University of Life Sciences NORAGRIC
Master of Development Studies 2007
Sustainability for the reindeer herding Samis with The Law of Finnmark
Gry Løge Lid
The Department of International Environment and Development Studies, Noragric, is the international gateway for the Norwegian University of Life Sciences (UMB). 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 theses are the final theses submitted by students in order to fulfil the requirements under the Noragric Master programme “Management of Natural Resources and Sustainable Agriculture” (MNRSA), “Development Studies” and other Master programmes.
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.
© Gry Løge Lid, May 2007 [email protected]
Noragric
Department of International Environment and Development Studies Norwegian University of Life Science (UMB)
P.O. Box 5003 N-1432 Ås Norway
Tel.: +47 64 96 52 00 Fax: +47 64 96 52 01
Internet: http://www.umb.no/noragric
Acknowledgements
During thirteen years of education in public schools in Norway only two hours were spent on learning about the Sami people. This has annoyed me ever since. Through this study I was finally able to learn more about the Sami people, and especially the people and culture of the reindeer herding Samis. For this I will forever be grateful.
First of all I will thank my supervisor, Cassandra Bergstrøm, for advising me through the whole process of this research. Your questions really helped me in times of confusion and I am grateful for your patience and time.
I will also like to thank Norske Reindriftsamers Landsforbund in Tromsø and Reindriftsforvaltningen in Alta for all the help and information provided to me.
A huge ‘thanks` to all the persons I have met and interviewed. Thank you for using of your time and sharing your knowledge with me. A special thanks to those who invited me to their homes and cabins and showed me what reindeer herding is really about.
I also need to thank Silje for helping me to “understand” Finnmark and her mother Bjørg for letting me stay in her house in Alta during my field work.
Finally, to all of you, thanks for the coffee!
Declaration
I, Gry Løge Lid, declare hereby to the Senate of the University of Life Sciences (UMB) in Norway that the present thesis is the original product of my own research. All sources of information used as references and material other than my own are duly acknowledged. The present work has not been submitted to any university other than UMB for any type of academic degree.
Ås, May 2007 Gry Løge Lid
Abstract
The Law of Finnmark, Finnmarksloven, has the aim of arranging for land and natural resources in Finnmark to be managed in an ecological sustainable way that will benefit the inhabitants of Finnmark, and especially the Sami peoples.
The present study addresses the issue of sustainability for one group of Samis in Finnmark, namely the reindeer herders. The Sami reindeer herders, dependant on the right to use land and natural resources for herding, belong to a minority in Finnmark. Using the theory of political ecology this study seeks to understand the present situation regarding sustainability for the reindeer herding Samis and the possible impacts of the Law of Finnmark.
Focusing on the process behind the law, the implementation of the law and sustainability this study shows that the law can contribute to strengthen the rights of the Sami people but not necessarily the reindeer herding Samis. This study suggests that the Law of Finnmark may rather worsen than improve the present sustainability for the Sami reindeer herders by acknowledging and extending land rights to other groups of people in Finnmark, and thereby weaken the existing land rights for the Sami reindeer herders.
List of Figures
Page
Figure 1: Map of Norway……….. 11
Figure 2: Map of Finnmark……….... 11
List of Tables
Table 1: Persons interviewed……… 19Table 2: Herders interviewed………... 21
Table 3: Internal and external factors influencing the reindeer herding……….. 34
Table 4: Herders interviewed according to number of reindeer owned………… 47
List of Content
Page Title page……….. I About Noragric……….. II Acknowledgements……… III Declaration……… IV Abstract………. V List of figures……… VI List of tables………. VII List of content……….. VIII
Chapter 1………... ……. Introduction………. 1
1.1 Scenery………. 1
1.2 Objectives………. 5
Chapter 2………. Theoretical Approach……….. 6
2.1 Political ecology……… 6
Chapter 3…………... Background……….. 10
3.1 The study area………... 10
3.2 The Sami reindeer herders in Finnmark……… 12
3.3 Indigenous peoples……… 14
3.4 The Law of Finnmark……… 15
Chapter 4……….... Research Methods………... 17
4.1 Social research method………. 17
4.2 Sampling………... 18
4.3 Data collection method………. 21
4.5 Limitations……… 23
Chapter 5……… Findings and Discussion………. 24
A. The process behind the Law of Finnmark………… 24
1. The issue of power………. 24
2. The issue of rights………. 29
3. The issue of management……….. 33
B. The implementation of the Law of Finnmark……. 36
1. The issue of power……….. 36
2. The issue of rights………... 39
3. The issue of management……… 41
C. Sustainability……….. 45
1. Economic sustainability……….. 45
2. Cultural sustainability………. 51
3. Social sustainability……… 55
4. Ecological sustainability……… 59
Chapter 6……… Conclusion………. 64
List of references……… ……….. i
Appendix 1………. Check list for interview with an organisation/institution…. a Appendix 2……… Check list for interview with reindeer herders in Finnmark… c
1. Introduction
The Law of Finnmark, lov om rettsforhold og forvaltning av grunn og naturressurser i Finnmark fylke, was implemented 1st of July 2006. This law has one main aim, namely, to arrange for land and natural resources in Finnmark to be managed in an ecological
sustainable way that will benefit the inhabitants of Finnmark, and especially the Sami peoples (Ot.prp. 53, 2002-2003: 9-11). In the law there are two concepts which are referred to
repeatedly; rights and management. The ideas of focusing clearly on indigenous peoples rights and implement a local management system were the reasons behind the Sami Rights Committee’s, Samerettsutvalget, initial work which resulted in the Law of Finnmark. This study questions whether or not this law is an appropriate tool to both pursue the aim of securing indigenous peoples rights and achieve a local system of management of land and natural resources by focusing on ecological, economic, social and cultural sustainability for one group of Samis, namely, the reindeer herders.
1.1 Scenery
Since the border treaty between Sweden and Norway in 1751, the reindeer herding Samis have been recognized as having the right to use land areas in the far north for herding purposes (Minde, 1989). The right is clearly stated in the attachment to the treaty,
Lappekodicillen. The right to use land for herding continues to be recognized by the state of Norway (Reindriftsloven, 1978). Nonetheless question remains as to what kind of land right the reindeer herders have and should have. In Finnmark, the Norwegian state was until the implementation of the law controlling 96% of the total land areas. According to Hågvar (1989) the reason for such a large area of state controlled land could be due to the nomadic livelihood of the Samis which have historically been a majority of the inhabitants. While the majority in other districts of Norway started to cultivate the land, reside on it and thereby acquire proprietary rights to it, the nomadic livelihood was common for a longer period in Finnmark. This could be the reason the inhabitants in Finnmark did not get right to control land but only right to access and use the land. Even if the reindeer herding Samis have been recognized the right to use a large area of Finnmark for herding purposes, the right have varied through history dependent on other stakeholders and existing management policies.
