Search results

This comparative article reveals how the general focus of Canadian and Russian threat perceptions in the Arctic have shifted from a Cold War fixation on hard defence to accommodate soft security issues over the last three decades. Both countries now pay greater attention to threats and challenges stemming from climate change, security, and safety risks associated with resource development and increasingly accessible sea routes. Although concern about military conflict arising from Arctic disputes continues to frame some media discussions in both countries, most strategic analysts and academics have moved away from this line of argument. Instead, military functions now include assertion of Canadian and Russian sovereignty over their respective internal waters, as well as protection of resources in their exclusive economic zones and on and in extended continental shelves; protection of economic interests in the North, including mineral and bio-resources; prevention of potential terrorist attacks against critical industrial and state infrastructure; and dual-use functions, such as search and rescue operations, surveillance of air and maritime spaces, support to safe navigation, and mitigation of natural and human-made catastrophes.
The authors argue that analysts should parse two forms of military modernization in the Arctic: one of capability development related to the global strategic balance, where the Arctic serves as a bastion or a thoroughfare; and a second intended to address emerging non-traditional security challenges. They contend that these modernization programs do not inherently upset the Arctic military balance and need not provoke a regional arms race.

Press, Profession and Politics is a festschrift in honor of Paul Bjerke, who celebrated his 70th birthday on 2 October 2022. Bjerke has had a far-reaching career in journalism, research and as a social commentator. This festschrift consists of research articles, professional literature, and congratulatory texts from colleagues and collaborators in the media and academic communities. The anthology includes new analyses of various aspects of professional journalistic practice and reflections on the realities of journalism today.

Three key concepts are central to an understanding of Paul Bjerke's research work: press, profession and politics. These concepts comprise the title of the festschrift and are also used to structure its content, with the goal in mind of providing insight into some of the work Bjerke has contributed, as well as linking the texts in this anthology to his research activities. In addition, we gain insight into his many years as a journalist, news editor, and finally, the editor of Klassekampen.

This book will be of interest to media researchers and researchers in other disciplines concerned with the function of the media in society, as well as students and practitioners. - Presse, profesjon og politikk er et festskrift til Paul Bjerke, som fyller 70 år 2. oktober 2022. Bjerke har en allsidig karriere bak seg innen journalistikk, forskning og som samfunnsdebattant. Dette festskriftet samler forskningsartikler, fagartikler og hilsningstekster fra kolleger og samarbeidspartnere i presse og forskning. Boka inneholder nye analyser av forskjellige sider ved journalistisk profesjonspraksis og refleksjon rundt den virkeligheten journalistikken befinner seg i.

Tre hovedbegreper er sentrale når Paul Bjerkes forskergjerning skal sammenfattes: presse, profesjon og politikk. Disse utgjør tittelen på dette festskriftet og er også brukt for å organisere stoffet. Målet er både å gi et innblikk i en del av de arbeidene Bjerke har bidratt med, og samtidig koble tekstene i dette festskriftet til hans forskervirke. I denne boka får vi dessuten et innblikk i hans mange år som journalist, nyhetsredaktør og til slutt redaktør i Klassekampen.

Boka retter seg mot medieforskere, forskere innen andre fagdisipliner med interesse for medienes funksjon i samfunnet, studenter og praktikere.

Most studies of Asian state involvement in Arctic affairs assume that shorter sea-lanes to Europe are a major driver of interest, so this article begins by examining the prominence of shipping concerns in Arctic policy statements made by major Asian states. Using a bottom-up approach, we consider the advantages of Arctic sea routes over the Suez and Panama alternatives in light of the political, bureaucratic and economic conditions surrounding shipping and shipbuilding in China, Japan and the Republic of Korea. Especially Japanese and Korean policy documents indicate soberness rather than optimism concerning Arctic sea routes, noting the remaining limitations and the need for in-depth feasibility studies. That policymakers show greater caution than analysts, links in with our second finding: in Japan and Korea, maritime-sector bureaucracies responsible for industries with Arctic experience have been closely involved in policy development, more so than in China. Thirdly, we find a clear tendency towards rising industry-level caution and restraint in all three countries, reflecting financial difficulties in several major companies as well as growing sensitivity to the economic and political risks associated with the Arctic routes. Finally, our examination of bilateral and multilateral Chinese, Japanese and Korean diplomatic activity concerning Arctic shipping exhibits a lower profile than indicated by earlier studies.

This paper examines how a transnational corporation (TNC) translates global standards and corporate policies into programs at sites of extraction. We explore this question through a comparative analysis of ExxonMobil's operations in two different politico-economic contexts: the Sakhalin-1 project in Russia and the Point Thomson project on the North Slope of Alaska, with field work on Sakhalin Island in 2013–2015 and in Alaska in 2015–2018. Theoretically, we use the Deleuzian concept of "diagram" as a lens through which to examine corporate policies, and a governance generating network (GGN) approach to analyze similarities and differences in benefit-sharing programs in both localities. We show that while global commitments and corporate principles contribute to a standardized approach to community engagement, Indigenous movements and associations, the government, and other corporate actors may play important roles in influencing how corporate policies and global standards are implemented at sites of extraction. Moreover, adaptation of community engagement, benefit-sharing, and environmental monitoring in one location may shape how the company's strategies are implemented in other sites of extraction.

This article reviews and compares Canadian and Russian approaches to Arctic fisheries management through a three-part format. First, the complex array of laws and policies applicable to Arctic fisheries is described for each country. How Canada and Russia have addressed international fishery issues is also highlighted, including their participation in the 2018 Central Arctic Ocean Fisheries Agreement. Second, commonalities in fisheries governance approaches are summarized, including national commitments to implement precautionary and ecosystem approaches. Finally, contrasts in Arctic fisheries management are discussed. Major differences include the greater devolution of management responsibilities by Canada to Indigenous communities through land-claim agreements and co-management arrangements and Russia's greater success in formalizing bilateral fisheries management arrangements with its neighbours.