The Changing Arctic Contents

4Commercialisation of the Arctic

Sustainable development in the Arctic

111.As the Arctic changes and warms new economic and social opportunities have the potential to be created. Reduced sea ice is making the Arctic more accessible and navigable, especially in the summer. The Scottish Association for Marine Science (SAMS) notes that increased shipping, exploitation of newly available mineral resources and tourism are among the opportunities available.163 The United States Geological Survey (USGS) estimates that about 30 percent of the world’s undiscovered gas and 13 percent of the world’s undiscovered oil may be found in the Arctic, mostly offshore and under less than 500 metres of water. It may or may not be commercially recoverable. SAMS suggests that UK Arctic policy “must balance new economic and social opportunities with environmental concerns, particularly as our international relationships change with the advent of Brexit.”

112.Mismanagement of the new opportunities in the Arctic created through climate change could have a profound impact on the environmental and social stability of the region. Professor Wolff from the Royal Society told us that if growing access to the Arctic due to melting ice is completely unmanaged it would be “quite horrendous.”164 Rod Downie from the WWF told us that “the actions of nations that sit outside of the Arctic have quite dire and important consequences for sustainable development in the Arctic.”165 As our expert witnesses reiterated, the Arctic is intimately connected to global actors, processes, and markets.166

113.One of the key changes between the UK’s first Arctic policy and the revised 2018 version is the explicit inclusion of sustainable development. Jane Rumble of the FCO, explained this development of the policy:

In the original report, we probably put the focus a bit more on responsible development. It was feedback from NGOs that said we should say “sustainable”. We had a long discussion on what is the difference between “responsible” and “sustainable”. Of course, there is a clear difference. We wanted to bring out that actually under responsible we sort of meant to include the whole umbrella of looking at these things from the pillars of sustainable development, so in the second report we just made that much more explicit.167

114.Rod Downie of WWF told us that the shift from responsible development to sustainable development was “very important” and that WWF had influenced the FCO to recognise the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in Arctic policy.168 Sustainable development is an established focus for the Arctic States. Under the current two-year Finnish Chairmanship of the Arctic Council, the SDGs have been established as a key priority alongside the Paris Agreement on Climate Change.169

115.UK Arctic Policy has identified three SDGs as particularly relevant to the Arctic; Climate Action (Goal 13), Life Below Water (Goal 14) and Life on Land (Goal 15) which focuses on biodiversity.170 The Minister for the Polar Regions explained that “the entire policy… is essentially inspired by and consistent with the SDGs, because it is our broader climate change policy; it is biodiversity and making sure that any development does not undermine the environmental quality of the Arctic.”171 Beyond the Ice states:

When the United Nations set the Global Goals for Sustainable Development in 2015, it recognised the importance of taking urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts; to conserving and sustainably using marine resources; and of life on land. The UK is firmly committed to delivering the Goals at home and around the World.172

Supporting sustainable economic development

116.New commercial opportunities emerging in the Arctic could benefit the numerous communities living there, if managed appropriately. Professor Wolff, from the Royal Society, explained that the G7 Academy has launched a new collaborative research effort on the subject The Global Arctic: the sustainability of communities in the context of changing ocean systems:

It [the G7 statement] particularly commented on the aspect that there are commercial opportunities in the Arctic that could help the livelihoods of people living in the Arctic but that assessing how to make those work for people in the Arctic rather than just for everybody else, rather than just being an imposition… does require a lot of thought and a lot of work.173

117.Dr Alexandra Middleton, Assistant Professor at the University of Oulu, emphasised that “we should stop looking at the Arctic as just a land of natural resources and minerals” and consider other economic opportunities that would help people living there to thrive.174 Dr Downie also noted that “a very diverse group of people… call the Arctic home and they all have aspirations … for prosperity and to be part of the wage economy.”175 Business Index North (BIN) is a report published annually that analyses ten regions in northern Norway, Finland, Sweden and Russia. The report provides an overview and a detailed picture of the socio-economic development and business opportunities within the BIN area and highlights the following topics of major relevance for the area: People, Life, Work, Performance of Business, Innovations, Connectivity, and Maritime Transportation through the Northern Sea Route. The 2018 report concluded that population growth in the Nordic BIN area is 2.7 times slower than in Nordic countries as a whole, and that across the whole BIN area the population is ageing and tertiary education is lower than the average across Nordic countries.176 Professor Middleton told us how economic growth in the Arctic could be incentivised:

First of all, I think it is providing an attractive education, because we also see disparity in tertiary education attainment in these territories, and universities should be multi-faceted. They should be providing very modern and comprehensive education. Then we would think about supporting vibrant communities, the cultural life, to attract women and families. Of course, urban planning and healthcare are the main solutions and digital connectivity is very important as well.177

118.The Arctic Council focused its interest in the economic development of the Arctic through the establishment of the Arctic Economic Council (AEC) in 2014 under the Canadian chairmanship of the Arctic Council. The AEC is an independent organization that facilitates Arctic business-to-business activities and responsible economic development through the sharing of best practices, technological solutions, standards, and other information. Members include both large oil and gas companies and smaller indigenous businesses, such as reindeer herders.

119.While we welcome the UK’s commitment to delivering the SDGs in the Arctic, we are concerned that the FCO has not made any material change to their Arctic policy in light of the move from “responsible” to “sustainable” development. Rod Downie from WWF praised Beyond the Ice for “its focus on climate change” but stated that “ we clearly need to meet those words with actions.”178 When we asked what had changed following the move to sustainable development the Minister responded:

The reason I was slightly puzzled is that they are absolutely inherent and embedded in the structure of entire policy and everything we are doing in this area. In terms of what they actually add and change, it is slightly more difficult to say “we built this in this way but not in that way.”179

120.We had hoped to have a more explicit link of policy to specific SDGs. In particular, the application of SDG 13 “Climate Action” to the Arctic seems inconsistent. For example, SDG 13 includes the target to “integrate climate change measures into national policies, strategies and planning” but the UK’s Arctic Policy notes that supplying the world’s continuing demand for oil and gas “for decades to come” will “require exploration of new potential resources, with the Arctic with its significant hydrocarbon reserves, potentially playing a major role.”180

121.In recent years there has been a move away from drilling for oil and gas in the Arctic thanks in part to lower oil prices. Rod Downie told us that since the last Environmental Audit Committee report on Protecting the Arctic in 2012, there has been “something of a groundswell of commitments not to drill for oil and gas in the Arctic”.181 Commitments have come from both nations and private companies. For example, in December 2016, the Prime Minister of Canada Justin Trudeau committed to an indefinite moratorium on new rights to drill in Canadian Arctic waters. At a private company level, in May 2016 the French oil giant Total ruled out Arctic oil drilling. Rod Downie commented that “very interestingly, they cited not only the high risks of operating in the Arctic but also that they felt [their decision] was incompatible with the Paris climate change agreement.”182

122.Dr Yumashev of Lancaster University explained that to meet inevitable residual demand for fossil fuels, a limited amount of fossil fuels needs to be used in order to meet the Paris Agreement and that “the Arctic fuels, if we want to purse that 2 degree target - or even more ambitious - appear to be too expensive.”183 When we asked the Minister for the Polar Regions about the Government’s position on drilling in the Arctic he responded that “as a specific issue it has never come across my desk to be put in that sort of way.”184 Following the evidence session, the Minister wrote to us to say that “the UK approach supports measures to reduce the demand for oil and gas though the development of a low-carbon economy while opposing restrictions that would affect the UK’s security of supply, affordability and sustainability.” The Minister also commented that, under the Paris Agreement, any emissions resulting from the extraction and use of hydrocarbons in the Arctic would be a matter for the nation concerned rather than the UK but that the “UK will continue to lead international calls for ambitious action to tackle climate change.”185

123.The loss of sea ice creates new economic and social opportunities and risks in the Arctic. We heard that if these opportunities are not managed correctly, the consequences could be dire for the Arctic. The UK has a responsibility to ensure that commercial opportunities in the Arctic are guided by the principle of sustainable development. The new focus on ‘sustainable’ rather than ‘responsible’ development in the UK Arctic policy is a welcome change in the Government’s intentions, as is the explicit reference to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). However, we are concerned that the Government may only be paying lip service to the SDGs, rather than using them to guide and evaluate its approach to the Arctic.

