Last reviewed September 2, 2026
Climate decisions made far from Antarctica depend on measurements made there. Ice, ocean, atmosphere, and ecosystems must be observed consistently before their changes can be detected, explained, projected, or acted upon.
Proposition
Sustained observation of Antarctica and the Southern Ocean should be treated as global public infrastructure. Governments, national Antarctic programs, research funders, and international scientific bodies should plan for the continuity, coordination, and public usefulness of those observations—not only for the completion of individual projects.
“Public infrastructure” describes a function, not an owner. Antarctic stations, satellites, autonomous instruments, research vessels, data centers, and the people who operate them may belong to different nations and institutions. The measurements form a shared system whose value crosses borders.
Supporting evidence
The World Meteorological Organization describes the global climate observing system—from satellites to Antarctic research stations—as a shared public good. It identifies long-term reliability, coordination, secure data streams, storage, sharing, and accessibility as parts of the same problem.
The Southern Ocean Observing System exists to facilitate the sustained collection and delivery of essential observations of Southern Ocean change. Its mission reflects a practical truth: no single expedition, institution, or country can observe the system adequately on its own.
The legal and scientific culture of Antarctica already recognizes the public value of knowledge. Article III of the Antarctic Treaty provides that scientific observations and results from Antarctica shall be exchanged and made freely available. The Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research’s data policy extends that principle into modern expectations for preservation, accessibility, interoperability, and responsible stewardship.
Continuity is especially important. A missed direct observation usually cannot be recreated later. Gaps can sometimes be estimated from neighboring data or models, but those estimates are not the measurements that would have been made. A break in a long record may impair the ability to distinguish a short-lived event from a persistent change, evaluate a model, or recognize a threshold while it is being crossed.
Recommended action
Krigsvold therefore supports five practical commitments:
- Protect long-term records. Fund essential observing programs on multi-year horizons and require continuity plans for measurements whose scientific value depends on an unbroken time series.
- Publish risks to continuity. National programs and funders should identify vulnerable instruments, missions, data services, and records before a loss becomes irreversible.
- Coordinate internationally. New investments should fill documented gaps, use compatible standards, and strengthen the observing system as a whole.
- Preserve and share the data. Publicly funded observations should be accompanied by durable archives, usable metadata, documented methods, and timely access.
- Fund the full chain. Instruments without calibration, maintenance, transmission, quality control, stewardship, and skilled personnel do not constitute a reliable observing system.
Limits and tradeoffs
Treating observation as infrastructure does not mean preserving every project or instrument indefinitely. Programs should still be evaluated for scientific value, duplication, cost, safety, reliability, and environmental impact. Priorities will be necessary.
Nor is this an argument for an unlimited permanent footprint in Antarctica. Satellites, autonomous platforms, shared logistics, and carefully designed remote systems may sometimes provide better coverage with less risk and less disturbance. In other cases, direct field observation is irreplaceable. The choice should follow the measurement need.
Open access also requires disciplined stewardship. Quality control, complete metadata, durable repositories, and clear provenance take time and money. Those functions are part of the infrastructure rather than administrative residue to be funded only if a project has money left over.
Finally, observation does not itself decide policy. It narrows uncertainty, tests explanations, and makes consequences more visible. Governments and communities must still make judgments about risk, cost, responsibility, and action.
Publication and review
Published September 2, 2026. Evidence and links last reviewed September 2, 2026.
This statement is based principally on the WMO’s work on the Global Climate Observing System, the Southern Ocean Observing System’s mission, Article III of the Antarctic Treaty, and SCAR’s 2022 Data Policy. Questions, contrary evidence, and correction requests may be sent to count@krigsvold.org. Material corrections will be recorded on the Corrections page.