204
Arctic Yearbook 2015
processes, (3) economic development, resource extraction, and building potential in the High North,
and (4) new challenges in environmental protection in the Arctic.
A summary evaluation of the roles and capabilities of the Conference and the Standing Committee of
Parliamentarians of the Arctic Region, we must inevitably note that while these institutions indirectly
enjoy indirect popular legitimacy and a ‘social mandate’ in Arctic affairs, their role in the Arctic Council
is largely limited to that of observers, not inspirers, pacesetters, or commanders. One expression of
this relatively weak position is the proposal to organize meetings of the Conference not every two
years, but annually, which would allow greater flexibility and clout in its relations with the Arctic
Council. The fact remains, however, that relations are sometimes strained, difficult, and hardly
congenial, as evidenced in the barring of Senior Arctic Officials (SAO) from participating in the
Conference in March 2014 (CPAR 2014). It seems that this is not only a symptom of the
‘intergovernmentalization’ of cooperation in the Arctic, but also a sign of narrowing possibilities of
open debate on the future of the Arctic through the vehicle of the Arctic Council.
The Barents Parliamentary Conference
Although cooperation in the Barents Euro-Arctic Region has developed since 1993 primarily on two
levels – intergovernmental (Barents Euro-Arctic Council – BEAC) and inter-regional (Barents
Regional Council – BRC) – it also encompasses the interparliamentary dimension, as each BEAC
chairmanship organizes a Barents Parliamentary Conference (International Barents Secretariat 2015;
Hasanat 2010). Because the chairmanships run on two-year periods, the parliamentary conference
takes place biennially. The participants of the Conference can be elected members of loca