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

186

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

should be mandatory; livelihoods other than reindeer herding should have formal rights to participate and be included in all stages of impact assessment; and traditional knowledge holders and practitioners should be included at earlier stages of an EIA. There is an urgent need to consider regional laws and best practices to issue the federal laws of direct action on EIAs, and mechanisms ensuring the active participation of indigenous peoples in decision-making should be formalized. In terms of landscape protection for traditional activities, the legal structure entitled ‘territories of traditional nature use’ offers some avenues for the delimiting of landscapes for the continuation of traditional livelihoods (Russian Federation, 2001). However, amendments to this legislation in 2013 have diluted their effectiveness, particularly in areas of interest for economic development (Kryazhkov, 2015). Through observation, practitioners of traditional livelihoods gain knowledge about the landscape, weather, and climate, and how these environmental factors interrelate. This comprises a rich, varied and valuable body of knowledge. However, research has shown that traditional knowledge is given less attention than scientific knowledge because the authorities consider the latter to be more objective and rational (Turi and Keskitalo, 2014; Johnsen et al., 2015). This is a short-sighted view, as Eira (2012) and Eira et al. (2013) have shown in the case of reindeer herders’ knowledge of snow. This knowledge is extensive, deep, accumulated over time and tested – much like traditional scientific knowledge albeit from a different perspective (Riseth et al., 2010). Traditional knowledge is continuously practiced and refined. Bull et al. (2001) and Sara (2009) gave examples for reindeer herding. Within reindeer husbandry it is local knowledge (concerning pasture areas, herd structures, animal behavior, climatic conditions) that enables pastoralists to choose from the many herding strategies available and so apply situated resilience-enhancing strategies (Mathiesen et al., 2013; Sara, 2015; Eira et al., 2016). For example, a herder may respond to less favorable grazing conditions by altering the use of pastures and migration patterns of the herd. Sámi pastoralists also have a specialized language that helps them articulate ecological variability and serves as a tool to minimize risk (Magga, 2006; Eira,2012a).A consequence of weakened traditional knowledge and declining use of language could be weakened adaptive capacity within the herding community (Mathiesen et al.,2013). Indigenous and local community participation in research is key to improving the management of nature in the North and to avoiding conflicts over nature use.According to O’Brien et al. (2009), the Norwegian social contract currently focuses on autonomy and rights, and fails to recognize the factors and knowledge that underlie the livelihoods of Sámi reindeer herders, such as the importance of maintaining diversity in reindeer herds.The state-assumed responsibility for regulating reindeer production undermines the resilience of reindeer pastoralists by insisting on the use of equilibrium-based management tools such as carrying capacity. This is also true 7.4 Towards a broader use of traditional knowledge

Currently, one of the more effective mechanisms for such participation in the Russian sector of the Barents area is built into an EIA process, but constitutes its last stage, namely public hearings (Klokov and Bocharnikova, 2013). However, the final decision on approving resource development projects is made on the basis of a state ecological review (gosudarstvennaya ekologicheskaya ekspertiza), which must take into account the outcome of a public hearing.State ecological review assessments of development projects are included in Russian federal laws, but are not laws of direct action. This means that for the laws to be implemented some statutory and non-normative Acts must be adopted (e.g. instructions, regulations and standards, and legislative instruments). These vary between regions if not decided by the Federal Court.As a result, the involvement of indigenous peoples is implemented differently in different regions (Matveev and Kotov, 2004). The only region of the Russian Federation where the active participation of indigenous peoples is ensured is in the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia), during the final decision-making stage of an EIA. There, an ethnological review is carried out together with the state ecological review, to analyze the cumulative impacts of planned industrial activities and the consequences for the original inhabitants and traditional livelihoods.The ethnological reviewmust be conducted before the decision on project approval is taken, and indigenous peoples and their associations have the right to representation on the expert committee. While the Russian sector of the Barents area has not achieved this level of legal protection and process, the region has developed some sustainable practices for ensuring the participation of indigenous peoples in decision-making. The existing procedures require an EIA to focus not only on the natural environment, but also on the social, cultural and economic aspects of life (Klokov and Degteva, 2012; Klokov, 2013a). Developers must ensure opportunities for indigenous peoples to participate at public hearings, which is particularly important for remote communities and nomadic herders. Companies have contributed to the development of the territory, which has included the building of schools and the provision of educational opportunities for indigenous youth. These practices have received considerable publicity in areas where large industrial developments are planned on the traditional lands of reindeer herders.One example occurred on theYamal Peninsula, where regional and municipal authorities were both involved in helping to facilitate the participation of indigenous peoples in decision-making and in pursuing their interests during assessments of the environmental impacts of infrastructure and oil and gas development (Klokov, 2013b). The diversity of regional legislation and practices involved in undertaking EIAs, public hearings, state ecological expertise investigations and the implementation of ethnological expertise investigations in the Russian Federation, offers considerable potential for means to advance the participation of indigenous peoples in the governance of their homeland (Klokov and Degteva, 2012; Klokov and Bocharnikova, 2013; Klokov and Khrushchev, 2014). Public hearings should not be the only mechanism through which indigenous peoples can participate outside regional and public governments; an analysis of social, cultural and economic consequences of proposed developments