433
Arctic Yearbook 2015
which the EU’s general approach towards the North is still a matter of debate and its policy still an
emerging one – a policy in search for a clear goal and a purpose. This painful and discouraging process
of elaborating a clear statement of the EU’s Arctic ambitions, contrasts with the otherwise appreciable
progress in the EU’s Arctic-specific activities. The EU’s funding for Arctic research is still widely
prized. The EU’s representatives in the work of Arctic Council have been able to provide visible
inputs, in particular as regards short-lived climate forcers (Joint Research Centre), birds (European
Environment Agency) or to the work of PAME (DG Move and the European Maritime Safety
Agency). Although leaving much to be desired, the dialogue with Arctic indigenous peoples has
become regular and more substantial. Recently, consultations regarding streamlining EU Arctic
funding have been carried out. While characterized by far too many deficiencies, the very fact of
conducting such consultations deserves acknowledgment.
Despite this progress, during eight years, the EU’s three main institutions (the Council, Commission
and European Parliament) have appeared to be in