMR: One of the last ODP expeditions.

LMN: Yes, I think that’s right.

BMR: I know you’ve been involved in NanTroSEIZE from 2009. How did your involvement evolve, over those years?

LMN: I think, then, I moved on to other projects, particularly moved back to doing some more work in continental rifting. We had some experiments collecting data there. I think I was a bit more focused on that, and I didn’t get involved in any IODP committees at that time. I was sort of more observing, and working on my own data, and following what other people were doing. That’s probably what happened.

BMR: Well, what’s interesting is that you were sort of coming back to IODP at different points of your career to support your research.

LMN: Yeah, I think that’s why I came back. There was another opportunity that was attractive in terms of the science that was going to be done. I was hearing about the NanTroSEIZE Project from coming to AGU and talking to some of those colleagues, including those that I had met on the previous drilling expedition. I knew about what was happening and was starting to get involved. And, actually, the expedition I went on was the first of those NanTroSEIZE expeditions.

BMR: Were you co-chief on that first?

LMN: No, no. I wonder if we’ve missed a gap. I was on 314.

BMR: Oh, okay, I only knew about 319.

LMN: Yeah, 314 was 2007. But you’re right, there was a bit of a gap where I was obviously doing other things. And it took a while to plan NanTroSEIZE. There were a lot of presentations and discussions at meetings like this [AGU], when they were doing some of the site survey, and presenting results, interpretations of the geophysical data… I was definitely following that, and at some point, I think probably after 314, I also started to get a little bit involved in some of the planning within the NanTroSEIZE Program, I did go to Japan for a couple of the planning group meetings… I suppose that was in the lead up to becoming a co-chief in the program, as well.

BMR: Now that you mention 314, I’ve heard about this expedition from different people serving in different roles, like EPMs. From the perspective of scientists experienced in the JR, how was like to be on the first ever expedition of Chikyu?

LMN: It was exciting. I think it was a big learning curve for everybody, including those operating the ship, from the technical side as well as the scientists getting used to Chikyu…. For those who have maybe been on the JR. Yeah, I think it was quite challenging at the start, including from the technical side of things.

There were obviously skilled people there, but it was the first time they had done something within this sort of scientific ocean drilling space, so that was quite different; and getting used to us, as scientists, in terms of what we were asking for and how we did that, and how we often wanted to change what we were doing… And, you know, introducing that flexibility in challenging conditions. The ocean current velocities are very high there. We have the Kuroshio current coming through, which causes quite a lot of challenges in terms of how you enter a hole, drill string vibrations… All sorts of things that were really quite difficult; even keeping the ship on station in those conditions was difficult. And, again, difficult if it hadn’t been done by that vessel and that crew before.

So, I think a lot of those were difficult. And then, we were doing logging while drilling. That’s challenging in those sorts of materials; often the borehole can collapse… So, yeah, a lot of challenges. A tool got stuck – and I won’t say more about that – but yeah, there were lots of challenges and I think probably lots of people found it a bit frustrating. Gradually, over time, things improved.

BMR: Yes, I’ve heard about it in terms of a brand-new ship, in this brand-new project, with experienced scientists and a not so experienced crew [in science].

LMN: Yes, and not so experienced in how those things are done in scientific ocean drilling – I think it’s the important thing. Lots of people I’m sure will refer to the JOIDES Resolution and its team as a well-oiled machine. And it’s true. They’ve done these things so many times. Of course, every expedition is a little bit different and there will be challenges, but they had so much experience, that they could handle that.

BMR: Maybe we can talk more about this later, because I have the feeling that after twenty years of operations, we can say that Chikyu is a well-oiled machine as well, but the MSPs are a different thing.

LMN: Exactly. It’s a steep learning curve for each one (laughs).

BMR: How come that you became co-chief in NanTroSEIZE?

LMN: Yeah… I don’t know. You have to ask the people who asked me. Hopefully it wasn’t just a token woman from outside the US or Japan (both laugh). Well, hopefully I had shown that I had some general interest in the broader science, and I was hopefully a reasonable team player, and showed some leadership qualities. I don’t know, you’d have to ask them (laughs).

