Arctic 2035: Issue 2026 – 4 (28)

Vladimir Nikolaevich Vasiliev is the Executive Director of the Northern Forum and a Candidate of Biological Sciences specializing in nature conservation and the development of the northern territories. He graduated from M. K. Ammosov Yakut State University in 1983 and completed postgraduate studies at the Yakut Branch of the Siberian Branch of the USSR Academy of Sciences in 1988. His professional career includes work at the Institute of Biological Problems of the Cryolithozone of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences and the Yakutsk International Center for the Development of the Northern Territories. In 2014–2018, Vasiliev held senior positions in the field of foreign relations of the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia), including that of Minister for Federal Relations and External Relations. His state and departmental awards include the title of «Distinguished Nature Conservationist of the Russian Federation».

The interview focuses on the role of the Northern Forum in international cooperation in the Arctic amid contemporary geopolitical turbulence. It examines the transformation of the organization’s priorities and geographical focus since 2022, as well as its capacity to maintain interregional and expert dialogue amid the fragmentation of Arctic cooperation. Particular attention is paid to developing cooperation with Asian countries, establishing new partnership mechanisms, and expanding the Northern Forum’s presence on global international platforms. The interview outlines the organization’s key areas of activity, including scientific and educational cooperation, the climate and environmental agenda, support for Indigenous Peoples, youth initiatives, the development of transport and logistics links, and Arctic tourism. Special consideration is given to the prospects for the Northern Sea Route and the Trans-Arctic Transport Corridor, the establishment of the Pacific-Arctic Platform, and the development of horizontal ties between Russian and foreign regions. The interview demonstrates that, under current conditions, the Northern Forum seeks to serve as a complementary international platform aimed at maintaining dialogue and implementing concrete practical projects in the Arctic.

The article examines the 35-year history of the Northern Forum, an international non-governmental organization uniting leaders of northern regions. The relevance of the study is determined by the growing geopolitical significance of the Arctic and the need to preserve interregional cooperation amid international turbulence. The aim is to identify the evolution of the organizational structure, programmatic priorities, and membership geography of the Northern Forum, and to determine its role in the contemporary system of Arctic cooperation. The empirical basis includes founding documents, General Assembly declarations, Board of Governors resolutions, and academic publications. Historical-genetic, institutional, and comparative methods are employed; the institutional life-cycle approach and the concept of paradiplomacy provide the explanatory framework. The study shows that the organization has passed through stages of emergence, growth, crisis, and adaptation. After 2022 it retains formal observer status at the Arctic Council, while foreign membership has narrowed to the State of Alaska and Gangwon Province. Project activities have evolved from disparate initiatives to structured programmatic work. It is concluded that the Forum retains a niche cooperative potential as a channel of subnational dialogue, and several development scenarios are outlined.

The article examines the Northern Forum and Barents Euro-Arctic cooperation as two distinct institutional responses by northern regions to the opening of international space after the Cold War. Instead of comparing membership, working groups and individual projects, the study focuses on their “institutional geometry”: spatial organization, project mechanisms, and resilience to external shocks. The Northern Forum is interpreted as a model of open zonal-network regionalism based on subnational paradiplomacy, knowledge exchange and high capacity for spatial and organizational reconfiguration. Barents cooperation represents territorially contiguous multilevel regionalism combining intergovernmental and interregional layers with denser project and financial infrastructure. The crises of 2012–2013 and 2022–2026 reveal two different forms of institutional resilience: resilience through mobility and reconfiguration in the Northern Forum, and resilience through organizational embeddedness in the Barents system. The article argues that the Northern Forum’s strategic advantage should lie not in reproducing other Arctic institutions but in strengthening its distinctive role as a global network for regional diplomacy, circulation of northern knowledge and incubation of interregional projects.

The article examines the prospects for developing the Pacific dimension of the Northern Forum’s activities amid the transformation of international cooperation in the Arctic. The relevance of the study stems from the geopolitical fragmentation of Arctic cooperation and the growing importance of the Asia-Pacific region for the economic and transport development of the Russian Arctic.

