Implications of Arctic ice melting

One of the challenges of Futures thinking is the way that trends and drivers interact with each other in complex ways, creating unexpected second- and third-order effects which typically can be considered using Futures Wheels. One particular interaction which is beginning to play out is the implications of global warming on the Arctic ice cap for an increasingly challenging geo-political world.

In recent years, the Arctic ice cap has been shrinking. Between 1979 and 2021, sea ice cover in September (the annual minimum) shrank by 13.0 percent per decade (31,100 square miles) relative to the 1981–2010 average.  Experts use the age of the ice pack as a proxy for ice thickness. In mid-March 1985 winter maximum ice pack was dominated by ice at least 4 years old; by 2021, only a small strip of very old ice remained - more than half of the winter ice pack was less than a year old.

The environmental consequences of continued melting are well known:

• Global sea level rise has increased by more than 50% when comparing the rate in the 1990s to the most recent 10 years: between 1993 and 2002, the global average sea level rose by 24 mm, whereas between 2014 and 2023, it increased by 36 mm;

• Sea level rise is not uniform: in the tropics, the sea level for example rises 30% more than the global average, because of gravitational effects and postglacial rebound (where land previously under ice starts rising);

• As ice melts, less sunshine is reflected back into space (the albedo effect), creating a positive feedback loop with faster melting;

• Eco-system collapse: Arctic biodiversity is under pressure; summertime thawing of the permafrost raises the prospect of “zombie” viruses re-awakening – there has already been a resurgence of the bacterion anthrax in Siberia.

But the opening up of new shipping routes and access to valuable minerals is also spurring a growth in geostrategic competition.

In Canada, for generations, the intense cold of the Arctic has served as the bulwark of a military defence of the north. But a rapidly changing climate, with extreme shifts in temperature in both directions, threatens that defence, replacing it with a land and seascape more volatile and far less predictable.

The North-West passage could soon open up for cargo and tourist ships with the potential to cut shipping times between Europe and Asia by thousands of miles – or as much as two weeks. Canada claims the passage as sovereign waters, while the U.S. insists on international navigation rights, fuelling a sovereignty dispute.

President Trump startled the world by his open recognition of the strategic importance of Greenland for US security.  The Pituffik Space Base is important for missile warning and space surveillance. Greenland has an abundance of minerals, including 39 of the 50 materials vital to US national security in fields such as defence, renewable energy and storage, electronics, and industrial manufacturing (copper, chromium). It also has substantial untapped oil and gas reserves. Melting ice and new shipping routes are making extraction more viable.

The Greenland–Iceland–United Kingdom Gap (GIUK) is a choke point in shipping between the North Atlantic and the Arctic Sea. Recognised as strategically important during the Cold War, it is once again becoming an issue in the new geo-political dynamics. If Russia’s Northern Fleet were to tighten control over the GIUK Gap, the Royal Navy would face a strategic chokepoint that could sever transatlantic supply lines. This has become especially relevant with accession of Finland and Sweden to NATO. The Baltic has become essentially a NATO lake, so Russian naval forces can only come out over the top of Norway via Murmansk: a secure foothold in the Arctic and a launching point for naval operations in the North Atlantic.

Norway’s Svalbard archipelago could enter Russia’s sights. Moscow has already accused Norway of militarising Svalbard, which is prohibited under the Svalbard Treaty that establishes Norway’s sovereignty over the archipelago. In January,  damage to an optic fibre providing internet connection to the mainland was potentially down to Russia.

Russia also will benefit from opening up the Northern Sea Route which shortens travel time between Shanghai and Rotterdam by two weeks. It is consolidating the route with military bases and would be able to extract taxes on shipping passing through it.

Russia is warming at least 2.5 times faster than the rest of the world, melting the long-frozen tundra that covers about 65% of the country's landmass and releasing greenhouse gases stored in the thawed soil. Some Russian scientists calculated that a warmer climate would improve conditions for growing key food crops, particularly wheat,  further north in Siberia.

Built in the 1960s and 1970s as Soviet Russia expanded into the Arctic, many buildings in the far north and far east were constructed with the assumption that the permafrost was sturdy and would never thaw. More than 15 million people are living on permafrost foundations. But melting permafrost has already triggered giant sinkholes, slumping phone lines, damaged highways and airport runways, and industrial pollution from melting containment wells. In May 2020, melting permafrost resulted in a Siberian diesel-waste spill of 20,000 metric tons, contaminating an area the size of Philadelphia.

China, although not strictly an Arctic country, has significant interests in opening up its shipping routes and accessing its resources. At present it is building its alliance with Russia, providing it with icebreaker ships, which enable safe passage through Arctic waters. How the US, Russia and China work together – or against one another – remains a key uncertainty.

The above discussion highlights some of the ways in which two key drivers of change interact. Other drivers  - notably technology, demographics and social attitudes – further add to the complexity.  Whether one uses Futures Wheels or scenarios to explore these interactions, it is clear that developing robust strategies -whether for countries or commercial entities – requires a sophisticated Futures Thinking exercise and certainly not a naïve projection of the status quo.  

Written by Huw Williams, SAMI Principal

The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily of SAMI Consulting.

Achieve more by understanding what the future may bring. We bring skills developed over thirty years of international and national projects to create actionable, transformative strategy. Futures, foresight and scenario planning to make robust decisions in uncertain times. Find out more at www.samiconsulting.co.uk

Image by mirluc from Pixabay