Experiencing and Protecting Sacred Natural Sites of Sámi and other Indigenous Peoples: The Sacred Arctic

196 Pages·2017·1.52 MB·English

by  Leena Heinämäki

Springer Polar Sciences
Leena Heinämäki
Thora Martina Herrmann Editors
Experiencing and
Protecting
Sacred Natural Sites
of Sámi and other
Indigenous Peoples
The Sacred Arctic
Springer Polar Sciences
Serieseditor
James Ford, Department of Geography, McGill University, Montreal, Québec,
Canada
Springer Polar Sciences is an interdisciplinary book series that is dedicated to
research on the Arctic and sub-Arctic regions and Antarctic. The series aims to
presentabroadplatformthatwillincludeboththesciencesandhumanitiesandto
facilitateexchangeofknowledgebetweenthevariouspolarsciencecommunities.
Topics and perspectives will be broad and will include but not be limited to
climate change impacts,environmental change, polar ecology, governance, health,
economics,indigenouspopulations,tourismandresourceextractionactivities.
Books published in the series will have ready appeal to scientists, students and
policymakers.
Moreinformationaboutthisseriesathttp://www.springer.com/series/15180
Leena Heinämäki (cid:129) Thora Martina Herrmann
Editors
Experiencing and Protecting
Sacred Natural Sites of Sámi
and other Indigenous Peoples
The Sacred Arctic
123
Editors
LeenaHeinämäki ThoraMartinaHerrmann
NorthernInstituteforEnvironmental Départementdegéographie
andMinorityLaw(NIEM),ArcticCentre UniversitédeMontréal
UniversityofLapland Montréal,Canada
Rovaniemi,Finland
UniversityofArcticLegalThematic
NetworkonArcticLaw
Rovaniemi,Finland
ISSN2510-0475 ISSN2510-0483 (electronic)
SpringerPolarSciences
ISBN978-3-319-48068-8 ISBN978-3-319-48069-5 (eBook)
DOI10.1007/978-3-319-48069-5
LibraryofCongressControlNumber:2016963339
©SpringerInternationalPublishingAG2017
Thisworkissubjecttocopyright.AllrightsarereservedbythePublisher,whetherthewholeorpartof
thematerialisconcerned,specificallytherightsoftranslation,reprinting,reuseofillustrations,recitation,
broadcasting,reproductiononmicrofilmsorinanyotherphysicalway,andtransmissionorinformation
storageandretrieval,electronicadaptation,computersoftware,orbysimilarordissimilarmethodology
nowknownorhereafterdeveloped.
Theuseofgeneraldescriptivenames,registerednames,trademarks,servicemarks,etc.inthispublication
doesnotimply,evenintheabsenceofaspecificstatement,thatsuchnamesareexemptfromtherelevant
protectivelawsandregulationsandthereforefreeforgeneraluse.
Thepublisher,theauthorsandtheeditorsaresafetoassumethattheadviceandinformationinthisbook
arebelievedtobetrueandaccurateatthedateofpublication.Neitherthepublishernortheauthorsor
theeditorsgiveawarranty,expressorimplied,withrespecttothematerialcontainedhereinorforany
errorsoromissionsthatmayhavebeenmade.Thepublisherremainsneutralwithregardtojurisdictional
claimsinpublishedmapsandinstitutionalaffiliations.
Printedonacid-freepaper
ThisSpringerimprintispublishedbySpringerNature
TheregisteredcompanyisSpringerInternationalPublishingAG
Theregisteredcompanyaddressis:Gewerbestrasse11,6330Cham,Switzerland
Contents
1 Experiencing and Safeguarding the Sacred in the
Arctic: Sacred Natural Sites, Cultural Landscapes
andIndigenousPeoples’Rights........................................... 1
ThoraMartinaHerrmannandLeenaHeinämäki
PartI Recognition of Sacred Sites of Arctic Indigenous
Peoples in Customary Rights, International and
NationalLaw,Institutions,PolicyandProtocols
2 LegalProtectionofSacredNaturalSitesWithinHuman
RightsJurisprudence:SápmiandBeyond............................... 11
DwightNewman,ElisaRuozzi,andStefanKirchner
3 HarmfulInvestmentsandProtectionofSacredSpaces–
Realisation of Indigenous Collective Rights in the
NorthernandArcticRegions.............................................. 27
RobertRode
4 ArgumentsfromCulturalEcologyandLegalPluralism
forRecognisingIndigenousCustomaryLawintheArctic ............ 37
DawidBunikowskiandPatrickDillon
5 Indigenous Peoples’ Customary Laws, Sámi People
andSacredSites ............................................................ 65
LeenaHeinämäkiandAlexandraXanthaki
6 ProtectingtheSacredintheFinnishSápmi:Settings
andChallenges.............................................................. 83
EijaOjanlatvaandAntjeNeumann
v
vi Contents
PartII IntangibleCulturalHeritageConnectedtoSacred
SitesofArcticIndigenousPeoples
7 Gosa Bássi Várit Leat Jávkan? Where Have AllThe
SacredMountainsGone?.................................................. 101
MaritMyrvoll
8 SacredSitesoftheSámi–LinkingPast,PresentandFuture ......... 117
KlemettiNäkkäläjärviandPekkaKauppala
9 External and Internal Factors the Desecration
andDestructionofPre-historicRockPaintingsinFinland? .......... 129
FrancisJoy
10 SafeguardingSacredSitesintheSubarcticZone–Three
CaseStudiesfromNorthernRussia ...................................... 159
Stephan Dudeck, Aleksei Anatol’evich Rud’,
Rudolf Havelka, Nikolai Mikhailovich Terebikhin,
andMarinaNikolaevnaMelyutina
11 FromKnowledgetoAction:HowtoProtectSacredSites
ofIndigenousPeoplesintheNorth?...................................... 181
LeenaHeinämäkiandThoraMartinaHerrmann
Chapter 1
Experiencing and Safeguarding the Sacred
in the Arctic: Sacred Natural Sites, Cultural
Landscapes and Indigenous Peoples’ Rights
ThoraMartinaHerrmannandLeenaHeinämäki
Culturally and spiritually important landscapes across the Arctic region express
this interconnectedness of Indigenous Peoples (IPs) with the natural and spiritual
environment,andtheirpreservationhasbeen,andcontinuestobe,essentialtoIPs’
identity and livelihoods. It is a common place to say that the lands are regarded
as sacred by many traditional worldviews of indigenous peoples. However, these
living landscapes contain also particular individual sites, or Sacred Natural Sites
(SNSs), which are associated with strong spiritual,or cultural intangible values of
the natural elements. As Schama (1995: 6–7) has noted: “Landscapes are culture,
before they are nature; constructs of the imagination projected onto wood, water
and rock”. Consequently, culturally and spiritually important landscapes and the
SNSstheyencompassareattheinterfacebetweennatureandculture,tangibleand
intangiblevalues,biologicalandculturaldiversity,andembodyacloselywovennet
ofconnectednessbetweencultureandnatureandpeople’sidentity(Rössler2006).
InmanyArcticindigenoussocieties,SNSsareembeddedinspirituality,cultural
practices and belief systems, and respect for and access restrictions to them have
often led to well-conserved areas within otherwise degraded Arctic environments.
As such SNSs play an important role for nature protection. Landscape-based
protected areas would not exist without the profound cultural and spiritual values
assigned to them by the societies that inhabit these areas and who often continue
T.M.Herrmann((cid:2))
Départementdegéographie,UniversitédeMontréal,Montréal,Canada
e-mail:[email protected]
L.Heinämäki
NorthernInstituteforEnvironmentalandMinorityLaw(NIEM),ArcticCentre,
UniversityofLapland,Rovaniemi,Finland
UniversityofArcticLegalThematicNetworkonArcticLaw,Rovaniemi,Finland
e-mail:leena.heinamaki@ulapland.fi
©SpringerInternationalPublishingAG2017 1
L.Heinämäki,T.M.Herrmann(eds.),ExperiencingandProtectingSacred
NaturalSitesofSámiandotherIndigenousPeoples,SpringerPolarSciences,
DOI10.1007/978-3-319-48069-5_1
2 T.M.HerrmannandL.Heinämäki
to shape them through unique land-use systems (Mallarach 2008). Culturally and
spiritually important landscapes have complex spatial-temporal dynamics as these
landscapesaregraduallyevolvingandadaptingtothecontinuouschangesoccurring
within the environment, culture and society (Ohnesorge et al. 2013). The cosmo-
logical and mythological associations of sacred places, characterize many cultural
landscapesofimportancetoIPsintheArctic(OviedoandJeanrenaud2007).SNSs
exist in nearly all ecosystems across the world (e.g., waterfalls, rocks, mountains,
rivers, lakes, or forests). SNSs may be the abode of gods, spirits or ancestors. As
apartofalargerculturallandscape,thesesitescanbeintegralpartsofindigenous
culturalidentityandcanplayakeyroleinindigenouslifestyles.Asmaintainedby
Schaaf, one of the most salient forms of culture-based conservation has been the
identificationandprotectionofSNSs,whichoftenprotectkeyecosystems(Schaaf
2008).IntheArctic,theseancientsitesareoftenthehomes offragilebiodiversity
andendangeredanimalsandplantsspecies,someofwhichdependentirelyonthese
landscapesfortheirsurvival(Verschuurenetal.2010).Theyhavefunctionssimilar
to those of protected areas (Dudley et al. 2000). Because of the spiritual values
assignedtothesesites,restrictionsonaccessanduseoftenapply,suchasspatialor
temporal bans, or closing access to a particular species in certain areas or during
certainperiods(generallygroupedunderthetermtaboo)(Borrini-Feyerabendetal.
