диссертация (1169188), страница 93
Текст из файла (страница 93)
However, they still cover only 5% of the coast, which is, of course, notenough to ensure a considerable contribution into the conservation of this unique563Corell R.W. Consequences of the Changes across the Arctic on Word order, the North Pacific Nations, andRegional and Global governance. / The Arctic in Word affairs.
Ed. by R.W. Corell, J.S.-C. Kang, Y.H. Kim. EastWest Center. Honolulu, Hawaii, USA. 2013. P. 17–57.410environment. To extend a specially protected zone, it is suggested, in particular, tocreate Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas or, alternatively, Arctic states would createspecially protected areas forming a sort of a belt, that would also help to stop orsignificantly mitigate a negative impact on the Arctic fauna, including migratorybirds, fish, and mammals.Another issue, whose seriousness is pointed out by Anglo-American andEuropean analysts, is Arctic tourism. The popularity of tours to the Arctic isgrowing, especially to Spitsbergen, Greenland and South Alaska. However, theships used for tourism are not designed or equipped for sailing the ice-coveredareas, which creates a grave peril both for people and the Arctic naturalenvironment.564Anglo-American and European scholars propose certain legal avenues andmethods to solve these problems.
However, these proposals are somewhat toogeneral and blurry. These are the solutions they see:- natural resources in the region are viewed as some sort of natural capital,from which goods can be derived, with simultaneous maintenance of the usefulattributes of ecosystems (literally ecosystem services, useful to man: clean air,potable water, healthy food, etc.);- integrating the environmental dimension into politics and states’ plans;- efficient use of natural resources and ecosystem support measures to beconsidered in market pricing so that economic growth and waste production do notentail degradation of the natural capital;- ecosystem-based management, with the key elements of collection of dataand information, planning development for specific regions;- elaborating comprehensive ecosystem management plans to covereconomic activities, nature’s possibilities and the ecosystem’s restoration capacity.The examples drawn are the EU Integrated Maritime Strategy and Norway’s564Bock N.
Sustainable Development Considerations in the Arctic. / Environmental Security in the Arctic Ocean.Ed. by P.A. Berkman. Springer. Dordrecht, 2013, P. 37–57.411Integrated Management Plan for the Barents Sea and sea areas off the LofotenIslands.565In suggesting ways to achieve sustainable development for the Arctic,scholars point to the related difficulties of a scale far surpassing the region’s limits.The first thing to be considered in the context of sustainable development inthe Arctic, is that that region, its nature, and social and economic environment aresuffering the increasing impact of the so-called global challenges.
These can besaid to include climate change, population growth, intensification of the fight fornatural resources, depletion of resources, increase of anthropogenic pressure on theenvironment, large-scale pollution, urbanization, technological processes, etc. Thatis, these are global factors to which not only the Arctic states are responsible for.But, as emphasized by N.
Bock, they engender problems for the Arctic that theArctic states alone cannot handle.566 He singles out climate change here, since it ishard to calculate and predict. For that reason, the scholar believes, achievingsustainable development in the Arctic is rather problematic. Moreover, climatechange affects a wide range of other factors, including social and economic ones.Legal academic publications stress that the strategies aimed at sustainabledevelopment and protecting the Arctic nature should take account not only of theincreasing stresses it is suffering, as discussed above, but also of the economic,social and natural links between the Arctic and other regions of the planet.
Thataspect is noted by many authors, but their interpretations vary. In some works, itgets rather dramatic. Thus, J.N. Larsen points out that the globally increasingdemand for a stable and reliable supply of resources means that the development ofArctic resources will continue and expand, irrespective of the price for natural andhuman factors at that. This author observes that involving both human and naturalresources of the Arctic in global economic relations is not mutually advantageous.For the indigenous population, the proliferation of economic natural resource use565Bock N., op.
cit., P. 52.566Bock N. Sustainable Development Considerations in the Arctic. / Environmental Security in the Arctic Ocean.Ed. by P.A. Berkman. Springer. Dordrecht, 2013, P. 52–53.412in the Arctic can only result in increased social problems, as their traditional livingspace and way of life will keep deteriorating. The opportunities for using thebenefits of market relations, however, will remain practically unavailable for theindigenous population; that, or their links to the market will be very limited orentirely absent.In the search for answers to the questions on the Arctic’s environmentalfuture, foreign analysts suggest departing from the traditional vision of worldArctic relations as centre-periphery.
