Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T18:13:55.842Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Articulating the Arctic: contrasting state and Inuit maps of the Canadian north

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 May 2016

Mia M. Bennett ,
Wilfrid Greaves ,
Rudolf Riedlsperger  and
Alberic Botella
Mia M. Bennett
Affiliation:
Department of Geography, University of California, Los Angeles, 1255 Bunche Hall Box 951524, Los Angeles, California, 90095, USA ([email protected])
Wilfrid Greaves
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, University of Toronto, 100 St. George Street, Toronto, Ontario, M5S 3G3, Canada
Rudolf Riedlsperger
Affiliation:
Department of Geography, Memorial University of Newfoundland, Science Building SN-1020, St. John's, Newfoundland and Labrador A1B 3X9, Canada
Alberic Botella
Affiliation:
Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, K1N 6N5, Canada
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper compares four maps produced by the Canadian government and Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, the indigenous peoples’ organisation representing Inuit living in the four recognised Inuit regions (Inuit Nunangat) of Canada. Our analysis is based on publicly available maps, documents, and records and extends the rich existing literature examining the history of definitions of the Canadian north. Distinctly, our research aims to understand the different ways in which the Arctic has been articulated as a geographic, political, and social region during the Harper government (2006–2015) and the effects these articulations have had on northern policy and people. We find that the federal government maintained a flexible definition of the Canadian Arctic as a region when in pursuit of its own policy objectives. However, when it comes to incorporating areas outside the boundaries of Canada's three federal territories, particularly communities along their southern fringes, those boundaries are inflexible. The people who live in these areas, which the state considers to be outside the Canadian Arctic, are marginalised within Arctic public policy in terms of access to federal funds, determination of land use, and a sense of social belonging to the Canadian Arctic. Our goal in this paper is to demonstrate that national-level disputes over what constitutes ‘the Arctic’ can significantly impact the day-to-day lives of people who live within and just outside the region, however it is conceived.

Type
THEMED SECTION: Arctic in the Anthropocene: sustainability in a new polar age
Information
Polar Record , Volume 52 , Issue 6 , November 2016 , pp. 630 - 644
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

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

ACIA (Arctic Climate Impact Assessment). 2004. Impacts of a warming climate: Arctic climate impact assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Aglukkaq, L. 2012. Northern vision: realizing the north's economic potential. Northern Public Affairs 1 (2): 31–33.Google Scholar
Agrawal, A. 2002. Indigenous knowledge and the politics of classification. International Social Science Journal 54 (173): 287–297.Google Scholar
Aporta, C. 2009. The trail as home: Inuit and their pan–Arctic network of routes. Human Ecology 37 (2): 131–146.Google Scholar
Council, Arctic. n.d. Arctic boundaries [map]. URL: http://www.arctic-council.org/images/PDF_attachments/Maps/boundaries.pdf (accessed 18 October 2015).Google Scholar
Arima, E. 1994. Caribou and Iglulik Inuit kayaks. Arctic 47 (2): 193–195.Google Scholar
Becklumb, P. 2013. Federal and provincial jurisdiction to regulate environmental issues. Ottawa: Government of Canada (Background paper no. 2013–86–E. Ottawa: Parliamentary Information and Research Service). URL: http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/LOP/ResearchPublications/2013-86-e.htm (accessed 20 October 2015).Google Scholar
Blunden, M. 2009. The new problem of Arctic stability. Survival 51 (5): 121–142.Google Scholar
