The issue of increased human activities in the context of area protection and
management is of very high relevance, specifically with respect to the Arctic. Due
to climate change, which continues to be widespread in the Arctic, and in some
cases, dramatic, new prospects for economic development arise. Reduced sea ice,
for example, is very likely to increase marine transport and access to resources.
At the same time, the region is faced with numerous environmental challenges
like those of projected shifting of vegetation zones and wide-ranging impacts on
animal species' diversity, ranges, and distribution. On the base of these
developments, it is very likely that interests of maximum resource extraction and
energy production conflict with those of keeping the environment pristine. In
consequence, “an extension of natural reserves/wilderness parks both on land and
at sea might need to be considered as the price for letting local populations and
incomers enjoy more unrestrained development in the remaining areas”.
The Arctic is home to many indigenous peoples, including reindeer herders,
hunters, fishermen and nomads. They all share one common feature: their
dependency on a healthy environment to support their livelihoods and chosen
ways of life. They are the descendants of peoples who followed the retreating icecap in Europe, spread out over northern Siberia and the Russian Far East, and
crossed the Bering Strait some 4,000 years ago or more. Indigenous peoples are
particularly impacted by climate change because of their cultural and physical
dependence on the environment, and their frequent lack of access to the resources
necessary to avoid the impacts of detrimental changes in their environment. In
such a situation they might find themselves in the middle of those conflicting
interests described above: on the one hand, defending their environment from
external desirousness and from this point of view supporting the designation of
certain areas as especially protected for their livelihoods, on the other hand,
having an interest to participate in economic developments and to be engaged in
the exploration of natural resources. Against this background, indigenous
peoples' rights are of important significance in the context of area protection and
management in the Arctic.[...]
Table of Contents
Chapter 1 Introduction
1.1 Background and aim of the research
1.2 Structure of the thesis and method of the research
1.3 Definitions
a) Area Protection and Management
b) Indigenous Peoples
c) Implementation
Chapter 2 Indigenous peoples and area protection
2.1 Different perspectives – the exclusionary approach
2.2 A shift in paradigm
Chapter 3 What are the most important indigenous peoples’ rights in relation to area protection and management?
3.1 Right to self-determination
3.2 Rights to lands, territories and resources
3.3 Right to Full and Effective Participation
3.4 Principle of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC)
Chapter 4 Recognition of indigenous peoples' rights in the human rights context
4.1 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966)
4.1.1 Right to self-determination
4.1.2 Rights to lands, territories and resources
4.1.3 The right to full and effective participation
4.1.4 Principle of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC)
4.2 Implementation of ICCPR indigenous peoples' rights in the context of area protection and management in national legislation
4.2.1 Finland
4.2.2 Norway
4.2.3 Russian Federation
4.2.4 Sweden
Chapter 5 Recognition of indigenous peoples' rights in the environmental protection context
5.1 International conservation policy
5.2 Regional conservation policy - Area protection and management in the Arctic
5.3 The Convention on Biological Diversity (1992)
5.3.1 Indigenous peoples related provisions and programmes of work
5.3.2 The programme of work on protected areas and its relation to indigenous peoples
5.4 Implementation of CBD obligations in relation to indigenous peoples' rights in the context of area protection and management in national legislation and policies
5.4.1 Finland
5.4.1.1 The protected area system of Finland
5.4.1.2 Implementation of the CBD Programme of work on protected areas
5.4.2 Norway
5.4.2.1 The protected area system of Norway
5.4.2.2 Implementation of the CBD Programme of work on protected areas
5.4.3 Russian Federation
5.4.3.1 The protected area system of the Russian Federation
5.4.3.2 Implementation of the CBD Programme of work on protected areas
5.4.4 Sweden
5.4.4.1 The protected area system of Sweden
5.4.4.2 Implementation of the CBD Programme of work on protected areas
Chapter 6 Conclusion
6.1 Analysis of the implementation of indigenous peoples' rights
6.1.1 Human Rights context
6.1.2 Environmental Protection context
6.2 Correlations between the implementation of indigenous peoples' rights in the one context and the other
6.3 Recommendations
Research Objectives and Key Topics
This thesis investigates the extent to which the rights of indigenous peoples are recognized and implemented within the framework of area protection and management in the Arctic. By adopting a comparative "top-down" approach, the research analyzes how international obligations regarding indigenous rights under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) are integrated into the national legal systems of Finland, Norway, Russia, and Sweden.
- The status of implementation of indigenous rights in human rights and environmental protection contexts.
- The interrelationship and correlations between human rights and environmental protection frameworks.
- The specific legal approaches to indigenous rights in the four selected Arctic states.
- The challenges and opportunities for integrating indigenous knowledge and participation in area management.
- Recommendations for strengthening the recognition and protection of indigenous interests in Arctic conservation strategies.
Excerpt from the Book
2.1 Different perspectives – the exclusionary approach
First of all, indigenous people feel often irritated being confronted with western philosophy of 'conservation', or as expressed by Janis B. Alcorn: “... there is no direct translation for the word "conservation" in any non-European language. It is generally translated as "respecting Nature," "taking care of things," or "doing things right." Indigenous peoples [thus] often find the Western idea of "conservation" as something to be separated from the rest of their activities as strange.”
