Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T14:12:58.480Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Whither the Arctic? Conflict or cooperation in the circumpolar north

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2009

Oran R. Young
Oran R. Young*
Affiliation:
Bren School of Environmental Science and Management, University of California at Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-5131, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Biophysical changes underway in the Arctic have stirred a remarkable surge of interest and concern in many quarters, including non-Arctic states and non-state actors. This article explores the implications of these developments for the pursuit of governance in the region. Many reactions to this situation are more alarmist than alarming. But recent developments do provide an excellent opportunity to reassess the effectiveness of existing arrangements and to enquire about the need for new forms of governance. The article does not support the claims of those who argue that a comprehensive, legally binding Arctic treaty (or even an Arctic Charter) is required at this time. Rather, it argues the case for a somewhat messier but more effective tripartite governance complex featuring an agreement to set aside without extinguishing claims to extended continental shelf jurisdiction on the part of the littoral states, an effort to adjust the character of the Arctic Council to meet emerging needs in the Arctic, and a push to devise issue-specific regulative regimes to address concerns involving shipping, fishing, and off-shore oil and gas development.

Type
Research Article
Information
Polar Record , Volume 45 , Issue 1 , January 2009 , pp. 73 - 82
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abbott, K., and Snidal, D.. 2000. Hard and soft law in international governance. International Organization 54: 431–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
ACIA (Arctic Climate Impact Assessment). 2004. Impacts of a warming Arctic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
AMAP (Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme). 2007. Arctic Oil and Gas 2007. Oslo: AMAP.Google Scholar
Antarctic Treaty. 1959. Adopted 1 December 1959. 402 UNTS; entered into force 23 June 1961.Google Scholar
Beck, P.J. 1986. The international politics of Antarctica. New York: St. Martin's Press.Google Scholar
Borgerson, S.G. 2008. Arctic meltdown: the economic and security implications of global warming. Foreign Affairs 87: 63–77.Google Scholar
Cressey, D. 2008. The next land rush. Nature 451: 12–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dhanapala, J. 2008. Arctic security problems – a multilateral perspective. Vancouver: Simon Fraser University (public lecture 12 March 2008).Google Scholar
Downie, D.L., and Fenge, T. (editors). 2003. Northern lights against POPs: combating toxic threats in the Arctic. Montreal: McGill-Queen's University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graff, J. 2007. Fight for the top of the world. Time: 1 October 2007.URL: www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1663445,00.htmlGoogle Scholar
Hoel, A.H. 2007. Jurisdictional issues in the Arctic. Oslo Files on Defence and Security 02/08: 39–47.Google Scholar
Huebert, R., and Yaeger, B.B.. 2008. A new sea: the need for a regional agreement on management and conservation of the Arctic marine environment. Oslo: WWF International Arctic Programme.Google Scholar
Lipson, C. 1991. ‘Why are some international agreements informal? International Organization 45: 495–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nazavisimaya Gazeta. 2008. A very cold war for energy resources. Nazavisimaya Gazeta [Independent Newspaper]: 11 March 2008.Google Scholar
Nowlan, L. 2001. Arctic legal regime for environmental protection. Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge: IUCN (Environmental Policy and Law Paper 44).Google Scholar
PAME (Working Group on the Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment). 2006. Arctic marine shipping assessment: progress report. Svartsengi, Iceland: PAME International Secretariat.Google Scholar
Peterson, M.J. 1988. Managing the frozen south: the creation and evolution of the Antarctic Treaty System. Berkeley: University of California PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rayfuse, R. 2007. Melting moments: the future of polar oceans governance in a warming world. Receil 18: 196–216.Google Scholar
Scrivener, D. 1989. Gorbachev's Murmansk speech: the Soviet initiative and western response. Oslo: Norwegian Atlantic Committee.Google Scholar
Skjaerseth, J.B. 2000. North Sea cooperation: linking international and domestic pollution control. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Stokke, O.S., Anderson, L.G., and Mirovitskaya, N.. 1999. The Barents Sea Fisheries. In: Young, O.R. (editor). The effectiveness of international environmental regimes: causal connections and behavioral mechanisms. Cambridge MA: MIT Press: 91–154.Google Scholar
Stokke, O.S., and Honneland, G. (editors). 2007. International cooperation and Arctic governance: regime effectiveness and northern region building. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wade, R. 2008. Why a warmer Arctic needs new laws. The Financial Times 15 January 2008.Google Scholar
Young, O.R. 1996. The Arctic Council: marking a new era in international relations. New York: The Twentieth Century Fund (a Twentieth Century Fund report).Google Scholar
Young, O.R. 2002. Arctic governance: preparing for the next phase. Tromsø, Norway (presented at the Arctic Parliamentary Conference, Tromsø, Norway, 11–13 August 2002). URL: http://www.arcticparl.org/resource/images/conf5scpa/20021.pdfGoogle Scholar
Young, O.R. 2005. Governing the Arctic: from cold war theater to mosaic of cooperation. Global Governance 11: 9–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar