Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
ity, a great deal of environmental information and understanding is required to reach this
conclusion with a reasonable level of confidence. At present, this body of knowledge is
simply not yet available for a significant number of the economic development proposals
currently on the table. Governments will not be able to honestly make environmentally sus-
tainable decisions forArctic resource development without a major new deployment ofsci-
entists. The reality is that even if this happens, the answers will not come quickly. This is
presumably the reason for the “Arctic knowledge” component of the Arctic Council's vis-
ion. But will governments wait for and be guided by any emerging science consensus? The
answer is probably that some will and some will not. A guide to what we can expect is to
lookatwhichgovernmentshave(andwhichhavenot)implemented actionsthatarealready
significantly reducing their national GHG emissions. Which governments are investing in
expertise, such as Arctic marine and freshwater toxicology, climate science and the phys-
ics of long-range atmospheric transport of pollutants, and which are not? Which govern-
ments encourage unimpeded public access to government-funded environmental scientists
and which do not? It will then be obvious which governments are truly committed to sus-
tainable Arctic development and to the support of knowledge-based decision making.
To sum it all up, the future well-being of the Arctic and of its peoples depends on the
wisdomofdecisionstobetakennowandinthenextfewdecades.Wisedecisionswillcome
from listening to those who live in the Arctic and from assessing the findings of the Arctic
environmental research community that hopefully will include more and more people from
indigenous communities. It is implicit that a wise Arctic country is one that environment-
ally educates its youth and nurtures a vibrant Arctic research community. Fortunately, no
Arctic country has to do all the work itself. There has been a long historical tradition of
cooperation in polar research forced by the high cost of logistics and a general shortage of
expertise. This tradition is still being maintained, as demonstrated by the activities of such
organisationsastheArcticCouncilandAMAP,theIASC,theBarentsEuro-ArcticCouncil,
the SAON and the various legacy initiatives of the IPY and, most recently, by the powerful
contributions of the European Framework Programme and its European Polar Consortium.
Search WWH ::
Custom Search