Changing Arctic. Firm scientific evidence versus public interest in the issue.: Where is the gap?

The authors provide hard evidence for a significant environmental impact of long-distance atmospheric pollution advection to the Arctic. Results from literature and of their research show that the atmospheric inflow of pollution to the Arctic has been increasing over the decades. The authors show evidence that biomass burning has a greater potential impact on radiative budget of the region than the well-known spring Arctic Haze phenomenon, which has always been regarded as the most prominent atmospheric pollution manifestation in the Arctic. Warming, which is observed in the Arctic, results in decreasing ice coverage of the region, which in turn, leads to the major changes in the ecosystem, hence affects human well-being. At the same time, the authors present results of two independent studies, dedicated to the recognition of the awareness and the level of interest of people in eight Arctic countries and among young learners in Poland. The results show that not only the level of public interest is low, but it is both decreasing or, at the best, low to societies. This is in strong contradiction to information available and the daily experience of the societies, which inhabit the region. The authors believe, that such contradiction results from a low level of knowledge and interest of the Arctic and the climate change itself. Finally, the authors provide some hints on how to link hard scientific evidence for Arctic environmental changes with proper communication to the general public, and hence to increase the level of interest among citizens.