
Mia M Bennett
I am a political geographer with geospatial skills interested in transportation infrastructure and frontier development, namely in the Arctic and areas within China's Belt and Road Initiative.
Address: Hong Kong
Address: Hong Kong
less
Related Authors
Ivan iv
Institute of Archaeology of Ukrainian National Academy of Sciences
Dimitrios Dalaklis
World Maritime University
Fabio Saguato
University of Oxford
Frederic Lasserre
Université Laval
Fabio Ballini
World Maritime University
InterestsView All (14)
Uploads
Papers by Mia M Bennett
conservation efforts in the post-Cold War period, which were grounded in perceiving the region as a global commons.
In this article, I examine the ways in which Canada and Russia use natural conservation areas as instruments to
express sovereign rights. I compare Canada’s proposed Lancaster Sound National Marine Conservation Area at
the eastern mouth of the Northwest Passage and Russia’s recently expanded Natural System (zapovednik) of
Wrangel Island Reserve at the eastern entrance to the Northern Sea Route. These two case studies allow for an
examination of the domestic politics of zoning, exclusion, and access alongside Arctic geopolitics and foreign policy
discourse. Both parks are complex products of domestic and foreign policy, making them densely layered spaces of
contested and contingent sovereignty. Moreover, Canada and Russia draw on regimes such as UNCLOS and
UNESCO’s World Heritage Committee to defend their sovereignty in contested waterways. Whereas around the
world, states have historically created national parks in areas without significant economic value, the conservation
areas in and around Lancaster Sound and Wrangel Island lie in waters valuable for their geostrategic position
and shipping potential. Yet importantly, the conservation areas are situated so as not to coincide with hydrocarbon
interests. Ultimately, Russia and Canada’s establishment of these two conservation areas suggests ulterior motives
of sovereignty and economic interests at work, suggesting that we should be carefully attuned to scrutinizing the
intentions behind environmental measures taken in the Arctic.
conservation efforts in the post-Cold War period, which were grounded in perceiving the region as a global commons.
In this article, I examine the ways in which Canada and Russia use natural conservation areas as instruments to
express sovereign rights. I compare Canada’s proposed Lancaster Sound National Marine Conservation Area at
the eastern mouth of the Northwest Passage and Russia’s recently expanded Natural System (zapovednik) of
Wrangel Island Reserve at the eastern entrance to the Northern Sea Route. These two case studies allow for an
examination of the domestic politics of zoning, exclusion, and access alongside Arctic geopolitics and foreign policy
discourse. Both parks are complex products of domestic and foreign policy, making them densely layered spaces of
contested and contingent sovereignty. Moreover, Canada and Russia draw on regimes such as UNCLOS and
UNESCO’s World Heritage Committee to defend their sovereignty in contested waterways. Whereas around the
world, states have historically created national parks in areas without significant economic value, the conservation
areas in and around Lancaster Sound and Wrangel Island lie in waters valuable for their geostrategic position
and shipping potential. Yet importantly, the conservation areas are situated so as not to coincide with hydrocarbon
interests. Ultimately, Russia and Canada’s establishment of these two conservation areas suggests ulterior motives
of sovereignty and economic interests at work, suggesting that we should be carefully attuned to scrutinizing the
intentions behind environmental measures taken in the Arctic.