Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-jr42d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-15T09:18:14.297Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Becoming an Arctic Council NGO observer

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 March 2019

Danita Catherine Burke*
Centre for War Studies and the Department of Political Science and Public Management, University of Southern Denmark
Teale N. Phelps Bondaroff
The Idea Tree Consulting, Victoria, B.C., Canada


This paper explores the question: How is the NGO observer application process to the Arctic Council influenced by perceptions of legitimacy of the applicant? Using information gleamed from numerous interviews we map out the application process for NGO observer status in the Arctic Council. In addition to the formal criteria, we argue that Arctic states have a set of informal criteria for evaluating NGO observer applications, and that the evaluation of these criteria are coloured by individual Arctic state and the Permanent Participant perceptions of the legitimacy of the NGO applicant. Reaching into the literature on NGO legitimacy, we develop a framework detailing four key components upon which the perceptions of the legitimacy of an NGO are generally formed. This framework is then incorporated into a broader model of the overall application process through which NGOs must submit in order to attempt to gain observer status at the Arctic Council.

Research Article
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)


Arctic Council. (1996). Ottawa Declaration: Declaration on the establishment of the Arctic Council, joint communiqué of the governments of the Arctic Countries on the establishment of the Arctic Council. Ottawa, Canada. Retrieved September 19, 1996, from Scholar
Arctic Council. (2013a). Arctic Council rules of procedure as revised by the Arctic Council at the 8th Arctic Council ministerial meeting. Kiruna, Sweden, 15 May 2013. Tromsø: Arctic Council Secretariat. Retrieved from Scholar
Arctic Council. (2013b). Observer manual for subsidiary bodies as adopted by the Arctic Council at the 8th Arctic Council ministerial meeting. Kiruna, Sweden, 15 May 2013. Tromsø: Arctic Council Secretariat. Retrieved from Scholar
Arctic Council. (2015a). Member states. Retrieved from Scholar
Arctic Council. (2015b). Permanent Participants. Retrieved from Scholar
Arctic Council. (2015c). Observer manual for subsidiary bodies as adopted by the Arctic Council at the 8th Arctic Council ministerial meeting, Kiruna, Sweden, 15 May 2013, and addendum approved by the senior Arctic officials at the meeting of the senior Arctic officials. Anchorage, United States of America, 20–22 October 2015. Tromsø: Arctic Council Secretariat. Retrieved from Scholar
Arctic Council. (2017a). New observer: National Geographic Society. Retrieved from Scholar
Arnaudo, R. V. (2013). United States policy in the Arctic. In Berkman, P. A. & Vylegzhanin, A. N. (Eds.), Environmental security in the Arctic Ocean. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
Arts, B. (2003–2004). Gemeinschaftsgüter: Recht, Politik, und Ökonomie. Preprints aus der Max-Planck-Projecktgruppe. [Non-states actors in global governance: Three faces of power]. Bonn, Germany: Recht der Gemeinschaftsgüter.Google Scholar
Auer, M. R. (2000). Who participates in global environmental governance? Partial answers from international relations theory. Policy Sciences, 33(2), 155180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Betsill, M. M., & Bulkeley, H. (2004). Transnational networks and global environmental governance: The cities for climate protection program. International Studies Quarterly, 48(2), 471493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Betsill, M. M., & Corell, E. (2001). NGO influence in international environmental negotiations: A framework for analysis. Global Environmental Politics, 1(4), 6585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burke, D. C. (in press). Diplomacy and the Arctic Council. Kingston and Montreal: McGill-Queens University Press.Google Scholar
Burke, D. C., & Rahbek-Clemmensen, J. (2017). Debating the Arctic during the Ukraine crisis – comparing Arctic state identities and media discourses in Canada and Norway. The Polar Journal, 7(2), 391409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Candler, G., & Dumon, G. (2010). A non-profit accountability framework. Canadian Public Administration, 53(2), 259279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clark, I. (2003). Legitimacy in a global order. Review of International Studies, 29(S1), 7595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eilstrup-Sangiovanni, M., & Phelps Bondaroff, T. (2014). From advocacy to confrontation: Direct enforcement by environmental NGOs. International Studies Quarterly, 58(2), 348361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fassin, Y. (2009). Inconsistencies in activists’ behaviours and the ethics of NGOs. Journal of Business Ethics, 90, 503521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faulconbridge, G. (2007, August 2). Russian sub plants flag under North Pole. Reuters. Retrieved from Scholar
