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

139

Chapter 6 · Impact analysis and consequences of change

Changing temperatures may directly affect community infrastructure (e.g. water treatment, sewage treatment, power supply) and community food and drinking water security. But the combined effects of warming, pollution and zoonotic diseases also represent a significant risk to the security of subsistence food and water supply (AMAP, 2015a). 6.2.3.1 Indigenous and local peoples’ health Around 2% of the Barents Region population belongs to indigenous groups such as Sami, Nenets, and Vepsians. The patterns of demographic and health development of indigenous peoples in the Barents Region differ from those of the majority population, usually having a weaker health status. Nenets and Vepsians have a lower health status than that of the non-Russian North.Diseasemortality of Finnish Sami was lower in the 1980s than for the general Finnish population, but during the past 30 years has increased to reach national/regional values (Soininen, 2015).As is the case for other indigenous and local populations in rural parts of the Barents area,mortality fromaccidents,violence and suicide in Sami is higher than national average values. Indigenous reindeer herders have a higher prevalence of suicide and mental health disorders than the national average over recent decades (Silviken, 2009; Kaiser and Renberg, 2012; Omma et al., 2013), especially for young males in Fennoscandia and Russia. This is considered to be a consequence of interactions between climate change and socio-economic change (Daerga et al., 2008; Kaiser et al., 2013; Pogodaev et al., 2015). Efforts to prevent marginalization of children and youth are important, and it is crucial to establish early warning signs of mental illness. 6.2.3.2 Disease, and food and water security One of the most important health impacts of climate change may be changing exposure to viruses, bacteria, parasites and contaminants. Infectious and vector-borne diseases, such as tick-borne encephalitis and Lyme disease, are spreading northward (Revich, 2008; Ogden et al., 2010; Tokarevich et al., 2011). The rapid thermal degradation of permafrost presents an increasing risk of hazardous substances and viable spores of highly virulent infections (anthrax, tuberculous) being remobilized from neglected cattle burial grounds and waste disposal sites (Revich and Podolnaya, 2011). Extreme weather events (floods, storms, wildfires) may contribute to further spread of disease through the destruction of infrastructure, buildings, roads and waste systems. One impact of climate change is remobilization of legacy POPs (such as from ice, thawing permafrost and waste disposal sites) and Arctic residents are also likely to be exposed to higher levels of contaminants and radioactivity (UNEP/AMAP, 2011). This is especially the case for local/traditional foods. Food security has become an increasingly serious issue for many Arctic residents, especially indigenous peoples, owing to a combination of climate, development, and contamination issues (AMAP, 2015a). The global ban on some POPs and mercury, means the remobilization of legacy POPs should be seen in conjunction with declining long-range transport of contaminants to the Arctic.

PBDEs are both listed under the Stockholm Convention and so concentrations should continue to decline. Of the heavy metals, mercury has received most attention in the Arctic. Over the past 150 years, mercury levels in the Arctic have increased roughly ten-fold. Most mercury in biota is now of human origin (AMAP, 2011). Most of the time series showing increased concentrations are for marine species, with no significant recent increases detected in terrestrial animals (AMAP, 2011). For example, total mercury showed no significant trend in reindeer fromAbisko (northern Sweden) over the period 1980–2005 (AMAP, 2011). Organic contaminants bind to fat and Arctic species typically build fat reserves to protect them from the cold and provide a source of energy when food is scarce.When the fat is consumed, the pollutants are released into their blood stream, perhaps having damaging effects even though the air and the water are cleaner in the Arctic than further south. Future trends of mercury in Arctic biota, at least from the medium term onwards will depend on the implementation of the Minamata Convention and thus on global emissions. Emissions scenarios project that if currently available emission reduction measures are implemented globally, then mercury deposition in theArctic could decrease by 20% by 2020 relative to 2005 levels (AMAP, 2011). The limited amount of human development in the Arctic has traditionally meant that local sources of chemical pollution were low. However, many new chemicals are found in consumer products such as electronics, clothing, furniture and building materials, as well as personal care products and pharmaceuticals.These chemicals of emerging Arctic concern include siloxanes, parabens, flame retardants, and per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs). Thus, their existence in the Arctic may be due not only to transport from long-range sources, but also to local sources such as community waste sites and sewage outflows (AMAP, 2017). Levels of anthropogenic radioactivity in theArctic attributable to previously identified releases are low and generally declining (AMAP, 2015b). This decline is expected to continue. 6.2.3 Human health Human health and wellbeing are defined as mental, physical, spiritual and social wellbeing with the absence of disease and infirmity. Cultural and social practices are critical contributing factors to human health and wellbeing (Larsen and Huskey, 2010). Healthy living means, at a minimum, clean water, food and air, but also a safe and secure life for the individuals, groups and communities. Housing conditions and food and water security are important in everyday life, but (as an example) the quality of tap water and well water are not monitored regularly in all municipalities in the Barents area (Nilsson et al., 2013). To understand the impacts of climate change on rural and urban populations, it is necessary to discuss factors such as contaminants and radioactivity; social, cultural, political, and economic factors; and poverty and lack of health and other services, especially in indigenous communities (Abryutina, 2009;AMAP,2009; Ford and Furgal,2009; UNEP/AMAP,2011).