Arctic Yearbook 2014 - Page 282

282       Arctic Yearbook 2014 itself is dying out”. This generation gap means that young people lack reasons to visit the north, and also lack incentives to want to live there. We have been neglecting the jobs. Now there are not many jobs left, not up here in the north, and we have to take these jobs, not because they are bad jobs but because they haven’t existed before [...] take the example of Ice Hotel in Jukkasjärvi, they have existed for 20 years but were not really acknowledged until 8 years ago, what were they doing the first 12 years? Exactly the same things as now, but all of a sudden they reach a threshold where the concept is accepted (Lorentz, participant). It is evident that the Ice Hotel was accepted as an important source of employment by the time the company started accounting for revenue in millions, and the multiplier effect in the community in Kiruna became measurable. This is understandable considering that economic growth is the dominant measurement for development. However, the results of the participatory modeling in figure 4 show how uncertainty in tourism business development threatens the economic stability of their socio-economic system of the community. According to this, it would not serve a great purpose for external actors to use economic growth as an argument to change tourism practice in Gunnarsbyn. Rather, the interviewees seem more responsive to arguments of increasing social well-being of communities in the northern peripheries with the long-term perspective of increasing economic stability and increasing population density. In a way the interviewees promote a form of development without growth (Daly 1996) when they say “we don’t need more money! Money is absolutely not a limiting factor! Just change the policies so that we have the same prerequisites to do our work! Provide us with the same base to start on as other industries!” (Kurt, participant). The described desire to live and work in the northern periphery is a concrete example of how sustainable development (as defined in ‘Our Common Future’ 1987) can play out in reality; namely the desire for development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of the future to meet its needs, in this particular area. When asked about the future, Tatiana and Love agree that they will probably not live to see measurable results of their work. But they work for the future of their children, and “we have come quite far, if we accept that” (Tatiana, participant). The tourist hosts do not see their situation of sharing common natural resources as a dilemma when communicating with other actors within the community. The dilemma situation is visible when communicating their needs to the larger system. The danger of choosing an alternative structure that maximizes short-term individual returns (Poteete et al. 2010) is thus not present in their current practice. Unofficial rules and strong norms seem important for monitoring their own actions. Systems of Cooperation The third research question is: What systems of collaborative action are important for meeting common sustainability challenges in the community? While specific practices are important accomplishments for sustainability on an individual level, these also contribute to form strategies and norms that can prove important for sustainability of the community.   Work Creates Community