In this session, archaeological science and tangible cultural heritage take centre stage in the interdisciplinary polar research agenda. Archaeology has a long tradition of being a thematic and methodological "interdiscipline". Our daily bread is the study of continuous human adaptation to age-old environmental and social change. We invite oral and e-poster presentations from across the range of heritage professionals and stakeholders for a show and tell: Introduce the one archaeological object (alternatively one structure, site, or landscape) that to you embodies an indispensable polar aspect and bears witness to recent changes, and deliver its global message that may otherwise be left unheard. Preference will be given to submissions that demonstrate a clear link to the conference call. We strongly encourage traditional and Indigenous participation and perspectives.
archaeology, cultural heritage, human history, object, artefact
Frigga Kruse | Kiel University
Franziska Paul | Kiel University
The Central Arctic Ocean (CAO) Fisheries Agreement highlighted both the need and the potential for international governance in this region. Now, commercial shipping has the potential to take transpolar routes through the CAO, in addition to the Northern Sea Route and Northwest Passage. Ships transiting the Arctic Ocean must also travel through the Bering Strait and the hunting and ancestral areas of local Indigenous communities. Similarly, fisheries within the EEZs of Arctic states are likely to affect fish stocks in the CAO as well as the willingness of distant-water fishing states to continue to stay out of these high seas waters. We propose a session to examine these multiple strands of governance across scales and sectors to consider (a) shared goals and principles such as ecosystem-based management, (b) the respective roles of different institutions and governments, and (c) research and action needed to work together in accordance with principles of equity and effectiveness.
governance, Central Arctic Ocean, shipping, fishing, conservation
Austin Ahmasuk | Kawerak, Inc., Nome, Alaska, USA
Liling Xu | Dept. of Geography, Royal Holloway, University of London, UK
Henry Huntington | Ocean Conservancy, Eagle River, Alaska, USA
The Arctic is becoming increasingly integrated into world affairs while the region is simultaneously experiencing the growing impacts of climate change, as well as the combination of climate change, pollution and resource exploitation. IPCC reports assert that the polar regions are experiencing climate change at twice the rate as the rest of the globe. Actors seeking to develop their region, however, do not necessarily align with a current geopolitical narrative that presents the region as a pristine environment in need of heightened protection and preservation. This session seeks to explore, analyze, critique, and further inform narratives about the Arctic, roles and responsibilities for adaptation and mitigation. What are the main risks and challenges of climate change in the Arctic? How are actors / the primary players, and how existing policies respond to climate change in the Arctic? Whose responsibility is it to respond - implement and enhance - to this global issue and take charge of mitigation? Is there a global strategy where the global society defined the regulatory code to be respected and put in action?
climate change, global impacts, local-regional-global, responsibility, Arctic
Lassi Heininen | University of Helsinki
Heather Exner-Pirot | Arctic Yearbook
Valter Cláudio | University of Lisbon
The Arctic is becoming increasingly integrated into world affairs while the region is simultaneously experiencing the growing impacts of pollution, climate change and mass-scale utilization of resources, and their combination. Actors seeking to develop the region, however, do not necessarily align with the geopolitical narrative of the Arctic as a fragile environment in need of heightened protection and preservation. Following from this, there is an ambivalence or paradox in Arctic development when a balance is sought between environmental protection / climate change mitigation, and an increase in economic activities (as a ‘new normal’). This session seeks to explore, analyze, and critique narratives and trends of Arctic development, and responsibilities and potential for mitigation and sustainable development in the midst of environment vs. economy competition. How are actors responding to this clash, and who are the primary players? How do we overcome the above-mentioned paradox? What policies developments are already been put in place, to support regional and local development, and what policy developments should be made?
the environment, economy, paradox, regional development, Arctic development
Mário Pontes | UArctuic Thematic Network on Geopolitics and Security
Francisco Cuogo | University of Minho
Heather Exner-Pirot | Arctic Yearbook
There are narratives and perceptions that the Arctic is influenced by geostrategic ‘game’, as it was in the Cold War, and consequently, there are resource competition and emerging conflicts. At the 2020s the Arctic reality, however, seems to be quite different, as high geopolitical stability based on cooperation is successfully been constructed. At the same time, grand environmental challenges with growing uncertainty are putting Arctic societies into a danger, much indicating an importance of ‘societal security’. Therefore, an alternative is to lean on the rhetoric of comprehensive security and disarmament based on mutually-beneficial constructive cooperation, instead of military-based national security and hegemony competition spending billions to arms race and strategies instead of climate change mitigation. This session seeks to explore, analyze and critique narratives, perceptions and discourses on Arctic security, as well as main security risks and challenges resulting from the current situation. Who are actors of security, and how do they respond to this dichotomy? How societal / human security is / should be defined, constructed and developed?
