Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This paper examines the governance and regulatory frameworks for expedition cruise tourism in the Canadian Arctic, with a particular focus on Nunavut. The aim of the study was to assess effectiveness among these frameworks in addressing previously identified concerns among Inuit communities about increased marine navigation activities across their homeland. These concerns include potential impacts to a pristine environment, disturbance to wildlife and traditional harvesting activities, and effects on cultural and historic sites, among others. A regulatory and policy scan was conducted to compile an inventory of applicable instruments and mechanisms from the broader marine and terrestrial regulatory frameworks based on the various jurisdictions at play, ranging from federal legislation to voluntary measures. Subsequently, a multi-criteria policy analysis approach was employed to assess the relevance and alignment of the inventory’s contents in addressing Inuit concerns. Finally, a gap analysis was carried out to identify areas in the existing regulatory landscape where Inuit concerns remain inadequately addressed. Results show that while the current overall framework effectively addresses vessel safety and environmental protection, Inuit concerns persist. This study finds that a reconceptualisation of the role of shore-based permitting regimes and emerging conservation mechanisms, particularly National Marine Conservation Areas, show promise in better aligning management approaches with identified Inuit priorities and in alleviating Inuit concerns. In addition, voluntary measures and industry self-regulation demonstrate potential to fill regulatory gaps in both the short and longer term.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Orawiec et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: