- Published on
Ingrid Eline Barrabés Gørrissen. Photo: Hlin Såga Kyrkjeøy
Ingrid Eline Barrabés Gørrissen’s Discussion Reflection
Hope for an Indigenous future
We have the pleasure and honour of publishing a reflection on the discussion delivered at the Arctic Frontiers conference. The conference was held in February 2026 in Tromsø, Norway. The discussion was part of the panel session organised by the CAP-SHARE project, entitled ‘Intergenerational Capacity Sharing: The Connection Between Nature and Youth’.
The text was originally written in English.
Discussion Reflection:
Hope for an Indigenous future
Ingrid Eline Barrabés Gørrissen
Board member, Noereh
On February 4th I was part of the CAP-SHARE panel on the connection between nature and youth. My experiences as a young Sámi person shape the way I view the world, nature and the future. I believe it is very important to get several different perspectives when talking about these issues. This is why I am happy to have both been able to partake in this panel, and feel honoured to have shared this space with such amazing young people from all over the Arctic.
What does biodiversity and community resilience mean to you in your everyday life and home region?
Our culture is completely interconnected with the land and nature. Without our lands and waters, we are unable to continue with our culture – both when it comes to reindeer husbandry, traditional fishing in rivers, lakes and the sea and, for example, berry picking and other ways to use the land. I do a lot of duodje – traditional Sámi handicrafts – and work with, for example, reindeer leather. Without a stable and predictable ecosystem, it is nearly impossible to continue our traditional ways of life.
We, the Sámi, are resilient, and we adapt. We have made it through the most intense periods of assimilation, and even though the threats we face today are existential, I believe we will make it through this as well. To me, biodiversity and community resilience means being able to practise our culture and carry it on for future generations.
What does a hopeful, just and resilient arctic future look like from your perspective?
We need to stop climate change, stop land grabbing without free, prior and informed consent (FPIC), and treat indigenous rights as legitimate rights – not a hurdle to overcome.
My dream is that Sámi people who are born today will not have to fight for our right to exist. For me, a hopeful, just and resilient arctic future has free prior and informed consent as a natural part of governance. A future where no land is seized without the real consent of the people who live there and use it. A future where the Arctic is not viewed as “the final frontier”, with endless resources to conquer and extract as long as you can find a shiny new excuse. For a hopeful future, cases such as the windmills on Fovsen Njaarkes land, the mine in Riehpovuotna, or the Naŋŋánjárgga hotel can never be allowed to happen.
We cannot have justice in the Arctic if standard business is “it’s easier to ask for forgiveness than permission”. In addition, the various truth and reconciliation reports need to have real consequences for policy, and not just be left to collect dust in a drawer.
How do you relate to land and water and how do these relationships shape your identity and sense of the future?
It’s difficult to say what nature means to me and how I relate to it, because I don’t see myself as separate from the nature and biodiversity that surrounds us. That would almost be like asking me how I relate to breathing: it’s just a natural part of who I am. The land gives us life, and in return we take care of it. It’s as simple as that.
Growing up, I have always been connected to the land; going fishing with my grandparents, picking berries with my grandmother, and playing in the forests around where I grew up.
When I see how the nature is treated and sacrificed for any slight profit margin, it makes me dread the future our politicians are creating. I have no hope of my children seeing the glaciers I marvelled at growing up. I hope they will not have to watch as the rivers, fjords and lakes they grew up are poisoned by mining waste or other pollutants.
Even so, it also gives me a lot of hope for the future to see that so many people are willing to fight for it. We are thousands of people who are unwilling to accept that we should sit and watch as our homes are destroyed. This gives me hope for what’s to come.
In your view, how is indigenous and local knowledge currently supported in biodiversity governance and policy processes?
I feel like indigenous people and our knowledge is often seen as no more than a checkmark on a list of bureaucratic procedures and a hurdle to overcome. In Norway, the government has a duty to consult indigenous rights holders if they want to build something, but this consultation often leads nowhere. When indigenous people give their input, saying a specific project will have certain effects, it is often disregarded. Indigenous knowledge is often not regarded as legitimate knowledge.
There needs to be a legitimate input of indigenous knowledge. Today, how consultation works is usually that governments have a proposal, ask for input, and then ignore it. This is not cocreation nor legitimate consultations. Indigenous knowledge and people need to be involved from the first moment a project is proposed and be a central part of creating the policies that govern our lives.
- Published on
Lemet Mihkkal Hætta. Photo: Beatrice Iren Fløystad
Lemet Mihkkal Hætta’s Discussion Reflection
Biodiversity, resilience, and the future of the Arctic
We have the pleasure and honour of publishing a reflection on the discussion delivered at the Arctic Frontiers conference. The conference was held in February 2026 in Tromsø, Norway. The discussion was part of the panel session organised by the CAP-SHARE project, entitled ‘Intergenerational Capacity Sharing: The Connection Between Nature and Youth’.
The text was originally written in English.
Discussion Reflection:
Biodiversity, resilience, and the future of the Arctic
Lemet Mihkkal Hætta
Participant in the Sámi Council's Sáttanuorat programme, Youth Together 4 Arctic Futures Project
When it comes to my view on biodiversity, I like to see it as the foundation that makes safety, culture and community life possible. However; I don’t see this as obvious. A weakened ecosystem affects people’s lives, including livelihood and their sense of security, as well as the possibility to continue ones’ ways of living.
When viewing resilience in a Sámi context, one word comes to mind connected to resilience – Birgejupmi – which means the ability to adapt through changing conditions. This is not only about surviving changes, but also about keeping cultures strong while adapting to new realities. I see a resilient community as one that can continue to speak its languages, use its knowledge, practice its livelihoods and pass on values intergenerationally. It is a very holistic view, but in my mind, that is exactly the kind of view that one has to have, in the Arctic, so as to be able to survive the harsh climate here in the North.
Regarding a hopeful, just and resilient Arctic future, in my opinion as a Sámi and a young person, such a future must be built on rights and responsibility. In practice, this means that decisions affecting our lands, waters, culture, and life futures must be respected, which means that the principle of free, prior, and informed consent must also be respected. I see a just future also as one wherein youth and elders are both participating in decision making. This is because elders carry forward wisdom from their lifetimes and from their ancestors, while youth bear the responsibility of living with the consequences of today’s decisions.
I like to think that I have a relationship to land and water as something which one has to take care of, and not just as something connoting the use of “resources”. The land and the water, for me, are connected to identity and language. One example of this relates to place names in the Sámi languages. Place names carry knowledge about the landscape, uses and stories told about the place in question. All this, for me, goes under indigenous knowledge. And when it comes to Indigenous knowledge in biodiversity governance, I think there has been some progress, especially in the language used by institutions. But the support is still uneven, and too often symbolic. Indigenous knowledge is sometimes integrated into processes without enough attention to ethics, ownership, consent, or how that knowledge will actually influence decisions. There is also a capacity problem: communities are expected to participate, share knowledge, and respond to consultations without the funding and resources needed to do that work properly. When Indigenous perspectives are included only for legitimacy, without real influence, this risks becoming Indigenous washing.
Young people’s opportunities to influence biodiversity protection and environmental decision-making are definitely increasing. Panels like this, youth workshops, and international Arctic forums can create important spaces for young people to speak, learn, and connect. These spaces matter. They can build confidence, networks, and knowledge across regions.
At the same time, barriers remain. Youth participation can also become youth washing if young people are invited in only after the most important decisions have already been made. Access is another barrier. Travel distances, costs, language, time, and funding all affect who is able to participate. Many consultations also happen too late in the process, when there is little room to change the outcome. If youth and Indigenous communities are to contribute meaningfully, they must be involved from the beginning and not only asked to comment at the end.
In conclusion, for me, biodiversity protection is therefore not only about protecting species or habitats. It is about protecting the conditions that allow communities, cultures, and future generations to live well. A resilient Arctic future is one where the land is still able to carry life, and where our people are still able to carry knowledge, language, and responsibility forward.
- Published on
Friðrik Thorsson. Photo: IACN
Friðrik Thorsson’s Discussion Reflection
Youth as the Future’s Foremost Stakeholders
We have the pleasure and honour of publishing a reflection on the discussion delivered at the Arctic Frontiers conference. The conference was held in February 2026 in Tromsø, Norway. The discussion was part of the panel session organised by the CAP-SHARE project, entitled ‘Intergenerational Capacity Sharing: The Connection Between Nature and Youth’.
The text was originally written in English.
Discussion Reflection:
Youth as the Future’s Foremost Stakeholders
Friðrik Thorsson
Project Manager & Deputy Director, IACN – Icelandic Arctic Cooperation Network
Why I admire this project.