Bone, R. 2009. The Canadian north: issues and challenges. Don Mills: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Broadhead, L. 2010. Canadian sovereignty versus northern security: the case for updating our mental map of the Arctic. International Journal 65 (4): 913–930.Google Scholar
Bravo, M.T. 2009. Voices from the sea ice: the reception of climate impact narratives. Journal of Historical Geography 35 (2): 256–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byers, M. 2009. Who owns the Arctic: understanding sovereignty disputes in the north. Vancouver: Douglas and McIntyre.Google Scholar
Canada. 2009. Canada's northern strategy: our north, our heritage, our future. Ottawa: Government of Canada. URL: http://www.northernstrategy.gc.ca/cns/cns.pdf (accessed 28 June 2015).Google Scholar
Canada. 2011. Achievements under Canada's northern strategy. Ottawa: Government of Canada, Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development. URL: http://www.northernstrategy.gc.ca/cns/au-eng.pdf (accessed 18 November 2014).Google Scholar
Castree, N. 1997. Nature, economy and the cultural politics of theory: the ‘war against the seals’ in the Bering Sea, 1870–1911. Geoforum 28 (1): 1–20.Google Scholar
Chapin, M., Lamb, Z. and Threlkeld, B.. 2005. Mapping indigenous land. Annual Review of Anthropology 34: 619–638.Google Scholar
Coates, K. and Poelzer, G.. 2014. The next northern challenge: the reality of the provincial north. MLI Commentary, April 2014.Google Scholar
Crampton, J.W. 2011. Mapping: a critical introduction to cartography and GIS. Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Dodds, K. 2010. Flag planting and finger pointing: the Law of the Sea, the Arctic and the political geographies of the outer continental shelf. Political Geography 29 (2): 63–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dodds, K. 2011. We are a northern country: Stephen Harper and the Canadian Arctic. Polar Record 47 (4): 371–374.Google Scholar
Edney, M.H. 1993. Cartography without progress: reinterpreting the nature and historical development of mapmaking. Cartographica 30 (2–3): 54–68.Google Scholar
Ejesiak, K. 2013. An Arctic Inuit union: a case of the Inuit of Canada, Greenland, the United States and Russia. In: Nickels, S. (editor). Nilliajut: Inuit perspectives on security, patriotism, and sovereignty. Ottawa: Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami: 66–71.Google Scholar
Escobar, A. 2001. Culture sits in places: reflections on globalism and subaltern strategies of localization. Political Geography 20 (2): 139–174.Google Scholar
Fenge, T. 2008. Inuit and the Nunavut Land Claim Agreement: supporting Canada's Arctic sovereignty. Policy Options 29 (1): 84–88.Google Scholar
Fenge, T. 2013. Asserting Inuit sovereignty in the Arctic: Inuit and the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement. In: Nickels, S. (editor). Nilliajut: Inuit perspectives on security, patriotism, and sovereignty. Ottawa: Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami: 49–53.Google Scholar
Gearheard, S., Aporta, C., Aipellee, G., and other. 2011. The Igliniit project: Inuit hunters document life on the trail to map and monitor arctic change. The Canadian Geographer/Le Géographe canadien 55 (1): 42–55.Google Scholar
Gerhardt, H., Steinberg, P.E., Tasch, J. and others. 2010. Contested sovereignty in a changing Arctic. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 100 (4): 992–1002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gibson, G. and Klinck, J.. 2005. Canada's resilient north: the impact of mining on aboriginal communities. Pimatisiwin 3 (1): 116–139.Google Scholar
Grace, S.E. 2002. Canada and the idea of North. Montreal: McGill–Queen's University Press.Google Scholar
Hamelin, L.E. 1979. Canadian nordicity: It's your north too. (trans. Barr, W.). Montreal: Harvest House.Google Scholar
Harley, J.B. 1988. Maps, knowledge, and power. In: Cosgrove, D. and Daniels, S. (editors). The iconography of the landscape. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 277–312.Google Scholar
Harley, J.B. 1989. Deconstructing the map. Cartographica 26 (2): 1–20.Google Scholar
