# data[].attributes.body
This link comes from the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) in the United States. They are a nonpartisan thinktank. It gives a good overview of the problems arising in the Arctic as well as recommendations, but it gives a good overview of the backstory of the Arctic and the developing challenges. I found it helpful as it easily explains the back drop for why the Arctic is essential and why States are and will be vying for it in the future.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Arctic Governance: Challenges and Opportunities

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As national governments, international institutions, and nonstate actors explore approaches to Arctic governance, a cohesive approach is necessary to address the environmental, economic, sociocultural, and geopolitical challenges the region faces.

# data[].attributes.headline
2008 Understanding of Arctic Sovereignty

# data[].attributes.subject
2008 Understanding of Arctic Sovereignty

# data[].attributes.body
This journal article discusses the issues of developing Oil and Gas within the Arctic as the Arctic softens and International Law falls behind. The article begins by explaining the hardships of governing the Arctic as it has been mainly ruled by soft law, i.e. simple agreements between States to ensure that it is ruled fairly. This is in conflict with the Antarctic which is ruled strictly by hard law, i.e. treaties and legalized agreements. The journal article is important as it draws the problems related to regulating a "common space" at which no single state can do everything alone. The issues began as the Arctic began to melt allowing fisheries and oil exploration to begin, but each State also wished to protect the fragile environment of a pristine sea.

The document continues on to explain the many different agreements that deal with the Arctic, including one in this project (UNCLOS). The issue that the article concentrates on is that no matter what States agree to by verbal consent, they will still do what they want with their territorial waters. In May 28th, 2008, five of the coastal states came together for the Ilulissat Agreement, detailing that there already is a framework necessary to protect the Arctic and nothing else is required of them.

This entire piece could be the cornerstone for future research. It explains in detail the issues with protecting the environment while that runs counter to what the States wish to do in the region. Only in the event that it better serves them rather than the resources they exploit, will they do something. This document explains the foundation of what I am attempting to explain here; the challenges of protecting the Arctic focused on a single aspect of resource extraction of Oil and Gas in relation to State Sovereignty.

To create a better future, the journal article does attempt to explain avenues that could be taken to protect the Arctic, but it would still require States to submit themselves to a treaty and ratify it, which with UNCLOS, the United States is still not a party to it, defeating its entire purpose.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Oil and Gas Development in the Arctic: Softening of Ice Demands Hardening of International Law on JSTOR

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The melting of Arctice sea ice, caused by climate change, presents opportunities for access to new oil and gas reserves in the Arctic. With access comes the ris...

# data[].attributes.body
This is the convention on the Law of the Sea from the United Nations. It explains the law of the sea, which is important for the Arctic as that is mainly water. This piece is helpful to establish the Exclusive Economic Zone which plays a large part of the conflict in dealing with the Arctic. It is the key piece of legislation that almost all States within the Arctic Circle have ratified, outside of the United States but they follow its provisions without being a party.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
UNCLOS and Agreement on Part XI - Preamble and frame index

# data[].attributes.headline
Conservation Problems of Arctic Oil and Gas

# data[].attributes.subject
Conservation Problems of Arctic Oil and Gas

# data[].attributes.body
Conservation of Oil and Gas in the Arctic is linked via the Murmansk Marine Biological Institute that the impact of Oil and Gas has on the local biological resources.

While fishing has been understood to be a standard in every country. This article dives into the damages of oil and gas drilling in comparison to overfishing that has occurred historically in coastal regions before regulations were in place.

I found it interesting that Oil and Gas production does less harm to fisheries in the area than a spill from oil and gas. It helps to explain in relation to other works that if the extraction of ground resources is inevitable, we can hope that fish populations will be safe regardless of what happens. Extraction of ground resources poses its own problems but basing it around protecting fish is not the end-all be-all of environmental protections.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Off-Campus Authentication @ Henry Madden Library

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Most online resources are available only to currently registered Fresno State students, faculty, and staff. Community borrowers, alumni card holders, and others can use online resources only from on-campus.

# data[].attributes.body
This article comes from the World Wild Fund, an NGO focusing on animal and nature sustainability. It explains in light detail some of the issues with the Arctic expansion of Oil, mapping, and other issues. I found it particularly interesting as it's an NGO focused on protecting wildlife from the expansion of powers. It contains links to some of their work that explain how the Arctic is being affected by the melting of the ice as States move in to map and utilize the waters for transportation.

