Report: United States leads Arctic research in both funding and projects

A UArctic report on funding of Arctic research was presented at a recent well-attended seminar at the Arctic Congress in Bodø, Norway, drawing great interest from the audience. This report underscores the U.S.'s pivotal role in Arctic research, showcasing its leadership in both funding and project initiation. It is part of the UArctic Thematic Network on Research Analytics and Bibliometrics and highlights the U.S.'s dominance in total spending and number of projects.

The report, available on Zenodo, reveals that Earth science, environmental science, and biological science are the top-funded research areas. Medical, social science, and humanities research also feature prominently, with health science, education, and human society among the top 10 subjects. It builds on previous UArctic reports from 2016 and 2017 using data from the Dimensions database.

"This report highlights the leading nations in Arctic research and underscores the importance of consistent funding and collaborative efforts in advancing our understanding of the Arctic region," emphasizes Lena Maria Nilsson, research strategist at the Arctic Center and one of the report's authors as well as the presenter at the Arctic Congress.

The report also discusses the challenges of comparing research funding across countries due to different funding systems. Denmark's limited representation in the Dimensions database contrasts with Sweden's higher proportion of externally funded research.

Sweden's influence is growing and the European Union's impact on Arctic research is significant

Sweden has notably increased its Arctic research funding and now joins the U.S., Canada, Russia, and Norway in the top five countries for Arctic research projects since 2016. The European Union (EU) ranks as the second-largest in terms of funding, following the U.S.

Globally, UArctic-affiliated institutions are key contributors to Arctic research, particularly in countries within the Arctic Council. In Sweden, the difference between UArctic and non-UArctic members is negligible. A more thorough analysis can be conducted if desired, providing deeper insights into the trends and impacts of Arctic research funding.

More information:
Dag W. Aksnes et al, Arctic Research Trends: External Funding 2016-2022, Zenodo (2024). DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.10521422

Provided by Umea University