Zhanna Anshukova, Tom Gabriel Royer, and Adam Kočí
A field report from the first phase of the Calotte Academy in the European Arctic and Sápmi, 11—17 November 2024
Introduction (Lassi Heininen and Tom Gabriel Royer)
The Calotte Academy, an international travelling symposium and school of Arctic dialogue, took place in the European Arctic and Sápmi from 11 to 17 November 2024. The participants of the 2024 Academy, with sessions and excursions in Rovaniemi, Luleå, Hetta, Kautokeino, Inari and Sodankylä, included 20 early career researchers and 7 professors from 13 countries. The theme of the event, “Environmental Security vs. Military Security”, is inspired by the world (dis)order of growing multi-crises, with dual, controversial realities reflecting their impact in the Arctic: Major challenges of the ‘Anthropocene’ (pollution, global warming, loss of biodiversity), accelerated by the mass use of resources and the political inability to manage the ecological catastrophe; and great power rivalries with growing arms races, lack of arms control, new East-West tit-for-tat, and hot wars in Africa, the Middle East, Ukraine. Finally, ‘securitisation’ as an overarching trend everywhere points to an apparent antagonism between militarisation & environmentalisation of societies, politics, transnational relations and media.
A certain “Save the Calotte Academy” approach was necessary when, only 1.5 months before the initially scheduled start of this 33rd edition of this travelling symposium, the organisers were left without the funds promised by the Norwegian Foreign Ministry for a joint project between the universities of Tromsø, Trent and Lapland. While this threatened the unique interdisciplinary travelling symposium, the belief in dialogue and the commitment to continue sharing knowledge with local communities and learning from other experts was stronger.
This report was collaboratively written by all the participants, who volunteered to take turns as secretaries, and it was assembled by our team. It shows the human dimension of our event and conveys the lively discussions and exchange of knowledge that took place.
The 2024 Academy is organised by the Northern Policy Society in cooperation with the Sámi Education Institute (SAKK), the International Reindeer Husbandry Centre (EALÁT), the Department of Media Studies at Stockholm University, Launch Pad Finland and UArctic’s Thematic Network (TN) on Geopolitics and Security.
Calotte Academy Session 1: “Securitizing Science and a Society - Remilitarizing the Arctic?”
11 November, University of Lapland, Rovaniemi
Rapporteurs: Zhanna Anshukova and Tom Gabriel Royer
Prof. Lassi Heininen (University of Helsinki) gave the opening remarks, emphasising the resilience of the Calotte Academy, especially as it has faced several organisational hurdles this year. The Calotte Academy is the oldest event of its kind in the Arctic, organised since 1991 – well before the Arctic Eight countries met for the first time. Prof. Heininen also emphasised the importance of engaging in fruitful discussions after each presentation.
Next on the stage was Matti Nojonen (University of Lapland), presenting “Emerging securitization narrative and academic freedom”, especially in the context of Chinese studies. Because of the securitization trend, there is increasing caution about working with China. Matti underlined the need for critical voices in the media. As limits are put on academic cooperation with Chinese institutions, the principle of equality is in question and the risk of self-censorship is high. The securitization trend therefore raises ethical legal and practical questions about the boundaries of academic freedom. Matti concluded with the words of Literary Nobel Prize winner Czesław Miłosz: “In a room where people unanimously maintain a conspiracy of silence, one word of truth sounds like a pistol shot”. The discussion took various directions.
During the discussion, the topic of international cooperation was discussed. There was also one question about the participation of researchers with Russian affiliation in some conferences. Then one comment was referring to war in Iraq and support from Europe leading to a discussion about losing the habit of practising the freedom of speech and lack of independence. Later during the discussion, Trump’s unpredictability was mentioned in the context of the future political situation. After that, one of the participants commented decolonizing of researchers’ thoughts. The final thought in the discussion was a case of teaching a course on human-induced climate change and the question of whether the lecturer should also take into account the considerations of the deniers.
The next presenter was Miyase Christensen (University of Stockholm), with the topic of “Arctic geopolitics and the role of (mis)information in a polarised communication ecology”. The presentation focused on the complex geopolitical and communication dynamics shaping the Arctic region. Key points included the rising strategic importance of the Arctic due to climate change, which is opening new resources and shipping routes. Major state actors like Russia, China, and the United States are more and more involved in Arctic affairs, often using media and information channels to influence public perception, territorial claims, and policy narratives.
The presentation highlighted the role of media in shaping both global and regional perceptions, especially in the case of security and national interests in the Arctic. It emphasised how countries use media to support their geopolitical ambitions. They are framing their activities as security measures while sometimes engaging in disinformation campaigns that make international cooperation more difficult. It was also mentioned that their stakeholders, including corporations, NGOs, and indigenous groups, also utilise media to shape Arctic narratives.
The presenter emphasised the need for transparent and accountable information systems to resist misinformation and to promote fact-based reporting. The presentation concluded by exploring how media and information governance can be strengthened to ensure a stable, cooperative Arctic future.
Many different ideas were discussed, including critical minerals, Arctic security, the idea of sustainability, the Sámi experience, colonialism and national sovereignty. AI and truth were also mentioned. One of the participants shredded her thoughts that sometimes a crazy, invented idea gets millions of views. Another participant stressed that there is too much dependence on technology today. Then there was the idea that the media could take a story in a different direction. One of the last thoughts was about the connection between social media and the military and NATO.
The third presentation was given by Marco Dordoni (University of Perugia) on the topic of “Securitizing the High North: A New Priority for NATO”. The presentation examined NATO’s evolving role and strategies in the Arctic, focusing on security challenges and responses to growing Russian influence in the region. The presenter provided a very structured overview of NATO’s concerns, including the militarization of the Arctic by Russia, especially around the Kola Peninsula. Russia’s nuclear and naval buildup was discussed, as well as hybrid threats such as cyberattacks, GPS jamming, and disinformation campaigns. Together, these elements point to a complex security environment.
NATO’s expansion with the recent inclusion of Finland and Sweden was also mentioned, bringing seven of the eight Arctic states under NATO’s umbrella. This expansion is intended to counterbalance Russian presence near sensitive areas. There was a slide about the icebreaker capacity demonstrating the significant number of Icebreakers in Russia.
The presentation was concluded by addressing the need for cooperation among NATO members, including non-Arctic states, emphasising that Arctic security transcends regional borders and necessitates both political and military collaboration. The session posed questions about the alliance’s potential future role in maintaining security and stability in the Arctic.
The discussion started with the example of Portugal-NATO exercises leading to the idea that the focus of NATO is security. The next question discussed was about the fact that the Arctic has always been one of the priorities of Russia, for Russia’s future. Lassi Heininen followed suit, by emphasising that Putin is not the sole character shaping this priority, but the whole Russian security establishment is doing so. A participant finally raised the importance of remembering that the whole Arctic is Indigenous land.
Laura Junka-Aikio (University of Lapland)’s presentation was entitled “There’s plenty of space, and it doesn’t bother the civilians”. A quote that reflects the military’s attitude to the consequences of militarisation in the Arctic. She argued that the militarisation of the Arctic should not only be seen as a reaction to, or a consequence of, the situation in Ukraine, but that it should be put into a wider context and discussed in terms of its consequences, which are rarely mentioned. NATO’s arrival in the Arctic is seen as an opportunity. However, the new transport infrastructure projects are being made according to military needs, not broader public needs. Laura reminded us that this is Sámi land and that development is now taking place on a military basis, without public discussion. The perspective of colonialism is therefore relevant to Finnish Lapland, because militarisation is similar to appropriation and assimilation. In addition, the idea of mastering nature has been essential to the militarisation of the Arctic. Moreover, in other areas, such as Canada, militarisation has made indigenous peoples dependent on the infrastructure that has been created. The Sámi people are trying not to antagonise the military.
During the discussion, the issue of the train project in Lapland was raised. This train was mainly wanted by the mining industry, which is why the tourist industry was also reluctant, fearing side effects. There was then an exchange about the environmental impact of military activities and whether there are any studies to ensure that they do not affect the health of civilians. Laura took the opportunity to mention a video made by the Finnish Defence Forces in Rovajärvi, near Rovaniemi. The video is called “Tuli lähtee | Fire at will” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5TQKhF6lX0) and shows the Arctic nature, before showing weapons being fired at it. Ultimately, the concluding argument was that the concept of security is currently being limited to military security.