In particular, they have a mapping of a theoretical oil spill that could cause major damage. That may become its own resource later on.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Why it matters

The Arctic's shallow and biologically productive seas are also rich with oil reserves. But oil exploration poses a tremendous risk to vulnerable Arctic ecosystems and communities. Oil and gas development could also damage fisheries, tourism and other, more sustainable economic activities. The production of Arctic oil and gas contributes even more to the climate crisis through increased greenhouse gas emissions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Arctic's shallow and biologically productive seas are also rich with oil reserves. But oil exploration poses a tremendous risk to vulnerable Arctic ecosystems and communities. Oil and gas development could also damage fisheries, tourism and other, more sustainable economic activities.

# data[].attributes.body
The Arctic is ruled by sovereign states that agree with one another that a suitable framework to govern it already exists in the UN Law of the Seas. Oil and Gas drilling is all but expected from States as they require more resources, such as Russia expanding into the Arctic Shelf through Gazprom, and the benefits they receive alone from this act. As the Arctic is not controlled by hard law like its sister, the Antarctic, it requires each State to agree to reduce the extraction of Oil and Gas. Concerns about this unimpeded extraction range from ice continuing to melt, to local populations of indigenous peoples, to the nearly pristine fish schools that have swum in those waters.

Regulation of the Arctic is limited to mutual agreements to stay within their sovereign waters. The powers claim to have no desire to regulate it outside of their personal areas as they believe that the Law of the Seas has all the necessary framework to allow the Arctic to flourish. Conservation of these resources is being attempted, but as they come up against sovereign power, there is little that the NGOs in the region can do.

The resources I have provided show that the constraints to a major regulation of the Arctic remain in the hands of sovereign powers who refuse, as per the Ilulissat Agreement, to do anything outside of their own waters. Likely, nothing will be done until a major spill happens as States are slow to react to climate change currently, we can expect that preserving the Arctic takes a back seat to preserving the resource usage rate that we currently do.

The challenges that are provided revolve around the ability to extract the resources safely. Since the Arctic States refuse to not extract or limit it, there must be protocol instituted to clean it up. Here is where International Law has actually shined through, in only a single law. While the grand majority of agreements are soft law, there is a hard law that dictates what each State is to do during an ecological disaster of an oil spill. In a system where there is nothing more than just executive agreements, the fact that they were able to unify behind an agreement to protect the environment is a key piece of legislation. Not pictured in this piece is a treaty on scientific exploration as well as a treaty on search and rescue.

In this space, there has only been a single IGO that worked to achieve these goals and that was the Arctic Council. They are made up of the States that border the Arctic including The United States, Canada, Russia, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Iceland, and Finland. This IGO allows a location for each of these States to come together and discuss what they need to in relation to the Arctic. The Arctic Council allows observer members that have the ability to work alongside the members of the Council to achieve the goals that they need. These NGOs provide localized insight from groups such as the Saami Council and the Inuit Circumpolar Council. They have provided integral support in the creation of the Arctic Council as an IGO, as well as being integral to everything that the Council does in Task Forces, Working Groups, and more.

Outside of the Arctic, there is the United Nations which has created the UN Law of the Seas that has, as stated by those in the council, become the framework for how the Arctic is regulated. Much of the UN's work is based around the generalities that provide for the rest of the oceans of the world, rather than having anything specifically targeting oil and gas production in the Arctic.

Other NGOs have provided insight and research into the damages that Oil and Gas can cause in the Arctic such as the Arctic Institute and groups such as Greenpeace who focus on greener technology to stop the exploitation of climate damaging resources such as Oil and Gas.

Finally, readers may wonder what they could possibly do to halt the exploitation of oil and gas in the Arctic or find a solution to these problems. The most obvious answer is to write to your local congressmen and advocate that they protect the Arctic from exploitation of this pristine habitat. There are also NGO groups that focus on this to apply this pressure globally such as Greenpeace. Despite the action that they take, the results they get work. Donating time and money to advocating appears to be the best avenue for affecting change. Spreading the word about the damages that extracting oil and gas from this environment would help. Since we are in college, there is a chance that there are groups on campus that could lead you to jobs in the market that would allow you to shape policy, or to provide influence in decisions globally to shift to greener tech and provide a reason to draw down on resource extraction.

# data[].attributes.headline
Russian Exploitation Benefits and Negatives

# data[].attributes.subject
Russian Exploitation Benefits and Negatives

# data[].attributes.body
This piece is an NGO explanation of what the Russian strategy for the Arctic is. Specifically, this resource is used for outlining what a singular nation is currently doing with the Arctic in defiance of climate activists.

This piece explains the Russian mindset in the energy field and gives some extrapolation insight into the other coastal states that require energy. It details their reasoning behind exploiting the Arctic along with the cooperation benefits and failures they have had. Exploring the Arctic is a costly endeavour, both physically as a single nation and monetarily.

I found it helpful in explaining the mindset behind the countries that are likely to exploit the resources and by using Russia as an example, as a nation that relies on oil for much of their exports, is important in understanding the challenges that oil consumption and regulation of the Arctic have in common.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Arctic offshore oil platform "Prirazlomnaya" in the Pechora Sea, south of Novaya Zemlya, Russia. Photo: Gazprom.
This four article series critically examines Russia's military, energy, and shipping interests in the Arctic and how Russian policies and actions compare to the existing academic and journalistic rhetoric about the Arctic region.
As the rate at which sea ice is melting in the Arctic accelerates, analysts have predicted unprecedented access to vast deposits of undiscovered oil, natural gas, and other natural resources. In 2008, the US Geological Survey estimated that the Arctic may contain 13% of the world's undiscovered oil and up to 30% of the world's undiscovered gas resources. Two thirds of Russia's oil and gas is expected in Russia's exclusive economic zone (EEZ) off its Arctic coasts. Such statistics are often used to back up the academic and journalistic hype over an impending competition for the Arctic's natural resources, even though estimates show that only a small amount of undiscovered resources are in disputed territories.

Competition for Arctic Resources

Given the rising global demand for oil, the Arctic's natural resources have found their way into the debate on Arctic affairs. The mostly unexplored sources of hydrocarbon have propagated a debate on whether the Arctic will be an area of conflict between competing Arctic countries or a zone of cooperation based on mutual interests. Marlene Laruelle characterizes the two sides of this debate as "resource nationalism versus patterns of cooperation."

Since Putin's first presidency in 2000, Russia has undergone a process of re-nationalizing its oil and gas companies. As a result, some of the largest Russian oil and gas companies, such as Rosneft and Gazprom, are under the complete or majority control of Russian state authorities. There is a common argument among writers such as Shane C. Tayloe and Scott Borgerson that Russia seeks to reap the benefits in the Arctic to achieve power parity with the United States and ultimately regain its great power status. They also believe that the possible hydrocarbon deposits in the Arctic will lead to competition and an inevitable military clash for resources.

Among the five littoral states, Russia possesses more than half of all the Arctic's estimated oil and gas resources. In other words, Russia is in control of the majority of the Arctic's hydrocarbons because they fall within their maritime boundaries. Further, this is supported by Russia's history of extensive production and exploration in the Far North. The US Geological Survey's probability map of Arctic oil and gas (see map below) shows that most hydrocarbons (indicated by the darker colored territories) are located far from the disputed seabed areas around the North Pole and the Lomonosov Ridge. The conclusion is that there is little incentive for Russia to aggressively seize the North Pole or other nations' territories for their resources because of their own vast resource base.

Arctic Energy Cooperation

International cooperation is becoming increasingly desirable since unilaterally exploring and developing the Arctic is expensive and complicated. The technological and logistical challenges of extraction in the remote and climatically harsh Arctic have led Russia to seek business and technological cooperation with American and European companies. In the aftermath of the Ukraine crisis, many Western oil companies found it difficult to work with Russian companies to explore the Russian Arctic. Western sanctions and Russian counter-sanctions prevented Western firms from participating in large-scale exploration and extractive efforts. Initially, the sanctions hindered partnerships in the oil industry, but the US (without the EU) has more recently also targeted the Russian gas industry.

Failed Cooperation

One planned energy project involved American energy giant ExxonMobil's plan to partner with Rosneft to develop oil and gas fields in Russia and North America. In 2012, Rex Tillerson and Igor Sechin, the then chief executive officers of ExxonMobil and Rosneft respectively, signed a deal that was worth $500 billion. The deal would have granted ExxonMobil access to the Russian Arctic with exemption from export duties and property tax. It would have been one of the biggest energy extraction projects in history before the sanctions put the deal to a halt. After Rex Tillerson was appointed Secretary of State, there was speculation that the new US administration would reinstate the deal or reduce sanctions. However, in April 2017 the US Treasury decided to not grant a waiver to ExxonMobil after they requested permission to drill in the Russian Arctic. The attempted deal was nonetheless an indication of Russia's openness to cooperating with other states in energy extraction.

