Navigating the North Seas: Balancing Environmental and Cultural Concerns of Arctic Shipping

In the Cold War era, the Arctic witnessed a surge in shipping activities, driven by receding sea ice and increasing demand for efficient trade routes. Arctic shipping routes, including the Northeast Passage (NEP) and the Northwest Passage (NWP), have seen the most significant uptick in vessel traffic. Prospects of the Transpolar Sea Route (TSR) becoming navigable by the middle of the 21^st century add to the complexities of managing Arctic waters. While this growth in Arctic maritime traffic offers increased opportunities for trade, transportation, fishing, national security protection, and tourism, it also threatens the delicate ecosystems and coastal indigenous communities. 

The researchers note that “each economic activity results in a specific impact […] and is associated with specific risks. “For instance, vessel traffic can lead to physical disturbances, pollution, noise, and the introduction of invasive species, all of which have detrimental effects on Arctic ecosystems. Notably, the NEP and NWP overlap with ecological hotspots like Ecologically and Biologically Significant Areas (EBSAs) and newly identified Culturally Significant Marine Areas (CSMAs). The NEP and NWP’s proximity to richly biodiverse areas magnifies the risk of accidents and poses a considerable threat to the environment and local communities. A hazardous spill could jeopardize subsistence livelihoods and the stability of place-based cultural identities. Indeed, the Arctic is home to diverse indigenous communities whose way of life is deeply intertwined with the marine environment. For these communities, shipping and pollution can disrupt traditional hunting and fishing practices and threaten the sanctity of cultural activities based on respect for and connection with the ancestral land. Shipping also affects local industries that depend on commercial fishing for economic security.  

Developing infrastructure to support shipping, such as ports and cruise terminals, also poses a risk to local communities and economies. Further, the influx of non-local individuals, often referred to as ‘outsiders,’ can encroach upon sacred and historic areas without respect for the sanctity of these sites. Research indicates that shipping activity could also infringe upon local communities’ landmark rights, which refer to the legal protections for indigenous communities to carry out economic and culturally significant ventures in their traditional territories. For example, the rights of Inuit communities to harvest in the marine environment are doubly protected under the Canadian Constitution and modern land claims agreements. Hence, any maritime industrial activity that interferes with their local access violates indigenous rights.

Efforts to address these challenges are underway, with indigenous representatives from the coastal Arctic states, including the U.S., Canada, Russia, Norway, and Denmark, advocating for greater involvement in decision-making processes about the regulation of maritime activity. Organizations like the International Maritime Organization (IMO) are urged to consider indigenous perspectives and prioritize environmental protection in Arctic shipping regulations. For instance, in Canada, initiatives such as the Low Impact Shipping Corridors aim to mitigate the environmental impact of shipping while involving indigenous groups in governance and management. Similarly, communities like Longyearbyen in Norway have proactively managed cruise ship traffic and ensured sustainable tourism practices.

The article’s authors emphasize that the “lack of knowledge on and management responses to impacts from shipping […] lead to accumulating effects on Arctic cultures and ecosystems.” These effects include but are not limited to changes in traditional hunting and fishing patterns, disruption of cultural activities, and long-term damage to the delicate Arctic ecosystems. Hence, balancing economic development, environmental protection, and cultural conservation in Arctic shipping is essential. Implementing policies prioritizing sustainability and tribal sovereignty will require sustained collaboration between governments, indigenous communities, and industry stakeholders. If legislative policies address environmental and cultural concerns by committing to collaborative and inclusive decision-making processes and regulations, there may be hope for the future of Arctic waterways.