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

30

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

mining (Wessman et al., 2014). There are similar examples in northern Sweden and Norway. In Russia,rights to subsoil resources are allocated by a tendering procedure and verified by a permit. Formally,mining activities in Russia must comply with, for example, basic environmental requirements, but in practice more attention has been given to issues such as property rights, and it is difficult to assess the extent to which environmental and social impacts are considered. Examples include extensive discussions concerning pollution from the nickel mine and smelter in Nikel close to the Russian border with Norway and Finland, especially following the fall of the Soviet Union. Forestry constitutes a major land use in Sweden, Finland, and northwestern Russia (and to a lesser extent Norway). Forests are important from the perspective of biodiversity conservation, carbon sequestration, and bio-energy, as well as being a source of timber and pulp (Teräs et al., 2014). Forests are also valued as a source of wellbeing and nature experiences, and as a basis for local use and industry (for instance, recreational as well as industrial berry picking, tourism and hunting).The range of forest owners in the four countries is wide. Forest in Russia is typically state-owned but 2.3.6 Multi-use areas: forestry, environmental protection and reindeer husbandry

with shorter-term horizons and other mining aims than those typical of the region, increasing discussion of potential boom-bust risk, fast track development of mines, and fly-in fly-out employment (not strong historically in Fennoscandia). Such fast-track developments may also challenge municipal planning, because municipalities may find it difficult to refuse projects with potential economic benefits to the area despite environmental risks; a risk national legislation may not yet have responded to sufficiently given the historically domestic mining development patterns (see Söderholm et al., 2015). Even with the global financial crisis of 2008 having caused down-turns in the mining sector, interest in the region’s mineral resources remains high and several mining projects have continued development activity (PwC, 2012; SGU, 2013) (Figure 2.14). Apart from traditional demand for iron ore, copper, nickel, zinc, and precious metals, there is growing interest in rare earth metals (Ericsson, 2010; Sarapää et al., 2013). In Svalbard, coal mining, which started in the 20th century, has been a mainstay of the region (Kovacs and Lydersen, 2006), although it has recently declined. Today, large development projects, as well as some bankruptcies among companies new to mining development, have led to increased local interest, for instance in the Pajala and Kolari areas (Nordic Council of Ministers, 2011). The Talvivaara copper-nickel mine accidents in Finland have also increased awareness about the environmental risks associated with

Precious (Ag, Au, Pd. Pt, Rh, PGE) Base: Ni Base: Co, Cu, Pb, Zn Ferrous: Cr, Fe, Mn, Ti, V Special: Be, Li, Mo, Nb, REE, Sc, Sn, Ta, W, Zr Metals

0

50 100 km

Bjørnevatn

Zhdanovskoe Tundrovskoe Zapolyarnoe

Mine project Active mine Closed mine Not exploited

Kjellmannsåsen

Kootsel'vaara-Kammikivi

Kovdor

Suurikuusikko

Pahtavaara Au

Kirunavaara

Malmberget

Kolari

Aitik

Pajala

Ørt ell

Kemi

Storliden

Kristineberg

Figure 2.14 Mineral mines and deposits in northern Fennoscandia (Nordic Council of Ministers, 2011; map layout: Johanna Roto, Nordregio).