Abstract:
The Arctic is a key area of political and economic interest, particularly with increasing commercial activity and fisheries. Canada’s national research infrastructures (NRIs) are providing the equipment, training, and expertise needed to understand the rapidly changing Arctic and inform policies to safeguard it from ecological and political threats. NRIs are also advancing monitoring efforts and engaging Arctic communities in decision-making to address the pressing challenges related to a shifting Arctic landscape and its resources. This panel—followed by a Q&A—will feature representatives from the Ocean Tracking Network, ArcticNet, Ocean Networks Canada and Torngat Wildlife Plants and Fisheries Secretariat.

Summary of Conversations

The discussion focused on the critical role of national research infrastructures in monitoring the rapidly changing Arctic environment to support climate adaptation, economic development, and sovereignty. Panelists emphasized that the vast geography and complex logistics of the Arctic make it impossible for any single entity to operate alone, necessitating deep collaboration between federal departments, academic networks, and Indigenous communities. A central theme was the shift towards meaningful co-development with northern communities, ensuring research priorities align with local needs while providing economic benefits through training and employment. Participants highlighted how assets like icebreakers, underwater cables, and acoustic receivers provide essential long-term data for fisheries management and marine safety. Furthermore, the conversation underscored the strategic importance of these facilities in asserting national presence and facilitating science diplomacy amidst growing international interest in the region.

Take Away Messages/Current Status of Challenges

• Vast Geographical and Logistical Constraints: The Arctic possesses the longest coastline in the world, making it impossible for any single institution to achieve comprehensive observation coverage, resulting in geographical gaps and the need for expensive, specialized assets like icebreakers.
• Rapid Environmental Shifts: The Arctic is changing at an unprecedented speed due to climate change, meaning historical baselines are no longer reliable; this creates an urgent need for continuous monitoring of factors like ice melt and ocean acidification to inform decision-making.
• Instability of Funding Cycles: Unlike some international peers with long-term plans, Canadian infrastructures often operate on five-year renewal cycles, which hinders long-term strategic planning and forces researchers to constantly seek refunding rather than focusing on operations.
• Coordination and Synergy Gaps: While individual scientific capabilities are high, there is a lack of cohesive coordination among the various national infrastructures and departments, leading to a need for better alignment to maximize presence and efficiency.
• Geopolitical Pressures and Sovereignty: Increasing international interest and the presence of foreign vessels in the Arctic create a “use it or lose it” dynamic, pressuring Canada to maintain a robust scientific presence to assert sovereignty and leadership.
• Complexity of Data Management: Managing vast amounts of oceanographic and biological data requires significant resources to ensure quality control, accessibility, and adherence to principles of Indigenous data sovereignty (CARE principles).
• Barriers to Community Independence: While there is a move toward local leadership, barriers regarding access to scientific equipment and technical training still exist, requiring infrastructures to actively loan equipment and provide capacity building to foster independence.

Recommendations/Next Steps

• Implement “Time Zero” Co-development: Engagement with Indigenous communities must occur at the very beginning of the research process (“time zero”) to co-design questions and priorities, rather than seeking approval for pre-determined plans.
• Establish Long-Term Funding Horizons: The government should transition to longer-term funding models (e.g., 15-year plans) for major research facilities to ensure stability, facilitate better planning, and match the continuity of international competitors like Germany.
• Maximize Dual-Use Capabilities: Research infrastructures should deploy multi-use sensors and technologies that serve both scientific mandates (e.g., climate monitoring) and national security or sovereignty requirements (e.g., surveillance) to optimize resource use.
• Foster Local Economic Integration: Research networks should systematically support local economies by hiring community members for equipment maintenance and data collection, thereby creating sustainable jobs and transferring technical skills.
• Strengthen Science Diplomacy: Canada should leverage its research infrastructure as a platform for science diplomacy to lead international negotiations, attract global collaboration, and assert control over the research agenda in the Arctic.
• Enhance Pan-Arctic Connectivity: Infrastructures must focus on connecting different regions and communities through shared data systems and standardized equipment to create a broader, more impactful understanding of animal movements and environmental changes.
• Create a Unified National Strategy: Stakeholders need to move beyond “fighting for the blanket” and work toward a cohesive national strategy that aligns federal, academic, and Indigenous assets to ensure Canada remains a leader in Arctic science.