Memo to Arctic businesses: Stop treating science as an afterthought

​As commercial interest in the Arctic grows, its future prosperity faces a new requirement: the integration of scientific research into business decisions.

International bodies such as the Arctic Council and various United Nations agencies produce valuable research on the Arctic from black carbon reduction to permafrost thaw impacts. But this knowledge often fails to reach corporate boardrooms.

​Meanwhile, voluntary sustainability frameworks for the Arctic – such as the Arctic Investment Protocol remain limited in scope and adoption – however well-intentioned they are.

​Companies operating in the Arctic can no longer afford to treat science as an afterthought. The book chapter “Integrating Science into Arctic Economic Development,” part of the volume titled “The Arctic at a Crossroads: The Making of a New Frontier,” contributes to the broader discussion on how to sustainably manage economic development in one of the world’s most rapidly changing regions.

The question is not whether the Arctic will experience increased economic activity, but whether that activity will be sustainable. The analysis proposes three recommendations to bridge this gap.​

1. Science to Guide Arctic Investment Strategy

First, Arctic businesses should base their strategies on scientific evidence provided by established international organizations. This means consulting research from entities such as the Arctic Council and the International Arctic Science Committee before major investments. Companies should also refer to UN climate assessments, including the Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate (2019). The stakes are rising: The UN has declared 2025 the International Year of Glaciers’ Preservation and launched a decade-long initiative to track ice loss and its cascading effects from Arctic shipping routes to flood risks in regions such as the Himalayas.

This richness of international research on the Arctic represents both a challenge and opportunity for Arctic investments. Translating complex scientific findings into business decisions requires effort.However, companies that master it gain crucial protection against environmental risks and can plan with confidence over longer time horizons.

2. Arctic-tuned ESG

Second, companies should adopt more robust environmental, social, and governance frameworks specifically designed for Arctic conditions. This means not just checking compliance boxes, but incorporating climate accountability, meaningful engagement with local communities and Indigenous Peoples, and designing governance structures flexible enough to adapt as conditions change. Companies can start by adopting established frameworks such as the Arctic Investment Protocol and the Circumpolar Inuit Protocols for Equitable and Ethical Engagement, then building more rigorous practices on top of them. For companies in the Arctic, building genuine trust is the most direct path to securing a social license, decreasing project risk, and attracting capital.

3. Case for Arctic Business-Science Forum

The Arctic requires an international platform dedicated to collaboration between scientists and business leaders. This forum would enable the sharing of knowledge, encourage science-based corporate practices, and assist companies in planning long-term changes in the region.

Part of the challenge is that no one is systematically tracking economic and business data across the Arctic. This means that companies and policymakers make decisions with incomplete information.Establishing comprehensive data collection would enable smarter business planning and support the upcoming Fifth International Polar Year in 2032-2033, when scientists worldwide will intensify their focus on polar research.

The region faces unprecedented environmental pressures that threaten both its ecological stability and the long-term economic viability of Arctic projects.

The Arctic requires tighter connections between scientific research and business practices. Without them, the region will likely repeat mistakes made elsewhere, prioritizing short-term profits over long-term sustainability.