124.The UK has identified three SDGs relevant to the Arctic; Climate Action (Goal 13), Life Below Water (Goal 14) and Life on Land (Goal 15), but the Minister for the Polar Regions was not able to explain how the SDGs applied in an Arctic context, nor how their implementation is audited. Even though the Government has identified Goal 13 as particularly relevant to the Arctic, the Minister told us that the compatibility of drilling for oil and gas in the Arctic with the ambition of Goal 13 had not been explicitly put to him. We heard that not only is drilling for oil and gas in the Arctic incompatible with the SDGs, it is also incompatible with the UK’s commitment to the 2015 Paris Climate Change Agreement. However, the UK’s Arctic policy notes that it supports the use of “the highest possible standards” in Arctic oil and gas activities, rather than supporting the termination of drilling in the Arctic.

125.If the SDGs are to inspire and inform the UK’s Arctic policy, the Government should consider ending its encouragement of UK businesses to explore oil and gas opportunities in the Arctic. In its response to this report, the Government should acknowledge the incompatibility of continued support for oil and gas exploitation in the Arctic “for decades to come” with the UK’s SDG commitments and with the Paris Agreement, and set out plans to press members of the Arctic Council to adopt a similar approach.

126.Additionally, as recommended earlier in this report, the FCO should set a series of strategic priorities and targets for the UK’s sustainable engagement with the Arctic. The SDGs should be used to set and evaluate these priorities. There are more than three SDGs relevant to the Arctic and this should be acknowledged throughout the next iteration of the UK Arctic policy, such as; Goal 7 (affordable and clean energy), Goal 8 (decent work and economic growth) and Goal 11 (sustainable cities and communities). The use of the SDGs will ensure that the UK takes a sustainable approach to Arctic tourism, social issues and economic development in Arctic communities.

Shipping in the Arctic

127.As Arctic summer sea ice melts, new shipping routes are becoming accessible.186 As far back as the 15th century explorers searched for a navigable route through the Arctic from Europe to East Asia, which would provide a more direct alternative to the Suez or Panama Canal routes. Much of the written evidence we received noted that, due to climate change, this is now close to becoming a reality. At present, most Arctic shipping is around the coastal periphery of the Arctic Ocean and is primarily for supplying communities in the region, marine tourism or transiting natural resources such as liquefied gas.187 Destination-based shipping is widespread along the Northern Sea Route (NSR), but climate change is opening up some transit shipping routes, such as the Northwest and Northeast passages (see figure 2.)

Figure 2: Arctic shipping routes. Credit: The Arctic Institute, Centre for Circumpolar Security Studies.

128.The NSR is one-third of the distance of the Suez Canal route, cutting journey travel time by approximately 13 or 14 days. In its Arctic strategy, China announced a ‘Polar Silk Road’ project as part of its existing Belt and Road Initiative to “facilitate connectivity and sustainable economic and social development of the Arctic.”188 Although Russia has made use of the NSR for destination shipping for decades, using costly icebreaker ships to help navigation, there has been a marked increase in commercial shipping in recent years. In 2010, just four ships went through the NSR and numbers increased to 34 in 2011 and 67 in 2012. In terms of tonnage, shipping through the NSR has increased from 2.8 million tonnes in 2013 to 10.2 million tonnes in 2017.189 Russian freight ship, the Venta Maersk was the first ship to navigate the route without an icebreaker in August 2018. Dr Downie from WWF told us about the environmental risks increased shipping brings:

Safe and environmentally responsible shipping is crucial. Of course, as Arctic shipping is set to increase, as we are seeing more ships and more vessels in the Arctic, that brings increased risks to Arctic wildlife through spills, through the introduction of invasive species, through underwater noise affected cetaceans, ship strikes and also just breaking up sea ice, which is an absolutely critical habitat for seals and polar bears and other species.190

129.Shipping in the Arctic carries serious safety risks. Professor James Ford explained in his written and oral evidence that growing tourism in the Arctic increases the likelihood of a “marine emergency” such as a ship foundering or an outbreak of disease on board, and that many regions of the Arctic would not be equipped to manage such an incident. There is a lack of Search and Rescue (SAR) facilities.

The Polar Code

130.Some risks posed by shipping in the Arctic have been mitigated through the introduction of the Polar Code. The Polar Code was agreed and introduced by the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) in 2017. The Polar Code amends the three cornerstone conventions of the IMO and introduces regulations to cover safety and limitations of ships and lifesaving equipment, additional crew requirements for operating in the Arctic and environmental provisions.

