5. Interdependency of subsistence and market economies in ... · The Economy of the North...

The Economy of the North Interdependency of subsistence and market economies in the Arctic

65

5. Interdependency of subsistence and marketeconomies in the ArcticBirger Poppel11111

In his address to the In-uit Circumpolar Confer-ence in 1998, Finn Lyn-ge focused on a topic«which has so far re-ceived all too little at-tention and which – tothe mind of a growingnumber of people – isessential in securing aplace for hunting cul-tures in the world of to-morrow. And that is theissue of economic quan-tification of subsistencevalues. … What evadesa monetary assessment has no interest for the statisti-cians. For governments’ economic planners, what can-not be counted in money doesn’t exist»2. On severaloccasions, the Arctic Council3 has focused on subsis-tence activities as part of the lifestyle of the indige-nous peoples of the Arctic, and on how subsistence isconditioned by environmental impacts. These con-cerns are reflected in research contributions devel-oped under the auspices of the Arctic Council, such asthe Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program, theArctic Human Development Report, the Arctic Cli-mate Impact Assessment Program and a number ofother projects4. The Arctic Human Development Re-port stated that: «Customary harvesting practices arenot only culturally but also economically importantlocally, although their role varies by region, ethnicgroup, urban or rural setting, and generation. Thisharvesting is important for its contribution to foodproduction and consumption.» Although the impor-tance of the subsistence economy in the Arctic is nowbecoming more widely recognized, sufficient data arenot yet available to give a comprehensive picture ofthe subsistence activities of economic significance toindividuals, households and communities in the Arc-tic. One of the purposes in launching the Survey ofLiving Conditions in the Arctic (SLiCA) was to help tofill this gap.

This chapter, which includes some preliminary resultsfrom the SLiCA project, aims to contribute to the pic-ture of how subsistence activities and the cash econo-my are mutually dependent on each other for provid-ing consumption possibilities in the Arctic today, and

at the same time are partof a lifestyle that repre-sents continuity, sharingand connection to na-ture. As we show in thischapter, the proportionof food obtained by sub-sistence activities is quitelarge for many Arcticcommunities. Moreover,subsistence activities areembedded in a uniquecultural and social con-text that conditions theirvalue. Quantification ofsubsistence activities in

economic terms cannot capture the cultural values,but may provide an important input for understand-ing the economy and living conditions in the Arctic.Hopefully, the information provided in this report andby follow-up activities, e.g., future SLiCA reports, willgive statisticians, policy-makers and the public a bet-ter basis for understanding the significance of theeconomy of subsistence activities outside the marketsphere. Thus, this information will give a more com-prehensive picture of consumption possibilities andwell-being of the people in the Arctic.

Subsistence and subsistence activitiesSubsistence is a highly disputed theoretical conceptwithin the social sciences and the humanities. Thediscussion among Arctic social scientists has been fo-cusing on how far into the transition, from wildlifeharvest and principles of sharing, to a globalizedworld governed by the market economy, it is stillmeaningful to employ the concept of subsistence. Toreflect the changing socio-economic conditions of thehunting, herding and fishing societies, a variety ofsubsistence concepts has been introduced, all stress-ing the importance of traditional subsistence activitiesin a mode of production now mixed with the casheconomy5. One approach suggests defining subsis-tence as «the concept of meeting basic human needsor requirements by expending the amount of labourand capital required to obtain enough food for per-sonal survival (and the survival of one’s family)», andhighlights that «subsistence hunting is not only whatone lives on; rather it is also what one lives by, be-cause it sustains the life of a culture»6. In the present

Ilulisssat, Greenland. Photo: Birger Poppel.

Interdependency of subsistence and market economies in the Arctic The Economy of the North

66

day setting of many northern indigenous communi-ties, the two sectors often coexist. Another approachpoints out «the combination of subsistence and com-mercial wage activities provides the economic basisfor the way of life so highly valued in rural communi-ties»7.

From an economic viewpoint, it is often emphasizedthat traditional hunting and fishing activities, takingplace at a distance from modern infrastructure andmarket opportunities, can represent a «barrier» forbroader participation in the market and thus limit ac-cess to what is provided from the market economy:not only wage income, but also access to credit, subsi-dies and market-related transfer payments. However,this aspect has only been emphasized in very few em-pirical studies of the subsistence economy of the Arc-tic, and should be included in future research.

In a 1992 statement from the Inuit Circumpolar Con-ference8, subsistence is defined as «a highly complexnotion that includes vital economic, social, culturaland spiritual dimensions. The harvesting of renew-able resources provides Inuit with food, nutrition,clothing, fuel, harvesting equipment and income.Subsistence means much more than mere survival orminimum living standards. … It enriches and sustainsInuit communities in a manner that promotes cohe-siveness, pride and sharing. It also provides an essen-tial link to, and communication with, the naturalworld of which Inuit are an integral part».

The concept of subsistence has had a prominent posi-tion in various discussions of indigenous people’srights in international legislation, conventions anddeclarations. For example, the International WhalingCommission recognized that aboriginal subsistencewhaling is different from commercial whaling, andsince 1985 the Commission has set catch limits forstocks with special allowances for aboriginal subsis-tence whaling. The United Nations Covenant on Civiland Political Rights and the International Covenanton Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, both from1966, have the following statement of principle: «Allpeoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose oftheir natural wealth and resources without prejudiceto any obligations arising out of international eco-nomic cooperation, based upon the principle of mutu-al benefit, and international law. In no case may apeople be deprived of its own means of subsistence.»This statement of principle introduces in internationallaw the concept of subsistence and thereby states aright for all, including the indigenous peoples of theArctic.

Rights to land represent a crucial condition for subsis-tence activities. An example is the Alaska NativeClaims Settlement Act (ANCSA), passed in 1971.Through ANCSA, the indigenous peoples of Alaska

received designated land and money in exchange forgiving up land, which then became public. The indig-enous groups also gave up rights to subsistence har-vest on public land. In 1980, the United States Con-gress passed the Alaska National Interest Lands Con-servation Act (ANILCA), attempting to return the sub-sistence rights to the indigenous peoples according tocriteria of traditional and direct dependence uponwildlife harvest as the mainstay of livelihood, and lo-cal residency9.

Land rights are not the only preconditions for subsis-tence activities in the Arctic. A crucial question todayis: To what extent will climate change and other envi-ronmental impacts limit the possibilities for subsis-tence activities in the Arctic? Changes in winds, oceancurrents and precipitation may have adverse impactson fish, birds and mammals, core elements for sus-taining life in the Arctic region. Melting ice may di-minish the habitat of animals and hunting opportuni-ties. Environmental toxins, with a high degree of ac-cumulation in northern regions, are found in Arcticanimals at increasingly high levels, threatening sub-sistence food production. The World ConservationStrategy Caring for the Earth from 1985 summarizesthe perspectives of the indigenous peoples: «Theircultures, economies and identities are inextricablytied to their traditional lands and resources. Hunting,fishing, trapping, gathering, herding or cultivationcontinue to be carried out for subsistence – food andmaterials – as well as for income. They provide com-munities with a sense of continuity with the past andunity with the natural world, reinforcing ethics ofsharing and of stewardship of the land.» It is oftenassumed that indigenous peoples have only two op-tions for their future: to return to their ancient waysof life, or to become assimilated into the dominantsociety. They should however, also have a third op-tion, to modify their lifestyles, combining the old andthe new in ways that maintain and enhance theiridentity while allowing their economy to evolve10.

Photo: Jack Kruse. Barrow


67

Measurement issuesIn order to measure the importance of subsistence ac-tivities, the following aspects are essential11:

• economic aspects – income, production and con-sumption, including the value of the harvest and ofthe «factors of production», e.g., hunting equip-ment.

• integrative aspects – the integration of market andsubsistence.

• nutritional aspects – including food security, thenutritional value of the diet, and environmentaltoxins in food

• social aspects – expressing the social order andkinship.

• cultural aspects – including the sharing of food.

• identity aspects – including identity markers, suchas language, food, relations to the land, huntingskills and traditions.

