Opinions

Greenland, Alaska share potential and problems of the Arctic Commons

Then-Gov. Wally Hickel described Alaska as an Owner State, with commonly owned land and resources to be developed for public benefit. His perspective was not confined to Alaska, however, and he took his message of the potential for northern prosperity around the world. For him, the Owner State could lift a people out of poverty.

In Alaska, the development of the Commons is not so simple, with intersecting sovereignty, governance and management regimes. The promise of prosperity has been tempered by the reality of a system designed not for effectiveness and cooperation, but focused on ownership in a singular interest. Those interests, whether federal, state or local, are not always in alignment -- and sometimes are in conflict.

Recently returned from Greenland, I find it interesting to reflect on two very different approaches to the Commons. In Greenland, which in 2009 assumed self-government from Denmark, a single government owns the land and resources, and manages it on behalf of the people. In meeting after meeting, individuals described the land beneath their feet as "ours" with no differentiation between Greenlandic and Danish inhabitants. A one-people approach has provided a common public interest.

Still far from independence, Greenland's government has identified 32 competencies for which, if it had the human and financial capacity, it could assume responsibility from Denmark. This march toward independence, as powers are devolved from nation to former colony, is impressive to watch, even as it is instructive for Alaskans.

Alaska, with a smaller land mass, greater population and 50 years of state governance, is clearly at a different developmental stage than Greenland. That said, both are on very similar development paths, with the development of resources – oil, gas and minerals – the mechanism by which they will deliver progress to citizens who demand a better quality of life. It is revenue from those resources that will allow both governments to respond to challenges of education, health and mental wellness, public safety, heat and power, and transportation infrastructure.

Our visit ended up as almost a diplomatic mission – Greenland's relationship with Denmark has meant very strong business and political relationships with Europe. But a relationship with the U.S. and Alaska makes so much more sense. The opportunity and potential to establish and cultivate cultural, economic, academic and government partnerships is impressive. This can be accomplished with a bilateral relationship, and also by leveraging the U.S. chairmanship of the Arctic Council. Alaska and Greenland share a respect for the environment upon which their peoples depend; they share huge distances, challenging climates and logistics nightmares; and they share a commitment to the lives and livelihoods of the people who live there.

From Greenland, Alaska can see a different approach to mineral development, which includes a social impact assessment that results in an impact benefit agreement negotiated between a project proponent, the Greenlandic government and the regional government. Alaska can explore new models of co-investment, such as the approach taken by Greenland in Nunaoil, a carried partner in exploration with, then, a government equity stake in production. And from Greenland, Alaska can think about new ways to leverage federal and state conservation units for highest values – a robust stakeholder process has resulted in mining exploration in their national park.

ADVERTISEMENT

This partnership goes both ways, and Alaska can offer to Greenland proven regulatory and permitting models that have provided for the health and safety of the environment and food security. It can offer a stellar university system with excellent cold climate engineering, as well as the best understanding of off-grid renewables-diesel systems in the world. And not only are we neighbors, but we're family, sharing similar lifestyles, language, culture and a dependence on the land and sea. Here, we can offer to host or sponsor exchanges and internships between peoples of the north.

In the Arctic, we have an opportunity to see the promise of Hickel's "Owner State" carried out by different nations, with different approaches. With much of the Arctic a Commons – and with so much in common – Arctic nations can support and strengthen one another for mutual benefit. Between Alaska and Greenland, we can see the promise of prosperity realized.

Nils Andreassen is executive director of the Institute of the North, an independent, non-governmental research organization that regularly hosts circumpolar policy tours. Andreassen recently served on the Alaska Arctic Policy Commission. The institute has a legacy working on Arctic infrastructure priorities and policies that serve to strengthen and connect northerners.

The views expressed here are the writer's own and are not necessarily endorsed by Alaska Dispatch News, which welcomes a broad range of viewpoints. To submit a piece for consideration, email commentary(at)alaskadispatch.com.

Nils Andreassen

Nils Andreassen is the executive director of the Alaska Municipal League.

ADVERTISEMENT