(Addressing the IPCC)
(1) intro (1 page)
According to NASA, Arctic sea ice is now declining at a rate of 12.85% per decade[footnoteRef:0] which not only has negative implications for climate change leading to extreme weather events, but also affects international relations. I will be focusing specifically on the effects on natural resources and development in the Arctic region. The melting ice will cause natural resources such as minerals, metals, oil, and natural gas to become easily extractable, providing ample opportunities for development and trade. However, this will have impacts on the lives of those who call the Arctic home and the traditional ways of life of the indigenous people. Countries in the region will also be vying for control over development for their own economic gains. Given the situation, my policy recommendations are to create an agreement delineating clear borders in the Arctic region to determine which countries have control over which areas, strengthen the bargaining power of Arctic indigenous peoples’ groups in order to make sure their communities are protected, and to create an agreement regarding extraction and development backed up by science in order to minimize environmental damage. [0: NASA, Arctic Sea Ice Minimum, (NSIDC/NASA, 2019) 1.]
(2) what policy options should be considered (highlighted above)? advantages /disadvantages
The first issue that comes up in regard to resource extraction and development in the Arctic is “who gets what?”. The main actors are the Arctic countries which include: Canada, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Iceland, Greenland (under Denmark), Russia, and the United States. Land wise, Russia occupies the most territory in the region and thus would have more area to profit from when it comes to resource extraction and development[footnoteRef:1]. [1: Eric Roston, How a Melting Arctic Changes Everything, (Bloomberg, 2017) 1. ]
(3) support for your argument (this may include data/visuals)
(4) a conclusion that reiterates and reinforces your policy recommendations.