Sust & resil in the n atlantic sem4
Download as PPT, PDF
0 likes387 views
1. The Norse settlements in the Faroe Islands, Iceland, and Greenland faced different challenges from climate change and made different choices, leading to different outcomes. 2. In the Faroe Islands, sustainable practices, utilization of wild resources, limited landscape impacts, and successful adaptation to climate change led to long-term settlement success. 3. In Iceland, early environmental management and regulation allowed sustainable exploitation but significant landscape degradation occurred when faced with unpredictable climate change. 4. In Greenland, dependence on marine resources left settlements highly exposed to climate hazards, and the isolation of communities prevented adaptation when faced with climatic, economic, and cultural pressures in the 15th century.
Sust & resil in the n atlantic sem4
- 1. Sustainability and Resilience in the North Atlantic
- 2. Norse migration and potential subsequent trade Norse settlement of North Atlantic routes
- 3. The Vikings
- 4. Viking helmets? Mad men? (berserkers)
- 5. Viking Age Westward Expansion
- 6. The Viking Age & the Norse Westward Expansion Norse landn叩m package Farming-based domestic economy Domestic animals Barley, flax, rye, oats, hay Supplemental use of wild food resources Natural Capital Fish, sea mammals, birds, reindeer, etc.
- 7. Natural Capital Wild species & lush landscapes serve to underwrite landn叩m by reducing consumption of imported domesticates Some resources might be expended - natural capital is totally drawn down Others might be managed sustainably for long period of time Participation in a community network was key for continued access to most important wild resources Human impact story is NOT simple
- 8. Norse North Atlantic Different choices- different outcomes to climate changes Communities in the Atlantic islands faced different challenges, made different choices and faced different outcomes.
- 9. Norse N. Atlantic: Different Geographies Greenland: Iceland: Faroes: Very large island- Large island- Everywhere close to sea Distant resources Extensive interior Close to Europe Short summer/pack ice Woodlands Open landscape No accessible iron Bog iron deposits Marginal grain production Pastoralism challenging Very marginal arable cultivation Pilot whales Caribou No terrestrial mammals Birds and fish Migrating seals Birds and fish Other societies
- 10. Three 1: The unsurprising part. In the Faroe contrasting Islands, sustainable practice, effective utilization of wild resources, limited outcomes in landscape impacts and successful the face of adaptation to climate change on centennial climatic time scales is associated with long-term settlement success and the development hazards of a prosperous society.
- 11. Sandur, Sandoy
- 16. Three contrasting outcomes in the face of climatic hazards 2: In Iceland we have the puzzle of Norse sustainable practice, successful adaptation Soil and long-term success erosion linked to extensive 2009 landscape degradation.
- 17. Same Beginnings, different outcomes- deforestation & erosion
- 18. The Great Hall at Hofsta丹ir
- 21. Three contrasting outcomes in the face of climatic hazards 3: In Greenland, sustainable practice, limited landscape impacts and successful adaptation to climate change on centennial time scales was followed by settlement abandonment in the mid 15th century.
- 28. Different choices & outcomes 1: Faroes
- 29. Human Impacts: Faroe Islands Little to no tree cover at settlement Grasses & peat Topography limited settlement locations Settlements clustered
- 30. Human Impacts: Faroe Islands Importance of Natural Capital Coastal & marine resources Peat Grasslands
- 32. Birding cliffs Sea Village (Infield) Outfield
- 33. Homefields Outlying field systems
- 35. Disruption of upland vegetation generates sediment flux KAM 3 First introduction of herbivores to hill tops?
- 36. Deflation of Faroese summits and dispersal of silt a notable local impact of landn叩m ..a modest effect compared to change in Iceland
- 37. The Faroes as success story Environmental: Creation of managed infield system No woodland to clear Limited soil erosion & peat removal Wild resources heavily, sustainably exploited Continued legacy Nucleated settlement Reinforces social interactions
- 38. Different choices & outcomes 2: Iceland
- 44. Legislated management system Exclusive grazing rights to hreppur Farm quotas for maximum number of sheep Penalty if exceeded Regulated grazing season Began given week in June Ended given week in September
- 46. 30 Proportions of cattle and sheep change over time from 9th-11th c, varying from ca 2 25 -6 sheep per cow. However, a major transition takes place ca 20 AD 1200: now 20-25 sheep per cow. Caprine per cattle bone This pattern continues to the 18th century 15 The wool-producing part of the flock which uses the highlands dramatically increases ca 1200 10 l 9th - e 10th c 10th c 11th-12th c Creates far greater chance of upland 5 degradation 0 He rg. SV fsd. h m W 2 SL c 11 1th m th m th th m th Sv 2th h ba 100 0 10 0 ea 00 9t HS 10t Sv r丹 1 120 th r丹 M rd 1 120 L 0 10 0 ST 10 na 17 1 14 HR id 1 HS id 1 -1 l 10 L ba H rjo ar e id id tL th K - 0- ba gi c n al H T Tj 25 ko VG T H K o m ga H Sv nb SV SL G ei n ei at Sv St 箪v al al
- 47. 13th Century environmental managers were slightly distracted... Civil W ! ar Age of the Sturlungs: - Five Great Families struggle to control all Iceland - Icelandic warlords seek kingship - Everyone loses - Iceland submits to Norway 1264
- 48. The human impacts of climate changes that were extreme (in terms of their deviation for the mean of the previous 15 years) were buffered by the drawdown of natural (landscape) capital and resulted in threshold- crossing events.
- 49. Iceland: success at a cost Early establishment of environmental management & regulation; sustainable exploitation of finite resources (e.g. birds) When faced with predictable changes (e.g. woodland clearance) adaptations were made to conserve a landscape fit for purpose When faced with unpredictable change (e.g. climate hazards) natural capitals could be drawn down to maintain settlement
- 50. Different choices & outcomes 3: Greenland
- 55. Travel time & connectedness With a 12-hr travel time, all settlement connected to each other Outer parts of fjord and skerries (seal hunting grounds) are only marginally reached or not at all
- 56. Travel time & connectedness With deteriorating climate, travel conditions become more difficult Settlements concentrate on best farmland & in greater concentration But crucial marine food resources are now further away
- 57. Changing world systems a double exposure? Plague may have reached Greenland in 15th century; it certainly caused the collapse of the Norwegian economy (and market for ivory) Triple exposure? Inuit contacts: source of conflict, or source of Exposure to step-wise climate trade goods (furs)? change Settlement focused on marine mammals for subsistence & trade did not endure past the climate hazards of mid 14th century
- 58. Lessons from the Viking Age In Greenland, successful adaptation led to the development of a rigidity trap Path chosen by the Greenlanders created a society that could not endure the conjunctures of climate hazard, economic change & culture contact of the mid 15th century In contrast to Iceland & Faroe Islands, the exploitation of marine resources in Greenland had greater exposure to climate hazards Faroe Islands faced less extreme climate change Icelanders could utilise greater pastoral resources (and drawn down landscape capitals) Greenlanders died
- 59. Lessons from the Viking Age People can... Creatively adapt to new environments Build up centuries of community-based managerial experience Wisely conserve fragile resources Maintain long-term (century-scale) sustainable patterns of life & society and still face localized collapse and extinction
- 60. Lessons from the Viking Age Scales & cross-scale interactions Distances matter Utilization of dispersed resources carries cost, especially when settlements are fixed Dispersed systems are vulnerable to increased travel costs Strong communal interaction can be a strength, but collapse of a well-integrated system can kill everyone