The Global North 2050

(1)

Compiled by:

Lois Macklin, B.Sc., M.A., Ph.D., R.P.F.

Axel Meisen, C.M., Ph.D., P. Eng., Eurlng, FCAE

Alberta Innovates–Technology Futures believes the great challenges of our world will be resolved by innovative leaders working creatively in partnership and across disciplinary boundaries.

Jasper Innovation Forum 2011

Summary Report

The Global North 2050

Jasper, Alberta, Canada November 22 to 25, 2011

(2)

(3)

REF: JIF 2011 Global North 2050 FINAL REPORT.docx

Summary Report

Jasper Innovation Forum 2011

The Global North 2050

Jasper, Alberta, Canada November 22 to 25, 2011

Alberta Innovates – Technology Futures April 16, 2012

.

Jasper Innovation

Forum 2011

(4)

(5)

The Jasper Innovation Forum 2011

was made possible with financial support from:

Alberta Innovates - Technology Futures *********

S&T Foresight and Science Promotion Division, Science Policy Directorate,

Health Canada *********

Canadian Food Inspection Agency *********

Canadian Commission for UNESCO

The views expressed in this report are the views of the participants in the Jasper Innovation Forum and not those of the financial sponsors.

The Jasper Innovation Forum 2011 and this

(6)

(7)

Executive Summary

The Global North is defined as the circumpolar region north of the 60th parallel. It is of immense size (approximately 21.5 million square kilometers), sparsely populated (with just 37 million people) and still relatively unexplored. Global interest in the North has increased significantly as retreating sea ice and rising temperatures increase access to natural resources, opens new pan-continental trade routes, and challenges national sovereignty. The strongest interest in the North is expressed from the perspectives of the eight sovereign nations which comprise the geographic North: Canada, Russia, USA, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden (collectively referred to as the Northern Rim Countries). However, other countries, including members of the European Union, China, India, and South Korea have demonstrated growing interests in the circumpolar region, primarily for climatic, resource and transportation reasons.

The future of the North has economic, social and political implications for the province of Alberta. Located just south of the 60th parallel in Canada, Alberta has long-standing connections with the North in the form of transportation links, natural resource developments and the provision of goods and services. As a result, strong personal and cultural associations have been forged between Albertans and those who live in the North.

The prevailing conditions in and the forces impacting on the Global North are complex, interrelated, and most importantly, are in the process of change. The objective of the Global North Project was to examine the long-term future of the Global North, choosing 2050 as the reference year. The first phase of this Project was the Jasper Innovation Forum in which, under the auspices of Alberta Innovates Technology Futures, 48 international participants with diverse backgrounds examined the principal forces and factors, together with their consequences, that will shape the future of the North. This report summarizes and expands on the Jasper Innovation Forum deliberations. It also provides a basis for future work focused on specific subject areas and geographical regions.

It is necessary to read the report in its entirety to understand the full complexity of the forces shaping the future of the Global North. However, the principal conclusions that emerged from the Jasper Innovation Forum and subsequent deliberations are as follows:

 Several potential scenarios could play out in the Global North by 2050, contributing to considerable uncertainty about the long-term future of the region. The characteristics and underlying causes of these scenarios are presented. The degree and pace of climate change, the future of the global financial systems, and the global demand for natural resources are some of the major forces that contribute to future uncertainty.

 There is a strong possibility that, in the longer-term, the Global North could become a centre of world attention and increasingly important to the South. Except for

(10)

2

relatively short periods of time (such as the Cold War), the North held little importance for the South. The implications for specific Southern jurisdictions (including Alberta) need to be assessed.

 Although Indigenous people comprise only a small percentage of the total Northern population, they hold strategic positions in certain jurisdictions (particularly in the Canadian Territories and Greenland) that if used wisely, can improve their future well-being. However, significant challenges lie ahead in terms of overcoming socio-economic barriers and building the skills and capacities required for successful engagement in the global economy.

 Digital technologies have a major role to play in alleviating the isolation of remote northern communities and improving the delivery of services, particularly educational, health, social, business and governmental services.

 Future economic opportunities in the North are strongly dependent on demands from the South. In the case of moving Northern goods to global markets, transportation plays a critical role. Lack of infrastructure is a major impediment to progress.

 Seven distinct economic models were developed at the Jasper Innovation Forum as long-term future possibilities for the North. The ‘Indigenous Capitalist Model’ is considered to be the most promising and innovative.

 The need for internationally recognized regulations and standards to mitigate the future impact of human activity in the North will continue to grow. Strong institutions and wise cohesive governance are essential prerequisites for peaceful progress toward sustainable future northern development. Issues such as outstanding Indigenous claims to land and other rights, and a lack of international collaboration and legal structures, pose risks to future development opportunities.

Immediate actions in the following areas are recommended to maximize future opportunity in the North:

1. Capitalizing on opportunities provided by

digital technologies 3. Developing capabilities for operating in remote and harsh environments

2. Meeting infrastructure needs 4. Developing business in and for the North

5. Governance

With the exception of “Governance”, these areas are well suited to be addressed collaboratively by non-government representatives from the Northern Rim Countries and others with strong interests and expertise regarding the North. Subsequent phases of the Global North 2050 Project will entail deeper explorations of these specific action areas. Consistent with its mandate, AITF’s Foresight Group will focus its efforts on recommendations that have strong technological components and will lead to increased commerce for Alberta.

(11)

3 Figure 1 Map of the Global North

(12)

(13)

4

Introduction

The Jasper Innovation Forum (JIF) concept was created in 2008 to examine critically important issues that can be addressed, at least in part, through the development and application of science and technology. The latter reflects the mandate of the principal JIF sponsor: Alberta Innovates – Technology Futures (AITF), a leading-edge research and development organization dedicated to fostering innovation and helping to build commerce for the province of Alberta. The 2008 and 2009 Jasper Innovation Forums focused on the themes of ‘Water, Food and Energy in the Context of Innovation’ and ‘Next Generation Communities’, respectively. The 2010 Forum focused on ‘Improving the Health of Canadians in a Single Generation’. JIF 2011 provided a venue for in-depth, structured discussion and debate about the forces and factors that will shape the future of the Global North1to the year 2050, with particular emphasis on the interaction between transportation and communication systems, the environment and social and economic change.

In many respects, the North is one of the last great frontier regions on earth. Approximately 37 million people reside in the circumpolar region, representing less than one percent of the world’s population (see Appendix E, Quick Facts about the North). The population is distributed across 21.5 million square kilometres, spanning three continents and eight national jurisdictions (see Figure 1). Due to its immense size and natural resources, the circumpolar region has become a key economic and social priority for many countries. For example, it has been estimated that up to 13% of the world’s unproven oil reserves and 30% of the world’s unproven gas reserves are to be found in the Arctic.2 For millennia, the North has been populated by Indigenous peoples, living in self-sufficient ways. More recently, natural resources, new marine transportation routes and security initiatives have attracted many others to the North. In remote regions of the north, social and economic growth is heavily influenced by the establishment of new transportation and communication links, frequently developed to exploit natural resources. These links also become determinants for major social, environmental, economic and other related changes.

Consistent with previous Jasper Innovation Forums, approximately 45 participants with wide-ranging expertise and highly creative abilities were invited. For a listing of participants, see Appendix B. Over a period of three days, participants explored the forces and factors that will drive change in the Global North by 2050. Their work was performed in plenary and group sessions as well as in informal discussions, all inspired by the extraordinary beauty of Jasper National Park.

1_{The Global North is defined as the geographic region located north of the 60}th_parallel.

(14)

5

The 2011 Forum discussion was launched using a Foresight methodology called scenario creation to explore what the world and the North may experience over the next forty years. This initial plenary session resulted in the identification of four possible scenarios that may represent the future of the world and by corollary, the circumpolar region, by 2050. It is suggested that the reader review these scenarios before reading the remainder of this report (see Appendix D).

Participants were then split into three working groups. Each group was asked to concentrate on one of three focus areas:

 Future Challenges of Governing the Circumpolar Region  Future Health and Education in the Circumpolar Region  Future Economic Opportunities in the Circumpolar Region

Each working group was asked to consider the impact of expansions to northern transportation and communications systems in relation to their specific focus area. A Discussion Guide was provided to direct and help focus the conversation of each group (see Appendix C). Numerous insights and new understandings emerged from the discussions. These insights as well as many that have emerged from post-Forum reflections and conversations are presented in this report.

The report was written over a period of several weeks following JIF 2011 in order to provide not only a summary of the deliberations and conclusions, but also to build on them and to identify important gaps that were not addressed in Jasper. The report is structured to create a logical progression for the reader and, where appropriate, departs from the chronology and details of the JIF 2011 discussions.

The insights and recommendations are intended to be of wide interest; governmental agencies can utilize them in formulating northern policy and AITF will incorporate them into its strategic planning process. Due to the preponderance of Canadian participants, it is important to recognize that the Canadian perspective dominated many of the discussions, as did the role of northern Indigenous people. These perspectives notwithstanding, the information in this report can provide guidance to decision-makers around the world as they consider strategic issues regarding the North.

Participants and readers from other regions of the world need to read the report from the perspective of their jurisdictions. It is also important to understand Alberta’s interests in the North.

(15)

6

Alberta’s Interest in the North

Over the past century, Alberta has become a logistics and supply centre for northern Canada with respect to national security, the transportation of natural resources to southern markets and the provision of services in the areas of health, food, energy, finance and housing. Geographically, Alberta is a natural north-south corridor. The flat traversable northern landscape provides easy road access from Alberta into the Northwest Territories, Yukon and Alaska.

In the future, Alberta’s relationship with the North could become increasingly important as pan-continental transportation routes are established through the Arctic. New ice breaking and other cold weather technologies, combined with changing climatic conditions, are opening up northern shipping routes that were historically considered impassable. As scheduled shipping through Arctic waters becomes more feasible, the need for marine and port transportation infrastructure to offload and handle cargo will grow. The establishment of deep sea cargo and shipping facilities will require improved land and air based transportation systems connecting northern freight to southern markets.

Alberta is strategically positioned to capitalize on the opportunities these future changes may present. Three key routes connect major northern urban centers (Yellowknife, Whitehorse and Fairbanks) to major centres in Canada and the United States of America. All pass through the province of Alberta. The construction of the Alaska Highway in 1942 connected existing Alberta road and rail infrastructure to destinations in the Yukon and Alaska. In 1974 the Dalton Highway expanded this route from Fairbanks, Alaska into the Prudhoe Bay oilfields on the Arctic Ocean.

In the 1960s the Mackenzie Highway was built from Grimshaw, Alberta to Hay River (Northwest Territories), and later expanded to Yellowknife (Northwest Territories). By 1994 this route had been expanded to Fort Simpson and Wrigley. The third route is the Dempster Highway that connects Dawson City (Yukon) to Inuvik (Northwest Territories) year round, and by a winter ice road to Tuktoyaktuk on the north coast. Dawson City is connected to Alberta via the Alaska Highway, which in turn connects into the Alberta highway system at Demmit, Alberta.

In addition, three major North American pipeline systems converge in north-western Alberta and the Edmonton and Grande Prairie airports are hubs for flights into Yellowknife and other northern communities. The Cold Lake Air Force Base in Alberta provides service and support to two arctic military installations (Rankin Inlet and Inuvik).

(16)

7

Alberta is also linked to the North West Territories by rail, connecting to the Mackenzie River Barge system at Hay River, NWT.

In recent years, digital communication tools and expanding marine, air and land-based transportation systems have removed many historic constraints on travel and communication in and through the Canadian North, improving access to the many rich mineral and petroleum deposits that exist above the 60th parallel. The complete isolation of several remote northern communities has consequently been alleviated. In the future, as northern populations grow, new social, economic and environmental imperatives will drive the need for enhanced services in healthcare and education. The use of satellites to provide broadband Internet service to even the most remote communities in the North opens up new opportunities for Alberta to expand its existing role as a key supplier of services, knowledge and goods.