My attendance at the 2026 Arctic Frontiers conference in Tromsø was marked by the wonderful opportunity granted to me by the CAP-SHARE project team to discuss a matter that is dear to me: ensuring that stakeholder perspectives and values are heard, understood and acted upon by those empowered to make final decisions.
Of course, this is something most people agree is important, at least in principle. However, it is when one looks at the practicalities that things tend to appear amiss. Like in a whispering game, a compounding process runs the risk of losing parts of the bigger picture with each step. Things are lost in translation, overlooked, affected by practical constraints, or are misunderstood or misinterpreted. Resolving this requires taking into account structural aspects relating to the development of effective communities of practice centred on the practical use of frameworks and tools that streamline and empower the knowledge-policy interface – from stakeholders and local communities to scientists, experts and policymakers.
This is where my appreciation for the work that CAP-SHARE does comes into play, as I find that their efforts to empower this process to be crucial for the sort of effective Arctic governance that is so necessary in these rapidly evolving times.
Why this matters to me.
To put into context why this matters to me personally, I will begin by telling you a little bit about myself. I had the privilege of growing up on a rural farm in the valleys of West Iceland. With this privilege came opportunities to surround myself with nature, tend to animals, swim in the river and catch charr. Having no other frame of reference, I took this all for granted. It didn’t come with any awareness – it was just life. Normal stuff.
The moment of realization came when a landmark glacier visible from my valley was declared dead back in 2014; the first to go extinct in Iceland since settlement. The depth of one’s relationship to something rarely ever becomes as apparent as when it has been lost. I realized, in retrospect, that these phenomena which we take for granted as part of normal, daily life are indeed exactly that. My normal – both a fundamental aspect of my identity and the vector through which I perceived reality – suddenly proved to be mortal.
It took a reality check for me to finally realize the fragility of my natural environment – something well understood by the many Arctic, and particularly Indigenous, communities who are even more closely connected and reliant upon it than I ever was. I do not intend to lose yet another piece of it without putting up a fight. I recognize that I have a say in terms of how the ship is steered. But being heard is another thing entirely.
The part I try to play.
Today, I work as project manager for the Icelandic Arctic Cooperation Network, an organization based in Akureyri, which serves as Iceland’s hub for Arctic governance and knowledge production. Our close involvement in this process has afforded us the opportunity to observe how the interface operates: what works, what doesn’t, and what often isn’t even considered. I was therefore happy to provide some insight on the first question posed to me in the panel in particular:
What experiences have you had collaborating with researchers, policymakers or authorities? What has worked well, and what needs to change?
I was thankful to receive such a good question. After all, effective capacity-sharing includes learning where processes fail and redesigning them.
In regard to what needs to change, one of the most glaring pitfalls in this process is a far too frequent misalignment between national policies and goals and regional realities. This fragmentation is especially evident in the Arctic and in rural areas. Accordingly, there is a need for a clearer, cross-cutting vision that encompasses all policies. Human realities cannot be reduced to singular concerns and solutions, so there needs to be increased efforts aimed at the mutual alignment of youth, gender, environmental and climate policies, to name but a few.
We note that such alignment, especially for cross-border attempts at governance on a human scale, requires data that is compatible across regions. Moreover, this data needs to be appropriately disaggregated to statistically represent how different strata intersect not only with one another, but also with the environment, in the case of climate change mitigation policy.
Lastly, but perhaps most fundamentally, there needs to be greater awareness of the inherent value of true stakeholder engagement. Capacity-sharing is not simply a transfer of skills from ‘experts’ to a subject group. Every stakeholder – or ‘youth’, as is the case in this project – is an expert on their own lived realities. Therefore, stakeholder engagement must occur right from the very beginning of the policy process. Proper engagement, involvement and tools such as Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) are not mere box-ticking exercises – they are guarantees of efficiency and risk-mitigating factors.
Alongside this acknowledgement comes the need to address the frequent incompatibility between research funding windows and the time required to establish trust and good faith. Resources must also be allocated to provide adequate support and ensure that rights holders, knowledge holders and stakeholders are duly compensated for their participation. This is no pipe dream; it is practically feasible and proven to work.
In your work at the IACN, how has what you mentioned earlier regarding youth participation been put into practice?
A good example of our attempt to actualize the sort of engagement I mentioned – both in terms of what worked and what we learned from it – is our work on the Pan-Arctic Report on Gender Equality in the Arctic. It serves as a good example of what one may expect from the knowledge-policy interface, due to its policy impact. Since its publication through the Arctic Council’s Sustainable Development Working Group, it has been reflected in subsequent Arctic strategies of Iceland and the Arctic Council, as per the Reykjavík Declaration of 2021.
However, as a case study in process design, it made very genuine efforts to ensure extensive youth engagement. Rather than simple ‘comments at the end’, the report embedded a Youth Advisory Group throughout the process, with talent drawn specifically from the Arctic Youth Network. This included theme selection, chapter review, feedback sessions and representation on the Editorial Committee.
This engagement was a real no-brainer from a research perspective. As a demographic group, youth are crucial to understanding ongoing social processes, regardless of the subject. Even if we were to limit ‘youth’ to the ages of 15-29, this group would still comprise a quarter of the Arctic’s total population. Also, not only is it the strongest predictive group for long-term demographic, mobility and labour trends, but it is also the section of the population in which Indigeneity, gender, geography and opportunity structures intersect in by far the most visible way. And who knows more about such things than those currently experiencing them?
This focus is especially relevant considering the glacial pace at which policy can react to reality. Ten years of engagement, research, deliberation and, finally, policy implementation can feel like the blink of an eye. But to a person just finishing school, such a span of time can easily determine the rest of their life.
The importance of centring policy around youth when it comes to long-term sustainability makes the inherent value of their engagement so readily obvious. As mentioned previously, this value must be reflected in the allocation of resources and direct compensation to the stakeholders with whom one needs to collaborate.
Youth as the Future’s Foremost Stakeholders
We have the pleasure and honour of publishing a reflection on the discussion delivered at the Arctic Frontiers conference. The conference was held in February 2026 in Tromsø, Norway. The discussion was part of the panel session organised by the CAP-SHARE project, entitled ‘Intergenerational Capacity Sharing: The Connection Between Nature and Youth’.
The text was originally written in English.
Discussion Reflection:
Youth as the Future’s Foremost Stakeholders
Friðrik Thorsson
Project Manager & Deputy Director, IACN – Icelandic Arctic Cooperation Network
Why I admire this project.
My attendance at the 2026 Arctic Frontiers conference in Tromsø was marked by the wonderful opportunity granted to me by the CAP-SHARE project team to discuss a matter that is dear to me: ensuring that stakeholder perspectives and values are heard, understood and acted upon by those empowered to make final decisions.
Of course, this is something most people agree is important, at least in principle. However, it is when one looks at the practicalities that things tend to appear amiss. Like in a whispering game, a compounding process runs the risk of losing parts of the bigger picture with each step. Things are lost in translation, overlooked, affected by practical constraints, or are misunderstood or misinterpreted. Resolving this requires taking into account structural aspects relating to the development of effective communities of practice centred on the practical use of frameworks and tools that streamline and empower the knowledge-policy interface – from stakeholders and local communities to scientists, experts and policymakers.
This is where my appreciation for the work that CAP-SHARE does comes into play, as I find that their efforts to empower this process to be crucial for the sort of effective Arctic governance that is so necessary in these rapidly evolving times.
Why this matters to me.
To put into context why this matters to me personally, I will begin by telling you a little bit about myself. I had the privilege of growing up on a rural farm in the valleys of West Iceland. With this privilege came opportunities to surround myself with nature, tend to animals, swim in the river and catch charr. Having no other frame of reference, I took this all for granted. It didn’t come with any awareness – it was just life. Normal stuff.
The moment of realization came when a landmark glacier visible from my valley was declared dead back in 2014; the first to go extinct in Iceland since settlement. The depth of one’s relationship to something rarely ever becomes as apparent as when it has been lost. I realized, in retrospect, that these phenomena which we take for granted as part of normal, daily life are indeed exactly that. My normal – both a fundamental aspect of my identity and the vector through which I perceived reality – suddenly proved to be mortal.
It took a reality check for me to finally realize the fragility of my natural environment – something well understood by the many Arctic, and particularly Indigenous, communities who are even more closely connected and reliant upon it than I ever was. I do not intend to lose yet another piece of it without putting up a fight. I recognize that I have a say in terms of how the ship is steered. But being heard is another thing entirely.
The part I try to play.
