How the Arctic is connected (and disconnected) by pollution

Pollutants and contaminants have become an unwelcome part of Arctic landscapes and socio-ecological systems. As ADAM STEPIEN, THORA HERMANN, ÉLISE LÉPY and TAHNEE PRIOR write, by its very presence, pollution acts as an uninvited connector between different places and times. It is also corroding the intimate linkages that have long existed between Arctic peoples and their Environment.

A multi-year initiative, the Horizon Europe ICEBERG project (short for Innovative Community Engagement for Building Effective Resilience and Arctic Ocean Pollution-control Governance in the Context of Climate Change) is trying to address these issues.

ICEBERG is examining a broad range of pollutants—from persistent organic pollutants (POPs) and heavy metals to macro- and microplastics and emerging contaminants, such as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)—through lab-, imaging- and community-based research.

Pollution across space and time

Researchers draw on local observations and experiences, samples from sediments and marine litter, and data collected using drones and time-lapse cameras. This multidisciplinary research project relies on dialogue with Arctic communities at study sites in southern Greenland, northeast Iceland and western Svalbard.

Its early findings reveal the connections that pollution creates across space and time, as well as challenges that pollutants pose for Arctic societies’ relationships with their environments.

It has been well understood for decades that diverse pollutants in the Arctic—especially POPs and heavy metals—originate from distant industrialized regions in North America, Europe and Asia. These contaminants accumulate in the Arctic environment, where they affect human and animal health.

Plastic, plastic, plastic

Scientists and policymakers are increasingly focused on plastic pollution, which includes litter on Arctic beaches and in coastal waters from local and international fishing operations as well as mismanaged waste generated within the Arctic and globally.

For example, recent ecosystem-scale assessments, including work by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea, identified microplastics and chemical contaminants as among the most significant pressures on the Central Arctic Ocean.

Other concerns include nano- and microplastics from sources such as polyester clothing as well as tires and road traffic in Europe and North America, including studded tires in the Nordic countries.

Connecting the dots from industry to the Arctic

The ICEBERG project aims to address multiple contaminants that connect global industrial centres around the world to the Arctic.

In Svalbard, researchers have found dust particles—such as black carbon (soot) and other airborne contaminants—on glaciers as well as microplastics and PFAS in the fjords. Given that few such pollutants are emitted in the Arctic—from sources such as shipping, industry or waste—these have clearly arrived in the archipelago from more southerly latitudes, carried by long-distance air transport and ocean currents.

In addition, litter collected on Arctic beaches shows that plastic waste can be carried north by ocean currents from across the North Atlantic Ocean and the Barents Sea. ICEBERG researchers have also analyzed food samples from southern Greenland and northeast Iceland and detected long-range transported chemical contaminants.

There is also growing awareness that climate change is amplifying pollution as melting glaciers and thawing permafrost release contaminants that were emitted decades ago back into the environment.

These so-called legacy contaminants have usually been trapped in ice for 40 or 50 years before being released again. For example, chemical compounds banned in the 1980s have been found in recent sediment samples from Kongsfjorden in Svalbard.

An Arctic health dilemma

Pollutants like these are affecting the intimate cultural connections that have existed for generations between Arctic peoples and their environment. Awareness of rising pollutant levels in the tissues of marine mammals and fish can pose a dilemma for Arctic communities: traditional foods are at the heart of identities, cultures and livelihoods, but may contain contaminants, while imported groceries offer less nutritional value and do not contribute to cultural continuity.

It’s easy to see how generating knowledge about contaminants can be a sensitive issue. As a result, scientists from various disciplines must conduct research in collaboration with Arctic communities, respecting their values and diverse knowledge systems. ICEBERG and other research projects are working to abide by these principles.

But we also need action by and cooperation among Arctic and national policymakers, regulators at the source of the pollution, and Arctic civil society, including Indigenous Peoples.

There are encouraging examples—including in the work of the Arctic Council and the development of international long-range pollution conventions covering POPs and mercury—and efforts to conclude an agreement on plastics are ongoing.

While pollution is not a connector that any of us would have chosen as a unifying force, it is something that could create a sense of collective responsibility for the Arctic, whether we are located in Brussels, Washington, Delhi, Tokyo or Beijing. Policies targeting Arctic pollutants do not depend on the participation of major global economies in Arctic governance.

Effective actions can address emissions, waste management, and industrial processes in the countries where long-range pollution begins.

We are all part of the problem, but we can also be part of the solution. You do not need to live or work in the Arctic to make a positive impact. Become a citizen scientist, join a community clean-up, or simply consume less plastic. The choices that can make a difference are nearly endless.