Fall 2010

Retrospective of the First Decade of the 2000s: Looking Back as We Move Ahead

Another decade, another period of sweeping change in the gem industry. . . . The articles in this retrospective offer four distinct perspectives on the developments of this tumultuous period, from the points of view of industry analysts Russell Shor and Robert Weldon; geologist James Shigley and colleagues; seasoned gemologists Shane McClure, Robert Kane, and Nicholas Sturman; and research scientist Christopher (Mike) Breeding and coauthors.

The content of this issue has been meticulously researched over the last several years. Russ Shor has been reporting on the business of diamonds and other gems for three decades now, and Robert Weldon has been doing the same for colored stones for nearly as long. Dr. Shigley and his coauthors started researching gem deposits for this retrospective issue almost as soon as they published the localities article in the Winter 2000 retrospective—which built on the Spring 1990 retrospective article. Shane McClure has lived and breathed gem identification in the GIA Laboratory for more than 30 years, with his two colleagues providing in-depth experience from both the lab and the industry. Dr. Breeding and his coauthors are experienced researchers tasked with applying the instruments and techniques described in their article to the gemological challenges of the 21st century.

Certain developments dominated gemology in this first decade of the 2000s. High-pressure, high-temperature treatment of diamonds augured chaos as we entered the century, but researchers around the world mobilized to find identification clues through traditional gemological observation as well as new technologies adapted from other fields. Likewise, beryllium diffusion of ruby and sapphire brought together geologists, gemologists, and physicists to determine the starting material used, the techniques being applied, and the instrumentation needed to identify the treatment. Little-known acronyms such as SIMS and LIBS permeated the gemological lexicon, and instrumentation such as LA-ICPMS—once primarily the province of academia—became a fixture in many gemological labs.

All these developments took place, as the lead article points out, during a period of profound changes in the diamond and colored stone industries. The traditional single-channel diamond distribution system morphed into many channels, TV shopping and the meteoric rise of the Internet created new challenges for the brick-and-mortar retailer, and new attention to social and political issues in gem production radically transformed the supply chain.

Amid all this change there was one constant that became ever more important as the decade progressed: the need for cooperation, to work together to tackle these issues with our colleagues—not alone. Researchers from laboratories around the world furnished pieces to the puzzle that led to the identification of HPHT treatment of diamonds. Likewise, colored stone dealers, scientists, and laboratory gemologists contributed to the understanding and identification of beryllium diffusion. This decade also witnessed the creation of the Kimberley Process Certification Scheme, which brought together nations, nongovernmental organizations, and diamond industry leaders to stop the trade in conflict diamonds.

We at Gems & Gemology hope that you enjoy this valuable compendium, digest the wealth of information, and recognize the contributions made by so many individuals, companies, and organizations to move gemology forward in this first decade of the new millennium.

One last note: Throughout the issue, you will see references to information available in our online G&G Data Depository (gia.edu/gandg). We urge you to visit the Depository for the additional information it provides, especially the tables of diamond and pearl localities active during the decade. Note, too, that a retrospective article on synthetics and simulants will appear in our upcoming Winter 2010 issue. We are grateful to all of our authors for the vast amount of knowledge and research they brought to this endeavor—and their willingness to share so much with the greater gemological community.

Alice S. Keller
Editor-in-Chief