Outline

The second chapter of this paper (posted first on this blog) provides a brief introduction to the Arctic region. An outline of past Arctic expeditions as well as the interests, history and exploits of native peoples and a summary of national claims made in the region all inform the reader on background issues relevant to the region. Additionally, this chapter explores recent changes in the region, particularly during the post-Soviet era, when the relationship between the United States and Russia became more amicable and detectable climate change trends accelerated.

Chapter three introduces the Arctic regional actors in detail. These include, but are not limited to, the eight Arctic nations – including the five nations with claims in the Arctic region – as well as fishermen, mineral and hydrocarbon companies, environmental and energy lobbies, indigenous peoples and shipping interests. The relevant policies of each state are examined in detail, as are their stated and likely ambitions in the Arctic region. These, for instance, include Russia's goal of turning the Arctic into its main resource base by 2020.[i] This chapter also introduces the international bodies involved in the Arctic. These include UNCLOS and the Arctic Council. Indigenous peoples, the United Nations Framework on the Convention for Climate Change, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature, the International Hydrographic Organization and the International Maritime Organization are also all introduced and discussed.

Chapter four of this thesis examines the pros and cons of potential regime solutions in the Arctic. In particular, this chapter addresses the collective action literature and examines what a non-cooperative Arctic scenario, largely similar to the one the world faces at present, might mean for the region. The fourth chapter also puts forth the pros and cons that would accompany both logistical and policy cooperation in the Arctic.

Chapter five spells out the role that public policy can play in ensuring that the Arctic is developed sustainably. It is unrealistic to believe that the Arctic will be preserved as a pristine and untouched wilderness in the coming decades. On some issues, such as territorial disputes, UNCLOS will largely provide a framework under which the Arctic nations can operate. On other issues, such as environmental management and search and rescue, the Arctic nations need to work to devise the most effective, equitable and sustainable answer themselves. The Arctic presents a singular chance for the world's leaders to come together and announce a new commitment to managing regional resources in a committed and responsible fashion. As nations make land grabs and tensions between nations play out far offshore and out of the public eye, the region could stoke tensions reminiscent of the Cold War. If managed attentively and effectively, though, the Arctic can become a symbol of a new and admirable commitment to passing on a positive and forward-looking legacy to our children rather than perpetuating our habit of exploiting an opportunity for all it is worth no matter the deferred expense. But is there evidence that major stakeholders and government leaders realize that they have to cooperate with each other and major shipping and corporate interests on some issues in order to achieve mutually beneficial outcomes such as building the infrastructure necessary for safe navigation, reliable ship monitoring and search and rescue operations?