Box 2: International Code for Ships Operating in Polar Waters (Polar Code)

The Polar Code was introduced by the International Maritime Organisation through amendments to three cornerstone conventions of the IMO: the Convention for Safety of Life at Sea, the MARPOL Convention for the Prevention of Pollution and the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers. The Code principally applies above 60 degrees north and below 60 degrees south. The Code is enforced by national procedures and ships require a polar ship certificate to demonstrate compliance with the Code.

The Polar Code comprises two parts that include both mandatory requirements and non-mandatory recommendations. The Code takes into account the unique risks associated with operating in the polar regions including ice; low temperatures; high latitude; remoteness; severe weather; limited charting; the pristine environment; and lack of training.

a)Part I addresses safe design, construction and operation of vessels. It enters into force under the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea. It also describes the enhanced training and certification requirements for crew members working on polar ships, the provisions of which enter into force under The International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers.

b)Part II addresses environmental protection with significant requirements for pollution prevention and the way garbage and sewage is dealt with. It enters into force under International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships.

Source: International Maritime Organisation

131.The Polar Code requires ships travelling to the Arctic, and whose routes start and end in different countries, to take extra safety precautions to deal with the uncertain environment. Dr James Lea, from the University of Liverpool, outlined that changes in iceberg frequency could significantly impact the viability and safety of shipping routes. Professor Lea notes that predicting changes in the frequency of the creation of icebergs is extremely difficult as glaciers can often remain stable for decades, but the cumulative effect of climate change can cause them to suddenly destabilise and retreat several kilometres in just a few years and that these “rapid, year-to-year changes in iceberg frequency are likely to represent an unexpected hazard for those operating in Arctic waters in the future.”191 The Polar Code requires operators to demonstrate understanding of, and preparation for, a worst-case scenario in polar conditions in order for a polar ship certificate to be issued. Michael Kingston, a shipping lawyer, explained that operators work with the International Ice Charting Working Group and that the Polar Code includes a requirement for real time meteorological information to be received while operating in Polar waters.192 However, as Dr Lea notes, predicting sea ice and iceberg change is complex. It is concerning that while the effects of climate change may have helped economic development in the Arctic by opening up new shipping routes, it may also hinder it by making them less accessible (and predictable) than they originally seemed.

Environmental issues

132.While the Polar Code is a landmark achievement for international governance of shipping in the Arctic, it lacks detail on environmental issues. Dr Downie, Head of Polar Programme at WWF explained that the Polar Code is “weaker than its original intentions.”193 Part II of the Polar Code includes a total ban on the disposal of oil, plastics, food waste, animal carcasses and noxious substances into polar oceans. However, it does not cover some crucial environmental issues such as marine noise, the use of heavy fuel oils in Arctic waters and polar-specific areas of invasive species. Dr Downie explained that although at present relatively few invasive species have become established in the Arctic, “this is absolutely set to change because we are seeing an increase in shipping but also because the thermal barriers are breaking down for these non-native species.”194

133.Heavy fuel oil (HFO) is the viscous leftover from the oil refining process. Only the largest ships can burn HFO and it is the preferred fuel for the marine shipping industry because it is cheap and widely available. The consequences of an HFO spill in the Arctic would be disastrous, as HFO does not disperse and break down in the marine environment. The Arctic Council working group on Protection of the Marine Environment (PAME) concluded in their 2009 Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment that the most significant environmental threat from ships to the Arctic marine environment is the release of oil through accidental or illegal discharge.195 The Polar Code contains a ban on the use and carriage of HFO in the Antarctic but not the Arctic. This could be for economic reasons, as the Arctic’s location makes it strategically useful for commercial shipping routes and the vast majority of the 100,000 or so commercial cargo vessels in the world today use HFO. Arctic states do disagree on issues such as the use of heavy fuels with countries such as Finland leading the way in calling for their prohibition. Canada and Russia have been reluctant to call for an outright ban.196

134.The cost and benefit of increased shipping in the Arctic is likely to be unevenly distributed among communities. Professor Ford explained that when ships break through ice in the Arctic, not only are they affecting natural habitats, they are also affecting the transportation routes that people rely on:

In the past there have been examples where people have been stuck on ice that has drifted out to sea, because people have crossed the lead created by an icebreaking ship or the icebreaking ship by creating that lead means that people cannot get across the ice.197

The Polar Code does not contain provisions to engage with communities about when ships are coming in and what precautions to take on the broken ice. The PAME Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment concluded that “many local Arctic residents today depend heavily on marine resources for subsistence and the local economy; over-the-ice travel and boat transport allow the use of large marine areas during much of the year. Such life in the Arctic is dependent on movement over the ice and ocean and sea ice is integral to this movement.” Communication with Arctic communities is essential to ensure that everyone in the Arctic feels the benefits of increased shipping, or at the very least is not disadvantaged.

135.Although the Polar Code is not as comprehensive as it might be, updating and extending it would be a lengthy, complicated process. Dr Downie from WWF told us that Phase 1 of the Polar Code took nearly a decade to produce and that extending environmental provisions in “Phase 2” could take a similar time.198 The risks to the environment from shipping are too immediate to wait another decade. The precautionary principle should be applied to the use of HFO, the risk of marine noise and invasive species and the danger to traditional indigenous ways of life.

136.As Arctic sea ice melts, new shipping routes are becoming increasingly accessible. We heard that by 2050, the Arctic could be ice free in summer. However, it will be some time until the Arctic seas can be fully utilised for transit shipping. We are concerned that there is a quickening “albedo effect” in the economic exploitation of the Arctic; as sea ice melts, more shipping is possible but this in turn further threatens the environment. The risk of oil spills, higher carbon emissions and plastic pollution threaten the fragile environment of the Arctic.

137.The Polar Code should be amended to protect the Arctic from the risks from increased shipping. The Polar Code includes some provisions on environmental protection in the Arctic such as a ban on the disposal of food and plastic waste, but the Arctic has fewer environmental protections than the Antarctic. The ban on dangerous heavy fuel oils currently applied in the Antarctic should be extended to the Arctic as soon as is technologically feasible. Provisions on marine noise and invasive species should also be added to ensure that increasing shipping does not threaten Arctic biodiversity and marine wildlife.

138.The UK Government should press the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) to ban HFO in the Arctic as soon as is technologically feasible and strengthen its involvement in the Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment working group of the Arctic Council to ensure that the Arctic Council is itself able to make an influential, science-driven representation to the IMO. The UK should push the IMO to make the Arctic designated as a special sensitive area under MARPOL annex 6 and thus join other seas such as the ‘Antarctic area’.

Tourism in the Arctic

139.One of the major drivers of economic development in the Arctic is the growing amount of tourism enabled by the increasingly long summer season, and reduced sea ice. The Geological Society note that economic opportunities enabled by climate change come with a certain level of risk:

In addition to the contribution of melting sea ice to global sea level rise, it opens the Arctic up to more industry and tourism-related traffic and development which in turn increases the risk of environmental impacts and incidents occurring in the Arctic.199

140.Tourism in the Arctic has grown dramatically over recent years. Edda Falk, from the Association of Arctic Expedition Cruise Operators (AECO) told us that over the past decade Arctic cruising has increased from around 50,000 passengers per year to around 80,000 in 2016. There is a risk that the thousands of tourists who travel to see a pristine, remote and unspoilt Arctic landscape are contributing to degradation of the very environment they came to see. Not only is there an environmental threat, there is a risk that as Arctic tourism expands there may not be enough capacity to deal with the significant risks posed by shipping in the Arctic.

141.The UK’s Arctic policy, Beyond the Ice, recognises that “while the majority of visits to the region are trouble-free, more visitors put greater strain on modest search and rescue capability, and increase the potential for harm to the fragile environment.”200 The Polar Code requires operators to have adequate lifesaving equipment to cater for passengers to survive for five days in the event of a marine emergency. However, as noted by Michael Kingston, as this is not possible with current equipment, operators must mitigate the risk in other ways, such as by tracking other ships in the vicinity to ensure close proximity to another ship in the event of an emergency. AECO, an industry body for small cruise ships of fewer than 500 passengers, explained that they have a live tracking system for their vessels and that “if anything happens, there are procedures in place.”201

