Avslutning av det internasjonale Polaråret

Check against delivery

 

Illustration: Title slide.

 

Ladies and gentlemen,
Dear friends,

A long and intensive week is about to come to an end. More than 2 300 polar researchers from nearly 50 countries have gathered in Norway – a record event in itself.

This has been the largest polar science conference ever – a powerful demonstration of knowledge. It has been an honour and a pleasure to host the conference.

Think about it: for centuries the polar regions ranked among the areas of the world about which we knew the least. A hundred years ago, large parts of the Arctic and Antarctica had not even been explored by people from outside these regions. And those who ventured deep into the polar regions were considered adventurous and daring explorers. Today, we can add the many researchers to their ranks.

Many countries have polar explorers they are proud of, and Norway is among them. Explorers and scientists such as Fridtjof Nansen and Roald Amundsen not only mapped uncharted regions. They also played a major part in shaping Norway’s modern national identity.

Next year – on 14 December – we will commemorate the fact that 100 years have passed since Roald Amundsen was the first to set foot on the South Pole. Others have almost been forgotten, like another Norwegian, Carsten Borchgrevink, who 12 years earlier led the first expedition to spend the winter on the Antarctic continent, and paved the way for his more famous countryman.

 

Illustration: Borchgrevink’s huts at Antarctica.

The huts his expedition erected at Cape Adare were in fact the first buildings on the continent. They were built using prefabricated pine units made here in this very municipality, Skedsmo, by Strømmen Trevarefabrikk about three kilometres west of this venue. The huts are still standing and are a proud part of Antarctica’s heritage.

For Norway, our history of polar exploration is just one reason for our deep involvement in polar research. We are the world’s fifth polar research nation in terms of publications. Norway is the only country with territories and maritime areas in both polar areas – large areas – and we have important industries that are dependent on them.

The intention of this conference has been to sum up the scientific results from the fourth International Polar Year (IPY), which ended on 1st March last year.

The results are impressive: altogether, 2 600 abstracts of scientific papers were submitted to the conference. Some 2 200 presentations have been given during the week. There have been a number of information and outreach activities. The work will continue for a long time after the end of the conference.

We can now conclude that IPY has lifted polar research to a new level. Fifty thousand researchers and technicians from more than 60 nations have demonstrated the value of international cooperation.

Sound scientific knowledge is paramount for good management, which makes you – the polar researchers – key drivers in dealing with the challenges in the polar regions and their global impact.

 

Illustration: “Upside-down map”.

Ladies and gentlemen,

Since 2005, the Norwegian Government has defined the High North as a strategic priority in our foreign policy. The High North is defined as the northern part of mainland Norway, stretching into the Barents Sea and the Arctic Ocean – focus areas of political bodies such as the Barents Council and the Arctic Council.

Why have we made this a priority? Because this is the region close to us that is changing most rapidly, where we have the most interests to safeguard, and where we have both a responsibility and the ability to make a difference.

I am showing you this slide because it is an illustration of a different way of perceiving the High North, which challenges the traditional notion of centre and periphery. These are key areas of my country, and of my country’s interests. 

During my five years as Foreign Minister I have noted the growing political interest in Arctic affairs. The Arctic merits – and is receiving – increasing attention from many states, for ecological, economic and geopolitical reasons. We welcome this. Developments in the Arctic have global ramifications. Global actors have legitimate interests in the region and a valuable contribution to make.

But we need to manage both activities and expectations in a responsible manner. This is a vulnerable region from an ecological and environmental perspective. I am pleased to see that there is growing consensus on the need for strict regulation in accordance with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea.

Let me expand on this perspective and share with you some reflections on the legal framework for the areas we are focusing on here.

The Arctic and the Antarctic both have a polar climate. But otherwise, there are fundamental differences.

In the Antarctic, the situation regarding claims to sovereignty and jurisdiction is ordered through a treaty – not least thanks to the previous international polar year, or the International Geophysical Year as it was called, in 1957–58. One of the key political achievements that resulted from the close scientific cooperation during that year was the Antarctic Treaty, which was signed in Washington DC in 1959. We celebrated its 50th anniversary, also in Washington, in April last year.  

Some people have been inspired by this lesson and put forward the idea that we may also need a treaty for the Arctic.

 

Illustration: Map, continental shelves.

But take a look at the realities. Whereas Antarctica is a continent surrounded by sea, the Arctic is basically an ocean surrounded by populated territories that are part of national states with sovereign rights to areas off their coasts in accordance with international law.

The five countries surrounding the Arctic Ocean – the US, Canada, Denmark/Greenland, Norway and Russia – have internationally recognised sovereignty over land and, as a consequence, jurisdiction over maritime zones and continental shelves.

 

Illustration: Photo from Ilulissat in 2008.

The foreign ministers of these countries met at Ilulissat, Greenland, in 2008 and issued a declaration in which we state our agreement on this approach.

The message was clear: we agreed that we have an international legal framework in place – namely the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. All states abide by the Convention’s provisions, including the US, although the latter has not as yet ratified the Convention.

This framework must now be filled with concrete policies.

We also agreed to settle all disputed issues in accordance with the provisions of the Convention. One of this spring’s main events here in Norway was the historic agreement between Norway and Russia on maritime delimitation in the Barents Sea and the Arctic Ocean on 27 April (resulting in a “fifty-fifty split”), after 40 years of negotiation.

During all these years we have followed the provisions of the Convention. Through this agreement, we are sending a clear message that there is no “race for the Arctic”, as some have claimed.

 

Ladies and gentlemen,

The fourth IPY has been a truly international, interdisciplinary endeavour. Researchers in more than 60 countries have taken part and their efforts have resulted in exciting new findings. This has been a unique effort.

So, what outcomes can we expect from this International Polar Year?

We will probably have to wait several years before we know the full answer – because findings have to be analysed, understood and put in context thoroughly. And more related research will be continuing.

However, some of the achievements of IPY are already well-known. Let me mention a few:

IPY has highlighted the global importance of polar processes and the urgent need to understand and track the rapid changes occurring at high latitudes. The polar areas are much more important for the global climate than we realised only a few years ago.

Some of the fastest and greatest changes to the climate are taking place in the polar regions.

 

Illustration: Climate change, ice melting, Arctic 1979–2007 (two maps).

The Arctic is now experiencing some of the most rapid and severe climate change on earth, and even greater change is projected. The climate change will also affect the rest of the world through increased global warming and rising sea levels. The consequences of melting ice in the Arctic are illustrated by the drying out of Lake Chad in Africa. I discussed these challenges when I met colleagues in Sudan last week.

Arctic sea ice is retreating at an alarming rate. Two weeks ago, sea ice cover fell below the recorded extent at the same time in 2007 (as you can see from the maps). In 2007, sea ice cover reached a record low, nearly 50% lower than during the 1950s and 1960s. The Greenland Ice Sheet is melting, and the Arctic snow cover and permafrost is being reduced.

Likewise, Antarctica is a critically important part of the Earth system. It contains more than 90% of the world’s ice.

The Southern Ocean has warmed faster than the global average. Parts of Antarctica are losing ice rapidly. Loss of ice from the West Antarctic Ice Sheet is likely to raise the global sea level by tens of centimetres by the end of this century. This is expected to contribute to a projected total sea level rise of about 1 metre by 2100, more than double the rise projected by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in 2007. In other words, just three years of research has doubled the estimate of sea level rise.

These are a few of the main points I have picked up from the International Polar Year. While there is still much we don’t fully understand, our knowledge is increasing. We are also discovering that that we have a lot more to learn.

 

Illustration: Mr Gore and Mr Støre at COP15 with the report Melting snow and ice.

At the COP15 Conference in Copenhagen last December, former US Vice President and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Al Gore and I presented the report Melting snow and ice. In this report, which I have sent to all foreign ministers in the world, we present research – carried out by some of you present here I believe – that updates the picture from 2004–2005.

It now seems that snow and ice are melting at an increasing rate all over the globe. (Including the glaciers in the Himalayas). The report is a clarion call urging political action to substantially reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, and primarily emissions of CO2.

However, even if we manage to slow or reverse the rising trend of global greenhouse gas emissions in the coming years, the reduction will not occur quickly enough to conserve the polar and alpine environments as we know them today.

We also need to reduce short-lived climate forcers such as methane, black carbon and ozone. Methane is one of the Kyoto gases, and it is responsible for about 25% of global warming. And in a study from last November, scientists at NASA’s Goddard Institute calculated that black carbon may account for as much as 12% of human-induced global warming so far.

This is exciting new knowledge. And the thing is that it is easy to do something to reduce these short-lived climate forcers. However, there is still considerable uncertainty about the scale of their effects The Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme is working on this issue. As you know, this is a working group of the Arctic Council – which has, by the way, become a much more important body, in political terms, during the last ten years. I hope that research from IPY as well as other research will increase our knowledge about this important issue.

Let me mention some other important achievements of IPY.

 

Illustration: Fishing boat (krill).

Ships from 17 nations, including the G.O. Sars from the Norwegian Institute of Marine Research, have been involved in coordinated efforts in Antarctic waters. The results include improved estimates of various fish and krill stocks in Antarctica, and the discovery of several new organisms.

Yet again we see the key role of modern knowledge: scientific knowledge is essential for sustainable use of natural resources, and this new knowledge will be of great importance in managing economic activities in these waters.

The Association of Polar Early Career Scientists (APECS) was established during IPY. I have read reports about the important contribution they have made to this conference. These young and talented researchers represent the next generation of polar researchers, and we need to encourage and facilitate their work. With its now almost 2 000 members, the association represents the future of research.

In a few moments we will be giving outstanding presentation awards to some of these young researchers. You have embarked on a career where the demand for your knowledge is greater than ever before – and it is increasing. The prospects are good. The key is knowledge.

Whereas we – the coastal states in the High North – may call ourselves the gatekeepers of the Arctic, you will in many respects be the gatekeepers of our common future. Because nowhere in the world is change more dramatic than in the polar regions – and the effects are global.

 

Illustration (photo): Nenets Boy from Siberia.

 

Dear friends,

People living in the Arctic have been much more involved in this IPY than ever before. Their contribution is important. Their knowledge is needed if we are to better understand the delicate balance of the Arctic environment and how to use Arctic resources sustainably. The integration of traditional knowledge with modern science has brought new insights. We, for our part, cooperate closely with the Sami Parliament.

In addition, the latest IPY has been more directly relevant to Arctic residents. Many projects are providing new insights into the human dimensions of the Arctic, as well as useful knowledge for those who use natural resources in the region. Research on the various problems facing Arctic residents is also important. For example, the health of Arctic residents is not as good as that of residents in areas further south in the same countries.

Thanks to IPY, students, teachers and the general public have been made more aware of the importance of polar research. Thousands of people have learnt about IPY and its research effort through exhibitions, lectures and many other outreach activities.

Through these achievements, IPY has also provided vital knowledge for the Arctic countries and for the Arctic Council. In the Arctic Council, science is the foundation for all activities relating to the environment and sustainable development. The contributions made to Arctic science by IPY will provide valuable input for assessments carried out under the auspices of the Council.

 

Illustration: The Arctic Ocean/ the “blue-green map”.

Now, I would like to conclude.

The question of the legacy of IPY has been discussed both by the Arctic Council and by the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting. For us politicians, the overall objective must be to translate your work into political action.

I will focus on three main tasks in this context:

The first task is to ensure full access to all the research data that has been produced during IPY. This is crucial both for further scientific work and for ensuring societal benefits. An information portal could be a useful tool for this.

The second task is to ensure the development and maintenance of polar research stations in region-wide networks.

Norway fully supports the work on the Sustained Arctic Observations Network (SAON) by the Arctic Council and the International Arctic Science Committee. We are also prepared to support this work financially. I believe it is important to take an inclusive approach, inviting all relevant states and organisations to take part. Incidentally, this June we are welcoming the third Indian science minister to visit Svalbard.

This is also important in Antarctica, where I would strongly encourage continued collaboration and development of sustained integrated observation systems inspired by work in the Arctic. There is much to be gained from working together on monitoring climate change, as we all know.

The third task is to ensure adequate and balanced recruitment and training of young experts. Appropriate facilities and training programmes must be secured and existing systems for cooperation and exchange programmes for scientists and students – like those at the University of the Arctic and the Association of Polar Early Career Scientists – must be strengthened. We should also support similar initiatives in an Antarctic context, or even consider a University of the Polar Regions encompassing both polar hemispheres.

 

Friends,

You are now about to leave Norway. Our quest for knowledge about the polar regions is necessary for both regional and global governance – because of the close linkages between these regions and the rest of the planet.

The Executive Council of the World Meteorological Organization is currently discussing the launch of an International Polar Decade – a long-term polar research effort to ensure top-quality observations and studies for a more extended period of time.

I welcome this proposal for delivering a lasting legacy from IPY – I will follow it closely – and urge all relevant partners to consider supporting it. I hope that the success of IPY and the dramatic changes now taking place in the polar regions will be an incentive for an International Polar Decade to strengthen polar research.

This conference is only the first of the IPY follow-up conferences. I am grateful to Canada for agreeing to host the next conference in 2012 and wish you every success in your preparations.

Finally, one important task for the research community will now be to produce comprehensive but accessible analyses of the findings of IPY that can be put to practical use in policy-making and politics. We will need this.

 Thank you.