BMR: How was the experience like? What did you find more challenging and more enjoyable, of being co-chief?

LMN: For that particular co-chief job? Because I’ve done three of them now.

BMR: Yeah.

LMN: All of them are different. That one had additional challenges, not just as a co-chief but just generally. That was the first riser drilling expedition, and the first time we did an expedition where the science party was split because it was longer than two months. It was done over three months, we split the science party in two, and we had four co-chiefs rotating. So, quite a lot of additional changes and challenges. And all of them, I think it’s probably fair to say that all of them didn’t quite work as well as they might have done.

That was all challenging. It’s all a learning experience in terms of how you do both the actual drilling operations, but also how you handle a larger science team over a longer period of time when they’re not all together at once. I think we were a bit of a guinea pig, there (laughs). It was interesting. There were a lot of challenges, and it was interesting as a co-chief. So, not only was it the first time I’d done that – I suppose for most of us, actually, it was maybe for all of us the first time we’d been a co-chief; I can’t remember. But what was maybe particularly a little bit challenging for me was, I was sort of the middle co-chief. So, there were two people on board to start with. One of them left and I arrived after, I think it was maybe a couple of weeks, 2 or 3 weeks; so, I arrived after they had all got to know each other. And then, halfway through my stay, all of the scientists left and another group of scientists came with a small amount of overlap between a few of them. And then, we’re all together and I leave, on my own (laughs).

BMR: …And all saying bye-bye from the ship as you get into the helicopter…

LMN: Yeah, exactly. So, no party because you’re on your own when you get back. That was a bit difficult. You didn’t quite feel part of the same team always; but yeah, some fun times in the co-chief’s office with Demian [Saffer], and Tim [Byrne] and Sean [Tokzco]. We definitely enjoyed getting care packages, snack packages, coming in by helicopter, which was fun (laughs). We had a good laugh and I think everyone got on as well as you could expect in those difficult circumstances. And we made some progress (laughs). There was always some progress.

BMR: I guess that if you’ve been co-chief three times, there’s something particular that you enjoy of the role. Is this a position that you particularly like, to get this sort of organizational perspective on things?

LMN: Yeah, I do actually. It’s quite challenging having to learn or try and learn as much as you can about all of the science, which is obviously quite broad, and as much as you can about the technical side of things as well, so that you can have conversations with the drillers, and the operations team, as well as all of the scientists, and understand their issues. Actually, I’m sure I haven’t learned everything; but definitely, I quite enjoy the challenge. I feel I’m reasonably organized, and I feel I can be fairly calm in a difficult situation. And I do enjoy knowing and having an overview of the kind of breadth of what you do. I think that probably came through even more on the other two expeditions that I was a co-chief on, because in some ways the science that we were doing was even broader, particularly for the one in the Corinth Rift.

We had a lot of people working on paleoenvironment and sedimentology, rather than just the structural tectonics and geophysical aspects that were more key in the Nankai and the Sumatra expeditions. I really quite enjoyed that, learning a lot about different aspects.

BMR: You mentioned that being a co-chief is always a learning curve for understanding all the science that goes on. Does it feel different to be a co-chief that very first time than when you repeat in the role? Or is it sort of a similar experience – arriving there and saying, now I have to learn…?

LMN: Yeah, different experiences because they were different projects, different vessels… And then, different again with the Mission Specific Platform because that’s a whole different way of doing things, in terms of only having some of the team offshore and you’re on a vessel that’s, in that case, an industry vessel. So, that had some other challenges. You’re doing certain things offshore and then coming onshore for a month with the rest of the team. So, each of them was different. So, you hope that you might be a bit better at it, but actually you just get thrown into different things, different problems, different challenges. They were all quite different, actually.

But there’s definitely common threads that you enjoy and that you’ve learned from: enjoying that breadth of science, meeting people from all over the world, from very senior people that you’ve heard about and never met and worked with before, to students who are just starting; and that’s really exciting that they’ve got that opportunity, and seeing them interacting with everybody else, and learning from them as well… There’s common themes that you take away and learn from and use, and enjoy each time. But then, actually, they were all probably quite different and had some different challenges.

