Committee on Transport and Tourism

New opportunities for commercial activities in the Arctic are presenting themselves due to advances in naval technologies and the opening of new shipping routes in the region. What approach should Arctic states take when it comes to the development of naval technologies, and the regulation of shipping routes, particularly keeping in mind the interests of local communities?

Committee on Transport and Tourism

Chaired by Luc Vorsteveld (NL). Covered by Pablo Ramírez (ES)

Executive Summary

The rapid warming of the Arctic region leads to numerous consequences. One of these is the melting of polar sea ice. This allows for more naval activity in the region, especially in resource extraction, shipping, fishing, and cruising. The economic viability of such shipping routes, however, remains questionable. Geography, climate, weather, technology, and Indigenous interests are key concerns to the question whether- and to what extent the Arctic should be traversed by commercial vessels. Furthermore, the environmental impact of naval activity could outweigh any economic benefits. The main question to be answered is what strategy Arctic states should take to regulate Arctic shipping, bearing in mind and balancing the interests of various stakeholders.

Listen to the audio Topic Overview

The Arctic is warming up faster than anywhere else in the world. Ice in the Arctic is disappearing at a dramatic rate, which is set to continue for the foreseeable future, no matter whether we manage to stay within the 2 degrees centigrade goal or not.¹ By midcentury, the melting of Arctic sea ice will lead to summer periods in which the pole will be mostly free of ice, enabling naval vessels to sail across the pole.² Shipping activity in the region is set to increase with more than 50% by 2050³, mostly driven by the extraction of minerals and hydrocarbons, fisheries, trade, and tourism⁴. Cross-Arctic shipping is particularly important given the fact that Arctic shipping routes between Europe and East Asia can be up to 3000nm (25%) shorter than conventional routes through the Suez canal⁵. This gives these routes a potential advantage over conventional routes. In the winter of 2018, a Norwegian vessel led the way in this development, crossing the Nothern Sea Route (NSR) without the need for an icebreaker.⁶

Introduction

Documentary
Short documentary about Arctic shipping and the "race for the Arctic"

Ultimately, the opening up of shipping routes due to global warming comes with a multitude of challenges. How to consider and weigh these effects is at the core of the subject of Arctic shipping.

As mandated by the UN Climate Change Conference (COP21) held in Paris in 2015. COP21 reached an agreement that set a limit to the global temperature increase of 2 degrees Celsius, with a stated goal of keeping global warming under 1.5 degrees.

Source

Some of the most prevalent minerals present in the Arctic region are coal, iron ore, zinc, lead, nickel, precious metals (e.g. gold and silver), diamonds, and gemstones.

Source

The Arctic is estimated to hold around 22% of the world's undiscovered natural gas and oil reserves. Currently, the region produces around 10% of the world's oil and 25% of natural gas.

Source

One nautical mile (nm) is 1,852 kilometres

When traversing the Arctic, ice breaking vessels are often needed, especially during winter when shipping routes are covered in sea ice. Ice breaking ensures the year-round operability of shipping routes through the region.

The ice breaking fleet mainly consists of double-hull nuclear-powered vessels. Ice breakers require special support facilities for refueling and disposal of spent fuel. Such modern ships can break ice up to 3 metres thick.

Source

Melia, N., Haines, K., & Hawkins, E. (2017). Future of the sea: Implications from opening Arctic Sea routes. Foresight - Government Office for Science. Link

Melia et al. (2017); Smith, L. C., & Stephenson, S. R. (2013). New Trans-Arctic shipping routes navigable by midcentury. Link

Transport & Environment. (n.d.). Arctic. Transport & Environment. Link

Melia, N. et al. (2017). Future of the sea: Implications from opening Arctic Sea routes. Link

Abbasov, F. (2018, February 28). Fears for Arctic ecosystem as shipping milestone reached. Link
Aksenov, Y. et al. (2017). On the future navigability of Arctic sea routes: High-resolution projections of the Arctic Ocean and sea ice. Link
Kitagawa, H. (2008). Arctic routing: Challenges and opportunities. Link

