Paikallisten elämäntyylit, alkuperäiskansojen kulttuurit? Kulttuuri ja sen kestävyydet arktisten valtioiden strategioissa

Contrary to mainstream political and academic debates, the cultural dimensions of sustainability and sustainabledevelopment have been prominent in political cooperation in the Arctic region already for decadesunder the auspices of the Arctic Council and its predecessor, the AEPS. This article takes...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Lempinen, Hanna
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:Finnish
Published: Alue- ja ympäristötutkimuksen seura 2016
Subjects:
Online Access:https://aluejaymparisto.journal.fi/article/view/60678
id fttsvojs:oai:journal.fi:article/60678
record_format openpolar
spelling fttsvojs:oai:journal.fi:article/60678 2023-05-15T14:30:51+02:00 Paikallisten elämäntyylit, alkuperäiskansojen kulttuurit? Kulttuuri ja sen kestävyydet arktisten valtioiden strategioissa Lempinen, Hanna 2016-01-01 application/pdf https://aluejaymparisto.journal.fi/article/view/60678 fin fin Alue- ja ympäristötutkimuksen seura https://aluejaymparisto.journal.fi/article/view/60678/22563 https://aluejaymparisto.journal.fi/article/view/60678 Alue ja Ympäristö; Vol 45 No 1 (2016); 4-14 Alue ja Ympäristö; Vol 45 Nro 1 (2016); 4-14 2242-3451 1235-4554 info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion Vertaisarvioitu artikkeli 2016 fttsvojs 2020-05-29T22:55:42Z Contrary to mainstream political and academic debates, the cultural dimensions of sustainability and sustainabledevelopment have been prominent in political cooperation in the Arctic region already for decadesunder the auspices of the Arctic Council and its predecessor, the AEPS. This article takes an explicit focus onthe contemporary articulations and understandings of culture and the cultural components of sustainabilityin the context of the Arctic region through an empirical analysis of the Arctic strategies of the eight ArcticCouncil member states – Finland, Sweden, Norway, Russia, Denmark, Iceland, Canada, and the United States.Our analysis of the eight Arctic strategies draws attention to four key themes structuring the discussionon culture in the context of the contemporary Arctic. We address the questions of 1) whose culture(s) arediscussed; 2) which factors or developments are seen to form a threat to sustainability of these cultures; 3)why these cultures should be sustained and maintained; and 4) who maintains and sustains them and how.The empirical analysis reveals a significant bias towards focusing on indigenous cultures and their sustainabilityas well as the instrumental role assigned to culture as potentially bringing administrative, economicand reputational gains for the Arctic states. Meanwhile, for non-indigenous residents, there is no culture tobe sustained, but new lifestyles brought on by large-scale economic development to be embraced instead. Article in Journal/Newspaper Arctic Council Arctic Arktis* Iceland Federation of Finnish Learned Societies: Scientific Journals Online Arctic Canada Norway
institution Open Polar
collection Federation of Finnish Learned Societies: Scientific Journals Online
op_collection_id fttsvojs
language Finnish
description Contrary to mainstream political and academic debates, the cultural dimensions of sustainability and sustainabledevelopment have been prominent in political cooperation in the Arctic region already for decadesunder the auspices of the Arctic Council and its predecessor, the AEPS. This article takes an explicit focus onthe contemporary articulations and understandings of culture and the cultural components of sustainabilityin the context of the Arctic region through an empirical analysis of the Arctic strategies of the eight ArcticCouncil member states – Finland, Sweden, Norway, Russia, Denmark, Iceland, Canada, and the United States.Our analysis of the eight Arctic strategies draws attention to four key themes structuring the discussionon culture in the context of the contemporary Arctic. We address the questions of 1) whose culture(s) arediscussed; 2) which factors or developments are seen to form a threat to sustainability of these cultures; 3)why these cultures should be sustained and maintained; and 4) who maintains and sustains them and how.The empirical analysis reveals a significant bias towards focusing on indigenous cultures and their sustainabilityas well as the instrumental role assigned to culture as potentially bringing administrative, economicand reputational gains for the Arctic states. Meanwhile, for non-indigenous residents, there is no culture tobe sustained, but new lifestyles brought on by large-scale economic development to be embraced instead.
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Lempinen, Hanna
spellingShingle Lempinen, Hanna
Paikallisten elämäntyylit, alkuperäiskansojen kulttuurit? Kulttuuri ja sen kestävyydet arktisten valtioiden strategioissa
author_facet Lempinen, Hanna
author_sort Lempinen, Hanna
title Paikallisten elämäntyylit, alkuperäiskansojen kulttuurit? Kulttuuri ja sen kestävyydet arktisten valtioiden strategioissa
title_short Paikallisten elämäntyylit, alkuperäiskansojen kulttuurit? Kulttuuri ja sen kestävyydet arktisten valtioiden strategioissa
title_full Paikallisten elämäntyylit, alkuperäiskansojen kulttuurit? Kulttuuri ja sen kestävyydet arktisten valtioiden strategioissa
title_fullStr Paikallisten elämäntyylit, alkuperäiskansojen kulttuurit? Kulttuuri ja sen kestävyydet arktisten valtioiden strategioissa
title_full_unstemmed Paikallisten elämäntyylit, alkuperäiskansojen kulttuurit? Kulttuuri ja sen kestävyydet arktisten valtioiden strategioissa
title_sort paikallisten elämäntyylit, alkuperäiskansojen kulttuurit? kulttuuri ja sen kestävyydet arktisten valtioiden strategioissa
publisher Alue- ja ympäristötutkimuksen seura
publishDate 2016
url https://aluejaymparisto.journal.fi/article/view/60678
geographic Arctic
Canada
Norway
geographic_facet Arctic
Canada
Norway
genre Arctic Council
Arctic
Arktis*
Iceland
genre_facet Arctic Council
Arctic
Arktis*
Iceland
op_source Alue ja Ympäristö; Vol 45 No 1 (2016); 4-14
Alue ja Ympäristö; Vol 45 Nro 1 (2016); 4-14
2242-3451
1235-4554
op_relation https://aluejaymparisto.journal.fi/article/view/60678/22563
https://aluejaymparisto.journal.fi/article/view/60678
_version_ 1766304643159162880