Abstract Antarctica is facing intensifying pressures from climate change, industrial fishing, tourism and renewed geopolitical competition, even as scientific activity on the continent reaches unprecedented levels. We argue that this proliferation of research often fails to deliver the integrated, policy‐relevant knowledge needed for precautionary governance, producing what we define as epistemic opacity: a structural misalignment between knowledge production and decision‐making, producing data‐rich but insight‐poor knowledge systems. These weaknesses are magnified by funding systems that prioritize short‐term projects rewarding novelty and visibility over continuity and institutional responsibility, as well as systematic biases in long‐term monitoring. Antarctic science produces vast knowledge, yet its political and institutional architecture prevents this knowledge from becoming understanding or governance. Unless Antarctic science evolves, the 2048 review of the Madrid Protocol may arrive without the legitimacy, data or governance capacity required to confront debates over mineral exploitation and resource governance. We therefore argue that long‐term ecological research must be treated as an institutional obligation rather than a discretionary pursuit of scientific excellence and that Antarctic research infrastructure should be embedded in interoperable observatories more directly linked to existing international coordination mechanisms within the Antarctic Treaty System. Transforming Antarctic science from fragmented observation to coordinated foresight is not just essential for the continent's protection, but for testing the very possibility of collective planetary governance under accelerating change. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.
Morandini et al. (Sat,) studied this question.