Abstract
In northern and western Greenland, human–qimmeq (Greenlandic sled dog, Canis lupus familiaris) relationships are evolving rapidly amid profound environmental and social change. Although the number of sled-dog teams is declining, qimmit continue to play a vital role in Inuit and Kalaallit life—not only as working animals but as active participants in practices of knowledge sharing, care, and identity formation. Drawing on ethnographic fieldwork and interviews with hunters [piniartut], mushers, and cultural knowledge bearers, this article explores the contemporary roles of qimmit within Greenlandic society. It examines how these relationships support intergenerational transmission of cultural knowledge and belonging, while also negotiating tensions between lived practices and formal heritage frameworks. Situating qimmit within critical discussions of living heritage and human–animal relations, the article argues that qimmit are not merely cultural symbols, but relational beings embedded in adaptive, negotiated, and resilient practices central to Inuit and Kalaallit life.
Across northern and western Greenland, rapid environmental, technological, and socioeconomic changes are transforming traditional ways of life. The Arctic is warming nearly four times faster than the global average (Rantanen et al. 2022), affecting sea ice, animal migration, and hunting conditions—challenges that directly impact Inuit and Kalaallit subsistence practices, including the culturally and economically vital role of qimmit—the Greenland sled dogs.
Specifically, the term qimmeq [plural qimmit] refers to the Greenland sled dog (Canis lupus familiaris), a unique landrace developed over generations through Inuit hunting and adaptation to arctic environments. Specialized hunting dogs known as nanorriutit are trained to assist in nanoq [polar bear] hunts and are prized for their agility and keen instincts. Piniartut [singular: piniartoq], or hunters, carry profound ecological knowledge crucial for survival in these landscapes. In the Avanersuaq region (Thule district), sled dogs are called Inuup qimmia—“the dog of the Inuk” or “the human’s dog”—reflecting a relational worldview rooted in partnership and coexistence. Elsewhere in Greenland, the term kalaallit qimmiat [“dogs of the Greenlanders”] underscores the cultural and national significance of these animals.
Qimmit have historically been essential not only for transportation and hunting but also as central figures in social life, knowledge transmission, and identity formation (Egevang et al. 2020; Jensen 2020). From the earliest Paleo-Inuit cultures through subsequent migrations—including Norse and Thule peoples—sled dogs have played a crucial role in arctic survival, shaping cultural practices and human–animal relations (Arneborg 2004; Gulløv et al. 2004; Meldgaard 2004). Understanding how human–qimmeq relationships persist and adapt amid these profound changes provides critical insights into arctic resilience and Indigenous cultural continuity (Fig. 1).
Sled dogs on the move across the ice. Photo by Carsten Egevang.
The Greenland sled dog is not only culturally cherished but also legally protected. In East Greenland and all areas north of the Arctic Circle in West Greenland, only qimmit are permitted—except police dogs—to prevent interbreeding and preserve their genetic resilience and adaptation to arctic conditions (Egevang et al. 2020; Inatsisinik nalunaarutit 1998) (Fig. 2). Each dog is microchipped and registered in a national database originally designed for health monitoring but now also used to track individual animals, ownership, and movement throughout the region (Langebæk et al. 2020).
Greenland sled dog resting on sea ice. Photo by Carsten Egevang.
Although the Greenland sled dog is not formally recognized as intangible cultural heritage (ICH), it is increasingly framed as such in official discourse and policy. This symbolic positioning—alongside legal protections and health surveillance infrastructures—raises important questions about the politics of cultural preservation. As anthropologists have argued, such heritage framings can risk fossilizing relational practices and shifting agency away from communities toward institutional actors (Kirshenblatt-Gimblett 2004; Smith 2006). Anthropological scholarship has long observed that when cultural practices are codified within heritage frameworks, agency often shifts from local communities to institutional actors, privileging documentation and conservation over lived practice (Kirshenblatt-Gimblett 2004; Smith 2006).
This article seeks to answer the following research questions:
1. How do human–qimmeq relationships contribute to cultural knowledge, values, and identity in Inuit and Kalaallit communities?
2. How are these relationships maintained, adapted, or challenged amid environmental, social, and technological change?
3. Why do qimmit continue to hold emotional, cultural, and practical significance in the everyday lives of those who live with them?
Drawing on ethnographic fieldwork and critical heritage theory, this study centers Indigenous voices and relational practices to illuminate the ongoing significance of qimmit in Kalaallit Nunaat.
Theoretical Framework
This study situates itself at the intersection of Indigenous knowledge systems, human–animal relations, and critical heritage studies. Drawing on Donna Haraway’s (2003) concept of “more-than-human” communities, we recognize qimmit as relational beings embedded within multispecies networks that include humans, animals, and environments engaged in mutual shaping and care. Haraway’s framework challenges anthropocentric perspectives and highlights coexistence as a dynamic, ongoing process. This perspective is crucial for interpreting the relational and cultural dimensions of human–qimmit connections (Fig. 3).
