Assessing Institutional Alternatives for Future Northwest Passage Governance

Abstract

Because of significant environmental changes underway in the Arctic region, institutional change for Northwest Passage management is receiving increased attention. Due to the potential environmental and security impacts of regularized ship transits through the Northwest Passage, a number of informed observers have discussed the need for considering alternative means of governing the waterway. This article assesses four approaches to governing the use of the Northwest Passage, including the current institutional arrangement. Following an overview of the environmental change underway in the Arctic region and its impacts on the Northwest Passage, the controversy surrounding the international legal status of the waterway and the possibility that it may in future become a commercial resource are discussed. Advantages and disadvantages of three alternative institutional models of resource governance recommended for application in the Northwest Passage case are presented, along with those surrounding the Arctic Cooperation Agreement, the current institution in use. The analysis suggests maintenance of the status quo institution appears to be the most likely outcome.

Keywords:

• Northwest Passage
• Arctic
• Canadian–American relations
• resources
• institutions

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by a doctoral student research award from the International Council for Canadian Studies and the Government of Canada. The author is grateful to Ms. Judith Costello, Professor Lloyd Ash, Dr. Rob Huebert, Mr. John Falkingham, Mr. David Jackson, Dr. Heather Nicol, Professor Ian Townsend-Gault, Dr. David VanderZwaag, Dr. Richard Hodgson, Mr. Mead Treadwell, CDR James Kraska, Dr. Christopher Kirkey, and the Honorable David Wilkins. He would also like to thank the United States Arctic Research Commission, the Association for Canadian Studies in the United States, and the CONNECT Canadian Studies mentoring program for their support. The recommendations of two reviewers of this article are also greatly appreciated. The author is solely responsible for this analysis and its conclusions.

Notes

1. Parry Channel through McClure Strait

2. Interview with Mead Treadwell, November, 2009.

3. Interview with David VanderZwaag, April, 2009.

4. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article520013.ece.

5. “Ice Sheet Breaks Loose Off Canada”. Retrieved 7/30/08 from http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/americas/07/30/canada.arctic.ice.ap/index.html

6. United Nations, International Maritime Organization, International Chamber of Shipping.

7. Interview with Richard Hodgson, April, 2009.

8. Interview with John Falkingham, March, 2009.

9. Ibid.

10. For a full presentation of the Canadian and American positions on this issue, see Kirkey, C. (1996). The Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention initiatives: Canada's response to an American challenge. International Journal of Canadian Studies, 13, 41–59.

11. Interview with Christopher Kirkey, November, 2009.

12. Interview with Mead Treadwell, November, 2009.

13. Ibid.

14. Interview with James Kraska, February, 2010.

15. Interview with David VanderZwaag, March, 2009.

16. Importantly, in 1952 and 1956. International Saint Lawrence River Board of Control http://www.ijc.org/conseil_board/islrbc/en/faq.htm

17. Interview with Mead Treadwell, November, 2009.

18. Ibid.

19. Interview with James Kraska, February, 2010.

20. Interview with David VanderZwaag, April, 2009.

21. Interview with John Falkingham, March, 2009.

22. Interview with David VanderZwaag, April 2009.

23. The now mandatory reporting and tracking mechanism for ships entering Canada's Arctic EEZ. Using the system, mariners can obtain navigation, ice condition, and icebreaker assistance.

24. Angus Reid. 2008. Canadians adamant on northern sovereignty. (Data collected from August 15–18, 2008).

25. For a comprehensive review of previous Canadian–American negotiations regarding the Beaufort Sea boundary, see Kirkey, C. (1995). Delineating maritime boundaries: The 1977–78 Canada–US Beaufort Sea continental shelf delimitation boundary negotiations. Canadian Review of American Studies, 25(2), 49–67.

26. Canada. CIA World Fact Book, https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ca.html

27. Ibid.

28. Agreement Between the Government of Canada and the Government of the United States of America on Arctic Cooperation, 1988 http://untreaty.un.org/unts/60001_120000/30/4/00058175.pdf

29. Ibid.

30. Interview with James Kraska, February 2010.

31. Interview with John Falkingham, March 2009.

32. “Experts question viability of year-round Arctic shipping,” Canadian Sailings: Transportation and Trade Logistics, September 28, 2009.

33. Interview with Rob Huebert, March 2009.

34. Interview with David VanderZwaag, April 2009.

35. Henry Marcus, “Economic Feasibility of Shipping Containers through the Arctic” presentation, 91^st United States Arctic Research Commission meeting, Cambridge, MA, November 2009.

36. Interview with Richard Hodgson, April 2009.

37. “Northern Sea Route to open for Russian oil tankers in fall,” RIA Novosti, June 11, 2011.

38. http://www.breakbulk.com/maritimebarging/survey-little-interest-northwest-passage.

39. Interview with Heather Nicol, March 2009.