New database exposes shadow networks behind Russia’s Arctic agenda

A new open-source database developed by the research group Arctida is shedding light on the hidden power structures shaping governance in the Russian Arctic. The tool, presented as a dynamic network graph, maps formal and informal relationships between over a thousand individuals and nearly 100 Arctic-related organizations—offering researchers, journalists and activists unprecedented insight into who really wields influence in the region.

“We created this tool to increase transparency around decision-making in the Russian Arctic,” Anastasia Martynova, an analyst at Arctida told Arctic Today. “Our goal was to help identify which actors—whether in government, business, or civil society—exert the most influence and how they are connected.”

Visualizing influence

At the core of the Arctida platform is a graph-based interface where nodes represent individuals and edges signify relationships. Connections within Arctic-related institutions are given higher weight, ensuring the most influential regional players rise to the center of the map. The project currently includes 89 Arctic-related organizations and more than 1,300 individuals affiliated with them.

“All data was manually verified using multiple sources,” Anastasia said. “Even informal connections—like shared business ventures—are carefully checked.”

Still, the team acknowledges the limitations of the tool. While it reveals who is connected to whom, it does not evaluate the strength or consequences of these ties.

“Researchers must do the hard work of case-by-case analysis to understand the significance of a connection,” she added.

Key findings

Arctida’s research has already led to major insights. Among them:

• Securitization of Arctic governance: A 2024 restructuring of the Maritime Board—a key Arctic policy body—saw it removed from government oversight and placed under direct presidential control. Under the leadership of former Security Council chief Nikolai Patrushev, the board shifted focus toward national security. The number of board members with backgrounds in the military or intelligence services increased from 8% to 28%.

• RAIPON’s ties to the State: The Russian Association of Indigenous Peoples of the North (RAIPON), a key organization claiming to represent Indigenous interests, shows signs of being a GONGO (government-organized NGO). Arctida found that 88.1% of RAIPON’s leadership has held public service roles, and many have received funding from state-linked extractive companies.

• Environmental GONGOs and greenwashing: Independent environmental NGOs in the Russian Arctic have largely been replaced by government-friendly alternatives. These environmental GONGOs are deeply intertwined with state authorities and the extractive sector, often serving roles in reputation management and corporate greenwashing.

Though built for investigative depth, Arctida emphasizes that its database is not a shortcut.

“This is a tool to guide researchers, not to replace research,” Anastasia stressed. “It shows, for instance, that someone once worked at a mining company subsidiary. But whether that influenced their decisions later is something only deeper study can determine.”

Looking ahead

For now, Arctida focuses on Russia’s Arctic regions, but includes select international organizations—such as the Arctic Council—whose influence crosses borders. Expanding beyond the Arctic is not on the agenda, the team says.

Users are encouraged to report errors or outdated data, as the database continues to evolve.

“We see this as a collaborative resource,” Anastasia said. “It can help inform investigations, amplify Indigenous voices, and support environmental accountability.”

As geopolitical tensions and climate stakes rise in the Arctic, the question of who governs—and whose interests are served—has never been more urgent. Arctida’s work provides one of the clearest windows yet into the architecture of Arctic power.