The first session ended in the afternoon with a presentation by Lassi Heininen, whose slideshow consisted mainly of maps showing conflict dynamics in the Arctic. He began his presentation by asking how many armed conflicts have occurred in the Arctic since 2022, and the answer was zero. His slide of a map of the Arctic Ocean without sea ice illustrated bathymetric efforts to introduce the issue of Russian sub-vessels dividing into a depth of 4000 metres, with Russia relying on the argument of extending its EEZ. Lassi then recalled the war at the end of the First World War in the Kola Peninsula, naval warfare with Nazi submarines. He stressed that there are many different activities in the Arctic, which makes it “a bit messy”, with different claims to sovereignty. According to him, the Arctic is the perfect place to operate. That is why it has been militarised for some time, and the infrastructure is still there today. For example, the coverage of the Thule radar is important for the USA, unfortunately to the detriment of the Inuit people. Then, on the subject of nuclear submarines, Prof. Heininen explained that during the Cold War, the USA and the USSR admitted to each other that they had the capability and agreed to a balance. Moreover, the split of the USSR created 4 nuclear powers instead of one; later, fear of the split of the Russian Federation arose. That is why the USA supported the Kremlin against the Chechens. In fact, in Lassi’s words: “National security doesn’t have a price”.
Calotte Academy Session 2: “Alternative Approaches to (Arctic) Security”
12 November, Luleå University of Technology (LTU) (Luleå)
Rapporteurs: Mirkka Ollila and Céline Rodrigues
The second session was held at the LTU starting with the welcoming words by Prof. Athanasios Migdalas (ETS Institute), affirming that receiving Calotte Academy will open the discussion to opportunities and the possibility of research projects focusing on risk management, logistics in the Arctic, joining Sweden, Finland and Norway. Taking into consideration that Finland and NATO are NATO members, the region is even more important for strategic reasons and it also means that “infrastructure is not enough to take on the burden of activity” in the professor’s words. The professor also mentioned that the military activity in the region is destroying land where mushrooms are cultivated due to military exercises in those places/areas/fields.
Rea Fraser (President of the Spanish NGO “Straight Up”) opened the session with her presentation entitled “The Military as a landowner: the case study of Punta Vigía”. Fraser started her presentation with a short background of the area of the case study, which includes 18 abandoned military bases, owned by the Spanish Ministry of Defense. Due to the military sector unintentionally being the environmental steward of the land they hold; the area has been so far saved from the increasing pressure of development.
However, with rising prices in the Spanish housing market and a surge in tourism, near-natural areas such as Punta Vigía have come to the attention of land developers. Fraser draws a link between the so-called ‘tourist invasion’ and the development of military land, highlighting the former’s interest in selling off its sites to escape risks to public safety posed by deteriorated infrastructure. However, the so-called emptiness of the abandoned areas, and the military’s willingness to sell them, is tempting developers to expand their operations.
Fraser used the rest of his presentation to give examples of dialogue-based and youth-inclusive land-use redevelopment of abandoned military sites. One example was the so-called youth exchange, which comprised young people at risk of social exclusion. The aim was to give young people opportunities to participate in the civil process, from which they are nowadays in many cases cut off, as well as to enable the reclaiming of shared space. Land use issues, even in the context of abandoned sites, boil down to power and its use. At the end of the presentation, Fraser shared the following questions, which can be applied to several different contexts, including Arctic exploitative land use issues: (1) Who are the decision-makers? (2) Who is consulted, who consults? (3) Who officially and unofficially represents the environment?
During the session, Fraser highlighted the growing challenges faced by young people as their opportunities to voice opinions and influence decisions become increasingly restricted, leading to a rise in extremist perspectives among them. He emphasised the potential of community-based initiatives, such as reusing abandoned natural areas, to engage young people in meaningful development projects that reflect their aspirations and provide a foundation for their future. The discussion also touched upon the significance of the area for migrants, with a focus on promoting intercultural dialogue to counter polarised narratives. Strategies included fostering regional cooperation and utilising various media platforms, such as radio, to advance the humanization of borders.
Another point raised was how young people were motivated to participate in these activities. The approach combined free training and EU youth programs with grassroots efforts to build trust. This was achieved through consistent, personal engagement in public spaces, often accompanied by shared meals, to foster understanding and encourage broader community support for youth involvement.
