Ocean & Coastal Management 89 (2014) 88e99
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Ocean & Coastal Management
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ocecoaman
Governance of Arctic expedition cruise ships in a time of rapid
environmental and economic change
J. Dawson a, *, M.E. Johnston b, E.J. Stewart c
a
Canada Research Chair in Environment, Society and Policy, Department of Geography and Institute for Science, Society and Policy, University of Ottawa,
75 Laurier Ave. Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, Canada
b
School of Outdoor Recreation, Parks and Tourism, Lakehead University, Canada
c
Department of Social Science, Parks, Recreation, Tourism and Sport, Lincoln University, New Zealand
a r t i c l e i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history:
Available online 14 January 2014
Changes in seasonal climate patterns and decreasing sea ice cover have facilitated an increase in navigable waters throughout Arctic Canada and resulted in the urgent need for new approaches to ocean,
coastal, and vessel management. Increased access has resulted in a significant expansion of Arctic
shipping activity over the past decade with one of the fastest growing sectors being expedition cruising.
This paper presents an assessment of the existing marine regulations and governance structures that
manage the cruise sector in Arctic Canada and provides a critical evaluation of its effectiveness
considering recent and rapid growth. Using a variety of sources, including interviews with community
residents and key informant stakeholders, analysis of changing ship volumes over the past decade, and
an inventory of institutional governance for the sector, the major governance challenges for the industry
were identified. Also identified are potential strategies for mitigating these challenges. Results of the
analysis raise concerns that there is no central authority to govern the growth of the industry, no specific
sector or operator management plan, and no site guidelines for highly visited shore locations (other than
in protected areas). Instead, governance occurs within the complex multi-jurisdictional regulatory
frameworks that exist for all shipping in the region. The paper concludes that under current conditions
there are significant barriers to supporting development of this sector while avoiding human, environmental and security problems in the near-to medium-term future.
Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
The Arctic has experienced the greatest regional warming on
earth in recent decades, resulting in numerous environmental
changes with wide-ranging economic implications (AMSA, 2009;
Lloyd’s, 2012). Of the evident changes, a reduction in sea ice
extent (Sou and Flato, 2009; Aporta, 2011) has been the most
influential for the expedition cruise ship industry, opening up
previously inaccessible areas for exploration and use and also
facilitating the lengthening of the shipping season (Stewart et al.,
2007, 2012; Pizzolato et al., 2013). Arctic sea ice retreat has been
concentrated in the Beaufort and east Siberian Sea (Stroeve et al.,
2005), but recent trends show substantial reduction in the central
Arctic and Canadian Arctic Archipelago (CAA), including the
Northwest Passage (NWP) (see ACIA, 2004; Howell and Yackel,
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ1 613 562 5800x1051.
E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected]
(J. Dawson).
0964-5691/$ e see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2013.12.005
2004, 2006, 2008, 2009; Tivy et al., 2011), a region which has
seen increasing cruise ship activity since 2005 (Stewart et al., 2010;
Johnston et al., 2012). Summer sea ice declines in the Northwest
Passage are predicted to continue, increasing accessibility both for
ice-strengthened and non-ice-strengthened vessels (ACIA, 2004;
Sou and Flato, 2009; Wang and Overland, 2009; also see Dawson
et al., 2007; Stephenson et al., 2011; Smith and Stephenson, 2013).
The four vessel categories that are the fastest growing in this
new ice environment are government vessels and icebreakers,
pleasure craft, passenger vessels, and bulk carriers (Pizzolato et al.,
2013). Included in the passenger vessel category are the expedition
cruise ships, whose numbers over the past decade show some
variability, but demonstrate a clear upward trend. Itineraries have
more than doubled from 2005 to 2013. In addition to the positive
influence of greater accessibility, other factors influencing the
overall growth include the greater availability of ice-strengthened
vessels, a global demand for remote ‘last-frontier’ tourism experiences, the unique and iconic landscapes and wildlife on offer, and a
growing base of retired baby boomers with the means and propensity for travel (Dawson et al., 2010, 2011; Lemelin et al., 2010,
J. Dawson et al. / Ocean & Coastal Management 89 (2014) 88e99
2012; Johnston et al., 2012). Tourism as an economic activity fits
well within Canadian Arctic development plans and is viewed as
providing access to Inuit culture and traditions, promoting historic
and contemporary arts, promoting national sovereignty, and
providing much needed supplementary income to remote northern
residents (SEDSG, 2003; Furgal and Prowse, 2008).
Given the rapid increase in expedition cruise traffic in Arctic
Canada, management stakeholders in the region are concerned
about issues arising from industry growth in a changing environment and the need to ensure effective development (Dawson et al.,
2013). Management of the sector largely relies on a set of regulations that apply to all types of Arctic maritime shipping and, though
many of the issues of expedition cruise ships are similar to industrial shipping and bulk and cargo-based marine transportation,
there are important differences that dictate the need for a more
focused and appropriate management regime. The sector is based
on the “expedition” model of polar cruising, relying on the notion of
adventure, wilderness, education and personal experience (Stewart
et al., 2010; Johnston et al., 2012a,b). These vessels do not travel on
a direct route through an area to a destination; rather the purpose
is to view landscapes at close range, often landing passengers at
sites so that they may experience the Arctic first-hand. This involves accessing shore locations, seeking wildlife and ice, venturing
into new, different or challenging and sometimes uncharted waters, and interacting with local people. These specific characteristics
and requirements of this form of tourism shipping set it apart from
industrial shipping in ways that have significance for governance.
This paper assesses the capacity of existing Arctic marine regulations and governance structures to deal with the changing
environmental and economic conditions affecting the Canadian
Arctic expedition cruise ship sector. This is achieved through four
focus areas: 1) describing cruise routes, patterns and growth between 2004 (pre-growth stage) and 2013 (market stabilization
stage); 2) outlining relevant vessel policies, regulations, and institutions governing the sector; 3) highlighting key governance
challenges; and, 4) identifying relevant strategies that could help to
minimize risks and maximize opportunities. The paper outlines the
methodological approaches taken, presents findings in each of the
four focus areas, and concludes from this material that under current regulatory and governance structures there are significant
barriers to supporting expedition cruise development while
avoiding human, environmental and security costs in the near-to
medium-term future.
2. Approach
The analysis presented in this article was developed through the
multi-year research project, Cruise Tourism in Arctic Canada
(CTAC), which began in 2009 (CTAC, 2012). The objectives of the
project were to develop an understanding of the changing passenger vessel sector in Arctic Canada and to explore the potential
for adaptive strategies and policy options to manage effectively the
risks and opportunities associated with environmental and economic changes in the region.
The research began by documenting growth in passenger vessel
activity over time. Internet searches of itineraries offered by
expedition cruise operators were conducted annually for the years
2006e2013 inclusive. Analysis took into account the actual vessels
used and dates specified in order to avoid double counting when
several operators sold the same itinerary. Data were crossreferenced and “groundtruthed” annually through consultation
with regional and local stakeholders to ensure accuracy. Data were
further compared to the only other comprehensive source of ship
track information available in Arctic Canada, the Canadian Coast
Guard’s (CCG) NORDREG (Northern Canada Vessel Traffic
89
Monitoring Services) annual datasets. Comparison revealed slight
differences in the annual vessel counts due to slight variations in
categories. NORDREG includes ‘people ferries’ in the passenger
vessel category, but this research excludes such ferries because they
involve quite a different form of passenger travel than is being
explored here.
An inventory of industry policies and institutional structures
was conducted through extensive document review, Internet
searches, evaluation of available datasets, and key-informant interviews. Governance challenges and potential policy alternatives
were synthesized through various sources of information including
material from almost 500 interviews with residents of Arctic
communities, cruise ship operators, and policy stakeholders, as
well as from a series of workshops, round table exercises, keyinformant surveys, extensive document review, and rudimentary
examination of other national passenger vessel management regimes. The collected data were coded thematically, categorized, and
compared with additional data as they were generated. This paper
draws upon project findings related to regional governance and
management.
3. Expedition cruise vessel governance in an environment of
change
3.1. Cruise tourism development in Arctic Canada
Passenger vessel travel for pleasure began in the Canadian Arctic
around 1880. However, because of variable ice conditions in the
region, the first cruise ship (the purpose built expedition MS Explorer) transit of the Northwest Passage did not occur until 1984
(Jones, 1999; Marsh and Staple, 1995). Cruise tourism then began a
steady increase in the late 1990s. This appears to be directly related
to the economic decline of the Soviet Union and its eventual
collapse in 1991 which, note Stonehouse and Crosbie (1995),
increased the availability of ice-breaking and ice-rated ships that
could be retro-fitted for polar leisure travel. As a consequence, from
1992 to 2005 a sporadic but increasingly regular pattern of cruise
activity emerged across the Canadian Arctic (Maher and Meade,
2008; Stewart et al., 2010). In 2006 the sector exploded, with the
number of cruises dramatically doubling to 22, up from 11 in the
previous season (Buhasz, 2006), signalling a new era for the industry and for the region.
