A Changing of the Guard... Outcomes from the 2013 Arctic Council Ministerial Meeting

As the impact of climate change intensifies in the Arctic, and the issues move from a regional to global stage, the Arctic Council faces substantial challenges to ensure a sustainable future for the North. 'Ive been fortunate to attend the Arctic Council ministerial summit in Kiruna, Sweden representing the Advisory Committee for the Protection of the Sea (ACOPS). This meeting sees a transition from Swedish to Canadian leadership of the Council and a new set of priorities and challenges emerge for Arctic governance.

The challenges for the Arctic are environmental, social and economic and are deeply entwined. While this is not new, specific recognition of their inter-related nature is relatively recent. The warning signs are increasingly there… disappearing summer sea ice, acidification of polar seas, shifting patterns of biodiversity as species shift their ranges northwards and habitats change due to climatic stress – all driven by human induced climate change. At the same time the Arctic is ‘open for business’ and while the reality of resource extraction is still in its infancy, the seriousness of the situation and the grave consequences of an oil spill are recognised. The Arctic Council was certainly saying the right words… Senator John Kerry, the US Secretary of State railed against the lack of international and domestic action on climate change and pressed for a global agreement with China…. But can the Arctic Council and its members deliver meaningful action and influence global outcomes?

The tone of the summit today was one where the immense challenges are recognised, and there seems to be real effort in negotiating the issues and moving forward. Don’t forget that this is really quite a difficult thing where eight countries (US, Russia, Canada, Norway, Sweden, Denmark – Greenland, Finland, Iceland) and 6 indigenous permanent members are pushing for their view of a sustainable Arctic. Not to mention the hustle from new observers all vying for their vision of the Arctic.

Today saw some noteworthy outcomes that indicate positive steps. The Ministers signed off on a legally binding agreement on oil pollution preparedness and response. This, while not perfect, will build capacity across the Arctic states to prevent spills from occurring and to coordinate in the case of (a disastrous) spill. There is some way to go to develop this capacity across the region and I’m sympathetic for calls for oil and gas development moratoriums until the regime is firmly in place. However, this is essentially happening in several areas… the US has pulled back from oil exploration off the Alaskan coast, Greenland has put in place new regulations and is limiting exploration, and Norway is exercising a very cautious approach. Russia is the wildcard and it is calling in partnerships from oil and gas companies (e.g. Shell, BP and Dong Energy) to develop the technical capability. However, exploration is risky, technically difficult and overtly expensive – major risks to any project and several (such as the Russian gas development Shtokman) have been delayed by several years.

The Arctic Council appears to be embracing its role as a policy making rather than policy shaping organisation. This was the 2^nd legally binding agreement out of the Council (the 1^st being a Search and Rescue treaty) and there are moves to develop a task force and agreement on addressing black carbon. This appears to be a sensitive subject with the Russian Foreign minister accused by Russian Association of Indigenous Peoples of the North for delaying progress on the issue. A permanent secretariat now exists in Norway for the Arctic council and there is a clear mandate for the Arctic Council to be more aggressive on the international stage, in particular with a commitment for all Arctic states to work together with other countries for a legal agreement on climate change no later than 2015. Time will tell….

Finally… in a significant development in the history of the council, China, Japan, Korea, India, and Italy have been awarded permanent observer status. The decision on the EU, again, has been delayed to next year, but rumours suggest it will eventually succeed. Although not widely discussed, I also heard Greenpeace was not successful in its application to be an observer. The observer tent is now considerably large – over 300 people attended today – and represents States, non-government  and indigenous groups….a question is will the Council be able to cope with this influx of interests. One thing that appears certain is that the Arctic is now a global issue and spreads beyond the borders of the Arctic states.

Canada now takes over the helm. Its objective is to focus on the human dimensions of the Arctic and improve conditions for indigenous residents, open up economic opportunities, and place indigenous knowledge alongside scientific information in making assessments. The spotlight is firmly on Canada and the Arctic Council to ensure that development does not undermine the ecological or cultural values of the Arctic… summed up beautifully by the Saami Council representative:

‘Energy security is only valid when underpinned by ecological security’.

A valid and insightful comment. More from Sustainable Seas soon. 

A new approach to mapping marine policy...

Often policy processes in coastal and marine systems are difficult to understand, opaque, or the means of making changes are hard to identify.  A new paper by Bainbridge, Potts and O'Higgins is freely available in the journal Plos One that demonstrates an approach to mapping and understanding marine and coastal policy. The approach, called Rapid Policy Network Mapping (RPNM) aims to improve the understanding and positioning of actors and institutions in environmental policy, see who is represented and where, and identify the 'levers of change'. It is a generic tool - one that can be used anywhere and at any scale - and users are asked to contribute to a growing community of online maps and debate about how the ecosystem approach can be implemented.

The main benefits of RPNM are that it:

1. Captures the majority and most significant instruments and actors in the development of specific policies.
2. Aggregates and compares actors and instruments by policy domain.
3. Provides a robust platform of data as a baseline for reference or further research or action e.g. multi-modal network analysis, policy networks etc.
4. Provides a web based tool for dynamic collaboration.
5. Is a means of understanding and visualising complex policy systems and identifies where changes can be driven through the system. 
6. Can be developed at a reasonably low cost and deployed rapidly. 
7. Helps understand who does what and where, who is over and under represented in policy debates.

The Reef Tank interview

Recently I was interviewed by the The Reef Tank, a great blog that covers many issues of relevance to marine science and conservation.

We discussed many issues concerning marine policy: governance reform in Scotland and the UK, ecolabelling in fisheries, the Arctic and the 'big questions' facing marine policy and governance.

An important point was the fact we need to get marine issues into the public consciousness - not just the usual suspects or those making a living from, or living in proximity to the sea.

For the interview and other posts covering diverse marine topics:

http://www.thereeftank.com/blog/

Scottish Parliament and the Marine Bill..a taste of things to come...

Debate has intensified in the parliamentary chambers over the incoming Scottish Marine bill. Follow the link to the debate:

Transcript of the debate

A number of issues were raised by MSPs including:

• The formation and status of Marine Scotland (the Marine management organisation) and its relationship with the government. Debate has intensified over the Independence of Marine Scotland and whether it should be a non departmental public body. Also issues of governance such as appeals bodies, engagement with science, and links to other arms of government have been raised.
• Concerns over the legislative process for the Bill and Marine Scotland - particularly Marine Scotland being set up before the Bill has been drafted and a lack of debate over its role and function.
• The balance between economic and environmental principles and application through marine planning - particularly the issue of marine conservation zones, and emphasis on development in the bill.
  
• The size and governance of the proposed regional marine planning zones and access by all interested stakeholders in marine planning and conservation.
  

Obviously a work in progress. The high priority for the development of Marine Scotland relates to its role as a body that will deliver the various parts of the Marine Bill such as UK coordination, National Marine Plan and Regional Marine plans - and therefore its development is being brought forward. However, Marine Scotland and the way it is structured and governed is a critical element of Scottish marine reform - and requires transparency via parliamentary debate, particularly its relation to the government of the day and its ability to make independent science based decisions that ensure the sustainability of Scotland's seas.

Expect a lot more posts on the emerging Marine Bill and what it means for Scotland and the UK in the coming months....