The study aims to assess the potential of the Northern Forum as a platform for interregional cooperation between Arctic and Pacific regions. Based on an analysis of the organization’s historical experience and current areas of activity, the article identifies promising fields of cooperation, including transport and logistics, energy, climate and environmental issues, scientific and technological cooperation, healthcare, and cultural and humanitarian ties.
The article substantiates the feasibility of institutionalizing the Northern Forum’s Arctic-Pacific dimension and establishing a network of regional, expert, and institutional partnerships. The practical significance of the study lies in developing specific proposals for advancing this area of cooperation.

This article revisits the sustainable development mandate of the Arctic Council and asks how it can be translated into a more coherent, people-centred agenda under present geopolitical conditions. The argument develops, substantially revises and academicizes ideas previously advanced by the author in a 2023 opinion essay. Rather than treating sustainable development as a single sector, the article understands it as a framework linking community well-being, viable regional economies, environmental protection, infrastructure, knowledge and institutional cooperation. Drawing on Arctic Council documents, international agreements and sectoral policy materials, the study identifies four interdependent dimensions of such a framework: human and community resilience; responsible economic development; environmental and operational security; and multi-level cooperation. Energy, critical minerals, transport, fisheries, tourism, digital connectivity, education and investment are examined through these dimensions. The article concludes that the Arctic Council remains the principal circumpolar framework for this agenda, while organizations such as the Northern Forum can complement it by connecting general principles with the practical experience of northern regions.

The article examines cross-sectoral partnership as a mechanism for the sustainable development of Arctic territories under climate-related, socio-economic and infrastructural challenges. Using the case of the Anabar National Dolgan-Evenki Ulus of the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia), the study analyzes the interaction between public authorities, the non-profit sector, the expert community, business, research organizations and local communities, including representatives of Indigenous small-numbered peoples of the North. Particular attention is paid to the role of the Russian Partnership for Climate Preservation, the international organization Northern Forum and the «Volnoe Delo» Charitable Foundation in creating conditions for climate adaptation, preservation of traditional nature management, development of digital infrastructure and ethno-ecological tourism. The empirical basis of the study includes materials from a field expedition to Saskylakh and Yuryung-Khaya, documents, expert interviews and observations. The article shows that cross-sectoral partnership makes it possible to combine the resources, competencies and local knowledge of different participants, thereby providing a more flexible model of Arctic territorial governance that is sensitive to the local context.

The Arctic is warming faster than any other region on Earth, yet dedicated regional cooperation formats have been operating in a restricted mode since 2022, while Arctic issues remain weakly represented in the UNFCCC process. The relevance of the study stems from the need for an institutional solution capable of sustaining Arctic cooperation while regional mechanisms are largely frozen. The aim is to find the conditions and formats for UNFCCC Conferences of the Parties (COPs) to function as a platform for Arctic cooperation. The empirical basis comprises COP documents, organizational materials of the Arctic Pavilion at COP29 and COP31, Arctic Council’s reports, and the author’s observations as a delegate to UNFCCC COPs in 2021-2025. The article proposes a typology of the Arctic Pavilion’s functions that demonstrates that this format enables cooperation at low political cost, and formulates recommendations for institutionalizing Arctic presence at the UNFCCC COPs.

The Arctic region poses unique challenges for digital governance, which remain underresearched. The article analyzes the International Expert Group on Regional IT Agenda established in July 2023 in the framework of the Northern Forum, which is an institutional mechanism of interregional digital cooperation that has not yet been studied in academic literature. The article compares nine digital indicators in the eleven member regions of the Northern Forum based on data from the HSE, records of the Northern Forum, and adaptive governance theory. The article finds discrepancies that cannot be eliminated by national broadband policy. An example of a mathematical model was proposed to evaluate IT governance capacity in extreme environments and a conceptual framework of DAIM (Define, Analyze, Innovate, Materialize) was proposed. In today’s complex geopolitical landscape, the Expert Group seems well-placed to support meaningful interregional digital cooperation.