The expressive face of a Greenland sled dog. Photo by Carsten Egevang.
Tim Ingold’s (2011) “dwelling perspective” further informs our analysis by emphasizing that humans and animals do not merely inhabit spaces but engage in ongoing, embodied, and sensuous relationships with their surroundings. This approach challenges traditional dichotomies of nature and culture, underscoring the continuous becoming of social-ecological systems, which helps us understand the deep entanglement of qimmit, people, and place.
We also draw on the concept of “communities of practice” (Lave and Wenger 2003; Wenger 1999), which illustrates how knowledge transmission occurs through participation in socially and ecologically embedded practices. Building on Olsen and Tharp’s (2013) work in Greenlandic Indigenous education, we emphasize relational, embodied, and place-based learning processes as central to how hunting skills, dog care, and cultural values are transmitted across generations. Their research highlights that knowledge is enacted through communal participation rather than formal instruction, reflecting a lived epistemological pluralism where Indigenous and Western knowledges coexist and inform one another.
Critical heritage theory provides a further lens for this study. Kirshenblatt-Gimblett’s (2004) notion of heritage as “metacultural production” frames heritage as actively created and negotiated, not passively preserved. Smith’s (2006) critique of the Authorized Heritage Discourse highlights how institutionalized heritage frameworks can fossilize living cultural practices, marginalizing local agency. We argue that heritage approaches must honor culture’s dynamic, negotiated, and community-driven nature to support sustainable cultural continuity.
Finally, we embrace epistemological pluralism (Bielawski 2005; Crate and Nuttall 2016; Kovach 2021), recognizing the coexistence and complementarity of Indigenous experiential knowledge and Western scientific knowledge. This pluralism is especially critical in understanding environmental change and adaptive responses within arctic communities, where diverse knowledge systems inform decision-making and resilience.
Together, these theoretical perspectives provide lenses to analyze human–qimmeq relationships as complex, embodied, and evolving practices that sustain cultural identity, knowledge, and adaptation in Kalaallit Nunaat.
Methods and Ethical Considerations
The fieldwork for this study was conducted across multiple sled-dog communities in northern and western Greenland, regions characterized by distinct linguistic and cultural contexts. Interviews were carried out primarily in Indigenous languages—Inuktun and Kalaallisut—as well as Danish, enabling participants to express themselves authentically within their preferred language frameworks. This linguistic diversity reflects the cultural pluralism inherent in Greenlandic society and is essential for capturing nuanced local knowledge about human–qimmeq relationships (Fig. 4).
Full-body portrait of a white Greenland sled dog. Photo by Carsten Egevang.
Conducting research in Indigenous languages allowed for richer and more respectful engagement, minimizing the loss of meaning often introduced by translation. This approach aligns with Indigenous methodologies that emphasize relationality, reciprocity, and the coproduction of knowledge (Kovach 2021; MacLeod 2021). By foregrounding local voices, this study centers Indigenous epistemologies and lived experiences as foundational to understanding the cultural significance of qimmit.
A multimethod approach was employed, combining ethnographic fieldwork with historical, archaeological, and popular literature to explore the cultural significance of qimmeq in Inuit and Kalaallit communities. The first author conducted fieldwork in 2017, 2018, and 2019, engaging with sled-dog communities in northern and western Greenland. Semi-structured interviews and informal conversations were conducted with Elders, mushers, hunters, and cultural knowledge bearers—respected community members recognized for preserving and transmitting traditional ecological and cultural knowledge (Berkes 2017; Smith 2012).
In total, 70 interviews were conducted in locations including Ilulissat, Oqaatsut, Qaanaaq, Saattut, Savissivik, Siorapaluk, Sisimiut, and Uummannaq. Additional interviews were carried out in Nuuk with participants originating from various settlements. These interviews took place in the participants’ preferred languages—primarily Inuktun, Kalaallisut, and Danish—allowing conversations to unfold naturally and respectfully within local linguistic and cultural frameworks. Follow-up interviews were conducted remotely in Nuuk between 2019 and 2025, sometimes initiated by participants themselves. These provided contextually rich insights shaped by shared language, cultural familiarity, and ongoing relationships. All interviews were guided by open-ended themes, allowing participants to direct the focus and content of the conversations (Fig. 5).
A Greenland sled dog mother with her pups. Photo by Carsten Egevang.
