In 2021, the decision to close the last Norwegian coal mine on Svalbard was made, and with that, the Norwegian coal adventure on the archipelago came to an end. This was a result of a political process, which is the focus of this article. Drawing on fieldwork conducted during the fall of 2022, I argue that the political process of phasing out coal changed from a conflict over interests to a contest over symbolic capital. The article contributes to the understanding of Norwegian Svalbard politics and the “balancing act” that this represents. I focus on how power, in the form of shaping people’s perceptions and as prestige, influenced what interests prevail and why. The article addresses (1) why the decision to phase out coal was not made earlier, (2) what ultimately made this decision possible and (3) why and over what the key actors were still competing after the decision to phase out coal was made.

Svalbard has experienced a dramatic increase in air temperature and glacier retreat since the end of the Little Ice Age. In many cases, this retreat has resulted in glaciers transitioning from being marine-terminating to land-terminating. Nordenskiöldbreen is an excellent contemporary example of this transition. A set of historical observations of glacier front positions was used to assess Nordenskiöldbreen's retreat rate and we found that the southern portion of the glacier front retreated by ~3500 m, since records began in 1896. The general retreat rate corresponds well with the air temperature trend during most of the 20th century. However, the average retreat rate has slowed since the 1990s despite increasing air temperatures. We show that this discrepancy between air temperature and retreat rate marks the transition from marine-terminating towards a land-terminating glacier, as the glacier's bedrock topography started to play an essential role in the glacier margin geometry, ice flow and retreat dynamics.

Drawing from ethnographic participation in a ski excursion among a group of Arctic Nature Guide students on the Arctic archipelago of Svalbard, this paper explores guiding as a model of practice embedded in relations – material encounters, discursive frictions and collaborative efforts. The article pays attention to practical negotiations and navigations of these relations while making use of historical scholarship on the role of the guide as a basis for theoretical reflections on the role’s mediation activities. More precisely, the paper advocates a “creation-model of mediation” that challenges modernist representational discourse (and conceptualisations of nature) through a recognition of guiding as productive behaviour. Displaying agency in meaning-making and embodying Svalbard’s transient cosmopolitan population, the guide emerges as a figure on ground far from fixed and settled, and as a tool with which to appraise Svalbard as more geo-aesthetical condition than bounded place.

The Svalbard archipelago is a centre of global research on climate change and also an example of a rapidly changing Arctic area with tourism replacing the traditional mining industry. We compared the different development paths of the Norwegian (Longyearbyen and Ny-Ålesund) and Russian settlements (Barentsburg and Pyramida) on Spitsbergen as part of the Svalbard archipelago using demographic and socio-economic data until 2022 when available, but not focusing on the impacts of COVID-19 and changing geopolitics after 2022. We analysed strategy documents produced by Norway and Russia and by organisations connected to Svalbard. The analysis continued by scrutinising the statistical data available to ascertain if this supported the strategic goals outlined in the documents. Data collection was by direct enquiry to national statistical bureaus, agencies and institutions in Norway and Russia. Secondary data were collected from media publications and social media accounts. Statistics Norway provided very detailed data on demographics and industrial structure, turnover, investments and comprehensive statistics on employees by industry on Norwegian settlements on Svalbard. The results revealed disparities in socio-economic development, striking differences in data availability and in transparency between the Norwegian and Russian settlements. The population in the Norwegian settlements continued to grow during the period 1990–2022 with an increasing number of foreign nationals, and the population in the Russian settlements decreased by 85% at the same time period. The Norwegian settlements exemplify a diversified economy with a growing private sector, and the Russian settlements continued to rely on the town-forming Russian state unitary coal mining enterprise, Trust Arktikugol. While Svalbard presented a prime example of open data and transparency in the environmental sciences, the socio-economic and demographic statistics were lagging behind. Several practical proposals are presented for improved data collection on the Svalbard settlements.