LMN: As far as you’ve experienced, how different or similar is doing science on the JR or Chikyu, and an MSP?

LMN: Quite different. I’m just trying to think how to describe it… I think that the easiest one was working on the JOIDES Resolution, and I suppose because I’ve done that twice, I had the experience initially and then was a co-chief on the Sumatra drilling expedition. So, you already know to some extent how it works and what’s going to happen. That was probably the easiest. Definitely some challenges in the operations (laughs), and some of them are unique to the expedition.

BMR: I’d like also to talk about your experience in committees and in the UK community but before that, is there something about expeditions, the science, that you’d like to add?

LMN: The science itself?

BMR: Well, we haven’t really talked about the science. How were the three expeditions you’ve been co-chief connected?

LMN: Not surprisingly, the Nankai and Sumatra subduction zones are very closely linked because they are about subduction zones, and they were focused on earthquake processes but were different in terms of what we were drilling and what we were trying to find out; but they had that link in terms of natural hazards. The Corinth Rift expedition is a little bit different. It’s still active tectonics, but we were less focused on earthquake hazards there, although an aspect of that was being able to quantify the rates of process in the rift. And that, then, enables you to truly say how fast the faults are moving, which ultimately affects the earthquake hazards. But it was more about tectonic development of an environment, and processes, and how that development of the rift then influences the sedimentology of the basin; and the environment of this basin through time, as climate and sea level fluctuated. It was a little bit different, that one.

So, they have some common aspects in terms of all being active tectonics, and partly a link to natural hazards and earthquakes, but the Corinth Rift one was a little bit different. And I think that’s why I enjoyed learning about aspects that were beyond my expertise. That happened more on that expedition. We did quite a lot on how the paleoenvironment of this rift basin changes as the rift subsides, but at the same time you have climate changing, particularly between the Quaternary glacial and interglacial periods; you’ve got sea level fluctuating, which means the basin is shifting from being a lake to a sea… It was really fascinating seeing how the sedimentary record was recording that, and how the organisms were changing and responding to these really quite extreme, but quite big differences in the environment of the basin. I got really interested in that. Obviously not an expert, but it was really interesting to learn a lot more about these sorts of processes.

BMR: That’s something really cool about these multidisciplinary expeditions. Each scientist comes with its set of expertise and research topics, and you get to learn from the others even if you are a more senior scientist.

LMN: Yeah, exactly. And I think although there are other big programs out there that bring together different disciplines of science, I feel that ocean drilling does that more than most in terms of the breadth. I think that is really quite unusual, the range of disciplines that it incorporates as part of a program. So, for me, that’s one of the really special things about it. And then, the consistency of doing that on each expedition. Regardless of the topic, you will still be collecting these datasets that may seem a bit sort of distance from the central aim of the project, but nonetheless, they will yield important information. So yeah, that’s something I’ve really enjoyed.

BMR: Let’s now talk a bit about your advisory positions in IODP. What positions have you occupied?

LMN: I’ve been on the Science Evaluation Panel, which is the panel that evaluates the proposals. I started off doing… I think I did the typical three-year period on the panel. So, I started off, I did a period on the panel, and at that time it was split between science and site survey. I was on the science panel. Then, some years later, I ended up chairing the panel – or co-chairing the panel, because at that point it had merged. That was really interesting.

The thing that you gain from that – I will say is quite some responsibility, both being on the panel and chairing the panel, because you’re making decisions about which proposals go forward – but again, the thing that I really gained from that, other than working with some great people, was two things. One, learning so much more about how IODP or any ocean drilling program operates, and all the different committees and the different people involved, and the challenges… You learn much more, and you’re keeping up to date with how things are going. But again, just learning through reading proposals and then hearing, listening, and joining in with the discussions in the panel… The amount that you learn about what’s going on (the science) is fascinating.

