Joint stewardship of the Barents Sea: Russian and Norwegian policy expectations for preventing offshore oil spills

Thesis (M.A.) University of Alaska Fairbanks, 2016As Arctic environmental conditions fluctuate, ongoing economic-related agreements established for the Barents Region continue to support and attract Norwegian and Russian oil-producing expeditions within the shared maritime zone. Increased industrial activity throughout the Circumpolar North heightens the need to understand the factors that influence policies responsible for protecting the environment – in particular, preventive measures. Agency theory provides the framework for an analysis of various dynamics that influence the Norwegian and Russian governments (principals) as they develop and enforce rules that regulate petroleum industries (agents). The research question asks about differences between the prevention policies of the two nations even though both acknowledge a very similar need to protect the Barents. Since the regulatory and governance structures cannot fully explain the differences between the two countries’ prevention policies, the hypothesis presents an argument that the strategic goals of Norway and Russia in the global political economy provide sufficient conditions for policy divergence. This research presents case studies of economic and environmental factors that influence how Russia and Norway develop energy-related prevention policies in the Barents Sea. The findings suggest that differing strategic goals between the two countries influence their oil spill prevention policies. Russia’s oil spill prevention policy enables it to maintain high production levels that it can leverage to further its geopolitical aims. Norway’s more cautious prevention policies promote domestic economic stability. In a progressively interdependent world, this study contributes insight into contemporary international relations regarding aspects of partnerships, energy economics, and geostrategic policy

The Russian Arctic Council Chairmanship: National Security Considerations in the Shadow of Regional Cooperation

From May 2021 to 2023, Russia will hold the chairmanship of the Arctic Council for the second time in the forum’s history. As chair, it will lead the collective efforts of the foremost regional deliberative body, comprised of the eight Arctic nations, six permanent participants representing Arctic Indigenous Peoples, six working groups, and thirty-nine observer states, intergovernmental organizations, and non-governmental organizations. This represents a critical opportunity for the host country to orchestrate focused attention on the importance of the Arctic through its particular lens

Exploring a nexus of national and human security: food and energy challenges in the U.S. Arctic

Changes in the U.S. Arctic are challenging both the national and human security dynamics of the region. Historically, the region’s significance had been defined by national security concerns, but the emerging concept of human security has come to provide a useful framework through which to define and demonstrate the nexus between the two. This paper provides an overview of the relationship between national and human security and the concerns shared by individuals working in both areas, with a more narrowed focus on the interrelated issues of both food and energy security within the U.S. Arctic. Considering the substantial overlap of aspects of food and energy on both national as well as human security, an analysis of the relationships involving each provides meaningful and extended context of the term "security" for the Arctic region

Exploring a Nexus of National and Human Security: Food and Energy Challenges in the U.S. Arctic

Changes in the U.S. Arctic are challenging both the national and human security dynamics of the region. Historically, the region’s significance had been defined by national security concerns, but the emerging concept of human security has come to provide a useful framework through which to define and demonstrate the nexus between the two. This paper provides an overview of the relationship between national and human security and the concerns shared by individuals working in both areas, with a more narrowed focus on the interrelated issues of both food and energy security within the U.S. Arctic. Considering the substantial overlap of aspects of food and energy on both national as well as human security, an analysis of the relationships involving each provides meaningful and extended context of the term “security” for the Arctic region

Russian and the Arctic

The topic of this issue is Russia and the Arctic. Firstly, Troy J. Bouffard and P. Whitney Lackenbauer discuss Russia’s 2021–2023 chairmanship of the Arctic Council, positing that Russia is not seeking to revise Arctic governance structures or undermine regional peace; instead, Moscow seeks to define the region in its preferred terms; secondly, Alexander Sergunin examines Russia’s policy priorities for its chairmanship in the Arctic Council and the possible implications thereof for the region. The author argues that Russia’s Arctic Council presidential agenda will likely include the following priorities: climate change action; sustainable development; social cohesiveness and connectivity in the region; indigenous peoples; conservation of biodiversity; science diplomacy; and partial institutional reform of the Council. Moscow will not, however, renew its earlier efforts to transform the Council from an intergovernmental forum into a full-fledged international organization and introduce military security issues to the Council’s agenda.Das Thema dieser Ausgabe ist Russland und die Arktis. Erstens analysieren Troy J. Bouffard und P. Whitney Lackenbauer Russlands Vorsitz im Arktischen Rat 2021–2023 und postulieren, dass Russland nicht anstrebt, die Regierungsstrukturen in der Arktis zu ändern oder den regionalen Frieden zu untergraben; stattdessen versuche Moskau, die Region gemäß seinen bevorzugten Konzepten zu definieren; zweitens untersucht Alexander Sergunin die politischen Prioritäten Russlands für seinen Vorsitz im Arktischen Rat und deren mögliche Auswirkungen auf die Region. Der Autor argumentiert, dass die Agenda des Präsidenten des Arktischen Rates in Russland wahrscheinlich die folgenden Prioritäten umfassen wird: Maßnahmen zum Klimawandel; nachhaltige Entwicklung; sozialer Zusammenhalt und Konnektivität in der Region; indigene Völker; Erhaltung der biologischen Vielfalt; Wissenschaftsdiplomatie; und teilweise institutionelle Reform des Rates. Moskau wird jedoch Bemühungen, den Rat von einem zwischenstaatlichen Forum in eine vollwertige internationale Organisation umzuwandeln und Fragen der militärischen Sicherheit auf die Tagesordnung des Rates zu setzen, nicht wiederholen.ISSN:1863-042

Arctic Sea Ice Decline and Geoengineering Solutions: Cascading Security and Ethical Considerations

Climate change is generating sufficient risk for nation-states and citizens throughout the Arctic to warrant potentially radical geoengineering solutions. Currently, geoengineering solutions such as surface albedo modification or aerosol deployment are in the early stages of testing and development. Due to the scale of deployments necessary to enact change, and their preliminary nature, these methods are likely to result in unforeseen consequences. These consequences may range in severity from local ecosystem impacts to large scale changes in available solar energy. The Arctic is an area that is experiencing rapid change, increased development, and exploratory interest, and proposed solutions have the potential to produce new risks to both natural and human systems. This article examines potential security and ethical considerations of geoengineering solutions in the Arctic from the perspectives of securitization, consequentialism, and risk governance approaches, and argues that proactive and preemptive frameworks at the international level, and especially the application of risk governance approaches, will be needed to prevent or limit negative consequences resulting from geoengineering efforts. Utilizing the unique structures already present in Arctic governance provides novel options for addressing these concerns from both the perspective of inclusive governance and through advancing the understanding of uncertainty analysis and precautionary principles