security (studies), military security, societal security, geostrategic game, Arctic
Sandra Balão | University of Lisbon
Ecaterina Crihan / Sara Coutinho | University of Lisbon
Lassi Heininen | University of Helsinki
COVID-19 is accentuating regional changes in Arctic fisheries. This session highlights fisheries lessons from the pandemic within the Arctic as well as at the global scale. Many Arctic and sub-Arctic fisheries such as crab span multiple locations in the Arctic, and most commercial Arctic fisheries have transport-intensive supply chains. Significant shocks are occurring from vessel, port, and processing facility restrictions, air transport reductions, general market access for producers and consumers, income and substitution effects, etc. Ecosystem impacts may also be underway as harvests decrease and marine traffic slows, though harder to identify and measure in real time. This session aims to identify data and theory to help empirical analyses using bioeconomics and interdisciplinary analysis. The changes raise issues of resilience, adaptability in resource management, monitoring, enforcement and policy coordination at various scales involving civil society and cooperative actions.
Arctic Fisheries, Supply, Demand, Policy
Brooks Kaiser | University of Southern Denmark
Linda Fernandez | Virginia Commonwealth University
Melina Kourantidou | Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
Earth system models are essential to improved understanding of the coupled hydrological, cryospheric, oceanographic, and ecological responses to climate change in the Arctic. Earth system changes such as permafrost thaw, coastal erosion, shifts in the seasonality and extent of river, lake, and sea ice, a stronger Arctic hydrological cycle, and evolving vegetation and fire regimes all require coupled models to better understand and predict the direct impacts on northern communities. These changes also impact global weather patterns, energy budgets, the carbon cycle, ocean circulation, and sea level rise. Improved prediction capacity requires progress in both standalone process models and the integration of atmosphere, ocean, sea ice, and land surface models. This session welcomes contributions presenting the development and application of Earth systems modelling approaches to the Arctic, including process-scale studies and the continuum from operational weather to seasonal to climate change time scales. We also invite contributions concerning the large-scale satellite and surface observing networks that are essential to such modelling efforts.
Earth system modelling, Arctic, cryosphere, climate change, Arctic hydrological cycle
Anastasia Piliouras | Los Alamos National Laboratory
Shawn | Environment and Climate Change
Arni Snorrason | Icelandic Meteorological Service
The Arctic is warming and melting at alarming rates. How, where, and when climate change in the Arctic will affect weather patterns around the globe is a matter of debate and a rapidly evolving research topic. Changes in prevailing weather patterns can affect the frequency and magnitude of extreme events in the Northern Hemisphere and, hence, impact economic activities sensitive to weather conditions, such as agriculture, transport or energy production and consumption. Understanding Arctic-midlatitude linkages is an important tool for managing the risks, as well as potential opportunities, arising from a changing climate. This session will bring together research scientists from a diverse range of disciplines and projects, including EU Polar Cluster projects, as well as stakeholders from around the globe. The aim is to exchange knowledge and share experiences and novel results on how Arctic’s warming influences weather, and therefore impact human activities, in midlatitudes. We can discuss together about the scientific consensus on the topic and how this new knowledge can benefit policy-makers, society and businesses in Europe and beyond.
sea ice; linkages; extreme events; energy; socio-economic impacts
Thomas Jung | Alfred Wegener Institute
Yongqi Gao | Nansen Environmental and Remote Sensing Center
Guokun Lyu | University of Hamburg
Mid- and low-latitudes impact the Arctic and Antarctic via various processes. In the atmosphere, poleward transports of heat and moisture are carried above all via transient cyclones typically originating from mid-latitudes. In addition, teleconnections generated by the tropical SST anomalies, Madden-Julian Oscillation, and Quasi-Biennial Oscillation affect the Arctic and Antarctic, also providing predictability in sub-seasonal to seasonal time scales. In the ocean, heat and salt is transported poleward via the mean meridional circulation and eddies. The El Niño / Southern Oscillation, Pacific Decadal Oscillation, and Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation play a key role in the linkages between low, mid and high latitudes. Challenges still remain in understanding and quantification of the mid- and low-latitude impacts on the Arctic and Antarctic. Major issues include bi-polar differences in the large-scale atmospheric and oceanic circulation and their impacts, challenges in modelling the circulation, transports and teleconnections, as well as their response to the global climate change. The session welcomes presentations on the above-mentioned and closely related topics.
