Arctic governance

This book seeks to pose and explore a question that sheds light on the contested but largely cooperative nature of Arctic governance in the post-Cold War period: how does power matter – and how has it mattered – in shaping cross-border cooperation and diplomacy in the Arctic? Each chapter functions as a window through which power relations in the Arctic are explored. Issues include how representing the Arctic region matters for securing preferred outcomes, how circumpolar cooperation is marked by regional hierarchies and how Arctic governance has become a global social site in its own right, replete with disciplining norms for steering diplomatic behaviour. This book draws upon Russia’s role in the Arctic Council as an extended case study and examines how Arctic cross-border governance can be understood as a site of competition over the exercise of authority

Ecosystems and Ordering: Exploring the Extent and Diversity of Ecosystem Governance

This article argues that, to grasp how global ordering will be impacted by planetary-level changes, we need to systematically attend to the question of the extent to which and how ecosystems are being governed. Our inquiry builds upon—but extends beyond—the environmental governance measures that have garnered the most scholarly attention so far. The dataset departs from the current literature on regional environmental governance by taking ecosystems themselves as the unit of analysis and then exploring whether and how they are governed, rather than taking a starting point in environmental institutions and treaties. The ecosystems researched—large-scale marine, freshwater, and terrestrial ecosystems—have been previously identified by a globe-spanning, natural science inquiry. Our findings highlight the uneven extent of ecosystem governance—both the general geographic extent and certain “types” of ecosystems seemingly lending themselves more easily to ecosystem-based cooperation. Furthermore, our data highlight that there is a wider range of governance practices anchored in ecosystems than the typical focus on environmental institutions reveals. Of particular significance is the tendency by political actors to establish multi-issue governance anchored in the ecosystems themselves and covering several different policy fields. We argue that, in light of scholarship on ecosystem-anchored cooperation and given the substantive set of cases of such cooperation identified in the dataset, these forms of ecosystem-anchored cooperation may have particularly significant ordering effects. They merit attention in the international relations scholarship that seeks to account for the diversity of global ordering practices.Ecosystems and Ordering: Exploring the Extent and Diversity of Ecosystem GovernancepublishedVersio

Promises, Promises: The Unbuilt Petroleum Environment in Murmansk

The Arctic as a booming oil and gas province has been a predominant geopolitical representation of the region. However, the shale gas revolution in the United States and the drop in oil prices since late 2014 has reduced the viability of many high-cost Arctic oil and gas prospects. Little scholarly attention has been paid to the consequences of pursued but unrealized natural resource-based projects. This article brings literature from geography and science and technology studies into conversation to map out a preliminary research agenda for understanding how these “shelved futures” are still likely to matter in Arctic communities and policymaking. This conceptual argument is bolstered with a short exploratory case study of Murmansk, Russia. The qualitative-interview based case study illustrates two ways in which the Shtokman gas project retained regional significance, even three years after the project was suspended. Specifically, these are 1) a comparatively negative assessment of the broader socio-economic prospects of the region, and 2) expanded and possibly changed understandings on the part of the different stakeholders (business, government, civil society/the public) about their own and others’ potential roles. The semi-structured interviews with stakeholders primarily focused on recollections of petroleum companies’ corporate social responsibility (CSR) efforts, as these efforts were a concrete harbinger of the much-trumpeted oil and gas future

Promises, Promises: The Unbuilt Petroleum Environment in Murmansk

The Arctic as a booming oil and gas province has been a predominant geopolitical representation of the region. However, the shale gas revolution in the United States and the drop in oil prices since late 2014 has reduced the viability of many high-cost Arctic oil and gas prospects. Little scholarly attention has been paid to the consequences of pursued but unrealized natural resource-based projects. This article brings literature from geography and science and technology studies into conversation to map out a preliminary research agenda for understanding how these “shelved futures” are still likely to matter in Arctic communities and policymaking. This conceptual argument is bolstered with a short exploratory case study of Murmansk, Russia. The qualitative-interview based case study illustrates two ways in which the Shtokman gas project retained regional significance, even three years after the project was suspended. Specifically, these are 1) a comparatively negative assessment of the broader socio-economic prospects of the region, and 2) expanded and possibly changed understandings on the part of the different stakeholders (business, government, civil society/the public) about their own and others’ potential roles. The semi-structured interviews with stakeholders primarily focused on recollections of petroleum companies’ corporate social responsibility (CSR) efforts, as these efforts were a concrete harbinger of the much-trumpeted oil and gas future.(Published: January 2017)Citation: E.W. Rowe. “Promises, promises: The unbuilt petroleum environment in Murmansk.” Arctic Review on Law and Politics, Vol. 8, 2017, pp. 1–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.23865/arctic.v8.50

