Ookpik Blog : Arctic

Exciting opportunies to participate in the Students on Ice Arctic Expedition 2010

Jesse Tungilik — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 10:51:00 GMT

Students on Ice is proud to offer several fully funded scholarships for our upcoming Arctic Youth Expedition from August 4-20, 2010!

This expedition represents a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for youth to expand their knowledge about the circumpolar world, and to gain a global perspective of the Arctic, its wonders, and its present and future challenges. Students on Ice offers unique educational expeditions to the Antarctic and the Arctic. Their mandate is to provide students, educators and scientists from around the world with inspiring educational opportunities at the ends of the Earth and, in doing so, help them foster a new understanding and respect for the planet.

Scholarships are available for youth, currently studying in high school who are between the ages of 14-18. Application deadlines are April 15^th (Canadian Students) and April 23^rd (Norwegian Students).

Please visit the following link for more information and application forms: Here.

If you are not eligible for these scholarships, but are interested in joining us as a student or chaperone, please contact the Participant Coordinator, Niki Trudeau: apply@studentsonice.com

IPY Oslo Science Conference: Call for Abstracts!

Jesse Tungilik — Fri, 22 Jan 2010 13:46:00 GMT

The IPY Oslo Science Conference will be the largest polar science event to date! Twice as large as the last, and up to then largest, global polar science meeting in terms of submissions. It will demonstrate, strengthen, and extend the International Polar Year’s accomplishments in science and outreach. The conference is an essential opportunity to display and explore the full breadth and implications of IPY activities. The international and interdisciplinary science conference will in particular highlight the global impact of the changes that have been observed in the Polar Regions.

The IPY-OSC steering committee received more than 2200 abstracts from 58 countries on deadline, however, as a courtesy to some partners, in particular Antarctic scientists returning from the field, the committee has decided to slightly extend the deadline until January 25, 2010.

Submit your abstract now!

PLEASE NOTE: PolarTEACHERS can still apply, and PolarCINEMA receives entries until 15th of February.

Over 100 conveners are being brought together to review the submitted abstracts, which are categorized into 6 overarching conference themes including:

Theme 1. Linkages between Polar Regions and global systems
Theme 2. Past, present and future changes in Polar Regions
Theme 3. Polar ecosystems and biodiversity
Theme 4. Human dimensions of change: Health, society and resources
Theme 5. New frontiers, data practices and directions in polar research
Theme 6. Polar science education, outreach and communication

Limited travel support is available for researchers through the International Arctic Research Center, University of Alaska Fairbanks. Priority will be given to young researchers and educators. These travel grants are available for US researchers, teachers and foreign scientists working at US institutions.

More information can be found here.

The International Arctic Science Committee (IASC) also provide travel grants for early career scientists to attend the IPY Oslo Science Conference. A special committee appointed by the conference organizers will coordinate the selection procedure.

Further announcements regarding the stipend and travel support for early career scientists and an overview of conference activities especially focused on early career scientists can be found on the APECS website.

National Native Organizations brief introduction

Elizabeth Zarpa — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 14:32:00 GMT

Canada has a large Native population. Largely Native’s are known as the Aboriginal people of Canada. Many do not understand that Aboriginal is not one homogeneous group, but rather consists of a diverse group of different peoples. Generally there are three and they are Inuit, Métis and First Nations. Each has their own national organization that represents their constituency at the federal level. Examples include the Assembly of First Nations, Métis National Council, Pauktuutit Inuit Women of Canada and Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami (ITK).

Recently the organization that represents Inuit, ITK launched their ‘2010 year of the Inuit’ campaign. The campaign gained a better understanding of how to structure its content from a Ipsos Reid North poll done in November 2009 the outcome produced results that are as follows “One in Three (31%) Canadians Score a ‘D’ (18%) or Fail (13%) a simple True or False Quiz About Canada’s Arctic. Just 16% pass with flying colours (grade of A)the national average is 12.7 out of 20 questions correct, Totalling 64% Average (Grade of C) Also 65% said they have a fondness for the Arctic” (http://www.itk.ca/north-poll-results) other highlights included…

Ø 74% said they would like to learn more about the Inuit way of life

Ø 81% know that climate change is affecting Inuit more so than the rest of Canadians

Ø 75% do not know that Inuit pay taxes

Ø 63% do not know Inuit are not First Nations” (http://www.itk.ca/north-poll-results)

As 2010 continues there will continue to be information updated on the current ‘2010 year of the Inuit’ website www.inuit2010.ca or to follow up on information about other national Native organizations you can go to:

Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami (ITK) www.itk.ca

Pauktuutit Inuit Women of Canada www.pauktuutit.ca

Assembly of First Nations www.afn.ca

Métis National Countil www.metisnation.ca

Government priorities could be education, but...