Today, I work as project manager for the Icelandic Arctic Cooperation Network, an organization based in Akureyri, which serves as Iceland’s hub for Arctic governance and knowledge production. Our close involvement in this process has afforded us the opportunity to observe how the interface operates: what works, what doesn’t, and what often isn’t even considered. I was therefore happy to provide some insight on the first question posed to me in the panel in particular:
What experiences have you had collaborating with researchers, policymakers or authorities? What has worked well, and what needs to change?
I was thankful to receive such a good question. After all, effective capacity-sharing includes learning where processes fail and redesigning them.
In regard to what needs to change, one of the most glaring pitfalls in this process is a far too frequent misalignment between national policies and goals and regional realities. This fragmentation is especially evident in the Arctic and in rural areas. Accordingly, there is a need for a clearer, cross-cutting vision that encompasses all policies. Human realities cannot be reduced to singular concerns and solutions, so there needs to be increased efforts aimed at the mutual alignment of youth, gender, environmental and climate policies, to name but a few.
We note that such alignment, especially for cross-border attempts at governance on a human scale, requires data that is compatible across regions. Moreover, this data needs to be appropriately disaggregated to statistically represent how different strata intersect not only with one another, but also with the environment, in the case of climate change mitigation policy.
Lastly, but perhaps most fundamentally, there needs to be greater awareness of the inherent value of true stakeholder engagement. Capacity-sharing is not simply a transfer of skills from ‘experts’ to a subject group. Every stakeholder – or ‘youth’, as is the case in this project – is an expert on their own lived realities. Therefore, stakeholder engagement must occur right from the very beginning of the policy process. Proper engagement, involvement and tools such as Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) are not mere box-ticking exercises – they are guarantees of efficiency and risk-mitigating factors.
Alongside this acknowledgement comes the need to address the frequent incompatibility between research funding windows and the time required to establish trust and good faith. Resources must also be allocated to provide adequate support and ensure that rights holders, knowledge holders and stakeholders are duly compensated for their participation. This is no pipe dream; it is practically feasible and proven to work.
In your work at the IACN, how has what you mentioned earlier regarding youth participation been put into practice?
A good example of our attempt to actualize the sort of engagement I mentioned – both in terms of what worked and what we learned from it – is our work on the Pan-Arctic Report on Gender Equality in the Arctic. It serves as a good example of what one may expect from the knowledge-policy interface, due to its policy impact. Since its publication through the Arctic Council’s Sustainable Development Working Group, it has been reflected in subsequent Arctic strategies of Iceland and the Arctic Council, as per the Reykjavík Declaration of 2021.
However, as a case study in process design, it made very genuine efforts to ensure extensive youth engagement. Rather than simple ‘comments at the end’, the report embedded a Youth Advisory Group throughout the process, with talent drawn specifically from the Arctic Youth Network. This included theme selection, chapter review, feedback sessions and representation on the Editorial Committee.
This engagement was a real no-brainer from a research perspective. As a demographic group, youth are crucial to understanding ongoing social processes, regardless of the subject. Even if we were to limit ‘youth’ to the ages of 15-29, this group would still comprise a quarter of the Arctic’s total population. Also, not only is it the strongest predictive group for long-term demographic, mobility and labour trends, but it is also the section of the population in which Indigeneity, gender, geography and opportunity structures intersect in by far the most visible way. And who knows more about such things than those currently experiencing them?
This focus is especially relevant considering the glacial pace at which policy can react to reality. Ten years of engagement, research, deliberation and, finally, policy implementation can feel like the blink of an eye. But to a person just finishing school, such a span of time can easily determine the rest of their life.
The importance of centring policy around youth when it comes to long-term sustainability makes the inherent value of their engagement so readily obvious. As mentioned previously, this value must be reflected in the allocation of resources and direct compensation to the stakeholders with whom one needs to collaborate.
- Published on
Isabel Louise Cadec. Photo: Victoria Cadec
Isabel Louise Cadec’s Discussion Reflection
Shaping Trails and Futures
We have the pleasure and honour of publishing a reflection on the discussion delivered at the Arctic Frontiers conference. The conference was held in February 2026 in Tromsø, Norway. The discussion was part of the panel session organised by the CAP-SHARE project, entitled Intergenerational Capacity Sharing: The Connection Between Nature and Youth.
The text was originally written in English.
Discussion Reflection:
Shaping Trails and Futures
Isabel Louise Cadec
Project Coordinator, The Þórsmörk Trail Volunteers, Land and Forest Iceland
It was a privilege to not only attend the Arctic Frontiers conference earlier this year, but to be invited by the CAP-SHARE project to participate as a panellist representing Iceland in a discussion about capacity sharing and biodiversity on 6 February 2026. Although I am not from Iceland myself, I have spent the last six years immersed in the Icelandic Highlands, leading groups of international volunteers in landscape restoration and hiking trail construction through sustainable approaches. This is with a project called The Þórsmörk Trail Volunteers, which is coordinated by Land og Skógur. I am grateful to have had the opportunity to discuss my experiences as a trail builder who works alongside groups of young people from across the world, including Taiwan, Canada, Finland, and Norway, to name but a few countries.
I thrive and feel most at home in the birch forest of Þórsmörk and Goðaland, a nature reserve in South Iceland, where I continually have soil-covered hands, grass-stained trousers, muddy boots, and windswept hair. I welcome the disconnection and stillness of the Icelandic Highlands. Smart business wear and public speaking are certainly out of my comfort zone, and I would be lying if I said I was not nervous in the minutes leading up to the panel discussion. However, I am enthusiastic and passionate about building trails, restoring Þórsmörk and Goðaland, and teaching our young volunteers about these strategies in a changing environment. Thus, despite the nerves, there was an undercurrent of excitement to be able to discuss a topic I deeply care about.
Early in the discussion, the panel was asked:
How do you relate to land and water - such as rivers, lakes, coasts, tundra, forests, or fells - and how do these relationships shape your identity and sense of the future?
As I listened to my fellow panellists, I was moved by the different stories and experiences they shared about land and place. When it was my turn to speak, I realised that the question was not asking for a single kind of connection, but opening space for different relationships, histories, and experiences to be expressed.
Our volunteer camp in Þórsmörk is basic. This has always been the intention. We are now going into our 15th year of this project, but at the very beginning there was nothing but a dusty scrap of land where our camp is situated. Over the years, our camp has been slowly built with low impact, sustainability and the landscape in mind. Our camp features turf roofs which now have small birch trees growing on them, and our huts are constructed with Icelandic grown timber. A colleague even referred to our camp as a hobbit village.
In the panel discussion, I explained how a significant part of this development has been about nurturing the forest in and round our camp. We have taken a lot of care to plant, relocate and nurture the native birch and willow. With this, the nature and wildlife are much closer to our door. Addressing the audience, I tried to paint the image that shows how we have fostered and created a camp that is part of the landscape and forest.
My relationship to this land, which has shaped my identity, has not come from being born into an Arctic country like my fellow panellists. I grew up on the sunny, populated south coast of England. Instead, my connection and relation to the land have developed over time, mediated through our basic camp lifestyle and passing on knowledge, inspiration, and passion, whilst creating a space for learning and escapism from our busy lives. I call this “the Þórsmörk bubble”. It has become a place to temporarily escape whatever concerns, worries, or stresses our volunteers have, through reconnecting with the land and nature. This is what I would like to continue in the future – not just a trail maintenance programme, but rather a place nestled in the Icelandic forests, rivers and mountains where people can come for a short while to disconnect, learn something new, reconnect with nature, and contribute something good to the landscape.
I was then directly asked:
How do you experience young people’s opportunities to influence biodiversity protection and environmental decision making in your community? What barriers exist?
For this, I had prepared some photographs to help illustrate a very small part of what our volunteers are involved with when they join our project. In Iceland, the term ‘youth’ encompasses people aged six to 25. Most of our volunteers are aged 20–25.
Shaping Trails and Futures
We have the pleasure and honour of publishing a reflection on the discussion delivered at the Arctic Frontiers conference. The conference was held in February 2026 in Tromsø, Norway. The discussion was part of the panel session organised by the CAP-SHARE project, entitled Intergenerational Capacity Sharing: The Connection Between Nature and Youth.
The text was originally written in English.
Discussion Reflection:
Shaping Trails and Futures
Isabel Louise Cadec
Project Coordinator, The Þórsmörk Trail Volunteers, Land and Forest Iceland
It was a privilege to not only attend the Arctic Frontiers conference earlier this year, but to be invited by the CAP-SHARE project to participate as a panellist representing Iceland in a discussion about capacity sharing and biodiversity on 6 February 2026. Although I am not from Iceland myself, I have spent the last six years immersed in the Icelandic Highlands, leading groups of international volunteers in landscape restoration and hiking trail construction through sustainable approaches. This is with a project called The Þórsmörk Trail Volunteers, which is coordinated by Land og Skógur. I am grateful to have had the opportunity to discuss my experiences as a trail builder who works alongside groups of young people from across the world, including Taiwan, Canada, Finland, and Norway, to name but a few countries.