Mining is the largest private industrial sector in the Canadian north, followed closely by oil and gas exploration. Fishing, transportation and tourism also play important roles in northern economies. Alberta has extensive industrial expertise in cold weather engineering, construction, infrastructure design, transportation, and Arctic drilling. This is not to discount the Province’s significant expertise in the delivery of health care and education into remote locations, land management, governance, finance and legal matters as they relate to the North. Alberta universities have an excellent record of research and training in the fields of northern culture, language, and climate and environmental change, making them major institutions for study and research focused on the North.

Due to its immense size and natural resources, the circumpolar region has become a key economic and social priority for many countries. With a population of only 100,000 people, northern jurisdictions in Canada will be forced to seek outside expertise in order to grow their economies. Alberta should begin now to position herself as a globally recognized centre of knowledge, expertise and commerce about the North. The following are significant opportunity areas where Alberta can strengthen and enhance current jurisdictional advantage:

 Advancing resource and economic development in and through the North

 Development of technologies for application in the North, with emphasis on adaptation to northern climatic change

 Promotion of social and cultural resilience in northern populations

 Participation in collaborative national and international networks with the governing institutions in the three Canadian territories, Alaska and other circumpolar nations

(17)

8

 The delivery of northern education and training programs and the remote provision of health care services

As the circumpolar region continues to develop, the global demand for expertise in northern issues across all disciplines will continue to grow. Understanding Alberta’s current and historical relationship with the North is an important first step in capitalizing on the opportunities northern development may present to the province. Understanding the expertise and knowledge that Alberta may contribute to future northern development is the second. This report provides insights and guidance on major future actions that may be undertaken today to ensure that Alberta and the rest of Canada are positioned to play a leadership role in achieving peaceful and sustainable development in the North.

(18)

(19)

10

Challenges of Governing the Circumpolar Region

As economic and geopolitical links between the North and the South tighten, new governance challenges are emerging around social expectations, environmental issues, legal rights and geopolitics.

At present, circumpolar governance entails the multi-layered application of national and international laws and various non-binding international treaties and agreements. International cooperation occurs through mutually agreed upon governance frameworks such as the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the Arctic Council and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Other governance mechanisms are regionally specific, such as the work of the Arctic Council and the Barents Euro-Arctic Council or functionally specific, such as the guidelines for shipping developed under the auspices of the International Maritime Organization (IMO). Governance is further complicated by the fact that the Indigenous peoples of several northern nations have a variety of legally recognized rights and treaty agreements over large tracts of their traditional lands.

National interest in the North is mainly expressed from the perspectives of eight sovereign nations: Canada, Russia, USA, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden (collectively referred to as the Northern Rim Countries) which comprise the geographic North. Rules and regulations may be determined by various international bodies, but are ultimately interpreted at the national level by politicians and regulators or occasionally implemented as voluntary initiatives through groups such as industry associations.

Several other nations that have commercial and/or national security concerns in the circumpolar region have also indicated major interest the North. The powerful influence of large multinational corporations in the development of governance frameworks is also increasingly a factor in circumpolar governance. Many private sector corporations anticipate future economic benefit from accessing northern resources, such as oil, gas and minerals. Through their investments and other business activities, they expect to have strong direct and indirect influence on northern affairs and development strategies. There are many reasons to conclude that the circumpolar region of the world is in the midst of unprecedented change driven by the interacting forces, including globalization, advances in transportation and digital communication technologies and climatic change. How these and other forces interact in coming decades will define the nature and complexity of the social, environmental, economic and associated governance challenges that will emerge.

(20)

11 Social Challenges

The circumpolar region is a vast geographic area and the people who live there are far from homogeneous. A high degree of variability exists in terms of population numbers, ethnicity and values. For example, the population of the relatively small European Arctic outweighs the combined population of Canada’s three territories and a large segment of Russia’s northern regions (see Figure 3). A distinct rural/urban divide further delineates between populations of Indigenous people and Non-indigenous people who have migrated north in more recent times. As the circumpolar region becomes more tightly linked to southern economies, all Northerners will experience profound social and cultural changes, but Indigenous people stand to be the most directly impacted.

Indigenous Peoples’ Rights

Currently, Indigenous people make up a relatively small portion of the total populations in the Northern Rim Countries (an estimated 1 million of the 37 million who live north of the 60th parallel are Indigenous). The relative portion of Indigenous versus non-Indigenous people varies greatly between jurisdictions (see Figures 1 and 2). Greenland, a territory of Denmark, and the Nunavut Territory in Canada have the highest proportion of the Indigenous people (90% and 85%, respectively). Other jurisdictions range from less than 1% in the Scandinavian countries and Iceland, up to 50% in the Northwest Territories of Canada. Historically, Indigenous culture and language knew no political boundaries. It was defined by migration and historical occupation. As colonization occurred, some populations such as the Sami of Scandinavia were divided by state boundaries and defined as being Norwegian, Finnish or Swedish. In many cases the imposed national identity continues to define future prospects and is further complicated by inter-racial marriage.

Among the Northern Rim Countries,the response to demands from Indigenous people for recognition and self-governance has been disparate. In Canada, the Canadian Constitution recognizes the complex nature and uniqueness of the Indigenous societies who have occupied northern landscapes since time immemorial. Through a system of negotiated treaties, Canada recognizes legal rights conveyed by traditional use and occupancy of the land. The manner and degree to which those rights extend, is in many cases, still open to judicial interpretation.

In Russia, Indigenous people have also sought to advance their legal rights, including rights to traditional territories and the resources therein. The Russian government initially responded to an Indigenous lobby by including discrete articles addressing Indigenous rights in a number of its laws, including those related to forests, sub-surface resources, and protected areas. More comprehensive laws, specifically addressing

(21)

12

Indigenous rights to land, were finally adopted in 1999, 2000, and 2001.3_Currently these laws are unevenly applied and also open to legal interpretation.