The Svalbard Treaty established Norway’s full and absolute sovereignty over the Arctic archipelago of Svalbard. At the same time, it also established special territorial status for the archipelago, providing nationals of all signatory nations equal access to its resources. During fieldwork in Longyearbyen, conducted as part of a bottom-up exploration of place in 2018, several recurring issues came up in the analysis of interviews with residents using grounded theory methodology. Two of these issues, sometimes linked and sometimes seen as separate, were a questioning of the legitimacy of the community and a sense of geopolitical vulnerability. These emerging categories led to a series of focus groups, conducted between December 2018 and November 2019, that was designed to explore the impacts and implications of the Svalbard Treaty through the articulation of residents’ lived experiences in Longyearbyen. This paper examines the findings that emerged within an Identity of Place framing that point to an inherent conflict between the Svalbard Treaty’s special territorial status and the possibility of establishing a fully functioning local democracy in Longyearbyen.

Based on long-term ethnographic fieldwork data, this article argues there is tension between how Longyearbyen’s residents wish to perform as a community and hindrances the town inherited from its past and accepts as demarcation lines of Norway’s Svalbard politics. The population of Longyearbyen has undergone considerable change since the 1990s, turning from a predominantly Norwegian mining community into a highly diversified group of people from all over the world. This article places Longyearbyen into the wider context of settlements with similar traces (in Scandinavia, the Arctic, multilingual and immigrant communities worldwide, or in the context of extractivism) and discusses the existing barriers of communitification. Encounters with four participants illuminate the tensions and contradictions when it comes to cultivating social cohesion and shaping Longyearbyen’s “desired futures.” Unless the process of increasing the community’s agency is actively encouraged by people living there and those governing it from the outside, the future of the settlement risks being alienating for its inhabitants, weakening further the communitification potential.

Longyearbyen, Svalbard, has become showcase of Arctic climate change. However, we know little about how these changes are dealt with locally. This article aims to fill this gap by examining climate change impacts and adaptation in a non-Indigenous “community of experts” and sets out to 1) describe observed changes and perceived societal impacts of climate change and 2) discuss adaptation measures and related understandings of adaptation. The research consists of ethnographic fieldwork and interviews with planners, engineers, architects, scientists, construction workers and local politicians. The research finds that climate change impacts the built environment in Longyearbyen, and that there is vast awareness of and concern related to these impacts. There is a substantial knowledge base for adaptation, and a special trust in scientific knowledge, skills and experts. The interview partners consider adaptation as necessary and feasible. Adaptation is understood and implemented as technical responses to physical problems, rooted in a modernist understanding of the environment as separated from humans, who can control it through technical means. This suggests a narrow understanding of adaptation that might fail to address more socially transformative processes.

The archipelago of Svalbard is a good example of an Arctic locale undergoing rapid changes on multiple levels. This contribution is a joint effort of three anthropologists with up-to-date ethnographic data from Svalbard (mostly Longyearbyen and Barentsburg) to frame and interpret interconnected changes. The processes impacting Svalbard are related to issues such as geopolitical interests, and increasing pressure by the Norwegian government to exercise presence and control over the territory. Our interpretations are based on a bottom-up approach, drawing on experiences living in the field. We identify three great ruptures in recent years – the avalanche of 2015, the gradual phasing out of mining enterprises and the COVID-19 pandemic – and show how they further impact, accelerate or highlight preexisting vulnerabilities in terms of socio-economic development, and environmental and climate change. We discuss the shift from coal mining to the industries of tourism, education, and research and development, and the resulting changed social and demographic structure of the settlements. Another facet is the complexity of environmental drivers of change and how they relate to the socio-economic ones. This article serves as an introductory text to the collection of articles published in Polar Record in 2021/2022 with the overarching theme “changing Svalbard”. Issues discussed range from socio-economic change and its implications for local populations including identity of place, through tourism (value creation, mediation, human–environment relations, environmental dilemmas, balancing contradictory trends), to security and risk perception, and environmental and climate change issues.

In the context of socio-economic transformation of Svalbard, from a place dominated by the coal mining industry to a nature-based tourism destination, the article focuses on how this transformation is co-created with material objects of coal mining remnants. These seemingly marginal, insignificant or even out-of-place remnants of coal mining activity (such as rusty barrels or collapsing infrastructure) have become, by law, a protected part of the Svalbard environment, a cultural heritage. Based on the relational (more-than-human) ethnography of guided tours, the analysis shows that this transformation is co-creating the characteristics of both the past of coal mining and the present notion of wilderness. It demonstrates the process not only as a transformation of interpretations, knowledge and values but also as a transformation of relations with non-human components of the environment. Rather contextual than linear shifts in a biography of the objects, together with the temporality of the objects and their porous character, play a significant role in the Svalbard’s transformation into a nature-based tourism destination.

