The Canadian North-West Shipping Passage and Ecofeminism

Hi Everyone,

Just wanted to share some further thoughts on Ecofeminism, and in particular the application of the principles discussed in my last post. Last night on the ABC, Foreign Correspondant showed a segment on the Canadian North-West Shipping Passage through the Artic, and the implications global warming and environmental degradation is having on the area. It appears that in the last 5 years the ice in the North of Canada has slowly been melting due to global warming. The has opened up the previously unaccessible North-West shipping route through the Canadian Archipeligo. As a result there is now a dispute over who owns the area and who should have access to this potentially lucrative shipping route, (lucrative because of the money to be made in cutting shipping times in half between the North Atlantic and the North Pacific regions).

What struck me most about the interviews conducted in the show was the language used to describe arguements for and against such use of Artic lands and waters. Both the US ambassador to Canada, and George Bush, talked about such land in the Artic and the environment as now being of 'value', because it could potentially be made 'productive' due to the significant monetary gains to be made by this country. Whereas the environmental activist Sheila Watt-Cloutier spoke of the land in terms of the 'relationship' she had with the land, including the social and environmental impact such 'claiming' of the artic would have on the indigenous people in the area, the Inuit.

It is clear by the language used by both sides that the principles of ecofeminism are being played out in opposition. Clearly the US government sees land and nature as something that is only of import and value when it becomes potentially 'profitable' and 'productive' in support of their ultimate aim of monetary gain. On the other hand, environmental activists clearly see the land in a mutally supporting 'relationship' with themselves The local Inuits see their environment as something that they must live in harmony with, not dominate and oppress.

This is one such current application of ecofeminist principles and theory, one which obviously has become more salient with the progression of global warming and environmental degradation. The cost of 'control' over the land may be the complete destruction of it, and subsequently the downfall of humans. As one ecofeminist pointed out; 'nature can survive without humans, but humans cannot survive without nature'!

Thats all for now!