Heininen, L. 2012. State of the Arctic strategies and policies – a summary. In: Heininen, L. (editor). Arctic Yearbook 2012. Akureyri, Iceland: Northern Research Forum.Google Scholar
ICC (Inuit Circumpolar Council). 2008. The sea ice is our highway: an Inuit perspective on transportation in the Arctic. Ottawa: ICC. URL: http://www.inuitcircumpolar.com/uploads/3/0/5/4/30542564/20080423_iccamsa_finalpdfprint.pdf (accessed 12 July 2015).Google Scholar
ICC (Inuit Circumpolar Council). 2011. A circumpolar Inuit declaration on resource development principles in Inuit Nunaat. Nuuk: Inuit Circumpolar Council.Google Scholar
ITK (Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami). n.d. About ITK. Ottawa: ITK. URL: https://www.itk.ca/about–itk (accessed 12 July 2015).Google Scholar
ITK (Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami). 2005. Kanatami Inuit Nunalingit [Inuit communities of Canada]. Ottawa: ITK. URL: https://www.itk.ca/system/files_force/20050922-itk-communities-map.pdf (accessed 27 June 2015).Google Scholar
ITK (Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami). 2008a. An integrated Arctic strategy. Ottawa: ITK. URL: https://www.itk.ca/sites/default/files/Integrated-Arctic-Stratgey.pdf (accessed 12 July 2015).Google Scholar
ITK (Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami). 2008b. Sikunga Ausuittuq Ammalu Inuit [Polar Ice and the Inuit]. Ottawa: ITK. URL: https://www.itk.ca/system/files_force/Polar_ice_map.pdf (accessed 12 July 2015).Google Scholar
ITK (Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami). 2011. Speaking notes for John Cheechoo. (Presented to the Standing Committee on Natural Resources, 23 November 2011). Ottawa: Canada. URL: https://www.itk.ca/media/presentation/nov-23-2011-standing-committee-natural-resources (accessed 28 June 2015).Google Scholar
Keeling, A. and Sandlos, J.. 2009. Environmental justice goes underground? Historical notes from Canada's northern mining frontier. Environmental Justice 2 (3): 117–125.Google Scholar
Keskitalo, E. 2004. Negotiating the Arctic: the construction of an international region. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
King, T. 2012. The inconvenient Indian: a curious account of Native people in North America. Toronto: Doubleday Canada.Google Scholar
McCannon, J. 2012. A history of the Arctic: nature, exploration and exploitation. London: Reaktion Books.Google Scholar
Mifflin, M. 2008. Canada's Arctic sovereignty and Nunavut's place in the federation. Policy Options 29 (7): 86–90.Google Scholar
Monmonier, M. 1991. How to lie with maps. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Morton, W.L. 1960. The north in Canadian history. North 7 (1): 26–29.Google Scholar
Müller–Wille, L. 1989. Place names, territoriality, and sovereignty: Inuit perception of space in Nunavik (Canadian Eastern Arctic). Schweizerische Amerikanisten–Gesellschaft. Bulletin 53–54: 17–21.Google Scholar
Mundy, B. 2000. The mapping of New Spain: indigenous cartography and the maps of the Relaciones Geograficas. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
National Defence and the Canadian Armed Forces. 2013. Ottawa: Government of Canada. URL: http://www.forces.gc.ca/en/news/article.page?doc=canadian-armed-forces-arctic-training-centre/hkdons6l (accessed 12 July 2015).Google Scholar
NRCan (Natural Resources Canada). 2012. Report: Evaluation of geo–mapping for energy and minerals program. Ottawa: NRCan. URL: http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/evaluation/reports/2012/800 (accessed 28 June 2015).Google Scholar
NRCan (Natural Resources Canada). 2015. GEM: Geo–mapping for energy and minerals. Ottawa: NRCan. URL: http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/earth-sciences/resources/federal-programs/geomapping-energy-minerals/10904 (accessed 28 June 2015).Google Scholar
Nicolas, M.P.B. and Lavoie, D.. 2009. Hudson Bay and Foxe Basin's project: introduction to the geo–mapping for energy and minerals, GEM–Energy initiative, northeastern Manitoba (parts of NTS 54). Winnipeg: Manitoba Science, Technology, Energy and Mines, Manitoba Geological Survey (Report of activities 2009): 160–164.Google Scholar
