Hostname: page-component-54dcc4c588-5q6g5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-09-12T09:03:53.289Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Human/nature relations in the Arctic: changing perspectives

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 October 2009

Gail Osherenko
Gail Osherenko
Affiliation:
Institute of Arctic Studies, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire 03755, USA
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Differing conceptions of the relationship between humans and the environment shape policies regarding Arctic development and protection. From the fifteenth century to the early twentieth century, conquest and colonization perspectives prevailed. While vestiges of these views still color Arctic policy, the dominant approach of governments today is balanced development. On the horizon, alternative conceptions are gradually changing both policy decisions and decision-making processes in the Arctic. These include sustainable and regenerative development, rational ecology, ecofeminism, and indigenous perspectives.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Polar Record , Volume 28 , Issue 167 , October 1992 , pp. 277 - 284
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Ackerman, L. 1990. Genderstatus in Yup'ik society. Etudes Inuit Studies 14 (1–2): 209–21.Google Scholar
Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act. 1980. Public Law 96–487, Title I, Sec. 101(d) (2 December 1980), 16 USC 3101.Google Scholar
Berkes, F. 1988. Environmental philosophy of the Chisasibi Cree people of James Bay. In: Freeman, M.M.R. and Carbyn, L.N. (editors). Traditional knowledge and renewable resource management in northern regions. Edmonton: Boreal Institute for Northern Studies: 7–21.Google Scholar
Black, L.T. 1988. The story of Russian America. In: Fitzhugh, W.W., and Crowell, A.. Crossroads of continents: cultures of Siberia and Alaska. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press: 70–82.Google Scholar
Bodenhorn, B. 1990. ‘I'm not the great hunter, my wife is’: Inupiat and anthropological models of gender. Etudes Inuit Studies 14 (1–2): 55–74.Google Scholar
Bookchin, M. 1990. Remaking society: pathway to a green future. Boston: Southend Press.Google Scholar
Brody, H. 1981. Maps and dreams. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
Callicott, J.B. 1982. Traditional American Indian and Western European attitudes toward nature: an overview. Environmental Ethics 4 (4): 293–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chance, N.A. 1990. The Inupiat and Arctic Alaska: an ethnography of development. Orlando: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Dahlberg, K.A. 1986. Introduction. In: Dahlberg, K.A. (editor). New directions for agriculture and agricultural research: neglected dimensions and emerging alternatives. Ottawa and New York: Rowman and Allanheld.Google Scholar
Dallin, D.J., and Nicolaevsky, B.I.. 1947. Forced labor in Soviet Russia. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Declaration on the Protection of the Arctic Environment 1991. Signed by representatives of the governments of Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, and the United States, at Rovaniemi, Finland, 14 June 1991.Google Scholar
Devall, B., and Sessions, G.. 1985. Deep ecology. Salt Lake City: Peregrine Smith.Google Scholar
Diamond, I., and Orenstein, G.F.. 1990. Reweaving the world: the emergence of ecofeminism. San Francisco: Sierra Club Books.Google Scholar
Dryzek, J. 1987. Rational ecology: environment and political economy. Oxford and New York: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Feit, H. 1988. Self-management and state-management: forms of knowing and managing northern wildlife. In: Freeman, M.M.R., and Carbyn, L.N. (editors). Traditional knowledge and renewable resource management in northern regions. Edmonton: Boreal Institute for Northern Studies: 72–91.Google Scholar
Fienup-Riordan, A. 1990a. Eskimo essays: Yup'ik lives and howwesee them. New Brunswick and London: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
Fienup-Riordan, A. 1990b. Eskimo iconography and symbolism: an introduction. Etudes Inuit Studies 14 (1–2): 7–22.Google Scholar
Fienup-Riordan, A. 1990c. The bird and the bladder: the cosmology of Central Yup'ik seal hunting. Etudes Inuit Studies 14 (1–2): 23–28.Google Scholar
Flanders, N.E. 1991. Missionaries and professional Infidels: religion and government in western Alaska. Arctic Anthropology 28 (2): 44–62.Google Scholar
Gorbachev, S.M. 1987. Arctic ‘zone of peace’ speech, Murmansk. ln:FBIS-SOV-87–191. 2 October 1987: 40–42.Google Scholar
Griffiths, F., and Young, O.R.. 1989. Sustainable development and the Arctic. Working Group on Arctic International Relations, Second Session, llulissat and Nuuk, Greenland 20–24 April 1989. Impressions of the Co-Chairs, in Reports and Papers 1989–1. Hanover, NH: Institute of Arctic Studies, Dartmouth College.Google Scholar
Gurvich, I.S. 1966. Etnicheskaya istoriya severo-vostoka Sibiri [Ethnic history of northeastern Siberia]. Trudy Instituta Etnografiiimeni N.N. Miklukhov Maklaya 89.Google Scholar
Hallowell, A.I. 1926. Bear ceremonialism in the northern hemisphere. American Anthropologist 26 (1): 1–175.Google Scholar
Herscovici, A. 1985. Second nature: the animal-rights controversy. Toronto: CBC Enterprises.Google Scholar
Lantzeff, G.V. 1943. Siberia in the seventeenth century: a study of the colonial administration. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Leopold, A. 1966. The land ethic. In: A sand county almanac. New York: Ballantine Books: 237–64.Google Scholar
Lopez, B.H. 1986. Arctic dreams: imagination and desire in a northern landscape. New York: Scribner's.Google Scholar
Lynge, F. 1992. Arctic wars, animal rights, endangered peoples. Hanover, NH: University Press of New England. (Translated and revised from Lynge, F. 1990. Kampen on de vilde dyr — en Artisk vinkel. Copenhagen: Akademisk Foriag.)Google Scholar
Merchant, C. 1980. The death of nature. San Francisco: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Nash, R.F. 1989. The rights of nature. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
NEPA. 1969. 42 United States Code, section 4331 (b)(5).Google Scholar
Nuttall, M. 1992. Arctic homeland: kinship, community and development in northwest Greenland. London: Belhaven Press; Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Osherenko, G. 1988. Can comanagement save Arctic wildlife? Environment 30 (6): 6–13, 29–33.Google Scholar
Osherenko, G., and Young, O.R.. 1989. The age of the Arctic: hot conflicts and cold realities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Osherenko, G. 1991. Environment and development in the Arctic. In: Lassi Heininen, L., and Kakonen, J. (editors). Arctic complexity: essays on Arctic Interdependencies. Tampere, Finland: Tampere Peace Research Institute Occasional Paper 44: 87–96.Google Scholar
Smith, E.T. 1992. Growth vs. environment in Rio next month, a push for sustainable development. Business Week 11 May 1992: 66–75.Google Scholar
Speer, L., and Libenson, S.. 1988. Oil in the Arctic: the environmental record of oil development on Alaska's North Slope. New York: Natural Resources Defense Council.Google Scholar
Stefansson, V. 1922. The northward course of empire. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Co.Google Scholar
Turner, E. 1990. Ethnographer's shared consciousness on the ice. Etudes Inuit Studies 14 (1–2): 39–52.Google Scholar
Vilchek, G.E., and Bykova, O.Yu.. 1992. The origin of regional ecological problems within the northern Tymen Oblast, Russia. Arctic and Alpine Research 24 (2): 99–107.Google Scholar
WCED. 1987. Our common future. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Wenzel, G. 1991. Animal rights, human rights: ecology, economy and ideology in the Canadian Arctic. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
White, L. 1967. The historical roots of ourecological crisis. Science 155 (3767): 1203–07.Google Scholar