Creating an interview guide to produce usable and culturally relevant research in Kullorsuaq, Greenland

Greenland is facing impacts from anthropogenic climate changes on multiple fronts. Warming ocean and air temperatures have decreased the integrity of sea ice, which is vital infrastructure for travel and hunting for Kalaallit during winter months; habitats of culturally and economically important animals are changing; and natural hazards like landslides are increasingly common. However, due to sparse data, the scientific record in Greenland and the Arctic generally is not robust enough to predict how these changes will affect communities on a local scale or affect future decision-making. Greenland Rising is an NSF NNA collaborative project between Columbia University and Greenland Institute of Natural Resources that seeks to combine western science and local expertise to prepare for changing sea levels in four Greenlandic communities: Nuuk, Aasiaat, Kullorsuaq, and Tasiilaq. While very little local quantitative data is available, people living in these communities have lifetimes worth of knowledge about their environment. To ensure the priorities of the communities and Greenland Rising scientists align, an interview guide was developed with questions about spatial and temporal changes community members have observed about ice, sea level, and habitat - with special emphasis on how these changes have impacted the interviewees and their communities daily lives. Additional interview questions about shoreline change were drafted and distributed for school-aged children to ask their elder family members, facilitating inter-generational exchange of traditional ecological knowledge. The interview guide was first implemented during an introductory trip to Kullorsuaq, and community input will be used to guide multibeam bathymetry surveys and further research. Collection of community data in a small settlement also brings great responsibility for the researchers involved to use and share information in alignment with the priorities of the community, with the consent of the community. We present our evaluation of the interview guide from the reality check on site, how it was used and when it was abandoned following local interests. We compare the results and the included processes with our previous interviews with communities and stakeholders to the project.