Perceptions of decision-makers about a potential forum of cooperation in the eastern part of the North American Arctic

  • Mathieu Landriault École nationale d’administration publique, Gatineau, QC, Canada
  • Jean-François Savard École nationale d’administration publique, Gatineau, QC, Canada
  • Anna Soer School of Political Studies, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada
Keywords: Cross-border cooperation, diplomacy, autonomy, people-to-people ties, economic development; governance


Cooperation in the Arctic region has been fruitful in the past few decades, generating several multilateral organizations and forums covering the entire circumpolar North. In many cases, forums were created to serve as catalysts, bringing together decision-makers from different backgrounds in a conference setting to promote dialogue and the exchange of ideas. To enquire about the possibility of creating a forum of cooperation in the eastern North American Arctic, a total of five governmental officials from Canada, Denmark, Nunavut, Québec and Greenland, and one elected representative from Greenland were interviewed with the same set of five questions. The governmental officials were in senior positions at the main department focusing on foreign affairs in their respective jurisdictions. Most thought that a new forum of cooperation in the region would be highly desirable, on the grounds of shared interests, common identity and cultural affinities. Consensual positions were also found regarding the central role that civil society would play in a new cooperative venue and on sub-national governments assuming a leading role to spearhead the initiative. Following these interviews, it is difficult to pinpoint one government that could alone spearhead this new forum of cooperation. However, the governments of Nunavut and Greenland were the most enthusiastic about such a new regional forum. Given Greenland’s drive to complete independence, this type of forum could prove to be a statement of diplomatic motivation and ambition, tilting toward proto-diplomacy and an international policy that prepares the terrain for complete autonomy.


Download data is not yet available.


Ackrén M. & Jakobsen U. 2015. Greenland as a self-governing sub-national territory in international relations: past, current and future perspectives. Polar Record 51, 404–412, doi: 10.1017/S003224741400028X.

Akimov Y. 2021. Arctic paradiplomacy of the Republic of Sakha (Yakutia): the impact of federalism, nationalism, and identity. In M. Landrault et al. (eds.): Mapping Arctic paradiplomacy. Pp. 77–98. Milton Park: Routledge.

Anderson S.V. 1963. Negotiations for the Nordic Council. Nordic Journal of International Law 33, 23–33, doi: 10.1163/187529363X00024.

Bailes A.J. & Ólafsson K.Þ. 2017. The EU crossing Arctic frontiers: the Barents Euro-Arctic Council, northern dimension, and EU–West Nordic relations. In N. Liu et al. (eds.): The European Union and the Arctic. Pp. 40–62. Leiden: Brill Nijhoff.

Caddell R. 2022. Strength in numbers? The Nordic Ministerial and Parliamentary groupings as observers in the Arctic Council. In N. Sellheim & D.R. Menezes (eds.): Non-state actors in the Arctic region. Pp. 133–152. Berlin: Springer.

Glaser B. & Strauss A. 1999. Discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research. Milton Park, UK: Routledge.

Henriksen A. & Rahbek-Clemmensen J. 2017. The Greenland card: prospects for and barriers to Danish Arctic diplomacy in Washington. Danish Foreign Policy Yearbook 1, 75–98.

Higginbotham J. & Spence J. 2018. The North American Arctic: energizing regional collaboration and governance. Waterloo, Canada: Centre for International Governance Innovation.

Landriault M., Chater A., Rowe E.W. & Lackenbauer P.W. 2019. Governing complexity in the Arctic region. Milton Park: Routledge.

Landriault M., Payette J.-F. & Roussel S. 2021. Conclusion–limitations and opportunities in Arctic paradiplomacy. In M. Landriault et al. (eds.): Mapping Arctic paradiplomacy. Pp. 217–223. Milton Park: Routledge.

Larsen K. 1984. Scandinavian grass roots: from peace movement to Nordic Council. Scandinavian Journal of History 9, 183–200, doi: 10.1080/03468758408579041.

Nielsson E.T. 2013. The West Nordic Council and its Arctic engagement. The Arctic Yearbook 2013 2. Accessed on the internet at on 7 December 2022.

Suddaby R. 2006. From the editors: what grounded theory is not. Academy of Management Journal 49, 633–642, doi: 10.5465/amj.2006.22083020.

Tsui E. 2016. Revisiting the Northern Forum: lessons from Alaska’s involvement. The Arctic Yearbook 6. Accessed on the internet at on 8 March 2023.

Wenger M. 2021. An own coast guard for Greenland? The Polar Journal. Accessed on the internet at on 7 December2022.

Zimmerbauer K. 2013. Unusual regionalism in northern Europe: the Barents region in the making. Regional Studies 47, 89–103, doi: 10.1080/00343404.2011.644236.
How to Cite
Landriault M., Savard J.-F., & Soer A. (2023). Perceptions of decision-makers about a potential forum of cooperation in the eastern part of the North American Arctic. Polar Research, 42.
Research Articles