As Bergstrøm (2005: 247) writes:“…there are important differences among forest, mountain and coastal Samis. There are also differences between Sami herders and Norwegian farmers,
differences between the Ministries of Agriculture and Environment…. The roles and differences of these agents have changed over time”.
A central stakeholder is the state of Norway. The interests of the state have resulted in several conflicts with the reindeer herders regarding the use of land through history. According to Bjørklund (1999) the conflicts were first about security considerations, later about agricultural interests, then about development interests and finally about environmental considerations.
While the Samis have had their own management system of reindeer herding in Finnmark based on kinship, the state of Norway have simultaneously introduced various management systems based on the four factors mentioned above, security, agriculture, development and environment (ibid). Today the Norwegian state continues to have several aims regarding the reindeer herding in Finnmark. According to Labba et al. (2006: 165) the aims are to
strengthen the rights of the Samis as indigenous peoples, to maintain clear borders towards Russia, Finland and Sweden, to achieve economic surplus from the herding and to obtain ecological sustainability. Both the aim to strengthen the rights of the Samis as indigenous peoples and the aim to improve state security by upholding a certain amount of inhabitants support the increase of total number of reindeer herders in the area. Contrary to this the aim to improve the economic viability of herding supports that the increase of total number of
reindeer herders should decrease at the same time as the total number of reindeer should increase. Finally, the ecological aim supports that the total number of reindeer should decrease to avoid land degradation of the herding areas through overgrazing. Labba et al.
writes that the four different aims in Finnmark have led to a management system which on one side is subsidising the reindeer herders and on the other side is working to reduce the total number of reindeer and herders (ibid). The various interests and management systems of the state has never through history recognized complete control of the land or proprietary right to the Sami herders, only right to access and use the land were granted. Therefore the herders have struggled and are still struggling to maintain and strengthen the existing right to access and use land for herding purposes.
The various interests in Finnmark from the different actors and stakeholders have through history led to different challenges for the reindeer herding Samis in terms of sustainability.
These challenges will be presented here and concerns all, ecological, economical, social and cultural sustainability, and thereby the entire livelihood of the Sami reindeer herders.
The first and most important challenge is the right to land. To be a reindeer herder is a way of life. This way of life is heavily dependant on the use of natural resources in large areas (Bull et al. 2001). There is a need of sufficient pastures for the herd, in all seasons. This demands access to large areas of land. There is a need to use natural resources such as woods, fish and small game when the herders move their herd from summer to winter pastures or from winter to summer pastures. The reindeer herding Samis therefore need to have access to and use vast areas of land to uphold their livelihood. Vistnes et al. (2004: 3) claim that more than 30% of the total areas used for reindeer herding in Norway have been lost due to construction of roads, power lines, cabins, hydroelectric power, pipelines, windmills, forest clearing and military activity, a large part of this being in Finnmark. The loss of land leads to an increased pressure on the remaining pastures which can have ecological consequences for the herders.
The second challenge is climatic change. Even small changes of the climate in the sub arctic area of Finnmark leading to warmer winters may be catastrophic for the reindeer (Berg, 1997). This is due to the increase of icing on the winter pastures which makes it difficult for the reindeer to reach the lichen and other types of food. The reindeer will thereby be in danger of starving during the winter if they are not given additional fodder. This will have economic consequences for the reindeer herders.
The third challenge is pollution. Pasture areas in Finnmark, as other natural resources are affected by different kinds of pollution. The pollution has many sources. One source of
pollution is land degradation from development projects, like the construction of a power line.
Another source is the use of snow scooters and all terrain vehicles in the herding area (ibid).
Yet another source of pollution is environmental accidents like the radioactive fallout that came after the Chernobyl accident in 1996 where an atomic power plant exploded in Ukraine (ibid). The pollution from these sources is partaking in degrading the herding areas and thereby reducing the possible areas for grazing, which can lead to further ecological implications for the herders.
A fourth challenge is reduction of pasture areas and overgrazing. Since the land used for herding in Finnmark is the same land used by other stakeholders for different constructions a large pressure on the existing natural resources is created. According to Nellemann (1995) even small changes such as the construction of a cabin or the introduction of a power line, will reduce the pasture opportunities to a great extent. This is firstly because the reindeer will
avoid not only the new construction but, also a large area near the new construction.
Secondly, the areas avoided by the reindeer might be what Nellemann (ibid: 3) calls “pockets of good terrain” with especially good grazing opportunities. Since there are large areas with poor grazing opportunities the reindeer are dependant on these pockets. At the same time as constructions have reduced pasture areas, the total number of reindeer and herders has increased. The total amount of reindeer in the western part of Finnmark increased from 80,707 in 95/96 to 90,983 in 04/05 while the total number of reindeer in the eastern part of Finnmark increased from 58,205 to 77,616 in 04/05 (Reindriftsforvaltningen, 2006). In the early 90`s the Norwegian state has in a parliamentary document declared that “There is today an imbalance in Finnmark between the number of reindeer herders, the number of animals and the areas of pasture” (St.meld. 28: 1991-1992:7). According to this document the number of reindeer had its biggest increase from 1968 to 1990 (ibid: 36). This document led to the reindeer herding policy of reducing the total amount of both reindeer and herders which have great social and cultural consequences for the herders.
The challenge of land right, climate change, pollution, overgrazing and reduction of pasture all deal with different aspects of sustainability. It is therefore possible to question whether the present situation for the reindeer herding Samis can be characterized as sustainable. The challenges are also quite similar to challenges found elsewhere for other indigenous peoples.
As an example the coastal Samis of Finnmark also face challenges in terms of their livelihood (Bjørklund, 1999). They face the challenge of rights to access and use resources, but to water instead of land. They face damages of pollution and climatic change in terms of polluted fish and the threat from leaking ships containing oil or other destructive material. They face the challenge of over fishing among themselves and from other fishing boats and trawlers. And they face the challenge from constructions, like today’s construction of the gas field Snøhvit outside of Hammerfest. It is also possible to find indigenous peoples who have comparable challenges in terms of sustainability, like the Masaii peoples in Kenya and the Evener peoples in Sibiria (Benjaminsen & Svarstad, 2003).
