Arctic Circle Assembly Report from Carissa Inuujaq Metcalfe-Coe

I am a recent graduate of Carleton University, where I earned a degree in Human Rights and Social Justice with a minor in Indigenous Studies. I currently serve as Parliamentary Affairs Advisor to the Senator for Nunavut in the Senate of Canada. My academic and professional interests center around Inuit-led discussions, policy development, and the intersections between economic development, political power, and community wellbeing across Inuit Nunangat, the Inuit homelands across the circumpolar Arctic.

As the Arctic attracts increasing international attention for its natural resources, emerging shipping routes, strategic military importance, climate research, and economic potential, an important question remains: who gets to shape the future of the Arctic, and who ultimately benefits from its development?

For Inuit, development cannot be measured solely by economic growth, infrastructure, or strategic advantage. It must also be measured by its effects on our cultures, languages, traditions, and community wellbeing, as well as the wellbeing of those with whom we share deep kinship: the animals, lands, ice, air, and waters. Inuit have maintained enduring relationships with nuna (land) for thousands of years. Our knowledge, lived experiences, and intergenerational relationships can contribute to development that is more sustainable, culturally grounded, and beneficial for generations to come, for both Inuit and non-Inuit alike.

Yet, despite this knowledge and experience, Inuit are too often consulted about decisions affecting our homelands without having meaningful authority over their outcomes. This raises an important distinction between consultation and consent, and raises the question: how to compel those in positions of power to recognize this reality? Acknowledging Inuit epistemology in principle is not enough. True meaningful progress requires more than investment; it requires a redistribution of power that places Inuit knowledge and leadership at the centre of decisions that shape development across the North.

Attending the Arctic Circle Assembly 2026 in Iceland offered an opportunity to explore this question alongside researchers, policymakers, and Inuit from across the circumpolar regions - Russia, Alaska the Northwest Territories, Nunavut, Nunavik, Nunatsiavut, and Greenland. Visiting Iceland also prompted me to reflect on how a remote island nation has developed its infrastructure and blue economy. While its experiences offer potential lessons for remote communities across Inuit Nunangat, our own histories, governance structures, and priorities must guide how we approach development.

Arctic Development

One of the most impactful discussions I attended focused on Arctic development, infrastructure, and Inuit participation. George Hickes, Deputy Premier and Minister of Transportation and Infrastructure for Nunavut, highlighted the importance of building capacity within Inuit communities and improving access to training and labour-market opportunities. His remarks reinforced a central principle: Inuit must be recognized not simply as participants in development, but as partners with the knowledge, land rights, and capacity to shape it.

This requires engagement before projects are designed and implemented. When companies and investors work with Inuit communities from the outset, there is greater opportunity to establish stronger partnerships, identify potential impacts, and ensure sustainable outcomes. Ultimately, development must be guided by our responsibility to future generations, both Inuit and non-Inuit, ensuring that the decisions we make today do not compromise the health of our planet, its ecosystems, the animals, or the ability of those who come after us to thrive.

These discussions also challenged the political tendency to frame the Arctic primarily as a strategic asset. Canada's Arctic is often discussed in terms of sovereignty, defence, shipping, and resource development. Yet, for Inuit, it is first and foremost our home. Inuit are often the first to witness and experience the unintended consequences of decisions made about the Arctic. These impacts are not always adequately captured or reflected in economic assessments or policy frameworks, yet they can have lasting consequences for our land, culture, language, livelihoods, and the overall wellbeing of our children, youth, and their families.

Inuit Nunangat, encompassing the Inuvialuit Settlement Region, Nunavut, Nunavik, and Nunatsiavut, account for approximately 40% of Canada’s landmass and roughly 70% of its coastline. These homelands are not simply part of Canada’s Arctic geography; they are central to Canada’s identity as an Arctic nation. Canada's Arctic identity is inseparable from Inuit presence, knowledge, rights, and enduring relationships with the land and its ecosystems. Any discussion of Arctic sovereignty, security, or development must therefore recognize Inuit as rights-holders and ensure that our voices, priorities, and well-being are central to decisions affecting the region.

With this understanding, we must then acknowledge that investments in infrastructure, energy, healthcare, education, and transportation can strengthen Canada's presence in the North, but they must also address longstanding community needs and our fundamental human rights. Development should leave behind more than completed projects, extracted resources, and degraded landscapes. It must build lasting local capacity, create meaningful opportunities for skills development and employment, and strengthen economic systems that remain past a project end-date.

In the Arctic, successful development needs to be measured not only by what is built, extracted, or exploited, but by the lasting benefits development creates for northern communities and the generations who will inherit the region. Meaningful partnerships must ensure that Inuit have the power to shape decisions before they are made, rather than being left to respond and manage the unintended consequences of decision made by those who are strangers to the North.