Elizabeth Zarpa — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 12:37:00 GMT

The Nordic model of governance used by the Nordic countries of Finland, Sweden, Norway, Iceland and Denmark emphasize the importance of taking responsibility of post secondary education for its citizens. This type of governance system promotes and funds students who are interested in obtaining a higher education through university or college. Coming from Canada I have realized that this is very effective in creating an atmosphere where education is not a privilege for a certain group of people, but it is just a part of life.

In Canada students who are interested in pursuing a post secondary education have to work part time while in school, spend family’s savings or get a loan from the bank. What ever route they choose to take in funding their education they are responsible for paying thousands in tuition.

Also in Canada there are different levels of governments that are responsible for different things and examples include the federal, provincial, municipal and land claims governments/self governments. The land claims governments like the Nunavut, Nunatsiavut, Nunavik and Inuvialuit called the Inuit Nunangat (where Inuit live) have a set of priorities that are different than other levels of government in Canada. Education is a priority for land claim governments and therefore beneficiaries from Inuit Nunangat have the opportunity to pursue their studies at a post secondary education institution and it’s paid for.

Like the Finnish, Inuit in Canada are not burdened finically when it comes to seeking a higher education. But, on the other hand citizens that are Canadian and do not belong to a land claims government have to pay for their tuition and therefore are burdened by their finances.

I have realized that those who do not get their post secondary education paid for could fall under the impression that Inuit are privileged because their education is paid for. And unfortunately, individuals who identify as Inuit beneficiaries sometimes have to face discrimination based on the fact that they do not have to pay for their university or college tuition. In situations like this it is important to outline that Inuit do not receive ‘special status’ from the government. Rather the land claims government that represents them and their needs understand the importance of funding post secondary education. It is not a case built on privilege, but a case built on a different set of government priorities.

The provincial, municipal or federal governments could follow the Nordic model or the land claim government’s model and fund post secondary education. Why they choose not to, I am still in question about this one………..

You can study in the North!

Elizabeth Zarpa — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 10:23:00 GMT

Working at the University of the Arctic International Secretariat is an educational experience. With two months of working in Rovaniemi, Finland where the UArctic International Secretariat is located, I have come to realize how much opportunity there is to study in the circumpolar regions of the world. Whether you’re from Canada, Norway, Finland, Denmark (Greenland), Russia, Iceland or the US there are hundreds of opportunities for students to receive a solid education about the north, in the north. For example UArctic offers the GoNorth program which is geared towards mobilizing students from one circumpolar country to study abroad in another country or the GoNorth program that seeks students from southern areas of the world to study in a more northern location or there is the Bachelor of Circumpolar Studies program where you can study the north at your own home through distance education. This is just the tip of the iceberg, these are just a few programs offered by UArctic and its member institutions, and this does not include the other study options available to students through other post secondary institutions throughout the north. If you have an interest in pursuing an education in the north, by the north, for the north then I encourage you to go to UArctic’s website www.uarctic.org and read through the different web pages to see what they can offer you! I guarantee there is something that could suit your needs!

University of the Arctic International Secretariat welcomes newest Intern

Carolee Buckler — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 13:20:00 GMT

Orginally posted on line at University of the Arctic

The Circumpolar Young Leaders program (CPYL) created through the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) seeks youth who are interested in working in the north. Through the CYL program University of the Arctic International Secretariat (UArctic) has hired Elizabeth Zarpa. The University of the Arctic International Secretariat has hired Elizabeth Zarpa as the Communications Assistant. Throughout the duration of her internship she will work alongside Riitta Aikio, Outi Snellman, Scott Forrest and others directly linked with University of the Arctic (UArctic).