Beside these irritations, the issue of nature protection for biodiversity and the material livelihoods of indigenous peoples are a matter of tension.
One reason for this, are the different philosophies/perspectives indigenous peoples and 'western societies' have on this matter. While indigenous relations to nature are based on unity between use and protection, implying that human use is necessary for effective protection, western perspectives on area protection are characterized by a diverge between humankind and nature, or as expressed by Colchester: “The idea that humankind, or to be more accurate mankind, is apart from nature seems to be one that is deeply rooted in western civilization.”
Indigenous world views are characterized by their “holistic nature, which means that they cannot be easily compartmentalized into religious, economic, social, or other components”. This may also include a world view in subsistence, as contemporary illustrated by Gwich'in thinking:
“Subsistence, narrowly defined, means to survive. To the Gwich’in, it means far more. Besides our spiritual relationship with God, the Creator of all that is, subsistence is the essence of the Gwich’in Nation. It is how we are sustained physically. It serves to support us economically and spiritually and is a key to our sustainability as a people. We are fed by plants and animals of the water, air, and land. Wood provides warmth and housing and the raw materials for tools and transportation devices, such as boats, snowshoes, and toboggans [runnerless sleds widely used by Native Americans]. ... Gwich’in identity is a picture of integration with the land and resources. We see ourselves as an integral part of the diversity of the landscape. We believe that we would not be whole if we were separated from this land. We also believe that this land would not be whole without our presence. Our well-being is linked closely with our ability to live on and adapt with the land. Our family and land-based bonds are strengthened, restored, and invigorated as we continue our subsistence lifestyle.”
Summary of Chapters
Chapter 1 Introduction: This chapter provides the background for the research, establishing the relevance of indigenous peoples' rights in the context of Arctic area protection amidst climate change and increasing industrial activity.
Chapter 2 Indigenous peoples and area protection: This chapter examines the historical and paradigm shift in the relationship between indigenous populations and western conservation models, highlighting the tension between exclusionary approaches and more inclusive, sustainable management.
Chapter 3 What are the most important indigenous peoples’ rights in relation to area protection and management?: This chapter identifies and discusses key rights, including self-determination, land rights, and the principle of Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC).
Chapter 4 Recognition of indigenous peoples' rights in the human rights context: This chapter analyzes how indigenous rights are reflected in the ICCPR and explores the state-specific implementation efforts in Finland, Norway, Russia, and Sweden.
Chapter 5 Recognition of indigenous peoples' rights in the environmental protection context: This chapter focuses on international conservation policy, specifically the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), and evaluates the implementation of its protected area provisions within the four Arctic states.
Chapter 6 Conclusion: This chapter synthesizes the research findings, compares the implementation of indigenous rights across human rights and environmental contexts, and offers policy recommendations.
Keywords
Arctic, Indigenous Peoples, Sami, Area Protection, Management, Self-determination, ICCPR, CBD, Human Rights, Land Rights, Participation, FPIC, Conservation, Sustainability, Environmental Policy
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this thesis?
This thesis examines the extent to which indigenous peoples' rights, particularly those of the Sami, are recognized and implemented within the context of area protection and management in the Arctic region.
What are the central thematic fields covered in the work?
The work covers international human rights law, environmental conservation policy, indigenous land and resource rights, and national legal implementations across four Arctic states.
What is the core research question addressed by the author?
The central question is: "To which extent are indigenous peoples’ rights implemented in the context of area protection and management in the Arctic?"
Which scientific methodology does the author use?
The thesis utilizes a "top-down" comparative legal approach, evaluating international agreements (ICCPR and CBD) and their subsequent implementation through national legislation, periodic reports, and available literature in Finland, Norway, Russia, and Sweden.
What topics are discussed in the main body of the work?
The main body treats the conceptual tension between conservation and indigenous life, defines relevant legal terms, analyzes specific human rights (self-determination, participation), and details the implementation status of CBD and ICCPR obligations within the four nations.
Which terms best characterize the research?
The research is characterized by the intersection of indigenous legal status, environmental governance, and the practical implementation of international treaty obligations in Northern jurisdictions.
How does the author evaluate the "Finnmark Act" in Norway?
The author views the Finnmark Act as an ambitious step toward giving local populations greater influence over land administration, although significant issues regarding land ownership and the scope of Sami rights remain for further clarification.
What are the main obstacles identified for indigenous rights in Russia?
The author identifies a critical lack of implementation of federal laws, a lack of dedicated funding, and an absence of effective representation or an "indigenous voice" in decision-making legislative bodies as primary obstacles.
What critique does the author offer regarding the Swedish approach?
The author notes that Sweden has not codified the status of the Sami as an indigenous people in law, and that the Sami Parliament operates primarily as a government administrative body, which limits its ability to exercise the full right to self-determination.
- Quote paper
- Antje Neumann (Author), 2010, The recognition of indigenous peoples’ rights in the context of area protection and management in the Arctic, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/210366