Abbasov, F. (2018, February 28). Fears for Arctic ecosystem as shipping milestone reached. Link

Fundamental challenges

Economic viability
Arctic shipping routes are potential alternatives to those that cross the Suez- and Panama canals.⁷ As of 2017, Trans Arctic shipping routes were found to be unreliable for container shipping. Because of the unpredictability of weather conditions, Arctic routes would be competitive only for bulk cargo shipping, as there are less complex logistics and more flexible schedules than container cargo.⁸ Arctic routes are also generally found to be more lucrative for Northern Asian destinations.

Insurance is another important consideration for shipping companies. Because of the greater risks of Arctic routes versus conventional ones, insurance companies may demand higher premiums. Insurance companies may also choose not to insure Arctic journeys at all.⁹
Geography
Climate, Geography and the Arctic’s weather patterns make routes crossing it less reliable than alternative routes.¹⁰ The Arctic Ocean can be shallow, limiting the size of ships that can cross. The Arctic also lacks exhaustive hydrographic and oceanographic data¹¹, making the navigation of the Arctic more risky and difficult.
Infrastructure
Another impediment is the considerable lack of infrastructure along the Arctic coast. There are no layover ports on the NSR outside of Northern Norway and Northeastern Russia Consequently, the new routes might only be viable strictly for cross-Arctic shipping.¹² The lack of infrastructure in the region worsens concerns about vessel safety.
Safety and technology
As mentioned before, the Arctic can be dangerous to traverse. Potential for human error is increased under extreme polar conditions. The lack of infrastructure additionally limits Search and Rescue (SAR) and salvage service capacity. This means that ships require higher safety and autonomy standards than conventional vessels.¹³ Communications systems commonly used in commercial shipping are often not suited for use at high latitudes due to poor coverage.¹⁴

Furthermore, naval personnel may lack the necessary training and experience to safely pass the region. A way to mitigate this problem is the use of piloting- and ice breaking services. However, this increases prices, lowering competitiveness.¹⁵ Weather conditions increase the uncertainty coming along with commercial naval activity. Sea ice can also damage ships. Not only does this increase costs, it can also be a danger for crew and cargo. Sea ice causes around 50% of shipwrecks in the region. Forecasting of sea ice- and weather conditions remains imprecise, increasing uncertainty.¹⁶

Video
Short video about how ice breakers work
Governance
The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) governs the general rules concerning the commercial- and military use of the world’s oceans.¹⁷ Additionally, the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) has devised the multilateral Polar Code in 2017, which regulates safety standards of naval operations and aims to mitigate the impact on the Arctic’s people and environment.¹⁸ Despite the existing regulatory framework, regional regulations are not always adequately enforced. Whether ships adhere to Polar Class certifications, as laid out by the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO), is often only done bureaucratically, without actual inspections. This increases the uncertainty and risk associated with Arctic naval operation.¹⁹
Environment and climate
Naval vessels emit black carbon.²⁰ Thus, even though Arctic routes may decrease the amount of global greenhouse gases, Arctic shipping may still increase global heating due to black carbon. Shipping is a particularly high polluting sector due to the use of Heavy Fuel Oils (HFO).²¹ 10% of vessels operating in the region use this type of fuel, especially cruise ships.²² The potential for oil spills increases with the number of vessels crossing the region.²³ HFO spills in particular are far more dangerous to marine life than leaks of other fuels used in the naval industry.²⁴ HFO is also more expensive to clean up once it is spilled; a 1 tonne leak of HFO in 2018 cost around $9 million to remove.²⁵ The introduction of invasive species and pathogens to the Arctic through the ballast water of naval vessels is another risk. Such species can damage the region’s delicate biodiversity.²⁶

