Interviewed on EU's new Arctic policy in Science/ Business

EU has just come out with its new Arctic Policy, to which I also gave my input through multiple organisations during the public consultation process. Science/Business was quick to publish its commentary, with yours truly as one of the interviewees.

Arctic is not my central field, but it is nevertheless nice to see the policy give so much importance to science, climate change and indigenous rights, and particularly science infrastructure and coordination. Policies like this are important as guidelines for upcoming EU decisions, but they have an impact even nationally and internationally, even if every one of the sentences is not backed up by EU funding immediately. It is also important ahead of the next IPY, now that the countries are gradually building up their national programs. I found it curious, though, that the IPY was not mentioned in the strategy.

The devil is always in the details - and strategies do not do details. We are yet to see how all of it is going to work out in practice. It was predictable that a lot of attention will go to economy and preparedness, but applied science is also science, and applied defence research is also research.

Funding for the Ocean Eye is important and very welcome, as is improving Copernicus and Galileo satellite systems. Currently, climate science depends a lot on the US infrastructure, and it is not guaranteed that those will remain available. An example at hand is Argo floats that the US government is defunding, risking the global ocean observing system going blind. EU’s compromise with the Ocean Eye is therefore crucial to ensure that the data will continue to be gathered even when the US pulls the plug. By developing independent European monitoring capacities, we can make sure that we will have reliable data and predictions. is equally welcome.  And that there exists climate research infrastructure when the IPY finally arrives in 2032.

Herri is out! Final product of the Decay without mourning

After an inspiring conference in Stellenbosch, Decay project has published its final product, a beautiful special issue of Herri, with many interesting pieces from project members and conference guests alike. WAMUWI MBAO’s report from the conference is an informative summary.

Herri is an online audiovisual journal that allows for publishing visual and multimedia art together with research papers, and it allows multilingual publishing, which is why we thought it was excellent for the project. I published a triptych on my Antarctic work, even though I had presented the Japanese case at the conference. The entire issue is very beautiful, except for my contribution, which I am really not happy with, because half of it is hidden and hard to find.

Don’t miss pressing on the text FILM and POEM, because these are two important parts of the triptych, an audiovisual artwork “tropical dinner” with the mesmerising singing of Inger, and a fresh poem on Antarctic heritage. The problem is, unless you know, it would never occur to you to click on these words, since the entire issue is laid out differently.

Anthropocene Heritage goes United Nations

Most protected heritage sites on this planet are profoundly shaped by the Anthropocene. The processes that so profoundly shape the Earth Systems are the same ones that constitute a threat and endangerment to our commonly cherished cultural and natural sites.

With a piece of space heritage - the moon rock - at the United Nations headquarters in Wien.

At the same time - there is also Anthropocene heritage in a narrow sense: heritage that has been shaped by studying and attending to the global earth system change. Such is the heritage left behind by big science in Antarctica, the laboratory of Earth system change, as well as the historical remains of human activities on the Moon.

On June 15, 2026, I was invited to talk about the protection of Antarctic heritage at the 69thsession of the United Nations’ Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS) in my capacity of the vice-President of the ICOMOS International Polar Heritage Committee. At a side event organised by the UN International Committee for the Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS), the international space delegates had a chance to hear about the protection of historically valuable sites in areas beyond national jurisdiction, and discuss what a protection regime for Lunar monuments and sites could look like.

The publicly available non-paper presented by the speakers, including myself, outlined the specifics of the Antarctic Treaty heritage regime and a possible setup for future lunar heritage protection.

This was also my first UN event to participate. I have by now been at four ATCMs, but the scale and the dynamics of the room with all the NGO and observer participants are something completely different.

Hiroshima lemons - ATCM in Japan

I had been waiting for this so much! ATCM in Japan - almost at home.

Of course, Hiroshima is not Kyoto. Particularly culinarily, I was surprised how little “at home” I felt. No fine tofu dishes - big fat okonomiyaki or yakisoba instead, and, to be true, I have never been a fan of these. Also, lots of gluten in it. But Hiroshima lemons - the lemon juice, jelly or ice cream - were wonderful. And when hiking up the hill to the wonderfully fresh and enchanting Mitaki temple, I got hold of some maccha warabimochi, and had a nice quiet Japan moment with friends.

I had the privilege of presenting Estonia’s Antarctic Education and Outreach activities at the dedicated workshop; the presentation was also submitted to the ATCM as IP132.

Hiroshima is the city of peace and it was no coincidence that the Japanese government had decided to hold the meeting here. Antarctic Treaty is a peace treaty, and Japan did everything they could to broker peace at this meeting. To no avail. As productive as the meeting was for me, it was rather unproductive for the Treaty as a whole. The main contested issues of the last several meetings - the protection of the emperor penguins, and the acceptance of new consultative parties - remained unresolved. The host country communique can be found here. Thorough and rather neutral, its publication was nevertheless contested by “some parties”. The lemons are sometimes very sour, even in Hiroshima.

I have been fascinated by the story of the canary birds taken to Antarctica by the first Japanese Antarctic expedition in 1957 by its overwintering leader Nishibori Eizaburō. The expedition felt weary about the airtightness of the module housing and was worried that the CO2 levels would get too high. In such an event, the canary bird would have given an early warning.

The true canary birds of the Antarctic are the emperor penguins. Except that “some parties” fail to listen to their warning signs. Despite clear signs of population decrease and dependence on reducing sea ice, Russia and China keep blocking their inclusion in the Specially Protected Species list. But do we others really listen? The inclusion in the Specially Protected Species List would allow limiting other anthropogenic pressures on the birds, which is helpful and necessary, but to actually save the emperor penguins, we would need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Now. Instead, we are voting whether our dying canaries should get an undisturbed nest in the mine.

By the way, Nishibori’s canary birds were eaten up by the expedition’s cat, but there seemed to be no oxygen problems in the station anyway.

A long article on the reasons for engaging with Antarctica (in Estonian)

A rather long feature on climate change and geopolitics of Antarctica, and what the Estonian role could be on that continent.

SEAL! - a seal of quality in polar education

The best seal is a seal in its natural habitat. The second best is the consortium SEAL that will train a new generation of polar researchers for Sweden between 2026-2029 (most PhD defences likely in 2030). On the picture: A goddamn excellent seal at Esperanza/Hope Bay waiting to be studied by the SEAL folks in the upcoming five years! (my photo from 2020).

This autumn’s application race is starting to bear fruit. Swedish government launched two important national targeted financing calls in polar research where I have been a co-applicant in a large consortium with four other important polar research environments in this country. This week brought us happy news: our application for a Swedish polar research school has received funding.

The consortium SEAL—bringing together Göteborg University, Uppsala University, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Chalmers University of Technology and Mid Sweden University—has secured national funding from the Swedish Research Council to launch a four‑year research school in polar studies. Starting in 2026, the school will train a cohort of PhD candidates across the natural sciences, engineering, humanities and social sciences, fostering interdisciplinary collaboration on Arctic and Antarctic challenges.

In a truly interdisciplinary setup, SEAL engages in new integrated polar research through joint transdisciplinary courses and doctoral research projects hosted at the partner institutions, each of whom has its own fields of expertise. Göteborg University combines expertise in polar oceanography and ecology with modelling to address sea-level rise and ecosystem shifts. Uppsala contributes competence in glaciology, hydrology and climate modelling, offering possibilities to link ice dynamics with governance or risk assessment. Chalmers adds advanced capabilities in radar remote sensing, AI and sensor development that can be integrated with social science perspectives on Arctic infrastructure or shipping. MIUN provides research in sustainable tourism, Indigenous studies, and polar law, which can be linked with natural science to examine land-use conflicts and community-based monitoring. Most importantly, the consortium will address both Antarctic and Arctic challenges.

I have been the co-applicant on behalf of KTH and its Division of History of Science, Technology and Environment. KTH will lead the polar humanities component, offering courses on polar geopolitics, science‑diplomacy and the ethics of working with Arctic stakeholders. A particular focus is to equip emerging scholars with the skills they need to contribute to Sweden’s presence in science diplomacy fora and decision-making.

