Search results

International audience ; This article analyses the governance process of offshore oil and gas activities in the Arctic with the concept of multilevel governance and legal pluralism to address both issues of management of the environment and public participation. The analysis goes beyond the single issue of fragmentation pertaining to the international and supranational levels, to encompass national and regional levels and evaluate how the interactions between those levels structure the policy process and impact the efficiency of environmental management and public participation. Four paths of reflection arise from the analysis. First it is unlikely that a dualistic vision opposing a normative option and an enabling option opens new avenues for solutions but the evolution of international law and customary international law deserves attention and a certain level of harmonisation may be welcome, for instance to cooperate efficiently on the prevention of an oil spill and the response to it. A second path relates to the institutional settings and proposes considering the stress lines pertaining to the entanglement of public and indigenous rights and authorities and the consequences at the local level. A third path suggests options pertaining to contract law to not only optimise the operator-regulator interface, but also more generally to offer a stable framework for inclusive dialogue between actors. In the end, the analysis of the rationale for engaging in offshore activities in the Arctic region, from a state perspective and from regional government, indigenous shareholders and corporation perspectives, could be helpful in providing relevant actors with arguments to weigh the decision on seismic and drilling activities in relation to risk acceptance. The concept of governance, which first emerged in the field of public policy, entered the field of international relations to allow the analysis of decision-making processes in societies as they become more complex, and to highlight the role of non-state actors in the ...

International audience ; This article analyses the governance process of offshore oil and gas activities in the Arctic with the concept of multilevel governance and legal pluralism to address both issues of management of the environment and public participation. The analysis goes beyond the single issue of fragmentation pertaining to the international and supranational levels, to encompass national and regional levels and evaluate how the interactions between those levels structure the policy process and impact the efficiency of environmental management and public participation. Four paths of reflection arise from the analysis. First it is unlikely that a dualistic vision opposing a normative option and an enabling option opens new avenues for solutions but the evolution of international law and customary international law deserves attention and a certain level of harmonisation may be welcome, for instance to cooperate efficiently on the prevention of an oil spill and the response to it. A second path relates to the institutional settings and proposes considering the stress lines pertaining to the entanglement of public and indigenous rights and authorities and the consequences at the local level. A third path suggests options pertaining to contract law to not only optimise the operator-regulator interface, but also more generally to offer a stable framework for inclusive dialogue between actors. In the end, the analysis of the rationale for engaging in offshore activities in the Arctic region, from a state perspective and from regional government, indigenous shareholders and corporation perspectives, could be helpful in providing relevant actors with arguments to weigh the decision on seismic and drilling activities in relation to risk acceptance. The concept of governance, which first emerged in the field of public policy, entered the field of international relations to allow the analysis of decision-making processes in societies as they become more complex, and to highlight the role of non-state actors in the ...

This article analyses the governance process of offshore oil and gas activities in the Arctic with the concept of multilevelgovernance and legal pluralism to address both issues of management of the environment and public participation. The analysis goes beyond the single issue of fragmentation pertaining to the international and supranational levels, to encompass national and regional levels and evaluate how the interactions between those levels structure the policy process and impact the efficiency of environmental management and public participation. Four paths of reflection arise from the analysis. First it is unlikely that a dualistic vision opposing a normative option and an enabling option opens new avenues for solutions but the evolution of international law and customary international law deserves attention and a certain level of harmonisation may be welcome, for instance to cooperate efficiently on the prevention of an oil spill and the response to it. A second path relates to the institutional settings and proposes considering the stress lines pertaining to the entanglement of public and indigenous rights and authorities and the consequences at the local level. A third path suggests options pertaining to contract law to not only optimise the operator-regulator interface, but also more generally to offer a stable framework for inclusive dialogue between actors. In the end, the analysis of the rationale for engaging in offshore activities in the Arctic region, from a state perspective and from regional government, indigenous shareholders and corporation perspectives, could be helpful in providing relevant actors with arguments to weigh the decision on seismic and drilling activities in relation to risk acceptance.

The author proposes an analysis of Inuit governance at the national and international level, discussing the evolving involvement of Inuit in policymaking. She examines the negotiation processes with governments and the role environmental knowledge might play in this process and shows that the emergence of Inuit political thought during the colonization process in most cases preceded the question of land claims, and underlines the restraints of political power granted to Inuit through land claims agreements and selfgovernment at the national level, with the notable exception of Greenland. The chapter then examines how environmental issues have been the driver for involving Inuit representatives on the international level. The author argues that in the State-centred present system of political participation in forums such as the Arctic Council, there is little probability that the advances of environmental law will suffice for Inuit populations to be associated in the decision-making process in the areas where decisions are being made more and more through international politics.

The author proposes an analysis of Inuit governance at the national and international level, discussing the evolving involvement of Inuit in policymaking. She examines the negotiation processes with governments and the role environmental knowledge might play in this process and shows that the emergence of Inuit political thought during the colonization process in most cases preceded the question of land claims, and underlines the restraints of political power granted to Inuit through land claims agreements and selfgovernment at the national level, with the notable exception of Greenland. The chapter then examines how environmental issues have been the driver for involving Inuit representatives on the international level. The author argues that in the State-centred present system of political participation in forums such as the Arctic Council, there is little probability that the advances of environmental law will suffice for Inuit populations to be associated in the decision-making process in the areas where decisions are being made more and more through international politics.

The author proposes an analysis of Inuit governance at the national and international level, discussing the evolving involvement of Inuit in policymaking. She examines the negotiation processes with governments and the role environmental knowledge might play in this process and shows that the emergence of Inuit political thought during the colonization process in most cases preceded the question of land claims, and underlines the restraints of political power granted to Inuit through land claims agreements and selfgovernment at the national level, with the notable exception of Greenland. The chapter then examines how environmental issues have been the driver for involving Inuit representatives on the international level. The author argues that in the State-centred present system of political participation in forums such as the Arctic Council, there is little probability that the advances of environmental law will suffice for Inuit populations to be associated in the decision-making process in the areas where decisions are being made more and more through international politics.

À la fin des années 1990, la création du Nunavut est remarquée sur le plan national et international car elle signifie la reconnaissance institutionnelle d'une population autochtone par une grande puissance dans un contexte de mondialisation. Cet article analyse les objectifs et les moyens de la politique culturelle du Canada à destination de ses terres arctiques, objectifs qui s'expriment en termes économique, politique et identitaire à travers le développement de l'art et de l'artisanat inuit. Progressivement, l'action du gouvernement évolue d'une gestion paternaliste, voire coloniale, à une politique ouverte à la reconnaissance de la différence et au partage des pouvoirs. Les représentants politiques inuit ont su s'appuyer sur des structures mises en place pour le développement des arts afin d'appuyer des revendications territoriales, et ont parallèlement bénéficié de l'émergence d'une identité collective qui a pu s'exprimer publiquement. L'engagement du gouvernement canadien évolue d'avantage encore vers le souhait d'une politique étrangère cohérente que le Territoire du Nunavut permet d'asseoir au sein de l'ensemble circumpolaire.

À la fin des années 1990, la création du Nunavut est remarquée sur le plan national et international car elle signifie la reconnaissance institutionnelle d'une population autochtone par une grande puissance dans un contexte de mondialisation. Cet article analyse les objectifs et les moyens de la politique culturelle du Canada à destination de ses terres arctiques, objectifs qui s'expriment en termes économique, politique et identitaire à travers le développement de l'art et de l'artisanat inuit. Progressivement, l'action du gouvernement évolue d'une gestion paternaliste, voire coloniale, à une politique ouverte à la reconnaissance de la différence et au partage des pouvoirs. Les représentants politiques inuit ont su s'appuyer sur des structures mises en place pour le développement des arts afin d'appuyer des revendications territoriales, et ont parallèlement bénéficié de l'émergence d'une identité collective qui a pu s'exprimer publiquement. L'engagement du gouvernement canadien évolue d'avantage encore vers le souhait d'une politique étrangère cohérente que le Territoire du Nunavut permet d'asseoir au sein de l'ensemble circumpolaire.