Figure 3 Population Distribution in the Circumpolar Region, By Country

Source: Hugo Ahlenius, UNEP/GRID-Arendal. URL http://www.grida.no/graphicslib/detail/population-distribution-in-the-circumpolar-arctic-by-country-including-indigenous-population_1282#

3_{V Fondal, G. & Poelzer, G. (2003). Aboriginal land rights in Russia at the beginning of the twenty-first}

(22)

13

The Nordic countries continue to be considered by many to be leaders in the recognition and protection of the rights of Indigenous people. However, according to a United Nations report released in June 2011, “more remains to be done to ensure the Sami people can pursue their self-determination and develop their common goals as a people living across more than one state and that Nordic states should continue existing efforts to advance the rights of Sami people within each of the states in which they live.”4_In Alaska, USA, native claims to almost all of Alaska were extinguished in 1971 in exchange for approximately one-ninth of the state’s land plus a substantial cash settlement. Iceland has no Indigenous population. The Inuit in Greenland continue to lobby Denmark for autonomy and recognition.

While Indigenous people remain a proportionately small part of the northern population, their assertion of aboriginal rights has become a major governance challenge. The coordination of geo-political interests and national laws with the ambitions and rights of Indigenous people requires nuanced thinking regarding a number of key concepts, including identity, citizenship, community, and sovereignty.

In the future, the prosperity of the northern Indigenous people will be determined by many factors. They currently have a strategic position that could become a major factor in future northern development. Unfortunately, success is not assured. Over the long term, the desire of Indigenous people to distinguish themselves as a sovereign people with unique rights to self-governance and the fruits of the lands they have historically occupied may become increasingly problematic to the non-Indigenous majority. The social complexity and multiple layers of governance that characterize self-government could become a destabilizing and therefore, a limiting factor in their ability to capitalize upon emerging opportunities.

National and territorial laws and regulations must be respected and upheld for the collective good of the region and the country. In many cases Indigenous groups control key resources and represent an important component of the labour force. If national regulations are perceived as a barrier to future economic opportunity for Indigenous people, litigation and conflict have the potential to complicate and even discourage many potential northern economic endeavours.

Alternatively, if Indigenous people are able to take full advantage of the opportunities their unique situation affords by raising their prospects through education, good health care, wealth generation and environmental stewardship, many could become major

4_{UN Human Rights Council (2011). Report of the Special Rapporteur on the rights of Indigenous}

(23)

14

players in the global economy. One possible future scenario (see Appendix D) has Indigenous people as a powerful visible minority who have the skills and sophistication required to exist and prosper within a growing multi-cultural and increasingly urban society. In this scenario, traditional language, knowledge and skills may only be preserved as the result of intentional intervention and a future demand for traditional knowledge. Climate change may result in a paradigm shift in the way the relationship between society and the environment is viewed, prompting decision makers to seek out traditional knowledge as a way to inform key decisions.

Like the remainder of the global population, Indigenous people will be significantly impacted if large cross cutting issues such as climate change, geo-economic crisis and global conflict continue to characterize the 21st century. In a highly disrupted future scenario where national economies are weakened, the trend of northern development may reverse. In this future, Indigenous people who have overcome historic socio-economic hurdles and who have education and skills, will be better prepared to pursue success elsewhere in the world. Many Indigenous people will be extremely vulnerable if future circumstances dictate that government support must be reduced due to budgetary constraints. In the absence of a willingness or ability to participate in the global economy, the future prosperity of the Indigenous people in the circumpolar region is unclear.

The Rural /Urban Divide

The urban/rural dichotomy that currently exists in the vast northern landscapes of Canada, Russia, Greenland, and Iceland is likely to persist in coming decades (see Figure 4). For the purposes of this report, rural communities are defined as communities with less than 25,000 people.

Under virtually all positive migration scenarios, northern urban centres will experience higher growth rates than rural communities. Within many northern jurisdictions, people who live in remote rural communities feel that their standard of living, including access to good health care and education, is significantly less than those living in larger northern urban centres, let alone those living in the South. The challenges of delivering health and education services in the North are discussed later in this report. Given that the majority of rural Northerners are Indigenous people, the urban/rural dichotomy could remain a source of tension for the foreseeable future if the disparities it represents remain unaddressed.

A number of factors could contribute to significant population growth in sparsely populated regions of the circumpolar region over the coming decades. Where resource development occurs, labour and expertise will need to be imported from southern

(24)

15

jurisdictions to fill jobs and deliver services. Over the longer term, sovereignty issues may prompt some national governments to incent the settlement of remote northern

(25)

16

locations in order to show occupancy and use of the territory. Increased military deployment into the North may create new urban centers staffed with Southerners who provide the workforce and expertise required for deep sea marine ports, communications installations and airports. As global warming progresses, increasingly hot dry conditions in central and southern latitudes may motivate Southerners to migrate to the comfort and greater productivity of cooler northern jurisdictions. It is fair to assume that most of the future migrants to the North will be people from non-Indigenous ethnic groups and quite possibly from other nations.

Changing demographics in the circumpolar region may exacerbate future regional and local governance issues, particularly if northern Indigenous peoples retain self-government and control over large tracks of resource rich land. In some jurisdictions, small proportional populations mean that Indigenous people will become an increasingly smaller segment of a growing urban and mainly non-Indigenous population. Nunavut and Greenland may be particularly challenged as these are regions where governance and ethnicity are closely linked. Many of the predominantly Indigenous citizens view the land within these political boundaries as ethnic homelands. For example, the consensus-based governance model adopted in Nunavut, Canada, where the population is predominantly Inuit, could lose legitimacy in the face of the expectations of an increasingly large and ethnically diverse immigrant population.

Alternatively, the negative impacts of forces like rapid climate change or terrorism on global geo-economics and national governments could depress the demand for northern resources leaving much of the circumpolar region as an undeveloped hinterland and the people who live there struggling to subsist. If this is the future, urban centers in the North could stagnate as citizens migrate south and rural communities suffer a loss of services and support. Under such dire circumstances, lifestyles for many Northerners may revert back to those experienced during the first half of the 20th century.

