Is a Melting Arctic Making the Arctic Council Too Cool? Exploring the Limits to the Effectiveness of a Boundary Organization

Abstract

The Arctic Council offers an interesting and unexplored case study of boundary work between policy makers, scientific communities, and Indigenous organizations in the circumpolar region. Its notable success can be attributed to the production of high‐quality policy products, including the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment and the Arctic Human Development Report—both of which meet the criteria of boundary objects. However, this article goes beyond applying the concept of the boundary organization to inform our understanding of the Arctic Council. Rather, I use the Council as a case study to explore the dynamic environment in which these types of institutions exist. I argue that, as a result of a number of factors, the Arctic Council is being pushed to be more action oriented. Furthermore, I consider the implications of this pressure for the institutional design of the Council and where the Council looks to affirm its credibility, saliency, and legitimacy. I conclude that the Arctic Council's effectiveness as a boundary organization is being compromised by pressures for it to be more action oriented.

En nordområdepolitikk om alt – eller ingenting?

“…Aforismen er omtalt som «the first law of ecology» (Commoner, 1971) og er velkjent hos flere urfolkskulturer (f.eks. Spence, 2017), som fremholder at innsikten om komplekse sammenhenger innebaerer at vi må tenke holistisk rundt problemer og løsninger.…”

Boundary Concepts for Boundary Work Between Science and Technology Studies and International Relations: Special Issue Introduction

“…The contribution by Holzscheiter () unravels the potentially negative conflicts and redundancies that a proliferation of boundary concepts can create. The contribution by Spence () also indicates a trade‐off between boundary work and decision making: the more sophisticated boundary work an institution seems to perform, the less it will have decision‐making power, as illustrated in the case of the Arctic Council. A balance between boundary work and decision‐making functions has to be reached.…”

“…IR studies of boundary organizations indicate that knowledge can be produced and brought into the debates by actors other than scientists or policy makers. In her contribution to this special issue on boundary work performed by the Arctic Council, Spence (2017) clearly demonstrates this shift from a classical understanding of science to an effort to include other sorts of knowledge into the equation.…”

The Science–Policy Nexus in Collaborative Governance: Use of Science in Ecosystem Recovery Planning

“…To better connect scientific and policy communities, scholars have examined the critical roles played by boundary organizations (Cash, ; Guston, ; Jasanoff, ; Swedlow, ). Such organizations help connect scientists with policy makers by fostering common understanding and knowledge building to inform policy making (Guston, ; Spence, ). Collaborative groups may act as boundary organizations, to the extent they include scientists and nonscientists working together to bridge the science–policy divide.…”