Toward the end, the conversation turned to the army’s decision to sell their land publicly, with concerns raised about investors being prioritised due to their financial resources and negotiation power. The lack of regulations governing these transactions was criticised, along with the potential for significant land-use changes. It was argued that public interest must take precedence in such cases.
Zhanna Anshukova (University of Lapland) then presented her research, “Sexuality as a threat”: Power, discourse and regulation” through the lens of the author Michel Foucault, who explains the relationship between power and sexuality. As Zhanna mentioned, power is everywhere, including in discourse and knowledge, it is not only present in politics. It can be oppressive or productive. It is through power discourse that we shape our identities, that we ’learn’ to accept things as ’normal’. It should be emphasised that discourse is a tool of power, and language is a way of enforcing what goes on, what we define as acceptable or deviant, and what should be hidden or suppressed.
When it comes to sexuality, Zhanna affirms that laws are created to govern the population, states have found a way to regulate people’s bodies, which is in line with Foucault’s idea of biopower, sexuality is synonymous with reproduction and health, and it is necessary to go back to the Victorian era, according to Michel Foucault, where morality enforces power. Zhanna added that sodomy laws, which control deviant behaviour, existed until the 20th century and still exist in our societies today.
In the Arctic context, many colonised regions adopted the sexual norms imposed by the colonial powers as a show of power. In the map shown (which was not accurate immediately after its publication in 2020), it was possible to see the places in the region where it is possible to express one’s own sexuality, such as Greenland, and where it is not possible, as in the case of Russia, where the LGBTQ+ community/movement is considered an extremist organisation. This community is seen as something bad for children because it affects their health. The same goes for the use of the rainbow flag, which is seen as a threat in Russia and China. In light of this, the Arctic is not considered safe for sexual freedom. As Michel Foucault pointed out, state-sponsored discrimination, because it upholds moral norms and traditions, whatever that means today, tells people what is safe and what is not.
At the end of the discussion, it was clear that the Arctic is a multicultural place, it is a diverse society and that the “#MeToo” movement works differently for men in a society that dictates how women should look in their countries or whether they are allowed to buy and/or use condoms.
Caterina Monni (Foscari University), provided an extensive overview of Arctic security, titled “Arctic security: Balancing hybrid strategies and nuclear challenges”. It weaved together insights on hybrid strategies and nuclear challenges. She emphasised the need for collaborative security in high-risk areas, highlighting the importance of a unified approach to managing risks as human activities increasingly strain governance frameworks.
The discussion then turned to the evolving legal status of the Arctic, focusing on the delicate balance between sovereignty and environmental responsibilities. This balance, Monni argued, is critical to ensuring effective Arctic governance. Drawing a parallel to space law, she suggested that principles of peaceful exploration could serve as a model for Arctic security. These principles could reshape Arctic operations while introducing necessary limitations on states’ freedom of action under high-risk conditions.
Finally, Monni addressed the topic of sustainable nuclear energy use in the Arctic, framing it as a global responsibility. She called for efforts to create a peaceful and safe nuclear energy landscape in the region, underscoring its significance for long-term sustainability and security.
Calotte Academy Session 3: “Indigenous Peoples in Arctic Politics – while forgotten, increasing self-governing and para-diplomacy”
13 November, UArctic EALÁT Institute (Kautokeino)
Rapporteurs: Michaela Louise Coote and Rae Fraser
Lassi highlighted his delight to be welcomed back to the new Kautokeino school, remarking that Calotte Academy students have been warmly invited to the Sámi village of Kauteneino for many years; however this year there is an exceptional shortage of snow. This session considered Indigenous Peoples (IPs) in Arctic politics (which was an Arctic Yearbook publication theme last year) and Lassi encouraged the students to consider exploring the link between the Calotte Academy and the Arctic Yearbook in future years.
Anders Oskal (Secretary General of the Association of World Reindeer Herders and Executive Director of the International Centre for Reindeer Husbandry) then presented on the topic of food security. He began the session by highlighting the sometimes cited notion that there are many ’Arctics’ – the Nordic Arctic, the Russian Arctic, and the North American Arctic – , emphasising the importance of the Arctic for both natural resources and geopolitical reasons. Anders highlighted that for him, there is a different truth – the Indigenous Arctic. This Indigenous Arctic consists of around 60 groups of IPs and thus is extremely diverse and represents a homeland for many people. Anders highlighted that not everybody sees the world from the same lens but instead – we see the world how we are. This is important for IPs because Sámi live a unique way of life – often following their reindeer like their ancestors for thousands of years. Sámi is an original nomadic culture which is about manoeuvring in an unpredictable environment.
In terms of food systems, Anders highlighted that this creates a unique relationship between humans and reindeer – called the social contract. This social contract states that without reindeer, humans cannot exist and vice versa. On one side of the coin we have intensive agriculture which requires a great deal of human control and lack of animal autonomy and on the other side; reindeer herding where man cannot have control over nature. Anders highlighted that there are several security challenges for reindeer herding, particularly from a comprehensive security perspective including climate change, wildfires, increasing human activity and infrastructure development, globalisation including land encroachment. Anders explained that the ones most impacted by these challenges are those who are most dependent on the land. Anders utilised a metaphor to explain this. He said, “we have been hit by the same train twice, once by climate change and the second time by climate mitigation”.
Anders then highlighted the role of sustainable science in food security. Anders highlighted that science builds societies and thus it is important to consider where science takes place and what will be left after the funding has one? He argued it is important to consider that none of us have ’perfect’ knowledge systems and we must keep growing to meet societal and environmental needs. Anders then explained the fundamental role of transboundary institutions such as the Arctic Council in balancing Traditional Indigenous Knowledge and modern science. Food security is a crucial issue and Anders explained some of the benefits of reindeer herding vis-a-vis modern agriculture including being sustainable, having the potential to produce a surplus and being high on animal welfare.
Anders returned to the concept of the importance of embedding knowledge to create Sámi’s own society. Anders was particularly proud of the NOMAD Indigenous food lab which is a transportable laavu including a state-of-the-art kitchen which was created in collaboration with Bocuse d’Or. Unfortunately, Anders could not present the laavu today as it was at the Norwegian Parliament where a vote took place, with the outcome to apologise to Sámi for the damaging and hurtful assimilation policies. Anders expressed the importance of the NOMAD food lab in this in order to create a Sámi space for these discussions.
Mirkka Ollila (University of Helsinki)’s presentation, “Uncovering power dynamics in contested extractivist narratives in Saam’jiemm’n’e (Kola Peninsula)”, was an overview of her dissertation topics. This presentation outlined her case study, the Kolmozerskoye deposit, and offered preliminary findings regarding the emerging green transition and lithium industry in Russia, with a focus on power dynamics in the Kola Peninsula. She has been studying the area since 2020 and acknowledges the need for self-awareness in researching such topics, given her position as a non-Sámi scholar.
Her work first considers the impact of Russia’s war of aggression on lithium supplies and the broader implications for the green transition. Before the war in Ukraine, Russia relied on lithium imports from South America, as its domestic reserves remained undeveloped. After the onset of the war and subsequent sanctions, Russia shifted its focus to its own lithium resources. Lithium, now described as “the new oil of the 2020s,” plays a critical role in low-carbon technologies and military supply chains, including drone technology. This shift has heightened Russia’s geopolitical isolation while increasing pressure on Indigenous lands and peoples as companies rush to secure resources in the name of national interests.
Geological surveys from the mid-20th century revealed significant lithium reserves in the Kolmozerskoye deposit, left untapped until now. Up to 20% of Russia’s lithium is located on Sámi lands. Extraction is scheduled to begin in 2026, following the granting of licences in 2023. The official narrative from the mining company emphasises dialogue with Indigenous communities and reindeer herders, claiming adherence to international standards through the Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) process.
The presentation critically examines the company’s narrative, contrasting it with realities on the ground. While the company claims environmental responsibility and modernity, its impact assessments highlight severe consequences, including fish population disruptions, water pollution, and altered bird migration patterns. Despite these findings, there is no record of Sámi communities outright rejecting the project; available evidence points to compensation and mitigation efforts instead. The presentation concluded with a thought-provoking question: “What is the motivation for dialogue by Russian resource extraction companies?”
The discussion explored the complexities of sustainable development narratives, particularly their implicit positive connotations and ties to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). One participant raised the challenge of countering these dominant narratives, questioning how alternative perspectives can emerge within the overarching framework of sustainability. In response, it was argued that the entire concept of sustainability itself needs to be interrogated.
