Breaking colonial borders: Arctic collaboration and the emergence of Indigenous screen industries in Sápmi and Greenland

Abstract

This article explores how collaboration across Arctic borders has enabled the emergence of ultrasmall, Indigenous-led sectors, examining the development of Indigenous screen industries in Sápmi and Kalaallit Nunaat (Greenland). The Sámi film industry has experienced a notable rise, driven by strategic transnational collaborations and the establishment of institutions such as the International Sámi Film Institute, which prioritize narrative sovereignty and cultural resilience. The developing Greenlandic cinema has followed a similar path, drawing on Sámi practices to build its own structures for growth, culminating in the establishment of a film institute in 2026. The study highlights how these industries confront legacies of colonialism whilst navigating challenges such as funding limitations, environmental sustainability, and filmmaker fatigue. Through comparative analysis, the article argues that Sámi and Greenlandic screen industries offer a model for other ultrasmall and Indigenous industries globally, demonstrating how cultural authenticity, ethical filmmaking practices, and strategic collaborations can coexist with global market integration. The findings underscore the importance of institution-building, transnational networking, and balancing local priorities with international opportunities. Ultimately, the article shows that Indigenous screen industries globally can transform traditional industry structures, asserting political and cultural agency whilst contributing to a broader reimagining of global cinema.

Introduction

In recent years, we have seen the rise of an Indigenous film industry that is now globally visible and thriving, promoting Indigenous stories and contributing to discussions of representation, narrative ownership, and diversity within the global media industries. ImagineNATIVE in Canada, Sundance in the US, Skábmagovat in Finland, Berlinale in Germany, and Māoriland in New Zealand, are all film festivals that promote Indigenous films. A prime example of the increasing visibility of Indigenous film is the Sámi film wave, which includes an increasing number of feature films, screenings and collaborations worldwide with Netflix, Disney, and Sundance Film Festival, just to mention a few. Sámi film production, which previously was almost non-existing, is now experiencing a momentum; we are witnessing a paradigm shift regarding recognition of Sámi culture and society, driven by a blooming of Sámi cultural expressions including film, television, art, and music (Sand, 2021). However, this development did not come easily but is the result of overcoming significant structural and historical barriers through various strategies. Thus, Sámi filmmakers were forced to seek support beyond and across (colonial) borders, forging transnational collaborations and securing co-production agreements.

The rise of Sámi cinema has naturally drawn the attention of other Indigenous film communities, particularly the Greenlandic screen industry, which shares a foundation in Indigenous storytelling, international collaborations, and efforts to secure diverse financing sources (Grønlund, 2021a, 2023, 2026a). Although Greenlandic cinema is still in its developmental phase and has not yet reached the global recognition or institutional support of Sámi cinema, it has made significant progress over the past decade. Much of this advancement can be attributed to collaborations with the Sámi industry, which has established itself as a regional trailblazer. To do so, the International Sámi Film Institute (ISFI) in Guovdageaidnu, Northern Norway, has played a crucial role in fostering collaborations across the Arctic, particularly among Indigenous communities seeking to strengthen their screen industries. Key support mechanisms, such as the Arctic Indigenous Film Fund (AIFF), have been pivotal in promoting cultural exchange, diversifying film narratives, and advancing Indigenous perspectives on themes like colonization, genre development, and the evolution of production practices. Today, international events like the Nuuk International Film Festival and the Indigenous Film Conference in Guovdageaidnu have further elevated the visibility of Arctic Indigenous cinema, and Norway’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the Indigenous Film Conference in Guovdageaidnu in 2023 have underscored the role of film in reconciliation processes. These platforms link cinema to broader political discussions on addressing colonial legacies and promoting Indigenous rights mirroring global debates and developments.

Overall, this development is reflected in international Indigenous collaborations and efforts to dismantle colonial barriers in film financing, such as The Indigenous Cinema Alliance (ICA), which was founded in 2015. In this way, the Sámi industry’s strategic collaborations and innovative practices have promoted and internationalized Sámi cinema, providing a successful model for Greenland, which is adopting similar strategies to expand its own screen industry. However, despite these advancements, research on strategies, the global impact of Sámi cinema and comparative studies with similar industries remains underexplored, limiting a fuller understanding of the increasing influence of ultrasmall Indigenous industries and their shared growth.

To mitigate this gap, this article examines the development of screen industries in ultrasmall contexts, including the rise of an Indigenous, Sámi screen industry and developments in Greenland. The article examines the Sámi screen industry’s development and practices and the impacts on the Greenlandic screen industry within the context of Indigenous and ultrasmall screen industries guided by the research question: What characterizes the development of the Sámi and Greenlandic screen industry and what lessons can be drawn from this in relation to Indigenous and ultrasmall screen industries globally? To do so, the article addresses broader discussions within the global media industries, including complex questions concerning diversity, representation and who have the right to tell a story. We comparatively introduce the historical contexts of Sámi and Greenlandic cinemas, examining their evolution and unique challenges. It thus addresses significant challenges faced by these industries and explores the distinct economic and political contexts that shape these industries, highlighting the unique status of these regions as non-nation states and the implications of this status.