In order to quantify the value of Arctic subsistenceactivities in regional and national economies, the fol-lowing activities must be examined: hunting, whaling,fishing, herding, animal husbandry, gathering andtrapping. To illustrate how the household in themixed subsistence and cash economy works as a mi-cro-enterprise, a household production model was de-veloped for use in SLiCA study12. The model illus-trates how Arctic households organize productive ac-tivities and allocate the factors of production (land,labour, capital) in order to optimize income flowsfrom both the market (public and private sectors) andsubsistence spheres of the economy. The model cap-tures both monetary and non-monetary productionand consumption within the household. However, themodel does not capture the potential barriers to mar-ket participation, such as lack of employment or cred-it13. Household income and expenditure are quanti-fied in terms of:

• cash income (wages from public and private sector,sale of commodities from harvest or householdproduction);

• transfers (pensions, social assistance);

• in-kind income from household subsistence produc-tion and gifts from mutual aid/sharing;

• household consumption;

• reinvestment/depreciation of the household capital.

Sources of data on subsistence are diverse and in-clude case studies of small communities, administra-tive registers of regional wildlife management, andregional and national statistical data on licences, quo-tas, catches of different species, and sales to process-ing plants. Other sources include harvest monitoring,government studies, species-specific studies, socio-economic impact assessments, claims statements,food security/nutrition studies, combined register and

survey data, community profiles and comparative cir-cumpolar studies. Some regions of the Arctic are richin administrative data from public registers, e.g., Rus-sia up to the collapse of the Soviet Union14, andGreenland, where very detailed wildlife harvestrecords has been registered for more than 200 years.

Since the late 1950s, the Canadian Government hascarried out a number of Area Economic Surveys,yielding data on local resources, game-catch statisticsand land-use maps. In Canada, harvest surveys areusually required in association with land claims docu-mentation and implementation. In Alaska, harveststudies are usually conducted in association withmanagement of subsistence rights. In 1978, the Sub-sistence Division of the Alaskan Department of Fishand Game began studies that, like the Canadian stud-ies, intended to establish baseline studies of subsis-tence resource use. Reports have since been publishedon wild resource harvest and use, seasonality of fish-ing, hunting, and gathering, methods of harvestingand processing, harvest levels, sharing and trading ofsubsistence foods, cultural and economic values asso-ciated with subsistence, trends in resource use pat-terns, and resource issues that need resolution 15.

The role of mixed cash and subsistenceeconomies in the ArcticRealizing that the traditional social indicators andways of measuring living conditions and individualwell-being did not adequately reflect the welfare pri-orities of the indigenous peoples of the Arctic16, Sta-tistics Greenland in collaboration and partnershipwith individual researchers, research institutions andindigenous peoples’ organizations initiated the Surveyof Living Conditions in the Arctic, SLiCA. The corequestionnaire (www.arcticlivingconditions.org) ap-plied by SLiCA offers opportunities to examine andgrasp some of the the economic, and social, culturaland nutritional significance of subsistence activities. Abroad variety of questions have been asked about in-dividual and household activities and behaviour. Theimportance of a mixed cash and subsistence economyfor living conditions in the Arctic is one of five inter-national research topics suggested by the indigenouspeople’s representatives participating in SLiCA.

Preliminary findings of the Survey of LivingConditions in the Arctic, SLiCABelow, some preliminary findings from SLiCA are pre-sented based on more than 7 000 personal interviewswith native adults (aged 15 and above) in Greenland,Canada, Chukotka in Russia, and Alaska17. Furtheranalyses will be carried out in forthcoming SLiCA re-ports. In addition to Inuit, the native populations in-clude Evan, Chuvan and Yukagir people living inChukotka. Since 97 per cent of the population repre-sented is Inuit, we take the liberty to refer to the pop-ulation in the survey as Inuit adults living in Inuit set-tlements of the Arctic.


68

Figure 5.3. Traditional food shared with other households.Regional Surveys 2001-2006

Percentage of households

0

20

40

60

80

100

TotalAlaskaCanadaGreenland

NoYes

Source: SLiCA.

Meat and fish harvested and eaten byhouseholdsOne of the SLiCA questions dealt with the proportionof meat and fish consumed by the household that washarvested by the household. The response as depictedin Figure 5.1 supports the hypothesis that subsistenceharvesting is still important among the Inuit of theArctic. In total, five out of ten households report thatthey harvested about half or more than half of all themeat and fish the family ate. Six out of ten Inuithouseholds in Chukotka and Alaska report that theyharvested about half or more than half of their meatand fish consumption, whereas less that ten per centdid not harvest at all. For Greenland, the harvest ac-tivity is smaller than Chukotka and Alaska as slightlyless than 40 per cent of the Greenland households re-

port that they fish, hunt and gather about a half ormore of the traditional food supply of the household.

Traditional food in the dietTo get an overall impression of the significance of tra-ditional food (the concept covers several regionalwords like e.g. nikipaq, kalaalimernit and countryfood) in the diet of the respondents, everyone in thesurvey was asked about the proportion of «traditionalfood» meat and fish, eaten by the household. In theliterature traditional food is usually characterised bytype of food and type of preparation: locally or re-gionally harvested, primarily meat from marine orland mammals, fish or wild fowl, but can also includeberries, mushrooms or herbs18. Regarding prepara-tion, food has generally been considered traditional ifit was eaten raw or transformed by natural processes(frozen, dried or fermented) or, if prepared, cookedor smoked. The term traditional food was not definedto the respondents which probably means that theterm, not least when it comes to the type of prepara-tion, covers a large variety. The proportion of meatand fish that is traditional in all regions comes fromdifferent activities and sources:

• the households’ own subsistence activities;• gifts from family or other households;• sharing due to local traditions and principles;• food exchange;• buying food directly from hunters/fishermen, at the

local markets, at co-ops or at supermarkets, e.g.,Greenland.

Figure 5.2 shows that traditional food accounts for asubstantial part of the food supply of the householdeverywhere in the Arctic. Two of every three Inuithouseholds report that half or more of their house-hold’s food consumption is made up by traditionalfood. Among the Arctic Inuit, traditional food seemsto account for the largest part of the households’ diet

Figure 5.2. Traditional food in household consumption of meatand fish. Regional Surveys 2001-2006


0

20

40

60

80

100

TotalAlaskaChukotkaCanadaGreenland

More than halfAbout halfNone and less than half

Source: SLiCA.

Figure 5.1. Proportion of meat and fish consumption harvestedby households. Regional Surveys 2001-2006


0

20

40

60

80

100

TotalAlaskaChukotkaGreenland

More than halfAbout halfLess than halfNone

Source: SLiCA.


69

Figure 5.4. Traditional food received from other households.Regional Surveys 2001-2006

0

20

40

60

80

100



NoYes

Source: SLiCA.

in Alaska, whereas the proportion of traditional foodconsumed by Inuit households of Greenland, Canadaand Chukotka is somewhat smaller. It should be notedthat the percentage of households that do not con-sume traditional food at all is below one per cent.

Some questions in the SLiCA questionnaire focus onsharing and exchange of traditional food. The find-ings are presented below (note that only Greenlandand Alaska are represented in both figures). Figure5.3 shows that in Greenland, Canada and Alaska, thesharing of traditional food is still an important andenduring tradition. In Canada, 96 per cent of Inuithouseholds in the Arctic share traditional food withother households. The corresponding figures for Alas-ka and Greenland are 85 per cent and 64 per cent,respectively.

The same pattern appears when traditional food re-ceived from other households is compared for Green-land, Chukotka and Alaska in Figure 5.4. On average,80 per cent of the households report that they re-ceived traditional food from others. Alaska rankshighest with 92 per cent, while 80 per cent of thehouseholds in Chukotka and 79 per cent in Greenlandreceived food from others.

In all the communities, sharing food is perceived asan important part of social relations, with differenttypes of social and cultural motivation. The food shar-ing can be seen as a form of «social security», provid-ing food for those who lack food; it can strengthensocial relations through the demand for «reciprocity»;and it can be a form of «conspicuous consumption»,showing the relative wealth of those with abundantfood supply. In Greenland and Chukotka, buying tra-ditional food is quite common. Seven out of tenGreenland Inuit households buy traditional food in a12-month period. In Chukotka, more than five out often indigenous households buy traditional food.

