On February 24, 2022, Russian forces invaded Ukraine. At that time, Russia was in the middle of its chairmanship of the Arctic Council. Recognizing the importance of a united response, the member states of the Arctic Council temporarily paused cooperation with Russia. Since then, Russian involvement in the Council has significantly diminished, although it has not ceased entirely. This reduced participation has affected the Council’s work, putting the future of the Arctic Council at risk. A key question of our project is: what would be lost if the Arctic Council fails to survive?

Climate and environmental challenges in the Arctic have been at the forefront of international research agendas for years, with scientific knowledge about Arctic developments playing a significant role in shaping both international and national policies. Legal and social science analyses also suggest that Arctic knowledge has influenced policymaking. 

In the MARCS project, we take a closer look at the Arctic Council, which, since its establishment in 1996, has produced vital scientific monitoring and assessment reports on Arctic climate change, biodiversity, and pollution. Our main focus is on the collection and dissemination of knowledge through three of the Council's key working groups: the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program (AMAP), the Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF), and the Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment (PAME).

Key Research Questions

We ask: why and how is scientific knowledge from these working groups used? The aim is to foster an informed discussion about how Arctic knowledge is created and applied across research, governance, and policy. We also aim to lay the groundwork for future research on the role of knowledge production in international regulations and national environmental management, an area that has received insufficient attention. Much of the existing research has focused on the development of natural science-based knowledge, with less emphasis on how and why certain types of knowledge are deemed relevant and ultimately used in decision-making processes.

Expanding the Research Agenda

Thus, this project advocates for an expanded research agenda on the Arctic. We aim to highlight the breadth of knowledge that exists and provide input to further in-depth case studies on topics such as climate change, environmental toxins, biodiversity, and pollution. To illustrate these dynamics, we use Norway and Canada as case studies, providing a deeper understanding of how different approaches to Arctic governance play out. This endeavor is more critical than ever, as it sheds light on the potential consequences of the Arctic Council’s collapse.


Project period: 2023-2026