In summary, different governance arrangements play two important roles in the ACIA. First, they ensured international data gathering as well as the sharing and standardization of measurements in some areas. This is often a prerequisite for making statements about climate trends over a larger scale than local. Thus they can play a role in emphasizing the regional or global scale. Second, they can privilege certain types of knowledge or framings. This is most clearly illustrated by the Arctic Council norms of including indigenous knowledge and priorities in the assessment. The fact that a circumpolar assessment occurred at all should be seen within the historical perspective of breaking up of the East-West division in the polar region and the rise of a pan-Arctic identity. These developments underpin the key norms of the Arctic Council, such as environmental cooperation and attention to indigenous peoples.
This analysis highlights how international regimes can play a major role in structuring knowledge production and in creating or maintaining certain ways of observing the world. The next section focuses on the actor networks that are visible in the ACIA, but which are not as easily identified as formal governance arrangements.
Was this article helpful?