The Resilience of Communities and Nature-Based Livelihoods in Northern Finland

Nordia Geographical Publications 41: 5, 95–106 Simo Sarkki & Hannu I. Heikkinen

The resilience of communities and nature-based livelihoods in northern Finland

Simo Sarkki1 and Hannu I. Heikkinen2 1 Thule Institute, University of Oulu, Finland 2 Cultural Anthropology, University of Oulu, Finland

Abstract: Resilience has become a key concept for assessing sustainability in relation to socio-environmental change in the North. This article considers various case studies in northern Finland relating to reindeer herding, forestry and nature conservation to draw upon lessons learned for resilience studies. Mainstream literature on northern resilience focuses on resilience of local livelihoods to only certain kind of disturbances, such as climate change and resource extraction. However, also conservation efforts may threaten specific livelihoods, but there seems to be a gap regarding assessing resilience in terms of conservation efforts. This article aims to fill this gap by examining resilience of forestry and reindeer herding, important northern livelihoods, to increasing conservation efforts. It is also recommended that resilience studies should be cautious regarding the definition of the system when they are assessing its resilience. We introduce a distinction between community resilience and the resilience of livelihoods communities depend upon.

Introduction 2. The degree to which the system is capable of self-organization Over the last decade, resilience has emerged 3. The ability to build and increase the as a fashionable concept and metaphor capacity for learning and adaptation to analyse the sustainability of integrated (Resilience Alliance 2012). socio-ecological systems (see Folke 2006; Resilience Alliance 2012). The resilience of When the resilience of socio-ecological ecosystems broadly refers to the capacity of systems is disturbed to a considerable extent an ecosystem to tolerate disturbance without the system may flip to another system collapsing into a qualitatively different state controlled by different variables, state that is controlled by a different set thus, exceeding a threshold and reaching a of processes. Resilience as applied to tipping point (see Nuttall 2012; Wassmann ecosystems or integrated socio-ecological and Lenton 2012). However, thresholds or systems has three defining characteristics: tipping points are almost always difficult to define and identify before they are 1. The amount of change the system reached and exceeded, because thresholds can undergo and still retain the same are dynamic and different actors may controls on function and structure understand, perceive and experience them

95 The resilience of communities and nature-based ... NGP Yearbook 2012 in significantly different ways (Gunderson they affect ecosystems’ and human & Folke 2007). populations’ ability to withstand In recent years, resilience based studies shocks. have been developed and carried out in • Evaluate strategies for communities several localities in the global North. For and governments to adapt (Arctic example Berkes and Jolly (2001) have Resilience Report 2012). examined community adaptation to climate change in Sach’s Harbour in Canada’s western Regarding the ecosystem, community or Arctic. Short-term adaptive strategies relate integrated socio-ecological system, it should to changing hunted species and where, when, be noted that communities are diverse and how these species are hunted. Here it not homogenous units. Thus, in addition can be suggested that heterogeneity in to examining socio-ecological systems as possibilities to use nature and its resources as a whole (e.g. Holling 1986; Carpenter & the bases for livelihoods enhances resilience. Brock 2004; Kinzig et al. 2006; Walker & Regarding long-term adaptive strategies, Lawson 2006), a more accurate definition Berkes and Jolly considered local social of the system under study would be fruitful. networks for sharing food and resources Carpenter et al. (2001) state that any study as well as co-management institutions to concerned with resilience should answer the be significant for community resilience. On question “resilience of what to what?” This the other hand, the resilience of northern means that the system under study should regions to social and environmental change be defined as well as the source and nature has been examined by emphasizing that of the factors disturbing the system. With dramatic change is taking place in the reference to disturbances in the Arctic there North and that northern areas can play is a strong trend in both current research a role in understanding the resilience of and policy to examine and consider climate the global system (Chapin III et al. 2004). change as the main challenge to northern Furthermore, the Arctic Resilience Report socio-ecological systems. However, as (ARR) is currently in progress. This report the focus of the ARR indicates. there was approved by the Arctic Council in 2011 are various other pressures threatening and is planned to be completed by 2015. The and affecting the sustainability of Arctic ARR is responding to increasing evidence socio-ecological systems that should not that Arctic areas are facing challenges posed be left in the shadows of climate change by rapid environmental as well as societal research. Furthermore, anthropogenic change. The goals of the ARR are to: environmental change, whether in the form of climate change, land-use or resource • Identify the potential for shocks and extraction, is resulting in pressures on large shifts in ecosystems services that northern communities and livelihoods. affect human well-being in the Arctic. However, as we will highlight, resilience • Analyse the interactions between assessments need not only to examine the different drivers of change, and how effects of these pressures, but also the side