Artikkel Roheportaalis

After the meetings and sessions of Antarctica Day were finished, I also gave an interview to the green news portal of one of the bigger media consortia. The title is pretty scandalous - and I guess it worked, guessing from the number of reactions. I do not read the comments myself, as they are often dominated by troll factories. But I am grateful that so many people took their time to read - and I hope something stuck.

Antarctic Treaty and Antarctica Day on radio

Meretund Kuku raadios 6. detsembril käsitles samuti Antarktika Lepingut: “1.detsembril tähistati rahvusvahelist Antarktika päeva, mis meenutab Antarktika lepingu allkirjastamist 1959.aastal. Sel puhul korraldasid Välisministeerium, Kliimaministeerium, Teaduste Akadeemia ning Eesti Polaarklubi ühisseminari „Polaarteadus, keskkond ja poliitika“. Meretunnis räägivad Antarktika lepingu ajaloolisest tähtsusest Eesti polaarklubi tegevjuhi Katrin Savomägi, Teaduste Akadeemia polaaruuringue komisjoni esimees akadeemik Maarja Kruusmaa, välisministeeriumi Arktika erisaadik Toomas Lukk, meteoroloog Priit Tisler, merebioloog Jonne Kotta ja Eesti kontaktisik Antarktika lepingu süsteemis Kati Lindström. Juttu tuleb ka sellest, kas leping on ohus.”

Antarctica Day in Estonia

December 1st is celebrated as Antarctica Day around the world because that is the day when the Antarctic Treaty was signed in 1959, dedicating Antarctica to peace and science. It is also the day when the Estonian Polar Club was established in 1984 - these kinds of clubs were an extreme rarity at that time, but somehow managed to get permission to operate under the Estonian Maritime Museum. It is also the day when in 2017 Ross Sea Marine Protected Area entered into force (signed in 2016) - this is the last time CCAMLR was capable of passing a decision on an MPA. Three other proposed MPAs have not been able to gain a consensus vote despite very solid scientific grounds due to some Parties’ dedicated obstruction of protection measures.

Birgit Njåstad speaking to the audience in the beautiful hall of the Estonian Academy of Sciences. Click on the picture to access the video recording of the day. Photo: Rene Riisalu

To celebrate the core values of peace, science and environmental protection that the Antarctic Treaty upholds, look back at Estonia’s scientific engagement and discuss what this should look like in future, and analyse the complicated geopolitical situation of polar politics, we have organised a half-day symposium in the Estonian Academy of Sciences. Dreamed up during the Milan ATCM, the Symposium united all major stakeholders of Estonian polar affairs. It was organised in collaboration between the Polar Research Committee of the Estonian Academy of Sciences, Estonian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Estonian Ministry of Climate, and Estonian Polar Club. It was a pleasure to welcome the former CEP-chair and a true expert on Antarctic environmental protection, Brigit Njåstad from the Norwegian Polar Institute, to Tallinn for a keynote speech. Equally valuable was the participation of all our international and local panelists. (Click on the picture above to access the recording of the day!)

Leading the panel discussion. Photo: Rene Riisalu

For myself, this meant chairing a panel on Antarctic Environmental Protection, Climate Change and Europe, several media engagements (including appearance in the morning program of Kanal 2, see 59:30 ff) and supporting the social media campaign of the institutions with expert advice. While we obviously cannot solve the geopolitical deadlock of the Antarctic Treaty System, we could hopefully contribute to increased awareness of the Antarctic politics, particularly the Madrid Protocol, and the needs of Antarctic science in Estonia.

Appointed as the IPHC Antarctic Treaty Liaison Officer

I am humbled and excited to be appointed as the ICOMOS International Polar Heritage Committee’s Antarctic Treaty System Liaison Officer.

