This paper explores whether a central plank of the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) – the science criterion – is threatened by anthropogenic climate change. It begins by situating the origins of the ATS within the context of the International Geophysical Year (IGY), and the privileged position that science obtained within first the IGY and later the ATS. This extends to science functioning as the dominant currency through which states may ascend to the level of consultative parties (CPs), the highest level of authority within the ATS. Within this model Antarctica functions as a laboratory, a metaphor with a long history in Antarctica, reinforced by the Madrid Protocol and its strong focus on maintaining environmental boundaries and by a perception that Antarctica otherwise plays a minimal role in global affairs. Much of the research in Antarctica focuses on climate change and indeed has been important in establishing its scope and magnitude. But climate change also threatens both Antarctica itself and – by extension – the many low-lying areas of the world that would be affected by rising sea levels caused by melting Antarctic ice. Given Antarctica may no longer be so removed from the rest of the world, is this sufficient reason to revisit the centrality of science to legitimate participation in Antarctic governance? The paper considers alternatives to the current system, including assigning authority within the ATS to states affected by climate change. It concludes that while the science criterion remains viable, it rests on a moral as well as practical foundation that could be undermined if the right to authority over Antarctica remains disconnected from the actions that cause changes to the continent.

中文翻译：

---

科学标准是否如履薄冰？

本文探讨了南极条约体系 (ATS) 的核心板块——科学标准——是否受到人为气候变化的威胁。它首先将 ATS 的起源置于国际地球物理年 (IGY) 的背景下，以及科学在最初的 IGY 和后来的 ATS 中获得的特权地位。这扩展到科学作为主导货币的作用，国家可以通过它提升到咨询方 (CP) 级别，这是 ATS 内的最高权威级别。在这个模型中，南极洲作为一个实验室发挥作用，这是一个在南极洲有着悠久历史的比喻，马德里议定书及其对维护环境边界的强烈关注以及南极洲在全球事务中发挥最小作用的看法得到了加强。南极洲的大部分研究都集中在气候变化上，而且确实对确定其范围和程度很重要。但气候变化也威胁到南极洲本身，进而威胁到世界上许多低洼地区，这些地区将受到南极冰层融化导致海平面上升的影响。鉴于南极洲可能不再如此远离世界其他地区，是否有足够的理由重新审视科学在合法参与南极治理中的中心地位？该文件考虑了当前系统的替代方案，包括将 ATS 内的权力分配给受气候变化影响的国家。它的结论是，虽然科学标准仍然可行，