Page - 435 - in Loss and Damage from Climate Change - Concepts, Methods and Policy Options

18 LossandDamage in theRapidlyChangingArctic 435 18.3.4 Societal Impacts Wealso foundstudies that focusonunderstanding the socio-economicandcultural vulnerabilitiesofArcticcommunitiesin-depth.Thesestudiesprovideasocio-cultural angleonclimate impacts,andincludenon-monetary impacts, suchas lossofculture and tradition.Theseareoftencase studiesof specificcommunitiesundertakenwith ethnographicmethods (e.g.Carothers et al. 2014).Many contributions in this field focuson the role that traditional/indigenousknowledgehasplayed in adaptationof Arcticpeoples in thepast, yetfind that theknowledgenowiseroding, andaffecting their culture and traditions.We also found a strand of literature that takes amore criticalviewonconceptualisingvulnerabilitybystressingthehistoricalbackground, whichreinforcescurrentvulnerabilityandplacesbarriers toadaptationinthefuture. For example, due to a multitude of changes in the past and currently, traditional knowledgehashad tomakeplace forwages, hunting regulations, for example, due tocolonialisminthepastandduetoongoingindustrialdevelopmentstoday(Cameron 2012). However,studieswhichtakeintoaccounttraditionalknowledgenowseemtohave gainedmore importance in research tobetterunderstandArctic changeandadapta- tiontoit (e.g.RiedlingerandBerkes2001;Maynardetal.2010;Douglasetal.2014; Cuerrier et al. 2015; Vinyeta and Lynn 2013; Golden et al. 2015). Also, special attention in this literature has been placed on recognising the impacts to indige- nouscommunitiesand institutional frameworks related tostrategies todealwith the impacts, suchas community-basedadaptation strategies andparticipatoryplanning (Tremblayetal.2008;HovelsrudandSmit2010;Pearceetal.2012;Champalleetal. 2015).Asamatteroffact, theresourcesofindigenouscommunitiestoincreaseadap- tive capacity have beendiminishingdue to reducedpossibilities tomakedecisions andpractice traditionalwaysof living(RobertsandAndrei2015)andconsequently, studies onoutmigration (or “climigration”) and (forced) relocationshave started to emerge (Table1). The focus on vulnerability due to climate impacts has indeed drawn some cri- tique for itsnarrowview.Manystudiesareconsidered to ignore thecolonial legacy in theArctic and its effects in termsof inducing social changewithnegative impli- cations (Cameron 2012;Whyte 2016). So, there are also new social, political and economicsettingsemergingand“blocking”thetraditionalwaystoadapt tochanges, as traditional livelihoodsarenowbeingregulatedfrom“outside,”suchaschanges in governanceof resourceuse, landuse,and landownership. Ithasbeenproposed that more public participation, co-management and self-governance of local communi- ties isneeded indecision-makingandplanning,andnew(participatory)governance mechanisms to tackle the transformationof theArctic region (Nuttal 2007;Bronen andChapin III 2013). Ford et al. (2007) have argued thatwithoutfinancial support provided by larger-scale actors, such as theUNFCCC, for example Inuit commu- nities and regionscannot successfullyadapt. Indigenouspeoplesoftenhave limited decision-makingpower, andboth environmental and social changes aremore rapid than theyhavebeenbefore. Integratedunderstandingof science, people, andcross-