Successful Cooperation with Western Europe

There are currently many instances of partnerships moving forward. Since the majority of Arctic hydrocarbons are expected to be in Russia's EEZ, foreign companies are interested in exploring the Russian Arctic in spite of the sanctions. In 2016, British Petroleum formalized a joint venture with Rosneft to assess the prospects of extraction in Western Siberia and the Yenesey-Khatanga basin. In 2017, BP and Rosneft struck another joint venture to extract gas in the Yamal-Nenets region. Russia and Norway have recently agreed to share seismic data on the Barents Sea region to boost the mutual exploration for gas and oil.

Russia looking East

Russian corporations such as Novatek and Rosneft have also been especially successful at cooperating with energy companies from Asia. Russian companies have signed agreements with the Chinese National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) and the China Development Bank to fund the Yamal LNG project after Western companies withdrew their support and funding in line with the sanctions in response to the Crimea and Ukraine crises. Although China and Russia have been able to agree on a certain degree of cooperation, there are still challenges that prevent a full-fledged partnership. Russia's reliance on extractive technology from the West and the fear of "China's rise" are such obstacles. Although Russia shares strategic interests with its neighboring countries and other interested parties, low oil prices and high production costs make Arctic oil production less profitable. Nonetheless, the overall trend is that the Russian state and Russian firms have been effective at cooperating with foreign companies in energy extraction and this has not been conflictive.

Official Energy Policy

Russia's official commitments to the Arctic's economic development can be found in the 2013 Development Strategy of the Russian Arctic. One of Russia's strategic priorities is to expand Russia's resource base in the Arctic region so that it can satisfy Russia's need for "hydrocarbon resources, water bio-resources and other types of strategic raw materials." Alexander Pelyasov remarks that the most recent Development Strategy mentions economic priorities more often than it discusses defense priorities. The document is noticeably more open to international cooperation in the interest of developing the region through joint projects. The Arctic is regarded as an enormous source of natural resources. Considering the significance of the energy industry to the Russian economy, exploiting the Arctic is considered an essential mechanism for Russia's social and economic development. Highlighting this objective, former President Medvedev said that Russia's "first and main task is to turn the Arctic into a resource base for Russia in the twenty-first century."

Another important document that presents Russia's official stance is the Energy Strategy for Russia up to 2030. It states that Russia aims to "increase geological exploration, private investments, and state participation in the development of new territories and waters." These are general aims but we learn from the document that the Russian state hopes to enhance Russian energy companies' positions abroad and provide an environment for efficient international cooperation for sophisticated projects in the Arctic. The regions of Eastern Siberia, the Yamal Peninsula, and the continental shelf of the Arctic seas are highlighted as they are relatively under-explored in comparison to other Russian regions. Lastly, one of the main strategic priorities of Russia is to develop the hydrocarbon potential of the Arctic continental shelf and the northern territories of Russia. The move towards the Arctic is intended to compensate for the decreases in oil and gas production in Western Siberia.

In 2012, the State Program for the Development of the Continental Shelf in the Period up to 2030 established the Arctic continental shelf as a territory for exploitation solely by state companies, namely Rosneft and Gazprom. With the support of the Russian state and an unchallenged control over the Russian Arctic, Russia's state-owned oil and gas companies enjoy outstanding exploration and exploitation privileges. However, former Minister of Natural Resources Yuri Trutnev has stated that the preference given to national oil companies over international companies actually hinders development of the Arctic shelf. Russia would benefit from improving its investment climate and making it easier for foreign companies to cooperate with Russian firms. Foreign firms are officially allowed to enter into partnerships with Russian corporations but foreign holdings cannot exceed 50% according to the 2008 Foreign Investment on Strategic Sectors legislation. This legal measure is an example of what Laruelle calls "resource nationalism."

