Kamrul Hossain

The EU Ban on the Import of Seal Products and the WTO Regulations: Neglected Human Rights of the Arctic Indigenous Peoples?

The EU ban on the import and commercializing of seals and seal products in the EU market has attracted intense attention in recent years. As seal products mostly originate from outside the EU, it is argued that the EU action has been discriminatory and hence contrary to the WTO regulations. Canada and Norway have been critical of the EU regulation and have initiated dispute settlement procedures within the WTO since most of the products that enter into the internal market are mainly from these countries. The ban also provoked anger within the Inuit and other indigenous communities, mainly from Canada and Greenland. Although the EU regulation provides an exception for Inuit and indigenous hunts and the subsequent commercialization of resulting products into the internal market, the exception suffers from clarity and lacks proper implementation procedures. The regulation is predicted to lead to the ultimate disappearance of the seal market in the EU, which directly affects the Inuit and indigenous peoples engaged in sealing activities. They are subject to lose their means of subsistence. While analysing the critical issues concerning the EU and the WTO regulations and its exceptions, the article focuses on the human rights perspective of the Arctic indigenous peoples affected by the EU ban.

Understanding Risks Associated with Offshore Hydrocarbon Development

Arctic sea ice is rapidly reducing due to climatic changes occurring in the region, allowing for easier access to vast amounts of undiscovered oil and gas resources. In recent years, growing interest in exploitation of Arctic hydrocarbon resources has led to an increase in exploration activity. Nevertheless, because of the Arctic’s harsh conditions, activities remain costly and are linked to serious environmental risks for vulnerable and unique Arctic ecosystems. Clean-up of potential oil spills would be highly complicated, if not impossible, and routine operational activities connected to hydrocarbon development, such as drilling or increased shipping traffic, have adverse consequences on marine flora and fauna. This chapter examines past, current, and potential future hydrocarbon activities in the Arctic, associated environmental impacts from accidents as well as normal operations, and possible cooperation between the European Union (EU) and United States (US) in mitigating the adverse environmental consequences of oil and gas development. Possibilities for transatlantic cooperation regarding hydrocarbon development in the Arctic are considered, including the use of legal and institutional frameworks to which both the EU and US have commitments.

Arctic ontologies: reframing the relationship between humans and rangifer

ABSTRACT This paper shows how to reframe the Arctic by recognizing the existence of different ontological assumptions about what is the Arctic and who dwells in it. This ontological divergence can be appreciated in the different relationship with animals of the genus rangifer (caribou, reindeer) that western and indigenous peoples have. This paper illustrates such differences by bringing two examples of interactions between indigenous peoples and rangifer in two very different parts of the world, Labrador in Northern Canada and Northern Scandinavia. These examples show that indigenous peoples give rangifer a sentient, social status whose level of autonomy is comparable to the humans. In the current framing of the Arctic as a land of resource development claimed by several Nation-states, conflict between states and indigenous peoples cannot be avoided because even when legislation attempts to accommodate cultural differences, it is powerless to recognize the universal validity of the assumed entities that exist in the legislation’s jurisdiction. If a re-framing of the arctic aims to facilitate the coexistence of different worlds in which animals are a different type of entity, it has to promote mutual understandings that are as balanced as possible.

How Great Can a 'Greater Say' Be? Exploring the Aspirations of Arctic Indigenous Peoples for a Stronger Engagement in Decision-Making

Over the past couple of decades, the aspirations of Arctic indigenous peoples for a stronger engagement in decision-making have become of crucial importance. Like in many other regions of the world, Arctic indigenous peoples have close links to their traditional lands and surrounding natural environment. The preservation of these links is of notable significance to the survival and identity of these peoples. The rapid transformation of the Arctic resulted mainly from climate change, has caused significant impacts on the lives and livelihoods of indigenous peoples in the region. Even though indigenous peoples are active in Arctic dialogues, by means of participating in Arctic Council meetings, for example, their collective role in the decision-making process is still a passive one. Southerly situated governments with apparently little knowledge of interaction between indigenous peoples and their unique environment predominantly control governance in the region, which in turn problematises fair decision-making. Consequently, the debate on the extent of indigenous peoples’ say in the decision-making process regarding matters directly concerning and affecting them has remained remarkably significant to both politics and international law. While considering the aspirations of Arctic indigenous peoples for a greater say in the decision-making process, this study concludes that a strengthened role of indigenous actors certainly makes Arctic governance more legitimate. However, the present structure of Arctic governance provides unequal footing for indigenous peoples to effectively engage in decision-making.