The four mentioned challenges are also challenges the Sami Rights Committee have been working on and the ones the Law of Finnmark can address. With the law a new system of management is carried into effect regarding land and natural resources in Finnmark.
1.2 Objectives
The objective with this study is to asses whether the Law of Finnmark can change the present situation regarding sustainability for the Sami reindeer herders. In order to achieve this I will focus on three issues, namely:
1. To asses the participation of the Sami herders in the process behind and the implementation of the law.
2. To look at the present situation for the herders in terms of sustainability.
3. To asses whether the law can change the present situation for the reindeer herding Samis in terms of sustainability.
In order to provide insight on the reindeer herding Samis this study will begin focusing on history and the present laws and rules regarding reindeer herders and herding. In order to understand the law this study will look into the process behind the law and the
implementation of the law. In order to answer questions regarding sustainability with the Law of Finnmark, this study will seek to find out whether the reindeer herding in Finnmark today can be characterized as sustainable before assessing whether or not the law can change the present situation regarding sustainability for the reindeer herders. The law emphasizes the issue of rights and management system and so will this study in questioning whether or not the law is an appropriate tool to pursue the aim of securing indigenous peoples rights and achieve a local management system, by focusing on sustainability for the reindeer herding Samis.
The livelihood of Sami herders has been extensively documented by several researchers (eg:
Jentoft, 2003, Minde, 2003 and Hansen & Olsen, 2004). There are also many who have focused on the rights of the reindeer herding Samis (eg: Bergstrøm, 2005, Bull 1997, Bull et al., 2001 and Tonstad, 1985) and the system of management regarding the herding (eg:
Bjørklund, 1999, Marin, 2003 and Riseth, 2001). This study will build on the findings of those, the theory of political ecology and draw on experiences from the field in order to see whether the Law of Finnmark can change the present situation regarding sustainability for the Sami reindeer herders.
.
2. Theoretical Approach
Given the complexity of sustainability, investigation of it is best approached using an interdisciplinary design which can capture the whole picture. More specifically, this study uses political ecology to asses the sustainability for the reindeer herding Samis in Finnmark.
Political ecology will be used to capture the relationship between nature and society in order to pay attention to the management system that is present in the law and put into effect as of 1 July, 2006. Political ecology will also give meaning to the concept of sustainability, by focusing on economical, social and cultural sustainability in addition to ecological sustainability.
2.1 Political Ecology
“Political ecology is about the relationship between nature and society” (Peet & Watts, 2004:
4). Political ecology is not about nature or only about society, but about the relationship between nature and society. “Political ecology treats the environment as politicised” (Adams, 2001: 252). This implies that the concept of environment is understood after being analysed and defined by the various actors and stakeholders in the society. The understanding of an environmental area is dynamic and interlinked to history and politics. The concept of environmental degradation therefore needs to be assessed not only in terms of ecological factors, but also economic and social factors.
The field of political ecology emerged from the work of Blaikie and Blaikie & Brookfield who focused on land issues and the importance of assessing economic and social factors in addition to ecological factors to understand land issues, like degradation (Blaikie, 1987 and Blaikie & Brookfield, 1989). By assessing economic and social factors next to ecological factors, political ecology seeks a broader understanding of land degradation in that the existing actors and stakeholders and the existing power structures will both be defined and analysed in order to understand the possible land degradation.
According to Robbins (2004) political ecology has mainly focused its studies in development countries focusing on marginalized and poor people. Adams (2001: 250) writes “very often those affected (by degrading environment) have neither the freedom to stop causing
degradation, nor the opportunity to move elsewhere”. People, directly dependant on the
natural resources, are commonly the people focused on in political ecology. The reason for this is that these people are often the ones who are accused of causing environmental degradation yet as they are seldom the ones found in the existing power structures. Political ecological studies often reveals that these in power have created the underlying conditions leading to degraded land areas.
This study will use political ecology on a case from the developed world, namely, the reindeer herding Samis in Finnmark. Countries in the developed world face the same environmental challenges as countries in the developing world. As mentioned, some of the challenges faced by the Sami reindeer herders today are land rights, climatic changes, pollution, reduction of pasture and overgrazing. These challenges are, also as mentioned, similar to challenges found elsewhere for other groups of indigenous or nomadic people. It is therefore relevant to use an approach found to be relevant in comparable issues in other places. In doing this it will be possible to compare and draw on former knowledge about environmental issues elsewhere and possibly fight environmental degradation as a global issue and not just an issue happening and affecting the developing world.
The interdisciplinary approach is what makes political ecology more useful to this study than other approaches that deal only with ecological issues. By assessing the law of Finnmark in terms of sustainability for the reindeer herders, where sustainability includes social,
economic, cultural and ecological factors, it is possible to answer questions regarding the sustainability of the entire way of life for the reindeer herders. More important than the question whether an environmental area is degraded or not, is the question of why the
environment is degraded or not degraded. Are the entire land areas in Finnmark degraded? Is there degradation of land areas at all? Are areas in Finnmark degraded in different ways?
These are interesting questions, and can all be answered by the theoretical approach of ecology. More important for this study are question like, who decides whether an area are degraded or not? What is the representation of the reindeer herders in the decision making processes in Finnmark? What role do the reindeer herders have in the new management system with the Law of Finnmark? How is the relationship of dependency between the reindeer herders and the state? How do the various actors and stakeholders define
sustainability? These questions can only be answered by using an interdisciplinary approach that deals with the relationship between nature and society.
I will mainly use three concepts from the field of political ecology, namely:
1. The relationship between nature and society.
In order to assess sustainability for the reindeer herding Samis with the Law of Finnmark this study will look at the relationship between the nature and the society. While nature will refer to the land areas of Finnmark, the society will include the state and the international
community. This is because important decisions effecting Finnmark and the Sami reindeer herders are taken outside of Finnmark, including conventions about indigenous people’s rights worldwide. The relationship between nature and society will also be relevant in order to look at the concepts of rights and management since both the definitions of and decisions about the nature are taken in the society.
2. The focus on a marginalized group directly dependant on natural resources.
The Sami reindeer herders, is a group of indigenous peoples heavily depending on land to exercise their livelihood. Both as Samis and as reindeer herders these people are emphasized in the Law of Finnmark. This group of people have used the land areas in Finnmark for herding purposes since before the modern state of Norway was founded and have therefore a long and relevant history in the district of Finnmark. It is therefore necessary to find out who these peoples are, what kind of rights they have had through history, what kind of
management systems that have affected their livelihood and what role they themselves have had in order to determine their livelihood, questions that political ecology can be a tool to answer.