Although fieldwork forms the foundation of this research, this article does not present new quotations or direct data excerpts from these interviews. Rather, it draws on the first author’s previously published work informed by that field research, in combination with a broader synthesis of historical, ecological, and anthropological sources. That research is reported elsewhere, and includes an exploration of narratives about sled dogs (Jensen 2020), observations of wolves and dogs interbreeding (Feuerborn et al. 2025; Jensen 2024, 2025; Jensen and Sinding 2023), and related ethnographic material developed over years of engagement.
The analytical framing offered here develops from long-term engagement with sled-dog communities and seeks to situate qimmit within intersecting cultural, environmental, and heritage discourses (Bielawski 2005; Crate and Nuttall 2016; Kovach 2021). Because this article does not present new quotations or reinterpret existing interviews beyond what has been published with informed consent, participants were not recontacted for additional approval. The material presented builds on previously published work grounded in earlier dialogues, without introducing new representations or analyses that would alter the ethical relationship between researcher and participant.
The first author, who has longstanding collaborative relationships in several of the communities involved, approached the research as an iterative, trust-based process shaped by shared priorities. While no formal research ethics committees exist in this field in Greenland, ethical practice was grounded in the principles of respect, reciprocity, transparency, and ongoing accountability to participants and their communities (Buschman 2021; Yua et al. 2022).
Historical Background of Qimmit
Greenland’s human history is marked by a series of migrations and cultural transformations that have shaped the role of qimmit in Inuit and Kalaallit lifeways. From the earliest PaleoInuit cultures around 2400 BC, dogs have been integral to hunting, transport, and social organization (Meldgaard 2004; Morey and Aaris-Sørensen 2002). Later migrations, including Norse and Thule peoples, brought diverse dog lineages and new hunting technologies, further embedding sled dogs in arctic survival strategies (Arneborg 2004; Gulløv et al. 2004).
The sled dog’s centrality is not only ecological but symbolic, deeply linked to cultural identity and narratives of resilience in extreme environments. Understanding this long history of human–dog collaboration provides essential context for interpreting contemporary adaptations and challenges facing qimmit culture.
Ancestry and Migration of Qimmit
This section provides an overview of the ancestral lineage and migration patterns of qimmit within the broader context of dog domestication. Dogs were domesticated by humans approximately 15,000 years ago (Perri et al. 2021; Savolainen et al. 2002; Sinding et al. 2020; Wang et al. 2016), although some authors suggest earlier dates of domestication or coexistence going back more than 30,000 years (Perri et al. 2021; Wang et al. 2016). Archaeological findings from Zhokhov Island, north of Siberia, indicate that around 9,000 years ago, fully domesticated dogs played a critical role in assisting humans with hunting and transportation (Pitulko and Kasparov 2017).
The literature highlights how qimmit are deeply rooted in human history, tracing their origins to domesticated dogs in Siberia before 9,500 years ago (Sinding et al. 2020; Skoglund et al. 2015). The migration of these dogs to North America and Greenland is thought to have occurred approximately 5,000 years ago (Raghavan et al. 2014).
Archaeological evidence of dog bones has been found at Saqqaq/PreDorset culture sites in Igloolik, Canada (Meldgaard 1960), and in West Greenland at sites such as Qajaa, Qeqertasussuk, and Nipisat (Meldgaard 2004; Morey and Aaris-Sørensen 2002). The Birnirk and Punuk cultures from Point Barrow and eastern Siberia are considered predecessors of the Thule culture (Ford 1959; Mason 2016).
Greenlandic qimmit are closely related to other Inuit dog breeds such as the Alaskan Malamute and Siberian Husky. Both the Canadian Inuit dog and Greenlandic qimmeq originate from the same ancient landrace (Egevang et al. 2020; Gjerløff 2020; Han 2018). However, DNA analyses of dog skeletons from PaleoInuit contexts show that the qimmit of the Thule culture do not directly descend from the earlier PaleoInuit dogs of the Saqqaq culture (Ameen et al. 2019).
This suggests multiple waves of dog migration and adaptation in the Arctic, indicating a complex historical relationship between humans and their qimmit, as well as the importance of these dogs for survival in this environment. Comparison of paleo-DNA with samples from modern Greenlandic qimmit indicates that the latter has the least amount of admixture with other dog breeds among arctic sled-dog types and suggests a high degree of isolation of the qimmit population in Greenland since a genetic bottleneck about 850 years ago, coinciding with Inuit migration to Greenland (Sinding et al. 2020; Skoglund et al. 2015).
This extensive historical background underscores the enduring significance of qimmit in Inuit culture as more than working animals: they are part of an ancient lineage intertwined with human survival, adaptation, and migration across the Arctic.
In sum, these findings emphasize qimmit’s role in a long tradition of human–canine collaboration spanning thousands of years, linking contemporary Inuit communities to a deep historical past. This history forms the foundation for understanding the contemporary cultural and ecological significance of qimmit explored in this article.
Migration to Kalaallit Nunaat
Qimmit are the only sled-dog breed found north of the Arctic Circle, predominantly in the regions of North, East, and West Greenland (Ameen et al. 2019; Feuerborn et al. 2025; Vibe 1981). Archaeological evidence indicates that Kalaallit Nunaat (Greenland) has been populated by several waves of immigrant groups from North America, each bringing dogs with them. While it remains uncertain whether early cultures such as Independence I (∼2400–2000 BC), Independence II (∼600–450 BC), and Dorset (∼700 BC–AD 1300 ) had domesticated dogs, excavations from the Saqqaq culture (∼2400–800/400 BC) confirm the presence of dogs through discovered dog bones at sites like Qajaa, Qeqertasussuk, and Nipisat (Meldgaard 2004; Morey and Aaris-Sørensen 2002).
Subsequent waves of migration introduced additional dogs to Greenland. The Norse and Viking settlers (AD 985–1450) brought two distinct types of European dogs: one resembling the Irish Wolfhound or Greyhound, and another similar to the Icelandic Sheepdog (Arneborg 2004; Degerbøl 1936; Jensen 2024; Smiarowski 2022). Perhaps most significant was the Thule culture (AD 1200–1900), whose people migrated from Alaska, bringing with them their qimmit (Gulløv 2004; Feuerborn et al. 2025). This group relied on a hunter-gatherer lifestyle centered around large game such as whales, walruses, and polar bears, as well as smaller prey including seals, fish, caribou, muskoxen, and birds (Gulløv et al. 2004; Ingold 2011).
Qimmit became indispensable in this context, with qamutit [sleds] harnessed to these dogs serving as a critical mode of transportation, alongside the umiaq [skin boat] and qajaq [kayak]. These tools enabled a technologically unique nomadic lifestyle, allowing the Thule people to adapt to the movements of game species across Greenland’s expansive and often harsh terrain (Meldgaard 2004; Morey and Aaris-Sørensen 2002). Historian Lyle Dick (2001) succinctly describes arctic nomadism as the practice of moving entire communities, with all their essential supplies like tools, skins, and food, to follow the widely dispersed game. This constant mobility was vital for survival in an environment where both people and animals were perpetually on the move.
This overview of migration patterns into Kalaallit Nunaat illustrates the deep entwinement of qimmit with human history and survival in Greenland. The arrival of multiple waves of migration, each introducing distinct types of dogs, reveals the dynamic and adaptive nature of both the people and their animals. The Norse introduction of European breeds and the crucial role of qimmit in Thule culture reflect a rich history of human–dog collaboration.
Examining the subsistence and mobility practices of Arctic peoples highlights the centrality of qimmit to nomadic survival strategies, underscoring their pivotal role in Inuit society. Beyond their utilitarian purpose, these dogs became vital partners in daily life, embodying the resilience and adaptability of Arctic communities. Their legacy extends beyond Greenland, as they were essential in facilitating polar exploration, further solidifying their status as indispensable in human adaptation to extreme environments.
The enduring importance of qimmit highlights their role not just as work animals but as integral companions that have shaped the cultural and environmental history of the Arctic.
Qimmeq in Greenlandic Settlements and Survival
The use of qimmit in arctic exploration reveals their central role in navigating harsh polar environments and underscores their invaluable contribution to the survival of explorers.
The earliest British expeditions into the Arctic, driven by the search for the Northwest Passage to India, began in the early 17th century. Notably, Captain William Baffin (ca. AD. 1584–1622) led the ship Discovery in 1616 (Dick 2001; Malaurie 2002). Soon after, European and American whaling and exploration ships began venturing into the Arctic. One such expedition, sponsored by King Christian IV of Denmark (AD 1577–1648) in 1619, saw Captain Jens Munk (AD 1579–1628) attempt to find the Northwest Passage, with the journey ultimately resulting in a tragic loss of 61 out of 64 crew members due to scurvy (Ladefoged 2012). Although some ships had dogs on board, which occasionally interbred with qimmit, it was not until later that sled dogs became instrumental in these missions (Degerbøl and Freuchen 1935).
Throughout the 19th and early 20th centuries, qimmit proved indispensable in several landmark arctic expeditions. Captain John Ross (1777–1856), during his 1818 voyage with the ship Isabella, made the first documented contact with the Inughuit, assisted by West Greenlander John Sackhouse (?–1819) (Gilberg 2005; Malaurie 2002; Potter 2005). Ross’s colleague, William Parry (1790–1855), further embraced the use of dog sleds during his travels in Igloolik in 1823, laying the foundation for future expeditions to rely on sled dogs (Malaurie 2002; Parry 1824).