Environmental Governance Challenges

The circumpolar region no longer exists in isolation. Historically, much of the circumpolar region was inaccessible due to the inhospitable climate. In recent decades, new cold weather technologies combined with climatic warming have opened the airways, waterways and landscapes to increased human activity. Due to changing climatic conditions, the ecological transformation of the circumpolar region continues apace as does the pressure to exploit the minerals, petroleum reserves, fish and other resources found in northern areas. Environmental degradation of circumpolar terrestrial and marine environments is a key concern associated with future economic growth,

(26)

17

especially since a significant number of unique ecological ecosystems are represented there.

Airborne pollution, improperly stored hazardous wastes from industrial activities, marine shipping accidents, off-shore fishing, military deployment and the impact of climate change are just some of the ways that human activities can impact all circumpolar environments either directly or indirectly. An important and complicating factor is that for the foreseeable future, the ‘environmentally destructive’ industrial activities that most impact the North (including greenhouse gas emissions) will continue to be driven by economic growth in the South. As the degree and pace of human activities in the North increases, the need for broad and inclusive mechanisms to address the governance challenges related to sustainable development will become of greater importance.

Climate Change

Climate change is arguably the most significant environmental challenge in northern latitudes. Climate-driven change is biophysical, social and economic in nature and is often non-linear, abrupt, and possibly irreversible. As global climate change alters wind, precipitation and temperature patterns worldwide, ocean currents may reflect these changes in unpredictable ways. In the future, rising sea levels and increased climate volatility could cause high degrees of system level disruption and generate unprecedented future global strife. The projected climate situation in 2090 is presented in Figure 5; the temperatures are annual values from the NCAR-Community Climate Model3 used by the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The ice and permafrost are from the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment, commissioned by the Arctic Council in 2005.5

Mitigation of climate change is proving to be a daunting governance challenge and a deeply divisive political issue. After seventeen years of work by the United Nations Convention on Climate Change (UNCCC), the goals set out in a fully ratified international agreement on greenhouse gas emission reduction have yet to be achieved. In large part, this is because climate change mitigation presents an unpalatable public policy dilemma. The reduction of atmospheric greenhouse gases demands significant short-term sacrifice on the behalf of individuals and organizations today, for the long-term benefit of the undefined collective at some unspecified time in the future. Furthermore, the phenomenon is global in nature but local in implications. Those jurisdictions prepared to incur the cost of mitigation are at a significant economic disadvantage to those which are not.

5_{Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (2005).}

(27)

18

Figure 5 Projected Temperature Increases, 2090

Source: Hugo Ahlenius, UNEP/GRID-Arendal. URL: http://www.grida.no/graphicslib/detail/increases-in-annual-temperatures-for-a-recent-five-year-period-relative-to-1951-1980_d666#

Climate change is also a North/South issue. Most of the activities that are causing climate change in the North are generated in the larger population centres of the world, which are mainly located in southern latitudes. Many northern people have an increased sense of urgency related to climate change given the profound biophysical changes they are already experiencing but, at the same time, resent the possible imposition of regulations and taxes that could restrict the industrial development required to grow local northern economies.

(28)

19

Climate change is not only impacting environmental systems, it is also a potential threat to global security. By the end of the 21st century, climate driven disruptions may take the form of extreme climatic events (e.g., droughts, floods, storms and changes to ocean currents), potentially leading to acidification of the oceans, rising sea levels, rising conflict over food, water and other resources and mass human migration. The European Environmental Commission has stated that environmental changes are altering geostrategic dynamics of the circumpolar region and that these changes could have consequences for international stability and is, therefore, a matter of global security.6 The World Watch Institute states that climate change may trigger severe disruptions with ever widening consequences for local, regional, and global security.7 In the future, if the degree and pace of biophysical change outstrips the ability of society to develop effective coping mechanisms, the impact of climate change will be globally destabilizing. For the circumpolar region this bodes poorly. The average temperatures in the Arctic continue to rise twice as fast as in the rest of the world. Locally, the relative abundance and distribution of species will continue to change, as do the types of human activity and the geographic regions in which they occur. If the impacts of climate change destabilize governments and disrupt global market forces, many of the economic opportunities that are expected to be realized in the North may be abandoned.

In the face of rapid and profound change, it is reasonable to assume that current environmental laws may need to be refined and new ones developed. Given that the Arctic plays such a key role in regulating global climate, this work will require extraordinary international collaboration to make adaptive social and economic transitions. In the face of rapid and disruptive climate change, decisions may need to be taken that have profound impacts on the North, its people and its environment (i.e., climatic engineering to prevent complete loss of the polar ice cap). Whether Northerners will have a dominant role in these future decisions remains unclear.

Political Challenges

The politics of the circumpolar region is the result of the interacting interests (whether direct or indirect, conflicting or peaceful) of nation states whose territory lies partly or entirely within the region, other nations which have no geographic proximity but do have

6_{European Commission Communication on the European Union and the Arctic Region (EU, Brussels, 20}

November 2008).

(29)

20

significant economic or security interests, and Indigenous people who hold a unique and strategic position in the northern context.

For the foreseeable future, nation states will remain the critical players in responding to the governance needs of the circumpolar region. Only sovereign governments currently have the legal power and international recognition to formulate new regulations and negotiate new international treaties to address large cross-cutting issues such as climate change, national security, trans-boundary pollution and sovereign border disputes.

The political will and cooperation of Canada, Russia, Denmark, Norway and the United States, the five most powerful countries with geographic presence in the circumpolar region (referred to as the Arctic Five), will be major factors in how and whether the circumpolar region is developed. However, nations such as China, South Korea, Italy, France, Germany, Singapore and others have demonstrated increasing interest in the North, particularly as it pertains to emergent sea routes, natural resources, economic opportunity and geopolitical power.

