Political ecology of climate change adaptation in the Arctic: Insights from Nunatsiavut, Canada – Nature

Executive Summary

This report details a political ecology analysis of climate change adaptation in five Inuit communities within Nunatsiavut, the self-governing Inuit region of northern Canada. The study reveals that historical and ongoing systemic factors, including colonialism, forced relocation, and capitalism, are primary drivers of contemporary climate risk and significant barriers to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The findings indicate that adaptation challenges are not experienced uniformly; inequities in economic and social standing dictate the capacity of community members to respond to climate change. Key barriers identified include the high cost of living, which undermines SDG 1 (No Poverty), and dependence on expensive store-bought food and technology for subsistence, which threatens SDG 2 (Zero Hunger). These challenges are contextualized within broader socioeconomic structures, highlighting an uneven distribution of adaptive capacity. The analysis centers on the question of “adaptation for whom?” and underscores the urgent need for equitable adaptation strategies that address systemic and infrastructural deficits. Such strategies are crucial for advancing SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities) and SDG 13 (Climate Action) in a rapidly changing Arctic. The research was conducted in alignment with Indigenous research ethics, prioritizing Inuit self-determination and community control, thereby supporting SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions).

1.0 Introduction: Climate Adaptation and the Sustainable Development Goals in the Arctic

The Arctic region is a critical frontier where climate change intersects with complex geopolitical, economic, and neocolonial pressures, creating significant challenges for environmental justice and sustainable development. A political ecology framework, which examines the relationships between political, economic, and social factors in environmental issues, is essential for understanding these dynamics. Climate change adaptation is inherently a political issue, yet dominant approaches often prioritize technical solutions over addressing the root causes of vulnerability. This oversight can reinforce existing inequalities, hindering progress toward key Sustainable Development Goals.

1.1 Context: The Arctic Climate Crisis and SDG 13

The Arctic is warming nearly four times faster than the global average, leading to profound environmental shifts with global consequences. These changes directly threaten the achievement of SDG 13 (Climate Action) by disrupting ecosystems and livelihoods. In the Canadian Arctic, Inuit communities experience these impacts acutely through:

• Disruption of traditional food systems, impacting SDG 2 (Zero Hunger).
• Threats to food security and cultural activities.
• Damage to essential infrastructure, affecting SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure) and SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities).

The high susceptibility of Inuit communities is linked to their dependence on natural resources, a connection that is being severed by rapid environmental change.

1.2 Political Ecology and SDG 10: Unmasking Systemic Inequalities

Apolitical, technical approaches to adaptation often fail to address the power dynamics and structural inequalities that produce climate vulnerability, thereby failing to advance SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities). A political ecology lens reveals how climate vulnerability is constructed through ongoing colonial histories and capitalist dependencies that marginalize Indigenous knowledge and authority. This perspective is critical for understanding how climate change exacerbates existing vulnerabilities and creates new forms of inequity, linking local environmental degradation to global power dynamics. This study applies this lens to interrogate the central question of “adaptation for whom?” and identify who faces the most significant barriers.

1.3 Case Study Focus: Nunatsiavut and Historical Injustices

Nunatsiavut, a self-governing Inuit region in Canada, provides a compelling case study due to its history of forced relocation and reliance on vulnerable ecosystems. Colonial disruptions have severed ties to homelands, disrupted subsistence practices, and weakened social cohesion, creating long-term challenges that intersect with climate change. Today, communities rely on a hybrid economy, but this is complicated by climate-driven environmental changes and socioeconomic challenges, including:

• Food insecurity, undermining SDG 2 (Zero Hunger).
• High costs of technology and limited infrastructure, hindering progress on SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure).

Current adaptation planning has not sufficiently addressed these historical and structural drivers of vulnerability. This report examines how these intersecting forces shape Inuit experiences and responses to climate change, reinforcing the need for adaptation strategies that promote justice and equity in line with the SDGs.

2.0 Research Framework and Methodology

2.1 A Decolonial Approach in Line with SDG 16 and SDG 17

The research methodology was informed by a decolonial framework, actively prioritizing Indigenous voices, knowledge, and self-determination. This approach aligns with the principles of SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions) by challenging Eurocentric research norms and supporting Inuit governance over the research process. The study was co-developed through extensive community engagement, ensuring that the research was grounded in the lived experiences and priorities of the Inuit. This participatory process fosters reciprocal relationships and knowledge exchange, reflecting the spirit of SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals). By centering Inuit knowledge systems, the study aimed to redress historical power imbalances in research and ensure that outcomes directly support local adaptation efforts and community well-being.

2.2 Study Area: The Five Inuit Communities of Nunatsiavut

This research was conducted across all five Inuit communities of Nunatsiavut: Nain, Hopedale, Makkovik, Postville, and Rigolet. Nunatsiavut is the first Inuit region in Canada to achieve self-governance. The region’s history is marked by colonial trauma, including the forced relocation of the communities of Hebron and Nutak in the 1950s. These relocations dismantled familial networks, disrupted land-based livelihoods, and caused deep psychological trauma, the legacies of which continue to shape land access, food security, and intergenerational well-being, creating persistent challenges to achieving SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being) and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities).

2.3 Data Collection and Analysis

Data collection was guided by key themes co-developed with community partners, focusing on climate impacts, adaptation strategies, and barriers to adaptation. The process involved:

1. Community Engagement: Initial consultations with the Nunatsiavut Government Research Advisory Committee (NGRAC) and community members to identify priorities.
2. Fieldwork: Semi-structured interviews (n=60), focus group discussions (n=6), and key informant interviews (n=14) were conducted across the five communities with diverse participants.
3. Validation: A community workshop was held to present preliminary findings and gather feedback, ensuring the results accurately reflected local experiences.

Data were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis, combining deductive codes from community engagement with inductive themes emerging from the data. This approach ensured that the analysis was grounded in Inuit worldviews and values, upholding the ethical principles of community-led research.

3.0 Findings: Intersecting Challenges to Sustainable Development

3.1 Climate Impacts on Livelihoods, Food Security, and Well-being (SDG 1, 2, 3)

Climate change is severely impacting the foundations of Inuit life in Nunatsiavut, creating significant obstacles to achieving fundamental SDGs. Later freeze-up and earlier thawing of sea ice disrupt traditional hunting routes and wood gathering, directly threatening livelihoods and economic stability, which undermines SDG 1 (No Poverty). These environmental shifts have led to:

• Reduced access to traditional foods such as geese, fish, and berries, increasing dependence on expensive and often less nutritious store-bought foods. This directly compromises SDG 2 (Zero Hunger).
• Increased safety risks and stress associated with unpredictable ice and weather conditions, negatively affecting mental health and community well-being, a core component of SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being).

3.2 Community-Led Adaptation Strategies and Climate Action (SDG 13)

In response to these challenges, communities are implementing a range of adaptation strategies that demonstrate local resilience and contribute to SDG 13 (Climate Action). These strategies blend traditional knowledge with modern technology:

• Community-Based Monitoring: Tracking environmental changes, including ice thickness and wildlife populations, to inform safe travel and harvesting.
• Information Sharing: Using social media platforms to share real-time updates on ice conditions, weather, and trail access.
• Technological Integration: Utilizing GPS, satellite phones, and online tools like SmartICE and NASA Worldview to enhance safety and navigation.
• Knowledge Transmission: Passing down traditional ecological knowledge to younger generations through land-based learning.
• Food System Diversification: Emerging interest in local agriculture, including vegetable gardening and poultry farming, to supplement traditional diets and improve food security.

3.3 Historical and Contemporary Barriers to Sustainable Development

The legacies of colonialism and the pressures of capitalism have constructed a landscape of risk that climate change now exacerbates. Colonial policies, including forced relocations and sedentarization, disrupted traditional economies and created a dependency on market-based systems. This historical context is a major barrier to achieving SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities) and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions). Participants noted that the “corporate world” has pushed them away from traditional ways of living, increasing dependence on costly imported goods and detaching them from their land and culture. The forced relocations from Hebron and Nutak severed connections to traditional hunting grounds, created social tensions, and led to long-term socioeconomic dislocation and trauma that persists today.

3.4 Analysis of Adaptation Barriers and Limits

The ability of Nunatsiavut communities to adapt is constrained by several interconnected barriers that reflect deep-seated structural inequities.

1. Economic Constraints (SDG 1 & 8): The high cost of living, fuel, and essential equipment (e.g., snowmobiles, boats) creates a significant financial burden. This limits the ability of many households, particularly those with lower incomes, to engage in land-based activities, thereby hindering progress on SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth).
2. Infrastructural Deficiencies (SDG 9 & 11): The lack of road access and reliance on costly and often unreliable air and sea transport isolates communities. This restricts access to food, goods, healthcare, and emergency services, undermining SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure) and SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities).
3. Energy Insecurity: Reliance on diesel generators and the high cost of electricity and heating fuel create economic disparities. While programs for energy-efficient woodstoves and heat pumps exist, they are often unaffordable for many families, highlighting an equity gap in the transition to sustainable energy.
4. Environmental Injustice: The disproportionate impacts of climate change on Inuit communities, whose contribution to global emissions is negligible, represent a profound environmental injustice. The barriers to adaptation are not natural but are produced by historical and political decisions that have marginalized Indigenous peoples.

4.0 Discussion: A Political Ecology Perspective on the SDGs

4.1 The Uneven Burden of Adaptation: A Challenge to SDG 10

This study confirms that adaptation is not a neutral process; it is deeply stratified. The question “adaptation for whom?” reveals that wealthier households are better equipped to adopt new technologies and strategies, while low-income families and elders face mounting barriers. This uneven distribution of adaptive capacity is a direct challenge to SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities). The high costs of fuel, equipment, and food are not merely economic issues but are manifestations of systemic inequalities rooted in colonial histories and ongoing marginalization within the capitalist economy. Without addressing these structural determinants, adaptation interventions risk reinforcing the very inequities they should be dismantling.

4.2 Colonial Legacies and their Impact on SDG 16

The findings demonstrate how settler and internal colonialism continue to shape climate futures in Nunatsiavut. Historical policies of forced relocation and the suppression of traditional economies have created a foundation of vulnerability. Contemporary issues, such as inadequate infrastructure and fragmented resource management, reflect ongoing systemic neglect. These dynamics undermine Inuit self-determination and constrain the ability of local institutions to lead effective adaptation efforts, thereby impeding progress toward SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions). True climate justice requires not only technical solutions but also the recognition of Indigenous sovereignty and the redress of historical injustices.

4.3 The Critical Role of Partnerships for Sustainable Adaptation (SDG 17)

The decolonial and participatory research approach employed in this study exemplifies the principles of SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals). By co-designing the research with community members and prioritizing Inuit knowledge, the study moves beyond extractive research models toward genuine collaboration. Such partnerships are essential for developing adaptation strategies that are not only effective but also culturally relevant and equitable. Integrating Indigenous knowledge systems as essential, rather than complementary, components of climate policy is crucial for crafting just and sustainable responses to the climate crisis in the Arctic and beyond.

5.0 Conclusion and Recommendations for Achieving the SDGs

This report illustrates that climate change adaptation in Nunatsiavut is constrained by a complex web of historical injustices, socioeconomic inequalities, and infrastructural deficits. A political ecology lens reveals that these are not isolated challenges but are interconnected outcomes of systemic processes. To build a resilient and sustainable future for Nunatsiavut and make meaningful progress on the SDGs, adaptation efforts must move beyond technical fixes to address these root causes.

The following recommendations are proposed to support equitable adaptation and sustainable development:

• Strengthen Food Sovereignty (SDG 2): Support local food production, including community freezers, food-sharing networks, and emerging agricultural initiatives, to reduce reliance on expensive imported foods.
• Invest in Resilient Infrastructure (SDG 9 & 11): Prioritize investment in community-led infrastructure projects, including improved transportation links and reliable, affordable clean energy systems, to reduce isolation and economic burdens.
• Promote Economic Equity (SDG 1 & 10): Implement policies to mitigate the high cost of living, such as subsidies for essential goods, fuel, and energy-efficient technologies, and create local job opportunities.
• Enhance Health and Well-being (SDG 3): Improve access to healthcare, including mental health services, within communities to reduce the need for costly and time-consuming travel.
• Uphold Indigenous Self-Determination (SDG 16): Ensure that Inuit are active and leading partners in all decision-making processes related to climate adaptation, resource management, and regional development, recognizing their inherent rights and knowledge.