142.The safety and security of conventional, large cruise ships however, appears less certain. Professor Ford told us that if a ship went down or ran into difficulties in the Arctic “there is very little capability to deal with that in rescue and also in treating for any injuries that might result from such an incident.”202 There is no size restriction on ships sailing in Arctic waters. Conversely, in the Antarctic there is a restriction that any ship over the size of 500 passengers cannot conduct landings. The UK Government acknowledges that while the Arctic States take their search and rescue responsibilities seriously, capacity to deal with major incidents in the high north is limited. Travel advice to British nationals states:

You should be aware that in these regions, search and rescue response will often need to be despatched from many hundreds of miles away, and assistance to stranded vessels may take several days to arrive, particularly in bad weather. Search and rescue assets are also likely to offer only basic transport and basic medical care, and are unlikely to be capable of advanced life-support.203

143.Additionally, we heard concerns about the social impact of large cruise ships. Professor Ford explained that large influxes of tourists can overwhelm small Arctic communities:

There are concerns. If you are in a community like Grise Fiord with 330 people, if a cruise ship of 1,000 people comes into town, that is a lot of people coming in… a cruise ship can turn up without announcing itself. The community has no idea a cruise ship is coming in and then all of a sudden you have twice the population coming in, walking around, peering in people’s windows, asking questions. There are opportunities, for sure, but it is a challenge of finding ways to manage those opportunities.204

144.Professor Ford suggested that the opportunities from tourism need to be correctly managed in order to be sustainable.205 During our visit to the Arctic, we met with expedition cruise operator Hurtigruten. According to AECO expedition cruising with their members is expected to grow by 44.5% from 2017 to 2020 - from 26,296 passengers in 2017 to 38,000 passengers in 2020.206 Hurtigruten’s Head of Communications told us that the Arctic states have an opportunity to decide what kind of tourists the Arctic wants to attract, and what limits to growth should be established. Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 8, Decent Work and Economic Work, contains a target to “devise and implement policies to promote sustainable tourism that creates jobs and promotes local culture and products by 2030.” Beyond the Ice details a project run by the British Embassy in Helsinki to identify key areas where the UK and Finland share strong expertise that could benefit the development of the Arctic. The project identified sustainable solutions, maritime and tourism as key areas of expertise. The UK should use this expertise not only to map new business opportunities but also to help the Arctic to develop carefully considered, sustainable tourism.

145.Arctic tourism can bring numerous economic opportunities to the region if it is managed correctly. Over the past decade the number of people going on Arctic cruises has increased from around 50,000 passengers per year to around 80,000 in 2016, and the market for small cruises in particular is expected to grow by almost 50% over the next three years. There is a risk that the thousands of tourists who travel to see a pristine, remote and unspoilt Arctic landscape are contributing to degradation of the very environment they came to see, and increased tourism can disrupt traditional ways of life. We heard that very large cruise ships with around 6,000 passengers are docking in small Arctic communities and overwhelming them. Large cruise ships also heighten risks of plastic pollution and place additional strain on already limited search and rescue capacity in the Arctic.

146.The Arctic states have an opportunity to place limits on the type of tourism acceptable in the Arctic region. The UK should work with the Sustainable Development Working Group of the Arctic Council to push for a ban on cruise ships of over 500 passengers, and instead promote sustainable and considered Arctic tourism. The UK should engage with the Permanent Participants on the Arctic Council to ensure that they have the capacity, in collaboration with Arctic states, to influence the development of Arctic tourism so it is managed in a way that benefits their communities.


163 Scottish Association for Marine Science (ARC0013)

172 Beyond the Ice, HM Government, 2018

176 Business Index North, 2018

180 Beyond the Ice, HM Government, 2018

183 Q195, Professor Ford from the Priestley Centre for Climate Change at the University of Leeds explained that working in the Arctic will always be dangerous and expensive due to the extreme climate and market dependencies, Q94

185 FCO letter

186 Michael Kingston told us record rates of ice melting combined with an increase in technological ability of ships to deal with ice was leading to more shipping in the Arctic, Q166

187 Dr Downie told us that 90% of all goods are brought into remote Arctic communities by boat, Q76

191 University of Liverpool (ARC0003)

195 Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment, Arctic Council working group on Protection of the Marine Environment (PAME), 2009

199 The Geological Society (ARC0006)

200 Beyond the Ice, HM Government, 2018

206 Association Arctic Expedition Cruise Operators (ARC0021)




Published: 29 November 2018