Global warming continues to reshape the ecological landscape, economic geography, and geopolitical environment of the Arctic. The Russia-Ukraine conflict has further affected the existing Arctic governance framework. The development of the «Ice Silk Road» has become increasingly substantive and practice-oriented, propelling China from a scientific participant in Arctic affairs to an active participant, builder, and contributor to Arctic governance. Based on official policy documents, government gazettes, authoritative media reports, and institutional research reports, this article divides the evolution of China’s Arctic policy since the founding of the People’s Republic of China into four stages: initial scientific exploration, institutional entry, strategic shaping, and adaptation to changing circumstances. It systematically reviews the domestic and international driving forces behind policy iterations. Based on the current great power competition landscape, it analyzes the basic pattern of cooperation between China and Russia and the Nordic Arctic states, identifying the real opportunities and multiple challenges in the cooperation process. Drawing on more than ten field research trips to Russia and firsthand experience of participating in international dialogues such as the Northern Forum and the Eastern Economic Forum, it elucidates the multiple dimensions of the Arctic’s strategic value for China in terms of climate security, transportation corridor security, energy security, technological upgrading, and global governance, and assesses the future development trends of China’s participation in Arctic affairs. This article argues that China’s participation in Arctic affairs has consistently adhered to the framework of international law, prioritizing protection and cooperation. It advocates for an inclusive governance paradigm that balances the sovereignty of countries within the region, the legitimate interests of countries outside the region, and the rights of Arctic indigenous peoples, providing a new reference path for the participation of countries of the Global South in polar issues.

The Republic of Korea has moved its engagement with the Northern Sea Route (NSR) from policy declarations to legislative institutionalization. This article examines the foundations of that shift through three interrelated dimensions. First, the legislative dimension: the 2026 Special Act on the Promotion of the Utilization of the Arctic Route and the Fostering of Related Industries frames the NSR not merely as a shipping route but as an integrated industrial ecosystem coordinated at the whole-of-government level. Second, the geoeconomic dimension concerns Busan’s potential role as a hub port within a multi-port model. Third, the technological dimension is represented by the Arc7 shipbuilding capabilities retained by Korean shipyards, whose application is currently constrained by exposure to secondary sanctions. The study provides an analytical assessment of enabling conditions, structural risks, and policy implications for the Republic of Korea’s Arctic strategy.

The article examines the prospects for Russian-Japanese scientific cooperation in the Arctic in the context of differences between the two countries’ approaches to the regulation of navigation along the Northern Sea Route (NSR). The study aims to assess the potential of science diplomacy as an instrument for strengthening mutual understanding and maintaining cooperation between Russia and Japan under the current geopolitical conditions. Particular attention is paid to the scientific foundations of Arctic shipping regulation, navigational and environmental safety, and the potential for joint research. The article demonstrates that scientific cooperation can remain a relatively resilient channel of bilateral interaction. Promising areas include joint research expeditions, scientific data exchange, and the participation of Russian and Japanese specialists in research programmes, including projects involving Japan’s new Arctic research vessel Mirai II.

The review analyzes the potential of Spitsbergen as a space for international scientific and educational cooperation in the Arctic, using the first HSE University International Summer School, organized in partnership with the Northern Forum and the State Unitary Enterprise «Arktikugol» in June 2026, as a case study. The article examines the objectives, organizational model, and main areas of the Summer School, which brought together Russian and international students, experts, and representatives of Arctic organizations. Particular attention is paid to the combination of academic training, field research, and practical case studies addressing international cooperation, Arctic tourism, and the development of Russia’s scientific and educational presence in the archipelago. The study demonstrates that cooperation among HSE University, the Northern Forum, and «Arktikugol» creates opportunities for developing international academic ties and practice-oriented forms of cooperation. The article concludes that the Summer School has significant potential as a regular format for scientific and educational cooperation in the Arctic.