The elevated levels of passenger vessel activity experienced in
2006 continued through to the 2010 cruise season, which saw between 23 and 26 total voyages each year. The number of voyages
decreased to 18 in 2011 and to 16 in 2012, but numbers rebounded
again in the 2013 season with 23 voyages planned by eight different
cruise ships. The two year drop in vessel numbers is likely a result of
several factors: the lingering influence of the global economic crisis
(especially considering the long planning timeframe required to
operate in the Canadian Arctic); a business merger between two
major players (Adventure Canada & Cruise North); and, the inspection failure and subsequent decommissioning of one of the
regular passenger vessel ships in the region (Lyubov Orlova) (Quinn,
2012). The recent rebound in vessel numbers is also due in part to
the return of vessels previously operating to Arctic Canada and the
arrival of new vessels.
Expedition cruise operators in Arctic Canada currently possess
relatively good human and environmental safety records (Stewart
and Dawson, 2011). However, sector development has not been
without incident and vessels globally have experienced a series of
high profile incidents and misadventure in recent years. For
example, the sinking of the MS Explorer in Antarctica in 2007
(Stewart and Draper, 2008), the grounding of the Costa Concordia, a
much larger vessel, off the western coast of Italy in January 2012
90
J. Dawson et al. / Ocean & Coastal Management 89 (2014) 88e99
Table 1
Relevant international conventions affecting Cruise Tourism in Arctic Canada.
Convention
Notes:
SOLAS e safety of life at sea convention
Specifies minimum standards for the construction, equipment and operation of ships. Flag States are required
to ensure that ships under their flag comply with requirements.
Sets minimum standards that countries are obliged to meet or exceed for training, certification and watch
keeping for shipmasters, officers and watch personnel on seagoing merchant ships.
Regulations aimed at preventing and minimizing pollution from ships (accidental and routine). Ships flagged
under countries that are MARPOL signatories are subject to its requirements regardless of where they sail.
STCW convention
The International Convention for the
Prevention of Pollution from
Ships (MARPOL)
United Nations Convention on
the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS)
Convention on Search and Rescue
Convention on Oil Pollution
Preparedness, Response
and Co-operation
Convention on Civil Liability
for Oil Pollution Damage
Athens Convention covering
liability compensation
for passengers at sea
The UN Convention on International
Trade in Endangered Species (CITIES)
London Convention
UNCLOS is a comprehensive law for the sea. Article 234 of UNCLOS may provide Canada with some flexibility
for creation and enforcement of their national laws into much of the Northwest Passage as it deals specifically
with ice-covered waters and the extension of state jurisdiction for the purpose of environmental protection.
Parties must establish SAR rescue regions within each sea area and then accept responsibility for providing
SAR for that region.
Parties to OPRC are required to establish measures for handling pollution events nationally or in cooperation
with other nations. Ships are required to have a shipboard oil pollution emergency plan, which must
be coordinated with national systems for responding quickly and effectively to oil pollution incidents,
and stockpiles of oil spill combating equipment.
Ensures fair compensation is available to persons who suffer pollution damage from maritime casualties
involving oil-carrying ships. Under the convention liability is placed on the owner of the ship from which
the polluting oil was discharged.
Establishes a regime of liability for damage suffered by passengers carried on a seagoing vessel. Carriers
are liable for damage or loss suffered by a passenger if the incident occurred in the course of carriage
and was due to neglect of the carrier.
This UN convention must be considered by cruise operators to ensure passengers are aware of what they
can and cannot take from Canada to their home country. For certain items that can be purchased by tourists,
territorial wildlife export permits or maritime mammal export permits must be obtained.
Prevents dumping of certain hazardous materials at sea.
Sources: International Maritime Organization (IMO), (2013a,b,c,d,e,f)
(see The Guardian, 2012), and the fire in the engine room of the
Carnival Triumph in the Gulf of Mexico (Jones, 2013) all illustrate the
nature and potential for negative outcomes of the sector (also see
UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office, 2012; Neilson, 2012; Klein,
2010a,b, 2011). Incidents in Arctic Canada have been rare, but some
have raised concern among authorities and communities. The most
significant incident was the grounding of the Clipper Adventurer in
the summer of 2010 (Stewart and Dawson, 2011). Smaller vessels
have also caused problems, such as the Berserk II sailing vessel,
which made its way from Greenland through the Northwest Passage to Cambridge Bay, Nunavut (some 2 500 km) before it was
stopped by authorities for illegal entry into Canada and for
misleading the RCMP by hiding a crew member (Teeple, 2010).
More recently, the crew and staff of the luxury yacht, the Fortrus,
were investigated for carrying illegal fireworks and for alcohol violations in Nunavut (George, 2012). Although there has yet to be
loss of life, a major environmental catastrophe, or a significant security threat (that has been publically documented) associated with
the rapidly growing marine tourism industry in Arctic Canada,
recent incidents bring into sharp focus the cultural, environmental,
and security risks associated with developing cruise tourism and
should send a message to decision-makers about the complexities,
challenges and urgency associated with effective governance of this
sector in Arctic waters (see Huebert, 2001, 2009; Stewart and
Dawson, 2011). Current mechanisms for expedition cruise vessels
in the Canadian Arctic are explored in the following section.
3.2. Mechanisms for cruise vessel governance in Arctic Canada
3.2.1. International maritime governance
There are four international maritime conventions that create a
foundation for multi-national maritime governance: 1) the International Convention for Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) (focus - safety
requirements), 2) the International Convention for the Prevention
of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL) (focus e environmental protection), 3) the Convention on Standards of Training of Seafarers
(STCW) (focus e training and competency), and 4) the United
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) (focus e legal
framework). In addition to these foundational conventions there
are a number of other international conventions that are relevant
for expedition cruise shipping in Arctic Canada (see Table 1).
The institution that predominantly governs international maritime law is the International Maritime Organization (IMO). This
agency was created in 1948 to maintain the evolving regulatory
framework of treaties that govern the international shipping sector.
Its organizational remit includes safety, ship design standards,
environmental concerns, legal matters, technical co-operation,
maritime security, and the efficiency of shipping (IMO, 2013g).
The IMO has produced three primary guidance documents with
direct relevance for the polar cruise tourism sector including:
Guidelines for ships operating in Arctic ice-covered waters (MSC/
Circ.506 and A.1024 (26)) (IMO, 2010), Guidelines on voyage planning for passenger ships operating in remote areas (A.999 (25)) (IMO,
2008), and Guidance for passenger ships operating in areas remote
from SAR facilities (MSC.1/Circ. 1184) (IMO, 2007). The IMO is
currently developing a draft of the Polar Code, an international code
of safety for ships operating in polar waters (i.e. both in the Arctic
and the Antarctic) which considers the full range of design, construction, equipment, operational, training, search and rescue and
environmental protection matters relevant to all ships operating in
polar waters (IMO, 2012).
3.2.2. Federal and territorial maritime governance
In addition to the umbrella framework provided by the IMO,
there are Federal Acts relevant for passenger vessel operation in
Canadian Arctic waterways. The most applicable include: the
Oceans Act, the Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act (AWPPA),
the Canada Shipping Act (CSA), the Marine Liability Act (MLA), the
Marine Transportation Security Act (MTSA), the Navigable Waters
Protection Act (NWPA), and the Coasting Trade Act (CTA)(Table 2).
A variety of federal, territorial, and local-level institutions are
involved in supporting the cruise tourism vessel sector not only
through the administration of federal acts, but also through the
implementation of a complex permitting process required for
J. Dawson et al. / Ocean & Coastal Management 89 (2014) 88e99
operation of any passenger vessel in the region. This permitting
process is outlined by Transport Canada in a document titled:
‘Guidelines for the Operation of Passenger Vessels in Canadian Arctic
Waters’ (Transport Canada, 2005). The process is extensive and
requires operators to contact over 20 federal, territorial, and locallevel agencies to obtain the necessary licences, permits and
informal permissions for operation (Fig. 1).
3.3. Governance challenges for cruise tourism vessel management
Effective governance of the evolving cruise tourism vessel sector
in Arctic Canada is vital to enable emerging economic and
sovereignty-related opportunities to be realized and also to mitigate issues associated with safety, security and environmental and
cultural sustainability. Analysis largely based on the interview and
workshop portions of this study reveals a number of challenges
that currently constrain effectual governance of the industry in
light of environmental and global change. These are summarized in
Table 3 and are further elaborated upon in the next sections. Five
notable governance challenges emerged:
i. Inconsistencies associated with the multi-jurisdictional/
trans-national operating context;
ii. Lack of guidelines for cruise tourism vessel operation and
management;
iii. Lack of capacity and aging/insufficient infrastructure;
iv. Challenges associated with a vast and demanding geographic
landscape;
Table 2
Relevant federal acts regulating cruise tourism vessels in Arctic Canada.