Well-being and quality of lifeTo get a better understanding of the role of subsis-tence activities in the lives of the Inuit, a number ofquestions were asked about satisfaction with differentaspects of the respondents’ lives, traditional Inuit val-ues, and the importance of different activities formaintaining an Inuit identity. The economic develop-ment over the last 50 years has meant that most in-habitants of the Arctic, including the Arctic indige-nous peoples, take part in market activities as full-time or part-time wage earners, as self-employed peo-ple and as consumers. Thus, the SLiCA questionnaireincludes questions on the respondents’ satisfactionwith the degree of market participation, and whichlifestyle they would prefer: wage employment or har-vesting, herding and processing their own food, or a

Figure 5.6. Importance of subsistence activities: hunting/fishing, gathering, preserving traditional food.Regional Surveys 2001-2006

Percentageof households

0

20

40

60

80

100


Very importantImportantNot very importantNot at all important

Source: SLiCA.

Figure 5.5. Preferred lifestyle. Regional Surveys 2001-2006

Percentageof households

0

20

40

60

80

100

AlaskaChukotkaGreenland

Self employmentBothHarvesting, herding or processing own foodWorking on a wage job

Source: SLiCA.


70

combination of market and subsistence activities. TheAlaska and Greenland answers to the question con-cerning satisfaction with a combination of market andsubsistence activities are very similar. More than 80per cent of Inuit adults in Greenland and Alaska areeither somewhat satisfied or very satisfied with thecombination of production activities that they pursue.The corresponding figure in Chukotka is 60 per cent.Comparable Canadian data are not available.

Figure 5.5 shows preferred lifestyle. In Chukotka andAlaska respondents were asked about their preferredlifestyle, being able to choose between wage employ-ment, harvest, herding and food processing or a com-bination of both wage employment and subsistenceactivities. More than 75 per cent of the Alaska Inupiatprefer a combination of harvesting, herding or pro-cessing and a wage job, whereas only 15 per cent pre-fer wage employment and one out of ten subsistenceactivities as the sole activity. In Chukotka a little morethan one out of four indigenous persons would prefera combination of activities, whereas 40 per cent pre-fer wage employment and 32 per cent choose harvest,herding and food processing activities as their pre-ferred lifestyle. In Greenland the question was askeddifferently including the possibility of choosing selfemployment. Almost 60 per cent of the GreenlandicInuit prefer wage jobs, a little more than one out offour prefer harvest, herding and food processing ac-tivities and one out of seven choose self employmentas preferred lifestyle. Though all respondents inGreenland were asked about preferences for a combi-nation of the different activities, the responses weredistinctly distributed between the response alterna-tives, not indicating combinations of alternatives, asin Alaska and Chukotka. The reasons for thesemarked differences are to be further analysed, bute.g. the criteria to get professional hunters’ status andtaxation policies in Greenland might be consideredobstacles to preferring a combination of productionactivities.

To some extent, different preferences across the re-gions may reflect what the respondents perceive aspossible and available options. It might therefore alsoreflect the fact that employment opportunities andthe conditions for subsistence activities differ be-tween the regions.

Traditional valuesAll respondents were asked a number of questions ontraditional values and urged to indicate how impor-tant they found different activities and customs formaintaining their Inuit identity. Figure 5.6 shows therespondents’ evaluation of three subsistence activitiesin which they engage: hunting and fishing, harvestingof wild berries and plants (gathering), and preservingtraditional food.

Figure 5.6 shows that almost all Inuit adults considerhunting/fishing, gathering and traditional food pre-serving activities important to their Inuit identity. Toconclude, the preliminary findings reported in thesefigures show that subsistence activities among the In-uits in the Arctic are highly important as contribu-tions to the diet, to consumption possibilities and tocultural identity. The fact that it is difficult to distin-guish between the motivations for different aspects ofsubsistence activities reflects the intertwined natureof economy and culture in the Arctic.

Subsistence activities in CanadaIn Canada, only the Northwest Territoriesseem to have a continuous record of nativeharvests, starting in 1975 with the JamesBay and Northern Quebec Agreement. In1982, aboriginal rights were placed underthe protection of the Canadian Constitutionas charter rights. A recent study19 reportsfrom surveys that «compare Inuvialuit use ofthe Beaufort Sea and its resources in the1960s and the 1990s», and shows that, «con-trary to many predictions in the 1960s, sub-sistence harvesting persists as a significanteconomic as well as cultural preoccupationin the lives of Inuvialuit today».

The Nunavut Land Claims Agreement (NL-CA) from 1993 required that: «A Nunavut

Table 5.1. Hunters and harvested animals. Canada.Annual average 1996-2001

Species Number of Number ofanimals harvested hunters

Caribou .............................. 25 000 3 000Ringed seal ........................ 25 000 2 700Ptarmigan .......................... 14 000 1 500Eider duck .......................... 6 000 950Arctic char .......................... 200 000 3 200Mussels .............................. 25 000 71

Source: NWHS.

Photo: Birger Poppel.


71

Wildlife Harvest Study (NWHS) shall be undertakenin, and cover, each of the three regions of theNunavut Settlement area». The purpose of the NWHSwas to establish current harvest levels, to contributeto the sound management of wildlife resources, docu-ment the levels and patterns of Inuit use of wildliferesources for the purpose of determining the basicneeds level, and analyse biological, ecological andharvest data pertinent to management of wildlife inthe Nunavut Settlement Area. The basic needs levelwas defined as the amount of harvest that is currentlytaken for domestic and cultural purposes.

As a result, the NWHS was conducted over 1996–2001. It was the largest wildlife harvest survey everundertaken in Canada. A total of 6 017 hunters weresurveyed. The mean annual response rate was 82 percent. This comprehensive study contained detailedinformation on 86 wildlife species within the follow-ing categories: big game, fur bearers, small game, ma-rine mammals, waterfowls, other birds, eggs, feath-ers, fish and shellfish. Data were presented on harvestestimates, reported hunter responses, calculated re-call periods between harvest and interview, and num-ber of hunters harvesting each species.

The NWHS estimated neither the nutritional nor themoney value of the catch to individuals, households,communities or regions. However, replacement valuefor the four main food species in Nunavut can be esti-mated from the NWHS data and from the NunavutWildlife Management Board. Replacement value isdefined as the amount of money one would have topay to purchase the harvested amount of meat andfish from a store. The replacement value of food har-vested by Nunavut Inuit has been estimated at be-tween 30 and 35 million CDD per year20.

In 2006, the first results from the combined «2001Aboriginal Peoples Survey and Survey of Living Con-ditions in the Arctic» were published21. More than 4700 Inuit adults (15 years of age and over) wereasked about their harvest activities (hunting, fishing,trapping and gathering), and their perceptions of thefuture for harvesting. A summary of the results pub-lished in the report concerning harvest and countryfood shows that seven in ten Inuit adults in the Cana-dian Arctic harvested traditional food in the year be-fore the survey. The average within the regions variedfrom roughly eight out of ten Inuit adults in Nunavik(81 per cent) and Labrador (76 per cent) to less thansix out of ten in the Inuvialuit region (55 per cent).On average, more men (80 per cent) harvested thanwomen (63 per cent) and the tendency that menwere more likely to harvest was reflected in all agegroups. Middle-aged men and women (45–54 years ofage) were most likely to harvest and nine out of tenmen, compared with seven out of ten women, weremost likely to prepare for the harvest.

The respondents were asked about their perceptionsof the future for harvesting, and 49 per cent thoughtthat harvesting would remain the same over the nextfive years, whereas 21 per cent thought the activitieswould increase. The main reason stated for increasingactivity was that more household members wouldtake part in harvesting. Of the respondents, 13 percent were of the opinion that harvesting activitieswould decrease and, of those, one-third referred tofewer resources to harvest or fish and game becomingscarcer. In almost four out of ten Inuit households,country food made up more than half of the fish andmeat eaten. In another third of the Inuit households,about half of the fish and meat eaten was countryfood. Most households (almost 80 per cent) in Nuna-vik answered that at least half of the fish and meateaten was country food. In Labrador, the percentagewas 66, whereas 45 per cent of the Inuit children inthe Canadian Arctic had wild meat five days or morea week and 20 per cent fish or seafood. The diet ofthe children varied over the Arctic. In Labrador, thefewest Inuit children ate wild meat and fish. In Nuna-vik, in the Nunavut and Inuvialuit regions, between45 and 50 per cent of the children ate wild meat atleast five days a week and between 14 per cent in theInuvialuit region and 30 per cent in Nunavut had fishor seafood five days or more. Finally, the study con-firmed that the tradition of sharing country food isstill alive, as nine out of ten households reportedsharing with family and/or community members.