3. The issue of power.
This study will look into the issue of power in order to asses the sustainability for the Sami herders. In order to determine the influence and power of the herders the issue of participation will be looked into, both in general and in the process behind and the implementation of the law. Who determines the management system and who determine what rights the reindeer herders have? These are important questions that can be answered using a political ecological approach.
According to Peet and Watts (2004: 5) “the meaning of terms like sustainability are hotly contested”. Adams (2001) supports this statement and claim that sustainability is more a political than a theoretical term. The debate, concerning the concept appears to have started
with the term sustainable development. Sustainable development is a concept used widely in the development arena since the United Nations Conference on Human Environment in Stockholm in 1972 (Adams, 2001). The concept was emerging from two different debates namely, the development debate and the environmental debate. In 1987 the World Committee on Environment and Development defined sustainable development as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (Brundtland, 1987: 43). With this definition, sustainable development was on the political agenda. From a political ecological approach the term sustainability refers to the relation between nature and society (Peet and Watts, 2004).
The economist Garret Hardin and his concept of “the tragedy of the commons” have played an important role in Finnmark (Hardin, 1968). Hardin claimed that areas without private property are likely to be degraded due to the incentive of all the actors operating in that area to use as much as possible of the resources before the other actors empties the area of its resources (ibid). Political ecology offers an alternative to the Darwinist perspective which views competition at individual level as the driving force for change (Robins, 2004). The Darwinist perspectives are represented by Malthusians and their view about the worlds limited resources as leading to competition and the survival of the fittest. In Finnmark, the Darwinist perspective has influenced the thinking about reindeer herding and the land management system until today. This perspective holds that the Sami reindeer herders are degrading the land by operating with too many reindeer and too many herders. The state document from 1991- 1992 about sustainable reindeer herding clearly holds this view (St.meld. 28, 1991-1992). In this document the increase of reindeer and herders are seen as the important factor for degradation of pasture areas. The fact that vast areas of the pastures have been used for development projects, leading to loss of land for herding purposes, is hardly mentioned. This document is, together with several other documents about the reindeer herding in Finnmark, influenced by the tragedy of the commons. The approach of political ecology can therefore be used to investigate the new management system and whether or not it will follow the former management system regarding its perspective of tragedy of the commons.
3. Background
The reason for Finnmark being the first, and maybe also the only, district of Norway with a local management system of vast land areas lies in its location, nature, history and population.
It is therefore necessary too describe and understand Finnmark as the study area. Beside from Finnmark, concepts like reindeer herding Samis, indigenous peoples and the Law of Finnmark will be used throughout this study. It will therefore be important to understand them. This chapter will focus on the concepts of the reindeer herding Samis, indigenous peoples and the Law of Finnmark in order to explain and define them. The concepts are closely linked to each other and to the issues of rights and management.
3.1 The Study Area
This study is conducted in Finnmark. Finnmark is the eastern and northernmost district in the sub arctic region of the Scandinavian country Norway (Figure 1). Finnmark is the largest district of Norway with 48, 637 square kilometres and the most densely populated, with a population of 72, 937 (ffk.no). Finnmark has the highest percentage of the population being indigenous peoples in Norway. Among them are more than 400 different reindeer herding units, with about 2000 active reindeer herders. The reindeer herding units constitute more than 70% of the total reindeer units in the whole of Norway (www.fifo.no). Finnmark is known for its long cold winters and short mild summers. Both climate and geology vary from the coastal areas to the inland in the district, which makes the district especially good for reindeer
herding.
More specifically this study is carried out in the municipalities of Alta, Porsanger, Karasjok and Kautokeino (Figure 2). Karasjok and Kautokeino are the municipalities in Finnmark, and Norway, with the most reindeer and reindeer herders. Karasjok and Kautokeino are found on the inland on the mountain plateau. The cold winters makes the areas good for grazing due to little icing (Bull et al., 2001). In these municipalities the majority of the population are Sami peoples. The municipalities are also where the question of sustainability has been raised the most due to loss of pastures or overgrazing (Berg, 1997). Alta and Porsanger are found on the lowland along the coast. These municipalities have better summer grazing areas than winter grazing areas (Bull et al., 2001). The majority of the population in these municipalities are
Norwegians. Alta and Porsanger are therefore quite different from Karasjok and Kautokeino in terms of climate, population and grazing opportunities.
Figure 1: Map of Norway, from http://kart.norge.no/
Figure 2: Map of Finnmark, from http://www.norge.no/kart/Finnmark/
Finnmark is divided into two main pasture areas by the Management of Reindeer Herding, Reindriftsforvaltningen, these are the western pasture area and the eastern pasture area (Reindriftsforvaltningen, 2006). The border between the western and eastern pasture area stretches between Kautokeino and Alta in the west and Karasjok and Porsanger in the east. In the western pasture area in the end of 2005 there were reportedly 227 units herding 90,983 reindeer in 26 regions. There were 182 units herding 77,616 reindeer in 11 regions in the eastern pasture area (ibid).
According to Bull et al. (2004) the pasture areas in 1852 were divided into three areas, namely, east Finnmark, Karasjok and Kautokeino. In 1852 there were assumed to be 31,000 reindeer in east Finnmark, 31,000 reindeer in Karasjok and 49,500 in Kautokeino (ibid: 35- 40). The number of reindeer in Finnmark, used for herding purposes, has thereby increased the last 150 years from approximately 120,000 reindeer to 167,000.
3.2 The Sami Reindeer Herders in Finnmark
The Sami population consists of 40,000-50,000 people organized in bilateral kinship
(Eidheim, 2000). The Samis are spread out geographically in Norway, Sweden, Finland and Russia with the highest population being in Norway (ibid). The Samis survived as hunters and gatherers before they took up fishing, agriculture and reindeer herding as important parts of their livelihood. The approximate time of the first reindeer herding in Norway is debated (Vistnes et al., 2004). According to Hansen & Olsen (2004) the catch of reindeer started around 1500 BC. The change from hunting wild reindeer to herding tame reindeer have occurred gradually (Vistnes et al., 2004).
The Siida has been and still is important for the reindeer herders. A Siida is a group of people working together with the reindeer herding. A Siida usually consists of one or more
households in addition to a few other relatives that together do all the work that is needed to maintain their livelihood as reindeer herders (Bull et al., 2004). Every Siida has got one Siida isit and one Siida eamit, a kind of male and female Siida authority, but decisions concerning the Siida are not always taken by the Siida isit or Siida eamit. Even if a Siida is a collective unit, the reindeer are owned by individuals (ibid). Each person within the Siida has got his or her own reindeer and earmark. Through history each Siida usually operated in separate areas, with different summer and winter pastures. Each Siida has thereby historically managed the land in its own pasture areas (ibid).
