What is the initiative expected to address?

According to the call for evidence, an updated EU Arctic policy will address emerging challenges without compromising the EU's commitment to long-standing key issues, such as climate change and the environment, science and research, cohesion and regional development, and indigenous peoples' rights. The update is also expected to align EU Arctic policy with new priorities such as competitiveness, strategic autonomy, sustainable prosperity, and security and defence.

Arctic stakeholders

Europaforum Northern Sweden, a network for politicians in Sweden's north, called for the update to build on three pillars – security, sustainability and prosperity. It noted that greater integration between these pillars is essential to reflect the needs of remote, sensitive areas with limited own capacity, while promoting the EU's interests of strategic autonomy, competitiveness and security.

The Norwegian Barents Secretariat, a compnay owned by the three county councils of northern Norway, argued that the update should place resilience at its core, as it enables Arctic communities' security, sustainable development and long-term economic viability, whilst also supporting EU competitiveness. In parallel, the North Norway European Office (NNEO), owned by the three northernmost counties in Norway, recommended making security (including societal, energy and food security), preparedness and resilience more explicit priorities. According to the NNEO, robust Arctic communities and infrastructure contribute directly to European security and strategic autonomy. Similarly, the Oulu Regional Council (Finland) argued that to ensure a prosperous and resilient Arctic, the EU should reinforce high technology investments, critical infrastructure, connectivity, research and innovation ecosystems, food security, dual-use capabilities and regional resilience as long-term strategic investments in EU stability and strategic autonomy.

The Association of Municipalities Jämtland Härjedalen, consisting of eight municipalities in the Swedish Arctic, noted that Arctic policy should have an integrated and cohesive approach between the three objectives outlined in the 2021 joint communication. According to the association, all three areas need to be considered in the context of EU competitiveness and strategic autonomy. It also emphasised that EU Arctic policy must be built on stakeholder dialogue and address the current issue of underinvestment and outflow of revenues.

The Inuit Circumpolar Council (ICC), representing Inuit from Alaska, Canada, Greenland and Chukotka, underlined the centrality of tackling climate change. It also called on the EU to give special attention to the rights of Arctic indigenous peoples. The ICC highlighted the need for the EU to address the conflation of indigenous peoples with other groups, such as those described as 'local communities'. Finally, the ICC argued that EU Arctic policy should continue to focus on peace, dialogue and cooperation, including through strengthening the Arctic Council.

Environment-focused stakeholders

The Planetary Restoration Action Group urged a reorientation of EU Arctic policy around a single overriding imperative: the preservation and restoration of Arctic conditions. It demanded that the European Parliament pass a resolution recognising the Arctic climate emergency, the establishment of a formal governance framework for Arctic restoration, and initiation and funding of a structured international research and testing programme for Arctic cooling interventions.

The EU Representative Office of the International Union for Conservation of Nature reiterated the importance of continuing to promote environmental protection, the precautionary principle and alignment with multilateral environmental agreements. It advocated a dedicated focus on biodiversity conservation, climate change adaptation and mitigation, and scientific cooperation.

The key message from the Jean Monnet Centre of Excellence on Just Fossil Fuel Transitions was to establish a permanent ban on the exploration and extraction of oil, coal and gas in the Arctic, building on existing partial moratoriums on hydrocarbon exploration.

The Clean Arctic Alliance, a coalition of 24 non-profit groups collaborating to address the impact of international shipping on the Arctic, called on the EU to adopt a strong and progressive approach to furthering Arctic policy while respecting indigenous rights and sovereignty in the Arctic. The alliance stated that the EU should: (i) require early implementation and enforcement of the Arctic heavy fuel oil ban ahead of the 2029 deadline through EU and EEA ports; (ii) promote the mandatory use of low-emission polar fuels in wider Arctic waters; (iii) support the accelerated uptake of energy efficiency measures, strengthening of measures regarding sewage wastewater discharges, regulation of currently unregulated Arctic shipping impacts, reduction of ship noise at sea and efforts to strengthen the IMO's Polar Code;³ and (iv) ensure that Arctic indigenous perspectives are central to the discussions.