Arcticle
Article from the WWF on the risks of Arctic shipping, including policy recommendations
Arctic- and Indigenous communities’ interests
Naval activity also has a profound impact on local communities. Notwithstanding the effects of global heating on such communities, increases in activity in the Arctic can harm the lives of such communities and their traditional ways of living. Some of the environmental risks of Arctic shipping can harm subsistence fishing and hunting done by circumpolar peoples. Cruise ships may pollute the region with grey- and black water. Fuel spills and the dumping of waste are also a threat to marine life. Fauna in the region may be impacted by increased human activity; hunting and fishing can be affected by the sound and vibration of naval vessels.²⁷

Hydrography is the science that measures and describes the physical features of the navigable portion of the Earth's surface and adjoining coastal areas.

Oceanography is the study of all aspects of the ocean. Oceanography covers a wide range of topics, from marine life and ecosystems to currents and waves, the movement of sediments, and seafloor geology.

Polar certification: a denotion of ice-going performance of a naval vessel.

The WMO is a specialised body of the United Nations, which is dedicated to international cooperation and coordination on the state and behaviour of the Earth’s atmosphere, its interaction with the land and oceans, the weather and climate it produces, and the resulting distribution of water resources.

Source

Black carbon decreases the reflectiveness of snow and ice (albedo). This makes snow and ice warm up faster under sunlight exposure.

Heavy fuel oil is one of the heaviest products of oil distillation and the heaviest commonly used fuel product.

Melia, N. et al. (2017). Future of the sea: Implications from opening Arctic Sea routes. Link

Schøyen, H., & Bråthen, S. (2011). The Northern Sea Route versus the Suez Canal: Cases from bulk shipping. Link
Melia, N. et al. (2017). Future of the sea: Implications from opening Arctic Sea routes. Link

Kitagawa, H. (2008). Arctic routing: Challenges and opportunities. Link

Buixadé Farré, A. et al. (2014). Commercial Arctic shipping through the Northeast Passage: Routes, resources, governance, technology, and infrastructure. Link
Kitagawa, H. (2008). Arctic routing: Challenges and opportunities. Link

Melia, N. et al. (2017). Future of the sea: Implications from opening Arctic Sea routes. Link
Arctic Council. (2009). Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment 2009 Report. Link

Buixadé Farré, A. et al. (2014). Commercial Arctic shipping through the Northeast Passage: Routes, resources, governance, technology, and infrastructure. Link
Lee, T., & Kim, H. J. (2015). Barriers of voyaging on the Northern Sea Route: A perspective from shipping Companies.Link
Melia, N. et al. (2017). Future of the sea: Implications from opening Arctic Sea routes. Link

Arctic Council. (2009). Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment 2009 Report. Link

IMO (2017) PUC_1503_14 or Polar Code (A.1024(26) Ships operating in polar waters) Link

Melia, N. et al. (2017). Future of the sea: Implications from opening Arctic Sea routes. Link

Aksenov, Y. et al. (2017). On the future navigability of Arctic sea routes: High-resolution projections of the Arctic Ocean and sea ice. Link

UN. (1982). United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) or 1833 U.N.T.S. 397. Link

IMO (2017) PUC_1503_14 or Polar Code (A.1024(26) Ships operating in polar waters) Link

Sergunin, A., & Gjørv, G. H. (2020). The Politics of Russian Arctic shipping: Evolving security and geopolitical factors. Link

Melia, N. et al. (2017). Future of the sea: Implications from opening Arctic Sea routes. Link
ksenov, Y. et al. (2017). On the future navigability of Arctic sea routes: High-resolution projections of the Arctic Ocean and sea ice. Link

Transport & Environment. (n.d.). Arctic. Link
Smith, L. C., & Stephenson, S. R. (2013). New Trans-Arctic shipping routes navigable by midcentury. Link

Arctic Council. (2021). Navigating the future of Arctic shipping. Arctic Council. Link
Abbasov, F. et al. (2018). Cost analysis of Arctic HFO ban for cruise shipping. Link

Transport & Environment. (n.d.). Arctic. Link

Abbasov, F. et al. (2018). Cost analysis of Arctic HFO ban for cruise shipping. Link

Desroches, K. (2018. Response wraps up on Shuyak Island oil spill. Link

Arctic Council. (2009). Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment 2009 Report. Link
Melia, N. et al. (2017). Future of the sea: Implications from opening Arctic Sea routes. Link

Arctic Council. (2009). Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment 2009 Report. Link

Key stakeholders

Canada, Denmark (including Greenland), Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden, and the United States have territory within the Arctic. These countries’ national legislation and international law govern the region.²⁹ Of particular interest to these countries is the legal status of Arctic waters. Territorial claims and the duties states have when it comes to the passage of vessels through Arctic shipping routes is controversial. Countries may have economic, strategic, or security interests underpinning their stances on the legal status of Arctic waters.³⁰

Arctic states

The previous section has discussed the economic potential of the Arctic region with all its complexities and uncertainties. Of particular interest to private companies and their customers alike are the logistical advantages through shorter shipping times that may result from the opening of Arctic shipping routes. Decreases in the price of logistics and lower risk of piracy may be of interest to these actors. For companies, reliable and safe maritime routes with clear legislation can decrease the opportunity costs for considering the Arctic for their operation.

Private companies and consumers

Indigenous communities

The Arctic has a population of around 4 million people. 10% of these are members of the more than 40 Indigenous groups that populate the region. Examples of Indigenous groups in the Arctic are the Sámi in Finland, Sweden, Norway, and Russia, Nenets, Khanty, Evenk and Chukchi in Russia, and the Inuit (Iñupiat in Alaska, Inuvialuit in Canada and Kalaallit in Greenland). Indigenous communities’ livelihoods and traditional ways of living are under threat by global heating and by increased human activity in the Arctic.²⁸

The International Maritime Organisation (IMO) is the UN specialised agency with the responsibility for the safety and security of shipping and the prevention of pollution by ships. It is tasked with creating a level playing field for commercial actors, so that no compromises on safety, security, and environmental performance are made to increase profits. IMO treaties are implemented into national law by the IMO’s member states.³¹

The Arctic Council³² is an intergovernmental organisation that promotes cooperation between Arctic states, Arctic Indigenous peoples, and other Arctic inhabitants. It was established in 1996. The Arctic council is a forum of countries and organisations; it has no programming budget, nor can it implement its guidelines or recommendations. Arctic states generally are responsible for sponsoring projects and implementation. The Council’s mandate specifically excludes military security. The Council has six permanent participant organisations that represent Indigenous peoples of the region, among which are the Inuit Circumpolar Council (ICC)³³ and the Saami Council.³⁴

International and intergovernmental organisations

WWF. (n.d.). Arctic communities. Link

Arctic Council. (n.d.). Arctic States. Link

Lothe, L. (2010). Arctic Shipping Routes and UNCLOS III. Link

IMO. (n.d.). Introduction to IMO. Link

Arctic Council. (1996). Ottawa Declaration. Link

Inuit Circumpolar Council. (n.d.). ICC Greenland. Link

Saami Council. (n.d.). The Saami Council. Sámiráđđi. Link

Measures in place

Two important documents that govern commercial naval activity are the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and the Polar Code. UNCLOS is part of the law of the sea, a body of law governing nautical issues and maritime disputes.³⁵ UNCLOS, among other things, sets out the areas of the seas in which countries have the right to natural resource exploitation. The Polar Code is an agreement that regulates the safety of naval operation in the Arctic and the environmental protection of the region.³⁶

The Arctic Council also has a number of agreements in force among its member states. These include Agreement on the Cooperation on Aeronautical and Maritime Search and Rescue in the Arctic (SAR agreement)³⁷, the Agreement on Cooperation on Marine Oil Pollution Preparedness and Response in the Arctic (MOPSA)³⁸, and the Agreement on Enhancing International Arctic Scientific Cooperation.³⁹

The Polar Code covers the full range of design, construction, equipment, operational, training, search and rescue and environmental protection matters relevant to ships operating in the inhospitable waters surrounding the two poles.

