Search

Benefiting from the guidance of scientific thinking, the diplomatic promotion of the head of state and the support of planning policies, China's concept of participating in Arctic governance cooperation has been continuously enriched, its ability has been continuously improved, and its international influence has been continuously expanded. The policy objectives of understanding, protecting, utilizing and participating in Arctic governance have been continuously implemented. After the outbreak of the Ukrainian crisis, the geopolitical and economic situation in the Arctic has undergone major changes, and multilateral cooperation mechanisms such as the Arctic Council are facing challenges. The trend of internalization of Arctic governance and the globalization of Arctic interests are intertwined. China's further participation in Arctic governance cooperation faces both a series of opportunities and challenges. We should accurately grasp the regular characteristics of the changing situation in the Arctic, combine safeguarding the common interests of all mankind with implementing China's Arctic policy, strengthen communication and cooperation with relevant parties in the fields of energy development, waterway management, scientific investigation and ecological protection, constantly explore new areas and opportunities for cooperation, actively build a blue partnership, promote the "Polar Silk Road" to achieve more positive results, and contribute more China's strength to promoting the sustainable development of the Arctic region. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Global society’s discussion on the climate change of the Arctic Ocean has been neglected in security studies in terms of its necessity, cooperation measures, and policy alternatives. Global warming and climate change with inevitable abnormal temperatures are increasing the significant importance of geopolitics and geologics in the Arctic region. The risks of climate change are inherent in uncertainty, ambiguity, and complexity, requiring resilient responses to past lessons and potential future impacts. The international community is paying keen attention to whether the thaw of the Arctic Circle will further cause conflicts and conflicts in human society or a channel of happiness and blessings. Theoretical debates lie in the transition of the international community’s operational or coordinated approach to a global governance system centered around hierarchy and anarchy. It is divided into an anarchy system, hierarchical order system, and network-oriented global governance system. Advocates of global governance reject hegemony-oriented hierarchical adjustments and do not support the market or anarchy system where authorities are absent. It refers to a form of instrument in which the autonomy and participation of various actors through a more multilateral and horizontal network is guaranteed. This study analyzes the issues and problems of climate change surrounding the Arctic Ocean and seeks international cooperation measures through the establishment of global governance, although it is arguable. It contains that Arctic sea governance is not only pushing for a norm to be prepared in advance in the era of the opening of the Arctic route, but also for a survival strategy that can determine the future fate of global society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Due to diminishing ice shelves in the Arctic, no doubt caused by climate change, previously unnavigable marine spaces are opening up, which in turn may provide new maritime routes. The shipping and maritime industry may capitalise on these routes more in the future as they provide shorter sailing times, and may assist with increasing oil and gas exploration and extraction in the region. However, increased maritime expansion in the Arctic comes with a number of unique risks and hazards for the insured and insurer. This opinion therefore seeks to discuss the implications of the multitude of risks that are associated with Arctic shipping from a marine insurance perspective and to highlight some of the gaps in existing regulatory frameworks. It is argued that marine insurers require improved data and risk management methodologies in order to better calculate the premiums of Hull & Machinery (H&M) and Protection & Indemnity (P&I) insurance policies for ships travelling through the Arctic. Until such time as these risks can be adequately assessed, evaluated, and managed by insurers; which of course is extremely difficult, due to the extreme environment, the unpredictability of climate change, a lack of key data, and the complexity of the various scenarios that can unfold in the Arctic environment, the practical viability of Arctic shipping remains doubtful. To date, insurers have paid out more in ship damage that has occurred in the Arctic than they have collected in premiums, which in itself is problematic. This situation may change in the future if Arctic shipping grows, and if it does the insurance market will no doubt, need to respond. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since the outbreak of the Russia Ukraine conflict in early 2022, the Arctic region has shown a complex security situation, geopolitical risks have been escalating, and Arctic security governance is also facing un-precedented challenges. On the whole, the current security situation in the Arctic region can be summarized as the strengthening of "militarization" and the intensification of the US-Russia game, which has led to the stagnation of Arctic security governance with inherent mechanism defects. Presently, many foreign countries intend to strengthen their military presence in the Arctic region. Meanwhile, there are multiple games between non Arctic countries and Arctic countries, as well as within Arctic countries, which hinder Arctic security cooperation. accordingly, Arctic stakeholders should actively participate in Arctic security governance, promote the establishment of an Arctic security coordination mechanism, and jointly improve the Arctic security governance system on the basis of building consensus and deepening cooperation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This thematic issue analyzes recent and ongoing changes in Arctic regional governance in new geopolitical, security, and socio-economic contexts. It places current challenges in the Arctic within a historical context, aspiring to identify solutions, and enhances our understanding of modern processes. It presents three perspectives on Arctic regional governance: the first focuses on the challenges to Arctic environmental governance (marine living resources and Arctic seals); the second looks at the role of large nation-states, such as Russia and China, in Arctic regional governance; and the third one analyses the challenges posed to Indigenous people--in Russia, Finland, and Canada. Many overlapping themes are developed in the articles: historical lessons (e.g., from the Cold War period), challenges to the inclusiveness of environmental governance, and the role of cross-border diffusion and learning. New challenges to Arctic regional governance in the context of the war in Ukraine affect environmental governance, international scientific collaboration, and the lives of Indigenous people. Yet we know little about the depth of these recent transformations. This thematic issue aims to fill in at least some of the outlined gaps. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Russia's war in Ukraine further strained Russia's relations with the West and negatively influenced Arctic regional governance, especially after seven members of the Arctic Council paused cooperation with Russia. The rationale of the suspension was to express disapproval by seven Arctic states of Russia's aggression in Ukraine. However, the suspension of cooperation with Russia within the Arctic Council format prompted some observers to question the relevance and utility of the institution. Russia never expressed its wish to leave the Council and continues to express its desire for multilateral cooperation in the region. This raises the question: Can Russia's assertive stance in Ukraine coexist with peaceful cooperation in the Arctic? In order to answer this question, this article addresses the following questions: How does the geopolitical tension shape Russia's approach to Arctic governance? And what is the role of military and economic security in Russia's Arctic policy? The article uses a comparative method combined with discourse analysis to establish a change in Russia's view on Arctic governance before and after the war in Ukraine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Arctic states, regional and local authorities, NGOs, and Indigenous communities have debated how Arctic seals should be governed for more than a century. This governance discourse covers a wide array of issues, from seal hunting and the sale of animal products to the impacts of pollution and climate change. This article examines the frames used by political entities to discuss the regional governance of Arctic seals in the North American Arctic from 1900-2020, a period defined by landmark agreements on seals. Informed by framing and agenda-setting theory, the article employs textual analysis of policy documents and newspaper articles. These serve as a source of information and space for policy advocacy and debate to study political entities' discourse regarding the issues and policies that shape Arctic seal governance. The analysis focuses on English-language texts from regional and local newspapers and international newspapers of record. The article identifies four dominant frames, namely perceived threats to (a) economic revenue, (b) animal welfare, (c) Indigenous ways of life, and (d) threats emanating from the involvement of NGOs in Arctic regional governance. Each of these frames is associated with one or multiple political entities involved in the regional governance of seals. The article demonstrates how the dominance of these entities and the frames they employ varies over time and corresponds to several anthropogenic threats to seals, including commercial hunting, pollution, and climate change. The article concludes that tensions between local and regional entities and international and non-Arctic entities are reflective of broader Arctic regional governance dynamics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years, China has become an increasingly important actor in Arctic regional governance. While Beijing consistently frames its engagement in the region as a strategy of mutually-beneficial cooperation, some Arctic countries have raised significant concerns about its growing economic presence, warning that China may leverage its geopolitical influence to change the existing norms and rules in the polar region. Facing the mounting "China threat" skepticism, what are Beijing's coping strategies to belie concerns? Based on a review of the existing research and government documents, particularly Chinese-language scholarly