While narratives can be shaped to appear positive, they often mask ongoing resource extraction, especially in contexts like Russia, where reliance on fossil fuels remains strong.
Another participant noted parallels between these narratives and those used to justify projects like the iron mine in Sweden, where arguments of self-sufficiency in metals post-Ukraine war have been employed to secure licensing. This observation extended to how myths, such as the overgrazing of herders, have been imported by Western scientists into Russian contexts, perpetuating negative narratives about traditional practices. Although the specific region discussed was not a strong area for herding, anecdotes about similar issues were mentioned.
The role of economic growth as an unquestioned justification for resource-intensive activities was also highlighted. In Russia, economic growth dominates the discourse, overshadowing alternative narratives and leaving little room for critical examination of its implications.
The conversation then shifted to the ’space sustainability paradox,’ a concept highlighting that the efforts to explore and utilise outer space create environmental problems on Earth. Activism by astronomers advocating for ’degrowth’ was mentioned as a counterpoint, though it was noted that such activism is difficult to find in Russia due to systemic constraints. Resistance, however, manifests in subtler forms.
Questions about land ownership revealed that the state holds legal control, underscoring the centralization of authority in such contexts. Discussions on lithium, identified as a critical mineral for military security, explored how narratives linking resource extraction to national security are often greenwashed to justify their continuation. This raised a broader question: why does an authoritarian state like Russia bother with greenwashing at all? These exchanges underscored the tension between dominant narratives of progress and sustainability and the realities they obscure.
Adam Kočí (University of Ostrava) then discoursed on “Greenlandic paradiplomatic relations in a postcolonial context”. Adam began by highlighting the importance of Greenmark to the Danish realm through the statistic that Denmark will lose 97% of its territory if it loses Greenland. Adam then gave an overview of the colonisation of Greenland as he explained that Greenland has experienced double colonisation – originally by the Vikings and later, after they disappeared by Denmark. Adam highlighted that the most destructive era experienced in Greenland was the post-colonial phase beginning around 1953 for IPs way of living as their Indigenous Knowledge Systems (IKS). As part of the historical overview, Adam also explained that the Home Rule Act was an important milestone in the history of Greenland’s sovereignty however; it is important to note that Denmark still has responsibility for security matters of foreign relations. Adam gave an overview of Greenland as a ’foreign actor’ which includes a mixed identity as Arctic, Nordic, Indigenous Peoples, American and Asian.
Adam completed Erasmus+ internship at the University of Greenland and conducted field research, i.a. in order to let the “Greenlanders speak” in his research which included interviewing various actors. The logic for choosing Greenland as a case-study was highlighted which included the countries strategic and resource importance, colonial legacies, dynamic state of Arctic geopolitics and the territory size located in a harsh climate/environment. Some of Adam’s research questions included: How did Danish colonisation influence the development of the Greenlandic paradiplomacy; What are the legal foundations of Greenlandic paradiplomacy and How is the Greenlandic paradiplomacy institutionalised?
Adam stressed that paradiplomacy is an evolving concept which requires further development. He highlighted the importance of his research stems from the important need to extend the geographical scope of the studied cases of paradiplomacy, filling a needed research gap and allowing the application of Kuznetsov’s framework to the case of dependent territory. Moreover, Adam has edited Kuznetsov’s framework of paradiplomacy to include national postcolonialism and the Greenlandic perspective in a historical contact to involve political partnership. Some of the actor groups that Adam researched included politicians, civil servants, members of Greenlandic representatives abroad, researchers and individuals from the Ministry of Resources, Greenland. Adam concluded that his research highlighted that the most important aspect of paradiplomacy for Greenlanders was not sovereignty per se but included fundamentally an economic element and implied some path to reconciliation.
Eleni Kavvatha (CReSPo Centre of Research in Political Science)’s intervention was titled “EU Environmental security and Indigenous peoples in the Arctic: How the EU Critical Raw Materials Act aims to bring environmental security in the EU but fails to sufficiently include the Sámi”. Eleni began by saying that it has been difficult to fund this project because Brussels does not like to be pressured into doing something it is not doing. The EU claims to be open to dialogue with the Sámi people. In 2021, it stated that it was more committed to a stronger Arctic by changing documents to stronger wording promising clear commitments, but there are concerns that EU extractive companies have priority.