BMR: Did you have the chance to apply some of the skills or insights you developed in that panel to other positions outside IODP?

LMN: Yeah, definitely. And also applying it to writing your own proposals, selfishly (laughs). It definitely gives you a really good insight into what it makes a good proposal, which you can always use, and also advise others on – “This is how to do it”. But, yeah, I think just in terms of the importance of – and this sounds a bit clichéd –the importance of making sure that everybody has an opportunity to speak, and ways to manage that in a polite fashion, which crops up in most committee scenarios, I would say. I think that’s a useful skill.

Actually, when I was chairing the panel, we did part of it during Covid-19 [pandemic]. So, we were doing a lot of it online and I gained quite a lot of skills as to how you manage a panel meeting online, where there’s up to – I think we often had about 60 or 70 people present, and they are there in different capacities – but how to run a meeting effectively online. I quickly learned and that was very useful during Covid and then since, I suppose. Well, I haven’t had to necessarily run committees or panels of that size online since, but I think that was a useful skill.

BMR: Zoom meetings are much more tiring than in-person, where you can read the faces of the people, or you can continue talking on the coffee break…

LMN: Yeah, absolutely. And sometimes in those discussions in the Science Evaluation Panel there’s definitely some politics involved, not necessarily internally, but there are politics involved in some of these proposals or sensitive discussions. Those are quite difficult when you’re in person, and are a bit more difficult or maybe just don’t happen when you’re doing it online. But I think I was quite pleased that we managed to handle it pretty well.

BMR: Have you taken any role in developing or encouraging the community in the UK to get involved in IODP?

LMN: Yeah. In the UK, if you sit on any IODP panel, you automatically are on the UKIODP Committee as well. Then you stay on it for a year after you’ve rotated off a committee or panel. So, I’ve been on it – not currently on it, but I was on it for a long time. We do lots of things, like put on training workshops for early career scientists, or proposal writing workshops… We usually have an annual science meeting, and within the committee we’re sharing information from the different panels. So, that keeps you very involved, but you’re also feeding back information and opportunities to people in the UK, and encouraging them to apply to participate.

In the UK, we have been able to gain funding for site survey projects, as well. Those can be actual site survey or virtual site survey, integrating data already collected, and integrating them for the drilling proposal purposes. That’s been another aspect that I’ve been involved with, both in terms of, again, encouraging people to put together those proposals or helping them, or doing it myself and have had one or two of those proposals funded. That’s another important aspect, as well, that’s been really nice.

I think as a result of that set up in the UK, and in parallel with a number of people who are involved, it kind of perpetuates. There’s a lot of people; the UK is very strong in terms of lots of people participating in the ocean drilling program including PhD students, but also a lot of people who are participating on panels and committees. So, yeah, we’ve got a very strong ocean drilling community in the UK.

BMR: Has there been something especially challenging to keep the funding or keep the community together?

LMN: Yeah. I mean, I haven’t personally been involved in getting the funding from the UK but yes, it’s always a challenge. We’ve managed to do it, but it’s difficult to get more funding each time. And I know that’s partly why we’re where we are now with scientific ocean drilling, in that there’s only so much funding that we can get for each country, and it’s really hard to increase that. We feel we’re doing really well if we’ve managed to get the same amount, stay level (laughs).

A huge amount of work goes into putting together the proposal internally, so there’s been several people in the UK who’ve led that, including Damon Teagle, Roz [Rosalind] Coggon, and Jude Coggon. They’ve put a lot of work into gathering data in terms of UK participation and outputs, and examples of quotes from people saying this is the best program ever – okay, more specific than that but still, they spend a lot of time putting together a really strong proposal to renew the funding, and have been successful. But yeah, it’s pretty hard to get more  (funding) than you had before. I haven’t personally been involved in that, other than cheering from the sidelines and providing the information that they request when they need it.

BMR: The funding issue is something that comes up all the time. It’s been always an issue. Do you have any idea of how can IODP attract more funding or attention?