I thrive and feel most at home in the birch forest of Þórsmörk and Goðaland, a nature reserve in South Iceland, where I continually have soil-covered hands, grass-stained trousers, muddy boots, and windswept hair. I welcome the disconnection and stillness of the Icelandic Highlands. Smart business wear and public speaking are certainly out of my comfort zone, and I would be lying if I said I was not nervous in the minutes leading up to the panel discussion. However, I am enthusiastic and passionate about building trails, restoring Þórsmörk and Goðaland, and teaching our young volunteers about these strategies in a changing environment. Thus, despite the nerves, there was an undercurrent of excitement to be able to discuss a topic I deeply care about.
Early in the discussion, the panel was asked:
How do you relate to land and water - such as rivers, lakes, coasts, tundra, forests, or fells - and how do these relationships shape your identity and sense of the future?
As I listened to my fellow panellists, I was moved by the different stories and experiences they shared about land and place. When it was my turn to speak, I realised that the question was not asking for a single kind of connection, but opening space for different relationships, histories, and experiences to be expressed.
Our volunteer camp in Þórsmörk is basic. This has always been the intention. We are now going into our 15th year of this project, but at the very beginning there was nothing but a dusty scrap of land where our camp is situated. Over the years, our camp has been slowly built with low impact, sustainability and the landscape in mind. Our camp features turf roofs which now have small birch trees growing on them, and our huts are constructed with Icelandic grown timber. A colleague even referred to our camp as a hobbit village.
In the panel discussion, I explained how a significant part of this development has been about nurturing the forest in and round our camp. We have taken a lot of care to plant, relocate and nurture the native birch and willow. With this, the nature and wildlife are much closer to our door. Addressing the audience, I tried to paint the image that shows how we have fostered and created a camp that is part of the landscape and forest.
My relationship to this land, which has shaped my identity, has not come from being born into an Arctic country like my fellow panellists. I grew up on the sunny, populated south coast of England. Instead, my connection and relation to the land have developed over time, mediated through our basic camp lifestyle and passing on knowledge, inspiration, and passion, whilst creating a space for learning and escapism from our busy lives. I call this “the Þórsmörk bubble”. It has become a place to temporarily escape whatever concerns, worries, or stresses our volunteers have, through reconnecting with the land and nature. This is what I would like to continue in the future – not just a trail maintenance programme, but rather a place nestled in the Icelandic forests, rivers and mountains where people can come for a short while to disconnect, learn something new, reconnect with nature, and contribute something good to the landscape.
I was then directly asked:
How do you experience young people’s opportunities to influence biodiversity protection and environmental decision making in your community? What barriers exist?
For this, I had prepared some photographs to help illustrate a very small part of what our volunteers are involved with when they join our project. In Iceland, the term ‘youth’ encompasses people aged six to 25. Most of our volunteers are aged 20–25.
Photo collage: Þórsmörk trail projects and the volunteer camp. Photo 1: Hreinn Óskarsson, photo 2: Chas Goemans, other photos: Isabel Louise Cadec.
We are an entry level programme, a stepping stone for young people in their early career development. An opportunity for them to learn about biodiversity protection and restoration in a different capacity. However, what exactly does biodiversity protection look like in relation to trail management, and how are these two elements linked? Trails are an essential infrastructure for our access into these nature destinations, to national parks, to protected areas, to semi-wilderness places. Yet, a poorly maintained trail is bad news for the plant biodiversity surrounding that trail.
Many areas of Þórsmörk feature fragile moss communities and slow growing flora. Biodiversity in Iceland is characterised by wide interspecies diversity. When answering this question, I explained how the moss species in Iceland are extremely vulnerable and take a long time to recover if trampled by hikers. This then exposes the soil beneath, which leads to continual soil erosion if this cycle of off-trail trampling is not fixed. It creates an ugly scar in the landscape.
This is where trail maintenance comes in. Well-maintained trails protect our vegetation biodiversity, because people walk on the trails and not on the moss. The slide I presented in the panel discussion shows what happens when the trails do not receive the continual support and maintenance required (photo 1). Photo 2 shows The Þórsmörk Trail Volunteers efforts in restoring this same section of trail. It gives the plants the opportunity to grow again.
I would also briefly like to point out the importance of community engagement in our trail maintenance strategy. This is illustrated in photos 6 and 7, a before and after look from 2025. At first glance, it is just another trail. However, the story behind it is grounded in a regenerative tourism approach based on community, stakeholder, and user engagement in our trail network development for both tourism and local use. Hiking guides who operate in the area worked with us to restore this section of trail, while we simultaneously cooperated with the local mountain biking community to develop an alternative route for keen bikers in the area.
In answer to this question, I hope it clarified for the audience that trail maintenance and its impacts go beyond just a one-metre path. Restoration and trail development are strengthened with community engagement and young people’s opportunities to learn about the diversity in biodiversity protection methods. As for barriers, we strongly believe in free volunteering to make these experiences and learning opportunities more accessible to a wider audience of young people. I for one was inspired after joining The Þórsmörk Trails Volunteers as a volunteer myself in 2020. Six years on and I am still in the valley of Þórsmörk and Goðaland, hopefully inspiring the next young graduates.
The final question was addressed to everyone in the panel:
What does a hopeful, just and resilient Arctic future look like from your perspective?
For me, I believe it is one that strongly recognises and acts on the understanding that we are part of nature, not apart from it – an Arctic region that actively responds to the environmental and societal concerns of everyone who lives in the Arctic, not just passively listens. We are all connected in this wider Arctic, and if we can all play our part to be inclusive, respectful, and environmentally conscious, that will lead to a more hopeful future.
I would also like to see improved youth mobility. An Arctic that promotes more environmental programmes which offer holistic training and mentoring for capacity sharing in a way that is accessible and financially viable for youth. After all, this is what influenced my own life, and I am all the more thankful for it.
Many areas of Þórsmörk feature fragile moss communities and slow growing flora. Biodiversity in Iceland is characterised by wide interspecies diversity. When answering this question, I explained how the moss species in Iceland are extremely vulnerable and take a long time to recover if trampled by hikers. This then exposes the soil beneath, which leads to continual soil erosion if this cycle of off-trail trampling is not fixed. It creates an ugly scar in the landscape.
This is where trail maintenance comes in. Well-maintained trails protect our vegetation biodiversity, because people walk on the trails and not on the moss. The slide I presented in the panel discussion shows what happens when the trails do not receive the continual support and maintenance required (photo 1). Photo 2 shows The Þórsmörk Trail Volunteers efforts in restoring this same section of trail. It gives the plants the opportunity to grow again.
I would also briefly like to point out the importance of community engagement in our trail maintenance strategy. This is illustrated in photos 6 and 7, a before and after look from 2025. At first glance, it is just another trail. However, the story behind it is grounded in a regenerative tourism approach based on community, stakeholder, and user engagement in our trail network development for both tourism and local use. Hiking guides who operate in the area worked with us to restore this section of trail, while we simultaneously cooperated with the local mountain biking community to develop an alternative route for keen bikers in the area.
In answer to this question, I hope it clarified for the audience that trail maintenance and its impacts go beyond just a one-metre path. Restoration and trail development are strengthened with community engagement and young people’s opportunities to learn about the diversity in biodiversity protection methods. As for barriers, we strongly believe in free volunteering to make these experiences and learning opportunities more accessible to a wider audience of young people. I for one was inspired after joining The Þórsmörk Trails Volunteers as a volunteer myself in 2020. Six years on and I am still in the valley of Þórsmörk and Goðaland, hopefully inspiring the next young graduates.
The final question was addressed to everyone in the panel:
What does a hopeful, just and resilient Arctic future look like from your perspective?
For me, I believe it is one that strongly recognises and acts on the understanding that we are part of nature, not apart from it – an Arctic region that actively responds to the environmental and societal concerns of everyone who lives in the Arctic, not just passively listens. We are all connected in this wider Arctic, and if we can all play our part to be inclusive, respectful, and environmentally conscious, that will lead to a more hopeful future.
I would also like to see improved youth mobility. An Arctic that promotes more environmental programmes which offer holistic training and mentoring for capacity sharing in a way that is accessible and financially viable for youth. After all, this is what influenced my own life, and I am all the more thankful for it.
- Published on
Photo: Camilla Aviaja Olsen
Camilla Aviaja Olsen’s Keynote Speech
Make the “co” make sense
We have the pleasure and honour of publishing a keynote speech delivered at the Arctic Frontiers conference. The conference was held in February 2026 in Tromsø, Norway. The keynote speech was part of the panel session organised by the CAP-SHARE project, entitled Intergenerational Capacity Sharing: The Connection Between Nature and Youth.
