Limits and possibilities of the Arctic Council in a rapidly changing scene of Arctic governance

Polar Record ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
pp. 146-156 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timo Koivurova
Keyword(s):  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Arctic Council ◽  
Protection Strategy ◽  
Testing Period ◽  
Negotiation Tactics ◽  
Future Challenges ◽  
Short Time ◽  
The Eu

ABSTRACTIn a very short time, discussions on Arctic governance have moved from being a topic of scholarly attention and NGO advocacy onto the agendas of states and of the European Union (EU). Increasingly, the various alternatives propounded by a diverse set of actors over what Arctic governance should look like appear as pre-negotiation tactics, a type of testing period before a regime change. The article examines whether the still predominant inter governmental forum, the Arctic Council, is facing a threat of being supplanted by other forms of governance. It will study how resistant the Arctic Council, and its predecessor the 1991 Arctic environmental protection strategy, are to change in order to understand whether the council could renew itself to meet future challenges. It will also examine the various proposals for Arctic governance set out by states, the EU and the region's indigenous peoples. All this will permit conclusions to be drawn on where the Arctic Council stands amid all these proposals and whether, and in what way, it should change to support more sustainable governance in the Arctic.

The present and future competence of the European Union in the Arctic

Polar Record ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 48 (4) ◽  
pp. 361-371 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timo Koivurova ◽  
Kai Kokko ◽  
Sebastien Duyck ◽  
Nikolas Sellheim ◽  
Adam Stepien
Keyword(s):  
International Negotiations ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Crucial Importance ◽  
Arctic Council ◽  
The Third ◽  
Broad Array ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Arctic Policy ◽  
The Eu

ABSTRACTThe European Union's (EU's) intention of becoming a permanent observer in the Arctic Council and the reluctance of Arctic actors to grant it that status have made the union's aspirations in the Arctic the subject of a continuing debate. The discussion appears to be dominated by geographical considerations and the EU's gradually emerging Arctic policy. This article puts forward a different view of the EU's presence in the region, one drawing on an analysis of relevant EU competences. As a complex international actor, the EU has acquired a broad array of decision-making powers from its member states, powers that partly extend to Iceland and Norway via the EEA Agreement. Moreover, the EU has in many cases become a relevant actor in international negotiations and treaty making processes the outcomes of which are of crucial importance for the governance of the Arctic. Our argument in the third and concluding section is that only by including the EU in Arctic governance can the international community provide better prospects for the union to sensitise its policies and discourses to the Arctic realities and for other Arctic actors to understand how the union functions. This argument is supported by an analysis of the EU's restrictions on the import of seal products and the ensuing litigation.

A new era in the Arctic Council's external relations? Broader consequences of the Nuuk observer rules for Arctic governance

Polar Record ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 50 (3) ◽  
pp. 225-236 ◽  
Author(s):  
Piotr Graczyk ◽  
Timo Koivurova
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Arctic Council ◽  
New Era ◽  
Protection Strategy ◽  
External Relations ◽  
External Actors

ABSTRACTThis article studies the role of observers under both the Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy (AEPS) and the Arctic Council (AC) before the Nuuk ministerial meeting that took place in May 2011. In this meeting, the AC actors were able to find consensus on criteria for admitting new observers, an issue that has received much media attention, given that China and the European Union, for example, are queuing to become observers in the AC. It is of importance to examine the content of these recently adopted Nuuk observer rules and their potential to impact decision-making on whether the external actors can be included as observers. Moreover, this article studies how, if at all, the Nuuk observer rules might affect the position of the AC in the broader setting of circumpolar cooperation.

scholarly journals THE LEGAL CHARACTER AND STATUS OF THE ARCTIC COUNCIL WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF INTERNATIONAL LAW OF THE SEA AND THE ARCTIC. THE ROLE OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES IN THE ARCTIC COUNCIL AND ITS FUTURE DEVELOPMENT

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 249-263
Author(s):  
Filip Farmas vel Król
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Regional Cooperation ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Arctic Council ◽  
External Agents ◽  
Legal Character

This article describes the legal character and status of the Arctic Council, focusing on the Council’s structure and powers in regional cooperation in the Arctic and elaborating on the decision-making process and the role of the indigenous peoples, both currently and from the point of view of suggested new legislation. The Arctic Council is also presented as a body in the tangible world, where other states and organisations may have a certain extent of influence over the Council’s capabilities. China and the European Union are good examples of such external agents. The aim of this article is to analyse the role of the indigenous peoples and their organisations in the Arctic Council. Te presence of representative bodies of the indigenous peoples within the frameworkof the Arctic Council is considered significant. I hold the view that an extensive range of powers should be granted to the organisations representing the indigenous peoples within the Arctic Council. My article elaborates on the details of these powers and their significance.

scholarly journals The Arctic Strategy of the European Commission: a challenge for Russia or a measure of forced integration?

2021 ◽  
pp. 32-39
Author(s):  
Diana Timoshenko ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
European Commission ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Arctic Council ◽  
Goals And Objectives ◽  
The Eu

The article analyses the priorities, goals and objectives of the European Union in the Arctic macro-region at present. The European vision of the processes taking place in the Arctic has been explored. The EU proposals to improve the situation in the region, primarily in the environment, are being considered from the standpoint of activities of the Arctic Council and Russian-European relations in the Arctic.

Arctic Policy in the European Union

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Njord Wegge ◽  
Cristina-Elena Merticaru
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Policy Development ◽  
Policy Formation ◽  
System Level ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Union Policy ◽  
Arctic Council ◽  
Arctic Policy ◽  
The Eu

The EU’s Arctic policy process represents and exemplifies a process of foreign-policy formation where forces from the Union’s internal dimension, involving tensions between member-state and community-level interests, have interplayed with influences from external actors and impacts from the system level in global politics. Going back to challenges with its relationship to Greenland, following the Kingdom of Denmark joining the EU in 1973, the Union’s Arctic relations have often been complex and challenging. The difficulties have ranged from the need to acquire better knowledge of the geographic and cultural properties of the Arctic, understanding the role of indigenous lifestyles and cultures; to comprehending the dynamics within and the roles of key regimes in the region, such as United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and the Arctic Council. After a decade of gradual policy development, it appears that the EU, with the European Parliament’s resolution of March 16, 2017, on an “Integrated European Union Policy for the Arctic,” has achieved striking a more appropriate balance between the role as passive observer and as proactive actor in the High North.

scholarly journals European Union and Cooperation in the Arctic Council

2021 ◽  
pp. 75-84
Author(s):  
Arseniy V. KIRGIZOV-BARSKIY ◽  
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Arctic Council ◽  
Member States ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Almost All ◽  
Arctic Policy ◽  
The Eu

Since 2008, the European Union has unsuccessfully tried to obtain permanent observer status in the Arctic Council, the central cooperation forum in the Arctic. The analysis shows that the EU's failures in this area are connected both with its location mostly outside of the region and remoteness from the northern realities, as well as global geopolitical tensions. However, the EU has had de facto observer ad hoc status since 2013, allowing it to participate in almost all formats of interaction in the Arctic Council. Considering this fact, the permanent observer status has rather a symbolic meaning and is equivalent to joining a kind of “privileged Arctic club”. An analysis of the EU's functioning in its relations with the Arctic Council and its members shows that the EU is ready to adapt and listen to the opinion of the Arctic countries in order to become a legitimate Arctic actor. The Arctic Council is of uneven importance for the different EU member states: Denmark, Finland and Sweden are full members, several countries are permanent observers, but most EU countries are not interested in the Arctic issues. Because of this multifaceted nature, the collective EU is more of an extra-regional player on the platform, but one with serious Arctic claims. The EU is actively working on a common Arctic policy. It is represented in the Arctic Council by the Ambassador-at-Large for Arctic Affairs, introduced in 2017, who acts in coordination with the European Commission and the member states concerned. The EU's overall approach is not unsuccessful: it has managed to engage more member states on the Arctic vector, and European expertise and input on sustainable development issues is already becoming an integral part of the AC's work and promises to evolve further.