96 Nordia Geographical Publications 41: 5, 95–106 Simo Sarkki & Hannu I. Heikkinen effects of societal responses (e.g. nature assessing local resilience, even many times conservation efforts) on the northern conservation objectives may differ from communities and livelihoods. local ones. Thus it becomes important The objective of this article is to examine to examine how resilient resource based the resilience of forestry and reindeer livelihoods are to the potential pressures herding to nature conservation strategies posed by conservation efforts. In this article and policies in northern Finland. For our we concentrate on forestry and reindeer purposes, we refer to resilience as a “long term herding and their relationships to nature vitality of a community or livelihood in changing conservation. Nature conservation relates contexts and under different pressures”. We here to two kinds of issues, firstly to protected believe that this definition is better suited areas, and secondly to environmental non- to examining the resilience of northern governmental organisations’ (ENGO) communities than ecosystem modelling- campaigns to leave old-growth forests related concepts often used in the resilience outside industrial forestry. literature. We share assumptions that self- Finnish protected areas are managed by organization capacity and adaptive capacity Metsähallitus Natural Heritage Services are important cornerstones of community (NHS), separate unit from Forestry and livelihood resilience. enterprise Metsähallitus. Metsähallitus NHS This article briefly outlines background (2012) aims to protect and manage species, for Finnish nature conservation, forestry, habitats and cultural heritage in protected reindeer herding and their relationships. areas and to provide outdoor recreation Next some results from our recent research services for hikers, hunters and fishers. projects regarding nature-based livelihoods The governance of protected areas is also and communities in northern Finland are impacted by European Union’s Natura 2000 presented. We end by relating lessons learned conservation area network, and also some from our case studies to the resilience protected area certification systems, such as literature, and outline some challenges PAN Parks and EUROPARC Federation. that assessments concerned with resilience The development of these international face. trends has sometimes led to efforts for stricter protection and thus created tensions between protected areas and their user Nature conservation, groups. Most of the Finnish protected areas forestry and reindeer are located in northern Finland, and for herding in northern Finland example in Forest Lapland the protected areas cover over 40 % of the area. Often The main resource-based livelihoods in conservation has synergies with reindeer northern Finland are forestry, reindeer herding as conservation helps to preserve herding, mining and tourism. On the other important reindeer pastures, particularly hand, nature conservation is important old-growth forests. However, recently some northern land use, but seldom included in contradictions between reindeer herding

97 The resilience of communities and nature-based ... NGP Yearbook 2012 and conservation have emerged in relation Forestry is defined here as wood to pressures for more strictly protected areas harvesting practices, while forest industry and predator conservation (Heikkinen et al. encompasses mainly pulp production 2010; 2012; Sarkki 2011; Sarkki et al. 2013). and the whole chain-of-custody from The contradiction between conservation harvesting practices by Metsähallitus, and forestry is apparent when new areas to pulp production by Finnish forest are conserved because the areas under companies, such as Stora Enso, finally commercial forestry directly decrease. to publishing companies purchasing the During the last two decades ENGOs paper from forest companies. In northern have been an integral part of northern forest Finland, the vast majority of forests are disputes pressuring not only Metsähallitus, owned by the state and are managed and the state-owned forestry enterprise, but logged by Metsähallitus. Metsähallitus also its customers such as Stora Enso is 150 years old and has well established and the paper and publishing companies position in managing state-owned forests in central Europe which buy its products in Finland. During the few decades after (Sarkki & Rönkä 2012). This has led to World War II Metsähallitus and forest leaving some forest areas outside forestry. industry was considered to benefit the However, it is uncertain how new and often well-being of the whole nation, but more rather small conservation areas affect the recently mechanisation of forest harvesting vitality of northern forestry. The main practices has decreased jobs in forestry, goal of ENGOs is to promote leaving and the benefits are not anymore diffusing remaining old-growth forests outside so wide to the society. This has shaken industrial forestry. the legitimacy of industrial forestry in Reindeer herding is a traditional but Finland (Donner-Amnell & Rytteri 2010). small-scale livelihood and there are Furthermore, concerns about intrinsic around 5000 reindeer owners in Finland. values of nature and old-growth forests However, reindeer herding is considered started to cause forest disputes between particularly important for Sámi people, Metsähallitus and spontaneous social but also emblematic for the Finnish North movements campaigning against forestry as a whole and as such is used heavily in in certain locations. In the 1990’s more marketing and image creation, especially organized social movements started to gain in relations to tourism. As such its value foot followed by series of forest conflicts is hard to measure. Reindeer herding has between ENGOs and Metsähallitus that had conflicts with forestry, for example in continued also in the new Millenium (Raitio Inari, where some Sámi herders formed a 2008). Since the 1990’s Metsähallitus also coalition with Greenpeace to gain better noticed the diversification of societal possibilities to influence forest-related values associated with forestry, and decision-making, in which herders have had initiated participatory processes, in which marginal roles to play (Raitio 2008; Sarkki various stakeholders, such as ENGOs & Heikkinen 2010). and reindeer herders, can participate in