Nationalism in Energy Policy

Writers who subscribe to the concept of "resource nationalism" tend to view Russia's development of natural resources through the perspective of nationalism. Moreover, analysts argue that Russian actions regarding natural resources are based on what they call "harder security or military considerations." For example, Michael L. Roi argues that Russia is using the earnings from its energy industry to rebuild its military capabilities. The narrative points to Russia's historical use of natural gas policies to influence its neighbors and the close ties between the Kremlin and the Russian energy sector. Katarzyna Zysk argues that there is interdependence between the development of the Russian oil industry and Russian military power in the High North. For instance, there are influential Russian officials with great authority in Arctic and defense affairs. The head of Russia's Arctic Commission, Dmitry Rogozin, is also the Deputy Prime Minister of the Russian defense and space industries, as well as Russia's former ambassador to NATO. Rogozin is a controversial politician; he is sometimes called the "architect of Russia's Crimea strategy." He is also often regarded as a leading figure in Russia's militarization of the Arctic. Heading the Arctic Commission means he is responsible for the economic development and security of Russia's Arctic regions. Rogozin's role could suggest that defense industries play a pronounced role in Russia's extraction affairs.

Conclusions

In the energy domain, Russia's Arctic policy concurrently involves elements of resource nationalism, competition, and cooperation. Russia is motivated to work independently from Western companies after the Ukraine crisis and has therefore turned to interested partners in Asia. The reinvestment into the Russian Arctic by some Western firms shows though that political tensions do not completely obstruct private sector collaborations. The concept of "resource nationalism" does not necessarily increase the chance of a military confrontation but it contributes to political tensions. As with other spheres of the Russian Arctic policy, the varied nature of Russia's energy practices demonstrates that conflict and cooperation are not mutually exclusive.
I would like to thank my colleagues from The Arctic Institute Ryan Uljua, Dr Kathrin Stephen, Greg Sharp, as well as Dr Felix Ciută, and my family for their support and guidance throughout this project.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Russia's Arctic Strategy: Energy Extraction (Part III) - The Arctic Institute

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Arctic offshore oil platform "Prirazlomnaya" in the Pechora Sea, south of Novaya Zemlya, Russia. Photo: Gazprom. This four article series critically examines Russia's military, energy, and shipping interests in the Arctic and how Russian policies and actions compare to the existing academic and journalistic rhetoric about the Arctic region.

# data[].attributes.headline
Arctic Oil and Gas International or National? 

# data[].attributes.subject
Arctic Oil and Gas International or National? 

# data[].attributes.body
This article from the NGO The Arctic Institute delves into the question of whether the Arctic as a whole is an international issue that needs to be tackled or if it is a region issue. It explains that there is a lack of cohesive action being done on the part of the States in the Arctic council itself as they hold the primary power over development in the Arctic. There is a lack of law being drawn up for the area as there hasn't been any major disaster that requires them to take action. The article goes on and argues that until something happens, the Arctic states are free to sit idly by and do nothing. Many other States have joined on as permanent observers but they do not have the power to do anything about it. I found this interesting to the issue of the Arctic and Oil drilling because it takes a realistic look at the Arctic Council and the States that make it up. There is little preventative action at the time this was written, and as of today, there has been some movement, but not much. Through their argument, we can infer that their solution would be to engage these States in drafting international laws to address the Arctic as they would any other ocean.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
The Arctic Institute - Center for Circumpolar Security Studies

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Arctic Oil and Gas: A Regional or Global Concern? - The Arctic Institute

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Due to environmental concerns, Arctic oil and gas is being scrutinized by governments, local inhabitants and the international community.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.embed_code
Arctic Oil and Gas: A Regional or Global Concern?

# data[].attributes.body
This is a news story that reflects, as of September 2021, the expansion of drilling in the Arctic. The article explains that while countries are currently struggling with the ability to reduce our reliance on carbon-based fuel and embrace greener forms of energy, there is major bankrolling of drilling platforms that include Gazprom, Russia's major producer of oil. It elaborates that while the rest of the world is attempting to draw down on relying on oil and gas, there is still major funding towards drilling for more oil in the Arctic. This is negating any benefits that have been sought by other States to reduce carbon output. I found this particularly interesting as there are other sources on this, but it highlights that States, even though they see there is an issue will continue to bankroll what they need for energy. It stresses that we are still in the early stages of exploiting the Arctic and that there is a lack of agreements to restrict this from happening.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Arctic Oil, Gas Production Is Booming Despite Climate Fears

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Oil and gas companies are being bankrolled by some of the biggest names in finance to tap the Arctic’s vast natural wealth even as warnings grow about the melting ice cap due to man-made global warming.

