Institutional Conditions in Arctic Frontiers: The Case of Mining in Greenland, Russia and Norway

Part of the Springer Polar Sciences book series (SPPS)


This chapter presents the main features of the different institutional and legal settings in Greenland, Norway and Russia, and how these frame the management of mining activities, particularly in relation to sustainability. The common denominator for Greenland, Norway and Russia is that mining activities have developed within continually evolving national structures in terms of formal legislation and governance institutions, as well as in response to the impact of new societal discourses on mining. The way in which these changes have played out, the degree of societal change, and the way national policies connect with the mining industry in light of these changes does however differ between the three countries.

The transformation of the Greenlandic context must primarily be understood in light of the transfer of power and responsibilities from Danish to native Greenlandic rule, influenced by the need to generate revenue to support independence. By contrast, mining in the Norwegian context has in recent years been characterized by a renewed interest in the sector on the part of a relatively stable national government, influenced by the imperatives of an emerging post-petroleum era. Meanwhile, the changes in Russian society over the last few decades are certainly profound, and there is clear evidence of new sustainability-related elements being introduced into the mineral legislation. Nevertheless, the environmental protection measures applied to the Russian mineral sector are weaker and the governance tradition is clearly more centralised than is the case in Greenland or Norway.


Arctic mining Mining governance Comparative institutional analysis Mineral industry legislation 


  1. Alieva, T. E. 2014. Main expected changes in legislative regulation of environmental protection for environmentally hazardous facilities in the Russian Arctic (pp. 538–545). Arctic Yearbook.Google Scholar
  2. Bortnikov N. S., et al. (2013). Arctic resources of strategic metals in the global prospect. Available at:
  3. Constitution of the Russian Federation. (2003). Available at: Accessed 20 June 2015.
  4. Draft Resolution of the RF Government. (2014a). On approval of the regulation on environmental impact assessment of planned economic and other activities in the Russian Federation. Available at: Accessed 25 Oct 2015.
  5. Draft resolution of the RF Government. (2014b). On approval of the regulations on assessment of the impact of planned economic and other activities on the environment in the Russian Federation. Available at: Accessed 21 June 2015.
  6. Fauchald, O. K. (2014). Regulating environmental impacts of mining in Norway. Nordic Environmental Law Journal, 2014, 1.Google Scholar
  7. Federal Law. (2002). On environmental protection. Available at: Accessed 21 June 2015.
  8. Hanssen, G. S., Hofstad, H., & Winge, N. K. (2015). Fungerer plandelen i plan- og bygningsloven (2008) etter intensjonene? Plan 1/2015.Google Scholar
  9. Joint Norwegian Ministerial Report. (2014). Framtid i Nord (‘Northern Futures’).Google Scholar
  10. Nielsen, N., Skautrup, P., & Vibe, C. (Eds.). (1970). J.P Trap – Danmark (Vol. XIV). Grønland: G.E.C. Gads Forlag.Google Scholar
  11. Nikitina, N. N. (2009). The efficiency of the state system of licensing subsoil use rights. Moscow: Geoinformmark.Google Scholar
  12. Nordic Consulting Group. (2012). Integritetsstudie af den offentlige sektor i Grønland. Norwegian legal acts: Act of 19 June 2009 No. 101 relating to the acquisition and extraction of mineral resources (the Minerals Act). Act of 14 June 1985 No. 77: the Planning and Building Act. Act of 13 March 1981 No. 6: Concerning Protection against Pollution and Concerning Waste. Act of 9 June 1978 No. 50 Concerning the Cultural Heritage. Act of 19. June 2009. No. 100. Norwegian Planning and Building Act.
  13. Pagh Nielsen, K. M., & Breinholt Larsen, F. (1985). Grønlandsk råstofpolitik – grønlandsk indflydelse? Politica. Bind, 17(1985), 1.Google Scholar
  14. Rasmussen, R. O. (2000). Formal economy, renewable resources and structural change in West Greenland. Études/Inuit/Studies, 24(1), 41–78. Économie contemporaine/Present-day economy.Google Scholar
  15. Rasmussen, R. O. (2005). Small, medium and large scale strategies: Cases of social response and change in Greenland. In: L. Müller-Wille, M. C. S. Kingsley, & S. Stach Nielsen (Eds.), Socio-economic research on management systems of living resources – Strategies, recommendations and examples. Inussuk – Arctic Researc Journal, 1. Google Scholar
  16. Russian Federation. (2003). Fundamentals of the state policy in the field of mineral resources and subsoil use. Available at: Accessed 23 June 2015.
  17. State Program of the Russian Federation “Protection of the Environment for the period until 2020”. (2014). Available at: Accessed 21 June 2015.
  18. State Program of the Russian Federation “Reproduction and Use of Natural Resources for the period until 2020”. (2014). Available at: Accessed 21 June 2015.
  19. Strategy of National Security of the Russian Federation. (2009). Available at: Accessed 24 June 2015.
  20. The Norwegian Ministry of Trade and Industry. (2013). Strategy for the mineral industry. Available at:
  21. Vasilevskaya, D. V. (2007). Legal regulation of subsoil use in the Russian Federation and foreign countries: Theory and practice. Moscow: Publishing House Nestor Akademik.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Nordland Research InstituteBodøNorway
  2. 2.Institute for Economic StudiesKola Science Center of the Russian Academy of SciencesApatityRussia
  3. 3.NordregioStockholmSweden
  4. 4.Kommune KujalleqKujalleqGreenland

Personalised recommendations