390
Arctic Yearbook 2014
economic, environmental and human issues, though they may also highlight non-military, transnational security challenges such as the shipping disasters that loom large in the Faroese
document. Along this spectrum the UK strategy largely, and logically, lies closer to the latter
group, notably in its dual focus on environmental responsibility and sharing the economic spoils.
Where it diverges from the ‘non-coastal’ model is in its forthright treatment of the military
dimension (rather than, for instance, merely calling for ‘peaceful’ Arctic development): but this
could be explained variously as a further claim to meaningful Arctic involvement, or a further
expression of responsibility (since UK forces also boost neighbours’ defence).48 Similar motives,
combined with the play of institutional influences during drafting, can explain the abnormally
large coverage of science.
Figure 1: Priority Themes of Arctic/High Northern Strategy Documents
Adapted and expanded from Lassi Heininen, ‘Arctic Strategies and Policies – Inventory and Comparative
Study’, Northern Research Forum 2011 (updated April 2012), available at http://www.nrf.is/arctic-strategies
Arctic
Council
Member
States
Sov/Sec
Econ/Trans Envir
Man/Res Human/Ind Sci
Canada
x
x
x
x
x
x
X
X
X
x
/x
/x
x/x
x/x
x
x
(x)
x/x
/x
x
x
x
/x
/x
x
x
x/x
x
x/x
x
x
x
x/x
x/x
/x
x/x
/x
/x
x/x
European
Union
2012
x
x
X
x
Faroe
Islands
2013
X
x
x/x
/x
x
Kingdom
of
Denmark
(2011)
Finland
Iceland
Norway
Russia
Sweden
USA
x
(x)
(x)
x
Other
States and
Entities
UK 2013
/x
x/x
x
x/
(x/x)
x
Germany
2013
/x
x/x
x
x/
(x/x)
x
Key to abbreviations:
Sov = Sovereignty
Sec = Comprehensive security
Bailes
Econ = Economic development (inc. natural
resources)