Nunatsiavut Government 2012. Nunatsiavut strategic plan 2012–2015. Nain: Nunatsiavut Government.Google Scholar
Nuttall, M. 2013. Zero–tolerance, uranium and Greenland's mining future. The Polar Journal 3 (2): 368–383.Google Scholar
Office of the Geographer. 1976. Continental shelf boundary: Canada–Greenland. Limits in the seas, No. 72. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Intelligence and Research.Google Scholar
Okladnikova, E. 1998. Traditional cartography in Arctic and Subarctic Eurasia. In: Woodward, D. and Lewis, G. Malcolm (editors). The history of cartography Vol 2, Book 3. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Ong, A. 2001. Graduated sovereignty in South–East Asia. Theory, Culture & Society 17 (4): 55–75.Google Scholar
Peluso, N.L. 1995. Whose woods are these? Counter–mapping forest territories in Kalimantan, Indonesia. Antipode 27 (4): 383–406.Google Scholar
Poole, P. 1995. Indigenous peoples, mapping and biodiversity conservation: an analysis of current activities and opportunities for applying geomatics technologies. Washington, DC: Biodiversity Support Program.Google Scholar
Price, M.D. and Cooper, C.W.. 2007. Competing visions, shifting boundaries: the construction of Latin America as a world region. Journal of Geography 106 (3): 113–122.Google Scholar
Prime Minister of Canada. 2008. Prime Minister Harper announces the Geo–mapping for Northern Energy and Minerals program. 26 August. Ottawa: Government of Canada. URL: http://www.pm.gc.ca/eng/news/2008/08/26/prime-minister-harper-announces-geo-mapping-northern-energy-and-minerals-program (accessed 13 July 2015).Google Scholar
Qikiqtani Inuit Association. 2012. Tallurutiup Tariunga Inulik: Inuit participation in determining the future of Lancaster Sound Inuit Association. URL: http://cpaws.org/uploads/Lancaster_Sound_Report_Feb_2012.pdf (accessed 27 June 2015) Iqaluit: Qikiqtani.Google Scholar
Rundstrom, R. 1990. A cultural interpretation of Inuit map accuracy. Geographical Review 80 (2): 155–168.Google Scholar
Sikor, T. and Lund, C.. 2009. Access and property: a question of power and authority. Development and Change 40 (1): 1–22.Google Scholar
Spink, J., and Moodie, W.D.. 1972. Eskimo maps from the Canadian Eastern Arctic. Toronto: Department of Geography, York University.Google Scholar
Spivak, G.C. 1988. Can the subaltern speak? In: Williams, P. and Chrisman, L. (editors), Colonial discourse and post–colonial theory. New York: Columbia University Press: 66–111.Google Scholar
Standing Committee on National Defence. 2009. Evidence, No. 038, Second Session, 40th Parliament. 5 November. Ottawa: Government of Canada. URL: http://www.parl.gc.ca/content/hoc/Committee/402/NDDN/Evidence/EV4214442/NDDNEV38-E.PDF (accessed 12 July 2015).Google Scholar
Tester, F. and Kulchyski, P.. 1994. Tammarniit (Mistakes): Inuit relocation in the Eastern Arctic, 1939–63. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.Google Scholar
Tobias, T.N. 2009. Living proof: the essential data–collection guide for indigenous use–and–occupancy map surveys. Vancouver: Ecotrust Canada/Union of BC Indian Chiefs.Google Scholar
Vandergeest, P. 1996. Mapping nature: territorialization of forest rights in Thailand. Society and Natural Resources 9 (2): 159–175.Google Scholar
Vandergeest, P. and Peluso, N.L.. 1995. Territorialization and state power in Thailand. Theory and Society 24 (3): 385–426.Google Scholar
Wastl–Walter, D. and Staeheli, L.A.. 2004. Territory, territoriality, and boundaries. In: Staeheli, L.A., Kofman, E. and Peake, L. (editors). Mapping gender, making politics: feminist perspectives on political geography. New York: Routledge: 141–151.Google Scholar
Wenzel, G.W. 2009. Canadian Inuit subsistence and ecological instability—if the climate changes, must the Inuit? Polar Research 28 (1): 89–99.Google Scholar
Wonders, W. C. 2003. Canada's changing north. Montreal: McGill–Queen's University Press.Google Scholar
Young, O.R. and Einarsson, N.. 2004. Introduction: human development in the Arctic. In: Arctic Human Development Report 2004. Akureyri: Steffanson Arctic Institute.Google Scholar