This paper presents an analysis of Finland's Arctic strategy, providing a perspective on contemporary 'Arctic geopolitics' outside the dominant emphasis on the territorial politics of the Arctic Ocean coastal states. Concurrently, this serves as an empirical framework for interpreting the contextual de-and re-territorialising manifestations of geopolitical state strategies that are increasingly about securing competitive advantages, rather than exerting or extending territorial control over resources. By deploying the notion of anticipatory geographies this paper shows that Finland's Arctic strategy documents have produced two intertwined promotional visions that are predicated on the discourses of international competitiveness and which relate Finland to the Arctic region. These are 1) Finland as a key provider of solutions to problems in Arctic development and 2) Finland as an attractive territorial node in 'Arctic flows'. These anticipatory geographies are facilitated in practice through the political consolidation of 'Arctic' markets for Finnish exports and through infrastructure projects purportedly enhancing the position of Finland within various 'economic flows'. Together, these notions illuminate the geopolitical dimension of attempts to secure competitive advantages and how this relates to the processes of state spatial transformation through de-and re-territorialisation, especially beyond the recently much emphasised context of city-regionalism.

Territory-network interplay in the co-constitution of the Arctic and 'to-be' Arctic states This paper discusses the (re)production of state and supranational regional spaces through speech acts. Emphasis is placed especially on speech acts that 'construct' regions and concurrently (re)position specific states as 'legitimized' actors within supranational space. Relatedly, focus is directed to how such repositioning is linked to territory-network interplay in establishing and contesting power relations in supranational regional institutions. The article discusses first how the region-building process in the Arcticand power relations within the Arctic Councilhas relied on territorial legitimation in which 'Arctic states' are rendered as the key 'Arctic' actors. Then the focus is shifted to how France and Japan, states considered 'non-Arctic', have recently repositioned themselves in relation to the region in order to gain influence. The key conclusion of the analysis is that by engaging with the observer criteria set by the AC, 'non-Arctic' states are redefining themselves in relation to the region, simultaneously (re)producing the Arctic region and non-Arctic states in relation to each other. This paper also argues that in attempting to dismantle some of the territorial criteria on which the established power relations within the AC rely, these states are pursuing the reinstitutionalization of a 'global' Arctic with renegotiated power relations.

Until the 1960s, only 20 km north of the city of Helsinki (Finland's capital, located at the southern tip of a country almost 1200 km long) was viewed as the 'wolf limit' (Lähteenmäki, 2017). Such a perception implied that it was wild and untamed countryside just beyond 20 km north of the capital. However, a dramatic shift took place at the turn of the millennium when the entire state of Finland was defined in relation to its northernness as an 'Arctic country' in its entirety, all the way from Helsinki to the land of Santa Claus up in Finnish Lapland. A wide range of state documents, official statements, policies, and texts have been produced that define and therefore identify Finland as an 'Arctic state.'

This paper focuses on the particularities of a regionalization process by investigating how a supranational region emerges as a context of, and tool for, political contestation regarding power relations between a sub-national and national government. This is done through an empirical case study of the Arctic Policy of the State of Alaska. The analysis shows how the contested relationship between state and federal governments became re-contextualized in relation to the Arctic due to a newfound federal attention on the region. This culminated in how the Arctic region is perceived within the 'Alaskan' and federal contexts. Additionally, the case study shows that by attempting to transform how the Arctic is perceived within, and enacted through, the policies of the federal government, state actors in Alaska have sought to utilize federal attention on the region and exert an influence on federal policies that affect Alaska. This, in turn, has potential implications for the overall regionalization process of the Arctic itself. The paper contends that rather than deconstructing regionalization processes as wholes, by focusing on the particularities of these processes we can better understand the politics at play. This concurrently helps to illuminate how such politics may affect the trajectory of regionalization itself.

No abstract