Born and raised in Happy Valley – Goose Bay, Labrador she has grown up close to nature. With a population of approx. 10, 000 the community she calls home has similar climate and vegetation to Rovaniemi, Finland, where her internship will be for 6 months. Once graduated from high school and college in Happy Valley her desire to pursue a higher education brought her to Halifax, Nova Scotia, where she will be graduating with an undergraduate degree in Political Science and International Development in 2011.

For three consecutive summers her work experience involved working with National Canadian Inuit Organizations such as Pauktuutit Inuit Women of Canada and Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami (ITK). Focused upon injury prevention and the Indian Residential Schools Settlement Agreement her knowledge of Indigenous Canadian priorities is deep. Elizabeth provides a perspective from academic and personal experiences that will continue to grow as she pursues this opportunity with UArctic! It is a pleasure to welcome this young Inuit woman from Labrador!

Elizabeth.Zarpa@uarctic.org
Phone: +358 040 484 4463
Fax: +358 16 341 4222

UArctic International Secretariat
Box 122, FI-96101 Rovaniemi, Finland

Training Day Three for the Circumpolar Young Leaders

Napatsi Folger — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 22:08:00 GMT

Today was our third day of the Circumpolar Young Leaders training. In the morning Terri Willard of the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), lead an in-depth discussion about networks, partnerships, and managing collaboration. With so many buzz words thrown around these days for networks and partnerships, we found this module very helpful in sharpening our understanding of what networking really is, and some key points for forging effective partnerships, by adding substance to abstract ideas.

Some of the key points that stood out to us include:

- know what you are trying to accomplish;

- setting up decision making processes and who can make those decisions;

- and acknowledging possible issues you may face.

We also learned that too much information can be detrimental in closing the gap between knowledge and action, by providing an excuse for people to follow the status quo. “There is so much information on this topic, it’s too confusing!”

In the afternoon Dagmar and Vanessa Timmer facilitated the “Making Change Happen” module, where they discussed systems analysis, being an effective change agent, and Dagmar’s own personal experiences as a former intern with the Young Canadian Leaders for a Sustainable Future Program. Her honesty about how the ups and downs of her internship affected her, soothed some of our own fears for what we are about to embark upon. We found Vanessa’s interactive approach to presenting her ideas about change and systems particularly effective because she incorporated our input into examples of how to be successful systems thinkers and effective change agents.

Although, we found everything we learned today interesting, the information that was most helpful, were the tips on dealing with people we didn’t get along with, personal experiences shared, and the discussions about culture shock.

Training Day One for the Circumpolar Young Leaders

Carolee Buckler — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 20:56:00 GMT

On Sunday, I had the pleasure to meet Jesse Tungilik from Rankin Inlet; Elizabeth Zarpa from Happy Valley, Labrador, Calista Morrison from Whitehorse and Napatsi Folger from Iqaluit. These impressive young northerners have been selected to part of this year’s Circumpolar Young Leaders program. The CYL program builds capacity of young northerners by combing training, in Arctic issues, communication and leadership with peer networking and work experience at organizations involved in circumpolar issues. The CYL interns are in sunny Winnipeg this week for training before departing for their various 6 month placements in the circumpolar world.

The focus of the day on Sunday was on team theories and team leadership. The facilitator, Mick Lautt, talked about the stages of team development and the building blocks of high performance teams. The participants were tasked with brainstorming on what makes a great team. Key words such as; supportive, dependable, committed, open communication, comfort to share, listening, non-judgmental, commonality, safe environment, collective success and trust were just some of the words that came to mind.

We were then put to the test with a number of game-based teambuilding activity challenges to practice what we’ve learned which is; the importance of good communication, listening, sharing roles, trust, co-creation, etc. The team challenge activities were a great way to learn about our own personal leadership style and that of our team members.

It was wonderful to witness how quickly trust was built amongst the group and how well everyone worked together. At the end of the day, we shared what contributions each individual made to the team, and then discussed how we had worked together to achieve our goals.

A key outcome of the day for the group was the bond that developed amongst the CYL interns. The interns can take comfort in knowing they have developed a strong support network to assist them as they move into their internship placements and beyond.