A pivotal figure in arctic exploration, Elisha Kent Kane (1820–1857), who led an expedition in the mid-1800s, learned firsthand the importance of qimmit when his crew was forced to overwinter due to encroaching sea ice in Kane Basin. With the assistance of the local Iita Inuit and their qimmit, the crew survived the ordeal. Kane’s later writings helped popularize Inuit methods of survival and travel in arctic conditions (Cowing 2005; Kane 1856).
Admiral Robert E. Peary (1856–1920), influenced by Kane, adopted the use of qimmit for his own expeditions, famously stating, “As a matter of fact, the Eskimo dog is absolutely the only motor for polar work, and will remain so until superseded by the aeroplane” (Peary 1917:202). Peary relied heavily on Inughuit guides and their expertise with survival and arctic travel with qimmit during his North Pole expedition in 1909, which he reached with Iggiánguak, Sigdluk, Ôdâk (1877–1955), Arkiok, and Matthew Henson (1866–1955) (Dick 2001; Peary 1910).
The widespread reliance on qimmit during arctic explorations is further exemplified by scientists and explorers like Lauge Koch, who mapped North Greenland with the help of Inughuit sled drivers; Inûtek Napa (1898–1976), Nukagpiánguak Imerârssuk (1894–1956), Itukusuk, and Knud Rasmussen, who completed the Fifth Thule Expedition on dog sleds across Canada and Alaska, demonstrating the critical role of Inuit knowledge and qimmit expertise (Malaurie 2002). These expeditions not only drew on the practical skills of dog-sled drivers like Inughuaq hunter and sled driver Qavigarssuaq Bartlett Kristiansen (ca. AD 1899–1978) but also relied on the technology and equipment developed by Inuit communities, such as the expertise in arctic survival by Arnarulúnguak (AD 1895–1933) with skin clothing and other tools (Degerbøl and Freuchen 1935; Knudsen 2024; Koch 1925).
Famously, Roald Amundsen’s (AD 1872–1928) successful 1911 expedition to the South Pole relied heavily on qimmit, illustrating their unmatched capability in polar environments (Amundsen 1912; MacRury 1991). These explorations highlight how qimmit were far more than simple transport animals; they were integral partners in human survival and arctic exploration, underscoring the deep interdependence between humans and dogs in these environments. Their role in polar expeditions reveals the depth of human–qimmeq interdependence, a relationship that long predates the arrival of explorers and continues in Inuit and Kalaallit lifeways today.
In the present day, sled dogs are used in a range of new and evolving contexts within Greenland’s sled-dog districts. In towns such as Kangerlussuaq, Ilulissat, and other settlements, qimmit play a central role in heritage tourism, where dog sledding is offered as a cultural experience for visitors. Beyond hunting and fishing, some people now keep sled dogs for recreational purposes—motivated not by subsistence needs, but by a desire to maintain a connection to nature, enjoy the lifestyle, or experience the emotional and physical rewards of dog sledding. For many, sled dogs have also become a hobby, especially in the form of competitive sled-dog racing, which is practiced throughout the sled-dog regions.
Currently, sled-dog culture is undergoing a significant transformation. In many towns, dogs are kept in designated areas outside urban zones, creating greater physical distance between humans and their animals. This separation affects the everyday intimacy and relational depth of the human–qimmeq bond. Moreover, hunting and fishing to acquire traditional dog food has become increasingly expensive and logistically difficult, meaning that maintaining a dog team now requires both financial resources and time. As a result, while the culture of dog sledding continues, it also adapts—shaped by new social, economic, and environmental realities (Egevang et al. 2020; Gjerløff 2020; Jensen 2020; Meldgaard et al. 2020).
Discussion
This study set out to explore three interconnected research questions: How do human–qimmeq relationships contribute to cultural knowledge, values, and identity within Inuit and Kalaallit communities? How are these relationships maintained, adapted, or challenged amid rapid environmental, social, and technological changes? And why do qimmit continue to hold emotional, cultural, and practical significance in the everyday lives of those who live with them?
The findings demonstrate that human–qimmeq relations are deeply embedded in multispecies networks of care, knowledge, and survival that transcend simplistic utilitarian views. These relationships embody rich cultural meanings and practices that are continuously negotiated and adapted in response to changing circumstances. The following discussion unpacks these themes, grounding them in empirical insights and critical theoretical perspectives to shed light on the resilience and complexity of sled-dog culture in Kalaallit Nunaat.
The findings of this study emerge against a backdrop of rapid climate change, sociopolitical shifts, and ongoing debates about Indigenous cultural heritage. As the Arctic warms and sea ice recedes (Rantanen et al. 2022), traditional hunting grounds and sledding routes become less reliable, threatening subsistence economies and cultural practices (Minor et al. 2023). These environmental pressures compound with social transformations such as urbanization, economic restructuring, and changing governance, which reshape how Inuit and Kalaallit relate to their qimmit.
