The International Political Systemic Context of Arctic Marine Resource Governance

Chapter
Part of the Springer Polar Sciences book series (SPPS)

Abstract

The Arctic has been an integrated part of the international system for centuries, and systemic developments have deeply influenced the region and its communities. Central Arctic Ocean marine resource governance is in the nexus of climate change and international systemic developments. The international systemic context for the Arctic is: The rise of China and emerging Asian economies driving gradual power transition from Western to Eastern states. Struggles continue over the domestic order and international position of post-Soviet Russia, where either side considers whether to escalate the Ukraine crisis horizontally to the Arctic. The USA and China interact concerning governing Arctic marine resources as Arctic Ocean coastal state/status quo power and fishing nation/rising power. Russia and the West choose not to escalate the Ukraine crisis horizontally into Arctic marine resource management. Co-creating of knowledge and epistemic communities are important for Arctic status quo and rising Asian countries to manage power transition in the Arctic and for Russia and the West to continue Arctic cooperation despite political crisis elsewhere.

Keywords

International system USA China Russia Power transition Post-Soviet Ukraine-crisis Status quo power Rising power Globalization 

References

  1. Bertelsen, R. G. (2014). The interaction of natural and social systems: how International Relations theory can inform research on Arctic marine invasive species. In L. Fernandez, B. A. Kaiser, & N. Vestergaard (Eds.), Marine invasive species in the Arctic (pp. 147–161). København: Nordic Council of Ministers.Google Scholar
  2. Bertelsen, R. G. (2015). The 2nd Arctic Circle assembly: Arctic science diplomacy at work. The Polar Journal, 5(1), 240–243.Google Scholar
  3. Bertelsen, R. G., Li, X., & Gregersen, M. H. (2016). Chinese Arctic science diplomacy: An instrument for achieving the Chinese dream? In S. Iglesias Sanchez & E. Conde Perez (Eds.), Global challenges in the Arctic region: Sovereignty, environment and geopolitical balance (pp. 442–460). Abingdon: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  4. Borgerson, S. G. (2008). Arctic Meltdown: The Economic and Security Implications of Global Warming. Foreign Affairs, 87(2), 63–77.Google Scholar
  5. Callahan, B. (2015). 2015–07-08-last update, Mearsheimer vs. Nye on the Rise of China [Homepage of The Diplomat] [Online]. Available: http://thediplomat.com/2015/07/mearsheimer-vs-nye-on-the-rise-of-china/ [2017, 03-21].
  6. Gjørv, G. H., Bazely, D. R., Goloviznina, M., & Tanentzap, A. J. (Eds.). (2014). Environmental and human security in the Arctic. London/New York: Earthscan.Google Scholar
  7. Haas, P. M. (1992). Introduction: Epistemic communities and international policy coordination. International Organization, 46(1), 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hansson, S. (1998). Malm, räls och elektrisitet – skapandet av ett teknologiskt megasystem i Norrbotten 1880–1920 [Iron ore, rail and electricity – creating a technological megasystem in Norrbotten 1880–1920]. In P. Blomkvist & A. Kaijser (Eds.), Den konstruerade världen – Tekniska system i historiskt perspektiv (pp. 45–76). Stockholm: Symposion.Google Scholar
  9. Harvey, D. (1989). The condition of postmodernity: an enquiry into the origins of cultural change. Oxford/Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  10. Heininen, L., & Southcott, C. (Eds.). (2010). Globalization and the circumpolar North. Fairbanks: University of Alaska Press.Google Scholar
  11. Herz, J. H. (1950). Idealist internationalism and the security dilemma. World Politics, 2(2), 157–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jervis, R. (1997). System effects: Complexity in political and social life. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Lau, R. R. (2003). Models of decision-making. In D. O. Sears, L. Huddy, & R. Jervis (Eds.), Oxford handbook of political psychology (pp. 19–59). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Li, X., & Bertelsen, R. G. 2013. The drivers of Chinese Arctic interests: Political stability and energy and transportation security. In L. Heininen, H. Exner-Pirot, & J. Plouffe (eds.), Arctic Yearbook 2013 (pp. 1–16). Northern Research Forum; University of the Arctic Thematic Network on Geopolitics and Security. http://www.arcticyearbook.com
  15. Mearsheimer, J. J. (2014). Why the Ukraine crisis is the West’s fault: The liberal delusions that provoked Putin. Foreign Affairs, 93(5), 77–89.Google Scholar
  16. Nye, J. S. J. (2006). The challenge of China. In S. Van Evera (Ed.), How to make America safe: New policies for national security (pp. 73–77). Cambridge, MA: Tobin Project’s National Security Working Group.Google Scholar
  17. Nye, J. S., Jr. (2011). The future of power. New York: PublicAffairs.Google Scholar
  18. Organski, A. F. K. 1968 [1958]. World politics (2nd ed. [rev.] edn.). New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
  19. Pan, M., & Huntington, H. P. (2016). A precautionary approach to fisheries in the Central Arctic Ocean: Policy, science, and China. Marine Policy, 63, 153–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Sears, D. O. (1975). Political socialization. In F. I. Greenstein & N. W. Polsby (Eds.), Handbook of political science (pp. 93–153). Reading: Addison-Wesley Pub..Google Scholar
  21. The Royal Society & AAAS. (2010). New frontiers in science diplomacy: Navigating the changing balance of power. London/Washington, DC: The Royal Society/AAAS.Google Scholar
  22. Waltz, K. N. (1979). Theory of international politics (1st ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.UiT-The Arctic University of NorwayTromsøNorway

Personalised recommendations