Measuring Development

Another important theme from the assembly was the need to reconsider how inequality in the Arctic is understood. Let me be clear, inequality extends beyond access to a livable income, education, housing, and health care. It also encompasses unequal access to infrastructure, economic opportunities, resources, and decision-making power. For example, investment often concentrates in larger communities, leaving smaller and more remote communities behind. Therefore, meaningfully addressing Arctic inequality requires a commitment to ensuring that the benefits of development reach communities across the region, regardless of their population size, extractable resources, or geographic location.

We must not forget that Inuit have historically been displaced from our homelands, forced to settle in isolated regions, and used as human flagpoles to assert Canadian sovereignty in the Arctic. For generations, Indigenous People have been oppressed, dispossessed, displaced, and dehumanized in pursuit of national interests. This history serves as a sobering reminder that Inuit have too often borne the costs of nation-building without receiving equitable benefits in return.

Future development must not reproduce these patterns or put the wellbeing of Inuit children and families at risk. It must recognize Inuit as leaders in shaping the future of our homelands and ensure that the wellbeing, rights, and aspirations of our communities are central to decisions that affect us.

At the same time, deficit-based approaches can reduce northern communities to statistics about disadvantage while overlooking their resilience, knowledge, and ingenuity to problem solving. I was particularly struck by Viola Ukkola, a young reindeer herder from northern Finland, who spoke about the significance of recognizing community resilience and locally developed solutions, rather than focusing exclusively on inequality.

Her perspective prompted me to consider who defines the problems that development seeks to solve, whose knowledge informs proposed solutions, and who ultimately benefits. These questions matter because policies designed around outside assumptions may fail to reflect the realities and priorities of northern communities.

The North cannot be understood simply as an underdeveloped resource frontier. Development must begin with the people who know it, live on it, and hold relationships with it. While infrastructure development is essential to improving access to services and opportunities across Inuit Nunangat, these projects must not come at the expense of critical caribou breeding grounds or the ecosystems that sustain Inuit communities. Similarly, the development of the Northwest Passage as an international shipping route brings economic and strategic opportunities, but increased marine traffic also raises concerns about underwater noise pollution and its direct impact on seals and whales.

These examples demonstrate how decisions made in pursuit of economic growth or national priorities can have unintended consequences for wildlife, ecosystems, and the people who depend on them. Inuit are often among the first to see and feel these consequences. Our knowledge, lived experience, and priorities are essential to understanding and informing the that decisions are made, rather than being considered only after projects are approved or implemented. Development should leave behind more than completed infrastructure, extracted resources, and environmental destruction. It must consider environmental impact, build local capacity, create meaningful opportunities for training and employment, and strengthen economic systems that continue to benefit communities and ecosystems beyond a project's lifespan. Without that foundation, well-intentioned interventions risk deepening the very inequalities they claim to address.

The Future of the Arctic

The discussions at the Arctic Circle Assembly reinforced that sustainable Arctic development requires a fundamental shift in how decision-making power is understood and exercised. Inuit partnerships cannot be treated as an optional component of development or a procedural requirement. They must be foundational to how projects are conceived, designed, implemented, and evaluated.

Inuit leadership also benefits the wider circumpolar region as well as non-arctic nations. Our knowledge and relationships with the land, ice, waters, and wildlife can contribute to more informed decisions and sustainable outcomes. When Inuit have the authority and resources to shape development, there is greater potential to balance economic opportunities with environmental stewardship, cultural continuity, and the wellbeing of both Inuit and non-Inuit.

I would like to express my gratitude, again, to the Korean Maritime Institute for supporting my participation in the Arctic Circle Assembly. The opportunity to take part in these discussions, learn from Arctic leaders and researchers, and connect with Inuit and other northern participants has broadened my understanding of the challenges and possibilities shaping the region. The experience has also strengthened my commitment to ensuring that Inuit perspectives are central to policy decisions about the North.

As I continue my studies and work in public policy, I hope to contribute to approaches that move beyond consultation towards meaningful Inuit leadership, equitable partnerships, and lasting, sustainable benefits for our communities. Supporting emerging researchers and professionals is also essential to building the relationships, knowledge, and capacity needed to advance a more equitable Arctic for this generation and those to come.

A sustainable Arctic will not be achieved through development alone. It requires a commitment to ensuring that Inuit have the authority and resources to shape the decisions that affect our homelands. The question is not whether Inuit have the knowledge or experience to contribute to the future of the Arctic, but whether those in positions of power are prepared to share the authority necessary for Inuit to lead it.

The future of the Arctic must be more than something decided about Inuit. It must be a future shaped by Inuit, grounded in our priorities, and accountable to the generations who will inherit our homelands.