by Adrian Braun
What actions are sustainable and what actions are not? Can the generation of societal benefits outweigh the reduction of non-renewable natural resources, such as, oil, gas, metals and minerals and is this all in line with the concept of sustainability? The concept of “weak sustainability” offers apparently a solution to brand resource depletion as sustainable, but the created societal benefit (e.g. energy supply) is for the present generation and the resource is not available anymore for future generations at some distant (or not too distant) point in time! Thus depletion of non-renewable resources in line with sustainability is hardly to achieve without kicking out the future generations out of the equation. Needless to say without needs and demands of future generations, we are talking about something else than sustainability!
Russia is active in research, fishery and exploration in the Arctic Ocean and everything at large-scale!
By Adrian Braun
Eight Arctic countries are on this planet. These are Canada, Finland, Greenland (Denmark), Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden and the United States. Most of them have shown stronger interest in the areas North of the Polar Circle in recent years (on- and offshore). All Arctic coastal states, except Iceland have filed a claim for territories in the Arctic Ocean beyond the exclusive economic zone of 200 nautical miles from their own shores. A main incentive for a state to claim the “North Pole” is largely based on the natural resources that are located in the Arctic Ocean.
However there are other reasons to be active in the Arctic!
By Adrian Braun
While I am here at my desk in Northern Finland, in the city of Rovaniemi, located exactly on the Polar circle, I noticed that I come across quite frequently with two terms that sound somewhat similar. Climate change and change management. By the way, “quite frequently” is a massive understatement in terms of climate change, while not only the term, but also its impacts occur in the every-day life here in the Arctic.