# data[].attributes.headline
EU Seeking to Ban Natural Resource Extraction

# data[].attributes.subject
EU Seeking to Ban Natural Resource Extraction

# data[].attributes.body
This article contains statements about the EU's increasing desire to appear larger on the world stage through the use of banning gas and oil extraction. Russia currently exploits parts of the Arctic but agrees in the article to ban it as prices increase. I found this one helpful because it is much more recent, as of around 2 weeks ago and brings a different perspective in how world powers are reacting to the Arctic's natural resources.
I found it helpful in understanding the underlying impact that countries near the Arctic have an interest in it outside of natural resources.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Oct 13 (Reuters) - The European Union will seek a ban on tapping new oil, coal and gas deposits in the Arctic to protect a region severely affected by climate change, according to a proposal for the bloc's new Arctic strategy published on Wednesday.

The European Commission proposal reflects the EU's efforts to boost its role on the global stage, though it has limited influence in the Arctic. It is not a member of the Arctic Council, the regional coordinating body, though three of its member states - Denmark, Finland and Sweden - are.

"The EU is committed to ensuring that oil, coal and gas stay in the ground, including in Arctic regions," the EU executive's proposal said, while acknowledging that the bloc itself still imports oil and gas extracted in the region.

"To this end, the Commission shall work with partners towards a multilateral legal obligation not to allow any further hydrocarbon reserve development in the Arctic or contiguous regions, nor to purchase such hydrocarbons if they were to be produced."

Russia's President Vladimir Putin, whose country is one of the world's largest oil and gas exporters and excavates fossil fuels in the Arctic, said Moscow would eventually benefit from such a ban due to rising prices.

"If such decisions lead to a certain price volatility, (Russia's economy) wouldn't suffer that much. That's because we will reduce production, but will get the prices we wanted," Putin told an energy conference in Moscow.

The Arctic is one of the regions most affected by climate change. It has warmed three times as fast as the planet during the last 50 years, causing the ice covering land and sea to melt, sea levels to rise and permafrost to thaw.

PERMAFROST

The EU also aims under its new strategy to strengthen research into the effects of thawing permafrost that may put oil fields at risk and threaten to release greenhouse gases as well as dangerous germs locked in the frozen ground.

"Over 70% of Arctic infrastructure and 45% of oil extraction fields are built on permafrost," said the document, which must still be approved by the EU's 27 member states.

Potential mitigation measures could include the development of methods for local cooling and stabilisation and the introduction of tougher building standards, the Commission said.

It also suggested the creation of a monitoring and early warning system to detect germs such as anthrax being released from the thawing ground.

The Arctic Council comprises Canada, Iceland, Norway, Russia and the United States as well as the three EU states, along with six indigenous organisations, and it acts as a forum for cooperation. The EU has applied for observer status.

To boost its regional presence, the EU plans to open an office in Greenland's capital Nuuk as the United States did last year.

Reporting by Sabine Siebold, additional reporting by Vladimir Soldatkin in Moscow Editing by John Chalmers and Gareth Jones

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
EU to seek ban on oil and gas exploration in the Arctic

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The European Union will seek a ban on tapping new oil, coal and gas deposits in the Arctic to protect a region severely affected by climate change, according to a proposal for the bloc's new Arctic strategy published on Wednesday.

# data[].attributes.body
This is an agreement in the event of an oil spillage on how these countries should react to it. It explains the exact methods each country should do if a spillage occurs in their territory. I found this piece helpful as it helps piece together what agreements in dealing with oil have been written and agreed upon. Gives hope that even if we do end up drilling in the Arctic, there is a plan in place for mitigating an ecological disaster.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Information document / Status of Ratification submitted by the Arctic Council Secretariat to the Arctic Council's Senior ARctic Officials meeting in Yellowknife, Canada, March 26-27 2014 on the Agreement on Cooperation ...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
AGREEMENT on Cooperation on Marine Oil Pollution Preparedness and Response in the Arctic.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Information document / Status of Ratification submitted by the Arctic Council Secretariat to the Arctic Council's Senior ARctic Officials meeting in Yellowknife, Canada, March 26-27 2014 on the Agreement on Cooperation ...