This approach, according to them, is alreadyoutdated. One needs to consider the increasing dominant role of global andtransboundary connections, and the role, presence and operations of multinationalcorporations. Thus, Fjellheim and Henriksen underscore the need to apply legalmethods and procedures aimed at harmonizing social, economic and environmentalfactors. At the same time, it is noted that using such factors requires newapproaches. As an example, they draw the use of EIA among the indigenousresidents of the Arctic. Running that procedure as per the European or Americanmodels here is, lawyers believe, problematic.
Indigenous inhabitants have noexperience of participation in such procedures or are scarcely involved in them. Asa result, their involvement remains inefficient. According to English-speakingauthors, during EIAs, the interests of indigenous peoples remain essentiallydisregarded. So the scholars suggest focusing EIAs on the wide awareness of theneeds of the local inhabitants, as well as on direct and obligatory negotiations withthem. Freely expressed and informed preliminary consent of the local populayionshould be based, as these authors believe, on the inherent rights of the indigenouspeoples to the lands and resources, and the legal right to demand that the otherparty treat them equally and with mutual respect.567Essentially, apart from the EIA procedure adapted to local conditions, noother specific legal mechanisms are proposed.The Arctic Council has approached the implementation of the sustainable567Fjellheim R.S., Henriksen J.B.
(2006). Oil and gas exploitation on Arctic indigenous peoples’ territories. Humanrights, international law and corporate social responsibility. // Galdu Cala – J. Indigenous Peoples Rights 4:1-37.http://www.galdu.org/govat/doc/oilengelsk2.pdf. Accessed 20 August 2011.413development concept at length, having given it a unique vector. In 1998, it adoptedthe Sustainable Development Program, and in 2000, the Sustainable DevelopmentFramework Document.568 To achieve sustainable development in the Arctic, theArctic Council has distinguished six priority areas:- matters of healthcare and well-being of the people living in the Arctic;- sustainable economic activities and increasing local community prosperity;- education and cultural heritage;- children and youth;- management of natural, including living, resources;- development of infrastructure.Accordingly, the Arctic Council is promoting and adopting projects whiletaking into account the following:•Sustainable Development must meet the needs of the presentgeneration, without compromising the ability of future generations to meet theirown needs.
Economic, social and cultural development are, along withenvironmental protection, interdependent and mutually reinforcing aspects ofSustainable Development and are all part of the Council’s focus.•Capacity Building at all society levels is a necessary element forachieving Sustainable Development.•TheSustainableDevelopmentProgramshouldleavefuturegenerations in the North with expanded opportunities, and promote economicactivity that creates wealth and human capital, while simultaneously safeguardingthe natural capital of the Arctic.•The Sustainable Development Program should promote the integrationof environmental considerations into all economic activities.•The Council’s work in the context of Sustainable Development mustbe based on sound science, traditional knowledge of indigenous and local people,and prudent conservation and management of resources.568http://arctic-council.org/index.php/en/414•The Sustainable Development Program requires coordination andsynergy among Arctic Council working groups and other cooperative activities.In 1998, the Arctic Council created the Sustainable Development WorkingGroup (SDWG).
In taking sustainable development that way, the Arctic Councilabandoned the globalist approach and did not take the well-trodden path of listingthe problems and targets to be solved and achieved to better the living. In theProgram “Sustainable Development in the Arctic in 2012-2014”, it made an effortto outline a sort of key element and indicated the need for interaction betweenlarge-scale industries and small-scale societies as the starting point. In searchingfor an approach to solve that problem, the Arctic Council opted for what it named“People first”.Based on this, for the years 2012 to 2014, the Arctic Council selected fiveareas of cooperation.1.
![](https://s.studizba.com/z.php?f=/templates/si/i/noavatar.png&w=100&h=100&t=1"){kind=avatar}
