advice to the main political body in the Arctic. IASC is
The next step was bilateral cooperation in the North
supporting the work of the Arctic Council, its Work-
(USSR-Canada, USSR-Norway).
ing Groups and Permanent Participants by providing
scientific expertise from all its members, including
The discussions on and planning of circumarctic
the non-Arctic countries, and IASC´s contributions
cooperation among scientists, seem to have stimu-
have resulted in a number of very successful joint
lated governmental people to think about intergov-
ventures (see Chapter 4.2).
ernmental cooperation. The first document expressing the potential need for arctic intergovernmental
As an International Scientific Associate of the over-
cooperation was in a paper by Roots, Rogne and
arching non-governmental science organization
Taagholt (1987),2 suggesting an “Intergovernmen-
ICSU, IASC is well connected within the broader
tal Forum on Arctic Science Issues.” During the IASC
ICSU family (see Chapter 4.3). In particular, coop-
planning process, this ‘forum’ evolved into the IASC
eration with its Antarctic sister organization SCAR
Regional Board, whereas the need for it was taken
resulted in various bipolar science activities and has
over by the AEPS.
led to the formation of a joint Action Group (see
However, we should take one step back and start
Chapter 4.5).
with the ‘Finnish Initiative.’3 How this initiative came
Over the past years, IASC signed formal partnership
about, is described in Chapter 1.1. Although its start
agreements with several other Arctic or Polar orga-
lacked some enthusiasm by some countries, the
nizations, which have resulted in numerous joint sci-
AEPS as an intergovernmental cooperation was
entific and/or outreach activities. Table 1 provides
agreed at a meeting on 14 June 1991 in Rovaniemi,
an overview of the organizations with which IASC is
Finland. Over the years, a broadening of the scope
formally cooperating.
of the AEPS to encompass all areas was suggested,
ending with the Ottawa Declaration of 19 Septem-
To provide opportunities for coordination, coopera-
ber 1996 that laid the foundation for the estab-
tion, and collaboration between the various scien-
lishment of the Arctic Council. IASC was invited to
tific organizations involved in Arctic research and
become an accredited official observer of the Arctic
to economize on travel and time, IASC initiated the
Council at the formational meeting.
ASSW (see Chapter 2.9). An additional partner in orIn the early years of the Arctic Council, IASC under-
ganizing the ASSW is NySMAC.
took several efforts to represent science to gov-
4.2
ernment and permanent participant communities,
and in 1998 the role of science became clear. At a
Arctic Council
Odd Rogne and Volker Rachold, with contributions from Robert Corell
Reviewer: Lars-Otto Reiersen
meeting chaired by the Canadian Minister of Foreign
Affairs, an exercise to understand the connection
between the Arctic Council´s policy agenda and
IASC´s research priorities clearly showed that IASC,
representing Northern Hemisphere scientific capabilities for research in the Arctic, was an important
and legitimate addition to the Arctic Council’s agen-
The need for intergovernmental cooperation in the
da. It should be noted that, during this time, conver-
Arctic has varied over time, and has been closely
sations began between IASC and the two leading
linked to the geopolitical situation. Like most of
scientific working groups of the Arctic Council—
the world, the Arctic was divided in an eastern and
AMAP and CAFF, which led significantly toward the
a western part. There were some short thaw peri-
development ACIA established a few years later
ods, and one of them led to the Polar Bear Treaty.
(Chapter 2.5).
1
86
04 Cooperation with Other Organizations