Most of the existing international agreements are voluntary, without legal force. Holding a country or even a foreign company accountable in the face of environmental damage is very difficult. While several collaborative frameworks related to international scientific research and data collection have been successfully established, reaching the same levels of cooperation on international accountability continues to be much more difficult. Resources that have less commercial value will remain the easiest to govern collaboratively. Whereas polar bears compel international cooperation, precious commodities like oil and gas provoke sovereignty claims.

From an environmental perspective, the activities of those operating in the international zones in the circumpolar region remain relatively unregulated and between nations, expectations and standards of practice are often fractured or even absent on some of the most challenging environmental issues. For example, fishery management strategies for open international waters in the Arctic are yet to be developed by the international community. As the polar ice recedes, there are 2.8 million square kilometers of potential new fishing grounds beyond the Exclusive Economic Zones of Canada, Russia, Greenland, Alaska and Norway that are currently unregulated. Some view the circumpolar region as a new frontier requiring its own unique systems of regulation and governance, while others feel that adequate governance structures exist that must simply be applied in the new northern context.

Issues related to international zones that are outside national jurisdictions in the circumpolar region have been addressed with varying levels of success, through a complex array of international treaties, conventions and programs, bilateral agreements,

(30)

21

national and sub national laws, and non-governmental institutions, but more work remains to be done. To date, this multi-layered governance approach has focused on:

 regulation of specific parts of the Arctic marine ecosystems (e.g., the International Convention on the Regulation of Whaling and the UN Fish Stocks Agreement);

 regulation in specific geographical segments of the North (e.g., The North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission);

 regulation of specific activities (e.g., the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships and the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter); and

 species-based management frameworks, such as the International Agreement for the Conservation of Polar Bears and protection of the Beluga Whale.

In the future, as the nature and scope of human activities in the North expands, the need for broad and inclusive mechanisms to address the governance challenges related to commercial development in the circumpolar region must be of increasing priority to invested parties. There has been growing recognition and respect for non-governmental organizations (NGOs), such as the Arctic Council, as increasingly important mechanisms for addressing emerging governance challenges related to the environment. Whether this type of organization can accommodate future governance challenges presented by highly divisive issues such as national security and climate change mitigation, is uncertain.

The Arctic Council

In 1996, the governments of Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, the Russian Federation, Sweden and the United States of America formed the Arctic Council. The main purpose of the organization was to: 8

a) Provide a means for promoting cooperation, coordination and interaction among the Arctic states, with the involvement of the Arctic Indigenous communities and other Arctic inhabitants on common Arctic issues [Arctic Council does not deal with matters of military security], in particular issues of sustainable development and environmental protection in the Arctic.

b) Oversee and coordinate the programs established under the Arctic Environmental Protection Strategy (AEPS) on the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program (AMAP), Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF); Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment (PAME); and Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and Response (EPPR).

c) Adopt terms of reference for and oversee and coordinate a sustainable development program.

8_{Ottawa Declaration on the Establishment of the Arctic Council. Sept 19, 1996. URL:}

(31)

22

d) Disseminate information, encourage education and promote interest in Arctic related issues.

The category of ‘Permanent Participation’ was created to provide for active participation and full consultation with Arctic Indigenous representatives within the Arctic Council. The Inuit Circumpolar Conference (ICC), the Sami Council and the Association of Indigenous Minorities of the North, Siberia and the Far East of the Russian Federation are permanent participants in the Arctic Council. Decisions of the Council are to be made by consensus of the eight member states and the permanent participants. Observer status in the Arctic Council is currently open to non-Arctic states; intergovernmental and inter-parliamentary organizations, global and regional and non-governmental organizations that the Council determines can contribute to its work. When the Council was formed, military and security issues were deliberately omitted from its mandate. Since then, sea ice has receded significantly thereby opening up previously inaccessible regions to threats from terrorists, smugglers, illegal immigrants and industrial spills and other serious environmental degradations. Many of these emerging governance challenges involve matters that are beyond the current mandate of the Arctic Council. However, the Arctic Council is considered by many to be a model that could be expanded to provide the level of coordination to address the complex and over-lapping governance challenges.

The idea of converting the Arctic Council mandate into a more comprehensive treaty may be worth future consideration, but it also raises questions about whether the legal authority, skills and knowledge of current representatives at the table are appropriate to deal with potentially charged geo-political issues such as global security. Recently, countries that have no geographical links to the region like China, Italy, South Korea, Japan and the EU have applied to become permanent observers of the Arctic Council, only to be turned down because Indigenous Permanent Participants fear their interests will be marginalized should large players like China and the EU become part of the Council. It is worth noting that the EU could acquire membership in the Council if Iceland joins the EU. If this were to happen, the EU would bring a different perspective to the table given that its overarching priority is protecting the Arctic environment while allowing for some sustainable resource exploitation.

Conversion of the Arctic Council into some form of legally binding international entity would require intentional and intensive international commitment to fiscal and legal obligations that most world leaders are hesitant to make in the absence of binding internationally recognized legal frameworks for accountability. In its current form, the Arctic Council already faces questions of legitimacy and not all international players give it equal commitment or recognition. While the work of the Council remains important, the effectiveness of the organization is constrained by its legal realities and restricted

(32)

23

mandate. For example, up until 2011 when the Aeronautical and Maritime Search and Rescue agreement (SAR) was signed, none of the agreements negotiated by the Arctic Council were legally binding. Some argue that the ability of the Council to achieve results on the environmental front would be compromised if they try to address politically sensitive issues such as national security and climate change mitigation.

Other organizations are beginning to form in response to rising concerns over sovereignty and security. For example, the Arctic Five (Canada, Russia, Denmark, Norway and the United States) produced the Ilulissat Declaration9 in 2008, which clearly states (see quote below) that from the perspectives of the Arctic Five, there will be no negotiation of an alternative regime for the Arctic Ocean that would be contrary to the provisions of the UN Law of the Sea Convention (UNCLOS).

