A Governance and Risk Inventory for a Changing Arctic
Background Paper for the Arctic Security Roundtable at the Munich Security Conference 2020
International Cooperation in the Arctic 2035 – The Four Scenarios
The Arctic has always fascinated people; its history, its present, and its future. The future of the Arctic has increasingly become a subject of academic research and the application of scenario methodology. Scenarios can be defined as pro- spective storytelling (Schoemaker, 1993), presenting a set of plausible, contrasting images of the future (Schatzmann et al., 2013), and indicating what alternative futures might look like (Amer et al., 2013). Studies offering scenarios of future development of the Arctic include Brigham (2007), Myllylä et al. (2016), Lazariva et al. (2021), Petrov et al. (2021), Haavisto et al. (2016), and Bourmistrov et al. (2015); see also the chapter by Krivorotov in this volume. The farther we look ahead, the more uncertain the future appears. There can never be full consensus on what major trends and driving forces will have the greatest impact on the future. But precisely for this reason, any kind of structured thought experiment, such as scenario development, is valuable and can add new knowledge and shared understanding.
Munich Security Forum - Arctic Security Roundtable (MSF - ASR)
This roundtable is organized by the MSC in cooperation with NUPI and Wilson Centre....
The Arctic Environmental Responsibility Index: A method to rank heterogenous extractive industry companies for governance purposes
The Arctic Environmental Responsibility Index (AERI) covers 120 oil, gas, and mining companies involved in resource extraction north of the Arctic Circle in Alaska, Canada, Greenland, Finland, Norway, Russia, and Sweden. It is based on an international expert perception survey among 173 members of the International Panel on Arctic Environmental Responsibility (IPAER), whose input is processed using segmented string relative ranking (SSRR) methodology. Equinor, Total, Aker BP, ConocoPhillips, and BP are seen as the most environmentally responsible companies, whereas Dalmorneftegeophysica, Zarubejneft, ERIELL, First Ore-Mining Company, and Stroygaz Consulting are seen as the least environmentally responsible. Companies operating in Alaska have the highest average rank, whereas those operating in Russia have the lowest average rank. Larger companies tend to rank higher than smaller companies, state-controlled companies rank higher than privately controlled companies, and oil and gas companies higher than mining companies. The creation of AERI demonstrates that SSRR is a low-cost way to overcome the challenge of indexing environmental performance and contributing to environmental governance across disparate industrial sectors and states with divergent environmental standards and legal and political systems.
Norway and Great Power Politics – Geopolitics, Technology and Climate (NISP)
Our times are shaped by developments in geopolitical power dynamics, fast-paced technological development and climate change. In this research program NUPI analyses how these developments change the s...
The Arctic Environmental Responsibility Index: A method to rank heterogenous extractive industry companies for governance purposes
The Arctic Environmental Responsibility Index (AERI) covers 120 oil, gas, and mining companies involved in resource extraction north of the Arctic Circle in Alaska, Canada, Greenland, Finland, Norway, Russia, and Sweden. It is based on an international expert perception survey among 173 members of the International Panel on Arctic Environmental Responsibility (IPAER), whose input is processed using segmented string relative ranking (SSRR) methodology. Equinor, Total, Aker BP, ConocoPhillips, and BP are seen as the most environmentally responsible companies, whereas Dalmorneftegeophysica, Zarubejneft, ERIELL, First Ore-Mining Company, and Stroygaz Consulting are seen as the least environmentally responsible. Companies operating in Alaska have the highest average rank, whereas those operating in Russia have the lowest average rank. Larger companies tend to rank higher than smaller companies, state-controlled companies rank higher than privately controlled companies, and oil and gas companies higher than mining companies. The creation of AERI demonstrates that SSRR is a low-cost way to overcome the challenge of indexing environmental performance and contributing to environmental governance across disparate industrial sectors and states with divergent environmental standards and legal and political systems.
Heading Forward in Response to Crisis: How the Ukraine Crisis Affected EU Maritime Foreign and Security Policy Integration
This chapter discusses the impact of the Ukraine crisis on EU foreign and security policy integration. It finds that the EU has responded to Russia’s aggression by deepening cooperation in areas not directly linked to Ukraine. Two least likely cases are analyzed: The EU’s Maritime Security Strategy and the EU’s Arctic policies. In both of these cases, agreement among the EU member states to adopt a common EU policy was driven mainly by Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014. This crisis functioned as a critical juncture, moving EU security policies to the top of the EU agenda and affecting reluctant member states’ positions in favor of forming common policies. In the foreign policy domain, crisis triggers more integration as the EU member states reactively seek to address common challenges.
Russian Certainty of NATO Hostility: Repercussions in the Arctic
How does a security dilemma dynamic between parties deemed not to hold hostile intentions toward each other emerge and escalate? This article investigates Russian official discourse on NATO engagement in Europe post-Crimea (2014), and its impact on security interaction in the Arctic. We also examine how Russia represents NATO intentions and actions in a context seen by Russia as a relation of war. We identify the effect of these changing representations of self and other for the emerging securitization dilemma in relations between Russia and NATO, arguing that they have replaced uncertainty about NATO’s hostile intentions with certainty. Although Russia still articulates the Arctic as a unique cooperative region, there may be little space left for non-conflictual Russian action when encountering NATO in the Arctic. We highlight the agency and importance of evolving political rhetoric in creating a dangerous situation where lethal conflict can occur between parties who do not seek it, and also suggest that adjustments to patterns of official speech could be a tool of mitigation
Ståle Ulriksen
Ståle Ulriksen is a researcher at the Norwegian Naval College, part of the Norwegian Defence University, with a 20 percent position at NUPI, in Th...
Per Erik Solli
Per Erik Solli is Senior Defence Analyst in NUPIs Research group on security and defence. Solli also has a position as Senior Adviser at Nord Univ...