Subsistence activities in GreenlandArchaeological studies of settlements along the coastsof Greenland document that, not only did the differ-ent groups of Inuit migrating to Greenland live fromhunting and fishing, but there has also been a diversi-fied exploitation of wildlife. The excavations atQeqertasussuk in the vicinity of Qasigiannguit in Dis-co Bay contain a particularly extensive example, withrelics from 45 different species (mammals, fowl, fish,mussels and snails) as well as tackle – including somemade of whalebone and baleen, contributing to thepicture of a diversified use of living resources.22 Formore than 250 years, hunting for food and clothingand maintaining social relationships and cultural tra-

Barrow. Bowhead in lead. Photo: Jack Kruse


72

ditions has coexisted with hunting for trade. Incomefrom this trading is, to some extent, a condition forcontinued hunting, by providing necessary cash in-come to buy hunting gear and boats23.

The political and economic changes in the period af-ter the Second World War led to profound changes inthe traditional Greenland fishing and hunting culture,and hence in the traditional social structures. Thetransition to a monetary economy, the educationalmobility and increased urbanization have meant thatthe norm, value and prestige systems in Greenlandsociety today are no longer so closely linked to subsis-tence production in extended families in small closedcommunities24. Social values have increasingly be-come linked to wage earning in a more globalizedand open society. In 1945, it was estimated that 66per cent of the labour force in a population of 21 412individuals were involved in hunting and fishing. In1996, this proportion had decreased to approximately25 per cent. This figure also includes people workingin the modern fishing industry. However, communitystudies from the 1970s and more recent studies of lo-cal Greenlandic communities and settlements confirmthat the introduction of wage labour in the Greenlan-dic society has by no means brought hunting and fish-ing for personal consumption, for sharing, or for localsale, to an end. Two studies25 conducted from 2003 to2006 contribute data to the understanding of the sub-sistence economy and the way it is mixed with thecash economy in contemporary Greenland.

In 1994, Statistics Greenland conducted a living con-ditions survey including the importance of subsistenceactivities to the Greenlanders. This was measured asthe participation in (subsistence) hunting and fishingactivities and as the contribution to the food supply ofthe various households. According to the survey, 67per cent of those with wage labour as their main in-come source were engaged in small-scale fishing and/or hunting (the corresponding figure for the inhabit-ants of towns26 was 28 per cent). In total, 80 per centof the households in the settlements hunt sea or landmammals and/or fish for the consumption of thehousehold (or the sledge dogs) as a necessary supple-ment to their wage incomes27. These figures show theimportance to the Greenlandic Inuit of having access tohunting and fishing activities and a significant differ-ence between ways of life in towns and settlements.

Socio-economic analysis of the GreenlandhuntersA socio-economic analysis of the Greenland hunterswas conducted in 2003–2005, surveying their catchesby species, expenses on hunting and fishing equip-ment, and attitudes to professional hunting28. Thestudy combined register data and personal survey da-ta. In the period surveyed (1987–2002), a total num-ber of 36 931 people (27 711 men and 9 220 women)were engaged in fishing and hunting activities. From

1993 to 2002, the number of people with a profes-sional/full-time hunter’s licence was reduced from6 560 to 3 083, whereas the number of people with aleisure-time hunter’s licence increased from 6 554 to8 398. The average age of professional hunters in-creased due to the lower recruitment of young hunt-ers. The average size of the hunters’ households wasequal to that of other households except in the settle-ments where there were more large and single-personhouseholds. There are, on average, more profession-al/full-time hunter’s licences in households in the set-tlements than in the towns. Whereas the profession ofhunting tended to continue from one generation tothe next, it now seems that being a professional hunt-er ranks low among the youth and is given low priori-ty in recommendations from parents. If the decreasein the number of professional hunters continues, theprofession will be extinct within a generation. A re-cruitment of a minimum of 40 new hunters annuallywould mean that the current number of hunters couldbe maintained.

The formal economy includes all economic transac-tions that are officially recorded and represent poten-tial tax objects, whereas the informal economy in-cludes all other economic activities. Estimating thetotal value of informal supply leads to an estimate be-tween 80 and 180 million DKK at purchaser prices, atthe local market. The proportion of the total valuecoming from the catches of professional hunters is80–90 per cent, whereas the contribution by leisure-time hunters amounts to 10–20 per cent. The value of

Photo: Birger Poppel.


73

minus costs, 121 million DKK, for hunting activitieswithin the informal economy contributed roughly to1.3 per cent of the total Greenlandic GDP of 9 040million DKK, in 2001. Although the value of the sub-sistence activities might seem negligible when mea-sured as a fraction of GDP, the subsistence activitiescontribute substantially to household consumptionand well-being. More focus on consumption data on acircumpolar basis is needed to document the contri-bution of subsistence to household consumption andwell-being.

The survey shows that cash income and subsistenceare of vital importance for the hunters and fishermen.There are major regional differences in hunters’ cashincomes. On average, the cash income of hunters inNorth and East Greenland is about 65 000 DKK, andin other regions of Greenland about 130 000 DKK.The hunter’s contribution to total household incomeamounts to between 40 per cent for hunters in Northand East Greenland and 25 per cent for hunters in therest of Greenland. A large number of hunters are sin-gle or members of low-income households, for whichthe products from hunting and fishing for the house-hold’s diet are of great significance. When the totalvalue of professional hunting activities, 130 millionDKK, is divided by the number of hunters, we findthat each hunter contributes to the household withhunting and fishing products plus cash from privatesales worth 42 000 DKK.

Table 5.5 shows that investments (including vessels,outboard motors, snow mobiles, dog sledges, rifles,shotguns, fishing nets and other equipment) were es-timated at 265 million DKK.

Table 5.6 shows that the total informal production isalmost as large as total sales value for hunting activi-ties.

the catches that are not sold to production plants orused to feed sledge dogs is estimated to be roughly130 million DKK. This number can be broken downinto the following categories as shown in Table 5.2.A little more than half of the informal transactionscome from activities within the towns and the restcomes from activities in the settlements. A third ofthe value comes from hunting marine and terrestrialmammals and fowl, and two-thirds comes from fishand fish products. The total value of the catches ofleisure-time hunters is estimated at 52 million DKK(see Table 5.3). Hence, the total value of informalproduction is 182 million DKK.

To estimate the contribution of informal productionto the Greenlandic GDP, it is necessary to estimateand subtract the variable costs of production. Table5.4 shows that variable costs for professional huntersamount to 153 million DKK, however, this numbercomprises both the formal (market) and informal(subsistence) activities of the professional hunters.

In order to calculate the contribution to GDP of infor-mal subsistence activities, the costs need to be allocat-ed between formal and informal activities. It is esti-mated that informal activities represent 40 per cent ofthe costs, or 61 million DKK for the professional hunt-ers. The costs for leisure-time hunters are unknown.Assume that these costs are zero. Then the value

Table 5.2. Contribution of professional hunters to the infor-mal economy in Greenland. Annual average 1993-2002. Million DKK

Type of activity Total value

Own consumption .......................................................... 46Gifts ............................................................................... 24Private sale ..................................................................... 10Sale to restaurants ......................................................... 6Sale to institutions .......................................................... 6Sale at market ................................................................ 38Total ............................................................................. 130

Source: Rasmussen (2005).

Table 5.3. Value of informal production by professional andleisure-time hunters in Greenland. 2004. Million DKK

Activity Total value

Professionals .................................................................. 130Leisure-time hunters ....................................................... 52Total ............................................................................. 182Source: Rasmussen (2005).