The speech was originally given in English.
Keynote speech:
Make the “co” make sense
Camilla Aviaja Olsen
Chair, Arctic Council’s Sustainable Development Working Group (SDWG)
Good morning everybody and thank you for being here with us.
My name is Camilla Aviaja Olsen, and I work at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Research of the Government of Greenland. I am part of the Kingdom of Denmark’s Arctic Council Chairship team, and I also serve as Chair of the Arctic Council’s Sustainable Development Working Group. I would like to thank the organizers for the opportunity and begin by sharing my appreciation of the format.
I feel like it makes sense to meet in this space, which brings together people who are too often separated in decision-making processes: Indigenous Peoples and their communities, youth, elders, scientists, policy makers – all of you. Today’s conversation is about biodiversity, youth and resilience. But I would say that, more fundamentally, it is about who gets to define the issues, whose knowledge counts, and how decisions about the Arctic are made. I will focus my speech on one single syllable, which can prove incredibly complex to articulate and implement. That syllable is, simply, “co”.
Consultation, inclusion, stakeholder engagement.
These are terms we typically hear in policy development processes. They are not necessarily bad, but they are not enough. Participation in these processes alone does not equal power over them. Consultation does not equal consent, and listening does not equal concerted decision-making. Adding the prefix “co-” to ongoing processes without a genuine transformative intention can easily become a mere box-ticking exercise. There is a very thin line between meaningful engagement and tokenism.
For Indigenous Peoples, this is not a new idea. It reflects the way in which knowledge has mostly been held and shared: through relationships, collectivity and across generations. But for many institutions, the “co” still challenges deeply rooted habits. Who sets agendas, who controls data, whose timelines matter, and whose knowledge is considered credible. I see this session as an attempt to take the “co” seriously. Not as a buzzword, but as a practice that requires time, trust and humility. Co-creation is necessary and, more often than not, is based on good intentions. But it is not enough. The “co” has to be extended to the implementation process, as well as to the very definition of the issues that are being addressed.
What is needed, in this particular context, is co-governance on equitable terms. This means recognizing Indigenous peoples as rights-holders, not just as one of many stakeholders. It means creating appropriate structures for co-leadership. It is not just a matter of them being consulted, so that only what is convenient is taken into account if it fits the project timeline. Indigenous Peoples are often on the receiving end of policies and frameworks that focus on the Arctic. I believe that it is only right that they should be in the driving seat, rather than being relegated to the back seat amongst other stakeholders. To achieve this, we need to invest in capacity-building and education. We need to invest in youth leadership and in structures that can outlast individual funding cycles. I noted my appreciation for the format earlier, and I think it is great to be able to create spaces like today’s discussion, which are rooted in this understanding. The challenge lies in sustaining them and allowing them to shape the way we do things.
Another challenge of working in a collaborative way lies in the fact that different knowledge systems can be seen as competing. I too often hear it presented as an either/or choice: Indigenous knowledge or scientific knowledge. Traditional versus modern. I don’t think we should let our reality be limited by this framing. Indigenous knowledge systems are adaptive, rooted in long-term observations, and closely tied to the land and our responsibility towards it. The challenge is not whether Indigenous and scientific knowledge systems can work together. The challenge is whether we are willing to create the ethical and synergistic conditions for its co-production.
And here we are today, trying to find ways for “intergenerational” to mean continuity, rather than rupture. When youth and elders are brought together in co-learning and co-leadership, knowledge is not just transferred, it evolves. Capacity is not only built, it is shared. This is why today’s panel session should not be a symbolic one-off. The youth are not here to represent a future idea; they are here as present-day knowledge holders. We have to make sure we are able to transform this engagement into actionable solutions, moving towards more thriving communities. This is done not by adding a “perspective” on already-shaped policies, but by a recognition of a deeper shared responsibility.
But again, this requires co-governance structures, not one-off consultations. It means that parties, institutions and individuals need to allow themselves to be transformed by the relationships they enter into. Even if that means moving away from the comfort of your day-to-day. Thriving communities create better policy. Thriving ecosystems sustain livelihoods, culture and identity. These outcomes are inseparable.
As we delve into this discussion, I invite us to shift the focus of our questions.
Thriving is not passive. It is practised. Through co-creation, co-governance and shared care for our environment. So how am I hoping this session will contribute? First, it is around the voices of Arctic Indigenous youth. It also creates space to explore practical pathways for integrating Indigenous knowledge into biodiversity governance: ethically, respectfully, and effectively. And finally, it seeks to generate concrete outcomes: co-created principles for knowledge integration and co-governance. Youth-led ideas for education and policy engagement. And a pathway for continued cooperation between communities, scientists and decision-makers across the Arctic. But, just as importantly, it aims to model a different way of working together – one based on shared responsibility for the future of the Arctic.
As we move on to the panel discussion, I invite everyone here to listen a little differently. There may be a difference between what you want to hear and what you need to hear. Let’s be honest: this isn’t your first discussion on the future of the Arctic, and nor will it be your last. We can do better. We have to do better. Allow yourselves to be inspired, but also challenged, and even provoked. The Arctic does not need more well-intentioned decisions made without the participation of those who live there. It needs shared leadership and relationships that are strong enough to withstand disagreements and uncertainty.
Make the “co” make sense.
I challenge you, for today’s discussion and for the rest of the conference, to remember that we are not talking about abstract concepts here. We are talking about people’s livelihoods, lands and languages. We are talking about heritage and culture. In my case, I am talking about home. Remember this when futures are being negotiated, often without the full involvement of the people who will be directly impacted. We cannot afford that.
With that, I would like to thank you all and it will be a pleasure to continue this discussion with my fellow panellists.
Qujanaq. Thank you.
Make the “co” make sense
We have the pleasure and honour of publishing a keynote speech delivered at the Arctic Frontiers conference. The conference was held in February 2026 in Tromsø, Norway. The keynote speech was part of the panel session organised by the CAP-SHARE project, entitled Intergenerational Capacity Sharing: The Connection Between Nature and Youth.
The speech was originally given in English.
Keynote speech:
Make the “co” make sense
Camilla Aviaja Olsen
Chair, Arctic Council’s Sustainable Development Working Group (SDWG)
Good morning everybody and thank you for being here with us.
My name is Camilla Aviaja Olsen, and I work at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Research of the Government of Greenland. I am part of the Kingdom of Denmark’s Arctic Council Chairship team, and I also serve as Chair of the Arctic Council’s Sustainable Development Working Group. I would like to thank the organizers for the opportunity and begin by sharing my appreciation of the format.
I feel like it makes sense to meet in this space, which brings together people who are too often separated in decision-making processes: Indigenous Peoples and their communities, youth, elders, scientists, policy makers – all of you. Today’s conversation is about biodiversity, youth and resilience. But I would say that, more fundamentally, it is about who gets to define the issues, whose knowledge counts, and how decisions about the Arctic are made. I will focus my speech on one single syllable, which can prove incredibly complex to articulate and implement. That syllable is, simply, “co”.
Consultation, inclusion, stakeholder engagement.
These are terms we typically hear in policy development processes. They are not necessarily bad, but they are not enough. Participation in these processes alone does not equal power over them. Consultation does not equal consent, and listening does not equal concerted decision-making. Adding the prefix “co-” to ongoing processes without a genuine transformative intention can easily become a mere box-ticking exercise. There is a very thin line between meaningful engagement and tokenism.
- Co-creation means that knowledge is shaped together, from the very beginning, and not just added at the end.
- Co-development means that priorities are defined collectively, not explained or translated after decisions have been made.
- Co-implementation means communities are not just informants, but leaders and partners.
- Co-governance means that authority, accountability and responsibility are shared.
For Indigenous Peoples, this is not a new idea. It reflects the way in which knowledge has mostly been held and shared: through relationships, collectivity and across generations. But for many institutions, the “co” still challenges deeply rooted habits. Who sets agendas, who controls data, whose timelines matter, and whose knowledge is considered credible. I see this session as an attempt to take the “co” seriously. Not as a buzzword, but as a practice that requires time, trust and humility. Co-creation is necessary and, more often than not, is based on good intentions. But it is not enough. The “co” has to be extended to the implementation process, as well as to the very definition of the issues that are being addressed.