A Governance and Risk Inventory for a Changing Arctic: Background Paper for the Arctic Security Roundtable at the Munich Security Conference 2020

Input report 2020 by the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs / Wilson CenterMany government officials, military leaders, and political observers have proclaimed the rise of a new, post-Cold War global great power competition between the United States, Russia, and China with myriad implications. Using this new reality as the backdrop for the Arctic Security Roundtable at the Munich Security Conference 2020, roundtable participants are asked to explore, discuss, and debate this issue in the context of, and implications for the new globalized Arctic. This paper – a primer of Arctic trends, risks, and institutions – provides a useful starting point for the discussion. Discussing Arctic security in high-level forums is important. One might ask why we should take the time to discuss the Arctic if we are not fighting a war there. The answer is this: there is a new ocean opening up due to global climate change. There is a promising track record of governance cooperation in the region that serves as a basis for pursuing sustainable management of and peace in this new ocean. The point of dialogue – with an emphasis on cooperation, joint governance and outlining risks and potential tipping points – is to make sure that we do not add the Arctic to the already far-too-long list of global hot spots. The Arctic Security Roundtable at the Munich Security Conference 2020 provides one such confidential forum for proactive and constructive debate on Arctic security issues

A Governance and Risk Inventory for a Changing Arctic

In chapter two, Elana Wilson Rowe, Ulf Sverdrup, Karsten Friis, Geir Hønneland, and Mike Sfraga caution against viewing trends of conflict and cooperation in the Arctic in binary terms. While the US and Europe are determined to confront malign activity in the region, all sides continue to “demonstrate a commitment to cooperation and joint solutions to common challenges.” After reviewing the key factors and drivers supporting and challenging stability in the Arctic, the authors remind us that “cooperation in conflict” has long been the norm in the region, allowing cooperative governance to progress despite the enduring NATO-Russia military rivalry. Ongoing dialogue in the region –essential for addressing the regional and global implications of climate change –is poorly served by focusing on “narratives or practices of strategic competition alone.” To avoid “political tipping points” beyond which cooperation will become too difficult, the authors call on policymakers to be more proactive in how they address emerging governance challenges related to security and economic development.publishedVersio

Local Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility for Arctic Petroleum in the Barents Region

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) is promoted and critiqued by many players involved in or opposed to petroleum exploration and extraction, although a common understanding of CSR’s theoretical and practical meanings rarely exists. This paper uses Arctic petroleum in the Barents region (Norway and Russia) to investigate local perceptions of CSR. We conducted open-ended, semi-structured interviews in four locations: Hammerfest, Murmansk, Komi Republic, and Nenets Autonomous Okrug (NAO). Interviewees included the local population, regional and local authorities, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), and petroleum company representatives. The field research suggests that those who gain directly from the petroleum industry and do not directly experience negative impacts were more inclined to be positive about the industry, although overall, general support for petroleum activity was high. In some cases, positive economic benefits resulted in greater tolerance of environmental risk. Sometimes, the industry and government were criticised by locals for failing to support a more equitable distribution of broader economic benefits. Rather than splitting along for-profit/NGO or indigenous/non-indigenous lines, our analysis suggests that those who are closer to the petroleum industry or its benefits, termed ‘insiders’, tend to be more positive than ‘outsiders’. This study is perhaps the first of its kind in its focus on local perceptions of CSR for Arctic petroleum across the Barents region. The findings of this study not only match with that of the previous literature on Arctic petroleum but also provide further practical and theoretical insights by indicating subtleties and nuances within the localities examined.(Published: November 2016)Citation: I. Kelman et al. ‘‘Local Perceptions of Corporate Social Responsibility for Arctic Petroleum in the Barents Region.’’ Arctic Review on Law and Politics, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2016, pp. 152–178. http://dx.doi.org/10.17585/arctic.v7.41

Governance for Earth system tipping points – A research agenda

publishedVersio

Arctic governance

This book seeks to pose and explore a question that sheds light on the contested but largely cooperative nature of Arctic governance in the post-Cold War period: how does power matter – and how has it mattered – in shaping cross-border cooperation and diplomacy in the Arctic? Each chapter functions as a window through which power relations in the Arctic are explored. Issues include how representing the Arctic region matters for securing preferred outcomes, how circumpolar cooperation is marked by regional hierarchies and how Arctic governance has become a global social site in its own right, replete with disciplining norms for steering diplomatic behaviour. This book draws upon Russia’s role in the Arctic Council as an extended case study and examines how Arctic cross-border governance can be understood as a site of competition over the exercise of authority