‘Road of life’: changing navigation seasons and the adaptation of island communities in the Russian Arctic

Figures & data

Table 1. Dimensions of adaptation options (Source: AMAP, 2017a, 2017b, p. 242).

Dimensions of current adaptation strategies	Dimensions in activating adaptation processes	Barriers and limits to adaptation
Engineering technical solutions and innovation; Infrastructural improvements Regulatory mechanisms Technological standards Economic mechanisms Innovation and entrepreneurship Product development and marketing New knowledge Institutional structures Production practices and routines Cross-sectoral interactions	Knowledge about the change and challenges/opportunity Attention to the change Observations of real events (local outmigration, unemployment, longer growing seasons) Extreme weather events (floods, avalanches) Engaged officials and residents Direct contact and involvement with research Enabling institutions (municipality or county for example) Livelihood flexibility and diversification Access to knowledge Access to human and financial resources, Capacity building Long term or short-term perspective on adaptation	Motivation and the perceived need to adapt Trade-offs between adaptation concerns and mandatory and more pressing tasks Available and relevant knowledge Lack of resources Transferability of national goals and guidelines to local concerns Unclear responsibilities and insufficient frameworks Ignoring local/ traditional knowledge
Governing tools
Cooperation and coordination on international, national, regional and local levels Distribution of responsibility for adaptation – at different levels Legal, regulatory, strategic and policy frameworks at various levels Climate scenarios and projections Policy and planning tools regional and local level – risk and vulnerability assessment, spatial planning Handbooks and guidelines on climate change adaptation planning; spatial planning taking climate change into account Networks and meeting points for sharing experience and knowledge dissemination among public agencies, ex. conferences Webpages as information hubs Cost-benefit analyses of adaptation in order to assess different options

Table 2. Overview of the interviewees.

Type of interview	Interviewees involved in the study
26 personal unstructured interviews with residents of the island villages	24 residents of the villages Two former residents who still have property in one of the villages and visit it during summer navigation season
Six personal unstructured interviews with relevant stakeholders, located in Arkhangelsk	One representative from public body working with island’s socio-economic development Five representatives from private and state-owned businesses within shipping related industries

Figure 1. The case study area. Arkhangelsk - Kegostrov line illustrates an example of an intercity shipping line. Other two illustrate examples of suburban shipping lines.

Figure 2. Private boats (2a) and a passenger vessel (2b). Both photos are taken near the village of Voznesenie. Photographer: Julia Olsen.

Table 3. The number of river transport routes (Arkhangelsk River Port, 2019).

The number of river shipping lines	1999	2001	2003	2005	2007	2009	2011	2013	2015	2017	2019
Intercity	5	6	3	3	2	3	2	3	3	3	3
Suburban	4	5	6	6	3	5	6	5	5	5	5
Local	0	2	2	2	2	1	1	3	1	1	1
Total	9	13	11	11	7	9	9	11	9	9	9

Table 4. Description of transportation and mobility options during three navigation seasons.

Season	Transportation options	Mobility options	Advantages and disadvantages
Winter navigation	Car Walking to and from Arkhangelsk or between settlements	Ice roads^a: Arkhangelsk with Kegostrov-Voznesenie-Konetsdvoria; Solombala (Arkhangelsk district) with Khabarka – Pustosh.	Advantages: Ice Roads can be used almost all the time. Sufficient for goods transportation and personal mobility. Disadvantages: Ice roads can be crossed by caravans, a convoy of vessels navigating in ice-bound waters led by an icebreaker. Waiting time for re-freezing can be a couple of hours before car transportation is allowed in designated areas.
Summer navigation	Passenger vessels Private boats Ferries	Passenger vessel lines^b: Arkhangelsk-Rybolovo-Chubola; Arkhangelsk-Voznesenie- Toyvatovo; Arkhangelsk-Kegostrov; Solombala-Khabarka-Vyselki-Pustosh.	Advantages Private boats are the most convenient mobility option between settlements Passenger boats are a reliable link between settlements Disadvantages: Expensive for private boats to dock in Arkhangelsk. Passenger boats are an expensive option for goods transportation
Rasputitsa navigation	Tugboats	Tugboat lines: Arkhangelsk- Kegostrov	Advantages: Tugboats are the only mobility option during the rasputitsa season Operate for free Disadvantages: Passengers have to stay outside

^aThe Ministry of the Russian Federation for Civil Defense, Emergencies and Elimination of Consequences of Natural Disasters in the Arkhangelsk region.

^bArkhangelsk River Port (http://arpnet.ru/).

Figure 3. A temporary bridge is used by island residents to cross a shipping corridor over the North Dvina River on their way to Arkhangelsk. Photographer: Rune Rafaelsen/Barentssekretariatet.

Table 5. Island residents’ and stakeholders’ perspectives on adaptation to changing navigation seasons and socio-economic development.

Adaptation options	Changes in mobility	Socio-economic changes
Adaptation strategies (residents)	The ability to influence public bodies in order to improve mobility options and information Use of private boats to help each other in goods delivery and mobility between islands. Incorporation of local knowledge into decisions on opening/closing navigation	Efforts to enhance island communities’ attractiveness for tourism and agriculture
Processes that activate adaptation (residents)	Residents’ close connections to industrial and public stakeholders Local government support/ transportation subsidies Local engagement and networks Local knowledge and place attachment	Close connection to industrial and public stakeholders Supporting funding options to establish local businesses Local engagement in socio-economic development Memories from the Soviet Period and a wish to rebuild the villages
Barriers to and limits on adaptation (residents and stakeholders)	Unpredictable rasputits’-season Regulations for use of smaller vessels Lack of harbor infrastructure Lack of resources to renew the fleet Need to incorporate local knowledge in decision making on navigation	Out-migration Transportation frequency Regulations for use of smaller vessels Lack of investments in island development
Adaptation governance (indicated by stakeholders)	Development of flexible transportation arrangements Regulation adjustments for passenger vessels and small boats (e.g. use of small boats in the form of ‘river taxis') Engagement of local authorities Increasing knowledge of changes in navigation	Measures to improve island attractiveness and transportation Enable funding opportunities to support local engaged residents in islands’ promotion Cooperation with local engaged residents

AMAP. (2017a). Adaptation actions for a changing Arctic: Perspectives from the Barents area.

 Google Scholar

AMAP. (2017b). Snow, water, ice and permafrost in the Arctic (SWIPA) 2017.

 Google Scholar

Arkhangelsk River Port. (2019). The number of river transport routes.

 Google Scholar