The warming
in Arctic regions is happening three times faster than the global average. This
has major consequences for the unique cultural monuments at Svalbard.

The old cable car station and forge in the mining town of Hiorthhamn are among the cultural monuments that are in danger of being lost. They are weathering due to rapid coastal erosion, caused by accelerating climate change.

“Temporary security measures from 2021 show that the management practices in this case adapted in the face of the climatic challenges,” Ingalill Johansen Seljelv says. 

She has taken her master’s degree in cultural heritage management at NTNU, in collaboration with the research project PCCH-Arctic (Polar Climate and Cultural Heritage – Preservation and Restoration Management). Here, the researchers investigate issues concerning the conservation and restoration of cultural monuments in the Arctic in light of climate change.

Through fieldwork, observation, and analysis of documents, Seljelv has investigated how the owners of the cultural monuments and the management have handled conservation work in Longyearbyen and its surroundings in 2003–2022.

The forge
was saved

Seljelv says
that immediate measures at the forge were carried out a few days after
permission had been granted. There was only a minimal delay due to a lack of
personnel.

The
proceedings were short, probably as a result of good and close cooperation
early in the application process.

Temporary
erosion protection at the cable car station was also carried out a few days
after permission had been granted. In this case, the processing time was
unusually short.

“This
illustrates how the administration is able to handle an acute danger caused by
climate change,” she says.

Management
practice characterised by special conditions

The
proceedings for measures on the cable car trestles, show how management
practices on Svalbard over time have been characterised by several different
conditions.

Owners must consider special factors when carrying out measures here. This involves aspects like financing, the decision’s  validity and terms, season, and logistics.

The mining
company Store Norske was the custodian of the cultural heritage in the period
examined. Responsibility now lies with the building conservation centre at
Svalbard Museum on behalf of the state at the Ministry of Trade and Fisheries.

The
measures have also, in many cases, been dependent on funding from Svalbard’s
environmental protection fund. The fund has two allocation rounds a year. The
award is valid for three years. This gives time limits for carrying out
measures. There are also restrictions on the season in which the measures can
be carried out.

“If
unforeseen events occur, you must wait until the next season. The validity of the permit decision sets the timeframe for the entire execution. If
measures are not carried out before the decision becomes invalid, you can apply
for an extended deadline if there are special reasons. If this is not the case,
the permit will lapse. Then you must start the application process over again,” Seljelv explains. 

The
restrictions are ineffective and expensive. They can often worsen the condition
of cultural monuments.

How
should the practice be adapted?

Many of the
documents that Ingalill Johansen Seljelv has examined, express a strong desire
that the work on restoration must be made more efficient.

“Not only
in terms of time use and finances, but also for climate reasons. Management
practices on Svalbard should therefore be adapted considering climate change,” she says.

Such
adaptation does not have to conflict with the regulations. On the contrary, it
can be interpreted as being in line with both legislation, parliamentary
reports, and the National Archives’ climate strategy.

“I also
believe that the wording in the decision on the preservation of the cable car
facility can actually be used to allow new methods of maintenance and repair.
It has previously conflicted with traditional management practices,” Seljelv says.

It may
become necessary to use non-antiquarian methods

Climate
change has had a major impact on the cable car facility and its management.
Store Norske’s first application for measures from 2013 was submitted after
investigations showed that the condition had suddenly worsened. Probably because
of a changed climate.

In the
years after this, climate change continued to negatively affect the cable car
trestles. Several applications for measures have mentioned changes in climate
as a particularly important reason why they should be restored.

Will the
cable car trestles remain in the future?

Climate
change will continue to have a major impact on the management of the cable car
facility in the future.

“If our aim
is to preserve the overall cultural environment in Longyearbyen and its
surroundings, it will be necessary to change the management practices. This
can, for example, involve challenging the traditional practice by using
non-antiquarian methods,” Seljelv says.

This may
involve adopting new techniques for foundations and types
of materials, among other things. There has not been a tradition of doing this at Svalbard before.

“In this
way, it is more likely that we will be able to preserve more cultural
monuments. The combination of special conditions on Svalbard and accelerating
climate change make such a change necessary,” she says.

Continuing
the restoration work under a traditional management practice is therefore
difficult to carry out, both practically and financially. The researcher believes that it
will hardly be possible to restore the cable car trestles in a way that
preserves the entirety of the facility without making any interventions in the
visual expression.

Entirety
or authenticity?

There are,
however, several arguments against such an adapted practice.

“Should the
cultural monuments be preserved as they are, or should measures be taken that
interfere with the cultural monuments? In such a discussion, one should
question what one wants the overall principle for management in Svalbard to be,” Seljelv says.

It becomes
a question of which is worse: That certain objects and thus the entirety of the
facility are lost, or that cultural monuments are restored using what is
considered less correct methods in an antiquarian perspective.

If
preservation of the entirety is the most important, then the methods of
restoration should be subordinate. If authenticity is the most important, the
wholeness will be subordinate.

“Should the
management of cultural heritage in Svalbard be practical or perfect? The answer
is perhaps a bit of both – as perfect as practically possible,” Seljelv says.

Natural to
do further research

Seljelv’s
investigations are part of a larger research project. It is therefore natural
that further research on the topic is carried out, she thinks.

“Proposals
for further research can, for example, be affiliated with the new building
conservation centre under the auspices of Svalbard Museum,” she says.

The centre
is currently responsible for managing the state-owned cultural heritage at
Svalbard.

“It would be
interesting to investigate how this transition takes place, and how the
building conservation centre eventually chooses to manage these objects,” she says.

Seljelv also
believes it could be of interest to look more closely at the cultural heritage
administration’s climate policy, both on the mainland and at Svalbard.

She herself
believes that she has documented the beginning of what is most likely a shift
in the management practice for cultural heritage in Svalbard.

Reference:

Seljelv, I.J. Praktisk eller perfekt? Kulturminner
og klimaendringer på Svalbard. Forvaltningen av taubaneanlegget i Longyearbyen
og omegn 2003–2022 (Practical or Perfect? Cultural Heritage and Climate Change in Svalbard. Management of the Cable Car System in Longyearbyen and Surroundings 2003–2022), Master’s thesis at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology
(NTNU), 2023.