According to the UN, there are more than 476 million indigenous people living in 90 countries across the world, which form more than 5000 distinct groups.[1] Indigenous peoples’ rights have been protected through various international legal mechanisms. The very first international legally binding treaty to be adopted was the Indigenous and Tribal Populations Convention, C107, by the ILO in 1957. However, almost after 30 years in 1989 due to ‘developments in international law’[2] it was upgraded as C169, Indigenous and Tribal Populations Convention. This is the only internationally legally binding document supporting indigenous peoples’ rights. Despite this fact, the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) has more prominence. The UNDRIP was adopted in 2007 and is considered one of the ground documents on  the protection of indigenous peoples’ rights. One of the core concepts embraced in the declaration is self-determination- the right to allow them to freely decide on their political, economic, social and cultural status. The self-determination of people is in the heart of the UN Charter, the integral document of the UN. The UN Charter’s Article 1 explicitly states that the ‘respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of people’[3] is key for universal peace. Hence the concept ‘people’ was generic and vague, however it is one of the first official documents where the self-determination of nations is highlighted. In general, there was no mention of the indigenous peoples’ right in international law up until 1957.

Minority rights, and, in general, human rights stand at the heart of the EU values and Article 2 of  The Treaty on European Union (TEU) which states that ‘The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities.’[4] Therefore, we can say that the rights of minorities and indigenous peoples are safeguarded by legal means.

Conventional sovereignty means indivisible and functioning under one authority. If the state lost its sovereignty it means ‘it is fractured and shared among the States and non-State actors in multi-level governance structure.’[5] But what does it mean to have sovereignty within indigenous people’s context? The concept of indigenous sovereignty poses a challenge to the political and moral primacy of nation-states, with an end goal of attaining acknowledgement and respect for "difference and diversity" in various levels of governance.[6] In this context there is no sole response for it but the most commonly adopted approach is that indigenous people have the autonomy to tackle their internal affairs and own a power to participate in decision-making processes.

Indigenous populations have lived in the Arctic area for millennia. Approximately, there are more than 40 different ethnic groups inhabiting the Arctic, which comprises 10 percent of the overall population of the region.[7] Except for Iceland all other Arctic countries have indigenous peoples populated within their territories. This is because, most of Iceland's population originated from Northern Europe since the 9th century AD, when settlements first appeared there.[8] Sami and Inuit are considered Arctic indigenous people within the European Union, however the latter group are residing within Greenland, which is included into the Overseas Countries and Territories (OCTs). Sami people are the only officially known indigenous people’s group within the EU.

Among four EU and EEZ Arctic countries, Sweden and Finland have not ratified ILO Convention N.169, denouncing themselves of any legal obligations that would follow from the Convention in relation to how their indigenous peoples are regarded.[9] However, despite having ratified the Convention, Norway and Denmark appear to have perceived its provisions in a way that has prevented their indigenous populations from fully utilizing its benefits, specifically in relation to land entitlements.[10] These gaps underline shortcomings in the protection of indigenous peoples’ rights within given four EU and EEZ Arctic countries. 

Sami people

According to the International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs the estimated number of Sami people is 50-100.000, which is the most shared by Norway, approximately 50-60.000, then Sweden around 20.000, and 8000 in Finland. In Russia only around 2000 people are populated.[11] Except Russia, in all three countries Sami people have their own parliament. States persist in enforcing their own domestic legislation upon the indigenous populations residing within their territorial limits, which are overseen by their respective domestic judicial frameworks.[12]

Sami People are entitled to various legislative systems due to their geographical distribution across the region. They do not have their own sovereign nation state. In this instance practicing self-determination rights is crucial to protect traditional livelihoods and rights. One of the essential nuances of self-determination for them is practicing it freely without deeming national borders together with all Sami people.[13] The geographic area which Sami people live is called Sapmi. ‘Indigenous peoples have long lived there before the introduction of modern borders’[14], due to historical reasons four countries divided Sami settlement regions, resulting in multiple authorities and legislators. Thus, Sami parliaments have an influence within their nation state.[15] 

For centuries Sami people were regarded as  marginalized groups, only in recently due to their activism there have been much discussion around them. In Finland and Norway they are considered indigenous peoples, whereas in Sweden as minority groups. Minorities are the peoples who are ‘in a non-dominant position vis-à-vis the dominant ethnic population’[16] and unlike indigenous peoples it is not always the case that minority groups possess the extensive ancestral, traditional, and spiritual ties to their lands that are commonly linked with self-perception as indigenous peoples.[17] However, in Sami people’s case they have inhabited in Scandinavia for thousands of years and they are spread to more than 20% of the Sweden’s territory. There are also limitations in the legislation of Sweden. In the Swedish national law, the sole legal framework that pertains to the Sámi community is the Reindeer Husbandry Act, which exclusively concerns Sámi individuals who engage in reindeer herding and maintain belonging in a Sámi village.

Overall Sami people rights are not violated as much as indigenous peoples living within repressive regimes, vice versa the countries hosting Sami majority are interested in supporting the celebration of diversity.