>Act
Notes:
The Oceans Act
Highlights the various zones of Canadian
oceans, the Arctic included, as well as
describing the Ocean Management Strategy
within which power to create and regulate
marine protected areas in Canadian oceans is
given. The Act also outlines the regulations
relating to Marine protected areas.
Provides measures to prevent pollution from
ships, and in particular, the deposit of waste
into Arctic waters. Includes regulations to deal
with navigating including the need for ice
navigators and a Zone/Date System (Z/DS)
identifying safety zones and opening and
closing dates for those zones for ships of
different ice classes.
Represents Canada’s principal legislation for
marine shipping and recreational boating in all
Canadian waters including the Arctic.
Requires that the owners and/or operators of
vessels are responsible and liable for their
vessels and the consequences of their operation
Provides for the security of marine
transportation and applies to marine facilities in
Canada and Canadian ships outside of Canada
Protects the public right to navigate and ensure
a balance between public right and need to
build works which may obstruct navigation
Supports domestic marine interests by
reserving the coasting trade of Canada to
Canadian register vessels. The legislation
provides a process to temporarily import a
foreign vessel under a coasting trade licence
when a suitable Canadian registered vessels is
not available or in the case of transportation of
passengers. In this case duty taxes under
Customs Tariff and Excise Tax Act apply.
Arctic Water Pollution
Prevention Act AWPPA)
Canada Shipping Act (CSA)
Marine Liability Act (MLA)
Marine Transportation
Security Act (MTSA)
Navigable Waters
Protection Act (NWPA)
Coasting Trade Act
Source: Government of Canada (GOC) 2013a,b,c,d,e,f,g)
91
v. The outcomes of rapid change in times of high environmental and economic uncertainty.
3.3.1. Multi-jurisdictional/transnational operating context
The maritime governance system is very complex, a situation
that is reflected in the multi-layered, multi-jurisdictional and
multi-scale nature of regulatory institutions involved (Tables 1and
2 and Fig. 1). Because cruise tourism vessels move between jurisdictions, both national and international, they are subject to each
jurisdiction’s set of regulatory systems (port state control at the
international level) as well as to the registry guidelines associated
with the country in which the vessel is registered. Open registry
shipping, pejoratively known as ‘flag of convenience, ’is typical of
cruise tourism vessels. Open registry is often economically and
bureaucratically advantageous because the popular countries for
registration (e.g. Liberia, Panama, Cook Islands) usually have less
stringent safety, labour and environmental regulations than do the
countries of destination. The conditions imposed on Canadian
flagged vessels are viewed as onerous and not competitive against
the foreign flag regulations and, not surprisingly, all of the cruise
tourism vessels currently operating in the Canadian Arctic are
foreign flagged (Figs. 2 and 3).
There are several disadvantages to this system with respect to
the economic development potential of the cruise tourism sector in
Arctic Canada. First, foreign flagged vessels often require foreign
crew (with official work visas) instead of, or in addition to, Canadian crew, which undermines one of the main purposes of the
Coasting Trade Act, which is to protect the domestic shipping industry and to encourage the training and employment of Canadian
seafarers (GOC, 2013g). Second, operators can either temporarily
‘import’ a foreign ship to work in Canada or they can pay a duty tax
to operate a foreign flagged vessel solely within Canadian waters.
However, vessel operators rarely, if ever, choose to temporarily
import vessels because of the high financial cost and extensive
permitting process, and they also regularly avoid paying an additional tax through the strategy of beginning or ending their voyage
in Greenland or Alaska. One operator noted: “cabotage rules are a
minor issue at best. It doesn’t take much to alter itineraries to include
international ports” (interview e passenger vessel operator). This
customs tariff equals 1/120th of the cost of the vessel plus tax,
making it a substantial additional cost for operators who run a
voyage entirely in Canadian waters. Through the operators’ avoidance of the tax, the resulting travel patterns reduce the economic
development potential for tourism in remote Canadian communities while improving opportunities in bordering nations. Nunavut
Tourism (2012) notes that the majority of money spent by maritime
tourists is expended in the communities where a voyage begins or
ends; this is because of the longer stay in these locations and the
increased propensity of tourists to shop for souvenirs at this time.
This situation not only reduces direct and indirect economic
impact from the development of the passenger vessel sector within
Canada, it also is thought by some to increase national security
risks. Hodgson (2010) states “the almost complete dominance of
commercial shipping in the Canadian Arctic by foreign flag vessels .
heightens the threat to Canada’s Arctic security in all its forms” (p.21).
This issue was reiterated in the study through speculation by
several Arctic residents who were interviewed that some commercial tourism vessels, and more often the smaller pleasure craft
vessels such as yachts, present serious security threats to the region
by dually engaging in surreptitious operations to map the sea floor,
spy on military operations, gather other geo-physical data, import
illegal goods, or engage in human or other trafficking, for example.
Recognizing the relationship between strict cabotage rules (i.e.
rules associated with foreign flagged vessels) and increased
92
J. Dawson et al. / Ocean & Coastal Management 89 (2014) 88e99
Fig. 1. Map of Arctic Canada.
security threats due to terrorism, illegal immigration, piracy and
drugs, as well as lost economic opportunities, and an erosion of
national knowledge and expertise in marine transportation,
members of the European Union have taken substantive steps to
reform tax systems that make it more attractive to place ships
under national registry (Hodgson, 2010). The EU and its members
“. have made . the national flag registration process simpler,
more appealing and user-friendly, while not sacrificing safety
standards” (Hodgson, 2010, p. 18). In contrast, Canada has to date
shown little interest in reforming tax regimes of the Coasting Trade
Act and has suggested that, if anything, it is more likely to create
stricter regulations than to relax the ones that already exist in order
to be more in line with the U.S.A. Jones Act (interview e policy
stakeholder; also see Lajeunesse et al., 2011). The threat of Arctic
shipping to national security in Canada was not seen by the Government of Canada’s Department of National Defence (DND) as a
high priority in 2012; instead primary concerns related to small
scale illegal fishing, drug smuggling and human smuggling (Joint
Task Force North, 2012). Nonetheless, the potential for regional
and local scale security and SAR risks are real considering the
absence of comprehensive Arctic patrols, the limited resources of
the Canadian Coast Guard and the vast geographic area requiring
monitoring and enforcement.
3.3.2. Lack of Guidelines for cruise tourism vessel operation and
management
Despite there being a relatively robust policy environment for
maritime shipping in Arctic Canada in general, there is no single
point of authority for the governance of the cruise sector and there
are no established sector specific development strategies, management plans, or sets of operational or site guidelines (outside of
protected area restrictions). The lack of a central point of authority
makes the permitting process for cruise tourism vessels extremely
complex and, in some cases, this creates cumbersome redundancies
(see Fig. 1); this issue also presents barriers for the development of
management plans and their eventual implementation and
enforcement. Indeed, one interviewee stated that the complexity of
the permitting system and lack of guidelines is ‘limiting operation in
the Canadian Arctic to only a few companies who have the resources,
time, patience, and knowledge to deal with the system’ (interview vessel operator) This form of decentralized management also tends
to cause a diffusion of responsibility for the sector among a large
number of organizations and departments, leading to management
gaps, oversights, and communication difficulties.
The situation in Arctic Canada contrasts with other Arctic destinations that have experienced rapid growth in the cruise tourism
sector. For example, expedition cruise ship activity in Greenland,
Jan Mayen, and Svalbard, Norway is supported through industry
self-regulation by the Association of Arctic Expedition Cruise Operators (AECO) (AECO, 2013a). AECO manages activities through a
set of by-laws, operational guidelines, and specific site guidelines
(see AECO, 2013b) that dictate appropriate behaviour for tourists
and operators while at sensitive and culturally and historically
significant shore locations, particularly those of high use. AECO
operates on the same model as the International Association of
Antarctica Tour Operators (IAATO), a voluntary organization, which
has successfully provided a forum for self-regulation of the tourism
industry in the Antarctic since 1991 (Stonehouse and Crosbie, 1995;
Johnston, 1997; Hasse et al., 2009).
3.3.3. Aging and insufficient infrastructure and lack of capacity
There are significant capacity and infrastructure deficits in the
marine environment across Arctic Canada. These deficits constrain
economic development potential, increase risks associated with
safety, security, and environmental sustainability, making passenger vessel operation, as well as planning and management,
J. Dawson et al. / Ocean & Coastal Management 89 (2014) 88e99
93
Table 3
Summary of Arctic cruise governance challenges and policy alternatives.