International Polar Heritage Committee is an international scientific committee working with polar heritage within the International Council of Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) and I have been serving in this committee as an expert member since 2019. In my capacity as a Liaison Officer to the Antarctic Treaty System, I will work with advocating on Antarctic heritage matters within the Antarctic Treaty System and facilitating the communication between the Treaty and the IPHC.

Currently, several important heritage issues are under scrutiny within the Antarctic Treaty, such as the impact of climate change or tourism to the heritage sites. I hope to contribute with not only the knowledge of individual heritage sites and today’s Antarctic Treaty politics, but also with my knowledge of the historical development of Antarctic Treaty heritage instruments.

Photo: Georg Savisaar (Estonian Public Broadcasting)

sum-up of Antarctic activities in 2023

2023 is soon drawing to close and it is time to look back to the year of Antarctic activities as well. It is probably right to say that the less is published on the blog, the more is going on, as all the energy goes to the world outside the www.

In May and early June this year, I had the honour to participate in the Estonian delegation to the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting (ATCM) held in Helsinki. From the same month I serve also as the Estonian contact point to the Antarctic Treaty.

Antarctic Treaty meetings are prime scientific diplomacy, so researchers have also been present at its diplomatic meetings, but it was a pleasure to see Estonia re-emerge at the ATCMs and signal that we are still committed to and interested in rules-based international order and environmental protection of the Antarctic environment. One of the important messages that Helsinki ATCM tried to signal was the urgency of climate change in Antarctica and the fact that what happens in Antarctica impacts the entire world, and it felt good to see that much of the research that we have been doing is relevant this global diplomatic system. Also, after all these years of going through tens and thousands of documents from and about the ATCMs in all imaginable archives around the globe, it felt really nice to see this system in action.

Climate Change and Cultural Heritage in Antarctica, XXV Science Afternoon of the U.S. Embassy in Estonia and the Estonian Academy of Sciences "Polar Research in Estonia" held on September 20, 2023

Estonia is a non-consultative member of the Antarctic Treaty, but has not ratified the Environmental Protocol yet. To draw attention to the polar research in Estonia and remind the decision-makers of the necessity to join the Environmental Protocol in order to be able to partake in the decision-making in Antarctica, the Estonian Academy of Sciences and the Embassy of United States of America in Estonia organised XXV Science Afternoon,"Polar Research in Estonia" on September 20, 2023.

You should be able to come to my talk by clicking on the picture. Polar science is by its nature big science, requiring big infrastructure and big money - things that Estonia does not have much of. Transition from being a part of Soviet Union’s Antarctic program with bottomless resources and from the optimistic economic growth of the early 2000s has not been painless. In short-term project-based international science where most of Estonian scientists need to work with time-limited grants in other countries’ programs to be able to do Antarctic science, it is hard to foster the next generation of Antarctic scientists and to even say where Estonian Antarctic science ends and others’ starts. None of my work would have been possible without the scholars in Argentina and Sweden whom I work with. However, conscious efforts in fostering a new generation is something that the Polar Research Committee of the Estonian Academy of Sciences will need to work with in the coming years.

Presenting the role of environmental NGOs in Antarctic mineral negotiations at the SCAR Standing Committee on Antarctic Humanities and Social Sciences (SC-HASS) conference in Lisbon as well as the European Society of Environmental History biannual conference in Bern almost feel like non-events in this line but were very giving. Another talk that gave me a lot of joy was a presentation in Swedish at the S A Andrées Polardagar at Grenna Museum and Polar Centre. It is not that often I get to speak to the Swedish audience outside the university and it feels good to give back to the people whose taxes have financed my research for many years. On the request of the tireless Håkan Joriksson who runs the museum and the polar days, I spoke on the past, present and future of the Antarctic Treaty to a very passionate crowd of Antarctic aficionados.

Environmental History Today on air again

During the season 2023-2025 I have the honour to serve as the Chair for the Council of Regional Representatives for the European Society of Environmental History (ESEH) and during this period, the CRR will be hosting the Environmental History Today seminar series. Each month, one region will be discussing what is going on in their environmental history - with book launches, presentations, round tables and whatever format the regions consider important. The seminar series is currently chaired by myself representing the Baltic States, Anna Olenenko from Ukraine and Nina Vieira from Portugal.

