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

25

Chapter 2 · Status of the natural and human environments

natural resource based industries and manufacturing, account for 68% of GRP in the Russian sector, but only about 30-40% in the Nordic sector,with 29% inNorway, 38% in Sweden and 40% in Finland (Glomsrod et al., 2017). Primary resources, although of significant importance to GDP, account for a relatively small contribution to employment. Cohort replacement, by younger generations with more education and higher expectations, is another important factor. To use fisheries as an example, growing differences in education, capital, technology, and fishing capacity are driving a change from the formerly traditional small-boat sector to increasingly sophisticated fishing technology and more business-oriented fishermen (Nordic Council of Ministers, 2011). While an increasingly urban population might imply a disconnect from natural resource use, evidence suggests that the rural-urban linkage remains relatively significant. In fact, the Fennoscandian part of the region stands out internationally in terms of large ownership and access to second homes or summer houses, which are often retained in places of origin (Müller, 2013), among other things providing a link to rural lifestyles. Thus, while components of rural livelihoods such as hunting, fishing, and berry and mushroom picking are often described as ‘subsistence’ in other Arctic areas (i.e. having an important and sometimes necessary economic role in the absence of or to supplement more limited economic income), the widespread practice of hunting, fishing and foraging among most Fennoscandian populations is better described as recreational and traditional (Vepsäläinen and Pitkänen, 2010). Thus, descriptions of northern areas in the Barents Region need to include both rural and urban lifestyles, as these are often interlinked in terms of practice and location. The large differences that have resulted in these varying developments (e.g. regarding population and health) are difficult to summarize, but can be illustrated by comparing the differences between the Scandinavian and Russian regions, drawing on the ECONOR report (Box 2.4). 2.3.2 Multi-level regulation and planning The primary sector makes a relatively small contribution to employment but continues to represent an important contribution to GDP in the Barents Region.Forestry is important in northern Sweden,Finland and northwest Russia,while fishing and energy (mainly oil and gas) are important in northern Norway and northwestern Russia.Mining is economically important in parts of each country.Tourismand reindeer husbandry are important locally, and in some cases for tourism regionally. About 7% of the total work force is employed in agriculture, forestry, fishing and reindeer husbandry (BEAC, 2016). Although resource development – often for an external market – has been important in the area, development within northern Fennoscandian welfare states has largely avoided the same boom and bust patterns and the limitations in local and regional infrastructure development (for instance road networks and integration into the states) that has been notable in circumpolar areas outside Fennoscandia. However, with shifts in the power of the state and organized capital through globalization, more short-term interests among developers originating in an international context have emerged, resulting in very quick developments as

Population growth

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

GDP

Female rate

Replacement rate

Disposable income

Demographic dependency ratio

Economic dependency ratio

Tertiary education

Life expectancy

Lapland

Oulu

Kainuu

Finnmark

Nordland

Troms

Norrbotten

Västerbotten

Population growth

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

GDP

Female rate

Replacement rate

Disposable income

Demographic dependency ratio

Economic dependency ratio

Tertiary education

Life expectancy

Arkhangelsk

Karelia

Khanty-Mansii

Komi

Murmansk

Yamal-Nenets

Figure 2.12 Main indices of economic and social condition in Nordic (upper) and Russian (lower) regions of the Barents area in 2012.

value is favorable, and for others, low value is favorable. For the indicators where‘more is better’,the difference between the actual observation for each region and the lowest observation in the dataset was divided by the gap between the highest and lowest observation.The resulting ratios weremultiplied by 10,to obtain indices expressed on a scale from1 to 10.For the indicators infant mortality,economic dependency and demographic dependency, ‘less is better’, and the scaling was calculated in the opposite way: the observation for each region was subtracted from the highest observation, in order to express that low values of the indicators are beneficial for human development. In the case of the female rate, the observation for each region was subtracted from the global average, in order to express that a value close to the global average is beneficial. The results are displayed in the nine-point radar-shaped plots for the Nordic and Russian regions of the Barents area. The interpretation is that the more of the area that is covered by the radar-shaped figure for each region,the more favorable is the situation in that region in terms of human development.

Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online