LMN: From the IODP perspective I always thought, as we were approached the end of the IODP program, what could we do… The only thing I could think of was, there must be some wealthy philanthropist out there that we could persuade, because there’s so many positive things about the program. And when people do review it, they are just overwhelmed by how great the program is and the bang for your buck, the rewards, the outputs relative to the money going in, are just huge. So, it always feels very persuasive; and the range of topics that are analyzed, from climate change through to hazards, resources… There are so many important topics there, as well as the blue skies, curiosity-type projects. So, yeah, I’m not an expert in getting millions of dollars from rich people, but I just felt that if you could find that right person…

In terms of funding, generally, it’s difficult. Maybe the same thing applies… But it’s frustrating because you often feel there are programs or areas of science that are so important and so impressive in their efficiency, that it’s just frustrating that you can’t get the funding. And to some extent, we’re suffering from global economies and their state in different countries. There are political situations, there are lots of challenges that you can’t get past. That you can’t do anything about – well, that’s a separate problem. But, you know, if there’s less money available, for example, it’s always going to be hard.

BMR: This is a problem that I see again and again, that scientific relations run at different level than political or diplomatic relations; and there’s only so much pressure that scientists can exercise at those other levels.

LMN: Yes, I think it’s important making that link or closing that gap between scientists and politicians or those that make the decisions. In the last couple of years, I’ve been involved in AGU [American Geophysical Union]. I’m a Section President of Tectonophysics, now. That’s been really interesting, not only learning about what AGU has been doing during the last year, around discussions about how you can influence policymakers, but also about science communication. And discussions – not necessarily all the answers – but just discussions about how you can improve that, particularly in terms of how things have changed a lot in terms of where people get their information from. So, yeah, completely different channels to what we’re used to or normally used to, and where we might put our materials, if people are not going anywhere near them, then you’re never going to reach them. So yeah, definitely not the answers, but it’s been really interesting hearing about what’s being done, what succeeds, what doesn’t, and having discussions about how you might improve that. That’s been really interesting. But yeah, it doesn’t give all the answers (laughs).

BMR: Especially in science communication, I’ve been a bit involved on that and it’s especially difficult because there’s so much voices out there.

LMN: Yeah, how can you be heard?

BMR: Yeah. If not hiring a youtuber or someone who does the promo for you.

LMN: Yes. And, particularly, less likely to be heard when you are maybe the other people, a scientist or left leaning political person, you’re maybe going to be dismissed before someone listens to what you have to say. It’s very difficult.

BMR: Let me ask you one more concluding question. What has been the most valuable, the most important thing for you, from being involved in scientific ocean drilling? And this can be personal or career-related. Anything you want.

LMN: I’m probably going to give the answers that everybody gives, or the obvious answers (laughs). The people. It is true that you make lifelong friendships and people that you work with; it’s not all just about having fun, but that is pretty special. And a lot of that is about being at sea with people for a long time, but it’s a real community, as well. That’s definitely very special.

Then, one of the other aspects that I mentioned earlier, which is about that sort of breadth of science. So, what you learn about. That’s been very valuable. I would admit that it’s certainly been very valuable for my career, being involved at a high level, and scientific ocean drilling has helped me go forward. That’s been a great benefit. And I think that there’s pride in being involved in it, as well, just in terms of seeing the results – not necessarily anything that you’re involved with personally yourself, but just seeing the results of the program in terms of the scientific results, but also the results of people that are involved, and what they go on to do.

BMR: That’s great. Actually, is this point where there’s this community of people who really cares for the community. And I think this is one component that has make the program continue.

LMN: Yeah, absolutely. I think those special aspects have allowed it to persist, and it’s a shame that it’s now not quite in the same state as it was.

BMR: Let’s hope for the best.

LMN: For the future, yes. But even regardless of what happens in the future, I think what has been generated over those decades, and the legacy of the datasets that still exist, is really unparalleled.

BMR: I think so, too. Is there something you want to add that I have not asked you?

LMN: No, seems good. I think we’ve covered a lot.

BMR: Yeah, it was great. Thank you so much.

LMN: Thank you, that was really good. Thanks a lot.