The EU Influence on Norwegian Domestic Legislation for the Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment

2018 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 415-435 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elise Johansen
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Marine Environment ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
European Economic Area ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Environmental Legislation ◽  
Economic Area ◽  
Domestic Legislation ◽  
Marine Areas ◽  
The Eu

Abstract In the last several decades, the European Union (EU) has demonstrated its intention to play an important role in supporting Arctic cooperation and helping to meet the challenges now facing the region. Norway, one of the five Arctic coastal states, and the EU have cooperated closely in this regard, particularly through the Agreement on the European Economic Area (EEA Agreement). This article examines how Norway’s domestic legislation applicable to its Arctic marine areas has been influenced by the development of EU environmental legislation. Specifically, this paper provides a discussion and analysis of the relevant Norwegian laws and mechanisms used to regulate how EU environmental legislation has been incorporated into Norway’s domestic legislation through the EEA Agreement.

scholarly journals Accommodating Divergent Policy Objectives under WTO Law: Reflections on EC—Seal Products

AJIL Unbound ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 108 ◽  
pp. 308-314 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Y. Qin
Keyword(s):  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Sustainable Management ◽  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
Marine Resources ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Public Concern ◽  
The Public ◽  
Policy Objectives ◽  
Domestic Regulation ◽  
The Eu

EC—Seal Products raises an important issue in World Trade Organization (WTO) law: How can WTO trea-ties be interpreted to accommodate divergent legitimate purposes of a domestic regulation? The European Union (EU) measure at issue is a ban on the placing of seal products on the EU market, coupled with excep-tions3 for seal products produced by Inuit and other indigenous communities (IC exception), and for seal products obtained from seals hunted for the purpose of marine resource management and sold on a nonprofit basis (MRM exception). The seal ban was imposed out of the public concern over the cruel manner in which seals are hunted and killed, whereas the IC exception was made to protect the traditional lifestyle of indigenous peoples and the MRM exception accommodated theneed for sustainable management of marine resources. The EU regulation, therefore, was designed to achieve divergent policy objectives. The exceptions derogate from the ban because they permit hunting and killing of seals which can cause the very pain andsuffering for seals that concerns the EU public.

6. Arctic governance

2021 ◽  
pp. 108-124
Author(s):  
Klaus Dodds ◽  
Jamie Woodward
Keyword(s):  
European Union ◽  
Civil Wars ◽  
Social Contexts ◽  
The Other ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Arctic Council ◽  
Military Conflict ◽  
Northern Latitudes ◽  
The World

‘Arctic governance’ discusses how the Arctic, unlike many other parts of the world, has been spared military conflict, civil wars, and terrorism. Arctic governance involves an array of actors, legal regimes, institutional and social contexts, and strategic aspirations. In 1989, Finland approached the other seven Arctic states with a proposal for the Rovaniemi Meeting, which discusses the protection of the Arctic environment. This provided the foundation for the intergovernmental forum the Arctic Council (1996). The eight Arctic states will remain significant players in the future governance of the northern latitudes alongside indigenous peoples/permanent participants. There will always be powerful drivers that ensure that the 'global Arctic' will be prominent in multiple ways, including the role that China, the European Union, and other external states will play in shaping its future.

Can the Arctic Council and the Northern Forum find common ground?

Polar Record ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 38 (207) ◽  
pp. 289-296 ◽  
Author(s):  
Oran R. Young
Keyword(s):  
Indigenous Peoples ◽  
Common Ground ◽  
Bureaucratic Politics ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Arctic Council ◽  
Global Issues ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Cold War ◽  
The Voice ◽  
Two Bodies

AbstractThe Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy (the forerunner of the Arctic Council) and the Northern Forum are both products of the sea change in Arctic politics occurring in the wake of the end of the Cold War. Both are soft law arrangements and both are lightly institutionalized. Yet these similarities have not provided a basis for collaboration between the Arctic Council (AC) and the Northern Forum (NF). For the most part, the two bodies have behaved like ships passing in the night. This article seeks to explain this lack of collaboration and to evaluate future prospects in this realm. The lack of collaboration is attributable in part to a number of sources of tension or fault lines, including issues relating to core-periphery relations, the concerns of indigenous peoples, divergent constituencies, the Russian connection, and bureaucratic politics and the complexities of political leadership. In part, it stems from ambiguities about the status of the AC and the NF combined with restrictions on the roles these bodies can play. There is little prospect of combining the two bodies into a more comprehensive Arctic regime. But there are opportunities to devise a realistic division of labor and to develop useful coordination mechanisms. The AC, for example, is the appropriate vehicle for efforts to strengthen the voice of the Arctic regarding global issues; the NF is well-suited to dealing with matters of community viability. Ultimately, the two bodies might consider creating a joint working group on sustainable development or organizing occasional joint meetings of the AC's Senior Arctic Officials and the NF's Executive Committee.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document