International Governance in the Arctic: The Law of the Sea Convention with a Special Focus on Offshore Oil and Gas

Unlike Antarctica, the Arctic can boast no region-specific treaty that comprehensively covers the challenges it faces, including potential threats to its marine areas. The Arctic states are, however, subjects of many international and regional legal instruments, most of which fall within the area of international environmental law. There are major differences between the two Polar Regions: the Antarctic is a frozen continent surrounded by ocean, whereas the Arctic is frozen ocean surrounded by continents.

Japan’s admission to the Arctic Council and commitment to the rights of its indigenous Ainu people

Abstract In 2013, Japan, along with four other Asian countries, was admitted to the Arctic Council (AC) as an observer. Japan’s admission to the AC is noteworthy because of the expansion of its interests in the Arctic region. Japan’s admission, as with the other observers in the AC, has been met by its willingness to pay due respect to the core values the AC holds, including respect for the rights of the indigenous peoples of the region. In this way, Japan has essentially agreed to respecting indigenous rights as part of its Arctic engagement. Japan has its own indigenous peoples within its own territory to whom it is committed. The main question this article examines is how the rights of indigenous peoples, as permanent participants in the AC to which Japan has committed to pay due respect as part of its Arctic engagement, are compatible with Japan’s commitment at the national level to protect the rights of its own indigenous peoples, especially the Ainu.

What Types of Foods Are Available in the Arctic-Barents Region?

To measure its food security, it is important to explore what types of foods are available in the Arctic-Barents region and what is being produced in the region. The information on available food products identifies possible areas of novel developments that can stimulate the economic growth of the region. It is hoped that best practices can be shared through cross-border collaborations, especially by stimulating the small and medium enterprises that engage in the traditional food business. It is equally important that the available foods in the region are well managed to ensure security; the key factor is to add value to these foods in such a way that it makes a difference to the living standard of the population in the region. Given that there are other factors that will influence food security and its governance in the Barents region, accurate statistical data on the common foods that are grown, harvested or fished are beneficial. The production figures for cereal grains and potatoes in the region are lower in comparison to those obtained in the southern region of the four countries in the Barents region.

Issues of Food (In) security in the Barents Region

This chapter discusses how the Barents Cooperation has moved on from environmental sustainability to include other areas of cooperation that will help to better manage the resources in the Barents region. Food insecurity, as one of the threats to human security, is affected by external factors such as political and economic changes. These changes are likely to have pronounced effects on the land and aquatic and terrestrial resources in the Arctic-Barents region. Climate challenges are expected to lead to crises related to food supplies, with a rise in imported or market foods and less access to traditional foods. The consumption of more market foods at the expense of traditional foods has been reported to increase the risk of several diseases, such as obesity, diabetes and cardio-vascular diseases, in the region. In addition, due to increasing interests in the region, human activities, tourism and other commercial activities have resulted in increased environmental pollution, which this chapter presents as a concern related to food security in the region.

Food Security and the Arctic-Barents Communities

This chapter briefly discusses the traditional livelihood in relation to food practices, such as reindeer herding, fishing and other such practices in the Arctic-Barents region. The chapter, based on future scenario-building workshops held in various communities across the region, brings a perspective on how these communities relate to food security. The workshops revealed that food security is linked to other issues such as climate change, human activities, globalization and the high prices of foods in groceries. These related issues were reported to have climatic, social and environmental impacts in the region. The important role of food in connecting families, groups and communities across the region as a means of strengthening food sovereignty is also highlighted. The chapter also addresses the similarities and differences between traditional foods among the indigenous groups (Saami, Komi, Nenets, Veps and Pomors) and non-indigenous peoples in the Barents region. Furthermore, the chapter discusses how food is linked to tradition and culture, which can help to boost the economic security of these communities, for example, by promoting food culture as part of tourism in the region.

Knowledge Gaps and Recommendations: An Analysis

The issue of food security is complex, as it encompasses not only the supply of food but also other interrelated issues, including politics, economics and social aspects. In addition, the processing of foods from farm to plate should reach consumers in a safe and unadulterated form. Food security is a broad concept that incorporates a wide range of factors that creates the baseline for the concept. Within this range of factors, we identified a number of challenges and threats to food security. We also integrated the concept of food sovereignty, not only to focus the concerns on the availability of food but also to encompass a number of other crucial matters that are directly related to the way food is produced as well as by whom and where it is produced. While slightly different in the sense that food sovereignty looks at issues such as from where food comes, or the conditions under which it is produced and distributed, we place these issues under the broader framework of food security. However, as the promotion of food security indicates guaranteeing availability, often subsidies and policies that destroy local food producers but benefit agribusiness corporations are supported. However, due to limitations in finding adequate materials, we cannot analyze every aspect of food security prevalent in the Arctic-Barents region, but we can provide a broad overview of gaps in regard to how laws and policies could be better addressed to promote the governance of food security. Therefore, the recommendations and suggestions in this chapter merely concern ways to improve and enhance food security in the Barents region based on our cited research materials and interviews.