The EU Critical Raw Materials Act (2024) states that the EU must have materials from its own soil for security reasons, enabling mining companies to override community opposition with fast-track procedures, posing a risk of increased exploitation and environmental impacts. Mining in Kiruna is an example of the price that the Sámi are paying for the Green Transition, with Brussels holding the view that the Sámi must “do their part” for it.
The Norwegian Supreme Court has ruled that western wind farms have illegally encroached on reindeer grazing land. The Norwegian companies may back down as a result of this ruling, but international companies might not. The lack of proper consultation, of compensation, and of longterm environmental studies, leaves the Sámi with even less control over the processes. Despite permits regarding consent and consultation, the process is still too fast.
The Norwegian Supreme Court has ruled that western wind farms have illegally encroached on reindeer grazing land. The Norwegian companies may back down as a result of this ruling, but international companies might not. The lack of proper consultation, of compensation, and of longterm environmental studies, leaves the Sámi with even less control over the processes. Despite permits regarding consent and consultation, the process is still too fast.
Kavvatha stresses a need for statistics on minority and ethnic groups. Indeed, some studies suggest that current statistics are not adapted to Sámi reality. She advocates for an increase in research funding for data collection and for ethical guidelines on EU research on the Sámi. Also, she points out that many EU decision-makers and researchers have never been to Sámi land. She wonders how to fulfil missing communication links to push the conversation up the ladder to decisionmakers from the academic community, so as to ensure better decisions.
The discussion explored how narratives and policies intersect in the context of EU-Arctic relations, touching on themes of power, sustainability, and representation. One participant raised concerns about misrepresentation risks via manipulation of outputs into propaganda. Another reflected on how disconnection from cultural and geographical contexts has allowed decisions made in isolation, urging a return to more contextually aware decision-making. In response, it was noted that industry lobbying in Brussels is highly effective, with business interests leveraging crises, such as war, to gain influence over policymakers. With significant budgets and political power, industry representatives often outmanoeuvre other voices, pushing agendas that align with resource extraction under the guise of sustainability.
The Sámi perspective added another layer to the discussion. Historical and ongoing tensions between the EU and Sámi communities were highlighted, including the EU’s reliance on industry during its formative years and current failure to address Sámi concerns holistically. The Sámi have raised critical issues such as youth suicides linked to policies, but these concerns are often overshadowed by geopolitics and raw material interests. Questions were raised about whether the EU’s engagement with Sámi issues is genuine or merely symbolic.
One participant pointed out that the EU’s ban on reindeer meat originated from the EU level, not its member states, illustrating a disconnect in policymaking. Another observed that when Finland and Sweden joined the EU, Sámi issues were not adequately represented in membership negotiations—a missed opportunity that continues to impact EU-Sámi relations. It was suggested that the EU lacks a holistic approach to the Arctic, failing to connect its policies on fisheries, climate change, and Arctic governance into a cohesive strategy.
Calotte Academy Session 4: “‘The Vision That Became Reality’ – the cooperative ‘BEAR’ with closed borders!”
14 November, Enontekiö Town Hall (Enontekiö) and UTAC (Ivalo)
Rapporteurs: Marco Dordoni and Christine Gawinski
Urban Wråkberg (UiT The Arctic University of Norway) presented “Research on the Euro- Arctic borderland under shifting politics”. Professor of Northern Studies at UiT in Tromsø, he previously worked in Kirkenes.
Professor Urban began by recounting his own experiences collaborating in Russia. Initially, these activities were productive, with no issues. However, following the Ukraine war, a Russian media outlet featured his image prominently in a report, and tensions emerged at his Norwegian university, where Professor Wråkberg worked. Opinions divided, and the university advised Urban to halt these collaborative initiatives with Russia. Today, the Euro-Barents cooperation is under threat, and it has become impossible to conduct research.
Contemporary Nordic institutions are increasingly shaped by media-driven fears, which often influence their priorities and decision-making. This environment highlights the growing importance of international networking and field excursions, which are not merely optional but crucial to establish and maintain credibility within one’s discipline. Scholars have a responsibility to engage globally, ensuring their research remains relevant and well-informed.
