Adaptation Actions for a Changing Arctic: Perspectives from the Barents Area

124

Adaptation Actions for a Changing Arctic: Perspectives from the Barents Area

in Contaminant Cycling) Results Overview.Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP), Oslo, Norway. Andersson,L.,A.Bohman,L.vanWell,A.Jonsson,G.Persson and J.Farelius,2015.Underlag till kontrollstation 2015 för anpassning till ett förändrat klimat [Supporting Report for Checkpoint 2015 forAdaptation to a Changing Climate]. SwedishMeteorological and Hydrological Institute (SMHI) Klimatologi No 12. Arbo, P.,A. Iversen,M. Knol, T. Ringholm and G. Sander, 2013. Arctic futures: conceptualizations and images of a changing Arctic. Polar Geography, 36:163‑182. Arctic Council, 2009.Arctic Marine ShippingAssessment 2009 Report. Arctic Council, second printing. Arctic Council, 2013. Arctic Resilience Interim Report 2013. Stockholm Environment Institute and Stockholm Resilience Centre, Stockholm, Sweden. Ash, N., H. Blanco, C. Brown, K. Garcia, T. Henrichs, N. Lucas, C.Ruadsepp-Heane,R.D.Simpson,R.Scholes,T.Tomich,B.Vira andM. Zurek (eds.), 2010. Ecosystems and HumanWell-Being: A Manual for Assessment Practitioners. Island Press. Avango, D., A.E. Nilsson and P. Roberts, 2013. Assessing arctic futures: voices, resources and governance. The Polar Journal, 3:431‑446. Baard, P., M.Vredin Johansson, H. Carlsen and K. Edvardsson Björnberg, 2012. Scenarios and sustainability: tools for alleviating the gap betweenmunicipalmeans and responsibilities in adaptation planning. Local Environment, 17:641‑662. Berkhout, F., J. Hertin and A. Jordan, 2002. Socio-economic futures in climate change impact assessment: using scenarios as‘learning machines.’Global Environmental Change, 12:83‑95. Börjeson, L., M. Höjer, K.-H. Dreborg, T. Ekvall and G. Finnveden, 2006. Scenario types and techniques: towards a user’s guide. Futures, 38:723‑739. Bourmistrov, A. (ed.), 2015. International Arctic Petroleum Cooperation: Barents Sea Scenarios. Routledge Studies in Environmental Policy. Routledge. Brace, C., and H. Geoghegan, 2011. Human geographies of climate change: landscape, temporality, and lay knowledges. Progress in Human Geography, 35:284‑302. Bravo, M.T., 2009. Voices from the sea ice: the reception of climate impact narratives. Journal of Historical Geography, 35:256‑278. Bruner, J., 1991. The narrative construction of reality. Critical Inquiry, 18:1‑20. Carlsen, H., K.H. Dreborg and P.Wikman-Svahn, 2012. Tailor- made scenario planning for local adaptation to climate change. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 18:1239‑1255. Carter, T.R., K. Jylhä,A. Perrels, S. Fronzek and P. Kankaanpää, 2005. FINADAPT scenarios for the 21st century: Alternative futures for considering adaptation to climate change in Finland. FINADAPT Working Paper 2. Mimeograph 332. Finnish Environment Institute, Helsinki, Finland.

with studies of the history of the region. This could become a powerful way to better understand path dependencies and trigger points for change in development direction. The work on which this chapter is based provides a few snapshots of how actors in the region see future possibilities and challenges.The future looks different depending on where you are and who you are. There is thus a need for organizing workshops in a broader range of settings and involving a more diverse set of actors. Especially relevant is to engage with young people who have a direct stake in how the future develops. A possible future activity would be to conduct similar workshops aimed at teenagers in schools at the junior high and high school level. Another potential group is families with young children. Further attention also needs to be placed on gender perspectives and on capturing the knowledge and thoughts of people that have come to the region very recently, including people from other parts of the world. These are just some examples to highlight the need to think about diversity issues when undertaking this type of exercise. While scenarios are used extensively for analyzing potential impacts of climate change and adaptation challenges, there appears to be a lack of explicit reflection on their advantages and disadvantages, as well as on joint method development across different communities of practice.A priority follow-up activity could thus be to create networks that facilitate cross-study comparisons of scenario methodologies and approaches. Such networks may focus on the Barents area but also be circumpolar and/or closely linked to the global scenario research community. Acknowledgments We would like to acknowledge the substantial contribution made to this chapter by participants at the scenario workshops in Pajala, Kirovsk and Bodø, and at Gávnnadeapmi 2015.Work on this chapter byAnnika ENilsson and Lize-Marié van derWatt was funded by the research program Mistra Arctic Sustainable Development – New Governance, which also funded the Pajala workshop.Additional funding forNilsson and forHenrikCarlsen’s participation was provided by the Swedish Environmental ProtectionAgency.Ingrid Bay-Larsen,Bob vanOort andMaiken Bjørkanwere funded by theNorwegianResearchCouncil,which also supported the Bodø and Kirovsk workshops. References Abbing,K., 2009. Illustration av kommande klimatförändringar i Lycksele Kommun - Delrapport inom projektet Clim-ATIC [Illustration of Future Climate Change in LyckseleMunicipality – Subreport within the project Clim-Atic]. www.lycksele.se/ templates/DepartmentPage.aspx?id=19602 Absar, S.M. and B.L. Preston, 2015. Extending the shared socioeconomic pathways for sub-national impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability studies.Global Environmental Change,33:83‑96. AMAP, 2014.ArcRisk (Arctic Health Risks: Impacts on Health in the Arctic and Europe Owing to Climate-Induced Changes