98 Nordia Geographical Publications 41: 5, 95–106 Simo Sarkki & Hannu I. Heikkinen the forestry planning. However, these pressures: the factory was shut down as participatory processes have been criticised part of the process of reorganizing global for not allowing genuine possibilities for pulp production by Stora Enso and moving participation, but rather used to justify production to the global South, for example the decisions. This has led into series to South America, for cheaper production of conflicts between ENGOs, reindeer costs. This highlights that disturbances can herders and Metsähallitus (Raitio 2008; be surprising and Finnish pulp mills seem to Sarkki 2011). be much more vulnerable to movements of global capital than to nature conservation. Here an interesting distinction can be Resilience of northern made between forestry as a local livelihood livelihoods to nature and forestry as an industrial sector with conservation national and global dimensions which overshadow the importance of local aspects Resilience of forestry to nature of production and social relations. Forestry conservation and globalization as a sector is susceptible and vulnerable Firstly, we will outline some developments to trends in the global market economy, regarding the closure of Stora Enso’s but resilient regarding its position in the northernmost pulp mill in Finland, at Finnish political system. The resilience Kemijärvi, in April 2008, which employed of Finnish forest companies towards, for some 220 workers and was important for example, local appraisals is based on their the regional economy and as a source of long traditions in Finland as being the key livelihood for local people beyond those industry previously benefitting various employed directly by the mill. Before societal groups, national exports, and the closure, Finnish pro-forestry actors economic growth. This means that while the communicated in the media that increasing forest industry makes necessary decisions pressures for forest conservation posed to maintain its competitiveness in global threats to pulp production at Kemijärvi. markets, these decisions may sacrifice local It was argued that a threshold would benefits in favour of “national benefits” that be exceeded if additional conservation forestry is still often perceived to deliver. measures were put into practice, leading This sacrifice was manifested in Kemijärvi to closure of the mill and reducing local when, despite the self-organized resistance possibilities for employment. As thresholds of the Kemijärvi community against the are hard to define before they are exceeded, mill closure, Stora Enso did not change its this line of argument can be considered as a plans to shut down the factory. Stora Enso way by which pro-forestry actors attempted argued that the Kemijärvi mill had to go gain a stronger position in debates between in order to maintain competitiveness in forestry and conservation. global markets and for securing the future The real threat to the Kemijärvi mill, of other mills in Finland. Interestingly, however, did not come from conservation Stora Enso also refused to sell the mill

