The Difference Place Makes: Regional Legislative Approaches to Territories of Traditional Nature Use in the Russian North

Indigenous northerners’ rights in the Russian Federation are legally protected at a range of levels (federal, regional, municipal), and by a diversity of types of legal acts (laws, decrees, orders, provisions). Within the complex structure of Russian federalism, the country’s regional governments elaborate upon federal laws in diverse ways and at different times. This article explores regional approaches to legislating one law on Indigenous rights, that of “Territory of Traditional Nature-Use” (territoriya traditsionnogo prirodopol’zovaniya) (TTP), identified by Indigenous leaders as the most important legal-territorial designation for protecting Indigenous livelihoods and cultures. While it is well known that legal strategies of the Russian state toward Indigenous territorial rights differ markedly from those of other Circumpolar countries, less appreciated are the ways in which these vary across space within Russia. We assert that the spatial informs the legal, documenting several illustrative approaches that regions have taken in legislating TTPs. In doing so, we demonstrate how a federal law initiative is interpreted and reimagined in place, giving rise to the potential for substantively different spatial outcomes for Indigenous persons and peoples seeking to actualize their rights to territory.

Ten Years of International Shipping on the Northern Sea Route: Trends and Challenges

Analysis of detailed statistics shows remarkable fluctuations in the volume and composition of voyages on the Northern Sea Route (NSR) along the northern coast of Russia since international use began in 2010. There has been strong growth in destination shipping between the Arctic and ports outside the region, but transit shipping between the Pacific and the Atlantic has not experienced the growth many had anticipated. Explanations are found in international market conditions as well as in the management of the NSR, with important lessons for the future development of different shipping segments. Shipping companies from several countries took part in the period up to 2019, but they seem to have become less central in the current phase of NSR shipping, which is dominated by the transport of hydrocarbons out of the Arctic. Russia expects international transit to pick up later. However, Russia alone cannot determine the volume of international traffic: it is the international shipping industry that will assess the balance of factors and conditions, and conclude if and when the shorter Arctic routes are safe, efficient, reliable, environmentally sound and economically viable in comparison with other routes.

Exponential Growth and New Agendas – a Comprehensive Review of the Arctic Conference Sphere

The Arctic region has attracted the interest of Arctic and non-Arctic states, as well as non-state actors, for decades. Corresponding with the growing attraction towards the region, the number of conferences attending to Arctic issues has expanded. This article provides an historical mapping of the Arctic conference sphere, and demonstrates how the establishment of Arctic conferences has both paralleled central events in Arctic affairs and can be linked to important international developments. Firstly, there is a notable peak conforming with the “second state change” in 2005, brought about by developments opening the Arctic to global concerns: the impacts of climate change and the spread of the socio-economic effects from globalization to the Arctic. Secondly, the expanding number of conferences around 2013 can be seen in relation to the growing interest in the region from non-Arctic states. As such, this article builds the argument for conferences as a central element within the Arctic governance architecture, creating linkages among units in the regime complex. The article devotes particular attention towards the two largest international conferences on Arctic issues – Arctic Frontiers and Arctic Circle Assembly – to illustrate how the necessity for hybrid policy-science-business conferences arose from a more complex governance system, and challenges requiring cross-sectoral, interdisciplinary, and international collaboration.

Norwegian Courts and Sámi Law

For decades, Norway has been viewed as a role model when it comes to safeguarding Sámi rights as an Indigenous people in the Nordic Countries. Among other reasons, this is because Norway is the only country with a Sámi population that has ratified ILO Convention No. 169. Also, Norway has adopted a particular land law where one of the purposes is to survey Sámi rights to land and water. It is also said that Norway has worked actively to ensure adoption of the 2007 UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Norway has gained international recognition for this work, among others from former UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous People James Anaya, who in his report on the situation of the Sámi people in Norway, Sweden and Finland, stated that Norway, since passing the Finnmark Act 2005, has set an important example for the other Nordic countries (para 44).