Governance challenge
Multi-jurisdictional/transnational operating context
Inconsistent polar regulations among Arctic nations
Prevalence of foreign flagged vessel use & issues associated with lack of
national mariner training opportunities
Lack of guidelines for passenger vessel operation and management
No point of authority for cruise tourism vessel governance
No strategic plan, management plan, set of operational guidelines, or set of
site guidelines (outside of protected areas) for sensitive and high use locations
Ongoing lack of communication among governing bodies and poor
connectivity
Complex and redundant passenger vessel permitting process
Aging and insufficient infrastructure & lack of capacity
Limited SAR, salvage and clean-up capabilities
Lack of personnel trained in hospitality
Limited tourism, service, and communications infrastructure
Difficult & expensive (per capita) to build new and maintain existing
infrastructure
Aging ship fleet
Vast and demanding geographic area to service and govern
Difficult and expensive to monitor activity
Difficult and expensive to enforce regulations
Lack of national and regional connectivity
Issues associated with seasonality
Rapid change and high uncertainty
Changing environmental conditions at rates that exceed the global average
Rapid economic growth
Economic development heavily focused on primary industry
Tourism is an inherently changing industry always seeking new opportunities
extremely challenging. For example, there are no public-use deepwater ports, re-fueling stations, or reliable re-supply locations; the
communications infrastructure and search and rescue services are
extremely limited; and, there is a lack of tourism services and human resources.
Compared to most other Arctic regions attracting passenger
vessel activity, Canada’s tourism infrastructure and local services
are minimal. Visitor exit surveys consistently reveal a distinct lack
of satisfaction with the ‘services available’ and the ‘high costs
associated with limited and/or poor services’ (Government of
Nunavut, 2008; Nunavut Tourism, 2012). Simple services that are
considered standard for a typical tourism sector, including other
northern destinations, are noticeably absent.
Discussions on establishing public deep water ports in the region have stalled as have promises for improved marine
Policy alternatives
Harmonize shipping regulations for trans-Arctic waters via a mandatory Polar
Code.
Develop specific provisions within the Polar Code for cruise tourism vessels.
Reform Coasting Trade Act (Customs Tariff, Excise Tax Act) (i.e. simplify waiver
system for open registry of cruise tourism vessels)
Establish formal Canadian Arctic cruise association (i.e. join AECO, appoint
Nunavut Tourism, or other).
Establish a regional cruise tourism strategy (i.e. that complements existing
regional tourism strategies).
Develop a cruise tourism working group with representation from all levels of
government, stakeholders, and community residents.
Establish ‘site guidelines’ for highly visited/sensitive sites
Implement formal communication channels among key governing
stakeholders (national to local)
Review appropriateness of existing maritime policies and regulations for the
cruise sector (consider exemptions, waivers, or amendments).
Streamline cruise vessel-permitting process via single body/institution (onewindow approach).
Invest additional resources in the Canadian Coast Guard.
Improve and enhance training and resources for Canadian Rangers and other
local volunteers.
Consider ban on heavy fuel oil in Arctic waters.
Require current technology & navigation systems.
Require better soundings and marine mapping resources.
Appoint a regional cruise liaison officer.
Improve local training and educational opportunities as well as service-based
infrastructure
Invest in multi-purpose infrastructure that will serve local populations as well
as the tourism economy.
Invest in and improve communications infrastructure
Consider charging an infrastructure tax to cruise ship operators
Make NORDREG (reporting mechanism) mandatory for all vessels.
Invest in additional Canadian Coast Guard resources and capability (ships,
personnel, training).
Improve monitoring technologies (AIS - shore and ship based) and invest in
new technologies.
Improve opportunities for cross scale communications (conferences, annual
meetings, working group, etc.)
Establish ‘site guidelines’ for highly visited/sensitive sites
Continue and improve government support for national climate change
mitigation policies and adaptation programs.
Invest in social and education programs and improve living conditions,
healthcare and basic services.
Invest in research and innovation to determine viable economic
diversification avenues, plans for economic self-sufficiency.
Develop a diversified economy with flexibility and economic support
programs.
Encourage local entrepreneurship and small business development
infrastructure. The federal government has moved forward with
the commissioning of a new icebreaker (the John G. Diefenbaker),
yet in reality this new ship is only replacing the soon-to-be retired
Louis S. St. Laurent. Promises have been made to procure ‘off-shore
patrol vessels’, improve communications infrastructure, port
infrastructure, and monitoring capacity. However, even if all these
improvements come to fruition, the Canadian Coast Guard will still
require substantially more resources to support industry growth, to
respond to needs for salvage and emergency clean up, and to fulfil
Canada’s obligations under the joint search and rescue agreement
established by Arctic Council in 2011 requiring the nation to assist
vessels in agreed sectors (Arctic Council, 2011).
These infrastructure limitations are serious, leading many
policy stakeholders in the study to believe “it is only a matter of
time before we witness a major ship based accident in Arctic
94
J. Dawson et al. / Ocean & Coastal Management 89 (2014) 88e99
Fig. 2. Cruise ship and passengers near Pond Inlet, Nunavut.
Canada” (interview e policy expert) and it has been stated that
‘the worst possible Arctic shipping accident at this time would be a
passenger vessel sinking’ (interview e policy expert 2). Also of
concern is the advanced age of the passenger vessels that are
currently operating in Canadian Arctic waters, many of which are
now functioning well beyond their estimated ‘service life’ and as
a result have a higher potential for failure. Of the passenger
vessels regularly operating in Canadian Arctic waters, 56% are
overdue for refurbishing and by 2020 this will increase to 89% (i.e.
all but one) (Brosnan, 2011).
3.3.4. Vast and demanding geographic area to service and govern
The closest rescue coordination centres servicing the Canadian
Arctic are in Halifax, St. John’s, Trenton, and Victoria. The Canadian
Coast Guard (CCG) reports an 11-hour commute time to northern
locations from these southern-based coordination centres (CCG,
2009). Servicing the entire Canadian coast is consistently a challenging task considering the nations coastline is the longest in the
world at 243,000 km (of which 162 000 is considered Arctic) (NRC,
2013). However, even if rescue centres were strategically located in
the north, as has been recommended by many stakeholders,
monitoring and serving the Canadian Arctic will remain extremely
challenging simply due to the geographic extent, nature of the
landscapes, and remoteness of the region from services.
Melting of sea ice has made previously inaccessible areas navigable and, as a result, a large portion of the Canadian Arctic is only
now available to be charted. Charting issues appear to have played a
role in the incident involving the passenger vessel ‘Clipper Adventurer’ which became grounded on underwater cliff in the summer
of 2011. Because of the size of the region, it took two full days for the
closest CCG vessel (the Amundsen) to rescue the passengers (see
Stewart and Dawson, 2011). No other large vessels were available to
support the ‘Clipper Adventurer’ during this time. Cruise tourism
vessels operating in other remote regions of the world regularly
utilize a ‘twinning policy’ whereby ships travel in relative tandem
in case of emergency. This twinning or ‘buddy’ system worked to
good effect when the MS Explorer sank in Antarctica in 2009 and the
Nordnorge was within range to provide critical assistance. However,
in the Canadian Arctic operators have deemed this policy to be
uneconomic and it is not currently being considered as a strategy,
according to many cruise ship operators who were interviewed. It is
clear therefore that ‘cruise operators themselves must have in place
their own SAR strategy in the event of an accident or incident’
(interview e maritime scholar).
Fig. 3. Institutions involved in cruise tourism vessel governance in Arctic Canada.
J. Dawson et al. / Ocean & Coastal Management 89 (2014) 88e99
The large geographic area and challenging operating environment additionally makes it extremely difficult for authorities to
enforce regulations and to distribute fines for non-compliance. For
example, according to interviewees, there are mounting concerns
about environmental negligence (e.g. barge dumping, illegal waste
disposal) and security threats such as human and goods trafficking
and illegal entry. Monitoring and enforcement have emerged as
major concerns for management agencies, in part because
improved regulation is meaningless without effective monitoring
and enforcement mechanisms.
3.3.5. Rapid change and high uncertainty
Temperature in the Arctic has increased at twice the rate of the
global average (ACIA, 2004; IPCC, 2007), and although residents of
the Canadian Arctic are known for their high adaptive capacity,
having dealt with the consequences of rapid political change over
the past fifty years (Nuttall, 1998; Nuttall and Callaghan, 2000), the
scale and scope of environmental and economic change expected in
the short to medium-term future is unprecedented. Further, the
changes in environmental conditions and their implications for
tourism are not necessarily straightforward. For example, the
decrease in ice cover that is being experienced is accompanied by
navigational hazards caused by increased ice movement (ACIA,
2004; Johnston, 2006; Stewart et al., 2007). Significant uncertainty is also inherent within the tourism industry itself. The sector
tends to be relatively changeable in response to on-going and unpredictable circumstances such as global economic trends, political
unrest, health outbreaks, and new opportunities; but the sector
also is characterised by flexibility and adaptability and it regularly
responds and changes existing situations. This means that the region, communities and local residents can not expect stable annual
tourism activity and revenues.