At the same time, Indigenous communities actively negotiate these changes, drawing on diverse knowledge systems that blend lived experience, traditional wisdom, and scientific understanding. This pluralistic epistemology challenges simplistic narratives of cultural loss by emphasizing resilience, adaptation, and the dynamic nature of heritage (Bielawski 2005; Kovach 2021).
In this context, intangible cultural heritage frameworks must be critically examined to avoid fossilizing living cultures, ensuring that local agency and multispecies relationships remain at the center of heritage policy and practice (Kirshenblatt-Gimblett 2004; Smith 2006) (Fig. 6).
Close-up of a grey Greenland sled dog from Uummannaq. Photo by Carsten Egevang.
Human–Dog Relationships: Relationality, Personhood, and Coexistence
This study set out to investigate the multifaceted relationships between humans and qimmit [Greenland sled dogs] within Inuit and Kalaallit communities, exploring how these connections foster cultural knowledge, values, and identity. It also examined the ways these relationships adapt, persist, or face challenges amid ongoing environmental, social, and technological changes in the Arctic. The enduring emotional, cultural, and practical significance of qimmit in the everyday lives of those who live alongside them was a central focus.
At the heart of Kalaallit sled-dog culture is an understanding that qimmit are far more than mere working animals; they are relational beings imbued with agency, individuality, and social presence. This aligns with Indigenous ontologies that recognize animals as coactors in human social worlds, a perspective resonant with Haraway’s (2003) concept of “more-than-human” communities and Ingold’s (2011) dwelling perspective, which emphasize lived, sensuous engagement between humans, animals, and environments.
Ethnographic testimonies vividly illustrate this relationality. K’aerngâk Nielsen, a respected hunter from Avanersuaq, conveyed this intimacy when he said,
If a hunter is to be a hunter, he must have qimmit. We live with them. My father told me it is necessary to love qimmit like people. He was right. Qimmit obey better when we live with them as people (Jensen 2025).
Such statements reveal the profound intersubjective bonds that underpin dog–human partnerships, fostering communication that is often nonverbal but deeply understood during hunting.
The symbiosis between piniartut [hunters] and qimmit unfolds as a partnership grounded in mutual respect and dependence. Hunters rely on qimmit not only as transportation but as sensory extensions, vital for navigating dangerous ice and tracking elusive nannut [polar bears]. Nanorriutit—the specialized polar bear hunting dogs—epitomize this relationship, bred and trained for specific roles in the hunt, demonstrating heightened instincts, intelligence, and speed (Jensen 2025; Jensen and Sinding 2023). Hunting knowledge, especially surrounding these dogs, is passed down through family mentorship and community engagement, sustaining the cultural transmission of critical skills and values over generations.
This cultural transmission is framed here as intangible heritage—a living set of practices, oral knowledge, skills, and cosmologies actively maintained through social relations and embodied experience rather than static artifacts. Inspired by Smith (2006) and Kirshenblatt-Gimblett (2004), this dynamic heritage challenges notions of culture as fixed, highlighting instead its fluid and negotiated character.
Yet, the human–qimmeq relationship faces mounting pressures from rapid climate change, disease outbreaks (such as rabies and distemper), changing legislation, and sociocultural transformation (Andersen-Ranberg et al. 2019; Bohm et al. 1989; Langebæk et al. 2020; Sandager and Jensen 2018). Warming temperatures and melting sea ice disrupt traditional hunting grounds and shorten the sledding season (Ford and Goldhar 2012; Ford et al. 2015; Gearheard et al. 2013; Krupnik et al. 2010; Minor et al. 2023; Rantanen et al. 2022), threatening the survival of the qimmit and the continuity of dog-sled culture. Rising costs and availability issues of imported dog food add further challenges, occasionally forcing difficult decisions such as euthanasia of starving dogs (Egevang et al. 2020; Jensen 2020; Meldgaard et al. 2020).
In addition to environmental factors, the cultural landscape is shifting. Urbanization and modernization alter livelihoods and social structures, sometimes weakening informal apprenticeship systems essential for passing on sled-dog knowledge (Jensen 2020, 2025). While some communities strive to revitalize traditions through mentorship programs and local initiatives, these efforts require supportive economic and ecological conditions (KNQK 2015; Løgstrup 2017; Lykke and Meldgaard 2020).
Despite these threats, the study underscores the resilience and adaptability of human–qimmeq relations, which continue to embody key dimensions of identity, belonging, and cultural vitality in Kalaallit Nunaat. The sled dog remains a potent cultural icon and practical partner, central to narratives of survival and heritage in an evolving Arctic.