99 The resilience of communities and nature-based ... NGP Yearbook 2012 to another company to continue pulp Finland’s northern forests, the activities of production in the area. However, after the ENGOs altered the position, perceptions Kemijärvi pulp factory was closed in 2008 and attitudes of customers in central the resilience of the Kemijärvi community Europe and hence created a new kind was examined by Rytteri (2010) who argued of pressure for Finnish wood harvesting that heterogeneity in wood production practices. Thus, resilience of the Finnish practices and variety of linkages to external forest industry to nature conservation markets were factors that enhanced the suffered when the ENGOs were able to ability of the community to cope with the persuade customers of Finnish forest rather dramatic closure, helped residents in products to change their stance regarding adapting to the change. logging activities in old-growth forests. Secondly, ENGOs have pressured Finnish forestry actors (Metsähallitus and other forest companies such as Stora Enso) Resilience of reindeer herding to nature conservation to decrease industrial forestry in the north and establish new conservation areas. Recent The Inari case was also revealing in terms forest debates in northern Finland (e.g. in of reindeer herding and the divergence Inari and Forest Lapland) were resolved in between community resilience and favour of ENGOs, reindeer herding and livelihood resilience. There have been long nature-based tourism, despite opposition lasting disputes in Inari between reindeer from local and regional pro-forestry actors. herders and Metsähallitus over loggings ENGOs, including Greenpeace and Finnish in old-growth forests, which provide Nature League, wanted to preserve large important winter pastures for reindeer. In areas of old-growth forests from industrial 2005 Greenpeace intensified its campaign forestry, and this also considered beneficial in Inari and established a campaign camp by reindeer herders as old-growth forests to Inari to promote conservation of old- function as important winter grazing growth forests. Greenpeace formed a areas, especially because of tree lichens. coalition with some reindeer herders A key reason for the debates turning to protect the forests. The intervention in favour of the ENGOs and herders of ENGOs, especially Greenpeace, in was that the forest companies feared the Inari debate that had been ongoing conservationist campaigns would disturb between Metsähallitus and reindeer herders, their image as ENGOs were claiming that led to a situation where reindeer herders the Finnish forest industry was engaged in had a stronger position in the debate. unsustainable wood harvesting practices in The coalition between Greenpeace and the north. Thus, the Finnish forest industry herders increased possibilities for effective can be seen as vulnerable to pressure from resistance against industrial forestry. their customers who were influenced by However, at the same time the intervention the ENGO campaigns. While customers of Greenpeace in the debate caused serious of Finnish forest industry had previously local friction between reindeer herders been supportive of harvesting practices in in coalition with the Greenpeace and

100 Nordia Geographical Publications 41: 5, 95–106 Simo Sarkki & Hannu I. Heikkinen some other locals resisting Greenpeace herding (Heikkinen et al. 2012). However, and promoting logging. Reindeer herders despite the pressures new regulations gained power to fight against forestry have not been implemented, but park while community resilience suffered, as management Metsähallitus has managed the the ENGOs introduced friction between tension quite successfully able to maintain heterogeneous parts of the community. It the certification, but not imposing stricter can be expected that poor local relationships rules for reindeer herding (Sarkki et al.2013). make collaborative decisions about forests Here also legal right for reindeer herding and self-organization capacity more difficult has protected herding from additional in the future, and thus decrease resilience restrictions to use the national park by of the community. In the Inari case the directing stance park management has taken heterogeneity of the local community in on herding. fact made the community more vulnerable In addition to protected areas, species to outside disturbance. conservation is causing harm to reindeer It is not only ENGOs that are causing herding, especially with regard to the problems for reindeer herders -- efforts protection of predator animals. For example, for stricter rules in protected areas can the number of wolves in Finland has been threaten reindeer herding. When stricter debated between the EU and Finland rules in protected areas are imposed on – the EU claimed in 2005 that Finland herding, as in the Malla Strict Nature was violating the conservation targets of Reserve in Lapland, it can lead to reindeer the EU’s habitat directive. After intense herding communities fighting each other debate, the appeal was closed in 2008 for the remaining pastures (Heikkinen et al. when the European Commission finally 2010). Here not only livelihood suffers but stated that Finland has not threatened the increasing pressure is causing changes in sustainable level of its wolf population community dynamics which are harmful for (Heikkinen et al. 2011; Hiedanpää & Bromley self-organization capacity and community 2011). However, this debate stresses that resilience. Yet, the Malla case is an exception international conservation pressures for as in the national parks Finnish law secures increased predator conservation exist. The rights of reindeer herding and thus increases resilience of reindeer herding to predation is the resilience of reindeer herding towards rather poor, for example, in southern parts potential pressures caused by protected of the Finnish reindeer herding area, where areas. Thus institutional mechanisms can predator populations are expanding from increase livelihood resilience. In addition, south and east in areas where conservation protected area certification system PAN hunting measures are rather limited and Parks has two certified parks in Finland. predator density high. Adaptation measures In Oulanka National Park PAN Parks by herders include taking reindeer to home certification has created considerable fences during wintertime and by spending pressures for stricter protection and has more time in forest areas in an effort to the goal to protect fragments of unlogged supervise their herd, or at least to find the boreal forest from intensive reindeer carcasses of reindeer killed by predators