works and official reports, this article specifically identifies two types of costly signaling approaches employed by China to reduce Arctic countries' distrust. First, China has started to curtail its Arctic investment in oil, gas, and mining while engaging more in sectors that chime well with Western societies' global environmental values, including clean and renewable energy, ecological research that addresses further climatic change associated with global warming, and other environmentally sustainable industries. Second, Beijing has increasingly involved in regional international organizations, such as the Arctic Council, to signal its willingness to exercise state power under institutional constraints. These approaches aim to send a series of costly signals to conventional Arctic states, reassuring them that China is not a revisionist power that pursues hegemony in the region. Taken together, our findings have both scholarly and policymaking implications to understand China's participation in Arctic regional governance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Moscow explicitly challenges what it depicts as a Western-led world order amid shifts in the global balance of power. However, while Russia has emerged as a fundamentally revisionist power in the global system, it has sought to maintain the status quo in Arctic regional governance, that is, to preserve the institutions and arrangements that have cemented its status as a great regional power on top of the world. This study, challenging the notions of Arctic exceptionalism and a distinct Arctic regional order, points out an obvious inconsistency in Russia's approach. It argues that Moscow's attempt at dismantling the world order while maintaining the status quo in the Arctic seems bound to fail simply because the current rules-based, liberal international order has also been the order of the Arctic. In conclusion, this study finds that Russia so far has been more successful in diminishing its own Arctic status and isolating itself from formal as well as informal arrangements than revising them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Moscow explicitly challenges what it depicts as a Western-led world order amid shifts in the global balance of power. However, while Russia has emerged as a fundamentally revisionist power in the global system, it has sought to maintain the status quo in Arctic regional governance, that is, to preserve the institutions and arrangements that have cemented its status as a great regional power on top of the world. This study, challenging the notions of Arctic exceptionalism and a distinct Arctic regional order, points out an obvious inconsistency in Russia’s approach. It argues that Moscow’s attempt at dismantling the world order while maintaining the status quo in the Arctic seems bound to fail simply because the current rules-based, liberal international order has also been the order of the Arctic. In conclusion, this study finds that Russia so far has been more successful in diminishing its own Arctic status and isolating itself from formal as well as informal arrangements than revising them.

This thematic issue analyzes recent and ongoing changes in Arctic regional governance in new geopolitical, security, and socio-economic contexts. It places current challenges in the Arctic within a historical context, aspiring to identify solutions, and enhances our understanding of modern processes. It presents three perspectives on Arctic regional governance: the first focuses on the challenges to Arctic environmental governance (marine living resources and Arctic seals); the second looks at the role of large nation-states, such as Russia and China, in Arctic regional governance; and the third one analyses the challenges posed to Indigenous people—in Russia, Finland, and Canada. Many overlapping themes are developed in the articles: historical lessons (e.g., from the Cold War period), challenges to the inclusiveness of environmental governance, and the role of cross-border diffusion and learning. New challenges to Arctic regional governance in the context of the war in Ukraine affect environmental governance, international scientific collaboration, and the lives of Indigenous people. Yet we know little about the depth of these recent transformations. This thematic issue aims to fill in at least some of the outlined gaps.

Russia’s war in Ukraine further strained Russia’s relations with the West and negatively influenced Arctic regional governance, especially after seven members of the Arctic Council paused cooperation with Russia. The rationale of the suspension was to express disapproval by seven Arctic states of Russia’s aggression in Ukraine. However, the suspension of cooperation with Russia within the Arctic Council format prompted some observers to question the relevance and utility of the institution. Russia never expressed its wish to leave the Council and continues to express its desire for multilateral cooperation in the region. This raises the question: Can Russia’s assertive stance in Ukraine coexist with peaceful cooperation in the Arctic? In order to answer this question, this article addresses the following questions: How does the geopolitical tension shape Russia’s approach to Arctic governance? And what is the role of military and economic security in Russia’s Arctic policy? The article uses a comparative method combined with discourse analysis to establish a change in Russia’s view on Arctic governance before and after the war in Ukraine.