Practice-Based Knowledge Systems and Epistemological Pluralism
The intimate relationships between humans and qimmit are not only emotional or practical but also form the foundation of rich systems of cultural knowledge and skill transmission. This knowledge is embodied within practice-based communities, where learning occurs through participation in social and ecological activities rather than through formal instruction. Such communities of practice (Lave and Wenger 2003; Wenger 1999) enable hunters, mushers, and cultural knowledge bearers to pass on skills, values, and ways of knowing that are vital to maintaining sled-dog culture.
As Olsen and Tharp (2013) emphasize in Indigenous contexts, knowledge transmission is deeply relational and situated, emerging through engagement with the environment and living beings rather than abstract codification. This dynamic process allows for continual adaptation to environmental variability and social change, key factors in arctic contexts where conditions can shift rapidly.
Moreover, this study highlights the coexistence of multiple epistemologies—Indigenous experiential knowledge and Western scientific knowledge—that inform how communities understand and respond to environmental challenges. This epistemological (Bielawski 2005; Crate and Nuttall 2016; Kovach 2021; Yua et al. 2022) recognizes the validity and complementarity of diverse knowledge systems.
Local knowledge of sila—the complex arctic weather and environmental conditions—is a prime example of this pluralism in practice. Hunters’ keen observation and embodied understanding of sila guide decision-making for travel, hunting, and dog care, complementing scientific meteorological data and contributing to resilient adaptation strategies in a rapidly changing Arctic (Minor et al. 2023).
By embracing this plural epistemic landscape, Inuit and Kalaallit communities sustain culturally relevant practices that are both grounded in tradition and responsive to contemporary realities. This challenges assumptions that Indigenous knowledge is static or incompatible with scientific frameworks, instead demonstrating a nuanced interplay that strengthens adaptive capacity.
Critical Reflection on Intangible Cultural Heritage Frameworks
While the UNESCO framework of Intangible Cultural Heritage (ICH) offers valuable recognition of practices such as sled-dog culture, it also presents challenges when applied uncritically. This study echoes critical heritage scholarship that cautions against institutionalizing culture as a fixed and preservable entity, a process that may unintentionally marginalize the lived and evolving nature of cultural practices.
Kirshenblatt-Gimblett (2004) conceptualizes heritage as “metacultural production,” highlighting how heritage is not simply discovered or preserved but actively created and negotiated within social and political contexts. Similarly, Smith’s (2006) critique of the Authorized Heritage Discourse (AHD) points to how dominant institutions can assert authority over what counts as legitimate heritage, often sidelining local voices and practices.
In the context of Kalaallit Nunaat, framing qimmit solely within ICH risks fossilizing a vibrant, adaptive practice into static symbols, detaching it from the everyday relational and embodied knowledge that sustains it. Such formalization can shift agency from Indigenous communities to external heritage bodies, privileging documentation and preservation over community-led living heritage.
This study argues for a heritage approach that respects the dynamism and negotiation inherent in sled-dog culture. Knowledge about dog training, hunting techniques, navigation, and climate adaptation is transmitted through ongoing social interaction and participation rather than through fixed scripts. Recognizing this fluidity is crucial to supporting sustainable cultural continuity in the face of rapid environmental and social change.
Flexible and locally grounded heritage frameworks are needed—ones that empower communities to define and enact their heritage in ways that are meaningful and relevant to their lived realities.
Cultural Plurality and Contemporary Challenges
The sled-dog culture in Greenland is not monolithic: it encompasses a plurality of practices, meanings, and functions that vary regionally and socially. In subsistence-oriented areas like Avanersuaq, qimmit remains central to hunting livelihoods, mobility, and cultural identity. Here, sled dogs are active agents in sustaining traditional ways of life, intimately connected to ecological knowledge and social networks.
Conversely, in more urbanized or touristic regions, sled dogs often occupy recreational, symbolic, or heritage-tourism roles. In towns such as Kangerlussuaq and Ilulissat, dog sledding has been commodified as a cultural experience for visitors, while some residents keep qimmit for enjoyment or competitive racing rather than subsistence. This diversification reflects broader socioeconomic shifts, changing mobility patterns, and evolving cultural aspirations within Kalaallit Nunaat (Egevang et al. 2020; Jensen 2020).
These plural manifestations challenge homogenizing national narratives that portray sled-dog culture as static or uniform. Instead, they underscore the necessity of heritage policies and support systems that accommodate regional specificities and local adaptations.
However, sled-dog culture faces profound challenges. Climate change drastically alters ice conditions, shortening the sledding season and impeding traditional travel routes (Jensen and Sinding 2023; Minor et al. 2023; Rantanen et al. 2022). Disease outbreaks, including rabies and parvovirus, threaten qimmit health and populations (Bohm et al. 1989; Peplinski 2024). Legal regulations like mandatory microchipping and vaccination programs reflect efforts to safeguard dogs, but also signal a shift towards bureaucratization of traditional practices (Langebæk et al. 2020).