2010). With these management tools based on customary rules of access, use,
protection and restoration, human disturbance is reduced or prevented (Colding
and Folke 2001). Many SNSs thus remain in a natural or near-natural state. In
otherareas,theinfluenceofmanismoreimportant,butstillallowsformaintaining
bioculturaldiversity.
A subset of the intangible cultural and spiritual values associated with Arctic
SNSs is related to indigenous knowledge (IK). IK systems provide a key window
for viewing at close range how the natural environment shapes human cultural
expression and vice-versa (Drew and Henne 2006; Nakashima and Roué 2002).
Such knowledge is often closely linked, on one hand, to spiritual beliefs, ritual
observances, local language, and on the other hand, to resource appropriation and
managementpractices,variationanddistributionofnaturalspecies(Berkes2008).
IPsgenerallyviewthisknowledgeasemanatingfromaspiritualbase(Posey1999).
Posey(2002:4)statesthat:“Thus,knowledgeoftheenvironmentdependsnotonly
ontherelationshipbetweenhumansandNature,butalsobetweenthevisibleworld
and the invisible spirit world. [:::] the unseen is as much a part of reality as that
whichisseen/thespiritualisasmuchapartofrealityasthematerial”.Culturaland
spiritualknowledgeandvaluesareatthecoreoftheethicsandpracticesofanumber
ofindigenouscustodiansofSNSsacrosstheArcticregion.
The resilience of Arctic communities, their ability to cope with and adapt in
sustainable ways to future changes is linked with their historical memory and
traditional knowledge about such changes. Indigenous SNSs and their cultural
heritage are crucial for the preservation and application of this historical and
environmentalknowledge.Hence,thesafeguardingandtransmissionofknowledge
linked with SNSs serves Arctic communities abilities to cope with present and
futurechangesandimpactsofneweconomicdevelopment(i.e.tourism,extractive
1 ExperiencingandSafeguardingtheSacredintheArctic:SacredNatural... 3
industries). It can enhance communities’ ability to protect their cultural heritage,
engageinmultiethnicdialogue,anddevelopculturesensitiveeducationandalegal
systemthatintegratesindigenouscustomarylaws.Inthefaceofgrowingindustry,
tourism development, and influx of outside communities in the Arctic, interaction
amongvarious stakeholdersandcompetitionover resourcesgrows.Oraltraditions
and knowledge associated with the cultural heritage of SNSs preserve means of
mediation, justice, and well being that are crucial for the ability to cope with
environmentalchallenges.
Despitegrowingrecognition,acrosstheArcticandNorthernregions,itbecomes
increasingly difficult for indigenous communities as custodians to protect their
SNSs, as these ancient areas are increasingly at risk from rising development
activities and social change. Examples of threats are: tourism; extractive indus-
tries (e.g., mining, oil and gas); industrial forestry; infrastructure development
(e.g., roads, dams) (Klubnikin et al. 2000); large-scale agriculture; urbanisation;
inappropriate archaeological research; memorialisation by national museums; and
secularisation. Some SNSs are included within official State protected areas, and
communities have lost access to and rights over them. Frequently, policies and
managementpracticesarenotalignedwithtraditionalmanagementstructuresbased
on indigenous customary laws (Ross 2005). As most threats impact on both,
cultural/spiritual and biological values, they reduce the resilience of these socio-
ecologicalsystems,andtheinterconnectednessofhumansandnaturalsystemsthat
ischaracteristicofthem.
ManySNSsareonlyknownbycommunitymembers,anditisveryimportantto
respectthisprivacy.Someofthemarelegallyrecognizedasaworldheritage.Until
recentlylittlehadbeendonetopromotetheinternationalagendaontheprotection
of these holistic and living places but the increased attention for the contribution
of IPs’ SNSs to effective environmental conservation in the Arctic has stimulated
renewed interest in them as a vehicle for biocultural diversity conservation. In
1992, the UNESCO World Heritage Convention (UNESCO 1972), became the
first international legal instrument to recognize and protect cultural landscapes
as a specific category additionally to the natural landscapes (Rössler 2003). The
International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN’s) Vth World Congress on
ProtectedAreas(Durban2003)highlightedsacrednaturalsitesandissuedrelevant
recommendations, which have been followed by a number of policy actions. One
of them is The Delos Initiative for the Protection of Sacred Natural Sites in
Technologically Developed Countries (IUCN). The CBD started to recognize the
importanceofSNSswhenitissuedtheAkwé:KonVoluntaryGuidelinesforImpact
Assessment in Sacred Sites in 2004. The CBD Programme of Work on Protected
Areasalsooffersopportunitiesforactiontoprotecttheseancientsitesandtheliving
landscapes.Yet,despitetheincreasingacknowledgmentofSNSs,manyofthemare
stilllargelyunusedforsupportingtheselivinglandscapesintheArcticregion,and
legalprotectionhereisstillofteninsufficientorevenabsent.Inallcases,itiscrucial
that all discussion and planning concerning these sites involve IPs. Recognition
of these SNSs can be also used as a cultural revitalization and educational
process.