As indications of ‘overtourism’ appear in the Arctic, tourism presents both management challenges and ethical dilemmas, applicable to broader discussions about sustainability within Polar tourism. I argue that mapping value relations can contribute to ongoing discussions for positive ways forwards and that the concept of degrowth holds promise in redirecting tourism to better serve the local community. Tourism has become the largest employer and most rapidly growing sector in Svalbard, taking over from coal mining. Longyearbyen is a small urban centre but nevertheless is the central hub where almost all tourism passes through. Indeed, tourism is how the majority of human relations with its lands, seas, human and non-human inhabitants will be enabled. This paper is centred on charting the transition of Longyearbyen to a ‘tourist town’. Drawing on local voices from 2013 to 2016 and 2019, I use a value-based analysis to assess the changes experienced in the context of wider systems of value at work in Svalbard.

Climate change has become significantly pronounced in the Arctic over recent decades. In addition to these climate effects, the environment has experienced severe anthropogenic pressure connected to increased human activities, including the exploitation of natural resources and tourism. The opportunity to exploit some of the natural riches of Svalbard was promptly grasped by the Soviet Union well before the 1940s. In this paper, we present the story of Pyramiden, a mining settlement in central Svalbard. The Soviet town experienced its golden age in the 1970–1980s but fell into decline in the late 1990s which corresponds well with the overall economic and geopolitical situation of the Soviet Union. The impacts of past mining activities and related urban infrastructure development are illustrated with the use of historic aerial photographs. The most pronounced changes in the terrain configuration were connected to adjustments of the river network, construction of roads, water reservoirs, and obviously mining-related activities. The natural processes overwhelmed the city infrastructure rather quickly after the abandonment of the town in 1998, though some traces of human activities may persist for decades or centuries. Nowadays, Russia has been attempting to recover the settlement especially through support of tourism and research activities.

Geopolitical interventions since the end of the 1980s—such as the collapse of the Soviet Union, a decline in the activities of state-owned coal companies, and governmental initiatives to increase tourism activities—have affected the community viability of two main settlements on Svalbard: Barentsburg and Longyearbyen. This paper explores how the residents of these settlements (with different cultural backgrounds) perceive the effects of socioeconomic transitions on community viability. The analysis of qualitative interviews with residents of Barentsburg (n = 62) and Longyearbyen (n = 36) reveals the residents’ perceptions of the pace of the transition and the changing community composition. New types of commercial activities, such as tourism, contribute to local value creation and socioeconomic development but come with concerns grounded in community fluctuation, environmental protection, economic prioritisation, and power relationships. Compared to Longyearbyen, Barentsburg has undergone relatively minor demographic and social changes and remains stable in terms of culture, language, and management practices. We conclude that the viability of Longyearbyen and Barentsburg during the transition was affected by community dynamics and fluctuations, social relationships within and between communities, and local institutional practices.

This commentary introduces a methodology and theoretical framework for studying how the tourism industry might balance the competing demands of economic growth and environmental governance. We focus on the “balancing act” Svalbard tourism industry must play among sometimes competing demands of climate change mitigation and emissions from tourism, and of strict Norwegian environmental management policy and demands for increased tourism. While these are specific to Svalbard, the balancing act of competing needs is the core challenge of the UN Sustainability Goals giving this research global and pan-Arctic relevance. Through collaboration between two tourism organisations, the Association of Arctic Expedition Cruise Operators (AECO) and Visit Svalbard and an interdisciplinary team of scientists, we will co-produce knowledge about how to innovate new opportunities while protecting the wilderness, the very backbone of tourism. This collaboration considers how policy, climate change, and local attitudes together may affect the tourism industry and helps to define and develop sustainable tourism operations and products. For instance, tourists may participate in environmental and community-related activities or “micro safaris” rather than a sole focus on charismatic megafauna. Policy discussions about tourism growth need to consider how local and national governments anticipate and navigate rapid social, political, and environmental changes.