Proposed Sessions

As the Arctic begins to assume a more prominent role in international affairs, Arctic governments seek to deepen their engagement in the region in the areas of environmental policy and human security. At the same time, a growing list of non-Arctic states seek to develop and strengthen their own Arctic identities, in policy documents, and expanded participation in Track II regional regimes. The development of Arctic identities has been crucial for the Arctic Council observers from Asia -- granted that status in 2013, namely China, India, Japan, Singapore and the Republic of Korea. The Asia-Arctic Five (AA5) hurriedly constructed their Arctic policies despite much less developed histories in the region compared to European observers. This has been especially challenging in the case of China, which has brought forward to concept of the country being a ‘near-Arctic state’, and arguing that certain areas of Arctic governance, including in economic affairs, should not be restricted to those states specifically in the region. These views have played out in several parts of the far north, notably Russia, seeking to act as a bridge between Asian and European Arctic interests, as well as Greenland, which emerged as a fledgling arena for great power rivalries involving China, the United States and the EU. These events have advanced the question of how best to define an Arctic stakeholder, as well as how the challenges of the Arctic’s opening affect changes in political culture not only in the Arctic itself, but within the AA5 as well.

There are an increasing number of development and research projects involving collaboration between art, education, crafts and the social sciences. In addition, the approach of art-based research has become more common in various disciplines, including the social sciences. We are interested in multidisciplinary research on change in the Arctic, sustainability, intergenerational dialogue, and revitalisation of traditions. In this session, we discuss current opportunities, challenges and results of art and social sciences cooperation and art-based research in the field. We ask, how revitalisation could be understood, supported and studied in relation to post-colonial (formal and informal) education, when traditions are continued and reformed in a cross-generational manner. The focus is on people and places in the Arctic and on socially and environmentally engaged art and education, as well as on arts and designs strategies recognizing past, present and future generations of Arctic residents. The session addresses the conceptions of intergenerational learning too, being central to the field of community based art education.

Since at least the Treaty of Westphalia, sovereignty and territorial authority have been seen to go hand in hand. But the possibility, and indeed desirability, of overlap between “people” and “place” has been challenged – not least by Indigenous decolonization. Moreso than elsewhere, such decolonization manifests in the circumpolar North. Hence, in the North we can study the (mis)match between Indigenous sovereignty and territory. Questions abound: How should territorial authority be reconciled where Indigenous and “settler” populations are mixed? Does thinking of territory “like a state” liberate or assimilate Indigenous peoples? Does Indigenous territory belong to individuals or collectives – and what level of collective? What is to be done where Indigenous land-claims overlap? How do we cope with mobility – for example, of nomadic reindeer herders? Are Indigenous rights portable outside of home territories – to Anchorage, Oslo or Moscow? Within Indigenous territories, do Indigenous governments have authority over “settlers”?

Youth in the Arctic face challenges undreamt of by previous generations. Large-scale changes only beginning to take shape today will unfold during the lifetime of the region’s youth, bringing disruption with the past as well as uncertainty as to the future. Studies examining the struggles faced by children in Arctic are, thus, imperative as is the necessity to protect the rights of youth involved in such research. This session will explore the ethics of working with youth in the Arctic and discuss methods for conducting such research, including the inclusion of participants and communities in research, insurance of consent, mitigation of risks, dissemination of research, and distribution of benefits. Papers will draw on examples of research involving youth from across the Arctic, highlighting challenges encountered when conducting research with children and youth as well as innovative and inclusive research designs, methods, and overall ethical considerations.

The session tends to be interdisciplinary, representing the intersection of international relations and law, geography, and climate change studies. Today, the social and economic effects of climate change are actively discussed, but its international political aspects are also of great importance due to challenges to special legal Arctic regimes. For the first time, for Russia, the United States, and other Arctic countries non-traditional security threats like climate change can lead to direct traditional threats related to ice melting and military activities, revision of international law on shipping rules in the Arctic, issues of international responsibility for the regulation of border ecosystems, etc. In recent years, Arctic and non-arctic states are increasingly active on Arctic agenda articulating and promoting national interests in the region. At the same time, Arctic international cooperation and the capacity-building of Arctic institutions crucial for the climate change adaptation and the future of the region demand rethinking especially in the light of the increased global political and military confrontation between Russia, the US and NATO, China. Otherwise, the chance for a shared constructive agenda for the Arctic future will melt as rapidly as the Arctic ice.

A collaboration of international Indigenous researchers and organizations, as well as academics, has worked to coordinate a second Survey of Living Conditions in the Arctic (SLiCA-2). The first SLiCA surveyed Arctic Indigenous communities in Alaska, Chukotka, Canada, Sweden, Greenland, Norway, and the Kola Peninsula through face-to-face interviews on aspects of the economy, health and living conditions. This session will present progress thus far on the collaboration towards a second SLiCA, including an introduction to Indigenous-led surveys in each region that may incorporate SLiCA. The session will also facilitate a discussion on priorities for comparability/regionally-specific data, areas of living conditions that are important to remain consistent since the first SLiCA, as well as new areas of interest, and areas that may no longer be relevant to Arctic communities.

The Arctic is increasingly heralded as a region that upends the conventions of singular academic disciplines. Arctic indigenous knowledge systems bring additional dimensions to the hegemony of Western thought; the region’s exceptionally dynamic geophysical environment challenges binary divisions that segment the world into discrete categories; its ecology is inextricably linked with political, economic, and climatic uncertainties; persistent mythologies and preconceptions interfere with research that aspires to objectivity. The Arctic thus is a region that requires new modes of knowing, and this session proposes an interdisciplinary approach as a means of achieving this. An interdisciplinary approach goes beyond crossing the boundaries of academic disciplines; it also challenges boundaries between the “Western” and the “indigenous”, between the practical and the conceptual, between the regionally specific and the seemingly universal. Session participants explore how an interdisciplinary approach, in both teaching and research, can foster the boundary-crossing ways of knowing that are crucial to understand and sensitively intervene in a dynamic, complex, and ever-changing Arctic.