Cutting ties with countries in conflict, such as Russia, risks producing weaker research that fails to capture emerging trends and key developments. These connections, even amid geopolitical tensions, are crucial to understand complex dynamics and ensure broader views. Notably, effective collaboration with Russian counterparts does not require intervention from security services like the Norwegian Security Service to validate the research’s credibility.
During the discussion, questions arose about institutional behaviour and its influence on research. One participant asked whether there are noticeable patterns in strategic decisions about who is included or excluded from interviews. Such choices, shaped by institutional priorities and external pressures, can have significant implications for the scope and quality of the resulting research.
These reflections underscore the need for transparency and inclusivity in scholarly practices to ensure robust and comprehensive insights.
Gerald Zojer (University of Lapland) introduced us to “Digitalisation and environmental security: The Corporeality of Cloud Computing”. He is investigating the environmental impact of cloud computing. While widely promoted as a cost-effective solution for hardware and software needs, cloud computing is also marketed as an eco-friendly option for data storage.
Data centres play a critical role in modern infrastructure, yet their environmental and strategic implications often go overlooked. In terms of energy consumption, most of the world's data is stored in the U.S., Europe, and China. In Europe alone, data centres account for around 4% of total electricity use. Despite ongoing advancements in storage efficiency, demand is projected to double between 2022 and 2026, highlighting their growing energy footprint.
Water usage is another pressing concern. Cooling systems, essential for the operation of these facilities, drive high water consumption. Many data centres are located in water-stressed regions, exacerbating resource challenges. To address this, there has been a noticeable shift towards building new centres in cooler northern regions, where natural temperatures can help mitigate water demand. Besides, regulations in the EU have made some progress, particularly regarding energy usage. However, water consumption remains largely unaddressed, leaving a critical gap in policies aimed at sustainability. This lack of comprehensive oversight underscores broader challenges in monitoring data centre operations. Transparency is often hindered by inconsistent regulations, proprietary interests, and insufficient public data, making it difficult to fully grasp the environmental and operational impacts of these facilities.
The U.S. has emerged as a key hub for data centres, with Texas being a notable location due to its low energy costs, extensive infrastructure, and abundant land availability. Northern Virginia, California, and parts of the Midwest also serve as significant hubs. The geographic positioning of data centres carries implications not only for environmental considerations but also for military security. Their locations are increasingly critical, as they ensure secure access to essential data while mitigating vulnerabilities to natural disasters and geopolitical threats.
For individuals, the growing demand for data storage calls for responsible use. Simple actions like decluttering cloud storage, opting for energy-efficient apps, and supporting companies committed to environmental sustainability can help reduce the strain on these facilities. As data centres continue to expand, balancing efficiency, environmental responsibility, and security will remain a complex yet essential challenge.
The whole group then enjoyed an excursion to UTAC’s winter testing facility. After a long drive from Hetta, we had a well-deserved stop at UTAC’s renowned winter testing facility in Ivalo, Sápmi, located roughly 300 km north of the Arctic Circle. This specialised location, the northernmost of its kind globally, allows year-round testing of automobiles under consistent winter conditions—a crucial advantage for speeding up development processes without needing to travel across continents to simulate cold climates. The facility offers both outdoor and indoor testing environments, including five indoor test tracks. These controlled indoor spaces allow precise testing in temperatures ranging from 15°C up to -40°C, using only natural snow, to ensure consistent conditions year-round. During our tour of the facilities, we visited an indoor snow and ice track, where tests on traction control, stability, and braking performance can be performed.
While enjoying warm drinks and a flavourful dinner in UTAC’s traditional wood hut, we learned more about the firm’s activities and testing grounds. The facility’s secure, access-controlled design allows for high confidentiality, which is critical given the early-stage prototypes and sensitive data handled here. In the wintertime, UTAC operates 1200 hectares of outdoor proving grounds, including the Ivalo Airport Proving Ground and the expansive Mellatracks, with nearly 100 seasonal employees and a dedicated permanent staff. In a Q&A session, UTAC representatives shared insights on the environmental considerations, energy-saving measures, and the rise in electric vehicle (EV) testing, with 75% of vehicles tested indoors now being EVs. They also discussed their contributions to the local economy, ongoing efforts to partner with regional universities, and the logistical operations required to transport tyres and vehicles to this remote facility.
Download as PDF
