Unique risks and evolving trends in Arctic governance: a forward-looking analysis based on policies and practices

Abstract As climate change and evolving international dynamics shape the Arctic, governance in the region is attracting heightened attention from major global stakeholders. Arctic governance is a broad concept that encompasses political, economic, legal, and security dimensions, with the overarching goal of fostering peace, stability, and sustainable development in the region. Presently, Arctic governance faces a range of intertwined risks, including environmental, geopolitical, legal, and structural governance challenges, each posing significant obstacles. Understanding the policies and practices of key Arctic stakeholders is crucial for discerning trends in governance evolution. Analyzing the policies and practices of Arctic and non-Arctic states, the European Union, and non-state actors reveals their significant influence on the governance landscape. This landscape reflects the interaction between traditional and non-traditional security concerns. Since the end of the Cold War, Arctic governance has shifted from “securitization” to “desecuritization,” with a recent trend toward “re-securitization,” highlighting a renewed focus on security issues. In this context, the fragmented nature of Arctic governance mechanisms is likely to give rise to a multi-level, multi-nodal heterarchy model. The traditional Arctic governance framework will be deconstructed by increasingly diverse, dynamic, and interdependent governance patterns. Given the constraints of strategic resource misallocation, the harshness of the geographical environment, and institutional limitations, geopolitical competition in the Arctic remains inherently constrained, which reduces the likelihood of conventional warfare. However, the potential risks associated with hybrid warfare are growing. In this situation, all Arctic stakeholders should actively fulfill their responsibilities, enhance dialogue and consultation, fully respect the legitimate interests of all parties, and work collectively toward a more stable and cooperative Arctic governance framework.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
European Journal of Futures Research
Published
2025-03-31
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40309-025-00250-y
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Arctic and Russian Policy Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
16.81
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Unique risks and evolving trends in Arctic governance: a forward-looking analysis based on policies and practices

Peiqing Guo, Fei Gao
4 citations
European Journal of Futures Research
Arctic and Russian Policy Studies
16.81
article

Unique risks and evolving trends in Arctic governance: a forward-looking analysis based on policies and practices

Peiqing Guo, Fei Gao
article en
4 citations

Abstract

Abstract As climate change and evolving international dynamics shape the Arctic, governance in the region is attracting heightened attention from major global stakeholders. Arctic governance is a broad concept that encompasses political, economic, legal, and security dimensions, with the overarching goal of fostering peace, stability, and sustainable development in the region. Presently, Arctic governance faces a range of intertwined risks, including environmental, geopolitical, legal, and structural governance challenges, each posing significant obstacles. Understanding the policies and practices of key Arctic stakeholders is crucial for discerning trends in governance evolution. Analyzing the policies and practices of Arctic and non-Arctic states, the European Union, and non-state actors reveals their significant influence on the governance landscape. This landscape reflects the interaction between traditional and non-traditional security concerns. Since the end of the Cold War, Arctic governance has shifted from “securitization” to “desecuritization,” with a recent trend toward “re-securitization,” highlighting a renewed focus on security issues. In this context, the fragmented nature of Arctic governance mechanisms is likely to give rise to a multi-level, multi-nodal heterarchy model. The traditional Arctic governance framework will be deconstructed by increasingly diverse, dynamic, and interdependent governance patterns. Given the constraints of strategic resource misallocation, the harshness of the geographical environment, and institutional limitations, geopolitical competition in the Arctic remains inherently constrained, which reduces the likelihood of conventional warfare. However, the potential risks associated with hybrid warfare are growing. In this situation, all Arctic stakeholders should actively fulfill their responsibilities, enhance dialogue and consultation, fully respect the legitimate interests of all parties, and work collectively toward a more stable and cooperative Arctic governance framework.

European Journal of Futures ResearchVol. 13(1)
Ocean University of China (CN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Arctic and Russian Policy Studies
16.81
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Unique risks and evolving trends in Arctic governance: a forward-looking analysis based on policies and practices — Peiqing Guo, Fei Gao · European Journal of Futures Research (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS