Engagement of indigenous peoples and inclusion of their knowledge in the Arctic Council and CAFF

Abstract

The Arctic Council was established in 1996, with reluctance on the part of the U.S and Russia regarding the role Arctic Indigenous Peoples should have in this new entity. However in no small-part due to the efforts of ICC and Canada the newly formed Arctic Council included Permanent Participant a category sitting below the States, but above that of Observers including non-Arctic States. Within the Council Permanent Participants have a clearly defined consultation right and therefore an influential role in how the Council operates. However some disadvantages of this new forum were that it is not a legally binding treaty or agreement and its decisions are therefore not legally binding and adherence to any decisions it makes are voluntary with no mechanisms in place to compel or track implementation and outcomes. The Council is funded on a voluntary basis, has no programming budget, all of which are detrimental to its effectiveness. Starting from these origins the Council has evolved, and it’s mandate has grown, moving from being a discussion forum, to a policy shaping and finally a policy making body. This development of the Council from being not only a forum for dialogue, but a forum for establishing norms, waiting to become law has allowed Arctic Indigenous Peoples through the Permanent Participants to influence and inform how circumpolar and global fora engage Indigenous Peoples and their knowledge indicating that their engagement with the Arctic Council has been meaningful in the sense that it has produced tangible results. Since it’s establishment Arctic Council has raised global awareness on climate change, the rapid change occurring in the Arctic and the impacts this has globally. It has been key in setting the agenda on Arctic dialogue bringing attention to emerging issues and creating spaces for conversations between stakeholders in the Arctic and building and improving on how Indigenous Peoples are engaged and their concerns taken into account. It is a forum Arctic Indigenous Peoples, helped create through their advocacy with Arctic States first within the framework with AEPS and subsequently through stronger roles within the Arctic Council. Permanent Participants ascribe high importance to the Council in their efforts to engage both nationally and internationally on issues of concern to their peoples; and have described the Council as a model to be replicated in other for e.g. the CBD.Permanent Participants have through their right to be consulted been able to slowly imbed their concerns and emphasize the importance of meaningful engagement within the Arctic Council and throughout all its subsidiary bodies. However, while the ability to engage and influence exists, structural challenges remain in the context of capacity of Permanent Participants themselves to take advantage of this body. The Arctic Council is a consensus-based body and the opinions of Permanent Participants are respected there are several examples where they have influenced decisions of the States. However ultimate decision-making power rests with the eight Arctic states and there remains a significant imbalance of power between Permanent Participants and the States, where the States have been willing “let” Permanent Participants influence certain issues and not others, the States dictate what is discussed within the Council and what not. The States have yet to address the Permanent Participant capacity and funding issues which, constitutes a major impediment for the Meaningful Engagement of Indigenous Peoples in the work of the Council and inclusion of IK. Permanent Participants have identified that what is required is both a capacity fund and a project fund. Arctic Council Ministerial Declarations show a gradual, shift towards a stronger commitment to the Meaningful Engagement of Arctic Indigenous Peoples in the work of the Council. Language used has shifted from the Ottawa Declaration (1996) “The use of the term “peoples” in this Declaration shall not be construed as having any implications as regard the rights which may attach to the term under international law” to the Reykjavik Declaration (2021) “Recognizing the rights and the special circumstances of Indigenous Peoples and the unique role of the Permanent Participants within the Arctic Council and noting the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples” Indicating a growing recognition or level of confidence with recognizing Indigenous Peoples rights. The Council has for the first time developed a long-term Strategic Plan 2021-2030 where addressing Permanent Participant capacity issues is among its objectives, which hopefully will lead to more meaningful outcomes than previous discussions on the topic. It is therefore the conclusion of this thesis that despite the Councils structural challenges that Arctic States are making efforts to meaningfully engage Permanent Participants in the work of the Council, and that their participation is of signifi