What is needed, in this particular context, is co-governance on equitable terms. This means recognizing Indigenous peoples as rights-holders, not just as one of many stakeholders. It means creating appropriate structures for co-leadership. It is not just a matter of them being consulted, so that only what is convenient is taken into account if it fits the project timeline. Indigenous Peoples are often on the receiving end of policies and frameworks that focus on the Arctic. I believe that it is only right that they should be in the driving seat, rather than being relegated to the back seat amongst other stakeholders. To achieve this, we need to invest in capacity-building and education. We need to invest in youth leadership and in structures that can outlast individual funding cycles. I noted my appreciation for the format earlier, and I think it is great to be able to create spaces like today’s discussion, which are rooted in this understanding. The challenge lies in sustaining them and allowing them to shape the way we do things.
Another challenge of working in a collaborative way lies in the fact that different knowledge systems can be seen as competing. I too often hear it presented as an either/or choice: Indigenous knowledge or scientific knowledge. Traditional versus modern. I don’t think we should let our reality be limited by this framing. Indigenous knowledge systems are adaptive, rooted in long-term observations, and closely tied to the land and our responsibility towards it. The challenge is not whether Indigenous and scientific knowledge systems can work together. The challenge is whether we are willing to create the ethical and synergistic conditions for its co-production.
- That means free, prior and informed consent.
- It means respecting Indigenous data ownership.
- It means understanding that knowledge is not just information.
- It is a responsibility, and often an identity.
- It involves a relationship.
And here we are today, trying to find ways for “intergenerational” to mean continuity, rather than rupture. When youth and elders are brought together in co-learning and co-leadership, knowledge is not just transferred, it evolves. Capacity is not only built, it is shared. This is why today’s panel session should not be a symbolic one-off. The youth are not here to represent a future idea; they are here as present-day knowledge holders. We have to make sure we are able to transform this engagement into actionable solutions, moving towards more thriving communities. This is done not by adding a “perspective” on already-shaped policies, but by a recognition of a deeper shared responsibility.
But again, this requires co-governance structures, not one-off consultations. It means that parties, institutions and individuals need to allow themselves to be transformed by the relationships they enter into. Even if that means moving away from the comfort of your day-to-day. Thriving communities create better policy. Thriving ecosystems sustain livelihoods, culture and identity. These outcomes are inseparable.
As we delve into this discussion, I invite us to shift the focus of our questions.
- Not only: How do we protect Arctic biodiversity?
But also: How do we ensure that communities can thrive with it? - Not only: How do we include Indigenous knowledge?
But: How do we co-lead with Indigenous Peoples in shaping the future?
Thriving is not passive. It is practised. Through co-creation, co-governance and shared care for our environment. So how am I hoping this session will contribute? First, it is around the voices of Arctic Indigenous youth. It also creates space to explore practical pathways for integrating Indigenous knowledge into biodiversity governance: ethically, respectfully, and effectively. And finally, it seeks to generate concrete outcomes: co-created principles for knowledge integration and co-governance. Youth-led ideas for education and policy engagement. And a pathway for continued cooperation between communities, scientists and decision-makers across the Arctic. But, just as importantly, it aims to model a different way of working together – one based on shared responsibility for the future of the Arctic.
As we move on to the panel discussion, I invite everyone here to listen a little differently. There may be a difference between what you want to hear and what you need to hear. Let’s be honest: this isn’t your first discussion on the future of the Arctic, and nor will it be your last. We can do better. We have to do better. Allow yourselves to be inspired, but also challenged, and even provoked. The Arctic does not need more well-intentioned decisions made without the participation of those who live there. It needs shared leadership and relationships that are strong enough to withstand disagreements and uncertainty.
Make the “co” make sense.
I challenge you, for today’s discussion and for the rest of the conference, to remember that we are not talking about abstract concepts here. We are talking about people’s livelihoods, lands and languages. We are talking about heritage and culture. In my case, I am talking about home. Remember this when futures are being negotiated, often without the full involvement of the people who will be directly impacted. We cannot afford that.
With that, I would like to thank you all and it will be a pleasure to continue this discussion with my fellow panellists.
Qujanaq. Thank you.
- Published on
The CAP-SHARE project team is pleased to share the second section of our strategy series: “Recognizing Local and Indigenous Knowledges.” This document forms part of a four-part series exploring pathways for capacity sharing in Arctic biodiversity conservation. It builds on co-creation processes developed through the CAP-SHARE international workshops conducted in 2024–2025 and is informed by rigorous research.
The publication explores how local and Indigenous knowledge systems, rooted in lived experience, land-based practices, and intergenerational knowledge transmission, can contribute to biodiversity governance and decision-making across Arctic regions. Across the workshops, participants identified five interconnected priorities for sustainable environmental governance: embedding intergenerational dialogue in biodiversity discussions, strengthening youth environmental stewardship, investing in culturally responsive education, supporting community-based and Indigenous knowledge infrastructures, and maintaining inclusive learning spaces that foster dialogue.
The workshops also highlighted the importance of developing context-sensitive approaches that respectfully engage with regionally specific intergenerational knowledge related to nature, biodiversity, and sustainable development. Such approaches are important for fostering biodiversity governance in Arctic and Nordic regions that are both socially just and ecologically sustainable.
🔽 Download the second strategy section here: https://www.interreg-npa.eu/projects/cap-share/home/outputs-results/
The publication explores how local and Indigenous knowledge systems, rooted in lived experience, land-based practices, and intergenerational knowledge transmission, can contribute to biodiversity governance and decision-making across Arctic regions. Across the workshops, participants identified five interconnected priorities for sustainable environmental governance: embedding intergenerational dialogue in biodiversity discussions, strengthening youth environmental stewardship, investing in culturally responsive education, supporting community-based and Indigenous knowledge infrastructures, and maintaining inclusive learning spaces that foster dialogue.
The workshops also highlighted the importance of developing context-sensitive approaches that respectfully engage with regionally specific intergenerational knowledge related to nature, biodiversity, and sustainable development. Such approaches are important for fostering biodiversity governance in Arctic and Nordic regions that are both socially just and ecologically sustainable.
🔽 Download the second strategy section here: https://www.interreg-npa.eu/projects/cap-share/home/outputs-results/
- Published on
In March 2026, the Icelandic Museum of Natural History, the Icelandic Seal Center, and Húnaklúbburinn conducted a CAP-SHARE workshop with Finnish and Icelandic youth during the “Mistakes make magic” Erasmus+ youth exchange project. The workshop used a photovoice approach to ask young people about their thoughts on biodiversity and how it makes them feel. For one week, 22 youths were gathered in Iceland, and photovoice activities took place almost every day to explore the meaning of biodiversity. Photovoice is a process where we use photographs to capture ideas and concepts, then we get together and discuss the photos as a group. The photos were gathered by splitting the youths into four groups, and each group had a camera.
The groups kept the same cameras for the week and were able to take pictures outside of regular activities. First, the groups took pictures in the countryside, illustrating what biodiversity means to them. Then, NMSI gave an open-air lecture about biodiversity with examples from Icelandic nature, such as birds and Arctic foxes in wetlands and heaths, to illustrate diversity between species, within species, and between ecosystems. The youth then took a hike in the mountains, taking pictures as they went on the same theme as before. During reflection, the groups chose together what photos best represented their view of biodiversity before and after the lecture. We explored together what we learned, what we thought and felt about biodiversity, why the youth chose their pictures, and how the photos represent biodiversity to us.
The opening of the Mistakes Make Magic Photovoice exhibition is on 30th of May 2026 at the Icelandic Seal Center in Húnaþing vestra, Iceland. The exhibition will be open until the end of September and will display the beautiful photographs and thoughts the youth would like to share. The Icelandic Seal Center would like to welcome visitors to come and learn about youth views on biodiversity.
The groups kept the same cameras for the week and were able to take pictures outside of regular activities. First, the groups took pictures in the countryside, illustrating what biodiversity means to them. Then, NMSI gave an open-air lecture about biodiversity with examples from Icelandic nature, such as birds and Arctic foxes in wetlands and heaths, to illustrate diversity between species, within species, and between ecosystems. The youth then took a hike in the mountains, taking pictures as they went on the same theme as before. During reflection, the groups chose together what photos best represented their view of biodiversity before and after the lecture. We explored together what we learned, what we thought and felt about biodiversity, why the youth chose their pictures, and how the photos represent biodiversity to us.
The opening of the Mistakes Make Magic Photovoice exhibition is on 30th of May 2026 at the Icelandic Seal Center in Húnaþing vestra, Iceland. The exhibition will be open until the end of September and will display the beautiful photographs and thoughts the youth would like to share. The Icelandic Seal Center would like to welcome visitors to come and learn about youth views on biodiversity.
- Published on
Sustainability expert and doctoral researcher Auni Haapala has started work as a planner in the CAP-SHARE project of the University of Lapland on 14 April 2026. Haapala will participate in the implementation of the project's workshops and other activities and produce project content, such as educational materials and policy recommendations, related to strengthening the participation of young people and local communities in the Arctic region in biodiversity issues.