Gibelman, M., & Gelman, S. (2001). Very public scandals: Non-profit organizations in trouble. Voluntas, 12(1), 4966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hasanat, M. W. (2013). Reforming the Arctic Council against increasing climate change challenges in the North. Michigan State International Law Review, 22(1), 195240.Google Scholar
Hurd, I. (1999). Legitimacy and authority in international politics. International Organization, 53(2), 379408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jasanoff, S. (1997). NGOs and the environment: From knowledge to action. Third World Quarterly, 18(3), 579594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Josefsen, E. (2010). The Saami and the national parliaments: Channels for political influence. Geneva & New York: Inter-Parliamentary Union and United Nations Development Programme (Case Study: Promoting inclusive parliaments – the representation of minorities and indigenous peoples in parliament).Google Scholar
Kearns, K. (1994). The strategic management of accountability in non-profit organizations: An analytical framework. Public Administration Review, 54(2), 185192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knetch, S. (2017). Exploring different levels of stakeholder activity in international institutions: Late bloomers, regular visitors, and overachievers in the Arctic Council Working Groups. In Keil, K. & Knetch, S. (Eds.), Governing Arctic change: Global perspectives (pp. 163186). London, UK: Palgrave MacMillan.Google Scholar
Logister, L. (2007). Global governance and civil society: Some reflections on NGO governance. Journal of Global Ethics, 3(2), 165179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morss, E. (1991). The new global players: How they compete and collaborate. World Development, 19(1), 5564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nordic Environment Finance Corporation (NEFCO). (n.d.). Structure & management. Retrieved from Scholar
North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission (NAMMCO). (2016). “About”. Retrieved from Scholar
Phelps Bondaroff, T., & Burke, D. C. (2014). Bridging troubled waters: History as political opportunity structure. Journal of Civil Society, 10(2), 165183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Price, R. (2003). Review: Transnational civil society and advocacy in world politics. World Politics, 55(4), 579606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Robinson, O. C. (2014). Sampling in interview-based qualitative research: A theoretical and practical guide. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 11(1), 2541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothwell, D. R. (1995). International law and the protection of the Arctic environment. The International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 44(2), 280321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shadian, J. (2010). From states to polities: Reconceptualizing sovereignty through Inuit governance. European Journal of International Relations, 16(3), 485510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sikkink, K. (2002). Restructuring world politics: The limits and asymmetries of soft power. In Khagram, S., Riker, J. V., & Sikkink, K. (Eds.), Restructuring world politics: Transnational social movements, networks, and norms (pp. 301317). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Sikkink, K. (2005). Patterns of dynamic multilevel governance and the insider-outsider coalition. In della Porta, D. & Tarrow, S. (Eds.), Transnational protest and global activism: People, passions, and power (pp. 151174). Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc.Google Scholar
Steinberg, P. E., & Dodds, K. (2013). The Arctic Council after Kiruna. Polar Record, 51(1), 108110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tansey, O. (2007). Process tracing and elite interviewing: A case for non-probability sampling. PS: Political Science and Politics, 40(4), 765772.Google Scholar
Tarrow, S. (2005). The new transnational activism. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tarrow, S., & della Porta, D. (2005). Conclusion: ‘Globalization, ’ complex internationalism, and transnational contention. In della Porta, D. & Tarrow, S. (Eds.), Transnational protest and global activism: People, passions, and power (pp. 227246). Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). (2008). “Circum-Arctic resource appraisal: Estimates of undiscovered oil and gas north of the Arctic Circle”. USGS Fact Sheet 2008–3049. Retrieved from Scholar
Wallace, R. (2013). The case for RAIPON: Implications for Canada and the Arctic Council. Calgary, Canada: Canadian Defence & Foreign Affairs Institute (Policy paper). Retrieved from: Scholar
Welsh Larson, D., Paul, T.V., & Wohlforth, W.C. (2014). Status and world order. In Paul, T. V., Welch Larson, D., & Wohlforth, W. C. (Eds.), Status in world politics. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Young, O. (2016). The Arctic Council at twenty: How to remain effective in a rapidly changing environment. UC Irving Law Review, 6(99), 99120.Google Scholar
Zelko, F. (2013). Make it a green peace! The rise of counterculture environmentalism. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar