Suchergebnisse

Greenland needs development. Oil and mineral extraction is pursued as a means to achieve economical growth. Fisheries, hunting and tourism are the main pillars in the Greenland economy in 2015. These businesses are however sensitive to potential negative impacts from oil and gas development. Local benefits are expected to derive from oil and gas projects, but these benefits cannot be achieved without careful planning and project management. To secure that negative impacts are mitigated and that positive outcomes are achieved, Impact Assessments (IA) have been implemented as in the Greenlandic regulation system in relation to oil and gas projects to promote sustainable development. Additional Impact Benefit Agreements (IBA) have to be negotiated between the communities potentially affected, the Government and the oil companies to assure that social investments are made to secure long-term benefits for the local communities. In the following sections I present a short description of the current situation in Greenland in relation to oil and gas development, then the Impact Assessment tool is introduced and how the tool is included in the oil and gas project management practice for offshore oil exploration in Greenland. Finally I discuss challenges related to securing local benefits when implementing this new industry.

Baggrundspapiret har fokus på samfundsmæssige konsekvenser og afledte effekter af råstofprojekter i Grønland. Papiret fokuserer på de forskellige faser for råstofprojekter og gennemgår de formelle krav og metoder, der anvendes til vurdering af råstoffernes effekter på samfundet i Grønland i dag: Social Impact Assessment (SIA) og Impact Benefit Agreement (IBA).

Although Greenland has pursued hydrocarbon development over the last four decades, no viable reserves have been found to date. Therefore, local Greenland communities have little experience or knowledge of how such development might affect their way of life or how to influence project development and outcomes should a significant reserve be found. On the North Slope of Alaska, in contrast, hydrocarbon extraction was commercialized in the 1970s, and the industry is now highly developed. North Slope residents have experienced dramatic influences on their everyday lives and well-being as a result of large-scale hydrocarbon projects. Some consequences have been welcomed, such as economic development and higher employment rates; however, other impacts are harmful, such as reduced ability of local peoples to maintain subsistence hunting practices. The villages on Alaska's North Slope share many features in common with settlements in Greenland, such as small size, isolation, and limited political influence. In this study, we explore how Greenlanders might learn from the Alaska experience by examining the comments of North Slope residents. We propose that increased local-to-local recommendation-sharing across the Arctic would better guide sustainable development practices and benefits into potential future projects in Greenland. We conclude that an Arctic "Community Guide" and the process to create one could improve planning and implementation of hydrocarbon projects across the Arctic and promote locally appropriate sustainable development in the affected communities. ; Bien que le Groenland se soit adonné à l'exploration d'hydrocarbures ces quatre dernières décennies, aucune réserve rentable n'a été trouvée à ce jour. Par conséquent, les communautés du Groenland possèdent peu d'expérience ou de connaissances pour savoir comment des travaux de mise en valeur pourraient modifier leur mode de vie ou comment elles pourraient influencer le développement et les résultats d'un projet en cas de découverte de réserves importantes. En revanche, sur le North Slope de l'Alaska, l'extraction d'hydrocarbures a été commercialisée dans les années 1970, si bien que cette industrie y est maintenant fortement développée. La vie de tous les jours et le bien-être des résidents du North Slope ont connu des influences dramatiques en raison d'importants projets de mise en valeur d'hydrocarbures. Certaines incidences ont été bien accueillies, comme le développement économique et la hausse des taux d'emploi, mais d'autres ont été nuisibles, comme la diminution des occasions de pratiquer la chasse de subsistance dans la région. Les villages du North Slope de l'Alaska ont de nombreuses caractéristiques en commun avec ceux du Groenland, comme leur petite taille, leur isolement et leur influence politique restreinte. Dans cette étude, nous explorons la façon dont les Groenlandais pourraient tirer profit de l'expérience de l'Alaska en dépouillant les commentaires des gens du North Slope. Nous proposons que le partage accru de recommandations locales à l'échelle de l'Arctique permettrait de mieux orienter les pratiques de développement durable et leurs retombées dans le cadre de projets susceptibles de se concrétiser plus tard au Groenland. Nous concluons en affirmant qu'un « guide communautaire » de l'Arctique et le processus de création d'un tel guide pourraient améliorer la planification et la mise en oeuvre de projets d'hydrocarbures dans l'Arctique, en plus de favoriser un développement durable local adéquat dans les localités concernées.

The article reflects on the challenges to Greenland's impact assessment (IA) system in a planning and policy context, and discusses if and how IA at a strategic decision level could contribute to securing good environmental management and support sustainable development. This is done by focusing on two value-rational questions: (1) Where are we going with industrial development, IA regulation and IA practice in Greenland? and (2) What should be done? The two questions are answered through a gap analysis of legislation and IA practice and through the values for a future IA system in Greenland expressed by key actors. The research points to a need for strategic considerations in relation to planning new industries, which could be met by upstreamed IAs. A broad concept of environment in IAs, increased participation in the process and accessibility to the IA statement for all stakeholders are needed. ; The full text file available is an electronic version of an article published in Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal © 2010 Copyright Taylor & Francis; Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal is available online at www.tandfonline.com http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17449642.2010.519139

(Published: May 2016)Citation: R. L. Johnstone and A. M. Hansen. "Introduction to the Arctic Oil and Gas Research Centre." Arctic Review on Law and Politics, Vol. 7, No. 1, 2016, pp. 107–108. http://dx.doi.org/10.17585/arctic.v7.421

(Published: May 2016)Citation: R. L. Johnstone and A. M. Hansen. "Introduction to the Arctic Oil and Gas Research Centre." Arctic Review on Law and Politics, Vol. 7, No. 1, 2016, pp. 107–108. http://dx.doi.org/10.17585/arctic.v7.421

Mineral extraction is pursued in Greenland to strengthen the national economy. In order that new industries promote sustainable development, environmental impact assessments and social impact assessments are legally required and undertaken by companies prior to license approval to inform decision-making. Knowledge systems in Arctic indigenous communities have evolved through adaptive processes over generations, and indigenous knowledge (IK) is considered a great source of information on local environments and related ecosystem services. In Greenland the Inuit are in the majority, and Greenlanders are still considered indigenous. The Inuit Circumpolar Council stresses that utilizing IK is highly relevant in the Greenland context. Impact assessment processes involve stakeholder engagement and public participation, and hence offer arenas for potential knowledge sharing and thereby the utilization of IK. Based on the assumption that IK is a valuable knowledge resource, which can supplement and improve impact assessments in Greenland thus supporting sustainable development, this paper presents an investigation of how IK is utilized in the last stages of an impact assessment process when the final report is subject to a hearing in three recent mining projects in Greenland.

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a policy tool implemented worldwide, to secure considerations of environmental and social impacts as well as democratic decision-making processes, when planning large-scale projects. Many EIAs related to implementation of renewable energy (RE) projects are subject to disputes in Europe, including Denmark. Here, some RE projects lead to citizens forming protest groups and authorities abandoning plans. This is a significant obstacle for implementation of RE policies. This paper investigates the role of EIA, specifically the handling of social impacts, in such conflicts. The paper presents a study of cases of RE projects in Denmark, analysed using a framework based on conflict theories. It is found that social impacts of concern to residents are not properly addressed in EIAs. This constitutes a contradiction between the concerns of the public and the focus of assessments and discussions, forming part of the basis for conflict. Additionally, there is a negative perception among residents of the behaviour of authorities and proponents, which contributes to tensions and leads to mistrust and opposition. It is concluded that to mitigate conflicts over future RE projects and improve the implementation of RE policies, specific improvements can be made in the EIA content and processes.

The recent rapid expansion of extractive industries in Greenland is both causing high hopes for the future and anxieties among the local population. In the Arctic context, even small projects carry risks of major social impacts at local and national scales, and have the potential to severely affect the way of life of local indigenous peoples. The effective identification and management of social impacts is therefore essential. We explore the challenges associated with on-going development as perceived by people in Greenland. We also review and synthesize the regulatory tools used to ensure social issues are adequately managed and taken into consideration when regulatory approval of new projects is considered. We found that there are many issues of concern. Of particular interest is the lack of trust by the public in the capacity of the Government of Greenland to protect local values. We suggest that, in the context of Greenland, social impact assessment is needed, not only at the project level, but also at the policy level carried out by or on behalf of the government and prior to project planning. We also advocate for the use of free, prior and informed consent.