3.4. Recommendations for improving passenger vessel management
in Arctic Canada
In addition to summarizing the challenges for governance,
Table 3 also lists possible strategies for those challenges. These
suggestions came primarily from consultation with Arctic residents, passenger vessel operators, policy stakeholders, and other
experts. The strategies are aimed at supporting and improving
governance of the Arctic passenger vessel sector in Canada in light
of changing environmental and economic conditions. Further
analysis of the list of strategies indicates that they fall within three
themes: 1) Regulation and Policy, 2) Infrastructure, Services, and
Technology, and 3) Communication and Outreach.
3.4.1. Regulation and policy
Creating and instituting the mandatory pan-Arctic polar code,
steered by the International Maritime Organization, was seen by
the majority of interviewees as an essential first step in improving
management of all maritime activities in Arctic Canada, including
passenger vessels. The code would help to establish synergistic
regulations, provide a consistent and robust set of policies that
harmonize environmental protocols, operating rules, and cooperative service arrangements across the Polar Regions, which can be
further supplemented with national and regional level regulation
(IMO, 2012; also see Kaltenstein, 2011).
At the national scale, Canada has already established a relatively strong Arctic marine governance regime for transiting vessels. However, according to many interviewees, there remains an
urgent need for a set of specific operational guidelines for cruise
tourism vessels. The need for official cruise tourism vessel guidelines and management plans in Arctic Canada was echoed by
Minister Aglukkaq in May 2013 who outlined Canada’s main
95
priorities in taking over the chair role of the Arctic Council,
including a strong focus on “safe Arctic shipping” that includes the
“development of guidelines for Arctic tourism and cruise ship operators” (CASR, 2013). The absence of operational guidelines or
‘codes of conduct’ in Arctic Canada is a concern considering cruise
tourism vessels purposefully travel away from typical shipping
corridors into remote areas.
In addition, the regional reduction in sea ice concentration has
improved access to even more remote and uncharted areas that are
completely void of basic navigation and environmental and cultural
interpretive information. Thus, there is also a strong need for the
generation of site guidelines for sensitive and highly visited shore
locations. Site guidelines already exist for other remote Polar Regions that are popular for passenger vessels including Antarctica
(Secretariat of the Antarctic Treaty, 2013) and Svalbard (AECO,
2013b). These guidelines include suggestions on how to conduct
visits to locations; they provide pertinent and site-specific navigational details, as well as cultural, historic and environmental
interpretive information and, further, they direct traffic to areas
deems suitable for visitation. Site guidelines are an extremely
valuable tool for tourism management in remote areas where
monitoring capabilities are limited and expensive.
Improving basic management of the cruise tourism vessel industry would also benefit from the appointment of single point of
authority that could oversee development and management. This
authority could come in the form of a working group or panel, but
perhaps most appropriate would be an extension of the operational
remit of AECO into the Canadian Arctic; however, interviewees
were mixed on this suggestion. This approach would mirror the
self-regulatory International Association of Antarctica Tour Operators (IAATO) an organization that has served the Continent and the
member operators well since IAATO was established in 1991. But in
recent years, the dramatic increases in the number of cruise vessels
(including large liners) coupled with a series of major incidents has
promoted commentators to scrutinize the self-regulatory nature of
polar cruise tourism (Haase et al., 2009). If the model of selfregulation as adopted by AECO and IAATO is regarded as the way
forward for cruise tourism activities in the Canadian Arctic
(following the self-regulatory lead of the Antarctic), then the
weaknesses of the experience in the Antarctic need to be closely
evaluated. Alternatively, as suggested in Bramwell and Lane (2009),
complex phenomena such as tourism in a rapidly changing environment may demand a government regulated framework, as
opposed to the voluntary structure currently used, as the most
appropriate way forward. Effective approaches to regulating polar
tourism may include both approaches, but must take into account
the needs of the particular setting when models from elsewhere are
imported or extended (Johnston, 1997, 1998). Regardless of how the
initiative proceeds or who leads it, the creation or appointment of a
single body that is charged with understanding big-picture management should be seriously considered in the short term.
Finally, it was suggested that the issues associated with
decreased economic development potential and the potential increase in security risks associated with the pervasiveness of foreign
flagged passenger vessel registration in Arctic Canada could be
improved through the implementation of a simplified waiver system for open vessel registry for expedition cruise ships. Acknowledging that the coasting trade legislation is rightly in place to
protect the domestic shipping industry, ensure environmental
standards are met, and to avoid any human rights abuses surrounding wages and working conditions, a waiver system (i.e.
exemption/acceptation) could help to improve economic opportunities for the region by encouraging operators to spend more
time in Canada instead of transiting between neighbouring nations
but without compromising the integrity of the act.
96
J. Dawson et al. / Ocean & Coastal Management 89 (2014) 88e99
3.4.2. Infrastructure, services, and technology
Significant investment needs to be made to improve and expand
infrastructure and related services across Arctic Canada. The current need for infrastructure is substantial but key improvements
should include: establishment of a deep water port with refuelling
capabilities, updating regional charts and navigation protocol systems, enhancing satellite and Automatic Identification System (AIS)
capacity (see Live Ships, 2013) as well as other monitoring programs (i.e. NORDREG), creating northern rescue and refuge centres,
increasing resources available for the Canadian Coast Guard, and
investing in community-based services and attractions. The level of
investment required to make such infrastructure improvements is
enormous, and such significant investment raises the question of
cost recovery (i.e. who should pay for the cost of providing and
maintaining services such as SAR, and icebreaking support).
Arguably, the cruise tourism vessel sector is one of the biggest
beneficiaries of this currently free service, but the situation, as one
interviewee claimed, does beg a difficult question: “why should the
Canadian taxpayer subsidize the encouragement of (largely foreign
flag) shipping activity in the Arctic, when such activity introduces
significant safety and environmental risks with frequently little or no
economic or other benefit to Canada?” (interview e maritime
scholar). In fiscally stringent times, decisions about cost-recovery of
key services and infrastructure in the Arctic are vitally important to
policy-makers, the general public and the users of such services.
However, improved maritime infrastructure at the communitylevel would benefit multiple industries in the region, in addition to
the passenger vessel sector, and would further support economic
growth and local employment. Federal and territorial initiatives are
already underway to improve infrastructure and services but progress has been slow and historic investment promises continue to be
re-packaged and sold as new. It is common for infrastructure taxes or
landing fees to be charged to cruise tourism vessels operating around
the world, which are then used to make additional improvements to
infrastructure and services. However, because there is extremely
limited maritime infrastructure (or services) on offer in Arctic Canada
charging, this type of fee is not currently an option.
Many policy stakeholders in the region are now expressing
concern that as a nation ‘we are promoting economic development in
the Arctic but we are not preparing for its consequences’ (interview e
policy stakeholder) and ‘we are marketing a tourism product here
that do not have the infrastructure to support (interview e local
resident). Infrastructure investments are vital to improving this
situation and could be used to leverage additional development
while simultaneously reducing the probability of major incidents
and potential lawsuits (see CBC, 2011).
3.4.3. Communication, outreach, and training
Considering that one of the most prevailing and pervasive issues
identified with the management of cruise tourism vessel activity in
Arctic Canada is poor communication, there are several strategies
that should be considered immediately. First, streamlining the
cruise tourism vessel permitting process via a one-window
approach would substantially improve the flow of information
required by different agencies and organizations; it would reduce
redundancy, reduce costs and personnel time for both operators
and federal and territorial agencies, and it would encourage
increased private sector competition among operators by attracting
new companies who do not currently operate in Arctic Canada.
Once the technical elements of a one-window system were developed the implementation could be overseen by a single point of
contact that would then communicate with relevant agencies.
Communication between federal agencies responsible for
monitoring and providing permits for cruise tourism vessels and
regional and local stakeholders must also be improved. The
permitting process currently requires operators to provide federal
agencies such as Transport Canada with an outline of travel itineraries well in advance of the shipping season. This information has
not consistently been made available to regional organizations or to
local communities and when it has it is usually immediately before
the season begins. This severely limits the ability of regional and
local stakeholders to plan for cruise tourism vessel visits (i.e. prepare
carvings, performances, and handicrafts) and for local Rangers to be
prepared to assist in the event of a search and rescue operation.
It is also important to invest in research and programs that
support successful economic development in the unique Arctic
operating environment, and that clearly identify best practices and
determinants of sustainable and diversified economic development. At regional and local scales investments should be made in
social and education programs, health-care, housing, and basic
services that ensure the wellbeing of local populations. Considering
the strength of a nation is based upon the strength of individual
societies, the structures and intuitions that are set up by society and
the capacity that exists within societies (see Naess et al., 2005),
investing in local communities, regional and local organizations
and local residents of Arctic Canada should be the foremost priority.
4. Conclusion
As Byers and Lalonde (2009: 1 141) indicate there is a sense of
urgency involved in governing the changing Arctic: “For many, an icefree Arctic is . only a question of time, and while science aims to
establish certainty, good public policy is frequently based on analyses of
risk. If there is even a 20% chance that the Passage will be safely navigable . within the next few decades, policymakers should be moving
quickly to prepare for that eventuality” (Byers and Lalonde, 2009:
1141). Under current conditions the existing management system for
cruise tourism vessel governance in Arctic Canada is characterized by
institutional complexity, capacity deficits, and an absence of a
dedicated authority to oversee management and development of
guidelines and best practices. Instead, governance of the industry
occurs within the complex multi-jurisdictional regulatory frameworks that exist for all shipping in the region, a problematic situation
considering the particular operating environment of expedition
cruise ships that regularly travel away from main shipping corridors
in search of ice, wildlife, and culture. This lack of focused management attention has led to a situation whereby the region is a full
decade behind other Arctic nations who have been more proactive in
establishing systems for managing and supporting a growing Polar
cruise industry. If Canada is to encourage the development of the
cruise sector in the Arctic, then it is vital that a harmonized policy
framework is established to ensure environmental and human risk is
minimized and economic and cultural opportunities are maximized.
Greater pan-Arctic collaboration and governance of the industry,
through the polar code, overarching organizational management (i.e.
AECO) or other initiatives, is urgent if a more harmonized and
effective regulatory framework is to be achieved.
As this paper has outlined, the challenges of managing Arctic
cruise tourism vessels are varied and exist at a variety of scales.
Given these multi-layered challenges, it is not surprising that there
are challenges and that mishaps occur and it is likely that more are
to come. A number of recommendations for improving governance
and management of these vessels in this region are provided.
Suggestions attempt to balance the social, economic and environmental imperatives at hand. Overall, the research revealed a strong
need to develop cruise tourism vessel management plans, operational guidelines, codes of conduct and site guidelines, and further
demands that a review of waiver options for domestic operation of
foreign flagged vessels be considered. To improve communication
and coordination, a single point of authority should be established
J. Dawson et al. / Ocean & Coastal Management 89 (2014) 88e99
or assigned and a one-window permitting procedure designed and
implemented. In addition to improving systems and procedures
substantial investment should be made in building and improving
maritime and tourism infrastructure. Private-public partnerships
can help to improve multi-purpose and multi-use infrastructure
that would not only serve cruise tourism, but also other vital economic sectors within the region.
Good governance of the cruise tourism vessel sector is good
governance of the Canadian Arctic shipping sector in general, given
that basic needs and requirements for all shipping are overlapping
and for cruise tourism may exceed those of typical maritime operation given its propensity for travel off the main shipping corridors.
Good governance of the sector will also contribute to establishing
locally desired and driven economic development pathways since
residents appear to be generally in favour of cruise tourism sector,
not only because of the economic benefits but also for the opportunities to share culture and traditions and to learn about other
people and places (Stewart et al., 2011, 2012; interviews e local
residents). However, communities and local resident support for the
industry only extends so long as the sector is well managed and
respects sensitive and culturally important shore locations, wildlife
and other natural landscapes. Because of the lack of management
plans, site guidelines, and best practices, the region currently relies
on the good will and high standard of ethic expedition cruise operators have thus far displayed in Arctic Canada. However, as the
operating environment becomes more competitive and new companies appear in the region, this standard may change. There is a
clear need for focused policy attention on the sector in Arctic Canada, not only to oversee proper regulation of vessels but also to
provide the sector with the support and services it needs to operate
competently and competitively. Without improved management
and support the economic opportunities of the Arctic cruise tourism
vessel sector will be lost as operators choose to travel elsewhere
where services are better and systems are efficient.
Ethical statement
This manuscript has not been submitted or published elsewhere. All authors approve submission and contributed fully to the
research.
Acknowledgements
Appreciation is extended to the residents of Canadian Arctic
communities (Pond Inlet, Ulukhaktok, Gjoa Haven, Nain, Kuujjuak,
and Iqaluit), and to the decision-makers and stakeholders in the
region who participated in the CTAC Project (http://www.
arctictourismandclimate.lakeheadu.ca/) (also see HYPERLINK
“http://www.espg.ca” www.espg.ca). The authors gratefully
acknowledge support from the Social Sciences and Humanities
Research Council of Canada. Jackie Dawson also acknowledges
financial support from both ArcticNet and the Global Environmental Change Group at the University of Guelph. Thanks also go to
Dick Hodgson and to Tim Meisner for comments and advice on an
earlier version of this paper. We also acknowledge the work of our
research assistants: Adrienne Johnston, Charlie, Mattina, Sarah
Wade, Jessica Jaja, Laurel Pentelow, and Laura Flemming.
References
ACIA, 2004. Arctic Climate Impact Assessment: Impacts of a Warming Arctic.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
AECO, 2013a. Association of Arctic Expedition Cruise Operators (AECO). Retrieved
March 19, from: http://www.aeco.no/.
AECO, 2013b. Site Guidelines for Svalbard. Accessed June 12, from: www.aeco.no/
guidelines.
97
Arctic Council, 2011. Agreement on Cooperation on Aeronautical and Maritime
Search and Rescue in the Arctic. Retrieved March 19, from: http://www.ifrc.org/
docs/idrl/N813EN.pdf.
AMSA, 2009. Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment 2009 Report. Arctic Council.
Retrieved June 22, 2011 from: http://www.pame.is/amsa/amsa-2009-report.
Aporta, C., 2011. Shifting perspectives on shifting sea ice: documenting and representing Inuit use of the sea ice. Canad. Geogr. 55 (1), 6e19.
Bramwell, B., Lane, B., 2009. Sustainable tourism and the evolving roles of government planning. J. Sustain. Tourism. 18 (1), 1e5.
Brosnan, I.G., 2011. The diminishing age gap between polar cruisers and their ships:
a new reason to codify the IMO guidelines for ships operating in polar waters
and make them mandatory? Mar. Policy, 261e265.
Byers, M., Lalonde, S., 2009. Who controls the Northwest Passage? Vanderbilt J.
Transnatl. Law 42 (4), 1133e1210.
Buhasz, L., 2006, July 1. Northern underexposure. Globe & Mail.
CASR, 2013. Canada’s 3 Sub-themes for the Arctic Council during Ms Aglukkaq’s
Tenure as its Chair. Retrieved June 12, from: http://www.casr.ca/as-arcticcouncil-canada-russia.htm.
CBC, 2011. Arctic Cruise Company Sues over Stranded Ship. Retrieved March 19,
from:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/story/2011/07/13/arctic-cruiseship-lawsuit.html.
CCG, 2009. Northern SAR in Canada. Retrieved March 19, from: http://www.nss.gc.
ca/site/North-Nord/CCG%20Northern%20SAR%20Roundtable.pdf.
CTAC, 2012. Tourism Change and Adaptation in Arctic Canada. Retrieved July 26,
from: http://www.arctictourismandclimate.lakeheadu.ca.
Dawson, J., Maher, P., Slocombe, D.S., 2007. Climate change, marine tourism and
sustainability in the Canadian Arctic: contributions from systems and
complexity approaches. Tour. Mar. Environ. 4 (2/3), 69e83.
Dawson, J., Stewart, E.J., Lemelin, H., Scott, D., 2010. The carbon cost of polar
bear viewing in Churchill, Manitoba, Canada. J. Sustain. Tour. 18 (3), 319e
336.
Dawson, J., Johnston, M.E., Stewart, E.J., Lemieux, C.J., Lemelin, R.H., Maher, P.T.,
Grimwood, B., 2011. Ethical dimensions of last chance tourism. J. Ecotour. 10 (3),
250e262.
Dawson, J., Johnston, M.E., Stewart, E.J., Lemieux, C.J., 2013. Cruise Tourism in Arctic
Canada: summary report of potential adaptation strategies. University of
Ottawa, Ottawa.
Furgal, C., Prowse, T.D., 2008. Northern Canada. In: Lemmen, D.S., et al. (Eds.), From
Impacts to Adaptation: Canada in a changing climate. Government of Canada,
Ottawa, pp. 57e118.
