Arctic Yearbook 2014 - Page 291

291 Arctic Yearbook 2014 All of Alaska, Canada north of 60°N together with northern Québec (Nunavik) and Labrador (Nunatsiavut), all of Greenland, the Faroe Islands, and Iceland and the northernmost counties of Norway (Nordland, Troms, Finnmark and Svalbard), Sweden (Västerbotten and Norrbotten) and Finland (Lapland)…(and in Russia) the Murmansk Oblast, the Nenets, Yamalo-Nenets, Taimyr, and Chukotka autonomous okrugs, Vorkuta City in the Komi Republic, Norilsk and Igsrka in Krasnoyarsky Kray, and those parts of the Sakha Republic whose boundaries lie closest to the Arctic Circle (Stefansson Arctic Institute 2004: 17-18). Beyond its geographical scope, it is common that Arctic tourism is characterized as remote and difficult to access (although this is not true across the entire Circumpolar North); as beset by human capital issues (e.g., lack of trained staff, or even a population large enough to handle the task); and as occurring in fragile natural and cultural environments. More so than most other destinations worldwide, Arctic tourism has strong seasonality due to the extreme variations in daylight hours, but winter tourism appears to be a growing phenomenon (Müller 2011). In the past decade there has been significant scholarly research on tourism in the Arctic. The International Polar Tourism Research Network (IPTRN; see http://iptrn.rmf.is/) has produced three recent publications from their community-embedded conferences (see Grenier & Müller 2011; Müller, Lundmark & Lemelin 2013; Lemelin, Maher & Liggett 2013). This network is complimentary to the University of the Arctic’s Thematic Network on Northern Tourism. Through these two networks, as well as many other means, scholars have dealt with a number of segments of the sector including: the peripheral realities (Müller & Jansson 2007); unique sub-sectors such as cruise tourism (Lück, Maher & Stewart 2010); and the inherent interconnectivity of environmental changes afoot (Hall & Saarinen 2010; Maher, Stewart & Lück 2011). From the socio-cultural perspective, Indigenous tourism has emerged as a significant dimension of Arctic tourism (Butler & Hinch 2007; Viken and Granås 2014). In addition, industry groups such as the Association of Arctic Expedition Cruise Operators (AECO; see http://www.aeco.no) provide excellent sub-sector oversight in some r Y