Haapala's background is in multidisciplinary environmental research. She has previously worked in research and development projects dealing with the impacts of climate change at, for example, the City of Helsinki and the Finnish Meteorological Institute, examining in particular the intersections of land use, climate change and inequality. Since 2021, Haapala has been delving into local and regional environmental governance issues in the Arctic region as part of her doctoral research at the Gender Studies Unit of the University of Lapland.
The central objective of the Interreg NPA-funded CAP-SHARE project is to strengthen the agency of young people and local communities as well as intergenerational communication on issues of strengthening biodiversity in the Arctic region. In addition to the University of Lapland, the project – which runs until 2027 – is implemented by the Icelandic Museum of Natural History (coordinator) and the Norwegian Arctic Frontiers.
- Published on
4.2.2026
We are delighted to publish the keynote speech delivered at the Arctic Frontiers Conference in February 2026 in Tromsø, Norway, as part of the CAP-SHARE project session Intergenerational Capacity Sharing: The Connection Between Nature and Youth
Keynote: The Cloudberry Theory of Capacity Sharing
Hans Ravna-Pieski Sámi Youth Council, Sámi Parliament, Finland
the cloudberry theory of capacity sharing
I like cloudberries. Yeah, those orange ones. I mean that first one of the season, freshly picked... oh yeah.
However, if one is to store these berries for the cold, long winter, I think you need a secret ingredient. So let me start this off, by dropping some real certified Indigenous knowledge on you, right here, right now... You gotta add some sugar, man.
And, okay, many may already know this, but maybe the secret is actually not so much in the ingredient, but the quantity. You don’t just add a little bit. You add… You add it like this:
The cloudberry season is only once a year. And so is this conference. And to get the most out of this event, I think there are some secret ingredients and quantities involved here, too.
My name is Hans Ravna-Pieski. I’m from the river valleys of the far North in Finland, from a small village called Ohcejohka, which lies by the river Deatnu.
I’m also from The Sámi Youth Council in Finland and I have a background in journalism at Yle Sápmi. Currently, I’m studying Information Technology at Tampere University and I’m specializing in AI and language technology.
So I spend my days teaching machines human language. But in my experience, the hardest work isn't getting the machines to understand us, it's getting us to understand us. And that requires more than just presence. Because being here today is not just about sitting in a room at Saga Hotel.
Many of you have made a great journey to join us today, though. I would assume most of you woke up pretty early, too. That’s effort, and it shows that you care. And seeing all this effort here today... amusingly, it reminds me of going out to pick cloudberries.
There are some differences, though. We all knew the exact date for this event a long time in advance. But you don’t know exactly when the cloudberry season begins.
I mean, obviously, one could use all their Indigenous knowledge and know-how and think "Oh, the snow melted pretty early this year... the summer has been quite hot... and there were so-and-so many mosquitoes..." And then you just get a feeling. Hmm, yeah. The berries could be ripe in that place right now.
And so you decide: Tomorrow I will wake up early, and I will go there. Like how all of you came here today.
And so, you put your boots on, your backpack, and you grab your bucket. You start walking. You leave the road and step onto the springing moss. You trudge through the wetlands where the ground tries to suck the boots right off your feet, šchlop šchlop šchlop.
Eventually, you get to your super-secret spot... but no. No berries. So you think: "Hmm, okay, well, there’s this other place nearby."
You walk there. Now the sweat is running down your back. The mosquitoes have found you, they are buzzing in your ears, biting your neck. It’s not fun. And some people have this theory about the Sámi, “Nooo, they don’t feel the mosquitoes…!” But you keep going.
You arrive at the… jeaggi – the swamp. But the berries aren’t ripe, or maybe they’re already too old. And you look here, and you look there... and nothing.
And you start looking down at your feet as you walk, and this is where you start questioning your own cultural identity. Am I even Sámi? I’ve miscalculated everything. I have lost the connection. My elders have abandoned me.
But just before you decide to abandon your whole culture, move south for the rest of your life, get a southern wife, never teach your kids to speak Sámi, and die an old, bitter, miserable man...
You see one shiny cloudberry. And then you see a few more.
You raise your head, and in front of you, the whole swamp is glowing. Like an amber blanket, there’s a sea of orange gold stretching out against the green moss.
And you are so happy. "Yes! I found them! I’m Sámi after all!"
I hope many of you are also happy to be here today. And let me assure you: You have come to the right swamp. However, to tell you the truth... coming here was the easy part. You still have all these berries to pick.
And here is the final thing about the cloudberry.
You know the berry is truly ripe... not when you need to forcefully pull it from its stem. But when you merely touch it, and it detaches effortlessly. It wants you to take it. It wants to be shared.
So, let’s make sure our ideas are prepared to do the same. Let's make our knowledge accessible, add a little sugar if we have to, and let's fill those buckets.
Thank you.
- Published on
Vesa Orassalo’s panel speech
Tiõrv!
We have the pleasure and honour to publish Vesa Orassalo’s speech at the CAP-SHARE panel Intergenerational Capacity Sharing: The Connection Between Nature and Youth. The panel was held at the Arctic Frontiers conference in February 2026 in Tromsø, Norway.
The speech was originally given in Finnish, and it has been translated into English, Northern Sámi, Inari Sámi and Skolt Sámi.
Panel speech: Tiõrv!
Vesa Orassalo, Skolt Sámi Fisherman and Preservice Teacher, University of Lapland
Tiõrv!
I was given a wonderful opportunity to attend the Arctic Frontiers 2026 conference in Tromsø. In this article, I will tell you about my participation in the CAP-SHARE panel discussion. The topics discussed include the Sámi identity, the Arctic and education.
First, I want to tell you a little bit about myself. My name is Vesa Orassalo and I study education at the University of Lapland. Deep down, I am a hunter and a fisherman. I am interested in the Arctic, the rights of indigenous peoples, and nature and its conservation. I come from the small village of Neiden in the Skolt Sámi region at the border of Finland and Norway.
The timing for the conference was perfect, as on 6 February, we celebrated the Sámi National Day. I was invited by the CAP-SHARE project of the Faculty of Education of the University of Lapland to participate in a panel discussion on young people’s views on the changing Arctic environment. I also participated in a student forum consisting of students from different parts of the Arctic region. I was also honoured to speak at the True North – Who is the Arctic? event. I was able to speak to a large audience at the event’s final Big Picture event, entitled Stories from the Coast, and I spoke about the changes in salmon fishing from the perspective of a Skolt Sámi youth.
CAP-SHARE panel discussion
On Wednesday morning on 4 February, I arrived nearly on time at the Saga hotel where the panel took place. I was not nervous since I was used to the situation and the concept. I had also prepared well for the questions. The topics discussed were biodiversity and the resilience of communities in the northern and Arctic regions. Two young Sámi persons, as well as Icelandic and Greenlandic youths took part in the panel discussion.
The first question was addressed to me.
What does biodiversity and the resilience of communities mean to you in your everyday life and in your home region?
For me, biodiversity means a more interesting life. In my region, people enjoy nature in many ways. Older people, such as my grandmother, care for small animals, such as birds and rabbits, where they live. This could be the highlight of their day. As a hunter, I pay attention to aspects of diversity that affect my own way of life. By this I mean that when I see a lot of moles, I know that small predators are hunting them instead of young willow grouse. Dense willow thickets, on the other hand, mean a good hiding and feeding spot for many game animals.
Biodiversity means opportunities for me. Biodiversity and the resilience of communities mean having the capacity to face short-term and long-term changes affecting local opportunities. How does climate change and other challenges, such as overgrazing, mining, forestry, and the green transition, affect nature and how do we keep up with it? How does nature keep up with it?
What does a hopeful, fair and sustainable Arctic future look like from your perspective?
For me, it looks like a region with scars left by the current problems we are facing today. However, the region is recovering. Winters are still freezing cold. Summers continue to be tolerable to biodiversity. Salmon still head up the river to spawn. Drought is not a constant threat. Birds can still hatch in stable weather conditions. Large animals, such as reindeer and elk, can handle the heat.
The Arctic continues to exist as a place we can still recognise.
How do you feel connected to land and water, such as rivers, lakes, coastal areas, tundra, forests, or fells, and how do these relationships shape your identity and vision of the future?
The answer to this question was very similar among all Sámi panellists. In my opinion, this illustrates how we indigenous peoples experience nature as an integral part of our lives.
In my turn, I said that I feel a deep connection with nature. When nature suffers, I suffer too. Even before I started upper secondary school, I told my family and friends that when I die, I want my ashes to be spread into the wilderness. I want to be part of nature forever. These environments and the opportunities they offer have already shaped my future. To this day, every decision I have made has supported my life in the Arctic. Whether it was about school, career or relationships, I always choose the option that will guide me back to nature.
