Arctic Yearbook 2014 - Page 313

313 Arctic Yearbook 2014   There might also be an institutional problem for defining who should be heard or be a legal party. According to one informant, being both Sámi engaged in the controversy and a researcher examining the case of Kallak:“Sámi who are not members of the Sameby are not consulted at all in particular, unless they are land owners. I filed a complaint – to the environmental court (Mark och Miljödomstolen, and Markoch Miljööverdomstolen) – rejecting the ´test mining´”. The informant is also a land owner down-stream of the little Lule River. Her complaint was rejected in both courts, and she pointed out that “I was not granted the right to be heard” neither as Sámi with traditional historical heritage in the Little Lule river valley, nor as a land owner. This happened despite the Sámi having rights recognized by national law on reindeer herding, and down-stream land owners having rights granted by the EU directive on water. The key challenge in the relations between reindeer herding and mining seems to be that both ore deposits and winter pastures are scarce and not transferable. Kallak might be a case where socially and culturally sustainable co-existence of mining and reindeer herding is not possible. The situation is characterised by lack of trust among the local Sámi towards the Swedish government and mining companies, making collaboration particularly challenging. Furthermore, looking also at mining cases in Kaunisvaara in Sweden and Hannukainen in Finland, there are numerous challenges regarding relationships between mining and reindeer herding. It has been found that reindeer herders would expect more two-way interactions during the planning of mines, and mining companies have not always been transparent regarding their plans and actions, leading to lack of trust. This lack of trust is a long-term problem and affects not only relationships with one company or regarding one project, but the industry as a whole and in the long term, undermines trust even outside of the communities that were originally affected by a company’s mismanagement of public relations (Heikkinen et al. 2014). Divergent Perceptions on Sustainable Use of Natural Capital Divergent perceptions on sustainable land use can create contradictions and undermine collaborative efforts. In Finland, the forestry industry is promoted by arguments according to which forests grow faster than they are logged, and thus the annually logged amount of cubic meters could be increased in a sustainable way. For example, Metsähallitus has used Maximum Sustainable Yield (MSY) logic when defining sustainability of the use of forest ecosystem services. Furthermore, to highlight the sustainability of forestry activities, Metsähallitus calculates how many million euros the state forestry loses annually due to taking societal obligations into account, including Sámi culture and reindeer herding. Opponents of forest industry loggings in old-growth forests argue that loggings may in fact be sustainable from the point of view of wood production, but the issue needs to be taken into account more holistically and in relation to other land uses, such as reindeer herding and naturebased tourism. Furthermore, alternative calculations are emerging to examine how much other land uses lose due to loggings. These calculations are, however, not the standard practice of Metsähallitus. This shows that the value of natural capital in forests is being calculated for political purposes, and that these calculations have different implications for sustainability depending on who has conducted them and from what perspective. Sarkki, Latola, Jokinen & Stepien