The state of Norway introduced its own systems of management of the reindeer herding in Finnmark. These systems of management have been given in the laws of reindeer herding.
The first Law of Reindeer Herding was implemented in 1933 and it recognises that reindeer herding was a right due to historical usage of the area (Reindriftsloven, 1933). This law was influenced by the idea that reindeer herding eventually would die out and be replaced by agricultural praxis that was looked upon as the next level of development (Bull, 1997). The second Law of Reindeer Herding came in 1978 and followed the law from 1933 in that reindeer herding continued to be recognized as a right due to historical usage. This law states that the reindeer herders can use the areas they formerly have been using to herd reindeer, including the right to use the pasture areas and other natural resources like fish and wood (Reindriftsloven, 1978). The law states that only people of Sami origin belonging to families traditionally working in the reindeer herding had the right to be recognized as a Sami reindeer herder. It further states that a person working as a herder has to belong to a reindeer herding unit that has got a permit from the state to do herding (ibid). The law also states that the herders have a right to be compensated when land, traditionally used for herding, is expropriated. And it states that the herders have liability for damages caused by their herd (ibid). Still, the law does not recognize the reindeer herders as the only group of people with right to use the land and natural resources in the herding areas. A reason for this could be the massive protests from people in the industry of agriculture and forestry (Bull, 1997). The third Law of Reindeer Herding will be implemented in 2007 and it states that reindeer herding is a right, outside the law, due to historical usage of the areas, but the law itself is as the two former laws not guaranteeing the right to use the land solely to the reindeer herders
(Reindriftsloven, 2006-2007). What seems to be new with this law compared to the former, are the details regarding the total number of reindeer both in Norway and each district of reindeer herding (ibid). The three laws all deal with rights regarding herding and management of the herding. The herders own management system, according to the Siida system, is only to a certain extent incorporated in the latest law (ibid). The two former laws uses the term
herding units only, instead of the Sami term Siida.
Every year since 1976 the reindeer herders, through the Norwegian Reindeer Herders Association, Norske Reindriftssamers Landsforbund, and the Ministry of Agriculture and Food come up with an agreement, Reindriftsavtalen, in relation to the economic subsidies the herders receive from the state (Berg, 1997). The aims of this agreement are to protect the
natural resources, increase the food production, assure an accepted level of income and ensure that research and guidance take place within the reindeer herding (ibid: 98).
Together, the Siida system, the Law of Reindeer Herding and the Agreement of Reindeer Herding tell us how the areas used for reindeer herding are managed and what rights the reindeer herders have on paper and in reality. This is because the Siida system of management exists next to the state system of management, both influencing each other.
3.3 Indigenous peoples
IWGIA (International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs) have defined indigenous peoples as “people who have a special connection with their land and territories, people who share a feeling of common ancestors and rights to self-determination, people who have their own language, culture, religion and knowledge, people who have their own political, social and cultural institutions, people whose land and territories as well as cultural institutions have been humiliated through national states and global institutions dominance and action”
(IWGIA, 1995: 33-34). This is also how the definition of indigenous peoples is used in this study.
The Samis are today commonly recognised as indigenous peoples, but it has not always been the case. Assimilation used to be the Norwegian state policy for the Sami peoples and other minority groups since before independence (Minde, 2003). Norwegianization and
christianization played a great role in this assimilation strategy. Following the Second World War, the Samis started to compare and identify themselves with indigenous peoples
worldwide (ibid). Together they started to fight politically to exercise their culture. In 1964 the Norwegian Sami Parliament, Sametinget, was established. The Sami Parliament was a Sami political organisation that would strengthen the Sami identity as an ethnic minority in Norway (ibid). Still the Samis were not yet recognised as indigenous peoples. This changed during the 1970s, much due to the case of Alta. The case of Alta was a massive movement of Samis and environmentalists to stop the construction of a dam and hydroelectric power station in the river Alta, right in the middle of an important pasture area for reindeer (ibid). The Samis and environmentalists lost the case of Alta in 1982 and the hydroelectric power plant was constructed. This event changed the common view of the Sami population, and their language and traditions were slowly accepted by the Norwegian society (ibid). In relation to the case of Alta the Sami Rights Committee was established in 1980, a committee with a
mandate to elucidate the rights of the Sami peoples, especially regarding land right (Ot.prp.53, 2002-2003). The work of this committee was the start of the process of what today has
resulted in the Law of Finnmark (Besl.O. 77, 2004-2005).
3.4 The Law of Finnmark
The Law of Finnmark concerns all peoples in Finnmark, but special attention is given to the Samis as indigenous peoples and among them the reindeer herding Samis are emphasized (ibid). The reindeer herding Samis are nomads moving with their reindeer from coastal areas in summer to the inland at winter (Bull et al., 2001). This moving is due to ecological and climatic factors. Entire households used to move together along the same routes every year.
Today it is common to travel back and forth between the herd and the household and to change the persons looking after the herd every now and then.
The reindeer herding Samis, as indigenous peoples, are entitled to certain rights according to national law and international conventions, among them the ILO (the International Labour Organisation) Convention nr.169 (ILO, 1989) and the UN (United Nations) Convention on Civilian and Political Rights (UN, 1966). In short, these conventions are basically stating that indigenous peoples have the right to exercise their cultures and way of life. As an attempt to accept and strengthen indigenous peoples rights in Norway, the Law of Finnmark was passed the 24th of May 2005 and implemented 1st of July 2006.
The law states that the Sami peoples, collectively and individually, have gained land right in Finnmark through usage and claim of the areas (Ot.prp. 53, 2002-2003). The state property held by the state, Statskog, is with the law transferred to the Finnmark Property,
Finnmarkseiendommen. The Finnmark Property is led by a board of six people, three from the Finnmark District Parliament and three from the Sami Parliament. These representatives all must live in Finnmark. One of the Sami Parliament representatives must be chosen from the reindeer herders and should represent the interests of the reindeer herders in Finnmark (ibid).
With this law, the people of Finnmark are meant to manage all land and natural resources, through the Finnmark Property, which is not legally held as private or communal property (ibid). In addition to the Finnmark Property there are two more institutions established in Finnmark based on the law, these are the Commission of Finnmark, Finnmarkskommisjonen, and the Court of Finnmark, Finnmarksdomstolen (Besl.O.77, 2004-2005). The mandate of the Commission of Finnmark is to elucidate land rights in terms of access to and control of land
in Finnmark while the mandate of the Court of Finnmark is to judge in case of disputes regarding land right. While the Finnmark Property was established in June 2006, the Commission of Finnmark and the Court of Finnmark where established in January 2007.
4. Research methods
This study is based on a combination of different methods. Data was collected during my stay in Finnmark, in November and December, 2006, and before and after in various libraries, bookshops and universities. The data were collected by;
1. Interviewing reindeer herders and persons from relevant organisations and institutions in Finnmark and Troms.
2. Observing the actual practice of reindeer herding in Finnmark.
3. Examine existing laws and conventions regarding rights and management of the reindeer herding in Finnmark.
4. Building on existing studies related to the reindeer herding in Finnmark.
I have mainly done qualitative interviewing and had the role as an observer-as-participant which is explained by Bryman (2004) as the role of being an interviewer with some observation without being involved as a participant.
4.1 Social research method
This study is a qualitative study based on theory from political ecology. The research is carried out using a qualitative research strategy. According to Bryman (ibid: 266) “qualitative research emphasizes words rather than quantification in the collection and analysis of data”.
This study is emphasizing words in the process of both data collection and analysis. The Law of Finnmark is a recent law, at the time of this study, and it is still early to state the actual effects of the law, therefore this study focuses on the thoughts, feelings and ideas of the informants regarding sustainability for the reindeer herding Samis with the law. “Peoples opinions, feeling, ideas and tradition need to be described in words” (Walliman, 2006: 54).
This study will therefore be purely based on qualitative methods.
4.2 Sampling
The sample in this study was collected through contacts from friends, family, colleagues and academics. Those contacts were used to gain access to the reindeer herding Samis in
Finnmark and other people working in relation to reindeer herding or the Law of Finnmark.
Sampling which is not found through random processes is regarded as non-random sampling, which can be purposive or not (Bryman, 2004). The sample in this study is purposive. They have been suggested from either someone known to me or from an individual with knowledge on this topic. This method of sampling is called snowball sampling (ibid). I made initial contact with people in Finnmark representing the reindeer herders, people representing the Sami community, people representing the state and people representing higher educational institutions. In doing this, I got access to a wide range of individuals relevant to my research questions. Among those people I chose to interview, most were reindeer herders but the sample also includes persons representing organisations or institutions with different perspectives regarding reindeer herding in Finnmark (Table 1).
Persons interviewed
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Reindeer
owner
x x x x x x x x x x
The
Norwegian Reindeer Herders Association
x x x x x
The
Management of Reindeer Herding
x x x
The Sami Rights Committee
x
The Sami Parliament
x x x x
The Finnmark Property
x x
Higher educational institutions
x x
Table 1: Persons interviewed.
In total 16 persons were interviewed during my stay in Finnmark. The categories in table 1 relate to the persons present or past job or tasks related to reindeer herding or the Law of Finnmark. The persons interviewed are, as other people complex. Table 1 show that some of the persons interviewed belong to more than one category. A person can, as an example, own reindeer, be a politician represented in the Sami Parliament and at the same time work in a
higher educational institution. A person can therefore represent or be influenced by different views regarding reindeer herding in Finnmark. This is also the reason why my sample consists of relatively few individuals. I chose to interview few but relevant people in person for
interviews and in-depth conversations, sometimes meeting them repeatedly, sometimes over longer periods. This study is built on the thoughts and meaning of the people I met
interviewed and observed.
Among the persons interviewed only 6 out of the 10 persons owning reindeer defined
themselves as reindeer herders. These are the people who I spent most time with in Finnmark.
These are also the people that have gotten the most attention in this study (Table 2). Among the reindeer herders interviewed, I tried to get a sample with a high degree of variations in relation to sex and age. This was more difficult than expected both because the majority of the herders and those working in relation to reindeer herding were men between 25-50 years old, and because more women than men refused to be interviewed.
Herders interviewed
1 2 3 4 5 6
Male x x x x x
Female x
Below 25 years old
x
Between 25 and 50 years old
x x x
Above 50 years old
x x
Eastern pasture area of Finnmark
x x x x
Western pasture area of Finnmark
x x
Table 2: Herders interviewed in Finnmark according to sex, age and pasture area.
4.3 Data Collection Methods
The objective of this study was made into smaller research questions. The main method for answering the research questions was qualitative interviewing (Appendix 1 & Appendix 2).
Qualitative interviewing can be structured, semi-structured or open (ibid). I used semi- structured interviews because I wanted the interviews to be flexible at the same time as I wanted the persons interviewed to elaborate and talk more freely than they would be able to with structured interviews. I used slightly different interview sheets depending on the person interviewed; this was because they could give me different background information. As an example I asked persons working in relevant organisations or institutions about the
organisation or institution while I asked the reindeer herders about demographic data.
The interview in itself lasted approximately one hour but most interviews were followed by a session of informal conversation, in agreement with those interviewed. I have used data from both the interview and the informal talks in this study. I did not use a tape recorder but took notes during the interviews. This was done deliberately to create an environment of trust.
During the months I spent in the field, the district and the Sami communities faced negative attention from media due to an ongoing trial. It was therefore important for me to make a clear distinction between myself and my intentions and a journalist and his/her intention. The interviews were conducted in Norwegian both with persons speaking Sami and Norwegian as their first language. All of the persons interviewed spoke fluently Norwegian but some of the persons might have been more comfortable speaking Sami so there is a possibility that the language have affected the answers I got. Still, I found it more likely that there would be a higher degree of misunderstanding if using a translator due to the fact that the answers had to be interpreted by a third person before translated to me. Some of the interviews were
conducted in the homes of the person interviewed. I was therefore able to meet and spend time with family members and friends of the person interviewed. Informal conversations with friends and family of the persons interviewed were conducted in Norwegian or in Sami and Norwegian with the translation of the person interviewed. The interviews have all been translated by me from Norwegian to English in order to use findings from the interviews in this study. The quotas in this study are therefore not direct quotations but translated
quotations.
Observation was an important tool besides interviews to collect data for this study. In addition to the 16 persons interviewed I spent lots of time with people living in Finnmark, both herders and others. This was mainly with family and friends of the people interviewed but also other people I met randomly in the store or on the bus. These people were not formally interviewed but they did give me valuable insight through informal conversation and daily contact. In addition to informal conversations, listening to local radio and reading local newspaper was also a part of my observations.