Source

Signed in Nuuk (Greenland) in 2011, the objective of the SAR Agreement is to strengthen aeronautical and maritime search and rescue cooperation and coordination in the Arctic.

Source

Signed in Kiruna (Sweden) in 2016, the objective of the MOSPA Agreement is to strengthen cooperation, coordination, and mutual assistance on oil pollution preparedness and response in the Arctic in order to protect the marine environment from pollution by oil.

Source

Signed in Fairbanks (USA) in 2017, the Arctic Science Agreement aims to increase international research collaboration and to support easier movement of researchers and research equipment across the Arctic region.

Source

UN. (1982). United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) or 1833 U.N.T.S. 397. Link

IMO. (2017). International Code for Ships Operating in Polar Waters (Polar Code). Link

Arctic Council. (2011). Agreement on the Cooperation on Aeronautical and Maritime Search and Rescue in the Arctic. Link

Arctic Council. (2013). Agreement on Cooperation on Marine Oil Pollution Preparedness and Response in the Arctic. Link

Arctic Council. (2017). Agreement on Enhancing International Arctic Scientific Cooperation. Link

Outlook

The commercial viability of in particular trans-Arctic shipping remains questionable. The Arctic Council argues that further research into shipping technologies is needed if Arctic shipping is to be made competitive.⁴⁰ This is important also in light of the environmental damage human activity can cause in the vulnerable Arctic.⁴¹ Another important factor decreasing the viability of Arctic shipping is the lack of complete hydrographic- and oceanographic data and inadequate modelling capabilities for predicting weather- and ice conditions. On top of that, ways need to be found to better weigh the environmental risks with the economic benefits of Arctic naval activity.⁴²

Arctic shipping is on the rise. Whether the economic opportunities weigh up against the environmental- and human consequences is not entirely clear. Difficult decisions need to be made that choose between- and balance the interests of commercial-, state-, and Indigenous actors. This in particular must be done to protect vulnerable environments and -people from the effects of unregulated business interests.

Food for thought

Do the (potential) economic benefits of Arctic shipping outweigh the environmental- and societal costs?
How can Arctic states and International Organisations account for Arctic peoples’ interests in decision making surrounding naval activity in the region?
Should Arctic states subsidise the development of new naval technologies?
How should Arctic states cooperate on the safety of shipping in the region?

Arctic Council. (2009). Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment 2009 Report. Link

Traut, M. et al. (2014). Propulsive power contribution of a kite and a Flettner rotor on selected shipping routes. Link

Aksenov, Y. et al. (2017). On the future navigability of Arctic sea routes: High-resolution projections of the Arctic Ocean and sea ice. Link
Arctic Council. (2009). Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment 2009 Report. Link

Download pdf

In case you need it

We gathered all the essential information of your TO is a PDF document for your convenience.

Click on the button below to download your Topic Overview, but be aware that the PDF document might not contain all the information from the website (pictures, videos, visuals, etc).

DOWNLOAD NOW

Motion for a resolution

Submitted by:
Hayden Anderson (ES), Luka Arsenović (RS), Zubin Battaglia (IT), Ensar Esen (NL), Isabel Fernandez (CZ), Alva Fjellström (SÁ), Ana Gabelic (HR), Monika Gabrielyan (AM), Vicky Garnier (FR), Nuno Oliveira (PT), Karin Pust (SI), Nea-Sofia Rikala (FI), Mariolina Villem (LU), Ali Sinan Yel (TR), Luc Vorsteveld (Chairperson, NL)