Arctic states, regional and local authorities, NGOs, and Indigenous communities have debated how Arctic seals should be governed for more than a century. This governance discourse covers a wide array of issues, from seal hunting and the sale of animal products to the impacts of pollution and climate change. This article examines the frames used by political entities to discuss the regional governance of Arctic seals in the North American Arctic from 1900–2020, a period defined by landmark agreements on seals. Informed by framing and agenda-setting theory, the article employs textual analysis of policy documents and newspaper articles. These serve as a source of information and space for policy advocacy and debate to study political entities’ discourse regarding the issues and policies that shape Arctic seal governance. The analysis focuses on English-language texts from regional and local newspapers and international newspapers of record. The article identifies four dominant frames, namely perceived threats to (a) economic revenue, (b) animal welfare, (c) Indigenous ways of life, and (d) threats emanating from the involvement of NGOs in Arctic regional governance. Each of these frames is associated with one or multiple political entities involved in the regional governance of seals. The article demonstrates how the dominance of these entities and the frames they employ varies over time and corresponds to several anthropogenic threats to seals, including commercial hunting, pollution, and climate change. The article concludes that tensions between local and regional entities and international and non-Arctic entities are reflective of broader Arctic regional governance dynamics.

The National Strategy for the Arctic Region of the United States emphasizes the traditional security of the Arctic region, attaches importance to climate governance in the region, and advocates the restoration of U.S. leadership through international cooperation. On the one hand, the U.S. Arctic strategy has shifted to “security and protection” because of the intensification of traditional security threats and the threat of its own hegemony; on the other hand, because climate change actually affects U.S. interests, domestic political needs have also prompted it to turn to protecting the Arctic environment. In view of the strong influence of the United States in the Arctic region, changes in its Arctic strategy will inevitably have an impact on China’s scientific research rights, economic rights and governance rights in the Arctic region. Accordingly, China should continue to participate in Arctic affairs, expand cooperation with Arctic countries and promote cooperation between China and the United States in areas such as Arctic climate governance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The right to development is a basic human right of states, collectives and individuals under international law, and indigenous peoples should naturally enjoy this right. In recent years, the indigenous people of Norway continue to oppose the government's Arctic development plan, and the conflict between the indigenous people and the government has become a social problem. The indigenous people believe that their right to economic and cultural development is hindered, and the indigenous people's development is forced to give in to "being developed", and facing economic development rights affected by Arctic development, green colonialist pressures and unequal rights to cultural development. What's more, it can be seen from the analysis that the reason for the conflict between the Norwegian indigenous and the government is that the indigenous peoples' rights to development and land resources are not adequately guaranteed by the Norwegian government and indigenous organizations, and there is a conflict between the right to development and the right to the protection of the environment. In the future, in the process of Arctic development in Norway, indigenous people will get more protection from Norwegian law, and more attention from indigenous organizations, and may be given more rights to self-determination and decision-making, and indigenous peoples will develop a diversified economy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Arctic region is warming four times faster than the rest of the planet, with the inevitable result that the economy, natural resources, ocean and land sustenance and all human security factors now require rapid adjustment by both government and population. The circumpolar nations have taken pride in an era of peaceful cooperation. Working together for the common good is a deliberate choice of the circumpolar nations but also a necessity because of the extremely harsh climate that prevails in the Arctic lands and waters. Over the past decade Russia has developed many military bases, extended over the whole of its lengthy northern seacoast. The Arctic is a major economic base for Russia. Undersea, the submarine patrols of the Cold War, by both Russia and the United States, had been drastically reduced. Now military exercises in and near the Arctic are extensive; Chinese military vessels have entered the North Pacific. While military resources of individual countries have occasionally entered the Arctic area, there formerly was genuine support for the ideal of a demilitarized Arctic. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was a clear indication that Russia is unpredictable and aggressive. Russia could choose aggressive action in the Arctic. The entire Arctic region is thus destabilized while it waits for the future to unfold. This is a brief review of the current situation of Arctic organizations and countries that intend to benefit by the opening of the Arctic. The composite situation provides a way to discern the ongoing destabilization of the Arctic