Today, the series has kicked off with the book launch by Viktor Pál, Tuomas Räsänen and Mikku Saikku. the next in line will be my very own Baltic region with a presentation by Karl Hein on Animal Rights in Interwar Estonia.

Environmental History Today seminar series on the ESEH web page

Update on the most important

Very long time has passed since the last post and that is no doubt because the times were very busy!

Starting from the most important (for myself) - on December 9th, 2021 I became a Docent in the History of Science, technology and Environment with specialisation in Environmental Humanities and uses of history. Docent is an academic degree above PhD used in the Nordic countries, similar to habilitas in Germany, but with a bigger focus on teaching competence. It is an important step in the academic career here in the North, but most importantly, I have now got a paper for what has been a reality for many years: I do historical research.

Public seminar on the history of epidemics at Estonian National Museum & Postimees

In the beginning of June I had the honour to speak at the Estonian National Museum at their public lecture day on epidemics, Jumala viha ja juudasitt. The public symposium was connected to the part of the permanent exhibition that speaks of health and disease in Estonian environmental history, which I once upon a time curated together with Liisi Jääts and the rest of the Estonian Centre for Environmental History, KAJAK. The epidemics section has for obvious reasons become popular over the last 1,5 years (I wrote about it once before), but 2021 was also 165 years from the first valioration in Tartu and 10 years from founding KAJAK, so the symposium was very timely. Apart from myself, the speakers lineup included soon-to-be president of Estonia but then the director of the Estonian National Museum, Alar Karis, curator of the environmental history section of the exhibition, Liisi Jääts, as well as Lea Leppik, Reet Hiiemäe and Ken Kalling - all researchers who have dedicated a considerable amount of their careers to studying Estonian medical history.

While we did quite extensive background research into different disease statistics, epidemics, treatment methods and public health campaigns on Estonian territory for the exhibition, I do not consider myself a major specialist in the field. My talk was more about wider history of ideas concerning disease and treatment which also provides the narrative roadmap for the exhibition from the folkloric disease conception, God’s will or miasmas to pathogen-based health care with sterilisation as an ideal. It also served as a popular reminder of how common epidemics have been here and how little traditional great herbalists could help in the event of an epidemic. Something which is increasingly forgotten, particularly among the new spirituality seekers. I also concentrated on the difference between biomedical, phenomenological and social definition of disease and the impact that the discrepancy between the three may have on how people react vis-a-vis epidemics and public health measures.

The talk and in fact the whole symposium can be watched at the website of the Estonian National Museum and parts of it were published in the Estonian daily Postimees. Which parts, I do not really know because the published version is behind the paywall and the public part includes the end of the manuscript I sent in. At least this time the title was not changed beyond recognition!

Public symposium on epidemic in Estonian history at Estonian National Museum.

New project!

Once again great news around here: Lize-Marié van de Watt, Lizabé Lambrechts and others, including myself have been awarded a new grant, Decay without mourning: Future-thinking heritage practices. The grant was received in the joint call Global Issues - Integrating Different Perspectives on Heritage and Change by Riksbankens Jubileumsfond, together with Fondazione Compagnia di San Paolo and Volkswagen Foundation. Altogether only eight projects with the total of 11 million of Euros was granted in this extremely competitive international call, and our share is € 1 437 200. For me it means some exciting work both with Japan and Antarctica, trying to work with heritage practices that embrace change and decay instead of unachievable permanence. The project will run between 2022 and 2025. Initially planned preparatory workshop in South Africa had to be cancelled for the obvious reasons, but hopefully the four years are long enough for the travel bans to be lifted, so that I can both do my field work and meet the other participants.

More can be read from here

Japanese traditional heritage practices offer many examples of decay and mending as a process that adds value to the item, instead of reducing the value.

On the picture: Traditional and modern (Macroflex!) mending techniques of hitsugi trees at Fuji Yoshida Shrine, Japan. The site is part of the Fuji-san world heritage site. Photo taken in 2016.

member of the polar research committee of the Estonian Academy of Sciences!