Table 5.4. Variable costs for professional hunters and fisher-men in Greenland. 2004. Million DKK

Equipment Towns Settlements Total

Boats .................................... 34 32 66Snowmobiles ....................... 2 2 4Dog sledges ......................... 10 11 21Other types .......................... 33 29 62Total ................................... 79 74 153


Table 5.5. Investments by professional and leisure-timehunters in Greenland. 2004. Million DKK

Type of equipment Towns Settlements Total

Boats .................................... 73 89 162Snowmobiles ....................... 3 3 6Dog sledges ......................... 4 5 9Other types .......................... 47 41 88Total ................................... 127 138 265


Table 5.6. Total estimated sales value and value of informaleconomic activities by professional and leisure-timehunters in Greenland. Annual average 1993-2002.Million DKK

Professional Leisure-time Totalhunters hunters

Sale ...................................... 196 10 206Informal value ...................... 130 52 182



74

Reindeer husbandryReindeer and caribou represent principle subsistenceresources for many indigenous people of the rural re-gions of the Arctic29. Their value as nutritional andeconomic resource is closely connected to their valuein maintaining culture and identity. The sustainabilityof reindeer and caribou herding and hunting relatesto ecology, socio-economic conditions and the trans-mission of cultural tradition from one generation tothe next, as well as political processes at a regional,national and international level. The following briefpresentations of reindeer husbandry in Norway, Swe-den and Russia give an introduction to the topic andpresent some findings from two recent reports on re-indeer herding and hunting30.

Reindeer husbandry in Norway31

Reindeer husbandry in Norway is organized within sixofficial grazing areas. Each grazing area is divided in-to districts containing several production units with alicence that determines each individual herder’s graz-ing rights. The «1978 Reindeer Husbandry Act» intro-duced the production unit to restrict individual accessto the industry and to avoid overgrazing. The oldestand original indigenous organization in reindeer hus-bandry is the siida. A siida is a herding partnershipbased on bilateral kin relations and has existed as acultural institution for hundreds of years. The siida isat the same time an extended family and an organiza-tion of the labour force. Family members may bemembers of different siidas during winter and sum-mer. When the herd is grazing on winter pasture, afamily unit may belong to one siida and, while theherd is grazing on summer pasture, they may bemembers of another siida. This flexible organizationof the herd and their owners is determined by thegrazing conditions of the herds, and depends on fami-ly patterns derived from interfamily relationships.

Each reindeer has an individual owner. All deerowned by a nuclear family constitute one or severallicensed production units. In this extended family,they make a siida that now and traditionally, in legal

terms, has an assigned grazing area at its disposal.The six herding districts in Norway consist of almost600 production units. Although there are only ap-proximately 600 licensed production units in Norway,as many as 2 200 family members are, in one way orthe other, involved in daily or periodical reindeerherding activities. Reindeer husbandry is, thus, a fam-ily business that requires the efforts of several siidamembers.

The concept of value entirely focused on economicsonly explains, to a limited extent, the values in aherding world. Throughout the Arctic region in theareas where herding is taking place, hunting andherding were the original basis for human existencein these remote landscapes. From time immemorial,different indigenous groups hunted the migrating re-indeer herds and, from the mid 1600s, started keep-ing them in herds. This fact must be considered whenthe economy of the herding business is to be account-ed for. There are no alternatives to careful handlingof the pastures in sustaining reindeer herding and theculture and livelihood it gives rise to. A myopic un-derstanding of improving the economy immediatelybrings reindeer herding into conflict with issues af-fecting the sustainability of the herders’ way of life. If,for example, the number of reindeer is increased forthe purpose of improving income in the short-run,this strategy will result in overgrazed pastures that inthe longer run will badly affect the economy of thesiida, as has happened in Norway, Sweden, and Fin-land32.

Originally, the herding business was a way of livingrather than a way of earning money. To a large ex-tent, reindeer herding works as an informal subsis-tence economy. Each siida or production unit shouldbe concerned with a whole range of issues affectingthe business. The herding activity cannot be separat-ed from the responsibility the herding world musttake for the Saami traditions, as a whole. For a longtime, especially from the 1850s to 1970, when theNorwegian authorities pursued a rather harsh policy

Photo: Jens-Ivar Nergård

Chukotka race. Photo: Jack Kruse


75

towards the Saami, the herding siidas were thestronghold of the Saami language and Saami tradi-tion. Herding has always been seen, by the outsider,as the leading Saami activity. When the Saami identi-ty revitalized in the 1980s, reindeer herding had aleading effect on the process, politically and symboli-cally.

Reindeer herding has gained knowledge from experi-ence through generations.33 Even though the siidamembers have ownership of the herd in legal terms,they are, at the same time, taking care of it on behalfof the next generation. Being responsible for its owngrazing land means that each siida needs sophisticat-ed knowledge and skills to handle the herd within itsparticular landscape. To this responsibility belongsthe knowledge of experience gained through genera-tions of handling the herd in the particular areas thesiida has at its disposal. This knowledge is referred to,by the outsider, as indigenous or traditional knowl-edge and is sometimes seen as less valuable and reli-able than modern scientific knowledge. Traditionalknowledge is sometimes handled within a spiritualframe of reference.34 One reason this knowledge isseen as somewhat obscure from an outsider’s point ofview is its attachment to the traditional narratives,having a strong cultural and religious flavour. The ex-perience of previous generations is, using a Mali-nowskian term, called sacralizen and communicatedwith narratives about the landscape handed downfrom one generation to the next35. Together with thesophisticated knowledge of an actual landscape, thisexperience works as a leading principle for harvestingof nature and natural resources – also seen as a pro-tection against overloading grazing land with herdsthat are too large. In order to keep the herds in thebest possible condition, the grazing areas must like-wise, be kept in the best condition. This is perhapsthe most important source of the values that haveguided the traditional herding economy for hundredsof years to the present day. This is also the most im-portant source of conflict with the Norwegian author-ities over strategies to improve the economy of Nor-

wegian reindeer husbandry, avoid overgrazing, andpromote sustainable development.

The composition of animal categories within a rein-deer herd is an important issue to address. Reindeerare considered herd animals, which mean that theyprefer to graze and move together. The female rein-deer graze in large groups, while the male reindeersometimes stray in search of more remote pasture ar-eas. However, the female reindeer tend to follow themovements of the males, resulting in the relocation ofseveral smaller groups consisting of male reindeer,female reindeer and calves. When the animals scatter,the herd grazes in several different places, whichtends to secure the quality of the pastures.

A herd with fewer male reindeer tends to graze in amore concentrated area, often with damaging effectson the pastures. When grazing exceeds the carryingcapacity, the land is overgrazed. A policy that aims toimprove the pastures and regain carrying capacitymust include traditional herders’ knowledge of herdstructure, herd composition and balanced grazing.Overgrazing is, thus, not just the result of increasedanimal numbers, but also a consequence of composi-tional and structural change within the herd.

The average production unit within a siida is partlycommercial and partly based on subsistence produc-tion, where women, especially, contribute largely tothe economy. Women quite rarely feature as ownersof the siida production units (less than 10 per cent),but they take part in herding activities in their sparetime away from their work in the home village of theherding family. They are active members of the herd-ing unit when the calves are marked during the sum-mer season and during the slaughtering season in lateSeptember. They are responsible for preserving theskins and preparing them as raw material for doudji,i.e. craft. In many families, this craft contributes tothe economy in terms of products for sale during thetourist season and as production of suitable clothes,such as footwear (skaller, komager), coats (pesker),

Photo: Jens-Ivar Nergård Photo: Jens-Ivar Nergård


76

etc. Women also receive income from paid employ-ment in the village. Women are the important teach-ers of Saami knowledge and tradition to their chil-dren. This teaching always takes a practical form.Hence, women are largely the carriers of the culturalcapital of the siida and herding family. An overall goalof the siida, and the nuclear family, is the mainte-nance of Saami tradition, Saami language and Saamicustoms. This maintenance entails a wide range ofactivities taking non-economic forms. The very main-tenance of Saami tradition, of herding knowledge,understanding nature, and sharing natural resourcesis the basis of the herding economy.

Reindeer husbandry in Sweden36

Reindeer are herded over an area of approximately160 000 square kilometres, or about 34 per cent ofthe area of Sweden. The topography includes a vary-ing landscape where forest, tundra and high moun-tains are all important pastures. The reindeer industryis divided into two main groups: forest and mountainreindeer husbandry. The first group stays in the forestduring both summer and winter, while the secondgroup uses the forest only as winter pasture and therest of the year is spent in the mountain regions onboth sides of the Norwegian–Swedish border.

