Sustainability in the Siberian Arctic

The global Arctic is both highly urbanized and is one of the most rapidly warming regions on the planet. A large percentage of Arctic residents are urban, and a majority of the cities in the Arctic are found in Russia. The Russian Arctic is thus a nexus for the intersection of climate change, adaptation, urban policy, and indigenous populations, given that much of Russia’s Arctic indigenous population is urban. The NSF-funded Partnerships for International Research and Education (PIRE) program funded Professor Brent D. Ryan in 2015 to examine sustainability in the Russian Arctic as part of a multiuniversity grant led by George Washington University. As part of this project Professor Ryan and Aleksandra Durova, a DUSP PhD student, conducted site-based research, carried out field visits to the Arctic, and participated in and hosted conferences for the university partners. A number of the MIT team’s activities were centered around Yakutsk, an Arctic-related city of approximately 350,000 that is capital of the Sakha Autonomous Republic of the Russian Federation and majority Yakut indigenous population. Yakutsk is one of the coldest cities on earth and the largest located atop permafrost. Yakutsk is therefore a natural nexus for research into Arctic sustainability.

Contradictions and compromises in sustainability planning: The case of the sub-Arctic city of Yakutsk, Russia

Sustainability assessment frameworks often fall short of elucidating context-specific conflicts inherent in planning practice and its contribution to diverse sustainability priorities. This study explores the integration of priorities and principles associated with sustainability in the spatial planning of the sub-Arctic city of Yakutsk. It also investigates how conflicting priorities manifest in the city's development. The research involves exploratory interviews with planning stakeholders, an analysis of General Plan iterations, and profiling of two expanding residential areas. Contrasting cases of residential growth untangle tensions between environmental, development, and social dimensions, emphasizing the prioritization of specific aspects over others. The study underscores that these tensions are intricately linked to historical, political, planning, and governance contexts and reflect the complexities of urban development politics. Despite planning documents encompassing a range of principles associated with sustainable planning, current practices prioritize specific dimensions but contradict others. A targeted emphasis on specific sustainability aspects may obscure interests in particular development types and equity compromises. This study raises concerns about the effectiveness of normative evaluations of sustainable planning, overlooking conflicting dimensions evident in practice. It calls for a more in-depth examination of how principles are valued, prioritized, and compromised in specific contexts.

Link