In his latest article, “Hallowed Grounds: Approaching Sacred Natural Sites in Sápmi”, Helge Årsheim examines the identification and protection of sacred natural sites (SNS) of Indigenous peoples, with a particular emphasis on cases where the Sámi people’s sacred natural sites have come under pressure in Sápmi.
Årsheim explores the origins and impact of the SNS concept, tracing its development from international frameworks to decision-making in Norway. By looking at three cases—the proposed Davvi wind park, the National Plan for Land-Based Wind Power, and the proposal to build a hydroelectrical dam in Hattfjelldal—he explores how SNS are identified and contested by different stakeholders. The Norwegian Energy Regulatory Authority, the Sami parliament, or neo-religious activist groups each bring out different perspectives on whether certain lands should be used for energy projects or preserved for religious and cultural reasons.
“With so many stakeholders, finding a solution—both in terms of legal norms and the procedures for consultation—is notoriously complicated. I don’t think there’s an easy answer. If my article contributes to this, it's by highlighting just how complex the situation is. But this complexity is necessary; dealing with these issues in overly simplistic terms isn’t the way forward," Årsheim notes.
The Legal Battle for Indigenous Land Rights
Sacred Natural Sites (SNS) are places valued for their significance in the worldviews, stories, and beliefs of Indigenous peoples, rather than for any physical structures or archaeological remnants. These sites are found in mountains, plains, caves, forests, groves, coastal areas, or along riverbanks.
International recognition and legal protection of these sites has evolved throughout several key treaties. "The UNESCO World Heritage Convention of 1972 coincided with the first Earth Summit, with talks centered on environmental degradation. The Convention was initially focused on cultural heritage sites, and the preservation of areas with natural significance and beauty. By 1992, however, its scope was expanded to protect areas not only for their untouched beauty but also because of the beliefs that were attached to them. This is where Sacred Natural Sites (SNS) find their place within the cultural heritage discourse," says Årsheim, highlighting the increasing shared interests with conservationists and environmentalists.
"In 1992, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) was introduced, specifically emphasizing that signatory countries must involve Indigenous peoples in the dialogue on preserving biological diversity," he adds, thereby adding another layer of regulatory interest in the preservation of SNS, culminating in the publication of guidelines for how such sites can be protected.
These foundational steps culminated in a more comprehensive acknowledgment of Indigenous rights: "The 2007 UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples marks a pivotal point for me, as it presents a unique approach to defining religion and its legal status. Unlike any other legal instrument, it mandates that states honour the distinct spiritual connection between Indigenous peoples and their ancestral lands."
However, the recognition of a place as a sacred natural site is not an evident or fixed matter. As Årsheim points out, the interplay between spirituality and law in this area is intricate:
"I find religion and the way it plays out in law far more complicated than we like to believe. I try to show the complexity of the intersection between religion and human rights legislation—particularly how the diverse norms of the international human rights regime provide protection through the angle of religion or spirituality, especially through the specific Sámi perspective."
Is the Aahkansnjurhtjie mountain sacred?
One of Årsheim's case studies is the Aahkansnjurhtjie case, which shows the challenges that arise when there is disagreement about whether an area is sacred. In 2013, a hydroelectric dam proposal in Stikkelvika, within Sápmi, faced opposition from the Sámi parliament and local reindeer herders due to potential harm to their livestock. Despite this, the Norwegian Ministry of Petroleum and Energy approved the project in 2018.
However, the Arctic Shaman Circle (ASC), a spiritual activist group, challenged the decision, claiming the area was sacred for the Sámi. Their report highlighted several cultural and spiritual attributes of the mountain that were intertwined with Sámi heritage. However, the Sámi parliament questioned the sacred status claimed by the ASC, citing different interpretations of the mountain's name and the lack of historical evidence. Despite the approval of the project, construction has not started.
The differing perspectives reflect the complex role of stakeholders like the Sámi Parliament:
"What I find fascinating is how sacred natural sites and their relevance to energy projects in Norway are framed differently by the various actors involved.
The Sámi Parliament stands out as a key player. It is both a representative of the Sámi people and an overseer of Norwegian laws on cultural heritage and land use in Sámi areas. The Sámi Parliament faces the challenge of developing strategies to address these cases: determining whether an area is sacred, how it should be protected, and how Sámi traditional knowledge should be incorporated into decision-making. These questions, however, are not unique to the Sámi community. Similar issues arise globally, involving different claims, groups, and outcomes,” highlights Årsheim.
Sacred Natural Sites as a Tool of Resistance
In the struggle for Sámi rights, sacred natural sites are also used strategically. "I find it interesting how the Sámi have embraced different approaches to their rights struggle, using whatever tools are available to them. This is an important aspect of the case with sacred natural sites—I’m not trying to discredit the Sámi, and I understand how my critique in this article could be read in that light. But I believe there’s nothing ethically or legally wrong with using the tools at your disposal. This is a strategy many Indigenous peoples have adopted around the world. Many Indigenous leaders have stated that they call certain places sacred because it’s the closest they can come to aligning their traditional knowledge with the legal tools available to them. And I think that’s a fair point. The Sámi, like anyone else, are fully entitled to rely on these tools," says Årsheim.
This case also highlights the challenges of addressing religion in legal contexts: “One of the main challenges of addressing religion legally is that religion is layered, with diverse perspectives from different actors, and there’s often a battle for hegemony among them."
Ultimately, Helge Årsheim's study of Sámi sacred natural sites highlights the complex relationship between spirituality, land and energy development in Norway. Linking Norwegian cases to the international movement for Indigenous rights and land preservation, this article helps to understand the current debates.
Årsheim’s research has been conducted in collaboration with the ongoing research project The Governmateriality of Indigenous Religions (GOVMAT) at the University of Bergen.