With climate change, melting sea ice and snow in the Arctic increase the probability that states engage in activities there. The prosperity of Arctic activities serves as a reminder to the international community that the issue of Arctic governance must be prioritised to avoid Arctic unsustainable development. As a major stakeholder besides the Arctic states, it is necessary to study China's role in Arctic governance for its sustainable development to provide a reference for the diplomatic decision-making of other states. The paper selects international law as a perspective. It discusses China's engagement in the development of international law related to the theme from the global, regional, and bilateral/multilateral levels. At the global level, China's national role is characterized by engaging in global governance under the international rule of law for guarding the international order based on international law. At the regional level, China maintains the role of supporting and engaging in the Arctic Council, both before and after its establishment. At the bilateral and multilateral levels, China, as an Arctic stakeholder pursuing cooperation, has achieved many cooperation results. The paper holds that under China's national roles, China's engagement has affected the development of international law referred to the theme to some extent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Governance institutions of the polar regions, as well as global oceans, may hold room for improvement in terms of effectiveness but, on the whole, their existence can be regarded as a success story. The arrangements managed to pool responsibility for regional resources amid Cold War geopolitics, mostly by delegating discussions to science committees. Changing global climate, however, provides considerable challenges to these governance arrangements. It begs the question of how the success story can be continued into the future. After sketching the emergence of polar and ocean governance and their core organizational principles during the 20th century, this article identifies some of the challenges linked to global warming that have been altering the context of governance fundamentally. The article discusses emerging issues that warrant attention, but which may be difficult to accommodate in present governance networks. Ultimately, the article argues that anchoring principles of “responsibility” that take into account the relational quality of polar and ocean spaces is key to any institutional design that seeks to take governance arrangements into the 21st century and beyond.

The article provides an overview of studies devoted to governance in the field of sustainable development of the Arctic regions. The work highlights such general approaches to the analysis of sustainable development as the concept of adaptive governance and resilience theory. Global governance institutions that operate in the Arctic are considered. Particular attention is paid to the Arctic Council and the constraints connected with its work. The article also describes non-state governance in the field of natural resources management and social sphere. Special attention is paid to the marine certification system (MSC), which has become widespread in the Arctic, as well as the benefit sharing arrangements between extractive companies and the Indigenous people of the North. In conclusion, the efficiency of the governance institutions is discussed in the context of achieving sustainable development goals.

As ice recedes, the governance of the Arctic is undergoing a significant change. What was once considered a frozen desert with little relevance to the legal system, the Arctic has gradually become a global object of governance. Furthermore, the growing political salience of the Arctic Ocean has generated interest in its governance beyond Arctic states, particularly Asian states such as China, India, Japan, Singapore and South Korea. These countries have been actively participating in regional cooperation arrangements, including the Arctic Council. Undoubtedly, science diplomacy has been an important driver in shaping the governance of the Arctic and maintaining it as a low-tension area. However, this perception is now being put to the test following the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Amidst this crisis, we explore whether science diplomacy can continue to promote peaceful collaboration in the Arctic region. Our research suggests that science diplomacy could potentially aid in the future of Arctic governance, particularly with regard to the involvement of Asian states. We analyse the legal and geopolitical factors involved in determining the potential roles of Asian states in Arctic governance, including whether they could serve as a bridge between the West and Russia or if their actions might further fragment Arctic governance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Global warming has led to the increase of sea ice melting. It is highly possible for the Arctic Passage to achieve continuous navigation in summer in recent decades. The key position of the strategic fulcrum port of the Arctic Passage has become increasingly prominent. Drawing on the relevant concepts of strategy, the authors define the connotation and scope of the strategic fulcrum port of the Arctic Passage, and analyze the current situation and layout of the strategic fulcrum port of the Arctic Passage in order to contribute to the study of polar governance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent global and environmental changes have marked the increasing significance of the Arctic region. With the