Geoengineering and the Arctic

Bjørnar Egede-Nissen — Thu, 10 Sep 2009 22:57:00 GMT

Desperate Times, Desperature Measures: Advancing the Geoengineering debate at the Arctic Council

Bjornar Egede-Nissen
Henry David Venema

This blog post is a much shortened version of the above paper, which I co-wrote the summer of 2009 as an intern for IISD.

Abstract

Download the paper (PDF - 639KB)

By Bjornar Egede-Nissen.

The Arctic has received a lot of attention in recent years following the increasingly pronounced effects of global warming. Worrying events in the Arctic of late indicate that we may be dangerously close to the disintegration of Arctic summer sea ice, and when that happens, it will open up vast new areas for commercial exploitation. There are a lot of resources in the Arctic -- minerals, fish, hydrocarbons -- and corporations are lining up even as I write to grab a piece of the action. They know the demand for these resources is almost limitless, because maintaining the high standard of living (and conspicuous consumption) of the North while raising billions of people in the South out of poverty will require greatly expanded production of consumer articles and energy. In a classical display of mercantilism, countries around the Arctic Rim are aligning themselves to protect their territorial and commercial interests, and this includes strengthening their military capabilities in the region.

As one of the largest pristine (relatively speaking) wilderness areas of the world, the Arctic is on the verge of fundamental change -- it is about to be ravaged by climate change and torn up by southern capitalists looking for resources. And in a vicious cycle, the resources they do find there will be funnelled into yet more development and consumption, leading to more global warming and more melting in the Arctic.

The cost of development

But we need the resources, you might say, lest we jeopardise the increases we have achieved in the standard of living, and if we are to lift billions of other people up to our level. Besides, surely development in the region can be done in a responsible manner that protects the environment as much as possible.

That may be so, though "as much as possible" is a very vague definition. Who will decide what the appropriate level of protection is? Perhaps we should turn it around and ask instead, "what is the appropriate or acceptable level of environmental damage?," because that is what the issue really is about. Neoclassical economists would say that development should go on until the marginal costs exceeds the marginal benefits -- when the cost of extracting one more barrel of oil from the Arctic Ocean is greater than the benefit to humans derived from that barrel. In any development scenario, nature will be encroached upon. This is unavoidable, they say, and a necessary sacrifice in the name of progress. In many if not most cases, however, the costs and benefits are borne by different people, geographically and politically separated by thousands of kilometres, and this means the marginal cost is far divorced from reality.

The global effects of Arctic climate change

Climate change, however, is different, though we act as if it is not. Immediate environmental degradation, such as depleted fisheries, a collapse in biodiversity, oil spills and thawing permafrost -- these problems will be borne almost exclusively by the inhabitants of the Arctic. But climate change is a global problem, and the effects of the disintegration of the Arctic ice cap -- which is increasingly a question of "when", and not "if" -- will be borne by us all. The Arctic ice cap is an important temperature regulator, and when it melts, global warming accelerates, because less sunlight is reflected back into space by the brilliantly white ice. The more ice that melts, the more the globe is heated through this positive feedback effect. But even worse, if the thawing of permafrost, which covers vast areas of Northern Russia, Northern Canada and Alaska, continues, we risk releasing billions of tons of carbon stored in the frozen soil. If this process is started in earnest, we may experience runaway climate change -- self-reinforcing and virtually unstoppable. We do not know, however, exactly when such a threshold -- or "tipping point" -- may occur, but we do know they are out there, and too close for comfort. If they do occur, however, the effects on the climate may be rapid and devastating.

Is this not a sufficient argument for taking climate change mitigation seriously? We also know that unless we start bringing emissions down before 2015, it will be extremely hard to limit global warming to less than 2°C of warming above pre-industrial levels, which is the official goal of the EU and the G8. As arbitrary as this number if, scientists believe most positive feedbacks and tipping points lie above this level, but that is small comfort if we are looking at three or four degrees of warming before we are half-way through this century.

So far, however, we perceive little imperative to act. A few more extreme weather events is not enough -- we can live with those -- and the slow creep of global warming is so gradual we can acclimatise; besides, before it gets really serious, surely we'll have the necessary technology to take care of it. But most do not consider that there is considerable lag in the climate system. Even if we stopped emitting greenhouse gases today, warming would continue for a long time into the future.

