The balance between critical thinking and paradigm thinking in the Arctic: Scientific cooperation across theoretical divides

Abstract

Abstract Kuhnian’ paradigms are a commonly used method of explaining the structure of knowledge production within the social sciences; however, in some ways, they are also in opposition with Popperian’ critical thinking. The opposing approaches surmount to a comparative analytic method – Kuhn advocates undertaking science that is incommensurable, discipline-specific and ideologically and metaphysically fixed in nature; whilst Popper advocates science that is pluralistic, rebellious, interdisciplinary, and ideologically and metaphysically adaptable. This article utilises a systematic literature review of key peer-reviewed articles, book chapters and online articles from respected sources relating to Arctic scientific cooperation during and since the Cold War in order to provide a qualitative data source for comparative theoretical analysis. This article analyses key trends in Arctic environmental decision-making since the Cold War utilising a comparative critical constructivist framework based on epistemological challenges visible in the “Science Wars” between Thomas Kuhn and Karl Popper. By applying two of the foundations of social science (critical thinking and paradigms) to Arctic International Relations and Geopolitics, this article assesses the state of Arctic science cooperation and; the potential for Arctic science cooperation to solve wicked environmental problems. The article concludes that there are power relationships within the epistemological background to environmental decision-making which impacts science cooperation in the Arctic and; current trends in Arctic decision-making further propels the Arctic along a trajectory of environmental degradation.