By addressing these systemic barriers, policymakers and partners can support adaptation pathways that are not only effective but also just, equitable, and aligned with the overarching vision of the Sustainable Development Goals.

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

SDG 1: No Poverty

• The article discusses the significant economic constraints faced by the Inuit communities, including high costs of living, food, fuel, and essential machinery for traditional livelihoods. This economic precarity, which forces households to choose between heating and eating, directly relates to ending poverty in all its forms.

SDG 2: Zero Hunger

• Food security is a central theme. The article highlights how climate change disrupts traditional hunting, fishing, and gathering, leading to “significant food insecurity” and an increased, costly reliance on store-bought foods, which affects nutrition and food sovereignty.

SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

• The article mentions the mental health impacts of climate change, such as stress from unsafe travel conditions. It also points to systemic health issues, noting the “lack of adequate healthcare facilities and the unavailability of doctors,” which forces residents to undertake expensive and time-consuming travel for medical care.

SDG 7: Affordable and Clean Energy

• Energy security is a major challenge. Communities rely on diesel generators, and face “expensive energy and fuel prices.” The article discusses the high cost of heating homes and the financial barriers to adopting more energy-efficient technologies like new woodstoves or heat pumps.

SDG 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure

• The article details “significant infrastructural deficiencies,” including a “lack of road access and reliance on air and seasonal sea transport.” This isolation hinders access to essential goods and services, limits economic opportunities, and is described as a legacy of systemic neglect.

SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

• This goal is at the core of the article’s political ecology analysis. It examines how systemic inequalities rooted in colonialism, forced relocation, and economic marginalization disproportionately expose Inuit communities to climate risks. The central question “adaptation for whom?” highlights the uneven distribution of adaptive capacity within and between communities.

SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

• The focus is on the resilience and sustainability of the five remote Inuit communities. The article addresses their vulnerability to climate impacts, the need for resilient infrastructure, and the importance of safe and affordable transportation to ensure the well-being of these human settlements.

SDG 13: Climate Action

• The entire article is framed around climate change adaptation. It documents the impacts of a rapidly warming Arctic, such as changing sea ice conditions, and analyzes the various strategies, barriers, and limits to adaptation, emphasizing the need to strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity in these frontline communities.

SDG 14: Life Below Water

• The health of marine ecosystems is critical for the Inuit way of life. The article describes the impacts of “later freeze-up and earlier thawing of sea ice,” which affects marine travel, safety, and access to marine resources like seals and fish, which are central to their food security and culture.

SDG 15: Life on Land

• The article discusses the impact of climate change on terrestrial ecosystems, noting changes in wildlife migration, reduced availability of berries, and, most significantly, the “drastic decline” in the George River Caribou population, which has led to a hunting ban and profound cultural and nutritional loss.

SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

• The article links current vulnerabilities to historical injustices, including “colonialism, forced relocation, and capitalism.” It advocates for Inuit self-determination, community control over research, and inclusive decision-making, reflecting the need for just and strong institutions that recognize Indigenous rights and sovereignty.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Target 1.5: By 2030, build the resilience of the poor and those in vulnerable situations and reduce their exposure and vulnerability to climate-related extreme events and other economic, social and environmental shocks and disasters.
   • The article’s focus on the Inuit communities’ vulnerability to climate change and the intersecting socio-economic challenges directly addresses the need to build resilience among this vulnerable population.
2. Target 2.1: By 2030, end hunger and ensure access by all people, in particular the poor and people in vulnerable situations… to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year round.
   • The discussion on “food insecurity,” disruption of “traditional food systems,” and reliance on expensive “store-bought food” clearly connects to this target of ensuring year-round access to sufficient and nutritious food.
3. Target 3.8: Achieve universal health coverage, including financial risk protection, access to quality essential health-care services…
   • The article points to the “lack of adequate healthcare facilities” and the need for residents to travel to “distant locations… for medical consultations,” which are “expensive but also time-consuming,” highlighting gaps in universal health coverage.
4. Target 7.1: By 2030, ensure universal access to affordable, reliable and modern energy services.
   • The communities’ reliance on diesel generators and the “high cost of electricity” and fuel for heating and transportation directly relate to the challenge of achieving affordable and reliable energy access.
5. Target 9.1: Develop quality, reliable, sustainable and resilient infrastructure… with a focus on affordable and equitable access for all.
   • The article explicitly identifies “significant infrastructural deficiencies” and the “lack of road access” as major barriers to adaptation and well-being, aligning perfectly with this target.
6. Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of… ethnicity… or other status.
   • The analysis of how colonial legacies and systemic inequities marginalize the Inuit and create barriers to adaptation directly speaks to the need for greater inclusion and empowerment of Indigenous peoples.
7. Target 11.5: By 2030, significantly reduce… the number of people affected and substantially decrease the direct economic losses relative to global gross domestic product caused by disasters… with a focus on protecting the poor and people in vulnerable situations.
   • The article details how changing ice conditions create safety risks, restrict travel, and lead to economic losses for hunters, which aligns with reducing the impacts of climate-related hazards on vulnerable communities.
8. Target 13.1: Strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards and natural disasters in all countries.
   • This is the central theme of the paper, which examines the climate impacts, adaptation strategies, and barriers faced by the Inuit in Nunatsiavut, a region on the front lines of climate change.
9. Target 15.5: Take urgent and significant action to reduce the degradation of natural habitats, halt the loss of biodiversity and, by 2020, protect and prevent the extinction of threatened species.
   • The article’s mention of the “drastic decline” in the George River Caribou population, a culturally and nutritionally vital species, connects directly to this target concerning biodiversity loss and threatened species.
10. Target 16.7: Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels.
    • The paper critiques historical policies that excluded Inuit voices and emphasizes the importance of Inuit self-governance, community-led research, and “Inuit self-determination and community control over the research process.”

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Yes, the article mentions or implies several qualitative and quantitative indicators that can be used to measure progress:

• Cost of Living and Economic Access: The article repeatedly mentions the high cost of essential goods as a barrier. Specific indicators implied are:
  • Price of fuel (e.g., “A can of gas is almost $50”).
  • Cost of store-bought food items (“milk, sugar, flour, frozen goods, and meat”).
  • Price of essential equipment for livelihoods (e.g., skidoos, boats, trucks).
  • Median after-tax income disparities between Inuit ($31,400) and non-Indigenous people ($49,600).
• Food Security: Progress towards Target 2.1 can be measured by:
  • Prevalence of food insecurity within households.
  • Ratio of traditional/country food consumption versus store-bought food.
  • Functionality and use of community freezers and food-sharing networks.
• Climate and Environmental Change: The article describes specific environmental changes that serve as direct indicators of climate impacts (Target 13.1):
  • Timing and duration of sea ice cover (“later freeze-up and earlier thawing”).
  • Sea ice thickness and reliability for travel.
  • Changes in local weather patterns and seasonality.
  • Observed changes in wildlife populations and migration patterns (e.g., caribou, geese, fish).
• Infrastructure and Access to Services: Indicators for Targets 9.1 and 3.8 are implied through descriptions of service gaps:
  • Availability of and access to all-season roads connecting communities.
  • Frequency and cost of air and sea transport for goods and people.
  • Travel time and cost for residents to access essential healthcare services.
  • Availability of local repair services for essential machinery.
• Energy Access: Indicators for Target 7.1 include:
  • Household energy costs (electricity and heating fuel).
  • Proportion of households using woodstoves versus electric heat or heat pumps.
  • Uptake of energy-efficiency programs (e.g., Nunatsiavut High Efficiency Woodstove Programme).
• Biodiversity: A clear indicator for Target 15.5 is mentioned:
  • Population status of key species, such as the George River Caribou herd, and the status of hunting bans.

4. Create a table with three columns titled ‘SDGs, Targets and Indicators” to present the findings from analyzing the article.

Source: nature.com