The Swedish Reindeer Herding Act 1971 regulates allreindeer herding activity in Sweden. As with the Nor-wegian case, the Act secures reindeer herding as anexclusive right for the Saami people of Sweden, andis of profound importance. Sweden, like Norway, hasone exception to this rule: a limited reindeer herdingarea below Lappmarksgränsen (the Saami territoryborder) in the Kalix and Torne river valleys in Norr-botten. This area is called the «Concession area» andthe reindeer owners are a mixture of Saami conces-sion holders and local farmers.

Reindeer herding is closely connected to membershipin a Saami Village. The designated pasture areas forreindeer husbandry are within the borders of theSaami Village. There are 51 Saami villages in Sweden.The northernmost Saami village is located in thecounty of Norrbotten and the southernmost is situat-ed in the county of Jämtland. According to the Swed-ish Reindeer Herding Act, a Saami village is definedas an organization that manages reindeer herding in adesignated geographical area. A Saami village is aneconomic unit, and rights concerning hunting, fishingand use of the forest are connected to membership ina Saami village, and it presumes active participationof its members in reindeer herding. The reindeer in-dustry in Sweden, including concession areas, in-volves approximately 950 private family businessunits distributed over the 51 Saami villages. A man-agement unit can be defined as an economic enter-prise managed by a responsible reindeer herder andhis/her household/family.

One difference between the economic structure of theSwedish reindeer industry and that of other Fennos-candinavian countries is the right to hunt moose, inaddition to fishing and berry picking. Fishing is gener-ally no longer an important source of income, exceptfor areas such as Jokkmokk. However, the right tohunt moose is assigned to members of the Saami vil-lages and generates a substantial income for many ofthe reindeer owners.

The price of reindeer meat is relatively low today,while the industrial costs are fairly high. The general-ly low income from reindeer husbandry often meansthat a supplementary income is required. Often it isthe women who provide the family with income fromsources other than herding. This, in turn, leads to areindeer industry dominated by men, although menoften have to work part-time as well, outside the in-dustry. A reindeer owner could have income from dif-ferent sources, but reindeer meat, compensation forloss of reindeer and income from sale of skins, ant-lers, hunting and fishing are important. For an aver-age reindeer owner, the income from meat is 43 percent, compensation for loss of reindeer is up to 20 percent, and the additional earning (hunting, fishing)amounts to 26 per cent. In addition, the average in-come from wages received from the Saami villageamounts to 11 per cent. The situation with loss ofpastures connected to infrastructure development is amajor threat to the reindeer industry in Sweden. Ajoint effort between national authorities and the rein-deer industry is needed to secure the remaining graz-ing areas.

Reindeer husbandry in RussiaReindeer herding and hunting is the economic andcultural basis of many northern indigenous peoples inRussia37. The sharp decline in harvesting of wild rein-deer in the early 1990s, see Figure 5.7, coincidedwith an increase in family-owned reindeer, see Figure5.8, in line with a move towards more private owner-ship, following the breakdown of the Soviet Union. Asillustrated in Figure 5.7, major changes in the harvestof wild reindeer took place during the 1970s and1980s, with a sharp decline in harvest level at the be-ginning of the 1990s.

The reindeer husbandry areas of Russia can be divid-ed into three zones, which differ concerning the stateof the industry, trends in change and perspective onfuture development. The North-western zone includestundra and forest tundra from the western borders ofthe Russian Federation to the Yenisei River. This is theterritory of Saami, Nenets, and Komi-izhemtsy rein-deer husbandry. Although this region is under inten-sive exploration for gas and petroleum, reindeer hus-bandry here is comparatively stable. The number ofreindeer in this area has remained constant or beenslightly reduced during the last decade. Conditions


77

for reindeer husbandry are comparatively favourablebecause of market conditions.

The North-eastern zone includes areas of tundra, foresttundra and the northern mountainous taiga to the eastof the Yenisei River. Meat-productive reindeer husband-ry is the occupation of the Evens, Chukchi and Koriaks.The number of reindeer in this region is reduced, re-sulting in increasing poverty of the indigenous popula-tion. To stabilize the situation and stop the decline inthe number of reindeer, financial support for reindeerherders’ families from regional budgets is granted, butthere is no clear effect. The future of the industry isuncertain. Reindeer husbandry here seems to developonly with other branches of the traditional economy(hunting wild reindeer, fur animals, sea mammals, fish-ing) as part of a common economic undertaking.

The Siberian Taiga zone includes all reindeer hus-bandry regions of the Siberian taiga (except northernmountainous areas). Here, many indigenous peopleare engaged in reindeer husbandry. In the Europeanpart of the territory, taiga reindeer husbandry has dis-appeared. In the Siberian taiga, it has rapidly dimin-ished; the area has been divided into separate isolat-ed lots with a few hundred reindeer in each. The pop-ulations of domesticated and wild reindeer in Russiaare now nearly equal in number, see Figure 5.8.According to official data from 1999 there were1 232 000 wild reindeer in Russia. About half of thestock of domesticated reindeer is owned by reindeerherder families and about half by collective and statereindeer enterprises.

In contrast to other countries, Russia does not haveany legislation that determines the legal status of re-indeer husbandry. The reindeer economy is regulated

by by-laws and is implied in other laws. Thus, it issubjected to management and legislation for land use,agriculture, the rights of indigenous peoples, legisla-tion on ecology and use of mineral resources. Recentlegislation has set the rules for compensation-inflicteddamages on the landowners, lessors and users of theland. This has been very important for all reindeerenterprises affected by industrial companies in theareas of extraction of oil, gas and other mineral re-sources.

The Russian Ministry of Agriculture manages the rein-deer economy at a federal level. The Department ofAgriculture within each Regional Administration isresponsible for reindeer management at the regionallevel. Traditional family-based reindeer husbandryhas been subject to major changes in external condi-tions. In the Soviet period, most reindeer husbandrywas organized as collective farms or state enterprisesand the herders and their families worked in «bri-gades». After the reforms in the 1990s, a partial re-turn to the family-based reindeer economy tookplace.

As is the situation of reindeer husbandry elsewhere inthe Arctic, the basic unit in Russia is also the family.The family is the main contributor to the transfer ofherding skills and habits, mother-tongue languages,traditional and cultural values and worldviews. Thereare four ways of operating the family-based reindeereconomy:

• the traditional organization of family nomadism(there are 3 000–4 000 nomadic families, mostlyNenets);

• the semi-traditional way of organizing the husband-ry (typically found in the brigades of the collective

Figure 5.7. Harvesting of wild reindeer in Russia. 1 000

Source: Ulvevadet and Klokov (2004), Figure 3.8, p. 85.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

1962-63 1965-66 1968-69 1971-72 1974-75 1977-78 1980-81 1983-84 1986-87 1990-91 1995-96 1998-99 2001-02

1 000


78

reindeer enterprises. Women are partly restrainedfrom living in the tundra);

• the neo-traditional type of organization where theherder families are integrated into the marketeconomy;

• disintegrated family husbandry: the husband work-ing in a herding brigade while the wife lives perma-nently in a settlement where she might have a paid job.

To conclude, «In general we find that most of the re-indeer economy in Russia is based on subsistence. De-spite the fact that most reindeer owners between1970 and 1980 received relatively high salaries fromtheir reindeer enterprises and were also considered tobe prosperous among other indigenous people, manyof them fell into poverty after the transition to a mar-ket economy.»38 The following income sources are im-portant to family-based reindeer husbandry in Russia:salaries from reindeer enterprises, pensions and wel-fare payments, sale of reindeer meat, skin and fish,sale of clothes and shoes made out of reindeer skinand sale of private reindeer. Nomadic reindeer hus-bandry is practically impossible without extra workincluding hunting, fishing and gathering: «If averageincomes are below the level of 500–600 USD a year,the indigenous population is compelled to returnfrom reindeer husbandry to other forms of economicactivity, such as subsistence fishing and hunting nearvillages.»39

Subsistence and climate changeClimate change can substantially influence the condi-tions for subsistence in the Arctic. The different signsof climate change, e.g., longer sea ice-free seasons,

soil erosion; melting glaciers creating torrents inplace of streams, and still more unpredictable weath-er, have been of growing concern to both indigenouspeoples and other Arctic residents. One of the keyconclusions of the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment(ACIA) was that numbers of marine species depen-dent on sea ice, including polar bears, ice-living seals,walrus and some marine birds are very likely to de-cline, with some species facing extinction. Moreover,environmental toxins, with a high degree of accumu-lation in northern regions, are found in Arctic animalsat increasingly high levels.

To summarize, «For the indigenous population, andparticularly for those people who depend on hunting,herding, and fishing for a living, climate change islikely to be a matter of cultural survival, however.Their uniqueness as people with cultures based onharvesting marine mammals, hunting, herding cari-bou and reindeer or fishing, is at risk because climatechange is likely to deprive them of access to their tra-ditional food resources … Today, the indigenous peo-ples live in greatly circumscribed social and economicsituations and their hunting and herding activities aredetermined to a large extent by resource manage-ment regimes and local, regional, and global econom-ic market situations that reduce their ability to adaptand cope with climate variability and change. Whilethey experience stress from other sources that threat-en their lifestyles and cultures, climate change magni-fies these threats.»40

Concluding remarksThis brief introduction into the complex reality ofsubsistence and subsistence activities as a means to

Figure 5.8. Number of family-owned (private) reindeer in Russia

Source: Ulvevadet and Klokov (2004): 64, Figure 3.2, p. 64.

1 000

0

500

1 000

1 500

2 000

2 500

2003200220012000199919981997199619951991198619811976197119661961195619511946194119341927191219060

20

40

60

80

100

Per centNumber of private reindeer, 1 000

Percentage of private reindeer, (total reindeer number = 100 per cent)


79

maintaining a cultural identity and livelihood amongArctic indigenous peoples, points to the followingconclusions.

• Hunting, herding, fishing and gathering activitiescontinue to be of major significance to the indige-nous peoples of the Arctic in providing food, socialrelationships and cultural identity.

• Subsistence activities and the cash economy jointlyprovide the consumption possibilities, and thesubsistence activities are an integrated part of alifestyle that embodies the importance of continuity,sharing and connection to nature.

• Sufficient and comparative data on the subsistenceeconomy and its importance for household con-sumption and well-being are not yet available on acircumpolar basis.

• Gaps in knowledge on the value of harvesting,consumption of wildlife, costs of harvesting and theeconomic significance to the households of theArctic imply a lack of recognition of activities thatare crucial to indigenous peoples and a lack ofrecognition of the indigenous people’s contributionto the total production and consumption in society.

• In international and some national legislation,subsistence is not considered part of, nor linked, tothe modern cash economy. Rather, subsistenceactivities are seen as existing separately from mar-ket-oriented activities.

• More relevant statistics are needed to evaluate thedevelopment of central economic indicators ofimportance to the indigenous population groups –and hence to evaluate development according tointernational conventions, as, for example, agreedupon in the International Labour Organization(ILO) Convention No 169: The Indigenous andTribal Populations Convention from 1989.41

• Continued documentation is needed on the loca-tion, participation levels and costs of subsistenceharvesting activities. Circumpolar, standardized,comparative and reliable data on subsistence pro-duction and consumption are required. Proven andup-to-date methods to generalize about cost levelsand the relationship of inputs to outputs in thesubsistence activities and environmental impactassessment are also required. Dialogue between thedifferent end-users and stakeholders: indigenousrepresentatives and other Arctic residents, dataproducers at local, regional and national level –including statistical institutions, other stakeholdersand policy-makers at regional, national and interna-tional levels, must take place.

• Further research is needed into the link betweenthe subsistence sector and the market sector, andthe potential consequences for households andcommunities of diminishing foundations for localsubsistence activities. Subsistence activities, in a

similar way as unpaid household work in «satelliteaccounts», i.e., supplementary accounts to thenational accounts42, should be measured in order toensure that the value of subsistence activities istaken into account. Research should also be under-taken into economic development that facilitatesthe continuation of subsistence activities and asubsistence mode of production mixed with marketactivities. The effect of climate change on the sub-sistence way of living also requires more research.

• To further document the significance of subsistenceactivities within the subsistence-based mixed econo-mies of the Arctic, to develop analyses and recom-mendations and to contribute to the follow up onthe above-mentioned recommendations, a workinggroup within the ECONOR project should be creat-ed.

Notes1 Birger Poppel is formerly Head of Statistics Greenland, is Sen-

ior Researcher at Ilisimatusarfik, University of Greenland andProject Chief, Survey of Living Conditions in the Arctic/SLiCA,www.arcticlivingconditions.org. The sections in this chapter onreindeer husbandry in Norway and Sweden are written byJens-Ivar Nergård and Johnny-Leo Jernsletten, respectively,both at University of Tromsø, Norway. The author is grateful toIulie Aslaksen, Yvon Csonka, Jens Dahl, Rune Fjellheim,Solveig Glomsrød, Jack Hicks, Jack Kruse, Finn Lynge, PeterNielsen, Carl Christian Olsen (Puju) and Rasmus Ole Rasmus-sen for helpful comments.

2 Lynge, F. (1998): Subsistence Value and Ethics. Address to theGeneral Assembly of the Inuit Circumpolar Council. Nuuk.

3 The Arctic Council members are the eight Arctic countries:Canada, Denmark/Greenland/The Faroe Islands, Finland, Ice-land, Norway, Russia, Sweden, USA, and organizations of theIndigenous Peoples of the Arctic: Aleut International Associa-tion, Arctic Athabascan Council, Gwich’in Council Internation-al, Inuit Circumpolar Conference, Russian Association of Indig-enous Peoples of the North, and Saami Council.

4 AMAP (1998): Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program, Arc-tic Council. 1998. AHDR (2004): Arctic Human DevelopmentReport. Arctic Council. 2004. ACIA (2005): Arctic Climate Im-pact Assessment Program. Arctic Council. 2005.

5 Among others the following terms have been used: mixedcash/subsistence or subsistence-based economies, see Hovel-srud-Broda, G. (1997): The Seal: Integration of an East Green-landic Economy. A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty ofGraduate School of Arts and Sciences, Brandeis University,Dept. of Anthropology; mixed subsistence-market systems /mixed subsistence-cash economies, see Wolfe, R.J. (1998):Subsistence Economies in Rural Alaska. Cultural Survival Quar-terly 22:3. Alaska Department of Fish and Game. Division ofSubsistence. Juneau, Alaska; mixed subsistence-based econo-mies in which the harvesting of country food for primarily do-mestic consumption plays a significant role in their economiesand cultures, see Usher, P. J. (2003): Environment, race andnation reconsidered: reflections on Aboriginal land claims inCanada. Wiley Lecture. The Canadian Geographer/Le Géogra-phy canadien 47:4, 365–382.

6 Kassam, K.-A. (2004): Hunting, Subsistence. In: Mark Nuttall:Encyclopedia of the Arctic, Routledge, New York.

7 Wolfe, R.J. and R.J. Walker (1987): Subsistence economies inAlaska: Productivity, geography, and development impacts.Arctic Anthropology 24:56–81.

8 Inuit Circumpolar Council 1992: Principles and Elements for aComprehensive Arctic Policy. Centre for Northern Studies andResearch. Montreal, Quebec. Inuit Circumpolar Council is an


80

NGO representing approximately 150 000 Inuit living in theArctic regions of Alaska, Canada, Greenland and Chukotka,Russia (http://www.inuit.org/).

9 Huntington, H.P. (1992): Wildlife Management and SubsistenceHunting in Alaska. Seattle: University Press. ANILCA, AlaskaNational Interests Land Conservation Act. 1980. Pub. L. No 96-497, 94 Stat. 2371. ANCSA, Alaska Native Claims SettlementAct. 1971. Pub. L. No 92203, 85 Stat. 688.

