On Monday, I had the privilege of delivering a guest lecture to third- and fourth-year undergraduate students at the University of Northern British Columbia (UNBC). The students were all taking part in the UNBC Geography Department’s course ‘Changing Arctic: Human and Environmental Systems’, convened by Prof Gail Fondahl. My lecture was entitled ‘”Greenshit go home” …
Public outrage over the death of Cecil the lion at the hands of a sport hunter is calling into question the Canadian polar bear sport hunt—and threatening the valuable cultural and economic benefits that Canadian Inuit gain from it.
‘What happens in the Arctic affects us all’ may well be true. But today’s popular slogan for the fight against climate change must not be used to justify putting our own needs and interests above those of Arctic peoples.
Despite Greenpeace’s recent attempts to align their Arctic campaign with indigenous peoples such as the Inuit, their new ‘global survey’ on Arctic industrial development continues their pattern of discounting the Arctic voice.
I’m delighted to have been invited to speak at the University of Chichester tomorrow, March 28, as part of the History Department’s lecture series on contemporary politics. Making use of a popular slogan in Greenland, I’ve entitled my talk “‘Greenshit go home!’ Greenpeace, Greenland and green colonialism in the Arctic”. My focus will be the …
The defeat of proposed bans on commercial sealing and the international polar bear trade gives some welcome breathing space to Inuit and other Arctic hunting peoples—at least for now.
A proposal to prohibit international commercial trade in polar bears would do little to protect an already well-protected animal further, but much to damage Inuit economic rights and interests.
Northerners shouldn’t worry that Canada will abandon its challenge to the EU’s seal-trade ban in favour of a free-trade deal with the EU, but they should worry instead about the damage the ban has done to the very idea of Inuit as economic actors in the modern marketplace.
A recent letter from Greenpeace Canada only strengthens the impression that Greenpeace’s vision for the Arctic doesn’t include the states and peoples who already govern and occupy the region.
My recent Northern Public Affairs column, “Arctic saviour complex,” seems to have caught the attention of Greenpeace. In my column, I criticized Greenpeace for failing to cooperate with arctic states and indigenous peoples in its campaign to “save the Arctic” from oil pollution and overfishing. As I wrote in a later summary of my column: Greenpeace …