George, J., 2012. Private yacht visitors to Nunavut create mixed impression in
Cambridge Bay: Aussie yacht owner faces liquor charges. Nunatsiaq News.
Retrieved June 12, from: http://www.nunatsiaqonline.ca/stories/article/
65674private_yacht_visitors_to_nunavut_create_mixed_impression_in_
cambridge/.
GOC, 2013a. Oceans Act: S.C. 1996, c.31. Retrieved March 19, from: http://laws-lois.
justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/O-2.4/.
GOC, 2013b. Canada Shipping Act. Retrieved March 19, from: http://www.tc.gc.ca/
eng/acts-regulations/acts-2001c26.htm.
GOC, 2013c. Arctic Water Pollution Prevention Act (AWPPA). Retrieved March 19,
from:
http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/marinesafety/debs-arctic-acts-regulationsawppa-494.htm.
GOC, 2013d. Marine Liability Act: 2001 C6. Retrieved March 19, from: http://www.
tc.gc.ca/eng/acts-regulations/acts-2001c6.htm.
GOC, 2013e. Marine Transportation Security Act (MTSA). Retrieved March 19, from:
http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/marinesafety/debs-arctic-acts-regulations-mtsa-1166.
htm.
GOC, 2013f. Navigable Waters Protection Act (NWPA). Retrieved March 19, from:
http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/marinesafety/debs-arctic-acts-regulations-nwpa1308.htm.
GOC, 2013g. Coasting Trade Act Home. Retrieved March 19, from: http://www.tc.gc.
ca/eng/policy/acf-acfs-menu-2215.htm.
Government of Nunavut, 2008. Nunavut Visitor Exit Survey: 2008 Final Report.
Retrieved July26, 2012, from: http://www.edt.gov.nu.ca/apps/UPLOADS/fck/file/
Nunavut_exit_study_2008.pdf.
Guardian, 2012. Costa Concordia. Retrieved July 25, 2012 from: http://www.
guardian.co.uk/world/costa-concordia.
Haase, D., Lamers, M., Amelung, B., 2009. Heading into uncharted territory?
Exploring the institutional robustness of self-regulation in the Antarctic
tourism sector. J. Sustain. Tour. 17 (4), 411e430.
Hodgson, D., 2010. National security and Canada’s shipping policy: we can do
better. Canad. Naval Review. 6 (3), 16e21.
Howell, S.E.L., Yackel, J.J., 2004. A vessel transit assessment of sea ice variability in
the Western Arctic, 1969-2002: Implications for ship navigation. Canad. J.
Remote Sens. 30 (2), 205e215.
Howell, S.E.L., Tivy, A., Yackel, J.J., Scharien, R., 2006. Application of a SeaWinds/
QuikSCAT sea ice melt algorithm for assessing melt dynamics in the Canadian
Arctic Archipelago. Journal of Geophysical Research 111, 1e21.
Howell, S.E.L., Tivy, A., Yackel, J.J., McCourt, S., 2008. Multi-year sea ice conditions in
the Western Canadian Arctic Archipelago section of the Northwest Passage:
1968e2006. Atmos. Ocean 46, 229e242.
Howell, S.E.L., Duguay, C.R., Markus, T., 2009. Sea ice conditions and melt season
duration variability within the Canadian Arctic Archipelago: 1979-e2008. GRL
36, L10502 doi:1029/2009GL037681.
98
J. Dawson et al. / Ocean & Coastal Management 89 (2014) 88e99
Huebert, R., 2001. Climate change and Canadian sovereignty in the Northwest
Passage. Isuma: Canad. J. Policy Res. 2, 86e94.
Huebert, R., 2009. Canada and the changing international Arctic: at the crossroads
of cooperation and conflict. In: Abele, F., Courchene, T.J., Seidle, F.L., St-Hilaire, F.
(Eds.), Northern Exposure: People, Powers and Prospects in Canada’s north.
Institute for Research on Public Policy (IRPP), Montreal, pp. 77e106.
IMO, 2007. Guidance for Passenger Ships Operating in Areas Remote from SAR
Facilities (MSC.1/Circ. 1184). Retrieved July 25, 2013, from: http://www.uscg.
mil/hq/cg5/cg534/MassRescueOps/IMO_ResolutionA.999(25)_Voyage_Plng.
pdf.
IMO, 2008. Guidelines on Voyage Planning for Passenger Ships Operating in Remote
Areas (A.999 (25.). Retrieved November 20, 2013, from: http://www.imo.org/
blast/blastDataHelper.asp?data_id¼29939&filename¼A999(25).pdf.
IMO, 2010. Guidelines for Ships Operating in Polar Waters e 2010 Edition e Electronic Edition. London. Retrieved June 7, 2013, from: http://www.imo.org/
Publications/Documents/Attachments/Pages%20from%20E190E.pdf.
IMO, 2012. Development of an International Code of Safety for Ships Operating in
Polar Waters (Polar Code). Retrieved March 20, from: http://www.imo.org/
mediacentre/hottopics/polar/Pages/default.aspx.
IMO, 2013a. International Convention of the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 1974.
Retrieved June 12, 2013, from: http://www.imo.org/about/conventions/
listofconventions/pages/international-convention-for-the-safety-of-life-at-sea%28solas%29,e1974.aspx.
IMO, 2013b. International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships
(MARPOL). Retrieved June 12, 2013, from: http://www.imo.org/about/
conventions/listofconventions/pages/international-convention-for-theprevention-of-pollution-from-ships-%28marpol%29.aspx.
IMO, 2013c. International Convention on Maritime Search and Rescue (SAR).
Retrieved June 12, 2013, from: http://www.imo.org/about/conventions/
listofconventions/pages/international-convention-on-maritime-search-andrescue-%28sar%29.aspx.
IMO, 2013d. International Convention on Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and
Co-operation (OPRC). Retrieved March 19, 2013, from: http://www.imo.org/
about/conventions/listofconventions/pages/international-convention-on-oilpollution-preparedness,-response-and-co-operation-%28oprc%29.aspx.
IMO, 2013e. Athens Convention Relating to the Carriage of Passengers and Their
Luggage by Sea (PAL). Retrieved March 19, 2013, from: http://www.imo.org/
About/Conventions/ListOfConventions/Pages/Athens-Convention-relating-tothe-Carriage-of-Passengers-and-their-Luggage-by-Sea-%28PAL%29.aspx.
IMO, 2013f. Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping Wastes
and Other Matter. Retrieved March 19, 2013, from: http://www.imo.org/about/
conventions/listofconventions/pages/convention-on-the-prevention-ofmarine-pollution-by-dumping-of-wastes-and-other-matter.aspx.
IMO, 2013g. International Maritime Organization. Retrieved March 23, 2013, from:
http://www.imo.org/About/Pages/Default.aspx.
IPCC, 2007. Summary for policy-makers. In: Parry, M.L., Canziani, O.F., Palutikof, J.P.,
Van der Linden, P.J., Hanson, C.E. (Eds.), Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, Contribution of Working Group II to the fourth
assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 1e22.
Johnston, A., Johnston, M.E., Stewart, E.J., Dawson, J., Lemelin, R.H., 2012a. Perspectives of decision makers and regulators on climate change and adaptation
in expedition cruise ship tourism in Nunavut. Northern Rev. 35, 69e85.
Johnston, A., Johnston, M.E., Dawson, J., Stewart, E.J., 2012b. Challenges of changes
in Arctic cruise tourism: perspectives of federal government stakeholders.
J. Marit. Law Commer. 43 (3), 335e347.
Johnston, M.E., 1997. Polar tourism regulation strategies: Controlling visitors
through codes of conduct and legislation. Polar Rec. 33 (184), 13e20.
Johnston, M.E., 1998. Evaluating the effectiveness of visitor-regulation strategies for
polar tourism. Polar Rec. 34 (188), 25e30.
Johnston, M.E., 2006. Impacts of global environmental change on tourism in the
Polar Regions. In: Gossling, S., Hall, C.M. (Eds.), Tourism and Global Environmental Change: Ecological, Social, Economic and Political Interrelationships.
Routledge, New York, pp. 37e53.
Johnston, M.E., Viken, A., Dawson, J., 2012. Firsts and lasts Arctic tourism: last
chance tourism and dialectic of change. In: Lemelin, R.H., Dawson, J.,
Stewart, E.J. (Eds.), Last Chance Tourism: Adapting Tourism Opportunities in a
Changing World. Routledge, UK, pp. 10e24.
Joint Task Force North, 28 Nov 2012. 2012 Arctic Summer Adventurer Summary
ICOD.
Jones, C.S., 1999. Arctic ship tourism: an industry in adolescence. Northern Raven 13
(1), 28e31.
