The Arctic Institute Arctic Extractivism Series 2024
- The Arctic Institute’s Arctic Extractivism Series 2024: Introduction
- Through Colonial Patterns of Extractivism: Self-Governance as a Sustainable Path Forward
The Arctic is experiencing a dangerous transformation because of the amplifying effects of climate change, warming at four times faster than the rest of the world.1) As the region grapples with ongoing challenges posed by the changing climate, there is a growing inclination towards embracing sustainable solutions, notably in energy and resource extraction. However, the responses from both the international community and state governments to implement “greener” energy processes are not without concerns, particularly regarding the impact new energy technology can have on vulnerable communities, including Indigenous peoples. Recently, Indigenous groups internationally have challenged governmental use of land and resources that have historically been cared for by Indigenous peoples. Many are protesting the dangerous pollution resulting from resource extraction and renewable energy developments. As a result, the management of renewable energy technology (RET) has become a topic of academic debate, alongside traditional non-renewable sources. Some scholars are now using the concept of extractivism in the energy sector to explain the prevailing conflicts between Indigenous communities and authorities, viewing energy development as an extension of colonialist power. Others, however, see the expansion of RET in Indigenous communities as a step forward in their self-governance. This article seeks to explore the transition from traditional non-renewable energy sources, such as oil and gas, to renewable energy, such as wind and hydro, and assess the impact on Indigenous communities in the Arctic regions of Canada and Norway.
Evolution of the Energy Sector
Generally, there are three ways Indigenous communities have interacted with the energy sector within the Arctic states of Canada and Norway: through traditional oil and gas production, through renewable resource developments, like hydro or wind power, and through the extraction of minerals and resources needed to develop the energy sector, such as copper mining. There has been extensive research done in the first area, as resistance to oil and gas extraction has been well documented for years, especially within North America.2) Persistence of state governments in pursuing energy projects that harm or pollute Indigenous lands exemplifies the perpetuation of colonialism and colonial violence. While these government actions are not direct forms of physical violence against human bodies, the indirect forms are still impactful for Indigenous communities today.3) In 2020, there were protests against the Coastal GasLink Pipeline in Western Canada, a project planning to cut through 190 kilometers of the Wetʼsuwetʼen First Nation. Although environmental and Indigenous consultations took place, Wetʼsuwetʼen chiefs never gave approval for the land to be used, inciting protests across the country.
The rhetoric surrounding these protests often criticized Indigenous perspectives, with the media labeling anti-pipeline activism as an act of “domestic terrorism.”4) The framing of Indigenous resistance to energy developments as a threat to the country fosters colonial discourse and may result in more oppressive controls such as surveillance and excessive policing.5) In the Wetʼsuwetʼen case, police and military forces were prepared to use ‘lethal force’ against protestors and were authorized to employ ‘as much violence toward the gate as you want’ to remove a roadblock protestors built to obstruct access to Wetʼsuwetʼen land.6) Dog raids and assault weapons were used, resulting in the arrest of 74 protestors. Subsequent reports have revealed that the treatment of protestors was unlawful and the tactics employed were ‘disproportionate’ to the level of threat, as there were no reports of protestors resorting to violence.7)
As the climate continues to shift, and renewable energy becomes increasingly in demand, some argue that the transition towards renewable energy may offer a better solution to create a more sustainable future for Indigenous communities and improve conditions for exercising sovereignty.8) However, resistance to RET developments has also emerged. While it is not as extensively documented as the Coastal GasLink Pipeline protests, there are discernible patterns in the behavior of authorities that indicate the presence of structural oppression. As recently as 2023, there have been protests against the development of wind turbines in the Fosen region of central Norway.9) These wind farms were established by three Norwegian investors, and from their conception over three years ago, there were concerns about the development’s impact on reindeer grazing land, that the turbines threaten to disrupt traditional Saami reindeer herding practices.10) Despite these concerns, the farm was approved, and the development was completed in 2020.11) These concerns proved to be valid, as reindeer herders reported that the noise and size of the wind turbines frightened the reindeer.12) In October 2021, the Norwegian government declared the development ‘unlawful’, stating that it violated the protected cultural rights of the Indigenous Sámi by encroaching on their reindeer grazing lands.13) However, over two and a half years later, the wind farm is still operating as the government did not call to have them removed.14)
In the same way traditional oil and gas extraction were furthering structural violence against Indigenous peoples, renewable energy can create similar challenges. The Saami Parliament called the building of the wind farm in Fosen an act of ‘green colonialism’ and it can be defined as “pinpointing that the processes around wind energy development might intensify colonial losses of land and rights in Norway.”15) The extension of colonialism into climate change mitigation is becoming increasingly apparent through instances such as the Fosen Wind farm, as governments prioritize the energy sector over the concerns of their population.
Additionally, one of the most overlooked aspects of the continued colonization of the energy sector is mineral and resource extraction required for the creation of renewable energy devices, such as wind turbines. Necessary for solar, wind, tidal, and hydro as a thermal and electrical conductor, one of the most commonly needed minerals for the expansion of renewable energy is copper.16) A heavily mined resource throughout the Arctic, this has become a point of tension with Indigenous communities in Canada and Norway, as well as other Arctic states, such as Russia. An example of this can be found in the mountains of Kvalsund, Norway, where a controversial copper mine was approved in 2019, an instance in which the Ministry of Trade in Norway expressed that “the green shift is dependent on increased recovery of many types of metals that can be used in new technologies…the mineral industry’s raw material for industry is therefore important for achieving the climate goals.”17) Although copper is necessary to achieve climate goals, Indigenous and environmental groups warn of the cost of such mines, as waste dumping into water sources and interruption of reindeer husbandry are significant risks that will worsen the environment in which Saami peoples live and work, continuing the trend of injustice towards Indigenous peoples.18)
Opportunities and Challenges for Indigenous Communities
Despite the risks associated with renewable energy developments, on a smaller scale, the adoption of wind and hydropower technologies in Canada’s Indigenous communities has proven transformative, offering a sustainable alternative to diesel-powered facilities plagued by contamination issues.19) In Canada, there are over 170 remote Indigenous communities that rely primarily on diesel for electricity,20) but aging facilities are causing “brownouts,” leading to numerous issues, such as water boil advisories and non-functional water treatment facilities. For instance, in 2022, Iqaluit experienced a two-month boil water advisory due to an aging diesel fuel tank leaking into the city’s water supply.21)
There are some instances, especially within Canada, in which wind and hydropower have significantly increased the sustainability of many Arctic communities, such as the Pic Mobert First Nation in Ontario. The community owns 50% of the Gitchi Animki Hydroelectric Project, or the Henvey Inlet First Nation wind partnership, the largest partnership in Canada which creates jobs and brings in millions of dollars annually for the community.22) Indigenous led projects have the potential to create both the ability to trust in the longevity of a power source, and in many instances, benefit from socioeconomic assets if communities decide to own and operate their systems independently.23) These processes can give communities more autonomy and “redistribute” power and justice away from governments and other historically oppressive authorities.24)
The decolonization of lands and systems Indigenous groups rely on is vital for the betterment of their communities, but the current process of establishing renewable energy developments is not the most sustainable way forward. The emerging literature on the concept that RET has the potential to extend colonial systems into the climate crisis is critical in understanding how to better decolonize the energy sector. While important in the fight against climate change, the energy sector is not held sufficiently accountable with regards to its lack of Indigenous inclusion. Even if governments acknowledge the potential risks, there are often only temporary solutions, such as halting construction for brief periods of time that are important to reindeer husbandry, public apologies, or monetary compensation.25) The wind farm case in Fosen, Norway, reached resolution in early 2024, nearly four years after its completion. The outcome entailed annual compensation and permission for the wind farm to remain operational, despite the 2021 ruling that the farm was unlawful.26) These temporary solutions perpetuate structural violence against Indigenous peoples by equating a land’s worth with financial value rather than its intrinsic value. Indigenous communities are forced to seek justice through colonial structures, often resulting in compensation that doesn’t solve the root issue. This approach undermines the principles outlined in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), particularly the concept of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC). UNDRIP and FPIC advocate for Indigenous peoples’ rights to give or withhold consent to projects affecting their lands and resources, emphasizing genuine participation and respect for their sovereignty. Without adhering to these standards, temporary measures fail to address the deeper issues of autonomy and cultural significance, perpetuating a cycle of marginalization and injustice.27)
One of the first steps to address these issues should be the expansion of RET research. This is imperative to gain a deeper understanding of the long-term effects of such developments on cultural practices. While some research advocates for the inclusion of Indigenous organizations and mediation between colonial and Indigenous governments, there is insufficient analysis of the root problems underlying these conflicts.28) Despite efforts by the Canadian government working on the Truth and Reconciliation Act, land rights have “been largely ignored…without resolving the conflicts around land in a fair and collaborative manner, real reconciliation will be difficult to achieve”.29) This can be seen through the government’s promises to improve the relationships with Indigenous communities while simultaneously developing pipelines on their land, and carrying out violent attacks against those protesting their fundamental rights.30)
There are still numerous land disputes over territories that have been historically inhabited by Indigenous peoples, and the provincial government of British Columbia disputed the land claim against the Wetʼsuwetʼen people and offered to only give them 4 – 6 percent of their original land claim.31) Although there are varying degrees in which colonialism has influence, as the histories of colonialism differ, as Patrick Wolfe famously says, “invasion is a structure, not an event”.32) This perspective recognizes that colonialism operates as a pervasive and ongoing force that continues to influence contemporary realities. Even in regions where colonial rule has formally ended, the legacies of colonialism persist in systems of governance over resources.