Economic pressures and urbanization have made maintaining dog teams increasingly difficult. Costs of imported dog food and reduced access to traditional feeding sources complicate care, sometimes forcing euthanasia of starving dogs during harsh seasons (Egevang and van den Berg 2020; Jensen 2020). Moreover, the physical separation of dogs from human living spaces in urban centers diminishes everyday intimacy and the depth of human–qimmeq bonds.
These socioenvironmental transformations raise urgent questions about the future viability of sled-dog culture and the transmission of related knowledge and values. Community-driven initiatives and mentorship programs offer pathways for revitalization, but their success depends on continued access to land, economic support, and the preservation of cultural frameworks that value human–animal relationships.
Recognizing and supporting the diversity and adaptability of sled-dog cultures is essential for sustaining this integral aspect of Inuit and Kalaallit heritage in a rapidly changing Arctic world.
Conclusion and Future Perspectives
This study demonstrates that qimmit in Kalaallit Nunaat embody far more than the role of sled dogs; they are deeply embedded relational beings central to Inuit and Kalaallit cultural, social, and ecological life (Haraway 2003; Ingold 2011). Through their roles in practices of care, knowledge transmission, and identity formation, qimmit support adaptive lifeways amid rapid environmental, social, and technological transformation (Bielawski 2005; Jensen 2020).
By centering Indigenous voices and embracing epistemological pluralism, this research shows how Indigenous experiential knowledge and Western scientific perspectives can coexist and coproduce understandings of arctic climate change and adaptation (Crate and Nuttall 2016; Kovach 2021). Valuing diverse knowledge systems is critical to building culturally relevant and resilient responses to contemporary challenges (Yua et al. 2022).
Engaging critically with intangible cultural heritage frameworks highlights the risks of institutionalizing culture as static or preservable, potentially displacing lived practice (Kirshenblatt-Gimblett 2004; Smith 2006). Instead, heritage should be recognized as a negotiated, evolving process that sustains community agency and reflects the multispecies entanglements shaping Kalaallit Nunaat (Jensen 2020, 2025; Jensen and Sinding 2023; Olsen and Tharp 2013).
The cultural diversity of sled-dog practices across Greenland underscores the need for flexible, locally grounded heritage policies that accommodate regional variation and evolving realities (Egevang et al. 2020; Jensen 2020, 2024, 2025; Minor et al. 2023). Supporting community-driven heritage initiatives is vital to sustaining sled-dog culture and the human–animal relationships essential to arctic survival and identity (KNQK 2015; Løgstrup 2017; Lykke and Meldgaard 2020; Rosing 1975; Siegstad 2008).
Future research should continue to explore multispecies relationships in arctic contexts through Indigenous epistemologies and participatory methodologies (Kovach 2021; MacLeod 2021). Such approaches can deepen understanding of resilience, adaptation, and the entangled dynamics of human–animal–environmental relations in a rapidly changing North (Bielawski 2005; Crate and Nuttall 2016).
The persistence of qimmeq–human bonds amid ecological uncertainty offers a vital lens for understanding Indigenous cultural continuity and transformation (Haraway 2003; Jensen 2020). Going forward, research and heritage practices must remain flexible and community-driven, responsive to local priorities while fostering dialogue across disciplines and knowledge systems (MacLeod 2021; Smith 2012). These approaches will help sustain culturally meaningful adaptation strategies that honor both human and more-than-human lifeways in the Arctic.
Acknowledgments
This research was made possible through generous funding from the Aage and Johanne Louis-Hansen Foundation and the VELUX Foundation, whose support is gratefully acknowledged. We also thank the participants, including Elders, hunters, mushers, and cultural knowledge bearers, who generously shared their time, insights, and lived experiences. Their contributions are foundational to this work, and we are deeply appreciative of their trust, knowledge, and engagement throughout the research process.
The first author gratefully acknowledges the mentorship of Morten Meldgaard, Anne Katrine Gjerløff, and the late Lene Kielsen Holm, whose guidance and encouragement were instrumental during the research. Holm’s legacy continues to inspire this work. Deep gratitude is also extended to Carsten Egevang for generously providing the photographs used in this article.
Finally, we thank the anonymous reviewers and the editor, Pete Collins, for their thoughtful and constructive feedback, which significantly improved the clarity and quality of this paper.
This open access article is distributed under the terms of the CC-BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0) and is freely available online at: https://aa.uwpress.org.
References
In this issue
Jump to section
Related Articles
Cited By...
- No citing articles found.