Like a salmon returning to its native river. Like a goose returning to a wild pond after the winter, I will always return to my home region. But first, I must survive the “winter” of my life, that is, university and finding direction for my life.
What role should education play in empowering young people to contribute to protecting biodiversity, adapting to climate change, and strengthening the resilience of communities?
This question was the only one that was directly related to my studies and not to my close relationship with nature. I discussed my bachelor’s thesis in class teacher education entitled “The significance of a positive relationship with nature in education”. My research revealed that especially the positive experiences of nature gained at an early age, younger than 11, are extremely important for the development of a positive relationship with nature, which in turn leads to more positive environmental behaviour.
In my answer, I stressed that teachers and the curriculum have a significant educational impact on young people who will protect the environment and act responsibly. The importance of education is growing significantly in cities and for families that do not have the same opportunity to take their children to enjoy nature as families in smaller localities.
In my opinion, school education and the curriculum should include time spent in nature.
In your opinion, how is information related to indigenous peoples and local information currently included in biodiversity management and policy-making processes?
I agreed with the other Sámi panellists that people and authorities do listen to the locals but not enough. One panellist compared the situation to consulting young people and children. They are asked for their opinion, but it rarely affects the final decision. I brought up an example of authorities ignoring local information about River Tana a few years ago. The locals reported that the location of the dam was bad, but their opinions went unheard.
Today, I am also a deputy member of the Neiden Skolt Council. Based on my experience as a member of the Council, I can say that local opinions are heard on many issues related to biodiversity and nature. However, I do not know how often the locals actually influence decisions and to what extent, because I have only held this position for a short time. Nevertheless, I think that we are moving in a good direction.
Conclusion
Arctic Frontiers was not just a conference for me, but a reminder of why I am doing what I do. Nature, my home region, and its people are not just themes for me – they are the foundation of my life. That week filled me with renewed enthusiasm and the young people I met gave me inspiration and hopefully useful contacts for the future.
If we want a future for the Arctic, we must listen to those who live there. I will do my part to make those voices heard. We must also raise new generations to join our choir.
I am incredibly grateful to the CAP-SHARE project for allowing me to participate in the conference.
Vesa’s WHO IS THE ARCTIC speech on YouTube:
https://www.youtube.com/live/LEoZ7u-EOM0?si=De-Z09tvRc4VvMAS
Tiõrv!
We have the pleasure and honour to publish Vesa Orassalo’s speech at the CAP-SHARE panel Intergenerational Capacity Sharing: The Connection Between Nature and Youth. The panel was held at the Arctic Frontiers conference in February 2026 in Tromsø, Norway.
The speech was originally given in Finnish, and it has been translated into English, Northern Sámi, Inari Sámi and Skolt Sámi.
Panel speech: Tiõrv!
Vesa Orassalo, Skolt Sámi Fisherman and Preservice Teacher, University of Lapland
Tiõrv!
I was given a wonderful opportunity to attend the Arctic Frontiers 2026 conference in Tromsø. In this article, I will tell you about my participation in the CAP-SHARE panel discussion. The topics discussed include the Sámi identity, the Arctic and education.
First, I want to tell you a little bit about myself. My name is Vesa Orassalo and I study education at the University of Lapland. Deep down, I am a hunter and a fisherman. I am interested in the Arctic, the rights of indigenous peoples, and nature and its conservation. I come from the small village of Neiden in the Skolt Sámi region at the border of Finland and Norway.
The timing for the conference was perfect, as on 6 February, we celebrated the Sámi National Day. I was invited by the CAP-SHARE project of the Faculty of Education of the University of Lapland to participate in a panel discussion on young people’s views on the changing Arctic environment. I also participated in a student forum consisting of students from different parts of the Arctic region. I was also honoured to speak at the True North – Who is the Arctic? event. I was able to speak to a large audience at the event’s final Big Picture event, entitled Stories from the Coast, and I spoke about the changes in salmon fishing from the perspective of a Skolt Sámi youth.
CAP-SHARE panel discussion
On Wednesday morning on 4 February, I arrived nearly on time at the Saga hotel where the panel took place. I was not nervous since I was used to the situation and the concept. I had also prepared well for the questions. The topics discussed were biodiversity and the resilience of communities in the northern and Arctic regions. Two young Sámi persons, as well as Icelandic and Greenlandic youths took part in the panel discussion.
The first question was addressed to me.
What does biodiversity and the resilience of communities mean to you in your everyday life and in your home region?
For me, biodiversity means a more interesting life. In my region, people enjoy nature in many ways. Older people, such as my grandmother, care for small animals, such as birds and rabbits, where they live. This could be the highlight of their day. As a hunter, I pay attention to aspects of diversity that affect my own way of life. By this I mean that when I see a lot of moles, I know that small predators are hunting them instead of young willow grouse. Dense willow thickets, on the other hand, mean a good hiding and feeding spot for many game animals.
Biodiversity means opportunities for me. Biodiversity and the resilience of communities mean having the capacity to face short-term and long-term changes affecting local opportunities. How does climate change and other challenges, such as overgrazing, mining, forestry, and the green transition, affect nature and how do we keep up with it? How does nature keep up with it?
What does a hopeful, fair and sustainable Arctic future look like from your perspective?
For me, it looks like a region with scars left by the current problems we are facing today. However, the region is recovering. Winters are still freezing cold. Summers continue to be tolerable to biodiversity. Salmon still head up the river to spawn. Drought is not a constant threat. Birds can still hatch in stable weather conditions. Large animals, such as reindeer and elk, can handle the heat.
The Arctic continues to exist as a place we can still recognise.
How do you feel connected to land and water, such as rivers, lakes, coastal areas, tundra, forests, or fells, and how do these relationships shape your identity and vision of the future?
The answer to this question was very similar among all Sámi panellists. In my opinion, this illustrates how we indigenous peoples experience nature as an integral part of our lives.
In my turn, I said that I feel a deep connection with nature. When nature suffers, I suffer too. Even before I started upper secondary school, I told my family and friends that when I die, I want my ashes to be spread into the wilderness. I want to be part of nature forever. These environments and the opportunities they offer have already shaped my future. To this day, every decision I have made has supported my life in the Arctic. Whether it was about school, career or relationships, I always choose the option that will guide me back to nature.
Like a salmon returning to its native river. Like a goose returning to a wild pond after the winter, I will always return to my home region. But first, I must survive the “winter” of my life, that is, university and finding direction for my life.
What role should education play in empowering young people to contribute to protecting biodiversity, adapting to climate change, and strengthening the resilience of communities?
This question was the only one that was directly related to my studies and not to my close relationship with nature. I discussed my bachelor’s thesis in class teacher education entitled “The significance of a positive relationship with nature in education”. My research revealed that especially the positive experiences of nature gained at an early age, younger than 11, are extremely important for the development of a positive relationship with nature, which in turn leads to more positive environmental behaviour.
In my answer, I stressed that teachers and the curriculum have a significant educational impact on young people who will protect the environment and act responsibly. The importance of education is growing significantly in cities and for families that do not have the same opportunity to take their children to enjoy nature as families in smaller localities.
In my opinion, school education and the curriculum should include time spent in nature.
In your opinion, how is information related to indigenous peoples and local information currently included in biodiversity management and policy-making processes?
I agreed with the other Sámi panellists that people and authorities do listen to the locals but not enough. One panellist compared the situation to consulting young people and children. They are asked for their opinion, but it rarely affects the final decision. I brought up an example of authorities ignoring local information about River Tana a few years ago. The locals reported that the location of the dam was bad, but their opinions went unheard.
Today, I am also a deputy member of the Neiden Skolt Council. Based on my experience as a member of the Council, I can say that local opinions are heard on many issues related to biodiversity and nature. However, I do not know how often the locals actually influence decisions and to what extent, because I have only held this position for a short time. Nevertheless, I think that we are moving in a good direction.
Conclusion
Arctic Frontiers was not just a conference for me, but a reminder of why I am doing what I do. Nature, my home region, and its people are not just themes for me – they are the foundation of my life. That week filled me with renewed enthusiasm and the young people I met gave me inspiration and hopefully useful contacts for the future.
If we want a future for the Arctic, we must listen to those who live there. I will do my part to make those voices heard. We must also raise new generations to join our choir.
I am incredibly grateful to the CAP-SHARE project for allowing me to participate in the conference.
Vesa’s WHO IS THE ARCTIC speech on YouTube:
https://www.youtube.com/live/LEoZ7u-EOM0?si=De-Z09tvRc4VvMAS