2015 is still four years away, but that is not much time when we consider how difficult it is to hammer out a global climate change deal. I sincerely hope the negotiations will be successful, but I'm not optimistic about it. While more countries now perceive the dangers, the same stumbling blocks and flaws that derailed the Kyoto process are still present. Successful resolution looks distant, while the window of opportunity is rapidly closing -- if it is not already closed.

Geoengineering

For that reason, I believe it would be dangerous not to investigate emergency options as well as other technological solutions that could remove CO₂ directly from the atmosphere and sequester it under ground or at the bottom of the oceans. This is called geoengineering; the deliberate manipulation of the planet's climate. Geoengineering schemes that have been suggested includes mimicking the effects of a volcano by infusing the stratosphere with SO₂ particles, and thereby cooling the planet (a giant sunshade); equipping buildings with white roofs to reflect more sunlight into space; stimulating algae blooms to sop up CO₂; or building machines to do the same.

Geoengineering has received much flak, and rightly so. The idea that we should look for yet another technological solution to political problems is hubristic, arrogant and possibly very dangerous. Our knowledge about the climate system is both incomplete and uncertain, and to start actively trying to adjust it would seem like the ultimate folly. How do we know that the climate will react the way we think it will? A lot of negative effects can even be predicted, such as disruptions in monsoon patterns, to the potential detriments of billions of people.

Not all geoengineering schemes, however, are borne equal. Schemes that would remove CO2 from the atmosphere obviously address the root of the problem of global warming (though it could be argued that the real root is the emission of greenhouse gases). At any rate, it is quite likely that we will have to augment the planet's ability to remove CO₂ from the atmosphere, as glaciers melt and as the oceans acidify, which is bad for marine life. Depending on the implementation, such schemes may be relatively harmless and probably very necessary.

Those schemes that change the Earth's radiative balance (heat transfer between the Earth and space), on the other hand, address only the symptoms of climate change. Some schemes in this category, such as white roofs, may buy us time to mitigate without causing irreversable ice melting, but at the cost of increased ocean acidification. Others, such as a stratospheric sulphur sun shade, could be deployed on very short notice, but could destroy the ozone layer and create acid rain everywhere. It is also possible that we could manufacture a different material with high reflectivity that would not have these harmful effects, though nature has a way of surprising us in ways we could not have thought of (or neglected to think of). Either way, it is envisioned that such geoengineering would only be deployed in a situation of dire need, where the effects of further warming would be far worse than the effects of intervention.

Geoengineering and the Arctic

Dire need, however, may present itself first in the Arctic. The governments of the Arctic need not only to be prepared for that, but they should actually "aid and abet" the process. Working together in the Arctic Council for almost 15 years, the Arctic Eight (Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Russia and the United States) have accumulated a considerable competency in Arctic research, not least in relation to climate change. As it is becoming clear that if the danger that geoengineering will one day be necessary is increasing, it becomes imperative that its scientific foundation and engineering implementations can be made as safe and reliable as possible. The Arctic countries and the Arctic Council can be trusted in this regard, and has a clear responsibility to engage with it.

So why the need for this paper?

I fear the Arctic Council and the Arctic countries may shun the issue. It has been subject to taboo for decades, and is on its way to become politically toxic. There is a strong argument for moral hazard, and for the risk that geoengineering may take attention and research money away from mitigation, as cautioned by Britain's Royal Society, which recently presented a comprehensive report.

But the paper should also serve as a warning to Arctic governments that business-as-usual in the Arctic over the long run will be catastrophic, and that the sort of conventional environmental stewardship will neither be capable of hindering nor handling the disruptive changes that are on the way. Unfortunately, this is not reflected in much recent policy research.

I still believe we can avert catastrophic climate change, but it will not be easy. An awareness of the criticality is an absolute minimum. But criticism should be followed by constructive advice, and my advice is that the Arctic Council engage fully with geoengineering research, and start building the necessary global governance foundation for trials, and if it is deemed necessary, deployment. The best- case scenario is that mere awareness of the issue, and its many adverse side-effects, will lead to a re-doubling of mitigation efforts.

This blog post was adapted from the one I wrote here.