By virtue of their sovereignty, sovereign rights and jurisdiction in large areas of the Arctic Ocean the five coastal states are in a unique position to address these possibilities and challenges. In this regard, we recall that an extensive international legal framework applies to the Arctic Ocean as discussed between our representatives at the meeting in Oslo on 15 and 16 October 2007 at the level of senior officials. Notably, the law of the sea provides for important rights and obligations concerning the delineation of the outer limits of the continental shelf, the protection of the marine environment, including ice-covered areas, freedom of navigation, marine scientific research, and other uses of the sea. We remain committed to this legal framework and to the orderly settlement of any possible overlapping claims.

This framework provides a solid foundation for responsible management by the five coastal states and other users of this ocean through national implementation and application of relevant provisions. We therefore see no need to develop a new comprehensive international legal regime to govern the Arctic Ocean. We will keep abreast of the developments in the Arctic Ocean and continue to implement appropriate measures.

Critics see the Ilulissat Declaration as an attempt to undermine the Arctic Council, and retract the influence of Indigenous groups. Non-arctic nations see it as an attempt to exclude them from having a role in the future of the region.

Failure to develop new collaborative governance mechanisms increases future northern vulnerability in the face of major disruptive forces such as geo-economic dysfunction or climate change. In the absence of strong governance, powerful national or corporate interests could assume unprecedented power positions in world affairs. Under such a scenario, resource rich jurisdictions such as the North could be exploited.

9_{The Ilulissat Declaration (2008)}

(33)

24

Those living in proximity may gain little social or financial benefit and experience severe environmental degradation over coming decades. For example, in recent years some in China have been vocal in asserting that the Arctic belongs to all.10 The concern is that European and North American Arctic powers will exclude other members of the international community from the potential benefits that the North has to offer. Given that nearly half of China’s GDP is dependent on shipping, there are substantial commercial implications if shipping routes can be shortened in the future by travelling through the Arctic (see Figures 6 and 12).

Figure 6 Shipping Routes: Current vs. Future Arctic Routes

Source: Hugo Ahlenius, UNEP/GRID-Arendal. URL: http://www.grida.no/graphicslib/detail/northern-sea-route-and-the-northwest-passage-compared-with-currently-used-shipping-routes_1336

Since 2004, China has had a permanent land-based research station (Huang He Zhan) in the Svalbard Archipelago, in the Barents Sea. The facility is supposedly dedicated to oceanic and climate research. China is building a new 8,000-tonne icebreaker that will be launched in 2013. The ship will be a companion to its current vessel, the Xuelong, which already operates in the Arctic and Antarctic regions. As the world’s largest consumer of many industrial raw materials and energy, China has implemented a coherent and assertive policy on the acquisition of raw materials and energy sources. The ownership of large modern icebreakers can be interpreted as a clear statement of interest from a country that would benefit significantly from new Arctic shipping lanes and the many resource and energy reserves found in the circumpolar region. China can

10_{Rear Admiral Yin Zhuo in March 2010: “The Arctic belongs to all the people around the world, as no}

nation has sovereignty over it. . . . China must play an indispensable role in Arctic exploration as we have one-fifth of the world’s population.”

(34)

25

be expected to gain further strategic position north of the 60th_{parallel through foreign} policy, military presence, trade, and investment.

China is not alone in her interest or concern about the future governance of the circumpolar region. A host of non-circumpolar states also seek international recognition of their interests in the region. Historically, an ‘interest’ in a jurisdiction has not equated to the right to make decisions about that jurisdiction; in the future this may change. If interest in the North remains strong over the coming decades, nations like China will become prominent players in circumpolar development. Proactively, integrating them into some sort of governance structure that preserves the primary role of sovereign northern nations seems preferable to alienating them.

If the Northern Rim Countries can find a diplomatic approach to productively channel the interests of powerful emerging nations like China, South Korea and others, the possibility of future international collaboration on many other emerging issues is increased. In the absence of new collaborative mechanisms, achieving multilateral cooperation in the circumpolar region will be challenging as international interest intensifies in the coming decades.

The emergence of a new democratically elected governance body that can set and enforce international regulations would go a long way in providing the future stability, accountability and predictability required to facilitate sustainable northern development. The European Union is one possible model. Another may be a United Nations Parliamentary Assembly, made up of elected members who mediate national disputes and make the decisions demanded to ensure future prosperity. There is little assurance that such governance mechanisms will emerge in the future, given the adherence of Northern Rim Countries to their sovereign interests.

Militarization in the Circumpolar Region

The fact that the nation states most interested in the circumpolar region are highly industrialized and globally powerful is a key consideration for the future of the North. Many industrialized nations have expressed that the Arctic is of high geo-strategic value. Consequently, the circumpolar region is now approaching a level of militarization not witnessed since the Cold War. Militarization appears to be driven to a great degree by sovereignty concerns, commercial ambitions and to a lesser degree, by security threats such as criminal acts and terrorism. Canada, Norway, Denmark and Russia have each indicated a considerable expansion of their respective military capacities in the region. Canada has announced plans to build six to eight offshore vessels; build one large icebreaker; expand Indigenous surveillance capacity, create a Northern

(35)

26

Reserve Unit based in the Arctic, develop an army training base in Resolute and develop a deep water resupply port in Nanisivik.11

Denmark has already made a significant investment in armed ice-capable patrol vessels that have the capability to take on additional anti-air and anti-ship defence systems. The Danish Air Force also has recently considered the acquisition of F-35 fighter jets, capable of Arctic operations.

Norway is also engaged in a very substantial rebuilding of her forces, including five frigates equipped with superior air combat capability, and the purchase of forty-eight F-35 fighter jets.

Russia’s 2007-2015 rearmament program calls for a general rebuilding of Russian military forces, including the construction of several new submarines and new nuclear powered icebreakers. Since 2007, Russia has been increasing military activity and the size of her forces in the Arctic.

The US has maintained Arctic military capabilities throughout the post-Cold War era and has always considered the Arctic as vital to US national security.

China is now ranked third in global military capacity, after the US and Russia, the United Kingdom is fifth and South Korea is seventh, followed by France and Japan respectively.12 In one possible future scenario, some or all of these states will choose to exert their presence in the North through increased arms deployment, physical occupation, and international alliances. It is also reasonable to speculate whether the current military power of the US and others will remain dominant. The emergence of other military superpowers could certainly reposition geo-political players in the North.