Jones, K., 2013. Fire Breaks Out Aboard Royal Caribbean’s Cruise Ship Grandeur of
the Seas. Huffington Post. Retrieved June 12, 2013, from: http://www.
huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/27/fire-breaks-out-aboard-ro_0_n_3342175.
html.
Kaltenstein, J., 2011. The Case for a Strong Polar Code. Retrieved March 13, 2012,
from:
http://libcloud.s3.amazonaws.com/93/94/6/1010/1/Friends_of_the_
Earth_The_case_for_a_strong_Polar_Code_December_2011.pdf.
Klein, R.A., 2010a. The cruise sector and its environmental impact. In: Schott, C.
(Ed.), Tourism and the Implications of Climate Change: Issues and Actions.
Emerald, Bingley, UK, pp. 113e130.
Klein, R.A., 2010b. Cruises and Bruises: safety, security and social issues on polar cruises.
In: Luck, M., Maher, P.T., Stewart, E.J. (Eds.), Cruise Tourism in Polar Regions: Promoting Environmental and Social Sustainability. Earthscan Ltd, London, pp. 57e74.
Klein, R.A., 2011. Responsible cruise Tourism: Issues of cruise tourism and sustainability, special issue on cruise tourism: emerging issues and implications for
a maturing industry. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 18, 103e112.
Lajeunesse, A., Russell, W., Johnston, A.E., 2011. Canadian Arctic Shipping: Issues and
perspectives. In: Occasional Paper Series, vol. 11 (1)University of Saskatchewan,
International Centre for Northern Governance and Development, Saskatoon.
Lemelin, H., Dawson, J., Stewart, E.J., Maher, P.T., Lück, M., 2010. Last chance tourism:
the doom, the gloom, and the boom of visiting vanishing destinations. Curr.
Issues Tour. 13 (5), 477e493.
Lemelin, R.H., Dawson, J., Stewart, E.J., 2012. Last Chance Tourism: Adapting Tourism
Opportunities in a Changing World. Routledge, UK.
Lloyd’s, 2012. Arctic Opening: Opportunity and Risk in the High North. Retrieved
June 24, from: http://www.lloyds.com/w/media/Files/News%20and%20Insight/
360%20Risk%20Insight/Arctic_Risk_Report_20120412.pdf.
Live Ships, 2013. Ships Map. Retrieved March 19, from: http://www.marinetraffic.
com/ais/.
Maher, P.T., Meade, D., 2008. Cruise Tourism in Auyuittuq, Sirmilik, and Quttinirpaaq National Parks: Project Technical Report (2007 Season) e Draft. Parks
Canada, Iqaluit.
Marsh, J., Staple, S., 1995. Cruise tourism in the Canadian Arctic and its implications.
In: Hall, C.M., Johnston, M.E. (Eds.), Polar Tourism: Tourism and the Arctic and
Antarctic Regions. John Wiley and Sons Ltd, Chichester, pp. 63e72.
Naess, L.O., Bang, G., Eriksen, S., Vevatne, J., 2005. Institutional adaptation to climate
change: flood responses at the municipal level in Norway. Glob. Environ.
Change 15, 125e138.
NRC (Natural Resoruces Canada), 2013. CoastWeb. Retrieved November 20, 2013,
found at: http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/earth-sciences/geography-boundary/coastalresearch/about-canada-coastline/8504.
Neilson, T., April 26, 2012. UK issues Arctic travTl warnWng. Barrents Observer.
Retireved July 25, from: http://www.barentsobserver.com/en/arctic/uk-issuesarctic-travel-warning.
Nunavut Tourism, 2012. Nunavut Visitor Exit Survey e 2011. Nunavut Tourism &
CanNor, Iqaluit.
Nuttall, M., 1998. Protecting the Arctic: Indigenous Peoples and Cultural Survival.
Harwood Academic, Amsterdam.
Nuttall, M., Callaghan, T.V. (Eds.), 2000. The Arctic: Environment, People and Policy.
Harwood Academic, Amsterdam.
Pizzolato, L., Howell, S.E.L., Dawson, J., Copland, L., Derkson, C., Johnston, M.E., 2013.
Climate change adaptation assessment for transportation in Arctic waters
(CATAW) scoping study: summary report. In: A Report Prepared for Transport
Canada. Ottawa, Ontario.
Quinn, M., 2012. Russian Ship to Leave St. John’s for the Scrap Heap. CBC News
Newfoundland & Labrador. Retrieved March 19, from: http://www.cbc.ca/news/
canada/newfoundland-labrador/story/2012/03/04/nl-orlova-scrapped-304.html.
Secretariat of the Antarctic Treaty, 2013. Site Guidelines for Visitors. Retrieved June
12, 2013, from: http://www.ats.aq/e/ats_other_siteguidelines.htm.
Sivummut Economic Development Strategy Group, 2003. Nunavut Economic
Development Strategy: Building a Foundation for the Future. Retrieved March
19, 2013, from: http://www.nunavuteconomicforum.ca/public/files/strategy/
NUNAVUTE.PDF.
Smith, L.C., Stephenson, S.R., 2013. New trans-Arctic shipping routes navigable by
mid- century. PNAS, 1e5. Retrieved March 19, from: www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.
1073/pnas.1214212110.
Stonehouse, B., Crosbie, K., 1995. Tourist impacts and management in the Antarctic
Peninsula area. In: Hall, C.M., Johnston, M. (Eds.), Polar Tourism: Tourism in the
Arctic and Antarctic Regions. John Wiley & Sons Ltd, pp. 217e233.
Sou, T., Flato, G., 2009. Sea ice in the Canadian Arctic Archipelago: Modeling the past
(1950-2004) and the future (2041-60). J. Clim. 22, 2181e2197.
Stephenson, S.R., Smith, L.C., Agnew, J.A., 2011. Divergent long-term trajectories of
human access to the Arctic. Nat. Clim. Change. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/
NCLIMATE1120.
Stewart, E.J., Howell, S.E.L., Draper, D., Yackel, J., Tivy, A., 2007. Sea ice in Canada’s
Arctic: Implications for cruise tourism. Arctic 60 (4), 370e380.
Stewart, E.J., Draper, D., 2008. The sinking of the MS Explorer: Implications for cruise
tourism in Arctic Canada. Arctic 61 (2), 224e231.
Stewart, E.J., Dawson, J.D., Draper, D., 2010. Monitoring patterns of cruise tourism
across Arctic Canada. In: Luck, M., Maher, P.T., Stewart, E.J. (Eds.), Cruise Tourism
in the Polar Regions: Promoting Environmental and Social Sustainability.
Earthscan Reader, pp. 133e145.
Stewart, E.J., Dawson, J.D., 2011. A matter of good Fortune? The grounding of the
Clipper Adventurer in the Northwest Passage, Arctic Canada. Arctic 64 (2), 263e
267.
Stewart, E.J., Draper, D.L., Dawson, J.D., 2011. Coping with change and vulnerability:
a case study of resident attitudes toward tourism in Cambridge Bay and Pond
Inlet, Nunavut, Canada. In: Maher, P.T., Stewart, E.J., Luck, M. (Eds.), Polar
Tourism: Environmental, Political and Social Dimensions. Cognizant Communications, New York, pp. 33e53.
Stewart, E., Dawson, J., Howell, S., Johnston, M., Pearce, T., Lemelin, R., 2012. Sea ice
change and cruise tourism in Arctic Canada’s Northwest Passage: Implications
for local communities. Polar Geogr., 1e24 iFirst.
Stroeve, J., Holland, M.M., Meier, W., Scambos, T., Serreze, M., 2005. Arctic sea ice
decline: faster than forecast. Geophys. Res. Lett. 34, L09501. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1029/2007GL029703.
Teeple, N., 2010. A brief history of intrusions into the Canadian Arctic. Canad. Army
J. 12 (3), 45e63.
J. Dawson et al. / Ocean & Coastal Management 89 (2014) 88e99
Tivy, A., Howell, S.E.L., Alt, B., McCourt, S., Chagnon, R., Crocker, G., Carrieres, T.,
Yackel, J.J., 2011. Trends and variability in summer sea ice cover in the Canadian
Arctic based on the Canadian Ice Service Digital Archive, 1960e2008 and 1968e
2008. J. Geophys. Res. 116, C03007. http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2009JC005855.
Transport Canada, 2005. Guidelines for the Operation of Passenger Vessels in Canadian Arctic Waters. Government of Canada, Edmonton/Winnipeg.
99
UK Foreign, Commonwealth Office, 2012. Travel and Living Abroad: Arctic.
Retrieved July 25, from: http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/travel-and-living-abroad/
your-trip/arctic.
Wang, M., Overland, J.E., 2009. A sea ice free summer Arctic within 30 years?
Geophys. Res. Lett. 36, L07502 http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2009GL037820.