The Sami Council (SC) is a non-governmental organization and was founded in 1956, making it one of the oldest indigenous peoples organizations. It is an umbrella organization involving Sami indigenous peoples’ organizations from all four countries. The primary objective of the Saami Council is to foster a sense of kinship among the Saami populace, ensure acknowledgement of the Saami as a distinct nation, and uphold the cultural, political, economic, and social entitlements of the Saami within the legislative frameworks of the four states.[18] The Sámi Council (SC) is recognized as the most prominent Sámi actor on the global stage, particularly its involvement in the European Union is notable. The preeminent body of the Saami Council is the Saami Conference, convened on a quadrennial basis. The Saami Council’s EU Unit is a recent mechanism, established in 2019, aiming to improve and develop communication between the parties, and increase competence-building.

As a part of the 1995 enlargement of the EU, Sweden and Finland gained the EU accession and in 1994 Norway became part of the European Economic Area (EEA). These memberships also brought alterations to the legal weight of the Sami people. According to the Sami Parliament in Sweden, Sami self-determination is about making independent decisions about the matters that affect them, ‘it is not about forming a new state.’[19]

The main economic activity for the Sami communities is reindeer husbandry, however also historically they have been actively engaged in various forms of traditional agriculture such as fishing, hunting and handcrafting. ‘The Sami carry out our activities in a way that respects nature and uses lands, natural recourses and biodiversity in a sustainable manner.’[20] Therefore, in general Arctic peoples commonly perceive themselves as an inseparable component, equitable member of the environment, rather than existing outside of nature. Also, harsh climatic conditions created the culture of sharing, as they readily offer aid to those in need, providing sustenance, labor, equipment, and services without the anticipation of immediate reciprocation.[21] This is seen both as exhibition of a remarkable proclivity for altruism and sustainability.

In Arctic Youth Leaders 2019 Summit climate change was one of the main concerns for the indigenous groups and in the adopted declaration it is stated that their daily lives are hugely threatened by global warming. Due to occurring climate change predicting seasons, especially winters, has become exceedingly challenging: seasons’ arrival is delayed significantly. This means reindeer herders once who relied on nature’s resource abundance, now also must adopt synthetic food to sustain their activities, which comes with additional cost.

EU policies towards Arctic peoples

As it is stated in the EU policies and resolutions, it prioritises international law when it comes to dealing with indigenous peoples. One of them is the Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, adopted in 1989 by the International Labour Organization (ILO), which is highlighted most of the EU official documents on the indigenous peoples, encouraging member states to ratify it. Overall, four EU countries have ratified it, of which only two are Arctic countries.

The Treaty of the European Union Article 2 states that ‘The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities.[22] Therefore Member States while implementing EU law are subject to these provisions. However, as these areas are not included into the EU’s exclusive competences,  the responsibility for safeguarding fundamental rights through the implementation of domestic legislation and adherence to international commitments rests with individual member states.[23]

Indigenous peoples starting from the first EU Joint Communication (JC) on the Arctic in 2008 have been one of the pressing matters. In the document their livelihoods, dependencies, traditional activities are respected and aimed to be preserved. One year prior to JC, the ban on commercial whaling occurred, which also was mentioned in the  JC and was followed by a huge criticism of indigenous peoples. At present, four political entities in Europe are involved in the practice of hunting whales, namely Iceland, Norway, Greenland, and the Faroe Islands and all are a constituent of the International Whaling Commission, while none of them holds membership within the European Union.[24] Despite  these areas not being included into the EU area, the moratorium had a direct effect on the indigenous communities, the EU market would not be available for the consumption of the whale products. Only Greenlandic community are assigned certain catch limits - Aboriginal Subsistence Whaling Quota, exceptions set by the International Whaling Commission (IWC), for meeting basic nutritional need. The ban on whaling has been seen as one of the obstacles to the EU membership of Iceland.[25] The EU holds observer status in the IWC and in the meantime 25 Member States are parties to IWC.[26] Similarly in the second JC adopted by the EU in 2012 the emphasis put on indigenous peoples was considerably striking. In fact, there was two times more mention of ‘indigenous’ people’s phrase than in the first communication. If in the first JC there was special section dedicated to indigenous peoples and it was the only part where they have been widely discussed, in the 2012 JC indigenous peoples have been integrated into the preliminary summary, international cooperation, climate change, engagement within the EU. Also, for the first time Sami people was mentioned in the Arctic policy of the EU, however despite they have been recognized as an indigenous people’s group, there was avoidance of usage the ‘Sami indigenous peoples’ notion in the policy, but there was a referral to them as ‘Sami population’ or ‘culture’. However, it was in the 2016 JC where EU acknowledged that ‘the Saami and the Inuit are the only nationally recognised indigenous peoples living partly on the territory of EU Member States.’[27] Dialogues between indigenous peoples and the EU have been mentioned throughout all JCs and dialogue meetings between parties have been held in order to find common grounds for the existing challenges. After all, in 2021 the term Indigenous Peoples’ Dialogue emerged, serving to the proper representation and participation of the given groups. A further instance of this is the organization of the EU Arctic Forums[28], where starting from 2021 the forum was renamed as EU Arctic Forum and Indigenous Peoples’ Dialogue. The Forum aims to facilitate a meeting of crucial players as well as involved stakeholders to address the pressing challenges. President of the Sami parliament in Norway, Silje Karine Muotka in her speech during the 2023 Forum in Nuuk, Greenland  mentioned that the similar international events are essential for them to develop cooperation, stay connected with other indigenous peoples groups and to form common grounds.[29] Besides, in her speech she mentioned  a point on the ignorance of indigenous voices when it comes decision-making – specifically cases related to mining, clean energy projects which are intended or already exist in indigenous peoples lands. Thus, the Forum can be regarded as a formal setting where the exchange of ideas takes place.