The European Youth Parliament aims to regulate and stimulate Arctic shipping, bearing in mind the environmental ramifications of commercial naval activity in the region. It aims to achieve by revising and improving existing international regulations and agreements and by investing in physical- and communications infrastructure in the region. It also proposes to develop technologies to make Arctic shipping more sustainable, improving safety standards, and data availability,

A. Considering the potential economic benefits Arctic shipping can have for Arctic States,

B. Whereas shipping routes through the Arctic are significantly shorter than conventional routes causing less greenhouse gas emissions,

C. Whereas Arctic shipping generates pollution due to sound, vibration, and light, fuel spillages, emission of black carbon increasing the albedo of sea ice, and invasive species being carried in ballast water and on the hulls of ships,

D. Noting the potential effects of commercial activity in the Arctic may pose to traditional Indigenous cultural practices due to disruption of marine life,

E. Noting the lack of infrastructure in the Arctic,

F. Considering that the development of infrastructure in the Arctic requires high investment costs,

G. Noting with regret that sustainable technologies are yet to be fully developed and implemented in commercial shipping,

H. Bearing in mind that insurance and icebreaking- and piloting¹ fees for Arctic shipping can be significant costs for shipping companies,

I. Concerned with the lack of cohesive regulations, limited policy revision, and lack of enforcement of policies and regulations,

J. Noting the lack of oceanographic-² and hydrographic³ data available for the Arctic,

K. Noting the lack of communication services coverage in the Arctic,

L. Noting the lack of training of naval personnel in Arctic navigation,

M. Noting the unpredictable- and extreme weather in the Arctic,

N. Noting the inadequate safety standards for ships,

O. Concerned that Indigenous peoples’ voices are often not accounted for in decision making;

1. Urges Arctic States to fully implement the Polar Code⁴;

2. Calls upon the Arctic Council to regularly revise the Agreement on Cooperation on Aeronautical and Maritime Search and Rescue in the Arctic (SAR Agreement)⁵ as well as the Agreement on Cooperation on Marine Oil Pollution Preparedness and Response in the Arctic (MOSPA)⁶ based on economic developments;

3. Requests Arctic States to increase investment in infrastructure in the Arctic such as layover ports, guided by a multi-year strategy to be created by the Arctic Council;

4. Suggests Arctic States implement an icebreaking- and piloting fee for ships entering the Arctic, with larger vessels paying more than smaller ones;

5. Suggests Arctic States to subsidise insurance for Arctic shipping voyages departing from local ports;

6. Requests the Sustainable Development Working Group (SDWG) of the Arctic Council to further research hydrogen- and ammonia fuel cells;

7. Calls upon the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) to mandate the use of carbon catching technologies for ships entering the Arctic;

8. Calls upon the IMO to amend the Polar Code to mandate the use of filters, laser, and UV systems to eliminate invasive species present in ballast water and antifouling coatings on ship hulls;

9. Instructs the European Investment Bank (EIB) to fund the development of hybrid ships;

10. Calls upon Arctic States to financially support initiatives on the gathering of hydrographic and oceanographic data of the Arctic region;

11. Directs the European Space Agency (ESA) to launch communication satellites covering the Arctic region;

12. Requests the Arctic Council’s Indigenous Peoples Secretariat to survey members of Indigenous communities on the effects of Arctic shipping on Indigenous communities’ traditional ways of living.

Please submit a short form if you want to report any bugs or errors →

Report an error

A maritime pilot manoeuvres ships through dangerous or congested waters, such as harbours or river mouths.

Hydrography is the science that measures and describes the physical features of the navigable portion of the Earth’s surface and adjoining coastal areas.

The Polar Code is an agreement that regulates the safety of naval operation in the Arctic and the environmental protection of the region.

The SAR agreement coordinates international search and rescue (SAR) coverage and response in the Arctic and establishes the area of SAR responsibility of each country.

The MOSPA Agreement aims to strengthen cooperation, coordination and mutual assistance among Arctic Council members on oil pollution preparedness and response in the Arctic to protect the marine environment from pollution by oil.