|
Alaska and the global Arctic agenda Drue Pearce questions whether Alaskans have enough influence in major international decisions impacting the state’s future Alan Bailey Petroleum News
In the global debate over the value of Arctic economic development and the need to protect the region’s spectacular environment is Alaska missing out in decisions that could have far-reaching consequences for the state’s future? And are the tradeoffs involved in that debate moving too far in the direction of environmental conservation?
In a speech on Nov. 19 at the Resource Development Council’s annual conference, Drue Pearce, senior policy advisor for Crowell and Moring LLP, warned that Alaskans might want to be aware of some dynamics in the international Arctic agenda that could have far-reaching consequences in Alaska both for business and for the state’s residents.
The Arctic Council Pearce’s speech particularly focused on the organization and activities of the Arctic Council, the intergovernmental forum that performs an important role as a venue for the eight Arctic nations to discuss and pursue issues of mutual interest. In 2015 the United States takes over the chairmanship of the council from Canada, the current chair. That change of chair gives the United States an opportunity to set the agenda for Arctic Council actions.
But there seems to have been a drift in the focus of government policy, away from Arctic economic development and towards environmental conservation, Pearce warned. By way of illustration, Pearce commented that, while President Bush’s U.S. Arctic policy, published in 2009, had supported both environmental protection and the promotion of economic and energy issues, President Obama’s strategy for the Arctic, released in 2013, said nothing about economic development.
“That’s the sea change that we’re dealing with,” Pearce said. “We now protect and conserve. We don’t develop.”
And commending the efforts of the Alaska Arctic Policy Commission and the Alaska Federation of Natives in promoting Alaska’s interests, Pearce emphasized the importance of having Alaskans involved in decision making over Arctic policies.
“It takes all of us working together to make sure that the people of Alaska, the people who live and work in the United States Arctic, actually have a place, and have an opportunity to explain to the folks inside the beltway what needs to happen and why we need to be there as decisions are taken,” Pearce said.
Canadian agenda The recent agenda for the Arctic Council, agreed at national government ministerial level and set during the current Canadian chairmanship, has revolved around development for the people of the north, with a focus on responsible Arctic resource development, safe Arctic shipping and sustainable circumpolar communities, Pearce said. The council has formed the Arctic Economic Council, a forum for Arctic business development, and has established guidelines for sustainable tourism and cruise ship operations. The council has also promoted the development of the polar code, a set of standards for vessels plying Arctic waters.
The Arctic Economic Council has already identified some initial projects addressing questions such as stewardship of the Arctic and responsible resource development, Pearce said.
And, while ministers and senior Arctic officials from the Arctic nations govern the council, the indigenous people of the Arctic have a say in council policies through the permanent participation of six groups representing indigenous communities around the region.
Environmentalist involvement But Pearce expressed concern about what appears to the over-weighted influence of environmental organizations in decision-making at the working-group level within the Arctic Council as a whole. Currently there are 11 nongovernmental organizations but no business organizations with Arctic Council observer status, she said. And, with funding being an issue for the council’s work, environmental organizations are happy to underwrite projects with environmental perspectives, she said.
Pearce described one project that an Arctic Council working group is conducting to identify areas of the Arctic offshore and coastline that may require environmental protection. That group has produced a draft map of proposed protected areas, including the entire Bering Strait, much of the Aleutian Islands, and much of the Chukchi and Beaufort seas, Pearce said. But, apart from a representative from the Inuit Circumpolar Council-Alaska, there are no Alaskans involved in this working group. The working group includes people from U.S. federal agencies, but has no representation from Alaska local government; from state or provincial governments; from the people who manage coastal infrastructure development; from people who manage local permitting; or from people who manage opportunities for subsistence hunting and fishing, Pearce said.
“The people who work on these maps are the people who covet the Arctic and they don’t covet it for the reasons we do,” Pearce said. “They’d like the whole Arctic off limits. And, if that doesn’t work, they’ll draw maps like this, which we will see in litigation.”
U.S. chairmanship When the United States becomes chair of the Arctic Council in April, the U.S. plans extensive public outreach, raising the level of Arctic and climate change awareness, and addressing themes such the impacts of climate change in the Arctic; stewardship of the Arctic Ocean; and improving Arctic economic and living conditions, Pearce said.
But none of the projects proposed thus far under the U.S. chairmanship will help build sustainable Arctic economies, she said. And some will actually undermine the region’s economic health, she suggested, citing one study calling for the elimination of emissions in the Arctic, including a ban on all gas flaring.
“The state would be devastated by a decision like that,” she said.
|