101 The resilience of communities and nature-based ... NGP Yearbook 2012 in hope to gain some state compensation Lessons learned payments. These may be successful to some extent, but the presence of wolves in herding Following the examples outlined in this areas is difficult for herders and reindeer to article, some suggestions can be made for to adapt to (Heikkinen et al. 2011). further examinations of resilience in the However, compensation schemes are North. However, it should be noted that perhaps the biggest issue affecting reindeer various contextual factors also impact on herding’s resilience to predators. As far as land resilience of reindeer herding and forestry to predators are concerned (wolf, wolverine, nature conservation. For example, resilience bear, lynx), the compensation schemes are of reindeer herding to nature conservation much debated and considered as insufficient depends on range of contextual factors: and unfair by the herders. Considerable what is the amount of predators in given problems arise when killed reindeer have Reindeer Herding Cooperative (RHC), are to be found and proven to be caused by a there certified protected areas within the predator to get compensation. As a result RHC, and are ENGOs campaigning in of this, the cost, time and money herders given RHC and what are the relationships have to invest increase and many predator of herders and other locals to the ENGOs. kills remain uncompensated. However, On the other hand, resilience of forestry the change in the compensation system is also dependent on the smaller scale regarding the golden eagle has been quite area under question. Obviously, if there successful. Reindeer Herding Cooperatives are no old-growth forests in the area, are currently being compensated for disturbances from ENGOs cannot be the number of nesting eagles within the expected. Furthermore, resilience of cooperative area as well as on the basis of communities mainly dependent on single the assumptions about how large a portion industry depends on the available alternative of the eagles’ diet is based on reindeer in a livelihood strategies. Finally, Metsähallitus as given area. Currently, herders themselves are an organization may be resilient to ENGOs’ informing the environmental administration aims as Metsähallitus dominates the forestry about eagle nests, which they have located planning, but ENGOs’ strategies to effect on in order to receive compensation. With land Metsähallitus through its customers are not predators, there are constant accusations that controllable by Metsähallitus. It is the market herders are poaching them without licences context in which Metsähallitus operates (Naskali et al. 2006; Heikkinen et al. 2011). that effects great deal on Metsähallitus’ The golden eagle example demonstrates resilience. In addition, resilience of forestry that institutional arrangements can play in private forests is different than in state an essential role in transforming a threat owned forests. The resilience of individuals into an opportunity and increasing the in forestry or reindeer herding depend resilience of local livelihood’s as well as on their relationship on the livelihood in enhancing relationships between reindeer question. If they have alternative livelihood herders and environmental managers and strategies this makes them less vulnerable. administrators. Finally, the enclosure of Kemijärvi pulp

