Master’s Thesis: Wind power may pose an existential threat to the Sámi people – ontological conflicts and green extractivism in the Fosen wind power conflict

Sara Vanhanen, who has worked as a project worker at Akordi, examined the Fosen wind power conflict from the perspective of ontological conflict and green extractivism in her master’s thesis. In this blog post, Sara explains what the conflict is about and how these perspectives manifest themselves in the case. The full thesis can be read here.

How I came to study the Fosen wind power conflict

I first became aware of the human rights violations taking place in Fosen, Norway, when my Norwegian friends shared Instagram posts by Sámi activists on social media about a protest in early spring 2023. Supported by climate activists, the Sámi protested against the government’s inaction following a Supreme Court ruling that declared the construction permit for the Fosen wind farm invalid. I followed the situation through social media at the time. I was affected by the case in a new way in the spring of 2024, when Sámi activists were engaged in a new legal battle. This time, the dispute concerned a protest in which activists had occupied the lobby of a ministry and were fined for their actions.

During the trial, I was living next to the Oslo District Court while doing my university internship at the Oslo Defense Attaché’s Office. So, for several days, we passed each other on the street as I headed to the embassy and the activists made their way to the courthouse. After I returned from Norway, I decided to write my master’s thesis on the Fosen case. The thesis is a case study that analyzes 18 different documents, ranging from social media posts to official government documents and a current affairs program on the state media NRK.

P.S. The activists’ fines were overturned by the Supreme Court in the summer of 2025. A great victory for democracy!

 

What happened in the Fosen wind power conflict?

Fosen is located on the west coast of Norway, on the southern border of the Sámi homeland. The Sámi people of the Fosen region belong to the Southern Sámi, who are a minority within the Sámi people and speak their own language. A military firing range was planned in the area from the 1970s until the 1990s, when wind power began to emerge as a possibility. After the turn of the millennium, the area was included in various wind power studies and impact assessments.

• 2008 – The area is included in a wide-ranging impact assessment that considers the potential impacts of more than twenty different wind farms.
• 2010 – The decision to build wind power in Fosen is announced.
• 2013 – The Ministry of Petroleum and Energy responds to an appeal, resulting in minor changes to the building licenses, but all planned licenses remain valid.
• 2014 – The two local reindeer herding co-operatives, the South Fosen Reindeer Herding Co-operative and the North Fosen Reindeer Herding Co-operative, challenge the license in court.
• 2015 – The project operator and developer Statkraft announces that it is withdrawing from all wind power projects in the Nordic countries due to poor economic viability.
• 2016 – Under political pressure, Statkraft resumes its activities and begins construction in Fosen.
• 2018 – The district court hears the challenge to the building license that was filed in 2014. After the proceedings, the case advances to the next level of jurisdiction. At this point, the United Nations (UN) asks Norway to suspend the construction of the turbines due to the ongoing legal proceedings. However, the Norwegian government does not comply with the request and denies that there has been a human rights violation in Fosen.
• 2019/2020 – The turbines are completed and the wind farms begin operating.
• 2020 – The case is heard in the Court of Appeal, but proceeds to the Supreme Court after both parties appeal the decision.
• 2021 – The Supreme Court declares the license invalid. The wind farms should never have been built.
• 2023 – In February, the Norwegian Sami Association (Norske Samers Riksforbund) and the nature conservation organization Natur og Ungdom (Nature and Youth) organize a large demonstration in Oslo 500 days after the ruling. The demonstration also receives international media attention, which is likely to be increased by the presence of climate activist Greta Thunberg. During the same year, several demonstrations are held in Oslo to mark 600 and 700 days since the ruling, leading up to the second anniversary of the ruling.
• 2023 – The South Fosen Reindeer Herding Co-operative and Fosen Vind sign a joint agreement in December.
• 2024 – The North Fosen Reindeer Herding Co-operative and Roan Vind sign a joint agreement in March.

This brings the Fosen wind power conflict to a nominal end in the spring of 2024. The agreements promise the Sámi, for instance, financial compensation for the harm caused by wind power and alternative winter pastures. The latter agreement also includes the establishment of a Southern Sámi cultural fund. Both agreements allow the turbines to remain in operation until the current license expires, after which the Reindeer Herding Co-operatives will have the right of veto if a new license is considered.

Now we know what happened in Fosen, but what is this case actually about?

The Supreme Court’s ruling states that Norway needs wind power, but the building permit for the wind turbines in Fosen was invalidated. The court justified this on the grounds that the Southern Sámi are a minority within a minority and are therefore in a very vulnerable position, and that the harm caused by the wind farm to reindeer herding violates Article 27 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which guarantees minorities the right to their own language and culture. Consequently, arguments comparing, for example, the economic benefits of reindeer herding and wind power are also irrelevant in the eyes of the court. In Fosen, the importance of reindeer herding for Sámi culture and its continuity must be recognised. In Southern Sámi culture in particular, the threat to reindeer herding must be understood as an existential threat to the culture.

In my research, I examined the case from the perspective of ontological conflict, which is a conflict between clashing realities. Through ontologies, we can understand what reality is and how it is created. Reality is created through action and is therefore not limited to what we can perceive with our senses. In Western countries, an ontological view has long prevailed, which has many names, but which I have referred to in my thesis as the One-World-Worldview. In this way of thinking, cultural differences, for example, can be understood, but they are seen as existing within the same shared reality.

Sámi ontology can be categorized as relational ontology, in which not only humans but also non-humans participate in the creation of reality, and in which both human and non-human beings co-exist in a state of interconnectedness. Many traditions are connected to the land, and local traditional knowledge can also be acquired through dwelling in the landscape. In Sámi ontologies, the land is seen as a living entity and can be considered relative to life itself. For this reason, different land requirements in many circumstances appear to the Sámi as existential threats.

In order to understand Sámi ontology and also to perceive ontological conflicts, we must accept the existence of a pluriverse. Somewhat paradoxically, if a one world worldview cannot comprehend the existence of other realities, then naturally it cannot witness a conflict between two or more ontologies either. However, pluriversalism is necessary so that, for example, when conducting mapping, it is possible to take into account aspects of reality that cannot be observed with the naked eye and that may remain completely hidden from those who are not part of that reality. These questions become very topical when we consider, for example, whether land is empty. What appears completely empty and lifeless to one person may be full of life to another. It is therefore very important that the Sámi people are involved in all stages of projects located in their homeland, in particular in mapping and impact assessment.

How does green extractivism feature in the Fosen case?

In addition to ontological conflicts, green extractivism was used as another theoretical framework in my research. There is no single unambiguous definition of extractivism, but it is used to describe processes that are characterized by the production of value in a way that renders the original environment unusable. Inequality in power relations and the violent disregard of the lived reality of the disadvantaged are also often essential elements in this equation. Extractivist processes rely heavily on the perception of the area as lifeless, which is why ontologies and ontological conflicts often become highly relevant in extractivist processes. Extractivism has long roots in colonialism, and the processes were first developed in the peripheries, after which they were brought closer to the centers. Arctic extractivism has emerged in literature in the 2010s. The wind farms in Fosen can also be seen as an extractivist project, as the reality of the Sámi people has been ignored and nature has been altered in a way that has rendered it unusable for the Sámi, with the wind farms generating value elsewhere.

Green extractivism is a concept that has been used in academia when discussing extractivist projects that are justified on the basis of their environmental benefits. Wind power is an excellent example of such a project. The greenness of wind power can be questioned when considering, for example, how much the increasing use of wind power requires the extraction of various minerals. On the other hand, a truly green choice would be to reduce growth and consumption. However, the material I used does not contain any references to degrowth thinking; instead, supporters of wind power justify its necessity largely on the basis of increased employment or economic growth. In these arguments, the green credentials of wind power receive less attention or appear completely questionable. Thus, the documents reveal that wind power is justified mainly on economic grounds, which increases the extractive nature of the project in Fosen.

Climate change is often described as a double-edged sword for the Sámi. Its effects are already visible and are strongest in the polar regions. On the other hand, the measures proposed to combat climate change often increase land use in the Sámi homeland. It is important to understand that the Sámi people and the climate activists who support them are not opposed to “green” initiatives or measures which combat climate change. The opposition to the Fosen wind farm is about opposition to an extractivist project. Perhaps more often, one hears the Sámi people talk about green colonialism. Since extractivism is colonialist in nature, in this case green colonialism can be seen to be realized specifically through a green extractivist project.

What can we learn from this?

It is challenging to summarize a 70-page study in a short blog post. I therefore recommend that readers who have made it this far familiarize themselves with the study itself. However, here is a summary of Fosen’s most important lessons:

1. The Fosen case shows how important it is to comply with both national and international legislation and various agreements. This also includes free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC), which, since the completion of the study, has been more clearly incorporated into Finnish national legislation following an amendment to the Sámi Parliament Act.
2. Once all laws are being followed, it’s also important to include the Sámi people in all stages of the project. As I mentioned earlier, mapping and impact assessment are particularly critical in this regard. Only the Sámi people can describe their own lived reality.
3. On the other hand, in order to truly listen to the Sámi people and accept their knowledge, it is also necessary to accept ontological diversity. Otherwise the ontological reality of the Sámi people will remain unrecognized.
4. Finally, I would also urge people to familiarise themselves with the existing knowledge. There is a large amount of accurate and ethically produced research on the Sámi people. Ignorance can therefore appear to be a strategic choice, whereby the rights of the Sámi people are bypassed on the grounds of a lack of knowledge.

Lack of knowledge was also a prominent theme at the Green Youth Camp held in Åland this summer, where the theme was green transition and indigenous peoples. You can find my blog post on the subject here. Akordi has also done its part to address the knowledge gap. I was involved in organizing training on the unique issues relating to the Sámi homeland in the context of the sustainability transition. A recording of the training can be viewed here (in Finnish). The training was definitely one of the highlights of my four-month project period. My time at Akordi is now coming to an end, and I would like to thank Akordi for this summer. Who knows what the future may bring in terms of cooperation!

If my thesis has piqued your interest, you can read it in its entirety here. Please send any questions or other inquiries by email to sara.vanhanen@gmail.com.