Assessing climate interventions

Phase One focused on identifying and mapping the range of proposed climate interventions aimed at reversing, stabilizing, or delaying climate change impacts in the northern and Arctic regions. The team, made up of experts from UArctic, GRID-Arendal, and the Arctic Centre/University of Lapland, reviewed both well-researched proposals and more speculative or emerging ideas, including those with limited documentation.

To support this, a standardized evaluation matrix was developed to gain an initial understanding of the potential strengths and weaknesses of each proposal. Results from Phase One are available in the summary report Frozen Arctic, and the peer-reviewed article, A survey of interventions of actively conserve the frozen North. 

Phase Two will conduct an academic review of all interventions identified in the rapid assessment, delivering a solid knowledge-based assessment of each intervention. It will expand on the existing criteria, applying a more detailed and comprehensive analysis to each intervention.

Reviews will be conducted by expert groups drawn from several relevant domains of expertise, including—but not limited to—atmosphere, terrestrial systems, oceans, ecosystems, economics, society, business, legal frameworks, and governance. In addition, independent assessments will be carried out by Indigenous Peoples and local communities.

Experts will be primarily recruited from UArctic Thematic Networks, UArctic Chairs, and the broader UArctic membership, along with individuals identified by partner organizations. The first assessment teams will focus on atmosphere, sea ice, and ice sheets.

An independent Indigenous assessment led by the Sámi Council will run in parallel with the academic assessment to offer a complementary perspective on the interventions. The Sámi Council will hold meetings with three distinct groups: Knowledge Holders (those who bring Indigenous Knowledge and grounded input to the assessment), Sámi politicians (those involved in the Sámi parliaments in the Nordic countries), and Sámi experts (those who are well-acquainted with the field).

They will also seek engagement with other Permanent Participants of the Arctic Council, with the aim of building their capacity to conduct similar assessments on their own terms.

To ensure a structured and consistent approach for documenting and evaluating potential interventions, the team developed a set of 12 key criteria (see table below). These served as important benchmarks for assessing each proposal.

A simple 3-point scoring system was applied—low, medium, high; negative, neutral, beneficial—along with qualifying statements to provide context and clarity on the ratings.

Each intervention was researched, documented, and evaluated by a team member, assigned based on their background and expertise. For each, we provided a concise narrative assessment addressing the 12 criteria, accompanied by a brief description of the proposed intervention and the specific challenge it seeks to address.

• In the initial assessment, certain traditional land-based mitigation activities (such as afforestation and peatland restoration), as well as some more experimental carbon dioxide removal measures (for example, biochar), scored relatively high as potential interventions to address climate change.
• Some proposed solutions, such as hydrological cycle modification and carbon dioxide deposition in Antarctica, scored low against most criteria rendering them unsuitable for further consideration at this time.
• Generally, ocean-based measures tended to receive lower scores compared to land-based ones and exhibited higher degrees of uncertainty.
• There have been only a few suggestions on how to mitigate the melt or preserve the current extent of sea ice and ice sheets, and most of these measures come with significant uncertainties or limitations.

• Some atmospheric solar radiation management measures scored very high in the initial assessment, particularly in terms of their potential global impact, although they also come with significant risks.
• The scores of the industry measures varied widely, with those related to methane, in particular, showing many uncertainties.
• Significantly more research is required for most measures, particularly regarding their potential impacts on local communities.
• This preliminary, high-level analysis raises many questions that will be examined in a more comprehensive evaluation during Phase II of the Frozen Arctic project.
• Read the summary report, Frozen Arctic, here
• Read the peer-reviewed article, A survey of interventions of actively conserve the frozen North, here (Please note that this is a correction to the original article published on 25 March 2024.)

The first phase of this project was a “rapid assessment” conducted in a three-month period, limited to a desktop review of the available literature (including academic, grey, opinion forums, etc.). The cut-off date for papers and other information was March 2023; any information appearing after this date has not been included. Documentation of interventions and subsequent evaluations were based on the information available, which, for many solutions, was found to be incomplete. Extensive interviews with experts or stakeholders were not conducted. Each solution was scored by a member of the assessment team and then reviewed by the other team members. An extensive peer review will be undertaken in the next phase of this assessment.

The initial rapid assessment of proposed climate interventions in the polar and northern regions will serve as the foundation for the project's second phase, during which experts will conduct a more detailed evaluation of these interventions. An Advisory Committee team will be assembled to provide strategic leadership for the assessment and the overall direction of the work, ensuring that it remains open, high-quality, transparent, and non-partisan.

Expert groups from various relevant domains, including atmosphere, terrestrial and ocean ecosystems, economics, society, business, legal and governance, will carry out the assessments of the interventions. Independent assessments from Indigenous peoples and local communities will also be included.

This website will be regularly updated to track the progress of the expert groups and provide the latest information on each intervention as it becomes available. Additionally, it will feature a media section for sharing videos and news stories related to the interventions.