102 Nordia Geographical Publications 41: 5, 95–106 Simo Sarkki & Hannu I. Heikkinen mill may increase resilience of Finnish tend to emphasise that the threshold is forest industry by increasing profitability closer than in reality as this supports the and raising values of stocks, and also position they take (see Sarkki & Karjalainen secures jobs in the remaining pulp factories, 2012). In this way, resilience studies need while having negative consequences for to provide solid evidence for the existence Kemijärvi community. Our cases provide of thresholds or tipping points if science only case specific examples regarding local is to have relevance for policy (see Cash et complexities of resilience and thus cannot al. 2003). provide generalised answer to a question: Thirdly, the Kemijärvi case also highlights how resilient reindeer herding and forestry that disturbances that exceed the threshold are to nature conservation in northern can be surprising and come from unexpected Finland. Despite the context specificity of directions, underscoring the need for our findings some lessons can be drawn for resilience studies to utilise scenario tools to future studies on resilience. examine the possible impacts of unexpected Firstly, resilience assessments should be developments. explicit as to whether they assess resilience Fourthly, the assumption that heterogeneity of communities or livelihoods since these in local livelihood structure increases resilience are two different things, and positive to outside disturbances (e.g. Rytteri 2010) measures for one can be a threat to the should be evaluated critically, as it may be the other. This was illustrated by the Inari case (like in Inari) that outside intervention case, where intervention of Greenpeace (e.g. by ENGOs) can create friction and and other ENGOs enhanced resilience gaps between heterogeneous local groups, of reindeer herding as a livelihood against making life more difficult and possibly also forestry, but at the same time decreased decreasing community resilience to other community resilience in Inari by causing disturbances in the future. local conflicts between some herders Finally it can be asked whether resilience and those in favour of forestry. Before towards nature conservation is a good or the intervention of ENGOs this local bad thing depending on scale and context. conflict was not acute. Furthermore, the Conservation is seen to benefit the public resilience of an industry should be treated good, while it may disturb local social as a different issue than the resilience of justice. The kind of resilience that ensures a livelihood from a local perspective. This long-term vitality of local communities and highlights that resilience studies need to livelihoods, even though new conservation address the question: resilience for whom measures are imposed, seems to be worth (Lebel et al. 2006). fighting for. Often conservation may be Secondly, as seen in the forestry sector beneficial for local livelihoods (e.g. protected argument regarding the possible shut down areas as reindeer pastures), but there is of the Kemijärvi pulp factory because of also threshold here in that a possibility additional forest conservation, we can see may be turned into a threat by restricting that thresholds and tipping points are very reindeer herding. Furthermore, institutional political concepts and ideas, and actors mechanisms (e.g. governmental practices)

103 The resilience of communities and nature-based ... NGP Yearbook 2012 can be put into place to increase resilience Carpenter, S.R. & W. A. Brock (2004). Spatial of local communities and livelihoods complexity, resilience and policy diversity: to the threat posed to reindeer which fishing on lake-rich landscapes. Ecology and Society 9(1), 8. is created by conservation. An example Carpenter, S., B. Walker, J. M. Anderies of this kind of institutional mechanism & N. Abel (2001). From Metaphor to is the compensation schemes regarding Measurement: Resilience of What to What? predators and reindeer. However, the ability Ecosystems 4, 765–781. Cash D.W., W.C. Clark, F. Alcock, N.M. of institutional arrangements to increase Dickson, N. Eckley, D. H. Guston, J. Jäger & resilience has its limits. In predator policies R. Mitchell (2003). Knowledge systems for there are institutional and governmental sustainable development. PNAS 100(14), mechanisms for enhancing herders’ resilience, 8086–8091. whereas in other areas (e.g. ENGOs and Chapin, lll, F. S., G. Petersort, F. Berkes, T. V. Callaghan, P. Angelstam, M. Apps, forestry) formal mechanisms are lacking C. Beier, Y. Bergeron, A-S. Crépin, K. and the institutional structure is in a sense Danell, T. Elmqvist, C. Folke, B. Forbes, N. “neoliberal”, which emphasises market- and Fresco, G. Juday, J. Niemelä, A. Shvidenko civil society-based governance, rather than & G. Whiteman (2004). Resilience and Vulnerability of Northern Regions to Social state-based regulation (Sarkki & Rönkä and Environmental Change. Ambio 33(6), 2012). This hinders possibilities for state- 344–349. based governance to create institutional Donner-Amnell, J. & T. Rytteri (2010). mechanisms which would help co-existence Metsäsektorin legitimiteetti murroksessa. of conservation and local livelihoods. How In Rannikko, P. & T. Määttä (eds): Luonnonvarojen hallinnan legitimiteetti, to plan and launch institutional mechanisms 219–256. Vastapaino, Tampere. also in neoliberal setting that would enhance Folke, C. (2006). Resilience: the emergence of local resilience to conservation and other a perspective for socialecological systems pressures northern communities and analyses. Global Environmental Change 16(3), 253–267. livelihoods encounter becomes a crucial Gunderson L. & C. Folke (2007). Looking research question. These mechanisms forward, looking back. Ecology and Society would make conservation more appealing 12(1), 32. to local communities. Heikkinen, H.I., O. Moilanen, M. Nuttall & S. Sarkki. (2011). Managing predators, managing reindeer: contested conceptions References of predator policies in the southeast Reindeer herding area of Finland. Polar Arctic Resilience Report (2012). An assessment Record 47(242), 218–230. of rapid Arctic change and tipping points led Heikkinen H.I., S. Sarkki, M. Jokinen by the Stockholm Environment Institute & D.E. Fornander (2010). Global area and Stockholm Resilience Centre. Arctic conservation ideals versus the local realities Council. http://www.arctic-council.org/ of reindeer herding in northernmost Finland. arr/?page_id=48. Accessed 12.12.2012. International Journal of Business and Berkes, F. & D. Jolly (2001). Adapting to Globalization 4(2), 110–130. climate change: social-ecological resilience in a Canadian western Arctic community. Conservation Ecology 5(2), 18.

