Constructing Arctic security: an inter-disciplinary approach to understanding security in the Barents region

Abstract

The field of Security Studies traditionally focused on military threats to states' survival, however, since the end of the Cold War the concept of security has widened and individuals and communities have gradually become viewed as appropriate referent objects of security: Multifaceted challenges facing communities at the sub-state level are increasingly regarded as security threats, including their potential to cause instability for the larger society, thus affecting states’ security. In the Arctic region, a central challenge is that inhabitants are exposed to multiple non-traditional and non-military threats resulting from environmental, economic, and societal changes, which can be understood as threats to human security. We argue that a comprehensive approach to human security overlaps with the concept of societal security, and must therefore consider threats to collective identity and the essential conditions necessary for the maintenance and preservation of a distinct society. We see the human security framework as a suitable analytical tool to study the specific challenges that threaten the Arctic population, and in turn the well-being of Arctic societies. Therefore, we argue that utilising the concept of human security can promote societal security in the context of the Arctic, and in particular, its sub-regions, for example, the Barents region.

Arctic Security Strategies and the North Atlantic States

“…18 These studies have often applied a broad understanding of security, 19 where issues stretching from societal and economic prosperity and stability, to climate change's effect on individuals, regional communities or indigenous people's livelihoods, have been scrutinized. 20,21 With the Russian flag planted on the sea floor of the North Pole in 2007, 22 fueled by high energy prices and global warming, a wave of debate on Arctic geopolitics followed. 23 While the media debate that followed the flag planting was largely centered on traditional aspects of security, the epistemological point of departure of many of the academic studies fits well within the tradition of critical geopolitics, by not having traditional aspects of state security and strategic interest at their core.…”

Security in the Arctic: High Politics in the High North

“…A non-traditional approach is, by nature, inclusive, and will not be limited to state or state-centred actors. On the contrary, and partly due to its rights-based foundations, it will cover the issues most relevant to the Northerners; it can also help establish a more inclusive and dialogue-based environment for policy makers (Hossain et al 2016a).…”

Energy security under the context of critical security studies

“…Similarly, the circumstances faced by Sámi in Norway, Sweden, Finland and Russia are very different, and relate to the challenges of living in urban or rural areas. These are some of the most important distinctions that need to be considered to enable a comprehensive analysis of human security in the Barents Region (Hossain, Zojer, Greaves, Roncero, & Sheehan, 2016).…”

“…Conservation of these values and identities is key for the survival of the indigenous societies and promotes a sense of security among its members. A thorough approach to security, while taking into account the well-being of individuals, must engage with the threats to the community and societal security (Hossain, Zojer, Greaves, Roncero, & Sheehan, 2016).…”

“…The Arctic is not a no-man's land but belongs to the rim states, who have agreed borders and follow international law procedures, especially where fossil fuels and fisheries are located. Many academics and researchers argue that a conflict for Arctic territory between states is very unlikely, and that the only potential for a violent conflict in the Arctic Region could be a spill-over from another conflict elsewhere (Hossain, Zojer, Greaves, Roncero, & Sheehan, 2016). Even so, the Arctic has not yet been affected by the conflicts in Georgia, Crimea and Syria, and cooperation in the region continues.…”