À la fin des années 1990, la création du Nunavut est remarquée sur le plan national et international car elle signifie la reconnaissance institutionnelle d'une population autochtone par une grande puissance dans un contexte de mondialisation. Cet article analyse les objectifs et les moyens de la politique culturelle du Canada à destination de ses terres arctiques, objectifs qui s'expriment en termes économique, politique et identitaire à travers le développement de l'art et de l'artisanat inuit. Progressivement, l'action du gouvernement évolue d'une gestion paternaliste, voire coloniale, à une politique ouverte à la reconnaissance de la différence et au partage des pouvoirs. Les représentants politiques inuit ont su s'appuyer sur des structures mises en place pour le développement des arts afin d'appuyer des revendications territoriales, et ont parallèlement bénéficié de l'émergence d'une identité collective qui a pu s'exprimer publiquement. L'engagement du gouvernement canadien évolue d'avantage encore vers le souhait d'une politique étrangère cohérente que le Territoire du Nunavut permet d'asseoir au sein de l'ensemble circumpolaire.

International audience ; Coherence, a fundamental principle of European Union (EU) foreign policy remains a challenge for the EU. For example, the development of an EU Arctic policy raises both internal and external challenges as two non-Arctic member states, France and Germany, move to establish their own Arctic policies. Internally, EU inter-institutional coherence has also been difficult to achieve as shown by the first effort to draft an EU Arctic policy and by the EU regulation on trade in seal products. However, internal coherence has significantly improved since 2008, and the Parliament, Commission, and Council now maintain similar positions, yet the EU is still waiting for its admission to the Arctic Council. External coherence between EU member states on Arctic issues has proven to be more elusive. France is using high-level diplomacy to define its Arctic agenda, and is clearly challenging the EU consensus on cooperation as an unambitious policy. Germany is pointing at inefficiencies regarding the coordination of EU member states while taking a more collaborative approach with Arctic countries and maintaining close ties with the EU. Although EU Arctic policy is now entering a new phase of maturity, the EU will require better coordination and a clearer vision of its role in order to position itself as an effective foreign-policy stakeholder in the Arctic, in particular when new powerful actors like Asian states enter the geopolitics and geo-economics of the Arctic.

International audience ; Coherence, a fundamental principle of European Union (EU) foreign policy remains a challenge for the EU. For example, the development of an EU Arctic policy raises both internal and external challenges as two non-Arctic member states, France and Germany, move to establish their own Arctic policies. Internally, EU inter-institutional coherence has also been difficult to achieve as shown by the first effort to draft an EU Arctic policy and by the EU regulation on trade in seal products. However, internal coherence has significantly improved since 2008, and the Parliament, Commission, and Council now maintain similar positions, yet the EU is still waiting for its admission to the Arctic Council. External coherence between EU member states on Arctic issues has proven to be more elusive. France is using high-level diplomacy to define its Arctic agenda, and is clearly challenging the EU consensus on cooperation as an unambitious policy. Germany is pointing at inefficiencies regarding the coordination of EU member states while taking a more collaborative approach with Arctic countries and maintaining close ties with the EU. Although EU Arctic policy is now entering a new phase of maturity, the EU will require better coordination and a clearer vision of its role in order to position itself as an effective foreign-policy stakeholder in the Arctic, in particular when new powerful actors like Asian states enter the geopolitics and geo-economics of the Arctic.

"Global energy problems will remain a challenge in the coming decades. The impact of climate change and the melting of polar sea ice opening up access to offshore hydrocarbon resources in the Arctic Ocean, raises questions for both civil society and the scientific community over drilling opportunities in Arctic marine areas. Disparities in approach to the governance of oil and gas extraction in the Arctic arise from fundamental differences in histories, cultures, domestic constraints and substantive values and attitudes in the Arctic coastal states and sub-states. Differing political systems, legal traditions and societal beliefs with regard to energy security and economic development, environmental protection, legitimacy of decision making, and the ownership and respect of the rights of indigenous people, all affect how governance systems of oil and gas extraction are designed. Using a multidisciplinary approach and case studies from the USA, Norway, Russia, Canada, Greenland/Denmark and the EU, this book both examines the current governance of extraction and its effects and considers ways to enhance the efficiency of environmental management and public participation in this system."--Provided by publisher.