# data[].attributes.body
Maybe this helps with writing your reflection :) Good luck! https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1twVj6ABR6hK9p-UPnM21OFe2TRw6XooPj2uUN8UYLYA/edit?usp=sharing

# data[].attributes.body
LUC North West Passage Group 2

Pola:

Exclude tourism to avoid commercialisation of the region

Impose heavy restrictions regarding the amount of tonnes moved through the area, as well as ship amounts

Make it into Carbon Trading/ Offsetting system→ reduce the amount of investors, make it sustainable

Limit arctic council members so they prioritise protection of the area instead of their own interest

Merge Innuit Council with Arctic Council

Nefeli:

Governments / organizations should impose policies regarding the size and number of ships allowed to pass

Constant monitoring and control / applying fees to those who don’t follow the laws

Not used for commercial reasons

Include inuit representation in the arctic council

Ryan:

Remove national EEZs, as to make it more similar to locations such as the Panama, or the Suez, due to its key role as an economic and naval transportation route.

Merge/Represent The ICC within the Arctic council so that a greater level of local representation and interactions.

Limit the amount of touristic outing in the region, or massively increase price as a carbon offset strategy.

Kaina

Regarding environmental considerations, with the looming threat of climate change, it would be beneficial for governments to impose restrictions on how much cargo and number ships that can pass through. This would also solve issues of the Panama Canal losing money.

# data[].attributes.body
We think that the passage should be opened under strict conditions:

firstly, tourism should be limited and be very regulated

The fees should be very high as to not concurrence the Panama canal

and the money should be used to help environment and indigeonous society

# data[].attributes.body
Yes, using it is inevitable because of the economic benefits. However, it could be done in a responsible way taking into account indigenous rights and climate. Some regulations should be put into place to limit the numbers of vessels passing through the passage.

# data[].attributes.body
We are against the use of the Northwest Passage, due to the impact on the environment and the indigenous populations.

# data[].attributes.body
No, due to social and environmental factors, such as the impact on the Inuit people and marine life, we disagree with the idea that crossing the Northwest Passage should be allowed.

# data[].attributes.body
1.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Northwest Passage - Arctic Exploration, Maritime Trade, Climate Change | Britannica

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Northwest Passage - Arctic Exploration, Maritime Trade, Climate Change: Opening the Northwest Passage to regular commercial ocean traffic would have worldwide economic significance in natural resources, transportation, and trade relations between countries. The greatest impact would be on the United States and Canada, but effects could be felt from the Persian Gulf to Panama and from Chile to Scandinavia. But competitive developments, governmental policies, and many complex economic issues are likely to determine how soon, and how much, such a route would be used. The cost of strengthening ships against ice and the probable high insurance rates for vessels used in Arctic service, however, may diminish the use of

# data[].attributes.body
Brief suggestions of different stakeholders' perspectives on allowing cruises through the NWP

# data[].attributes.headline
Press the + button to add your ideas to the board

# data[].attributes.subject
Press the + button to add your ideas to the board

# data[].attributes.body
Once you've added your idea, read through your classmates' work.