Polar Plunder: Extractivism in the Arctic

With rising temperatures resulting in the Arctic ice melting, this polar region faces severe climate-change driven threats to its unique ecosystems. As the arctic’s shrinking ice expands, ice-free summers expand with it, exposing untapped reserves for oil, gas, as well as fishing. At the same time, the global scramble between competing powers for critical raw materials (CRMs) is also enticing surveyors and corporations to find the most lucrative ways to benefit from this tension. Several companies are already actively planning to extract CRMs, such as copper, cobalt, and rare earth elements (REEs) in Greenland, Canada and northern Scandinavia. These regions are also home tol diverse communities with millions of indigenous inhabitants. Without restraint, these corporate plans will undoubtedly put ecosystems and populations that have existed in the Arctic for centuries in serious danger.  

The reasons why corporations have begun laying claim on the CRMs in the Arctic are linked to the vast needs of these metals for military purposes, for the green and digital transitions as well overall economic growth. 

Resistance Throughout the Arctic Region

With available reserves and refinement of REEs and other strategic metals concentrated in a few states around the world, the Arctic provides an opportunity for competing powers to change the status quo of the minerals market. The cost of extracting these resources decreases with every centimeter of ice lost, and advances in mining technology are making resource extraction economically feasible despite the immense initial investments.

Greenland, long speculated to hold colossal untapped wealth, had so far seen little investment because of its terrain partially covered by ice and therefore difficult to develop. In turn, the EU, since 2023, has formalised agreements declaring interest in “Greenland’s extensive natural riches”. Greenland’s southern and western regions are still being surveyed as the government grants dozens of mining permits to incentivise further exploration. Much opposition is present among the native Inuit communities in the large island, as they refuse to see their homelands turned into open mine pit operations and while the protest actions resulted in some success, particularly in Greenland’s parliament passing legislation to buranium mining and cease development of the Kuannersuit mine, which was to be one of the biggest rare earth deposits in the world, interest in Greenland is only continuing to increase.

In other arctic regions, Canada has had proven deposits of (REEs) nearing at least 15.2 million tons of rare earth oxide, which means that such reserves could place the country next to nations like China in terms of competitiveness on this market. Reports since a decade ago have hinted at Canada’s potential to be a significant exporter but mentioned extraction difficulties due to the lack infrastructure and immense initial investment before potentially yielding results, possibly taking years before seeing progress. Industry figures searching for gold have described the northernmost regions of Canada as the state’s “newest mining-friendly territory.” More and more mines searching for gold, REEs, and diamonds are being established in spite of the existing movements against mining in other regions of the country.

In the Scandinavia region, the plans to open new mines have been negatively impacting the Sámi indigenous group in the northernmost territories. As Europe’s last indigenous population, these people have been fighting to preserve their way of life in the face of expanding mining projects. In the past, the Sámi experienced forced relocation, leaving continuous tensions with national governments up until this day. The demand for copper, predominantly within the ancestral land of these herder communities, has resulted in the emergence of strong language, such as “green colonialism”, critiquing the recently passed Critical Raw Materials Act, which encourages the facilitation of more mining projects in the region via strategic projects.  

Mineral Toxicity and Metal Demand

While the expansion into these regions may excite many policymakers and industry representatives, such plans often fail to consider the history of neglect affecting native communities or undermining the fragile ecosystems. Focusing on the investment and job creation possibilities while disregarding the detrimental environmental costs of pollution, biodiversity loss, and climate change will ultimately create significantly more damage than good. When it comes to pollution, waste is the largest point of concern and mining is one of the leading industry polluters, with nearly all of the waste stored in water waste storage facilities, with some estimates expecting to accumulate almost 19 billion tons by 2025. Massive dams and building complexes can spill, causing flash floods that will damage the environment and local infrastructure. The human health hazards are so numerous that they could lead to various premature death scenarios for both younger and older individuals. Additionally, the ecological damage will cause long-term land poisoning that will prevent other land uses, including underground aquifers for water and terrain from agricultural use, as welle as push local species out of their habitats.  

More outstanding initiatives must be pushed to ensure a proactive policy prioritising marginalised communities’ needs. Ways to do this include the “Right to Say No” initiative should be promoted to empower local communities in negotiations regarding mining plans, ensuring their full and informed consent. This initiative does not mean that no mining activities will occur; rather, it allows communities to have a say—to reject a project, agree to it, or agree after certain conditions are met. This is especially crucial for Indigenous communities whose rights are often disregarded, despite international laws such as the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) and International Labour Organization Convention No. 169 (ILO 169), which guarantee “free, prior, and informed consent” (FPIC). As Galina Algarova, Executive Director of the SIRGE Coalition, stated during the last OECD Minerals Forum, “[FPIC] is the social license to operate, it is the cost of doing business.”

Communal Action Can Save a Planet

Lastly, developed economies should promote the restructuring of the consumption and production patterns to find sustainable living patterns for all. Circular economic models and mitigate consumption can help in this regard, because if global action only focusing on greening the current unsustainable production and consumption patterns we can forget any chance to minimise the damages brought by climate change. The demand for CRMs needs to be taken under control. We need to also recognise that although indigenous communities might not be living in our immediate proximity, their experiences are relevant to us all. Thus, we have to proceed to solidify a legal precedent and set a moral standard for future policymakers to conduct business, which will become necessary in scenarios when a strategic metal is found in our neighborhoods one day.

None of us wants to be displaced from our homes or witness the destruction of our surroundings. By adopting these measures now, we can ensure that ecosystems, and both local and global communities are safeguarded against the negative impacts of extractivism.