The year 2020 has urged Humanity to rethink the sustainable development agenda. The COVID-19 pandemic rearticulated the gaps in implementing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to benefit remote regions and and their populations including Arctic Indigenous Peoples. In this brief communication, we want to draw attention to the need of reshaping UN SDGs in light of the ‘new normal’ to promote sustainable development of Arctic Indigenous communities. The UN Agenda 2030 sets priorities that have relevance to the Arctic, with its rapidly changing environmental and social systems that are interlinked to other parts of the globe. Successful implementation of SDGs in the Arctic can only be accomplished through an open and pluralistic dialog among global and Arctic stakeholders with the engagement, equal partnership, and under the guidance of the Arctic Indigenous Peoples. This process, we argue, could start by revising the existing 17 goals and creating five new ones (Sustainable Governance and Indigenous Rights, Resilient Indigenous Societies, Livelihoods and Knowledge systems, Life on Ice and Permafrost, Equity and Equality in Access to Natural Resources, and Investment in Youth and Future Generations) that represent Indigenous People’s knowledge and aspirations for sustainable development. By indigenizing SDGs in the Arctic, we will not only build the Arctic’s own sustainable development framework but attain greater equity and expand the knowledge base of sustainable development globally.

In this paper, we argue that Indigenous data sovereignty (IDS) is vital for addressing threats to ecosystems, as well as for Indigenous Peoples re-establishing and maintaining sovereignty over their territories. Indigenous knowledge-holders face pressure from non-Indigenous scientists to collaborate to address environmental problems, while the open data movement is pressuring them to make their data public. We examine the role of IDS in the context of cumulative effects and climate change that threaten salmon-bearing ecosystems in British Columbia, guided by content from an online workshop in June 2022 and attended exclusively by a Tier-1 audience (First Nations knowledge-holders and/or technical staff working for Nations). Attention to data is required for fruitful collaborations between Indigenous communities and non-Indigenous researchers to address the impacts of climate change and the cumulative effects affecting salmon-bearing watersheds in BC. In addition, we provide steps that Indigenous governments can take to assert sovereignty over data, recommendations that external researchers can use to ensure they respect IDS, and questions that external researchers and Indigenous partners can discuss to guide decision-making about data management. Finally, we reflect on what we learned during the process of co-creating materials.

This perspective presents a statement of the 10th International Congress of Arctic Social Sciences Indigenous Knowledge and knowledge co-production panel and discussion group, 20 July 2021. The statement is designed to serve as a characterization of the state-of-the-art and guidance for further advancement of Indigenous Knowledge and knowledge co-production in the Arctic. It identifies existing challenges and provides specific recommendations for researchers, Indigenous communities, and funding agencies on meaningful recognition and engagement of Indigenous Knowledge systems.

This article focuses on the “second wave” of the COVID-19 pandemic in the Arctic and examines spatiotemporal patterns between July 2020 and January 2021. We analyse available COVID-19 data at the regional (subnational) level to elucidate patterns and typology of Arctic regions with respect to the COVID-19 pandemic. This article builds upon our previous research that examined the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic between February and July 2020. The pandemic’s “second wave” observed in the Arctic between September 2020 and January 2021 was severe in terms of COVID-19 infections and fatalities, having particularly strong impacts in Alaska, Northern Russia and Northern Sweden. Based on the spatiotemporal patterns of the “second wave” dynamics, we identified 5 types of the pandemic across regions: Shockwaves (Iceland, Faroe Islands, Northern Norway, and Northern Finland), Protracted Waves (Northern Sweden), Tidal Waves (Northern Russia), Tsunami Waves (Alaska), and Isolated Splashes (Northern Canada and Greenland). Although data limitations and gaps persist, monitoring of COVID-19 is critical for developing a proper understanding of the pandemic in order to develop informed and effective responses to the current crisis and possible future pandemics in the Arctic. Data used in this paper are available at https://arctic.uni.edu/arctic-covid-19.

Arctic research faces unprecedented disruptions due to COVID-19. This ‘pause’ gives an opportunity to reflect on the current state and the future of Arctic science and move towards a more resilient, thus equitable, coordinated, safe and locally-embedded Arctic research enterprise. Arctic science has been greatly affected by COVID-19. This comment looks forward to how Arctic science could be conducted in the future.

Cities play an important role in promoting sustainable development. In the Arctic, most particularly in Russia, cities concentrate the majority of residents and economic activity. Sustainable development initiatives are often deployed through programs that operate at different spatial and jurisdictional scales. While national and regional policies and programs have received some attention, the understanding of urban development policies and programs at the municipal level in the Arctic is still limited. This paper presents a case study of municipal sustainable development programming in Arctic cities and examines municipal programs in two larger Russian northern cities: Murmansk and Magadan. While both are regional capitals and the most populous urban settlements in their regions, the cities have district historical, economic and geographical contexts. Through the content analysis of municipal programs active in 2018, we aim to understand, systematize and compare the visions and programmatic actions of the two municipalities on sustainable development. Ten sustainable development programming categories were identified for using a UN SDG-inspired approach modeled after the City of Whitehorse, Canada. While the programs in Magadan and Murmansk are quite different, we observed striking commonalities that characterize the national, regional and local models of urban sustainable development policy making in the Russian Arctic.