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

175

Chapter 7 · Indigenous peoples’ perspectives

state rationale promoting participation, the main objective of the current governance regime is still ‘rationalization’ of Sámi pastoralism and State governance of reindeer husbandry,which is in conflict with the social organization and herding strategies of Sámi pastoralists. This threatens the traditional knowledge and language of pastoralists, affects their ability to participate in decision-making, and ignores Sámi customary rights (Turi and Keskitalo, 2014; Johnsen et al., 2015; Eira et al., 2016; Johnsen and Benjaminsen, 2017). Although it is difficult to predict future changes in the Norwegian governance of reindeer husbandry in Norway, it is possible to explore two alternative developments and their possible consequences for Sámi pastoralism: decreased and increased self-governance. Decreased self-governance Over the past 40 years, the State has strengthened its control over reindeer, pastures and herders (Johnsen and Benjaminsen, 2017). This trend is still ongoing. In 2015, the government introduced the option of labeling each animal as a measure to increase the control of reindeer numbers (Nationen, 2015), and proposed an amendment to the Act in order to increase the State’s ability to destock the herds (Landbruks og matdepartementet, 2015). A future that includes further measures to turn reindeer husbandry into a uniform meat- producing industry could erode the diversity, flexibility and mobility of and within herds – all of which are important elements of Sámi pastoralists’ traditional knowledge. The State-promoted reindeer industry could also threaten the traditional social organization and customary rights of individual pastoralists and the siida and thereby reduce the resilience and adaptive capacity of the herding groups to cope with environmental and human-induced change. Ignoring the historical co-evolution of reindeer pastoralists and the ecosystems that support them could also undermine the integrity and resilience of these social-ecological systems (Comberti et al., 2015). Increased self-governance Internationally, the recognition of indigenous peoples’rights to self-governance is increasing andNorway is among the countries at the forefront of ratifying and supporting relevant conventions and initiatives (for example, ILO 169, 1990; UNDRIP, 2007 and the CBD Art. 8(j) and 10(c)). Recent legislation for reindeer husbandry also acknowledges the siida as a key Sámi pastoral social institution. This acknowledgement could, if taken seriously, also become a basis for self-management based on siida land rights,customs,traditions,and autonomous processes of knowledge (Sara, 2009). In 2015, the government established a working committee with the mandate to explore how the autonomy of the pastoralists could be improved.A governance regime facilitating autonomy could strengthen the siida and enable pastoralists to use a combination of situated, traditional knowledge, science and technology when considering herding practices and slaughter strategies. Increased self-governance could therefore build resilience and adaptive capacity of the pastoral community by maintaining and enhancing flexibility, mobility and social-ecological diversity (Turi, 2016).

have also shown that even though Norwegian legislation requires the inclusion of Sámi traditional knowledge in land- use planning, this knowledge is often ignored in decision- making processes. Another factor that has undermined the customary rights of herding groups to land is that since the late 1970s the State has recognized the grazing lands of inner Finnmark as communal land. The so-called ‘commons’ are however winter, spring and autumn pastures traditionally managed by the siida in a complex system controlling access and use of the land (Sara, 2009; Marin and Bjørklund, 2015). The introduction of ‘commons’, undermined the traditional management and distribution of the land andmade it possible for herding groups to start using pastures to which they were not entitled according to customary rights. State incentives for intensive herding practices are another hindrance to using the potential of one’s pastures. The theory is that herds heavily dominated by females will produce many calves in the spring, which can be sold and create income the following autumn. However, a lack of diversity within the herd prevents it from utilizing the full range of pastures within a herding district. Bucks are more tolerant of human disturbance and can graze areas that females and calves will avoid, while a herd with many calves but few bucks is more vulnerable in winter when snow conditions make it difficult for reindeer to access lichen through the snow (a condition known as guohtun in northern Sámi) (Eira et al., 2010). During the 1970s, Norwegian government officials became increasingly concerned that too many reindeer and too many people engaged in pastoralism would cause overgrazing and jeopardize the economic viability of the reindeer industry (Stortinget, 1976-1977; Lenvik, 1998). There was also a perception that Sámi reindeer husbandry had not progressed at the same pace as the rest of Norwegian society. These concerns together formed the basis for a political reform of reindeer husbandry governance (Storli and Sara, 1997). Scholarly experts, rather than practitioners were appointed as advisors of the reform (Paine, 1994; Riseth, 2000) and science on how to optimize reindeer meat production formed the value and knowledge-base for reindeer husbandry governance from the 1970s onwards.The political reform – often referred to as modernization, rationalization or optimization of Sámi reindeer husbandry (Lenvik, 1990; Paine, 1994; Berg, 1996; Riseth, 2000; Reinert, 2008; Hausner et al., 2011) – aimed to stimulate herding practices in line with scientific knowledge about optimal herd structures, harvest strategies and reindeer numbers for maximizing meat production. For almost 40 years, the State has regulated reindeer husbandry through a concession system for owning and managing reindeer and has promoted ‘rational’ herding practices through economic incentives and sanctions (Johnsen et al., 2015). New reindeer husbandry policies in 2007 aimed to facilitate self-governance and participation in public decision-making related to the management of reindeer and pastures (Landbruks og matdepartementet and Reindriftsforvaltningen, 2007). However, Johnsen (2016b) recently identified several barriers to participation in the decision-making processes. Despite new tools for the internal management of pastoralism and a