Arctic, Antarctic, meteorology, oceanography, teleconnections
Timo Vihma | Finnish Meteorological Institute, Helsinki, Finland
Genrikh Alekseev | Arctic and Antarctic Research Institute, St. Petersburg, Russia
Natalia Gnatiuk Nansen | International Environmental and Remote Sensing Centre, St. Petersburg, Russia
Science diplomacy plays an integral role in international science facilitation and communication being an element of soft power that enables the nations to build comprehensive longer-term and stable science dialogue at different levels from the global arena to national, regional, and even institutional actors. While being such a powerful and overarching instrument, science diplomacy constantly experiences paradigm shifts driven by the multiple and multidimensional internal (regional, national) and external (global) changes which have the direct co-influence on each other. Current global environment and the rapid changes it undergoes shape the state of science diplomacy by putting forward both challenges and opportunities not only at the level of international science but also regionally through bilateral, cross-border cooperation and regional interconnections. Increasingly, our understanding of the importance of science diplomacy drives forward adaptability and innovation and through this - continuity of scientific interaction. This is what we witness today despite the challenges brought about by the coronavirus pandemic, with temporarily closed national borders, limited mobility, and switching to online communication formats. One of the recent successful examples of delivering science diplomacy in this challenging global context is the flexible shift of the ASSW2020 conference to online format with the support of the Icelandic government. Institutionalization of online conferences is becoming a global practice and a new trend. At the same time, a few challenges have jeopardized the development of science communication and collaboration among regional and institutional actors. Closed national borders and restructuring of national regulative rules regarding international mobility have hampered the summer field season in the Arctic including monitoring and observation activities. In this session we aim to discuss Arctic science diplomacy case studies which both exercise examples from the regional to global and global to regional co-influence and explore innovative tools and approaches to delivering science diplomacy in the rapidly changing global context. We invite presentations from scientists, non-academic experts, and actors in this field.
Arctic science diplomacy, international cooperation, global changes, innovation, science dialogue
Yulia Zaika | International Arctic Science Committee (IASC), Kola Research Centre of the Russian Academy of Sciences
Yekaterina Kontar | National Science Foundation, Office of Polar Programs, Arctic Sciences Section
Tatiana Iakovleva | UK Science and Innovation Network in Russia (SIN Russia)
No The COVID-19 crisis has dramatically shown how important scientific knowledge is for political decision making. All over the world, governments are relying on experts advice to decide on measures to combat the pandemic. At the same time, global temperatures are continuing to rise, and the warming processes are going fastest in the Arctic. International efforts on climate and polar science and technology have shown that this has had, and will continue to have, profound global consequences, affecting the livelihoods and sustainability of whole regions and communities not only in the Arctic but across the globe. However, the political response is still unassertive and a clear and effective communication between scientists and policymakers is needed to transform the scientific findings into action. This session aims to explore the role and potential of the science-policy interface in tackling Arctic change and its global effects. It will discuss approaches to transfer scientific knowledge to a defined political target audience and it will present both examples of good practice and challenges. Submissions from all fields, including but not limited to climate change, are encouraged. Policy-making occurs on different levels, reaching from international to national and regional, and contributions from all levels are welcome.
Knowledge transfer, Policy-making, Climate change, Environmental policies, Science-policy dialogue
Volker Rachold | German Arctic Office, Alfred Wegener Institute, Helmholtz Center for Polar and Marine Research
Tahseen Jafry | Centre for Climate Justice, Glasgow Caledonian University
Anna Gebruk | School of GeoSciences, University of Edinburgh
Thorsteinn Gunnarsson | Icelandic Centre for Research (RANNIS)
Closed on December 10, 2020