The conference is part of the project: Marine Resource Governance in the Arctic, financially supported by Nordic Council of Ministers' Arctic Co-operation Programme, the Joint Committee for Nordic Research Councils in the Humanities and Social Sciences, and the Carlsberg Foundation.
Confirmed Keynote speakers: Vincent Gallucci, School of Aquatic and Fisheries Sciences, Univ. of Washington Sue Moore, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory
Conference Themes: The ecosystem changes underway in the Arctic region are expected to have significant impacts on living resources in both the short and long run, and current actions and policies adopted over such resource governance will have serious and ultimately irreversible consequences in the near and long terms. The themes of the conference will be:
- 1. Global management and institutions for Arctic marine resources : For participation in this theme, we seek research that investigates global governance issues for the Arctic. This includes activities both within the Arctic Council and in relation to the rest of the world. While the Arctic Council works to bring together the 8 Arctic nations and permanent participants from indigenous Arctic communities to resolve governance issues requiring multilateral cooperation, the governance challenges this group faces are complex and cut across many different policy lines. Such challenges include non‐legally binding policy. Furthermore, while other nation states may, through an application process, become observers of the council actions, engagement of the rest of the world directly with the Arctic Council is limited. Potential topics include: alternate and/or complementary global governance activities for the Arctic, including the Arctic Circle meetings and the Arctic Economic Council; North‐South relations; the roles of indigenous communities, linking international legally binding policies to Arctic marine issues; stewardship of the Central Arctic Ocean for environmental protection and safety. A sample question for this theme is: What happens when the provisions of two resource regimes conflict? The IWC, for example, has a very narrow exemption for aboriginal subsistence whaling. The Arctic Council, on the other hand, is much more sensitive to the needs of the Arctic's permanent residents. This raises questions about institutional interplay, overlapping institutional goals and jur
- 2. Resource stewards and users: local and indigenous co-management: The living marine resources in the Arctic have long been used and managed by indigenous communities, and ice cover has, to date, assisted in protection of remote marine resource stocks. As climate change shifts the productive capacity of the environment and global values for such resources, and as economic development and technological innovations change the structure and demands of indigenous communities for resources, governance must move to co‐management of the resources to best resolve disparate values and multiple uses of marine ecosystems and their services. Potential topics: evaluation of existing co‐management schemes for marine mammals or other consumptive use species; forecasting of expanding long term participatory citizen monitoring with spatial ecosystem assessment for Arctic resilience; formal channels for longitudinal knowledge of indigenous residents in aiding marine resource management and improved living conditions and capacity building for Arctic residents. sample question for this theme is: How do we deal with situations where the interests of commercial and subsistence users conflict? How well has the American system of community development quotas (CDQs) worked to alleviate this tension? In the case of CDQs, we can evaluate the effectiveness of an institutional innovation that has been in place for some time.
- 3. Governance gaps in Arctic marine resource management: The 6 working groups of the Arctic Council (ACAP, AMAP, CAFF, EPPR, PAME and SDWG) all have specific mandates which in principle should cover the realm of issues requiring multilateral decision‐making. In some cases, however, certain concerns may fall into governance gaps outside of the Arctic Council entirely, between the working groups, or, in overlapping several groups, find themselves without dedicated resources or actionable governance plans. Research in this theme is intended to focus on identifying these gaps and the development of potential solutions to address them. Potential topics include governance options for dynamic responses to marine resource shifts (beyond migratory species), marine invasive species management, institutional Management of externalities to marine resources beyond the on Arctic Council and not included in existing regulatory programs (Polar Code, etc). How do we deal with situations in which marine pollution originates within the jurisdiction of one state but impacts areas within the jurisdictions of others (Arctic states or others) as transboundary pollution? Sample questions for this theme include: What happens when the relevant marine areas cut across the jurisdictional boundaries of two states or across the boundaries of the EEZs of coastal states and the high seas? Can we deal with potential fisheries in the Arctic Ocean without consulting key non‐Arctic states? The underlying issue here has to do with nesting a focused arrangement for a specific issue into the broader constitutive framework of UNCLOS
- 4. Multi-scale, ecosystem-based, Arctic marine resource management: The complexities of the Arctic political, economic, and ecological environment mean that governance must accommodate multiple scales of use and concern. Rapid climate change – predicted to be more rapid and more influential in the Arctic than anywhere else on the planet – means that shifts in ecosystems and the resources they provide will require adaptive, ecosystem‐ based management to successfully navigate the uncertainty and change underway. Potential topics include: analytical tools for connecting bioeconomic integrated systems into adaptive management among Arctic sovereign for decisions and policymaking, incorporation of risk management into ecosystem based management, analysis of systematic differences in policies and outcomes associated with scale of policy implementation.
Discussion of the themes and sample questions of interest can be found in the extended call through www.sdu.dk/arctic. Content: We intend to host up to 50 participants, with approximately 30 ½ hour presentations in addition to the keynotes. We bring together experts on marine resource management and the Arctic with the purpose of examining case-studies from the Nordic countries and to discuss continuing applicable research. We anticipate participation from academics, resource managers, Nordic and other Arctic policy makers and stakeholders to achieve maximum effectiveness and impact. Participation There is no conference fee. Acceptance is limited and will occur on a rolling basis, with a final deadline for abstract submission for presentation considerations of May 31, 2015. For consideration as a presenter, please submit a short abstract and title pertinent to the theme. For consideration as an attendee, please send a short note identifying your experience and interest in the topic. Presenters and attendees should expect to contribute to conference outputs, some of which may include publications and receive stipends (details to follow).
Deadline for enrolment is September 15, 2015. Please send your application by e-mail to News and questions Updated information about the conference can be found at the Arctic website www.sdu.dk/arctic under Workshops and Conferences. Questions?
Do not hesitate to contact Irene Nygaard at Contact: Department of Environmental and Business Economics, University of Southern Denmark Niels Bohrs Vej 9 – DK-6700 Esbjerg, Denmark Tel. +45 6550 1000 – E-mail - Website: www.sdu.dk/arctic