Environmental Public Debate: In the Context of the Arctic in Russian and Norwegian Media

153 Pages·2014·1.05 MB·English

by  Hana Christie

Environmental Public Debate:
In the context of the Arctic in Russian and Norwegian Media
Natalia Nefidova

Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for
the Degree of Master of Philosophy in
Culture, Environment and Sustainability
Centre for Development and the Environment
University of Oslo
Blindern, Norway
September 2014
ii
Abstract: This interdisciplinary and comparative study explores the public
environmental debate on the Arctic in the context of Russian and Norwegian
media. The aim of the study is to define how the public environmental debate is
constructed in the media and is possibly affected by the present resource-oriented
policy-making processes regarding the Arctic from the perspective of climate
change. Comparing countries with two different political systems and media
traditions, this thesis examines how and if public debates contribute to
environmentally-oriented policymaking. The novel aspect of this study is that
analysis of the public debate is conducted in parallel with the analysis of official
debates. The advantage of focusing on two debates simultaneously is that it
reveals the contradictions or consistencies of opinions between authorities and
the public sphere. The research is based on the analysis of discourses from
several Russian and Norwegian media sources from May 2013 to May 2014. The
discourse approach represents both a theoretical and methodological framework
for analysis. An important part of this study concerns the evolution of historical
representations and narratives of the Arctic, which helps to trace modern Arctic
narratives and discourses from both countries’ historical contexts. Particularly,
the environmental aspect of Arctic policies in both countries represents one of the
key issues of the debate. With focus on media sources – newspapers articles and
radio programs – in both countries I analyze whether the idea of sustainable
development is perceived as an efficient and practical alternative to argue against
resource depletion and for conservation of the Arctic ecosystem. Particularly, the
role of security in the Russian and Norwegian official debates is considered.
Taking into account that ethics are an important component of Arctic discourse,
this study examines how Russian and Norwegian public debates address this
aspect in their rhetoric.

iii
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................... IV
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................. VI
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .......................................................................................................... VII
1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 THE AIM AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS OF THE RESEARCH ........................................................ 3
1.2 BACKGROUND FOR THE STUDY: ARCTIC FOREIGN POLICY AND FUNDAMENTAL ARCTIC POLICY
DOCUMENTS IN RUSSIA AND NORWAY .............................................................................................. 5
1.3 THE POLITICAL SYSTEM AND MEDIA MODELS IN RUSSIA AND NORWAY ................................. 9
1.4 SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT AS A TURNING POINT OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DISCOURSE .. 12
1.5 THE ORIGINS OF ENVIRONMENTAL DISCOURSE AND GREEN POLITICS IN THE ARCTIC IN RUSSIA
14
1.6 NORWEGIAN ‘HIGH NORTH’ POLITICS ................................................................................... 16
2. THEORY, METHOD AND THESIS STRUCTURE ............................................................ 19
2.1 LACLAU AND MOUFFE'S DISCOURSE THEORY ....................................................................... 21
2.2 CRITICAL DISCOURSE ANALYSIS ........................................................................................... 22
2.3 DRYZEK'S CLASSIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DISCOURSES.............................................. 24
2.4 CLASSICAL AND CRITICAL GEOPOLITICS ................................................................................ 26
2.5 SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: A DEFINITION ........................................................................ 28
2.6 SOURCES UNDER SCRUTINY .................................................................................................. 29
2.7 RELATION OF THE THEORY TO THE THESIS. ........................................................................... 30
2.8 OUTLINE OF THE THESIS ........................................................................................................ 31
iv
3. ARCTIC NARRATIVES ......................................................................................................... 33
3.1 REPRESENTATIONS OF THE NORTH IN WORLD HISTORY ......................................................... 35
3.2 ARCTIC NARRATIVES IN RUSSIAN HISTORY AND CULTURE .................................................... 42
3.3 ARCTIC NARRATIVES IN NORWEGIAN HISTORY AND CULTURE .............................................. 49
3.4 THE ARCTIC OF THE NATIVES................................................................................................. 56
3.5 THE OUTSIDERS’ ARCTIC ....................................................................................................... 60
3.6 COLD VS. WARM ARCTIC ....................................................................................................... 62
3.7 CONCLUSION: ARCTIC NARRATIVES IN RUSSIAN AND NORWEGIAN PUBLIC DEBATES ........... 64
4. ARCTIC DISCOURSE IN RUSSIAN AND NORWEGIAN MEDIA .................................. 71
4.1 OPINION-MAKERS AND THE ISSUE PUZZLE ............................................................................. 72
4.2 ARCTIC DISCOURSE IN THE RUSSIAN AND NORWEGIAN MEDIAS ............................................ 75
4.3 RESOURCE-ENERGY-ECONOMY DISCOURSE .......................................................................... 78
4.4 SECURITY DISCOURSE ON THE ARCTIC ................................................................................... 91
4.5 ENVIRONMENTAL DISCOURSE: THE POWER OF ‘NO’ .............................................................. 97
5. ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE ARCTIC CONTEXT IN RUSSIAN AND
NORWEGIAN MEDIA .................................................................................................................... 111
CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................. 123
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................................. 132

v
List of Tables
Table 1: REPRESENTATIONS AS DISCURSIVE ‘ELEMENTS’ WITHIN THE
ARCTIC DISCOURSE ........................................................................................ 66

vi
List of Abbreviations
AC Arctic Council
CDA Critical Discourse Approach
DN Dagens Næringsliv
EEZ Exclusive Economic Zones
GULag Soviet System of Forced Labor Camps
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
ITAR-TASS Russian News Agency
NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization
NGO Non-governmental Organization
NRK Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation
RAN Russian Academy of Science
SP North Pole
SSW Strong Sustainable Development
UN CLCS United Nations Commission for Limits of the Continental Shelf
UN CLOS United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
WCED World Commission on Environment and Development
WCIOM Russian Public Opinion Research Center
WSD Weak Sustainable Development
WSSD World Summit on Sustainable Development
WWF World Wide Fund for Nature
vii

1. Introduction
...the Arctic is the fastest changing environment on Earth.
(Berkman 2012:123)
Since the second half of the 20th century, Arctic ice has diminished considerably,
placing the region in the limelight of the global environmental agenda. Global
warming affects the vulnerable Arctic environment, threatening endangered
species and traditional lifeways of indigenous Arctic peoples. Furthermore,
climate change will likely fuel increased economic interest in the region, since
the deicing of the Arctic Ocean will facilitate access to offshore oil resources and
possibly navigation through the Northern Sea Route. In 2008 the US Geological
Survey published a report stating that the Arctic contains 13% of world
undiscovered oil and 30% of world undiscovered gas reserves (Brigham
2013:371). Additionally, increased international tensions regarding the right to
exploit Arctic resource reserves brings up the issue of security, feeding
speculation about the possibility of military conflict between Arctic states.
According to Griffiths (2011:6) “the region is coming alive politically under the
effects of climate change, resource scarcity, and geostrategic competition.” This
study endeavors to explore these aspects of the Arctic debate.
The opening of the Arctic has become a significant international media topic in
recent years. My intention is to scrutinize this debate in the context of two
countries: Russia and Norway. In the broad sense, this comparative study will
map the main perspectives of Arctic discourses in Russian and Norwegian media
over the period of May 2013 to May 2014.
Russia and Norway are two of the main claimants attempting to benefit from the
opening of the Arctic due to global warming. I chose these countries for my study
since Russia and Norway are two of the five Arctic coastal states with resource-
1
based economies. Such dependence means that resources are vital economic
interests, explaining why authorities of both countries confidently follow pro-
resource extraction discourses (Jensen 2007). Moreover, the governments of both
countries, though they claim to have a high level of commitment to protecting the
Arctic’s vulnerable ecosystems, continue on with their plans to drill in the region.
This tendency is broadly reflected in the official debate present in the media of
both countries.
A perspective favoring environmental conservation in the public debate serves as a
firm alternative to an economic one. In this respect, Lassi (2013:41) stresses the link
between environmental policies and the public sphere. Since the “environmental
awakening” began in the 1960s, the public sector became the main initiator of
environmentally responsible policy (Lassi 2013, Dryzek 2013). Politicization of this
issue, as a result, has led to the emergence of “international environmental politics
and environmental security” (Lassi 2013:43).
The public “sphere” (or “space”) is an ambivalent notion. Cârstea (2012:125) points
out that the general definition regards the public sphere as “any form of association
in the name of dialogue and free debate”. Jürgen Habermas focused on this
phenomenon in his work, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere
(1962). Fraser (1990:57) points out that in Habermas’s sense the public sphere
“designates a theater in modern societies in which political participation is enacted
through the medium of talk (...) the space in which citizens deliberate about their
common affairs, hence an institutionalized arena of discursive interaction”.
Therefore, the public sphere “is conceptually distinct from the official-economy; it is
not an arena of market relations but rather one of discursive relations, a theatre for
debating and deliberation rather than for buying and selling” (Ibid. 57). However, it
is important to stress the modern tendency of “marketization” which affects the
media sphere, since commercialization processes and business lobbyism started
playing a significant role in policies of modern democratic states (Midttun and
2