99 / 479
Proceedings of the 18
th
International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, Paris 2013
Member Societies and Technical Committees to start submitting
material. He emphasised that he would like to include what
could even be considered as minor news items. Professor
Towhata asked for proposals on how to publish the special
edition in celebration of ISSMGE’s 75 Anniversary, possibly at
the time of the Paris conference. He was particularly interested
in receiving articles on urban re-development, and also
expressed interest in receiving submissions on the Gotthard
Base Tunnel. He pointed out that good articles in the Bulletin
could also be submitted to the IGJCH, which is peer reviewed,
and therefore there was no conflict.
The President noted that it would be interesting to find out
who of the individual members was receiving the Bulletin. The
Secretary General asked if there were any comments from the
floor on what people would like to see in the Bulletin, and asked
for any feedback in general. There were no further comments.
10
INTERNATIONAL SEMINARS
Pedro Sêco e Pinto made his presentation, which included an
outline of the procedures established for the International
Seminars. There had been 24 International Seminars organised
between 2006 and 2009, and 10 between 2010 and 2011. He
expressed his deep gratitude to all those who had helped him
organise the various events. He concluded his presentation
stating that if any Member Societies felt that they would benefit
from such seminars that they should contact the President, their
regional Vice-President or himself.
The President acknowledged the amount of energy that
Pedro Sêco e Pinto had put into this initiative, and thanked him
for his efforts. He confirmed that the Board had voted
unanimously to continue with the International Seminars, under
the new procedures that had recently been established.
11
CHANGE OF NAME OF THE SOCIETY FROM
INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR SOIL MECHANICS AND
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING" TO "INTERNATIONAL
SOCIETY FOR GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING".
The President presented this item, which had been proposed by
the Member Societies of the USA, Mexico and Japan. He gave
a brief background to the origin of this motion, pointing out that
the International Society for Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Engineering (ISSMFE - the society’s original name) changed in
1997 to its current name, the International Society for Soil
Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering (ISSMGE). In his
Progress Report of June 2010, the President asked individual
opinions on a possible name change to International Society for
Geotechnical Engineering. The response was 60% in favour,
40% against. Later on that same year, the President sought the
view of the Member Societies, which indicated 40% in favour,
60% against. In the Spring of 2011, the President took a poll
amongst the ISSMGE board, resulting in an 8 to 2 vote in
favour of the new name, provided this also involved a merger
with the International Society for Rock Mechanics (ISRM).
At the Federation of International Geo-engineering
Societies (FedIGS) Meeting in Rome in May 2011, the
representatives of the ISRM and the International Association
for Engineering Geology and the Environment (IAEG) were
consulted, and they were strongly against the name change and
merger. The President reported that he had since received
letters from the Presidents of both societies reiterating their
opposition to such a name change. Nevertheless, the President
was very much in favour of the name change and he felt
strongly that it would strengthen the public perception of the
profession. He noted that he had received some comments in
advance of the meeting and he asked those individuals to share
their views with Council.
Juan de Dios Aleman (Mexico) commented that similar
discussions had taken place in the Mexican Member Society,
resulting in a name change in 2009. The feeling was that the
new name was more inclusive of other activities. In fact, once
the name change had been approved, new members were
interested in participating in the newly named society,
improving activities and making the society’s objectives more
attainable.
Osamu Kusakabe (Japan) reported that the Japanese
Member Society changed its name in 1995 (from the Japanese
Society for Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering to the
Japanese Geotechnical Society). He did not see any difficulties
with the proposal, as long as the Sister Societies were happy
with the change.
Robert Holtz (USA) spoke in support of the proposal,
stating that in his opinion the new name was the best description
of what the members do.
Michele Jamiolkowski (Past President) presented arguments
in favour of changing the present name of the Society and a
brief history regarding the current name of the society. In the
late ‘80s, early ‘90s, it was felt that “Foundation Engineering”
was not a fully recognised activity, hence the decision to change
to Geotechnical Engineering, which was felt to broaden the
scope of the society. In his opinion, short names were more
readily accepted by the media. Furthermore, most European
member societies did not use the term “Soil Mechanics” in their
title, referring to themselves as geotechnical societies: this was
their main activity, they were involved in geotechnical design,
and there was no doubt that the term “geotechnical engineering”
best reflects what they are and what they do. However,
removing the term “Soil Mechanics” also meant removing links
to the society’s heritage. Insofar the issue of a possible merger
with the Sister Societies was concerned, he was aware that the
sister societies were against such a move, but a name change
may help the transition. In any case, he felt that the issue
should not split the society, but that nevertheless its presence on
the agenda was important. He closed by saying that if the
motion was defeated, it should be placed again on the agenda in
Paris in 2013.
Pedro Sêco e Pinto presented arguments in favour of
retaining the present name of the Society. The tern “Soil
Mechanics” respected the roots of the Society and encompassed
the necessary theory used in the applied disciplines of
Geotechnical Engineering. Using the two terms reflected the
integrated nature of the Society, which must be seen to be
preserved. Changing the name could lead to confusion and
thoughts that a new society had been created. He felt that
changing the name of the Society should not become an
obsession and he was strongly against merging with the Sister
Societies arguing that ISSMGE must retain its autonomy.
The President then opened the floor to discussion.
Georg Heerten (Germany) stated that the DGGT was
against the change, as it was itself an umbrella society,
combining members of ISRM, IAEG and IGS. He felt that the
society would need to become an umbrella organisation first,
before contemplating a name change.
Owen White (IAEG) reported that at their recent Meeting,
the IAEG Council had expressed strong concern against the
name change; IAEG wants to be fully collaborative, but
maintain independent development.
Gareth Belton (UK) echoed the thoughts expressed by
Georg Heerten: the British Geotechnical Association includes
ISRM, hence its name. The BGA itself had conducted a
national poll, which showed that the majority of members
rejected a name change.
Roger Frank (Appointed Board Member) also confirmed
that the Comité Français de la Mécanique des Sols were not in
favour of the name change, as they felt it meant losing historical
background. He felt that the proposed name change could
antagonise the Sister Societies and that in academia there would
Volume 6 - Page 99