In recent years, it is argued that the EU has transitioned from a comparatively inactive stance towards to a significantly more proactive engagement in guaranteeing the efficacy of these rights in its policies.[30] This can be observed through undertakings which have been adopted or the space given to the Arctic related projects. ‘On the Arctic: opportunities, concerns and security challenges’ a European Parliament (EP) Resolution was adopted in 2021, October. Here the EU tries widely to address indigenous peoples’ challenges, however only Sami people are mentioned. Whereas Sami people have been highlighted along the whole geographical area they cover, to put it in another way Russia is also included. If in the previous communications the political relations between the region’s countries are seen as a good example of cooperation, in this document Russia’s growing expansionary threat is seen as a disruption of the peace in the region. It is also regarded in the diminishing role of the indigenous peoples in the political and civil participation of the country.[31]

After having policy documents in place, what are the primary policy instruments aimed at enhancing the livelihoods of indigenous peoples? As mentioned earlier EU Arctic policies primarily constitutes to soft power. There are several undertakings of the EU in the region which will be further discussed in this part. The EU’s key programme in research and innovation is Horizon 2020[32], later renamed as Horizon Europe for the 2021-2027 period has a budget of 95.5 billion euro. Within the programme along with climate, biodiversity related research of the region, also indigenous people’s capacity building projects, relevancy of indigenous people’s knowledge in climate change studies, study of their languages, history and many other topics have been funded and studied. Within the first half of the Horizon programme there were two groups’ projects, firstly, ones which directly addressed Arctic indigenous peoples and the other which also studied indigenous peoples globally. One of the pertinent projects was the Indigenous Climate Change Impacts Observation Network, with studies  being done to see if indigenous and local knowledge might help with climate studies. Certainly, there were criticisms around the programme as well, Anne Gaspers etc. argue that in Horizon Europe there is less space given to two main groups – women and indigenous peoples, which are essential in addressing climate change through nature-based solutions (NbS). Authors bring up the vitality of the indigenous knowledge in fighting climate calamities.[33] Indigenous peoples' perspectives and traditional knowledge are frequently taken into account when developing capacity under multilateral environmental agreements like the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, the Kyoto Protocol, and the Convention on Biodiversity, however, these groups are typically only marginally involved in developing the details of these agreements or in their implementation.[34]

Horizon 2020 had around 20 funded projects which entailed both Arctic indigenous people and climate, 200 projects which entailed indigenous peoples in general and around 200 projects entailed both climate and Arctic region, out of total 35.000 projects.  Overall, Horizon 2020 programme and the successor Horizon Europe is regarded as a successful example of cooperation, scientific research and innovation.

Interreg Europe is one of the programmes which is contributing to the regional development within the framework of the cohesion policy. Within the Arctic region there are two Interreg programmes - The Northern Periphery and Arctic (NPA), and Interreg Aurora. The NPA program’s geographic area covers broader areas, including parts of the Arctic and non-Arctic areas, aiming to support a wide range of areas, mainly energy efficiency, entrepreneurship, innovation and protection of the natural and cultural heritage. Thus, this programme was not directly addressed to the indigenous group, but also included them. Within the programme frame of 2014-2020, overall, 8 projects have been funded which directly were addressed to the indigenous groups, mostly related to tourism, sustainability. Unlike NPA programme, Interreg Aurora programme is specifically integrated with the Sapmi area and Sami people.[35]

Interreg Aurora programme is another EU (co)funded project aiming to support cross-border cooperation area ‘through social inclusion, digitalization and green transition’ between the years of 2021-2027 with a budget of 165 million Euro.[36] The considerable financial support is contributed by Norwegian IR[37]-funding and national co-funding, considering that the overall budget of Interreg is 379 million, therefore states provide up to 80% of the funds needed for cooperation.[38]The programme is split between two geographical areas within Europe – Aurora and Sapmi. The programme is designed to contribute to the EU’s commitment to Sustainable Development Goals under the Smart, Green, Social and Cooperation division. Therefore, the nature of the conducted projects varies, serving to SDGs.  

Over time, the growing involvement of the European Union (EU) in the area becomes noticeable, particularly concerning the native populations. The recent EU Arctic policy emphasizes the necessity of incorporating the Arctic into both the external and internal aspects of EU relations for the purpose of "sustainable connectivity."[39] This implies the absence of a significant component, which is the EU's position as an observer in the Arctic Council. While the EU's interactions with indigenous communities are largely collaborative, obtaining observer status within the Arctic Council remains a crucial step.