A Marine-Biology-Centric Definition of Ocean Connectivity and the Law of the Sea

The inter-connectedness of marine ecosystems has been repeatedly acknowledged in the relevant literature as well as in policy briefs. Against this backdrop, this article aims at further reflecting on the question of to what extent the law of the sea takes account of or disregards ocean connectivity. In order to address this question, this article starts by providing a brief overview of the notion of ocean connectivity from a marine science perspective, before taking a closer look at the extent to which the law of the sea incorporates the scientific imperative of ocean connectivity in the context of four examples: (i) straits, (ii) climate change and ocean acidification, (iii) salmon and (iv) the ecosystem approach to fisheries. Tying the findings of the different examples together, this study concludes by stressing the need of accommodating ocean connectivity not only in the interpretation and implementation of the existing law (of the sea) but also in its further development.

The Norwegian Bioeconomy Strategy and the Way Forward for Blue Growth

The Arctic Council Sustainable Development Working Group (SDWG) recently released a report on the blue bioeconomy in the Arctic. In this paper, we discuss the Norwegian policy to promote the Norwegian blue bioeconomy, analysing the government’s bioeconomy strategy and its strategy for marine residuals. We find that the strategies have several and partly incompatible goals, related to improving the economic, environmental, and social sustainability of the seafood sector. We discuss challenges and (missed) opportunities in the Norwegian government’s strategy for turning the Norwegian economy towards blue growth. Our findings are supported by recent studies that conclude that more efficient and coherent policy actions are needed to ensure the sustainability of the marine bioeconomy.

Indigenous Peoples’ Rights and the Norwegian Courts Moving into 2021

This article, by the journal's editor-in-chief, is the lead editorial for volume 12 of journal and introduces the first two articles.

Girjas Reindeer Herding Community v. Sweden: Analysing the Merits of the Girjas Case

For the first time in the Swedish Supreme Court, a small Sami reindeer herding community has won an important victory affirming the community’s small game hunting and fishing rights. Because of protracted use and the concept of immemorial prescription, the Court recognised the community’s exclusive hunting and fishing rights, including the right to lease these rights to others. Such leases have long been prohibited by legislation and the State has retained its powers to administer such leases. This case signifies a considerable development in the area of Sami law. In its decision, the Supreme Court made some adjustments to the age-old doctrine of immemorial prescription, and provided insights into how historic evidence should be evaluated when the claimant is an Indigenous people. A common motivator for these adjustments is an enhanced awareness of international standards protecting Indigenous peoples and minorities. Even ILO Convention No. 169 – the only legally binding convention concerning Indigenous rights, but which Sweden has not yet ratified – is relevant when it comes to evaluating Sami customary uses. The Court addressed the problem of gaps in the historical material and used evidence from other parts of Swedish Lapland and adjacent time-periods, making reasonable assumptions to fill in these gaps. The Court imposes on the State the burden of proof regarding the extinguishment of already established Sami rights, as well as proof that extinguishment by legislation or expropriation, is “clear and definitive”. These conditions were not met in this case.

Testing the Limits of Jurisdiction in Investor-State Arbitration in Svalbard’s Waters: Peteris Pildegovics and SIA North Star v. Kingdom of Norway

On 1 April 2020, the Latvian fishing company SIA North Star and its owner Peteris Pildegovics initiated an investor-State arbitration against Norway (Peteris Pildegovics and SIA North Star v. Kingdom of Norway) at the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID). This case is not only Norway’s first ever ICSID case, but also the first publicly known investor-State arbitration in which an operator of a fishing vessel has brought a claim against a coastal State for allegedly unlawful exercise of prescriptive and enforcement jurisdiction in relation to fisheries. The case raises intricate questions concerning the limits of jurisdiction ratione materiae and jurisdiction ratione personae of investment tribunals.

Review of Graham White, Indigenous Empowerment through Co-management: Land Claims Boards, Wildlife Management, and Environmental Regulation (UBC Press: 2020)

Graham White’s recent book, entitled Indigenous Empowerment through Co-management: Land Claims Boards, Wildlife Management, and Environmental Regulation, is a balanced, accessible, and honest discussion of a very complex realm of Crown-Indigenous relations and institutions in Canada. The book is very well researched and clearly communicated by one of Canada’s leading experts on the topic. Co-management has been the subject of scholarly attention for many years in Canada; however, perspectives vary widely with respect to appropriateness and effectiveness. White’s book is a bold project that tackles the complexities, sensitivities, and diverse contexts head-on. It ought to be at the top of the reading list for all academics, practitioners, and government officials with an interest in modern treaties.