104 Nordia Geographical Publications 41: 5, 95–106 Simo Sarkki & Hannu I. Heikkinen

Heikkinen, H.I., S. Sarkki & M. Nuttall Resilience Alliance (2012). Research on (2012). Users or producers of ecosystem resilience in socio-ecological systems services? A scenario exercise for integrating – a basis for sustainability. http://www. conservation and reindeer herding in resalliance.org/. Accessed 12.12.2012. northeast Finland. Pastoralism: Research, Rytteri, T. (2010). Tehdasyhdyskunnat ja Policy and Practice 2, 11. metsäteollisuuden rakennemuutos: Hiedanpää, J. & D. Bromley (2011). The vertailukohteina Kemijärvi, Suomi ja Pine harmonization game: reasons and rules in Falls, Kanada. Alue & Ympäristö 39(2), European biodiversity policy. Environmental 3–15. Policy and Governance 21(2), 99–111. Sarkki, S. (2011). The site strikes back: Multi- Holling, C. S. (1986). The resilience of level forest governance and participation in terrestrial ecosystems: local surprise and northern Finland. PhD dissertation. Thule global change. In Clark, W.C.& R.E. Munn Institute & Discipline of Anthropology, (eds.): Sustainable development of the University of Oulu, Finland. biosphere, 292–317. Cambridge University Sarkki, S. & H. I. Heikkinen (2010). Social Press, Cambridge, UK. movements’ pressure strategies during Kinzig, A.P., P. Ryan, M. Etienne, H. Allison, T. forest disputes in Finland. Journal of Natural Elmqvist & B. H. Walker (2006). Resilience Resources Policy Research 2(3), 281– and regime shifts: assessing cascading 296. effects. Ecology and Society 11(1), 20. Sarkki, S. & T. P. Karjalainen (2012). Science Lebel, L., J. M. Anderies, B. Campbell, C. and issue advocacy in a forest debate in Folke, S. Hatfield-Dodds, T. P. Hughes Finland. The Polar Journal 2(1), 125–138. & J. Wilson (2006). Governance and the Sarkki, S. & A.R. Rönkä (2012). capacity to manage resilience in regional Neoliberalisations in Finnish forestry. Forest social-ecological systems. Ecology and Policy and Economics 15, 152–159. Society 11(1), 19. Sarkki, S., H. I. Heikkinen & R. Puhakka Metsähallitus Natural Heritage Services (2012). (2013). Boundary organizations between http://www.metsa.fi/sivustot/metsa/en/ conservation and development: Insights contactus/NaturalHeritageServices/Sivut/ from Oulanka national park, Finland. World NaturalHeritageServices.aspx. Accessed Review of Entrepreneurship, Management 12.12.2012. and Sustainable Development 9(1), 37– Naskali, A., J. Hiedanpää & L. Suvantola 63. (2006). Biologinen monimuotoisuus Walker B.H. & R.L. Lawson (2006). Case talouskysymyksenä. Suomen ympäristö studies in resilience: fifteen social- 48/2006. ecological systems across continents and Nuttall, M. (2012). Tipping points and the human societies. The Resilience Alliance. http:// world: Living with change and thinking about www.resalliance.org/1613.php. Accessed the future. Ambio 41, 96–105. 12.12.2012. Raitio, K. (2008). ”You can’t please everyone” Wassmann, P. & T. Lenton (2012). Arctic tipping – Conflict management practices, frames points in an Earth system perspective. and institutions in Finnish state forests. PhD Ambio, 41(1), 1–9. thesis, University of Joensuu. Publications in social sciences N:o 86.

105