As Russia continues to wage war on Ukraine, two scientists consider the impacts on arctic science.
The Polar regions; areas that act as indicators and drivers of climate change, with 8 of sixteen climate ‘tipping points’ located in the Arctic and Sub-Arctic.
Half of the Arctic is found in Russian territory along with 60% of the world’s permafrost, with significant differences between the Russian and non-Russian parts. In other words, any data taken from the non-Russian parts cannot be extrapolated across the whole Arctic and vice-versa.
The International Arctic Science Committee, a non-governmental organisation, was established in 1990 to strengthen international coordination in arctic science.
As the importance of the Arctic regarding global climate systems has been recognised, the number of Arctic publications has grown along with the international connectedness of polar research.
However, since the turn of the century, this international cooperation of the climate science community has not included Russia or China.
Russian isolation from Western science
Russian detachment from global science increased rapidly following its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
Scientific programmes designed to strengthen collaboration and running right up until January 2022 were stopped immediately.
Among the still-growing crises are concerns about the state of the Russian Arctic. In the weeks that followed the start of the invasion The Arctic Council, running since 1996, ceased to function. Some activity has now resumed, though institutional-level science between Russia and Western countries is rarely permitted and peer-review collaborations are strained.
Economic sanctions make it harder for Russian scientists to access equipment, while many of Russia’s most highly educated citizens have fled the country. Those who remain are unlikely to seek collaboration with foreign scientists for fear of potential repercussions, whilst Western scientists are unlikely to reach out for fear of putting their Russian colleagues in danger.
(Arctic mountains – Annie Spratt/Unsplash)
Why is this important?
As Russia’s isolation continues, long-term problems have appeared, including data sharing and using standardised, agreed-upon methods of data collection, particularly in relation to permafrost data.
The quantitative impact of Russia’s lack of contribution to the climate community regarding the Arctic has been estimated.
There is strong evidence of decreasing accuracy in climate data, with biases sometimes as large as the predicted climate change effects. This is especially true for predictions of vegetation growth.
The lack of representative Arctic field data and reduced long-term monitoring create a major data gap. This problem is likely to worsen as global collaboration decreases, with fewer Russian researchers having access to necessary tools and consistent methods.
While satellite technology provides some information on the current state of the Arctic, it cannot replace data collected on the ground. Areas of permafrost found in Russia form unique, complex environments that cannot be fully analysed from space.
This, along with the positive feedback loop associated with permafrost and climate change, highlights the need for continued international scientific cooperation, but the Arctic is increasingly being split into ‘Western’ and ‘Russian-Asian’ areas.
It’s worth noting that all seven non-Russia states that make up the membership of the Arctic Council are now members of NATO.
Related posts
- Shell Shock: The devastating impact of war on our planet
- Could the challenge of climate change help bring peace to Israel and Palestine?
The need for Russian reintegration into arctic science
Preparation for the fifth International Polar Year (a year of intense, collaborative research efforts focused on the polar regions), taking place 2032-33 has begun. Seven Research Priority Teams have been created to identify research gaps.
Without Russian input, it will be impossible to have a full understanding of where these gaps are and how significant they might be.
While Russia continues to be isolated for its aggression, resumption of any meaningful arctic science between Russia and Western countries seems unlikely. Networks can degrade quickly and trust will take time to be rebuilt.
Russia has formed scientific partnerships with China and other countries it does not deem unfriendly, but these will also take time to be effective and may not lead to open communications with the global scientific community.
As natural and social systems face increasingly difficult challenges as the century progresses, it’s vital that new links with Russia can be developed and let scientific diplomacy be expanded as required.