Norwegian University of Life Sciences Faculty of Social Sciences Department of International Environment and Development Studies Master Thesis 2014 30 credits “When You Think Like the State” The Political Ecology of Pastoral Modernization in Finnmark, Norway Erik Johan Langfeldt Borgenvik The Department of International Environment and Development Studies, Noragric, is the international gateway for the Norwegian University of Life Sciences (NMBU). Eight departments, associated research institutions and the Norwegian College of Veterinary Medicine in Oslo. Established in 1986, Noragric’s contribution to international development lies in the interface between research, education (Bachelor, Master and PhD programmes) and assignments. The Noragric Master thesis are the final theses submitted by students in order to fulfill the requirements under the Noragric Master programme “International Environmental Studies”, “International Development Studies” and “International Relations”. The findings in this thesis do not necessarily reflect the views of Noragric. Extracts from this publication may only be reproduced after prior consultation with the author and on condition that the source is indicated. For rights of reproduction or translation contact Noragric. © Erik Johan Langfeldt Borgenvik, May 2014 [email protected] Noragric Department of International Environment and Development Studies P.O. Box 5003 N-1432 Ås Norway Tel.: +47 64 96 52 00 Fax: +47 64 96 52 01 Internet: http://www.nmbu.no/noragric i DECLARATION I, Erik Johan Langfeldt Borgenvik, declare that this thesis is a result of my research investigations and findings. Sources of information other than my own have been acknowledged and a reference list has been appended. This work has not been previously submitted to any other university for award of any type of academic degree. Signature……………………………….. Date………………………………………… ii iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis is written as part of the project Dávggas – The Economics and Land-Use Conflicts in Sámi Reindeer Herding in Finnmark: Exploring the Alternatives, funded by the Norwegian research council (grant 215961). The project is a cooperation between researchers at the Sámi University College, Tallinn University, The International Center for Reindeer Herding (ICR) and the Department of International Environment and Development Studies (Noragric) at the Norwegian University of Life Sciences. I would like to thank a group of important people who have contributed to- and supported me in the thesis work: First of all, I would like to express my gratitude towards my two brilliant supervisors, Professor Tor Arve Benjaminsen and Professor Espen Sjaastad. Thank you for your guidance, patience, confidence and interesting discussions. Your combined knowledge has enabled me to mix methods, theories and perspectives in a very interesting way. A big thank you goes out to the members of the Dávggas project, especially to Associate Professor Inger Marie Gaup Eira for helping me in planning the fieldwork and Associate Professor Mikkel Nils Sara for willingly sharing his knowledge of reindeer herding with me. I would also like to thank Professor Øystein Holand at the Department of Animal and Aquacultural sciences at NMBU for interesting conversations and advice. I would also like to express my deepest gratitude to my informants. Thank you for willingly answering all my enquiring questions about reindeer herding. The thesis would not have been possible without you. To Heli and Helge: Thank you for your hospitality at Olderfjord Hotell. Last but not least I would like to thank my parents, Karen and Erik, for always believing in me and my dear girlfriend Marte for her unconditional support and love. The submission of this thesis marks the end of 5 years of studies at Noragric and the Norwegian University of Life Sciences. iv v SUMMARY Reindeer herding in Norway is an indigenous pastoral livelihood exclusive to the Sámi people. The regulation of this source of livelihood by the Norwegian state intensified with the introduction of a new law and policy from the late 1970s. As a result of this increased state control and management of the reindeer industry, the Ministry of Agriculture and Food, working through the Reindeer Herding Administration, has in particular focused on increasing the sustainability and productivity of the industry. This has led to an overall aim of increasing meat production through implementing a bioeconomic model called the Røros model. The model, which has been promoted through economic incentives and information work entails reductions in reindeer numbers, the altering of herd structures and increased calf slaughter. Many reindeer herders have contested these recommendations. They claim that the model undermines the traditional knowledge that has been, and still is, accumulated and reproduced through experience in the herders’ own social institutions Through qualitative interviews with reindeer herders in Finnmark I have explored such indigenous perspectives on herd structuring. Findings revolve around the following key issues: the products derived from reindeer husbandry; the importance of herd structure for coping with critical climatic events; and the role of the various animal categories. While the scientific criteria of the Røros model are presented as universal criteria by the promoters of this model, the herders own criteria seem to result from local contexts, with specific adaptations conditioned by heterogeneous landscapes. The second part of the thesis is a quantitative study, which assesses the scientific uncertainty behind the claim that reindeer herding operates in a stable and predictable environment, which is a premise of the Røros model. I argue that methodology applied by the Ministry and the Reindeer Administration for calculating maximum stocking rates is unreliable. The thesis is a contribution to the political ecology of environmental governance in Norway. Political ecology provides critical tools for analyzing human-environment issues. Through perspectives provided by Scott (1998), Li (2007) and Ferguson (1994), the management of reindeer husbandry is understood as a process that simplifies reality to create legibility and to implement policy through technically defined criteria. This is a process that expands the power of bureaucracies and which promotes scientific solutions in a narrow and technical sense to problems that are imbued with questions of politics and power. vi The thesis is not an argument against the Røros model as such. The thesis is rather a critique of the model’s claimed general applicability. I want to direct attention to the importance of the local context and the expert knowledge that the herders hold about their own landscapes. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS DECLARATION ................................................................................................................................... ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................................. iv SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................... vi TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................... viii MAP OF THE STUDY AREA ............................................................................................................ xi LIST OF FIGURES............................................................................................................................. xii LIST OF TABLES.............................................................................................................................. xiii 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Objectives and research questions ................................................................................................. 3 1.2 Structure of the thesis .................................................................................................................... 3 2. THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES ................................................................................................ 5 2.1 Political Ecology ........................................................................................................................... 5 2.2 Challenges and critique of political ecology ................................................................................. 6 2.3 Critical Realism in political ecology ............................................................................................. 7 2.4 Bringing political ecology “home” ................................................................................................ 8 2.5 Seeing Like a State ........................................................................................................................ 9 2.6 The Will to Improve ...................................................................................................................... 9 2.7 The Anti-Politics Machine .......................................................................................................... 10 3. BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY ............................................................................................... 11 3.1 Development and promotion of the Røros model ......................................................................