adoption of the Polar Silk Road (PSR) policy framework by China, emerging opportunities and challenges for Nordic countries in the region have received wider attention. This article mainly explores several plans and projects regarding the development and utilization of Arctic sea routes under the shadow of increasing global uncertainties. It suggests that sides can facilitate efforts toward convergent preferences in bilateral and multilateral contexts for achieving greater benefits from integrated projects within the framework of the PSR. Despite all significant evidence for the improvement of China-Nordic cooperation, obstacles need to be overcome by focusing on coordinated policies toward global governance, accommodating common interests, and promoting sustainable development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Arctic region has attracted the interest of Arctic and non-Arctic states, as well as non-state actors, for decades. Corresponding with the growing attraction towards the region, the number of conferences attending to Arctic issues has expanded. This article provides an historical mapping of the Arctic conference sphere, and demonstrates how the establishment of Arctic conferences has both paralleled central events in Arctic affairs and can be linked to important international developments. Firstly, there is a notable peak conforming with the “second state change” in 2005, brought about by developments opening the Arctic to global concerns: the impacts of climate change and the spread of the socio-economic effects from globalization to the Arctic. Secondly, the expanding number of conferences around 2013 can be seen in relation to the growing interest in the region from non-Arctic states. As such, this article builds the argument for conferences as a central element within the Arctic governance architecture, creating linkages among units in the regime complex. The article devotes particular attention towards the two largest international conferences on Arctic issues – Arctic Frontiers and Arctic Circle Assembly – to illustrate how the necessity for hybrid policy-science-business conferences arose from a more complex governance system, and challenges requiring cross-sectoral, interdisciplinary, and international collaboration.

Governance institutions of the polar regions, as well as global oceans, may hold room for improvement in terms of effectiveness but, on the whole, their existence can be regarded as a success story. The arrangements managed to pool responsibility for regional resources amid Cold War geopolitics, mostly by delegating discussions to science committees. Changing global climate, however, provides considerable challenges to these governance arrangements. It begs the question of how the success story can be continued into the future. After sketching the emergence of polar and ocean governance and their core organizational principles during the 20th century, this article identifies some of the challenges linked to global warming that have been altering the context of governance fundamentally. The article discusses emerging issues that warrant attention, but which may be difficult to accommodate in present governance networks. Ultimately, the article argues that anchoring principles of "responsibility" that take into account the relational quality of polar and ocean spaces is key to any institutional design that seeks to take governance arrangements into the 21st century and beyond. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The establishment and development of the Arctic Circle Assemble provide an open platform for Arctic stakeholders around the world to explore Arctic affairs, promote discussion and communication among various parties on more diversified and open Arctic issues and seek solutions, which is a supplement to and collaboration with the existing international Arctic governance institutional arrangements. The Arctic Circle Assembly is gradually growing into a more perfect international dialogue platform for Arctic affairs, benefiting more and more Arctic stakeholders, including China. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As an area with global significance and international influence on the common destiny of mankind, the no-polarity situation of the Arctic is gradually emerging under the coupling of multiple factors such as ecological environment, geopolitics, economic development and scientific and technological progress. The ecological environment in the Arctic region is interdependent and cooperative; geopolitics is the structure and reality of balance of power and win-win cooperation; economic development is the demand and expectation of shared responsibility and mutual benefit; scientific and technological progress is the model and vision of intellectual convergence and dynamic balance. The future of no-polarity Arctic governance needs to be considered from the aspects of value concept, international mechanism and leading force, and extensive and in-depth Arctic cooperation between China, the United States and Russia is needed. The construction of “Arctic community with shared future” is the development direction of no-polarity Arctic governance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Sino-Russian Yamal LNG project is the first large-scale Arctic oil and gas exploration project under the construction of China’s " Polar Silk Road". In recent years, with the increasing demand for clean energy such as natural gas in China, the Yamal LNG project is conducive to alleviating China’s tension of energy demand and ensuring its energy security. However, from the perspective of energy geopolitics, Yamal project faces with risks from six risks from energy supply countries, energy transport corridors, energy international mechanisms, energy supply pricing rights and energy competitors. It can be seen that the Yamal LNG project is not only a Sino-Russian oil and gas transportation cooperation project, but also a place for energy political game among countries. At present, the "Polar Silk Road" is still in the initial stage of construction, and China has not been able to participate in Arctic governance. Therefore, China needs to effectively predict the risks faces in the Yamal LNG project, and find a practical path to deeply participate in the project. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It has been argued that science diplomacy (SD) helps avoid or mitigate conflicts among stakeholders in the Arctic. Yet underlying some of these well-intended and sometimes successful initiatives is a one-sided understanding of SD. The most recent literature takes a more differentiated approach towards the means and ends of SD. It shows that international scientific interaction is shaped by the twofold logic of competition and collaboration. Instruments of SD can be meant to serve national interests, collective regional goals or global agendas. The present paper disentangles these confounding discourses of collaboration and competition based on a conceptually enhanced SD framework. It analyses Arctic strategies and two cases of Arctic SD, the Agreement on Enhancing International Arctic Scientific Cooperation and research activities on Svalbard, to reveal the mechanisms of collaboration and competition in the sphere of international science in relation to security, environment and economy. By pointing out where and how science is currently being used in the Arctic, this article provides (a) a systematic overview of the state of SD in the region and (b) a tool for policy-makers and scientists to assess what impact different facets of SD have in Arctic politics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Science diplomacy has been instrumental in facilitating cooperation in the Arctic region, yet through the projection of vast hydrocarbon potential in the region, it has also served to undermine the major transformation necessary in Arctic decision-making towards the goals of climate governance. This article surveys the translation of science from the United States Geological Survey (USGS) reports (i.e. the CARA study and Factsheet 2008-3049) on Arctic oil and gas and its transformation into common knowledge within Arctic discourse through repetition by the agents in between and its subsequent adoption into Arctic policy documents. In this process, we interrogate the production of the science underpinning US science diplomacy and the influence of this science on international Arctic discourse and policy use science diplomacy. This paper contributes to the literature of science diplomacy in the Arctic by examining the contributions of the USGS to Arctic policy discourses and its impact on Arctic governance at the nexus of science diplomacy on climate and energy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The end of the Cold War ushered in the golden age of Arctic cooperation. The Arctic Council established in 1996 is the most representative intergovernmental forum in the field of Arctic governance. In 2009,the Arctic Council adopted the AMSA 2009 Report, which adopted: listed recommendations related to the three topics of enhancing Arctic marine safety, protecting Arctic people and the environment, and building the Arctic marine infrastructure. Subsequently, four Status on Implementation of the AMSA 2009 Report Recommendations were released from 2011 to 2017. The implementation of the AMSA 2009 Report reflects two characteristics: international cooperation can eliminated faults in Arctic governance; permanent participants and international organizations are involved. China is an observer of the Arctic Council. According to China’s Arctic Policy, the Arctic Council is one of the platforms for China to build a community with a shared future for mankind in the Arctic. Therefore, China’s deep participation in Arctic governance, is to strengthen cooperation with Arctic states, permanent participants and international organizations; On the other hand, efforts should be made to jointly host the workshops of the Arctic Council working groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

At present, the status of cooperation between China and Russia on the topic of sustainable development in the Arctic is mainly manifested as a high level of official support and a low level of local cooperation; cooperation in the field of Arctic scientific research is mature, but cooperation in the field of ecological environmental protection, tourism and other fields is still in its infancy. Meanwhile, Sino-Russian cooperation on the Arctic’s sustainable development topic is also faced with constraints from internal and external and sporadic factors, such as Russia’s balance between Arctic ecological environment protection and mineral resources exploration, the militarization trend in the Arctic region and the Covid-19 epidemic, which may affect the depth of cooperation between the two countries. Although the international community has often criticized the lack of internal motivation for Sino-Russian cooperation, China has always been an irreplaceable partner for the factors of capital, technology and market demand. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A review of the book: Svein Vigeland Rottem, The Arctic Council: Between environmental protection and geopolitics (London: Palgrave Pivot, 2020)

A review of the book: Elana Wilson Rowe, Arctic Governance: Power in cross-border cooperation (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2018)