The Arctic Ocean as Kin: Rethinking Law through Relational Care
Vessel navigating in sea ice. Photo: Samuel Martínez Llobet
The Arctic Institute Planetary Series 2025
- Planetary Approaches to Arctic Politics: The Arctic Institute’s Planetary Series 2025
- Relating to the Planetary Arctic: More-than-human considerations
- To the Earth and Back: Expanding Polar Legal Imagination
- Are Arctic Viruses “Zombies”?
- Thawing Grounds, Rising Stakes: The Importance of Including Permafrost Emissions in Climate Policy
- The Arctic Ocean as Kin: Rethinking Law through Relational Care
The Arctic is one of Earth’s most rapidly changing regions, with profound implications for its human and more-than-human inhabitants, as well as global ecosystems and the climate.1) As sea ice melts and ocean temperatures rise, the region faces escalating threats such as ocean acidification, increased pollution, and disrupted migratory patterns, with consequences that ripple far beyond the Arctic itself. Traditional legal frameworks, including the United Nations Convention for Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), have proven insufficient to address these complex challenges.2) Rooted in outdated paradigms of domination, exclusion, exploitation, expansion, and state-centrism, these frameworks prioritize human (over)use of natural resources over the intricate interdependencies between human and ecological systems.3)
The socio-ecological crises unfolding globally, including in the Arctic, pose profound legal and ethical questions that cannot be addressed by existing frameworks alone. Transcending the human-nature dichotomies is essential to fostering a sustainable future by recognizing the interconnectedness of all life and addressing the socio-ecological crises rooted in exploitative relationships with nature. This paradigm shift calls for care, mutual responsibility, and relational governance that embraces diverse ways of knowing and being, including the invaluable insights of Indigenous worldviews.
This article envisions a future where the Arctic is not a region to be governed or exploited, but a site of care and interdependence, where human and more-than-human collaborate, co-exist, and co-create to address socio-ecological challenges. After exploring the rights of nature in the context of the Arctic Ocean, the article concludes that a paradigm shift embracing relational ethics is crucial to achieve this future vision of the Arctic Ocean.
Exploring Legal Personhood for the Arctic Ocean
In recent years, there has been growing momentum towards recognizing natural entities as legal subjects. Examples include the Whanganui River in Aotearoa New Zealand, the Birrarung River in Australia,4) the Mar Menor lagoon in Spain,5) and even “nature” itself in Ecuador.6) Recently, a notable development occurred in Linhares, Brazil, where waves at the mouth of the Doce River and its connected bodies of water were granted legal personhood,7) making the first recognition of oceanic rights. These legal initiatives reflect the attempt to shift global consciousness regarding environmental protection and frameworks from an anthropocentric worldview, where nature is seen as a resource to be exploited, to one that acknowledges the intrinsic rights and moral value of more-than-human entities.
Against this backdrop, and as an exercise of legal imagination8) it is useful to imagine the Arctic Ocean as an actor of law rather than an object. Could granting legal personhood to the Arctic Ocean redefine the human-ocean relationship? Drawing on initiatives such as the Universal Declaration of Ocean Rights (UDOR), we might envision the Arctic Ocean as a rights-holder, with the right to health, to flourish, to be free of pollution, to be restored, and to not be overfished. In practice, there are challenges from the interplay of existing frameworks, rooted in state modes of existence, such as UNCLOS, the Central Arctic Ocean Fisheries Agreement, and the BBNJ Agreement, reflects state-centrism and a geography of sovereignty that imposes rigid spatial boundaries on the fluid and interconnected nature of the Arctic Ocean. Beyond these challenges, the deeper question remains: can granting rights to the Arctic Ocean truly shift how humans relate to and interact with the environment?
While granting legal rights to natural entities is progressive as it changes who/what is the subject of law, its effectiveness depends on a deeper shift in values, power dynamics, and forms of governance (the author acknowledges that even the word “governance” points towards dualism and subject/object relationships). Critics argue that “rights” remain a product of Western legal traditions.9) As such, extending rights to natural entities risks reinforcing human authority over nature by confining the ocean within Western legal categories10) and perpetuating the same legal structures that have historically treated nature as a resource to be managed, regulated, and exploited for human benefit.11) While granting legal personhood to the Arctic Ocean could create an illusion of empowerment, these approaches may commodify or regulate natural entities within a system that views legal personhood as an extension of human authority, thereby maintaining the underlying dominion-based relationship intact and keeping the Arctic Ocean within a paradigm where humans are the ultimate arbiters and enforcers of what is best for the natural world. Rights, in general, remain subject to human interpretation, shaped by competing economic, political, or cultural interests, which may still prioritize human welfare over the ocean’s health and inherent value. Therefore, unless there is a significant shift in the current and prevailing paradigm, rights of nature applied to the Arctic Ocean risk being subsumed within the very framework they aim to reform.12)
Beyond Legal Personhood: A Shift Towards Relational Approaches
Addressing the Arctic’s escalating socio-ecological crises requires rethinking our normative relationship with the ocean at its core. A radical departure from the entrenched structures of traditional Western tools informed by state-centrism is necessary, moving instead toward a relational approach rooted in care, reciprocity, and mutual enhancement. This shift envisions the Arctic Ocean not as a passive object of regulation but as an active agent in shaping this relationship. Drawing from Indigenous knowledge, relationality scholarships, ethics of care and the profound interdependencies with these fragile ecosystems, this article suggests a relational model that challenges the Western legal tradition.
In many Indigenous worldviews, the ocean, among other natural entities, is viewed not as separate from human life but as kin or sacred beings that coexist in balance with human life. For instance, the Arctic Ocean forms the essence of Inuit identity and livelihoods, deeply woven into the fabric of their way of knowing and being.13) It is central to their existence, cultural identity as a people, economic stability, and social well-being in all its forms, from liquid to frozen.14) In this context, embracing relationality becomes a shared collective responsibility to care for the ocean’s health and flourishing, which cannot be separated from the flourishing of the human and the more-than-human communities that depend on it.
A relational ethic that resists the binary epistemological frameworks and ontologies characteristics of Western modernity is essential to this reimagined relationship.15) Legal initiatives based on relational ethics move away from the state’s all-encompassing sovereignty, embracing diverse actors, including Indigenous peoples, and even conceptualizing nature, including the ocean itself, as an active participant.16) One notable example of relational legal framework is Aotearoa New Zealand’s recognition of the Whanganui River as a legal person under the Te Awa Tupua (Whanganui River Claims Settlement) Act 2017.17) This model goes beyond conventional Western legal paradigms by incorporating Māori perspectives, which view the river as an ancestor (tupuna) and emphasize its intrinsic value as part of a living system. The Act established the Whanganui River as a legal person, with its interests represented by a guardian (Te Pou Tupua) composed of two people acting as one single entity: one appointed by the Whanganui iwi (tribes/people) and one by the Crown. While this guardianship model provides an innovative step toward relational laws, it still operates within the constraints of human oversight and interpretation. The guardians act as intermediaries between the river and human society, upholding the river’s intrinsic values, safeguarding its ecological integrity, preserving its biodiversity, protecting its cultural heritage, and ensuring its overall health and well-being. However, while inspired by Indigenous relationality, such a model remains rooted in Western anthropocentric legal traditions that frame nature through human categories of rights and representation.
In this context, a guardianship framework tailored to the Arctic could offer a practical avenue for implementing relationality, with representatives from Arctic Indigenous peoples and communities, and state or regional authorities co-caring for the Arctic Ocean. However, for this model to truly reflects relational values it would need to avoid the pitfalls of conventional legal personhood by emphasizing care, reciprocity and the ocean’s agency, thereby recognizing the ocean not as a passive entity to be managed but as a dynamic, self-regulating force with a distinct voice in representative frameworks. The Arctic Ocean, envisioned as a co-creator in the interdependent relationships that sustain life, would take an active role in its own care, rather than being subject to dominion-based paradigms. Drawing on Indigenous worldviews that already view the ocean as kin or a sacred entity, this expanded relational legal model would foster a connection to the Arctic Ocean that transcends utilitarianism, emphasizing mutual respect, care, and enhancement. Such an approach also addresses the Arctic’s unique challenges by respecting its interwoven ecological, social, and cultural dimensions. Furthermore, it situates the Arctic Ocean as an integral part of a broader ecosystem where all beings—human and more-than-human—collaboratively shape a shared future. This inclusive perspective honors non-Western worldviews and ways of being, affirming the rights of all beings to coexist harmoniously.
A relational legal model emphasizes the dynamic, interconnected, and inclusive nature of ecological, social, and cultural systems, advocating for governance models that move beyond the constraints of state-centrism.18) Dynamism enables legal frameworks to adapt and evolve in response to the Arctic’s rapidly changing social and ecological landscapes, where rigid, static approaches are insufficient. Connectivity reflects the deep interdependence between human and more-than-human entities in the Arctic, recognizing that the health and well-being of these systems are inseparable. Relational laws also promote inclusivity, ensuring that diverse voices and knowledge systems, particularly those of Indigenous peoples, are woven into governance structures, respecting the unique relationships that local communities have with their environments. By honoring place-based knowledge of Arctic Indigenous peoples, relational laws bridge the gap between Western legal frameworks and Indigenous relational ethics, fostering a normative relationship that is deeply rooted in local contexts. In doing so, they reject universalizing practices that flatten the richness of specific places and natural systems. Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s notion of the “danger of a single story” underscores the importance of embracing diverse perspectives and experiences to avoid harmful simplifications and distorted understanding of reality.19)
In addition, a shift toward relational models extends beyond legal frameworks; it also requires cultivating emotional and cultural connections with the ocean. Empathy, compassion, and responsibility become the drivers of environmental caretaking, encouraging deeper and lasting behavioral changes. Recognizing our emotional and moral responsibility to care for the Arctic Ocean fosters a collective commitment to protecting it that challenges the status quo.
Conclusion: Envisioning a Relational Community of Care
Rethinking the normative relationship with the Arctic Ocean calls for a transformative vision of the region as a space of shared care, where humans and the more-than-human collaborate to preserve their common home. This vision aligns with the concept of “community of care,” as articulated by Emily Murray and Margherita Poto,20) which emphasizes mutual learning between humans and the ocean, and fosters caring as a shared responsibility. Such a vision requires humankind to think with the ocean, not merely about it as a resource, but as an active participant in co-shaping its/our future.
It calls for relational and reciprocal legal models that acknowledges the interconnectedness of human and more-than-human worlds and recognizes the diverse experiences of the Arctic Ocean. It underscores that there is no single story of the Arctic Ocean, but a multitude of Arctic experiences, each shaped by local histories, ecologies, and communities. A key step in this transformation is devolving authority to communities and fostering place-based laws. By centering the voices and knowledge of those most connected to the Arctic, including Indigenous peoples and local communities, we can move toward legal systems that are as diverse and dynamic as the ecosystems they aim to protect. This localized approach ensures that laws reflect the unique characteristics and needs of each Arctic context, rather than imposing homogenizing frameworks.
While the rights offer a meaningful starting point by acknowledging the intrinsic value of natural entities, they remain grounded in Western legal paradigms that risk reinforcing human authority over nature. It is unsure whether they are sufficient to pave the way for a legal model that transcends state-dominated structures. These rights could serve as a transitional tool in this journey towards a deeper transformation that prioritizes relational and reciprocal ethics and systems over rigid legal mechanisms. A relational and inclusive model unlocks new pathways for the future of the Arctic Ocean. Rooted in respect, reciprocity, and care for the ocean and for each other. By cultivating a community of care, we honor the Arctic Ocean as an integral part of the web of life, ensuring its health and well-being alongside the flourishing of human and more-than-human communities.
Mana Tugend is a PhD Research Fellow at the Norwegian Centre for the Law of the Sea, UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø.
References