Secondly, Indigenous communities like the Saami in Norway and Inuit in Northern Canada, are well known for their traditional practices in terms of resource management, and land and water conservation which have sustained their communities well, which are not often considered when implementing energy developments.33) The increased presence of renewable energy to alleviate the effects of climate change without the involvement of Indigenous insights furthers the impact of oppressive colonial systems, as seen through the Wet’suwet’en protests and Fosen wind farm protests. Indigenous inclusion in decision-making processes is not only necessary for conflict resolution and reconciliation but also a fundamental aspect of upholding Indigenous rights and dignity. This principle is ingrained in the UNDRIP, which outlines the standard for engaging with Indigenous communities and operating within Indigenous territories. Both Canada and Norway, as signatories to UNDRIP, are obligated to adhere to its principles, which emphasize conducting meaningful consultation, following FPIC, and recognizing Indigenous sovereignty and self-determination. In Canada, initiatives such as the Inuit-led Qulliq Energy Corporation demonstrate the potential for community-led energy projects to empower Indigenous communities and enhance their capacity for self-governance.34) These projects prioritize local control and benefit-sharing, fostering economic development and cultural preservation. However, challenges remain, including the need for improved infrastructure and regulatory frameworks to support Indigenous-led initiatives.
The absence of supportive frameworks for Indigenous-led initiatives poses a challenge to the decolonization of energy transitions, underscoring the exclusion of Indigenous communities from decisions impacting their land and resources. This highlights how green colonialism perpetuates existing colonial power structures.35) While recent literature has increasingly focused on Indigenous sovereignty and independence regarding energy benefits,36) there remains a lack of accountability for governments that disregard Indigenous input and resistance. This was evident in British Columbia, where despite objections from Indigenous leadership, the Supreme Court sanctioned the violent removal of Wetʼsuwetʼen protesters, underscoring the enduring pattern of colonial violence against Indigenous bodies in the struggle against resource development projects.37) Also, in Norway, where the Supreme Court ruled in 2021 that the construction of wind turbines violated Saami rights, the turbines continue to operate.38)
Conclusion
The shift towards renewable resources holds the potential to contribute significantly to the decolonization of the energy sector, provided Indigenous governance and practices are integrated into the process. It is vital for these processes to be guided by Indigenous leadership in order to reduce the impact of colonialism in climate change mitigation. Additionally, without a full recognition of the structural and cultural ways in which governments perpetuate conflicts stemming from the oil and gas industry, these practices will continue to increase in the renewable energy sector. Within Canada and Norway, there is significant room available to improve the systems in which Indigenous peoples have increased dialogue in decision-making processes. Meaningful engagement requires addressing power dynamics in the energy sector and confronting colonial legacies that perpetuate inequality and marginalization. By prioritizing Indigenous rights and knowledge, a more just and sustainable future can be built for Arctic states and the people living in them.
Moreover, true reconciliation and progress in decolonizing the energy sector depend on concrete actions beyond mere consultations. It necessitates the implementation of policies that not only acknowledge but also actively incorporate traditional ecological knowledge and Indigenous management practices. This means providing Indigenous communities with genuine control over resource development in their territories, ensuring fair and equitable benefit-sharing, and creating legal frameworks that safeguard their rights and lands. As Canada and Norway move forward, embedding these principles into their national and international energy policies will be crucial in achieving long-term sustainability and justice for Indigenous peoples and the broader global community.
Emily Schmidt studied Arctic security and Indigenous responses to renewable energy developments during her Master’s degree in Global Peace, Security, and Strategic Studies at the Brussels School of Governance.
Source – The Arctic Institute