4.4 Analysis
Qualitative studies are usually more difficult to analyse than quantitative studies (ibid). A reason for this is due to the large quanta of information gathered from interviews and observations. Since this study is a non-statistic qualitative study I have not used any data package to analyse the findings. I have rather used theory from political ecological in the
process of analyzing. I have analysed the findings both in relation to power and the
relationship between nature and society which are both important aspects of political ecology (Adams, 2001).
Qualitative data analysis is “a constant interplay between collection of data and analysis of data that produce a gradual growth of understanding” (Walliman, 2006: 129). In this study a mini analysis was conducted after each interview in the field. From the notes taken during interviews and the latest observations in the field a bigger analysis was conducted every week to search for interesting findings and to consider new research questions. Finally, the main analysis was done from all the interviews and observations closely linked to the literature read. The results reflect the cumulative results of these findings.
4.5 Limitations
As mentioned in the section on sampling, I have interviewed 16 persons among them only 6 herders in relation to this study. The findings in this study are related to the thoughts, feelings and opinions of these 16 people and can not be used for generalizations.
As mentioned in the section on data collection methods I have conducted the interviews in Norwegian. When conducting the interviews in Norwegian some nuances could have been missed, both because some of the persons interviewed would have felt more comfortable speaking Sami and also because some Sami words relevant for the herding can not be translated to Norwegian.
5. Findings and discussion
A. The process behind the Law of Finnmark
Power is, as discussed earlier, an important aspect of political ecology (Robins, 2004). In this chapter the issue of power will be considered in relation to the reindeer herder’s participation in the process of making the Law of Finnmark. It is important to understand the relationship between the reindeer herders and the rest of the society in order to be able to conclude the power and influence of the herders. The possibility the herders have to determine their own livelihood will tell us something about the sustainability of their livelihood. This chapter will therefore look at processes behind the Law of Finnmark and find out to what degree the reindeer herders have been seen and heard in this process on matters regarding their rights and the system of management.
1. The issue of power
In order to determine the influence and power of the reindeer herders in the process of making the law it is necessary to look at how the reindeer herders are represented and how they themselves feel that they have been seen and heard, both in processes that have had an effect on the herding and in the process of making the Law of Finnmark.
In general the herders interviewed (person 1-6) stated that herders were poorly represented in cases relevant for the reindeer herding.
“The herders are neither seen nor heard in cases relevant for the herding. Reindeer herding has little respect in cases concerning the herding. The herders have to be a part of the
planning process itself and not only get to tell their opinion at hearings when the major plans are already made” (Person 2).
It also seemed that the herders felt that when they were represented it was by politicians or the Norwegian Reindeer Herders Association:
“It is only recently that reindeer herding is represented on different boards. Most
representatives are politicians elected to be in these boards and the herders themselves are poorly represented” (Person 1),
“The herders in general are not represented in boards relevant for the herders but I have some influence since I am a politician and a member of the Board of the Norwegian Reindeer Herders Association” (Person 3).
Also the people interviewed who were not herders, but working in relation to reindeer herding in Finnmark seemed to agree with the herders in the matter of poor representation.
“The Sami Parliament is consulted in cases about reindeer herding but the herders themselves are not consulted. But the herding gets more and more attention and are better represented today than a couple of years ago” (Person 11),
“The Norwegian Reindeer Herders Association have represented the reindeer herding and been a negotiation partner in cases relevant for the reindeer herding, but it is possible that they do not represent the herders themselves. There is also a problem of democratic processes when you are representing the minority” (Person 15).
From the first findings it therefore seems that the herders participate only to a small degree in processes that will have an effect on the herding. Still, the further findings seem to suggest that the herders participate in more processes today than before. This can therefore imply that, matters regarding how the herders are participating and who the person representing the herding is, are as important as whether the reindeer herding is represented or not.
The Sami reindeer herders are represented in cases influencing the herding with the Norwegian Reindeer Herders Association, The Sami Parliament and the Board of the Management of Reindeer Herding.
The Norwegian Reindeer Herders Association was formed in 1947 by reindeer herders to unite the herders and work to improve the conditions for the herders (Berg, 1997). Since the Norwegian Reindeer Herders Association are negotiating the annual Agreement about Reindeer Herding every year with the Norwegian state it is possible to claim that the herders
are both seen and heard in matters regarding economy. The association is also informed about development plans that will have an impact on the pasture areas from the various
municipalities, the district of Finnmark and the state and asked to comment on the plans at hearings. This supports the view of the interviewed herders in that they are only involved in the hearing processes and not in the original planning phase in matters that concerns their pasture areas.
The Sami Parliament is also informed about development plans that will have an effect on the pasture areas, but the Sami Parliament is often represented both in the planning phase and the hearing. In addition, the Sami Parliament is also together with the Finnmark District
Parliament were political decisions are made about development projects in Finnmark. The Sami Parliament therefore has a higher degree of representation and more power than the Norwegian Reindeer Herders Association in all cases relevant for reindeer herding except from the economic agreement between the association and the state. In contrast to the association were all the members are reindeer owners if not herders, the people in the Sami Parliament are democratically elected among Samis all over Norway. Among the 44 politicians in the Parliament there are 5 reindeer owners (www.sametinget.no) and 1 out of these 5 represent a political party, Flyttsamelista, with reindeer herding as the main political agenda. The reindeer owners and herders are therefore clearly a minority group in the Sami Parliament. This further strengthens the general impression of the persons interviewed regarding participation.
The Management of Reindeer Herding is run by the Norwegian state under the Ministry of Agriculture and Food (Reindriftsforvaltningen, 2005). The Management has one main administration with a Reindeer Herding Board, Reindriftsstyre, and 6 smaller district administrations each with a District Board, Områdestyre. Two of the District Boards are in Finnmark, the Eastern District Board and the Western District Board (www.reindrift.no). The Reindeer Herding Board consists of 7 members. Out of these 4 are appointed from the
Ministry of Agriculture and Food and 3 are appointed from the Sami Parliament (ibid).
Among the members there should be at least one person who is a reindeer herder and the reindeer organisations can come up with suggestions (ibid). The District Boards have 5 or 7 members, depending on the district, 3 or 4 of these should be appointed from the District Parliament while 2 or 3 should be appointed from the Sami Parliament (ibid). Also these boards should consist of at least one person working as a reindeer herder and also for these
boards the reindeer organisations could make suggestions (ibid). Reindeer herders are therefore represented in both the District Boards of Finnmark and in the Reindeer Herding Board. It is highly possible that the herders represented in these boards are the same people represented in the Sami Parliament and in the Norwegian Reindeer Herders Association since the Sami Parliament provides its own representatives and the association can come up with suggestions about representatives. This supports the general impression of the persons
interviewed that when the reindeer herders are represented it is mainly by politicians or by the Norwegian Reindeer Herder Association.
