53
Arctic Yearbook 2015
Arctic maritime activities, the risks, and the potential for development in the changing climate have
been widely discussed in the literature, illustrating the extensive range of interests, concerns, and types
of activities. Anthropologists and geographers have documented the role indigenous people have to
play in developing their territories (Hovelsrud et al. 2012; Kelley & Ljubicic 2012; Flynn 2013);
biologists have raised awareness about the risks to the Arctic environment from maritime activities
(Erbe & Farmer 2000; Huntington 2009; Reeves et al. 2012; Chan et al. 2013); engineers have studied
technological and structural issues with cold-climate navigation (Frankenstein & Tuthill 2002; Liu, Lau
& Williams 2006; Kennedy, Simoes Re & Veitch 2014); and lawyers have described the international
and national legal aspects (Pharand 2007; Chircop 2012; Karim 2015). Each of these is an important
piece, but putting them together to form a complete picture of the region is challenging.
Some reports have endeavoured to provide an overview of the situation. Many organizations, for
example, have produced reports addressing aspects that must be considered when trying to develop
marine Arctic activities, all providing a broad perspective of their respective topics (Chatham House
2012; Parsons 2012; Conference Board of Canada 2013; Johnston et al. 2013).
Most notably, however, is the Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment (AMSA) (Arctic Council 2009) by the
Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment (PAME) working group of the Arctic Council. The
AMSA report provides an overview of the aspects that need to be taken into consideration if and
when maritime activities progress in the circumpolar Arctic. The working group incorporated the
views of a range of stakeholders, and approached the document by ship type, including tankers, bulk
carriers, offshore supply vessels, passenger ships, tug/barge combi