GOVERING THE ARCTIC
PARTNERSHIP As explained in the previous chapter, several bodies work together at various scales to govern the Arctic. The bodies consist of the surrounding nations as well as the indigenous people, the commercial actors and the scientist. To bring the interest points of each of these groups together, the bodies I touched upon earlier try to built a frame in which the voices of each party can be heard. I will use the term ‘partnership’, from Mitchell James to propose a solution to govern the changing environment of the Arctic region. A region that needs to deal with political uncertainty, social and demographic change, and shifting landscapes. ‘Partnership’ can give structure to maintain peace and bring all the different voices existing in the region together. LVI Currently, the factors that need to be tackled within the Arctic poses challenges for humans to respond, but at the same time also open the field for new ideas and approaches. The notion of partnership has proven to be very efficient in reducing hazards. For exemple, during Hurricane Katrina it worked as a efficient and potential instrument for change. It brings together several voices and bridges the gap between public and privat sectors as well as between experts and laypersons.LVII These charasteristics show that within the Arctic, this notion can work as a potential instrument of change and bring together the priorities of all actors to govern the area. The disadvantage of partnership is that it only lasts as long as these nations have the same interest and experience a similar benefit. Within the Arctic, this is a delicate balance since the environment is rapidly changing, which poses different benefits for the various parties. Therefore, the connection will probably weaken or disappear.LVIII Now, the Arctic Five and Arctic Council try to govern this delicate balance. They use soft laws to establish a global habitat, a place that is influenced by different actors from around the whole world; in the Arctic Council, these actors got the status of observers.LIX As such, China and France both called itself a ‘near-Arctic state,’ and other nations such as Swiss expressed itself to be a ‘vertical Arctic country’; even Scotland said they were the ‘closest Arctic neighbour.’LX
26
