WEEK 10: Northern Impacts
Understanding Vulnerability
• Relatively global homogeneous changes across temperatures
o Expect same pattern to accelerate in the future, with most areas above average
• Southeastern Asia -> SLR risk, degradation of coral reefs for those who rely on fisheries
• Lower latitudes -> Drought risks for those who rely on agriculture
• Western Europe/North America -> Risks mostly associated with infrastructure
• Not just observed changes that make populations vulnerable, but other SES factors
o Especially in low latitude areas, tend to come up high up in vulnerability i.e. food
systems, inequalities in access to resources to deal with changes
o Larger economy = more resources to respond and adapt in ways to reduce impacts
• Climate change exacerbates inequalities
o Those with least resources to deal with change are often the least responsible for it
• Need to be wary of how indices are being constructed when deciding what does/doesn’t
constitute risk, and differences in definitions of the “North”
o Big difference in western Europe northern peoples and Canadian northern peoples
at risk, and types of vulnerabilities they’re exposed to
Northern Communities
• Even under more modest scenarios, northern Canada experiences fair amount of change
compared to northwestern Europe that doesn’t get the same degree of change until a
really extreme (RCP 8.5) scenario
• Quite a number of Arctic nations and large communities in high latitudes throughout
circumpolar region
o Some of largest in northern Russia, Norway (Tromso city), Sweden
o Different sets of risks and vulnerabilities in Tromso, which could have more
resources, than remote community
o Inuvik, Northwest Territories +3k population, mostly Indigenous
o Whitehorse, Yukon +30k population, not as huge of an Indigenous community
o ^Two Canadian cities both with green spaces and infrastructure
o Salluit, Quebec more prototypical of what people picture of northern communities
in Canada -> Remote, located on continuous permafrost, sparsely vegetated
despite being at a similar latitude as Whitehorse
o Hopedale, Newfoundland -> No plowed roads in winter so travel on snowmobile
• Regions may appear to be as equally vulnerable on the map, but considering resource
availability and infrastructure, recognize differences in remoteness and local climate
• Huge variety of Indigenous people in the North, heterogeneity between groups
• Don’t like to consider complexity -> Need to move to smaller scales when considering
vulnerability to understand levels of change we expect to see
• In Canadian context, image to right usually how we subdivide the Arctic
and the people who occupy those areas
o Some programs use a North of 60° line, unfair to peoples living
south of what should really be considered the Arctic
• Much of area considered to be Arctic occupied by Inuit people
• Inuit Nunangat has four settled Inuit regions -> Inuvialuit (4.8%), Nunavut (46.4%),
Nunavik (18.1%) and Nunatsiavut (3.5%)
o 27.2% of Inuit peoples live outside of Inuit Nunangat, total population 65,0245
o All fairly remote, mostly distributed along the coast, Iqaluit has largest city center
o Inuit known historically as people being of the sea ice, relying heavily on sea-
borne resources for subsistence and travel
o Most people still live lifestyle that relies heavily on the land, most still maintain
very strong cultural ties to families
Northern Community Vulnerability
• From infrastructure perspective, lots of challenges for First Nation and Inuit communities
• Rail network across Canada -> Not a lot of coverage, especially moving toward the North
o Not a viable option for shipping of goods and people
• Distribution of national highways and airports
o Some airports in the North (Whitehorse, Yellowknife, Iqaluit, Goose Bay)
o Highway system extends a bit more into North but a lot of northern roads don’t
meet typical standards
o Roads in purple are northern/remote roads, only green roads
considered highways, while feeder roads in red (decent standard in
between remote and highways)
▪ In North, northern and remote routes go as far as Whitehorse,
Inuvik (Dempster Highway made of gravel)
▪ Towards La Grande hydroelectric system in Quebec, remote road
▪ Now a loop connecting to Labrador since 2009, with some paved sections
o Much of Canadian North doesn’t have road access, depiction matching with
mobile/cellular patterns indicating technology, internet service
▪ For many northern/Indigenous peoples amidst COVID-19, lots of
problems with issues with satellite Internet and technology restrictions
▪ Strong spatial agreement with surface availability and whether community
has access to other important resources
• Moving into Inuit Nunangat, lose access by anything other than air travel
o Nutrition North meant to subsidize food for remote communities
▪ Note on document of eligible communities that a community was removed
because it got road access, despite it still being remote
▪ Communities the government of Canada has determined as most remote
and least access to nutritional food
▪ Challenges with money being filtered to owners of stores, opposed to
communities themselves
• But highlights areas considered to be most remote by government
o Highlights both risks associated living in the north, as well as importance of air
transportation so if lacking those resources, limit availability of livelihood staples
• Lots of airstrips short and made of gravel, so unable to land if weather bad
o Highlights how lack of infrastructure can bring additional potential climate
change vulnerabilities, directly linked to how remote the area is
• Correlation matrix -> More remote, less access to health, social, legal, retail services