10 Beazley, M. (1993): Caring for the Earth: A Strategy for Surviv-al. Published in association with IUCN, UNEP and WWF.

11 See e.g. Kruse, J. (1991): Alaska Inupiat Subsistence andWage Employment Patterns: Understanding individual Choice.Human Organization, 50(4):317–326, Rasmussen, R.O.(2000): Formal economy, renewable resources and structuralchange in West Greenland. Èconomie contemporaire. Present-day economy. Études/Inuit/Studies 24(1):41–78, Dahl, J.(1989): The Integrative and Cultural Role of Hunting and Sub-sistence in Greenland, Etudes Inuit Studies 13(1):23–42, Hertz,O. (1995): Økologi og Levevilkår i Arktis: Uummannarmiut.Christian Ejlers’ Forlag. Mellemfolkeligt Samvirke, Krupnik, I.(1993): Arctic Adaptations: Native Whalers and Reindeer Herd-ers of Northern Eurasia. Dartmouth College, University Press ofNew England, Hanover and London, Hovelsrud-Broda, G.(1997), see note 5, Duhaime, G. et al. (2002): Food Consump-tion Patterns and Socioeconomic Factors among the Inuit ofNunavik. Ecology of Food and Nutrition, 41, 91–118, Duhaime,G. and N. Bernard (2006): Arctic Food Security. (To be pub-lished 2006/07), Nuttall, M. (1992): Arctic Homelands: KinshipCommunity and Development in Northwest Greenland. Universi-ty of Toronto Press, Huntington, H.P. (1992), see note 9,Wolfe, R.J. (1998), see note 5, Wenzel, G. et al. (2000): TheSocial Economy of Sharing: Resource Allocation and ModernHunter-Gatherers. Senri Ethnological Studies. National Muse-um of Ethnology, Osaka, Lynge, F. (1998), see note 2, Gumbay(2003): Making a Living: Place and the Commoditisation ofCountry Foods in a Nunavik Community. A thesis submitted tothe Department of Geography, Queen’s University, Kingston,Ontario, Canada. Moreover, household activities like cooking,cleaning, childcare, etc. are included in SLiCA, but not ana-lyzed in this chapter. Despite the fact that these activities arecrucial to family well-being everywhere in the world, they areusually not accounted for in economic valuation. For a discus-sion and analysis of unvalued housework see e.g. Waring, M.(1988): If Women Counted. Macmillan, London.

12 Usher, P.J., G. Duhaime and E. Searles. (2003): The Householdas an Economic Unit in Arctic Aboriginal Communities, and itsMeasurement by Means of a Comprehensive Survey, Social In-dicators Research. 61: 175-203. Kluwer Academic Publishers.

13 Kruse, J. (1991): Alaska Inupiat Subsistence and Wage Em-ployment Patterns: Understanding individual Choice. HumanOrganization, 50(4):317–326.

14 Krupnik, I. (1993): Arctic Adaptations: Native Whalers andReindeer Herders of Northern Eurasia. DartmouthCollege,University Press of New England, Hanover and Lon-don.

15 www.subsistence.adfg.state.ak.us.16 Andersen, T. and B. Poppel (2002): Living Conditions in the

Arctic. In: Michael R. Hagerty, Vogel, J. and Møller,V. ed.: As-sessing Quality of Life and Living Conditions to Guide NationalPolicy. The State of the Art. Social Indicators Research Series,Vol. 11. Kluwer Academic Publishers. Reprinted from: SocialIndicator Research 58, Nos. 1-3 (June 2002): 91-216, 2002,Andersen, T. (2006): Living Conditions Research in the Arctic.How to measure Living Conditions and Individual Well-beingamong Inuit and Sami in the Arctic. To be published 2006/07.

17 The development of the analytical concepts, the database andthe SPSS syntax is chiefly the result of the joint efforts of JackKruse, Program Director and Marg Kruse, Research Assistant.

18 Petersen, R. (1985): The Use of Certain Symbols in Connectionwith Greenlandic Identity. In: Brøsted et al. (eds). The Questfor Nationhood of Indigenous Peoples. Bergen: Universitetsfor-

laget, Roepstorff, A. (1997): Den symbolske betydning af Ka-laalimernit [The Symbolic Significance of Kalaalimernit]. Ka-laalimerniit. Inussuk – Arktisk Forskningsjournal 1, 1997.

19 Usher, P.J. (2002): Inuvialuit Use of the Beaufort Sea and itsResources, 1960–2000. Arctic 55 (Supplement 1):18-28.

20 Hicks, J. and G. White ( 2000): Nunavut: Inuit self determi-nation through a land claim and Public government. In: Dahl,J., J. Hicks and P. Jull. (eds.) Nunavut - Inuit Regain Control oftheir Lands and their Lives. IWGIA doc. N. 102.

21 Statistics Canada (2006): Harvesting and community well-being among Inuit in the Arctic: Preliminary findings from the2001 Aboriginal Peoples Survey – Survey of Living Conditionsin the Arctic. Ottawa.

22 Bjarne Grønnow og Morten Meldgaard i Naturens Verden1988: 11–12.

23 Marquardt, O. and R.A. Caulfield (1996): Development ofWest Greenlandic Markets for Country Foods since the 18thCentury. Arctic, 49(2):107–119.

24 Hertz, O. (1995): Økologi og Levevilkår i Arktis: Uumman-narmiut. Christian Ejlers’ Forlag. Mellemfolkeligt Samvirke.

25 Rasmussen, R.O. (2005): Socioøkonomisk analyse af fanger-erhvervet i Grønland [Socio-economic analysis of the Greenlandhunters]. Prepared under contract to the Greenland Home RuleGovernment, Department of Fisheries and Hunting, Poppel, B.(2006): Levevilkår i Grønland 2004-06 [Living Conditions inGreenland 2004-06] forthcoming.

26 There is no official distinction between the concepts of«towns» and «settlements» in Greenland. In practice, however,the «capitals» of the 18 municipalities are classified as towns,while other inhabited places are classified as settlements. Thenumber of persons living in different towns ranges from 550to 14 000, whereas the population in the settlements variesfrom 25 to 500 persons.

27 Andersen, T. (1995): Living Conditions in Greenlandic Settle-ments. Statistics Greenland. Nuuk.

28 Rasmussen (2005), R.O.: Socioøkonomisk analyse af fanger-erhvervet i Grønland [Socio-economic analysis of the Greenlandhunters]. Prepared under contract to the Greenland Home RuleGovernment, Department of Fisheries and Hunting. 2005.

29 Fishing is also important to many Saami communities but isnot dealt with in the chapter.

30 Jernsletten, J.-L. and K. Klokov (2002): Sustainable ReindeerHusbandry. Centre for Saami Studies, University of Tromsø,Ulvevadet, B. and K. Klokov (2004): Family-Based ReindeerHerding and Hunting Economies, and the Status and Manage-ment of Wild Reindeer/Caribou Populations. Centre for SaamiStudies, University of Tromsø.

31 The section on reindeer husbandry in Norway is written byJens-Ivar Nergård, Faculty of Social Sciences, University ofTromsø, Norway.

32 Moen, J. and O. Danell (2003): Reindeer in the SwedishMountains: An Assessment of Grazing Impacts. Ambio, 32,397–402.

33 Nergård, J.-I. (2006): Den levende erfaring (The living experi-ence), Cappelen Akademisk Forlag, Oslo.

34 The sacred landscape, in Jones and Schanke: Landscape, Lawand Cusomary Rights. Diedud nr. 3, 2004 (Sami Institutha).

35 Malinowski, B. (1954): Magic, Science and Religion. GardenCity, NY: Doubleday.

36 The section on reindeer husbandry in Sweden is written byJohnny-Leo L. Jernsletten, Centre for Saami Studies, Universi-ty of Tromsø, Norway.

37 This section relies on two reports by Ulvevadet and Klokov(2004) and Jernsletten and Klokov (2002), see note 30.

38 Ulvevadet and Klokov (2004), see note 30.39 Jernsletten and Klokov (2002), see note 30.40 Weller, G. (2005): Summary and Synthesis of the ACIA. In:

Arctic Climate Impact Assessment, ACIA Science Report. Chapter18: 990–1020. Cambridge University Press.

41 ILO (1989): ILO Convention No 169: The Indigenous and TribalPopulations Convention.

42 United Nations (1993): System of National Accounts 1993.

Date post:	25-Jun-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

5. Interdependency of subsistence and market economies in ... · The Economy of the North...

Documents