Business stakeholders

Mediterranean Shipping Company (MSC), an international shipping and logistics group, argued that the update should not compromise the EU's commitments to climate and environmental protection or to scientific, technological or regional cohesion in favour of the proposals supporting new Arctic shipping routes that the industry, including MSC, considers non-viable and of significant concern. MSC called for applying the precautionary principle regarding shipping routes in the Arctic. It also argued that the update should not refer to the maritime transport industry or shipping routes in the Arctic as part of the rationale for developing other elements of the policy. For instance, according to MSC, protecting shipping routes does not justify promoting defence and security cooperation if the maritime industry is not interested in those routes.

Fincantieri, an Italian shipbuilding company, highlighted that only a technology-centred EU Arctic policy could enable the EU to take a rules-based, sustainable approach to the Arctic and guarantee the security of its shipping routes. Fincantieri argued that strengthening the EU's position in the Arctic is closely linked to continuous investment in key innovation areas, including alternative propulsion systems and fuels, artificial intelligence and advanced automation and digital ship systems, predictive maintenance, and advanced navigation technologies. According to the company, research into innovative technologies must translate into advanced, special-purpose platforms enabling the EU to enhance its capacity to survey the Arctic waters and seabed, facilitate naval operations and protect critical infrastructure. Fincantieri noted that an updated policy should leverage funding for Arctic maritime capabilities under the current and future multiannual financial framework (MFF), including the Connecting Europe Facility, European Competitiveness Fund and Horizon Europe.

Offshore Norge, the industry association for companies with activities on the Norwegian continental shelf within energy activities, recommended aligning the EU's Arctic policy with energy security objectives, including security of supply, diversification, resilience and closer energy cooperation. It noted that the update should recognise economic activity in the Arctic as a security enabler for the EU. Similarly, the Arctic Cluster Team, a Norwegian innovation cluster, suggested making the Arctic a strategic industrial pillar of the EU, a strategic provider of critical raw materials, and a hub for resilient energy systems. It noted that the policy should support Arctic hydrogen valleys, integrated CO₂ infrastructure, Arctic energy system resilience and integration of Arctic energy hubs into broader EU energy security strategies.

Academia and research institutes

The Arctic Six, an alliance of Nordic universities, noted that climate change should remain the organising principle of EU Arctic policy, but be more explicitly integrated with infrastructure, preparedness, competitiveness and security. It argued that the update should more clearly reflect the post-2022 security landscape. The alliance also noted that the update should frame the Arctic as a strategic region where sustainability, competitiveness and justice must be progressed together. Finally, according to the Arctic Six, science, research, technology, connectivity, innovation and the rights of indigenous peoples should remain central.

The Polar Research Committee of the Estonian Academy of Sciences stated that the EU must continue with stable, predictable and long-term financing for polar research and research infrastructure.

Imperial College London highlighted technological innovation as a key opportunity to strengthen the EU's Arctic policy. It recommended strengthening the role of science, research, technology, connectivity and innovation through: (i) Arctic digital infrastructure and connectivity; (ii) expansion of the EU's Earth observation and monitoring systems; (iii) support to the Arctic research and innovation on cold-climate technologies; (iv) promotion of the participatory monitoring and inclusive knowledge systems; and (v) strengthening of scientific cooperation and data sharing.

Others

The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, in consultation with UNESCO, recommended the following: (i) recognising the impact of climate change and environmental degradation on the enjoyment of human rights, and contributing to protection of human rights; (ii) preventing human rights harms associated with military operations by adopting effective legal policy and early warning mechanisms, and guaranteeing access to remedies; and (iii) strengthening protection of human rights defenders, including environmental human rights defenders.