Rights-based Approaches and Bilateral Aid Agencies: More Than a Metaphor?

It could be argued that the rights based approach … is no more than ametaphor; a concept that catalyses a set of values into a phrase that many people can adopt and adapt. It is a general statement in favour of equitable development, involving widespread participation of those with no direct control of, or access to, the power of the state … If we still take rights as a legal concept then much of what passes as rights based is unlikely to be successful because there are often no state bodies committed to meeting the obligations implied. There is also a sense in that the “emperor has no clothes ” as there are too many people arguing about the details of what a rights approach should be and how it should be operationalised.Meanwhile, this is happening in the absence of any clear idea of what it is they are engaging with. (Pratt 2003: 2)

Games in the Arctic: applying game theory insights to Arctic challenges

We illustrate the benefits of game theoretic analysis for assisting decision-makers in resolving conflicts and other challenges in a rapidly evolving region. We review a series of salient Arctic issues with global implications—managing open-access fisheries, opening Arctic areas for resource extraction and ensuring effective environmental regulation for natural resource extraction—and provide insights to help reach socially preferred outcomes. We provide an overview of game theoretic analysis in layman's terms, explaining how game theory can help researchers and decision-makers to better understand conflicts, and how to identify the need for, and improve the design of, policy interventions. We believe that game theoretic tools are particularly useful in a region with a diverse set of players ranging from countries to firms to individuals. We argue that the Arctic Council should take a more active governing role in the region by, for example, dispersing information to “players” in order to alleviate conflicts regarding the management of common-pool resources such as open-access fisheries and natural resource extraction. We also identify side payments—that is, monetary or in-kind compensation from one party of a conflict to another—as a key mechanism for reaching a more biologically, culturally and economically sustainable Arctic future. By emphasizing the practical insights generated from an academic discipline, we present game theory as an influential tool in shaping the future of the Arctic—for individual researchers, for inter-disciplinary research and for policy-makers themselves