Search for: All records

Many western scientific disciplines adopted Indigenous Knowledge and terminology without deference or understanding of the original meanings and values attached to Indigenous terms and concepts. This form of scientific appropriation has become a serious issue in light of decolonizing Arctic research. The notion of Alaas is an example of such appropriation by the western science-based system of Indigenous knowledge about human-nature relations. This paper aims to discuss the term Alaas as it is represented in both western science and Indigenous knowledge. The paper will explore the development of ‘alaas’ as an international permafrost science term and Alaas as an economic, traditional, cultural and spiritual space of the Sakha People in Northeastern Siberia. In analyzing these histories and meanings, the authors will attempt to provide a pathway to decolonizing western science-appropriated Indigenous terminology. 

Indigenous understanding of sustainability is embedded in close relations to land and environment, Indigenous Knowledge systems, Indigenous epistemologies and ontologies, and Indigenous languages. However, the sustainability of Indigenous peoples’ livelihoods is significantly affected by various global change drivers. In the Arctic, Indigenous peoples’ livelihoods are impacted by environmental, social, and cultural changes, including climate change, environmental pollution, economic processes, and resource extraction. This paper aims to review and synthesize recent academic and gray literature on the sustainability of Indigenous communities in Sakha Republic, Northeast Siberia, Russia in the face of global change with a particular focus on land- and water-based traditional activities, native language, and the Indigenous Knowledge system. 

Abstract In 2023, the first Polar Postdoc Leadership Workshop convened to discuss present and future polar science issues and to develop leadership skills. The workshop discussions fostered a collective commitment to inclusive leadership within the polar science community among all participants. Here, we outline challenges encountered by underrepresented groups in polar sciences, while also noting that progress has been made to improve inclusivity in the field. Further, we highlight the inclusive leadership principles identified by workshop participants to bring to the polar community as we transition into leadership roles. Finally, insights and practical knowledge we gained from the workshop are shared, aiming to inform the community of our commitment to inclusive leadership and encourage the polar community to join us in pursuing action toward our shared vision for a more welcoming polar science future. 

ObjectivesThis study examines the COVID-19 pandemic’s spatiotemporal dynamics in 52 sub-regions in eight Arctic states. This study further investigates the potential impact of early vaccination coverage on subsequent COVID-19 outcomes within these regions, potentially revealing public health insights of global significance. MethodsWe assessed the outcomes of the COVID-19 pandemic in Arctic sub-regions using three key epidemiological variables: confirmed cases, confirmed deaths, and case fatality ratio (CFR), along with vaccination rates to evaluate the effectiveness of the early vaccination campaign on the later dynamics of COVID-19 outcomes in these regions. ResultsFrom February 2020 to February 2023, the Arctic experienced five distinct waves of COVID-19 infections and fatalities. However, most Arctic regions consistently maintained Case Fatality Ratios (CFRs) below their respective national levels throughout these waves. Further, the regression analysis indicated that the impact of initial vaccination coverage on subsequent cumulative mortality rates and Case Fatality Ratio (CFR) was inverse and statistically significant. A common trend was the delayed onset of the pandemic in the Arctic due to its remoteness. A few regions, including Greenland, Iceland, the Faroe Islands, Northern Canada, Finland, and Norway, experienced isolated spikes in cases at the beginning of the pandemic with minimal or no fatalities. In contrast, Alaska, Northern Sweden, and Russia had generally high death rates, with surges in cases and fatalities. ConclusionAnalyzing COVID-19 data from 52 Arctic subregions shows significant spatial and temporal variations in the pandemic’s severity. Greenland, Iceland, the Faroe Islands, Northern Canada, Finland, and Norway exemplify successful pandemic management models characterized by low cases and deaths. These outcomes can be attributed to successful vaccination campaigns, and proactive public health initiatives along the delayed onset of the pandemic, which reduced the impact of COVID-19, given structural and population vulnerabilities. Thus, the Arctic experience of COVID-19 informs preparedness for future pandemic-like public health emergencies in remote regions and marginalized communities worldwide that share similar contexts. 

The discourse on vulnerability to COVID-19 or any other pandemic is about the susceptibility to the effects of disease outbreaks. Over time, vulnerability has been assessed through various indices calculated using a confluence of societal factors. However, categorising Arctic communities, without considering their socioeconomic, cultural and demographic uniqueness, into the high and low continuum of vulnerability using universal indicators will undoubtedly result in the underestimation of the communities’ capacity to withstand and recover from pandemic exposure. By recognising vulnerability and resilience as two separate but interrelated dimensions, this study reviews the Arctic communities’ ability to cope with pandemic risks. In particular, we have developed a pandemic vulnerability–resilience framework for Alaska to examine the potential community-level risks of COVID-19 or future pandemics. Based on the combined assessment of the vulnerability and resilience indices, we found that not all highly vulnerable census areas and boroughs had experienced COVID-19 epidemiological outcomes with similar severity. The more resilient a census area or borough is, the lower the cumulative death per 100 000 and case fatality ratio in that area. The insight that pandemic risks are the result of the interaction between vulnerability and resilience could help public officials and concerned parties to accurately identify the populations and communities at most risk or with the greatest need, which, in turn, helps in the efficient allocation of resources and services before, during and after a pandemic. A resilience–vulnerability-focused approach described in this paper can be applied to assess the potential effect of COVID-19 and similar future health crises in remote regions or regions with large Indigenous populations in other parts of the world.