Publications

Five and a half years after its first appearance as a printed book in 2014, the transdisciplinary anthology The Postcolonial North Atlantic: Iceland, Greenland and the Faroe Islands, edited by Professor Lill-Ann Körber (Aarhus Universitet) and Associate Professor Ebbe Volquardsen (Ilisimatusarfik), came out in an open-access second edition today. Stored on the document server of Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, the book can from now on be downloaded free of charge by anyone.

Whereas a new preface, written by the editors, has been added, the articles in the volume have not been changed or amended since the first edition, and thus reflect the state of the art of the first half of the 2010s. Yet, the texts remain relevant and topical in that they provide fundamental insight into negotiations of the postcolonial status of the North Atlantic nations, and into manifestations of their interconnected, often competing, histories in literature, language, politics, art, fashion, and public discourse. They invite to comparative investigations into the region’s past and present as seen from its diverse and distinct viewpoints, and to explorations of this part of the Nordic region from a joint critical postcolonial perspective.

It is the editors’ hope that The Postcolonial North Atlantic will find many curious new readers and re-readers among students, scholars, and the broader public; and we look forward to continued discussions and North Atlantic journeys.

This book intends to inform the key participants in extractive projects – namely, the communities, the host governments and the investors – about good practice for effective community engagement, based on analysis of international standards and expectations, lessons from selected case-studies and innovations in public participation.

The extent of extractive industries varies widely around the Arctic as do governmental and social attitudes towards resource development. Whilst most Arctic communities are united in seeking investment to fund education, healthcare, housing, transport and other essential services, as well as wanting to benefit from improved employment and business opportunities, they have different views as to the role that extractive industries should play in this. Within each community, there are multiple perspectives and the goal of public participation is to draw out these perspectives and seek consensus. Part I of the book analyses the international standards that have emerged in recent years regarding public participation, in particular, in respect of indigenous peoples. Part II presents six case studies that aim to identify both good and bad practices and to reflect upon the distinct conditions, needs, expectations, strategies and results for each community examined. Part III explores the importance of meaningful participation from a corporate perspective and identifies some common themes that require consideration if Arctic voices are to shape extractive industries in Arctic communities.

In drawing together international law and standards, case studies and examples of good practice, this anthology is a timely and invaluable resource for academics, legal advisors and those working in resource development and public policy.

Kapitlet henvender sig til studerende og andre som ved hjælp af interview ønsker indsigt i patienters eller andre brugeres hverdagsliv fra deres perspektiv. Der findes mange måder at skabe viden om patientperspektiver. Derfor diskuteres først det vidensmæssige grundlag for hverdagslivsinterview, som det fremstilles her. Der argumenteres for at patienters konkrete livsbetingelser og værdier må inddrages som rationel viden i faglig beslutningstagen, og at dette kræver særlige fremgangsmåder. Det vises herefter, gennem et praktisk eksempel fra et forskningsprojekt blandt grønlandske patienter, hvordan samtalen i interviewet kan generere viden om patientperspektiver gennem fælles udforskning af interviewpersonens konkrete livsførelse i dagligdagen. Kapitlet beskriver nogle principper for udforskning af patientperspektiver omhandlende inddragelse af subjektivitet, forskellige sundhedsopfattelser og kulturforskelle mellem forskere og interviewpersoner.