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.