Now it’s official!

As of May 25, 2021 I have ben officially appointed a member of the Polar Research Committee of the Estonian Academy of Sciences!

The Polar Research Committee is a body that coordinates polar research in Estonia and acts as as a contact to European Polar Board. It is also the scientific research institution that coordinates Estonian Antarctic engagement, which is the reason why I joined their ranks.

Polar committee is affiliated to the Estonian Academy of Sciences, but not all the members need to be academicians. I am glad to see though that the all-the-too-male composition of the committee has improved with the new appointments this year.

In the bed of the receding glacier at Snow Hill island, ducking from the bird attack. Nordenskjöld’s overwintering station and our camp far in the background, Jonathan and Dag droning the receding glacier line in the middle ground.

Speaking on Antarctic heritage at First Argentine Days of Antarctic Humanities and Social Sciences

On 21-23 of April, the Argentine Antarctic Institute and Universidad Nacional de Tierra del Fuego held an online conference - the First Days of Antarctic Humanities and Social Sciences. The conference was held in Spanish and its three days were packed with presentations of all possible topics on Antarctica and Argentine Sub-Antarctic. First intended to be a hybrid event, it had to be taken fully online because of the COVID situation. This was surely lamentable for all of the local participants who would have loved to meet and chat, but made participation certainly easier and more giving to those joining from distance. There were quite many foreigners, but as always, when joining any of the national Antarctic events, I must but lament that so much of this research never reaches scholars in other languages. Almost endemic nationalism of the research about this international and multinational continent is quite lamentable. At all conferences can some works be more intellectually sophisticated and some others more dedicated to searching for elusive details of some old expedition. Not all academic cultures are equally comfortable with high theory and politics which is the dominant Angloamerican mode of academic writing. But it is always valuable knowledge and I feel sometimes truly sorry that not many other people than me can with ease participate at Spanish, Russian, English, Japanese and Scandinavian conferences. Polish, Chinese, French and German are unfortunately off limits for me so far, even if I can figure out quite a bit in written documents in these languages.

This time I presented the work we have done over the last years in the Creating Antarctic Heritage project in tracing the birth of the Historic Sites and Monuments instrument of the Antarctic Treaty, based on the archival evidence from New Zealand (thanks to Bob Frame!), and the documents I’ve collected from Chile, UK and, most importantly, Japan, where the first List was consolidated. Several important discussions appear in the documents: How old is a historic site and monument? How should they be called (what is a vestige?!!!)? How much of the monuments must be preserved to merit inclusion? And can refuges be listed as historic sites and monuments? And of course, when all complicated political hurdles have been passed and the list is ready to be approved, Antarctic Treaty does what it is best at: gets stuck with one insignificant word that has nothing to do with the heritage instrument itself and puts the whole instrument in danger. This time, in. 1970, the word was ‘DDR’ which US could not accept in the documents and Soviet Union refused to remove.

Those who speak Spanish, can listen to the presentation on youtube through the link below. I have to say that one of the hardest moments in working with transnational methodology is deciding how many juicy and rude comments from internal documents should one disclose? I am probably the least diplomatic person ever, but nevertheless feel that if I want to gain the confidence of the diplomatic archives, it is probably best not to quote these statements word for word. Believe me, sometimes this is hard.

Participating at the KTH digital teaching conference

Last year was teaching heavy. Digital teaching heavy. And more so than normal.

This week KTH held a conference on digital learning with the pandemics in focus. Great keynotes and hand-on tips were very welcome to everybody who’s been trying to make sense of the jungle of new digital tools emerging on the market. The Division of History decided to make their contribution: Siegfried Evens organised a session where me, Katarina Larsen, Siegfried himself and Per Högselius summed up the takeaway points from our two biggest courses, Energy Systems in Society and Swedish Society.

Achim Klüppelberg has summed up the discussions on the Division blog.

Embed Block

Enter a valid embed URL or code.