Interviewed on EU's new Arctic policy in Science/ Business

EU has just come out with its new Arctic Policy, to which I also gave my input through multiple organisations during the public consultation process. Science/Business was quick to publish its commentary, with yours truly as one of the interviewees.

Arctic is not my central field, but it is nevertheless nice to see the policy give so much importance to science, climate change and indigenous rights, and particularly science infrastructure and coordination. Policies like this are important as guidelines for upcoming EU decisions, but they have an impact even nationally and internationally, even if every one of the sentences is not backed up by EU funding immediately. It is also important ahead of the next IPY, now that the countries are gradually building up their national programs. I found it curious, though, that the IPY was not mentioned in the strategy.

The devil is always in the details - and strategies do not do details. We are yet to see how all of it is going to work out in practice. It was predictable that a lot of attention will go to economy and preparedness, but applied science is also science, and applied defence research is also research.

Funding for the Ocean Eye is important and very welcome, as is improving Copernicus and Galileo satellite systems. Currently, climate science depends a lot on the US infrastructure, and it is not guaranteed that those will remain available. An example at hand is Argo floats that the US government is defunding, risking the global ocean observing system going blind. EU’s compromise with the Ocean Eye is therefore crucial to ensure that the data will continue to be gathered even when the US pulls the plug. By developing independent European monitoring capacities, we can make sure that we will have reliable data and predictions. is equally welcome.  And that there exists climate research infrastructure when the IPY finally arrives in 2032.