The Law of Finnmark concerns the entire district and all its inhabitants. The law pay attention to the Sami reindeer herding due to its importance for the Sami culture and their rights to access and use the land (Ot.prp. 53, 2002-2003: 8). This is also why the reindeer herding are represented with one person in the Board of Finnmark Property (ibid). Similar reasoning would suggest that reindeer herding was also represented in both the process of making the law and in the hearing regarding the proposed law.
The general impression from the persons interviewed was mixed. Some claimed that reindeer herding got special attention in the process of making the law while other stated that matters regarding herding were left out during the entire process.
“In reality reindeer herding has weak protection of its pasture areas. If you compare it with agriculture, farmers have a stronger protection of their fields than the herders have of their pasture areas. This is why reindeer herding had to be considered in the process with the Law of Finnmark” (Person 12).
This statement shows that the reindeer herding was considered during the process of making the law but it does not say whether the reindeer herders themselves where consulted in the process.
“The law has not given special attention to the reindeer herding. Both in the process of making the law and in the law itself the politics, rules and laws regarding reindeer herding were just transferred from the former politic, rules and laws. Reindeer herding is only to a small extent seen and heard, at the same time as it is politically decided that reindeer herding should exist in Norway”. (Person 4)
This statement underlines the view that the reindeer herding was not seen or heard any more in the process of making the law than in previous cases relevant for the reindeer herding.
“The reindeer herding has been seen and heard during the process of making the law”
(Person 7).
From this statement it seems that the reindeer herders did have a say in the process of making the law, but this person did not say anything about who the people representing the herding were. Finally this idea is summed up by another individual.
“Reindeer owners and reindeer herders are not a group of homogeneous people and I am not sure that the Norwegian Reindeer Herders Association and the board of Finnmark Property are representing all the people in the reindeer herding” (Person 4).
From these findings it seems like the persons representing the herders in the process behind the law were the same persons representing herding also in other processes. This can also be the reason why some of the persons interviewed claimed that the herding was not represented while others stated that the herding was represented.
The most important institutions in the process of making the law were the Finnmark District Parliament and the Sami Parliament in addition to the Sami Rights Committee (Ot.prp. 53:
2002-2003). As mentioned, the Sami Parliament represents all Samis and the reindeer herders are a minority group among the politicians in the Sami Parliament. It is therefore hard to claim that the involvement of the Sami Parliament in the process behind the law ensured the reindeer herding Samis representation in the process. The Sami Rights Committee sent the proposed law on a round of hearing to 104 organisations and institutions in June 1997 (ibid:
21). Among these were 15 Sami organisations or institutions and 3 reindeer herding organisations or institutions, namely, the Norwegian Reindeer Herders Association, the Reindeer Herding Alliance, Reindriftsforbundet, and the Management of Reindeer Herding.
This can support the persons interviewed who claimed that reindeer herding was poorly represented in the process of making the law, and that the few persons, organisations or institutions that were participating, either in the process itself or in the hearing, were the same as the ones who were representing the reindeer herding in other cases regarding the district of
Finnmark, namely, the Sami Parliament, the Norwegian Reindeer Herders Association and the Reindeer Herding Management.
2. The issue of rights
In order to find what kind of rights the process behind the Law of Finnmark addressed, it is necessary to look at the statements from the persons interviewed along with the existing rights given by the Law of Reindeer Herding (Reindriftsloven, 1978).
The existing rights regarding reindeer herding in Norway is, as mentioned earlier, found in the Law of Reindeer Herding (Reindriftsloven, 1978). It is only Sami people whose families traditionally have been working as reindeer herders who are entitled to the rights regarding reindeer herding within the reindeer herding districts (ibid). The reindeer herders have the right to access and use land in relation to their herding needs. This right includes using the land and natural resources for moving the reindeer, for pasture, for hunting and fishing, for collecting firewood and for putting up instalments for the reindeer on all land which is not regarded as private property (Bull, 1997). Since the existing land rights for herding are right regarding use and not proprietary right, the land can be expropriated for other uses, like military fields. As mentioned earlier, different development constructions are also built on the plains of Finnmark, like roads and power lines, which also have an effect on the herding.
In these cases the herders can be compensated for the loss of pasture areas. The land areas used for reindeer herding were divided into several districts with the Law of Reindeer Herding from 1978 (Reindriftsloven, 1978). During the course of a year, the reindeer in Finnmark will have been in different reindeer districts. The summer districts are small and separated between the Siidas while the winter districts are huge common districts used by many Siida`s (ibid). Before the districts were introduced in the 1978 law, the reindeer herders had their own system of dividing the land areas used among the Siidas both at summer and winter times.
All the people interviewed claimed that the right to access and use land and natural resources for herding was more important than proprietary right.
”The Sami culture and the Samis interest are against proprietary right. We cannot own nature” (Person 3).
It is here implied that the Sami peoples have a different understanding of land rights than the rest of the Norwegian society. Historically the Sami reindeer herders have not been concerned about owning land, they have rather used or borrowed the land from nature. Still, there have been boundaries between the different Siidas regarding use of land (Bull et al., 2004). This is also emphasized by another herder interviewed.
“Land right for the reindeer herding is the right to use the land because the herders are not concerned about ownership. The right to use land should follow the reindeer not humans, it is therefore difficult with proprietary right. But the use right should be strengthened, especially to the winter pastures. You see, historically the summer pastures have been recognized as separated between the Siidas while the winter pastures have been viewed as common for all the Siidas with common rights” (Person 4).
“The Siidas used to stay in their areas before but today there is heavy competition about the resources” (Person 4).
In these findings proprietary right are out of the question because it is the reindeer that have the right to use the land. Still, the persons interviewed points out a possible problem related to the common winter pastures. Due to an increased competition regarding natural resources the persons interviewed stated that the rights of the herding should be strengthened. One way of strengthening the right to access and use the land is to focus on individual rights instead of common rights which are here mentioned in relation to the differences between summer and winter pastures. The persons interviewed did not agree whether they preferred common or individual rights for the herding.
” Common rights are more important than individual rights because the reindeer herding uses 95% of the mountain plateau in Finnmark” (Person 6).
Common rights are here viewed as most important. Other people interviewed followed this view but opened up for individual rights in terms of Siida rights.
“Common rights are better but a form of individual right where each Siida has land right could be possible” (Person 9).
