Demographic and economic disparities among Arctic regions

Schmidt, Jennifer I.; Aanesen, Margrethe; Klokov, Konstantin; Khrutschev, Sergei; Hausner, Vera Helene

doi:10.1080/1088937x.2015.1065926

Cited by 17 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The livelihoods and economies goals do not currently consider informal economies or subsistence livelihoods, which are prevalent in many regions across the Arctic (Larsen et al 2015). We were unable to find data to support the development of an indicator reflecting these less formal elements of the economy at the pan-Arctic scale, particularly as the informal economy varies widely between regions (Schmidt et al 2015). Furthermore, many indigenous communities view economic development differently; while many wish to maintain traditional lifestyles, many communities are keen to mitigate high levels of poverty, ill health, and food security issues through full-time employment and the benefits that economic development can bring (Stewart et al 2011;McCauley et al 2016).…”

Section: Spatial Patterns and Management Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 78%

A pan-Arctic assessment of the status of marine social-ecological systems

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Marine social-ecological conditions in the Arctic are rapidly changing. With many transboundary issues, such as shifting ranges of fisheries, biodiversity loss, sea ice retreat, economic development and pollution, greater pan-Arctic assessment and co-management are necessary. We adapted the Ocean Health Index (OHI) to compile pan-Arctic data and evaluate ocean health for nine regions above the Arctic Circle to assess the extent to which pan-Arctic assessment is possible and identify broad social-ecological trends. While the quality and availability of data varied, we assessed and scored nine OHI goals, including the pressures and resilience measures acting upon them. Our results show the Arctic is sustainably delivering a range of benefits to people, but with room for improvement in all goals, particularly tourism, fisheries, and protected places. Successful management of biological resources and short-term positive impacts on biodiversity in response to climate change underlie these high goal scores. The OHI assesses the past and near-term future but does not account for medium-and long-term future risks associated with climate change, highlighting the need for ongoing monitoring, dynamic management, and strong action to mitigate its anticipated effects. A general increase in and standardisation of monitoring is urgently needed in the Arctic. Unified assessments, such as this one, can support national comparisons, data quality assessments, and discussions on the targeting of limited monitoring capabilities at the most pressing and urgent transboundary management challenges, which is a priority for achieving successful Arctic stewardship.

show abstract

Section: Spatial Patterns and Management Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 78%

A pan-Arctic assessment of the status of marine social-ecological systems

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To standardize the influence of each set of variables they are weighted by dividing their values by the square root of the first eigenvalue obtained in the PCA/MCA [67]. The results of an MFA are multiple independent factors that each explain a decreasing proportion of the total variation [68,69]. There are several ways of selecting the number of dimensions that adequately reflects the variability in the data.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stakeholders’ perceptions of protected area management following a nationwide community-based conservation reform

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People’s perceptions can point to reasons for conservation support or lack thereof. In this study, we surveyed the perceptions of conservation among local stakeholders who participated in protected area (PA) management following a reform towards community-based conservation in Norway. We analyzed the link between perceptions of threats to conservation values, prioritized management actions and trust in PA governance, and assessed how these perceptions aligned with the stakeholders’ preferred overarching conservation approach and their support for PAs. Conservation perceptions differed mostly between property owners and representatives of nature conservation (such as NGOs). Property owners perceived modern farming, grazing and hay making, and securing the interests of rights holders as a priority. They had a lower support for PAs and favored a conservation approach focusing on “people and nature”. Representatives from nature conservation prioritized management actions to increase biodiversity and reduce land development, had higher trust in environmental authorities and identified motorized vehicle use as a threat to conservation values. They had a high support for PAs and favored a conservation approach that mitigates threats from human activity (i.e. “nature despite people”). The nationwide reform aimed at increasing support for PAs, but 31% of the members of the stakeholder advisory councils were willing to downgrade or degazette PAs for the benefit of economic development, which is much more than general population surveys. However, the level of trust in local governance was less polarized among the members of stakeholder advisory councils compared with the former state governance, which suggests that that the community-based conservation reform has the potential to improve collaboration and conflict mitigation.

show abstract

“…This value does not capture the informal economy, and therefore provides a biased estimate. People in the Arctic participate in both informal and formal economies, of which only the reported part (the formal economy) is captured in offi cial statistics (Schmidt et al 2015). The population of Kotzebue was 3.154 in 2017 (Alaska Energy Gateway 2019).…”

Section: Simulation Of a Blackoutmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dependence оn Electricity Among the Inhabitants of the Rural Western Arctic

Witt¹,

Valfells²,

Larsen³

et al. 2020

Kunstkamera

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reviews the electricity dependence of inhabitants in the western Arctic and provides an overview of past developments of electricity supply and how the current relation between the inhabitants and electricity is structured. In the Arctic, electricity takes on a special role due to its importance for security in addition to a matter of entertainment and productivity as seen in more temperate areas (Allen et al. 2016). This paper discusses the importance of electricity in the North, including the questions of what would happen to Arctic communities in the absence of an electricity supply. A hypothetical case of a blackout is presented. Furthermore, the burden of high electricity costs in the Arctic is discussed. The results of this research may contribute new knowledge for further research on the potential energy transition in the Arctic. Furthermore, the results emphasize the importance of energy and its supply security in the Arctic, which provides support for a focal point on energy security for energy transition policies.

show abstract

Demographic and economic disparities among Arctic regions

Cited by 17 publications

References 33 publications

A pan-Arctic assessment of the status of marine social-ecological systems

A pan-Arctic assessment of the status of marine social-ecological systems

Stakeholders’ perceptions of protected area management following a nationwide community-based conservation reform

Dependence оn Electricity Among the Inhabitants of the Rural Western Arctic

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About