However, what currently appears to be an upward trend in militarization within the circumpolar region may flatten or even reverse. There are no guarantees that future international interest in the circumpolar region will continue to grow. Should major forces such as global recession or the development of new alternative disruptive energy technologies occur, many nation states may decide to redirect their efforts and investments away from the North. Severe and rapid climatic change could also force many nations to abandon their aspirations in the circumpolar region and reallocate available financial and other resources to addressing national emergencies such as food shortages and drought.

11_{Rob Hu}_{ebert, “Canada and the Changing International Arctic: At the Crossroads of Cooperation}

and Conflict” in Northern Exposure: Peoples, Powers and Prospects for Canada’s North edited by Frances Abele, Thomas J. Courchene, F. Leslie Seidle and France St-Hilaire (Montreal: IRPP).

(36)

27

The Future Role of Multinationals in Northern Development

Governance is the result of the dynamic interplay of public and private actors. Large multinational corporations have the money and experience required to translate the resources of the North into economic opportunities. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that much future development in the circumpolar region will be driven by corporations.

Increasing market demand is expected to drive the exploitation of natural resources well into the 21st century. Under such a scenario, the opportunity to attract direct foreign investment may be extremely appealing for various Indigenous communities in the circumpolar region. In recent years many multinational corporations have quietly gained control over large portions of the natural resources that exist in the circumpolar regions. In particular, Indigenous people have begun to directly enter into business alliances with large multinational corporations. In exchange for resource exploration and production rights, they are promised benefits such as local employment and profit sharing. The long-term advantages derived from such arrangements will largely be a function of how well they negotiate.

Well managed public/private partnerships have the potential to expedite the commercial development of resources in a sustainable manner that benefits all northerners. In the absence of strong institutions and good governance, public–private partnerships can pose risks for community dependency and government neutrality. Through taxes, fees and wages, multinationals add hard currency to local economies, build infrastructure, and often raise the local standard of living. As a result, large corporations can wield disproportionate power through the threat of withdrawal, elimination of competition, and aggressive support of favourable political representatives.

Interaction between a particular people and the global economy is creating a new governance context that clearly challenges existing political decision-making structures. Multinational corporations are already centres of economic power that increasingly challenge the sovereignty of some nation states.

In the future, if national governments are weakened by fiscal constraints or other internal national crisis, multinational corporations could gain extraordinary global dominance. By occupying the void government contraction would create, multinational corporations might undertake northern development in the pursuit of narrow corporate interests. In this future, those who work for large corporate entities would thrive while those who lacked such employment would, in all likelihood, suffer a dramatic reduction in their standard of living, including access to quality education and healthcare. Entities that enter into partnerships with large multinationals could lose control if future

(37)

28

governing bodies are not strong enough to counter the narrow commercial interests of these corporations. A clear and effective regulatory environment is critical to minimizing negative externalities of foreign investment by large multinationals.

It is also worth considering the special role of large multinational insurance companies. Most commercial strategies are based on the willingness of private-sector insurance agencies to underwrite potential loss. If in the future, large multinational insurance companies cease to cover losses resulting from climate change, many commercial endeavours in the North may simply not be pursued. Without the ability to manage risk through insurance, the feasibility of many proposed future activities, such as marine shipping, the installation of communication complexes, expansion of infrastructure, etc. will be deemed unfeasible. Withdrawal of insurance coverage due to natural disaster would have profound implications for any future development in the North.

Summary

In coming decades, changing climatic conditions will remain a significant driver in the circumpolar region. In order to support costs that must be incurred to address climate change and ensure sustainable future development in the North, intensive and effective international cooperation is required. However the future may evolve, the greatest governance challenges by 2050 will occur when coordinated responses are required that must alleviate significant tensions: the trade-offs between economic prosperity and environmental degradation, individual versus collective rights, racial discrimination, northern versus southern interests, and public versus private sector interests. These are not governance challenges that are unique to the North, but they are more pronounced in a huge geographic landscape inhabited by a small but highly diverse population. Under all future scenarios, harmonization of international agreements with national laws and the ambitions of northern Indigenous peoples will remain challenging. Competing objectives will make the achievement of cohesive governance over such a vast but important region of the world extremely challenging. A significant source of future conflict will be the divide between those who see the North as a resource –rich area ripe for extraction and those who are deeply concerned about the fragile ecosystems that characterize the North. In isolation, national and regional approaches will not achieve the cohesion required to address large cross-cutting issues impacting the circumpolar region (such as climate change). While some international organizations have exhibited some capacity to create cohesive governance frameworks to deal with trans-boundary environmental issues, they currently lack the weight of binding international law to ensure appropriate investment, commitment and compliance from all the national and international players involved in northern development.

(38)

29

Cooperation and resources are required from the international community to respond to the receding Arctic ice and all the future issues associated with climatic change. Nationally, sovereignty issues must be resolved as they relate to the determination of national waters and geopolitical boundaries. Regionally, major adaptation is necessary in the way of life for many northern Indigenous peoples.

In the absence of such collaboration, governance in the circumpolar region will likely continue to reflect the will of the most influential, whether they are significant investors such as multinationals, sovereign nations, or the southern majorities. This does not bode well for Indigenous society, small communities and less powerful nations which try to exert their sovereign rights in the region. How future human activities in the circumpolar region should be governed is a question of significant future importance to which the answer is presently unknown.

The Global North 2050

Jasper Innovation Forum 2011

Summary Report

The Global North 2050

Summary Report

Jasper Innovation Forum 2011

The Global North 2050

Jasper Innovation

Forum 2011

The Jasper Innovation Forum 2011

was made possible with financial support from:

The Jasper Innovation Forum 2011 and this

Table of Contents

Executive Summary

Introduction

Alberta’s Interest in the North

Challenges of Governing the Circumpolar Region

Environmental Governance Challenges

Political Challenges

Militarization in the Circumpolar Region

The Future Role of Multinationals in Northern Development

Summary