Political Participation in the Arctic: Who is heard, when, and how?

“Open dialogue” has remained a key aim of the conference since its beginning, and efforts are made to include a diversity of plenary speakers and discussants – not least involving Indigenous Peoples of the Arctic to a larger extent than was perhaps previously the case, and most recently including more youth. However, as all who have participated will know, neither the conference itself nor the wider context of visiting Iceland are readily accessibly without substantial funds.

And, for better or worse, the ACA only lasts for three days, while political participation should be strengthened not just within Harpa’s halls but also during the remainder of the year. Indeed, the region’s central forum, the Arctic Council, is often described as lacking transparency and currently operating in a limited fashion; and much of Arctic political discussions happen at the seemingly inaccessible foreign policy arenas, rather than through voting boxes and public engagements.

Political participation – barriers and opportunities: The roundtable speakers each mentioned different challenges to participation – for example, language barriers in terms of policy documents not being available for a non-native speaking audience and written in a complicated and cumbersome language.

The audience also pointed to both geographical and financial barriers, as well as language abilities, an expectation of “volunteerism” by Indigenous Peoples and disadvantaged groups, and wider lack of access and capacity. Arguably underlying many of these, one barrier identified was also “colonialism impacts in political structure”, and another pointed to uneven power dynamics even within dialogues.

Turning our attention from problems to solutions, the speakers had prepared some concrete suggestions, such as empowering local and regional elected assemblies – a suggestion made by Øystein Solvang, who is currently writing a PhD on political reforms in Northern Norway.

As for the audience, their suggestions are again worth highlighting – suggesting improvements to school curricula as “awareness and ability are pre-condition[s] for political participation”. More resources and funds were mentioned, as were comprehensive language learning resources – presumably beyond school-level. Having grown up in Korea, Kim Insuk shared her experience living in Greenland, explaining how traditional media (tv, radio, newspapers), social media (most importantly Facebook) and public meetings present language barriers at times: “As a foreign resident, I’ve experienced the challenges of exclusion due to language barriers, which limit full participation in political discourse for those who don’t speak either language fluently.”