In this article, we describe the development of ultrasmall Indigenous screen cultures, arguing that these cultures reflect the complexities of Indigenous and ultrasmall screen production on a global scale, including topics such as policies and financing, collaborations, size, diversity and what recognizes screen production that (often) takes place in peripheral areas. It thus demonstrates how ultrasmall industries are strategically adapting to, and even reshaping, the demands of the global film landscape, all within the constraints imposed by their size as well as geographical and political positions. Here, Sápmi and Greenland reflect global developments in which ultrasmall and Indigenous screen industries are expanding and attracting growing industrial attention, as seen in initiatives such as Netflix’s partnerships with the Indigenous Screen Office in Canada, Screen Australia’s First Nations programs, and the increasing visibility of Indigenous storytelling at major film festivals.

Similar trends and academic interest can be seen across the Arctic and North Atlantic regions, including in Nunavut, Canada, and the Faroe Islands (Bredin, 2015; Grønlund, 2023; Harmon, 2020; MacKenzie and Stenport, 2015; Sand, 2022b, 2026) – with discussions and increasing focus on narrative sovereignty, representation, decolonization and industry growth. For instance, recent studies emphasize that Indigenous filmmaking and worldviews plays a critical role in reclaiming cultural narratives and resisting the homogenizing tendencies of global media industries (Milligan, 2025). These developments resonate with research beyond these regions – from the Navajo Nation (Lewis, 2010) to Aotearoa (New Zealand) (Martens, 2010) – where even small island states in the Pacific look to Sámi-led initiatives such as AIFF, which “demonstrates the potential for regional cooperation to support film production, particularly, in this case, of Indigenous communities in a region where access to resources is also very unequal” (Stupples et al., 2022: 226). As such, this situates the article within a wider discussion and scholarship on Indigenous and ultrasmall screen industries that are redefining global media industries through collaboration, resilience, and locally grounded forms of creative sovereignty and collaboration.

By exploring these themes, the article demonstrates how Indigenous and ultrasmall screen industries can leverage their unique cultural, demographic, and political contexts to impact global film markets. This research contributes to the study of Indigenous cinema and offers critical insights and lessons for the development and sustainability of other ultrasmall and regional screen industries worldwide.

Complex screen histories

The histories of the Sámi people and Kalaallit (Greenlanders) are marked by complex interactions between Indigenous communities, nation-states, and colonial forces. These histories fundamentally shape contemporary cultural expressions, including the recent rise of Sámi and Greenlandic screen industries. Both Indigenous communities have experienced oppression and marginalization, yet their experiences diverge significantly due to differing political and demographic contexts.

The Sámi, Indigenous to the northern regions of Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Russia, have faced systemic assimilation policies and cultural erasure. Beginning in the 1850s, Norway implemented stringent Norwegianization policies, forcibly assimilating Sámi children by prohibiting the use of their language in schools. The period was also marked by race-biological research that sought to justify the inferiority of Sámi culture through pseudo-scientific practices such as skull measurements. These policies and practices framed the Sámi as an “Other,” perpetuating a narrative of cultural and racial inferiority.

In the media, Sámi culture and identity have historically been portrayed through the lens of outsiders, reinforcing stereotypes and marginalization. However, recent decades have witnessed a resurgence of Sámi cultural expressions and Sámi media has contributed to increased self-determination and recognition, propelled by increasing recognition of Indigenous rights (Dubois and Cocq, 2019; Sand, 2021). A pivotal moment came during the Alta controversy (1979–1982), when Sámi activists protested the construction of a hydroelectric dam, claiming it violated their rights and destroyed Sámi land (Sand, 2022). While the dam was built, the protests catalyzed significant changes, including the establishment of the Sámi Parliament in 1989 and the ratification of the ILO Convention 169 in 1992, recognizing the Sámi as an Indigenous people. In 2018, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) was established to investigate the Norwegianization policy and injustice against the Sámi and the minorities Kvens/Norwegian Finns and the Forrest Finns, and they delivered a report in 2023. The report emphasizes “knowledge raising, strengthening of the Sami and Kven languages, as well as language proficiency, strengthening of culture and cultural expertise, conflict resolution and implementation of regulations” (Sannhets- og forsoningskommisjonen, 2023: 90). The acknowledgment of Indigenous, Sámi rights and Sámi-majority relations are important for understanding the rise of Sámi film in Sápmi, including the emergence of Sámi cinema as a platform for self-representation.

Similarly, Greenland’s history is deeply intertwined with Scandinavian colonialism, especially since a permanent connection was established by the Danish-Norwegian missionary Hans Egede in 1721. Since then, Greenland has undergone several significant political and administrative developments, transitioning from a formal colony to a Danish county (“amt”) in 1953. During the 1960s, modernization efforts, including infrastructure, education reforms, and massive focus on assimilation, occurred and caused growing dissatisfaction over Danish dominance and the marginalization of Greenlandic culture. This discontent led to the introduction of Home Rule in 1979, granting autonomy over internal affairs, and later, Self-Government in 2009, which transferred more control and affirmed Greenland’s right to self-determination while maintaining the connection to Denmark as an autonomous territory within the Kingdom of Denmark.

The early cinematic histories of Sámi and Greenlandic communities were largely defined by external perspectives, often filtered through exoticism, romanticism, and colonial attitudes. In the Sámi context, early 20th-century films such as Laila (1929) and Markens Grøde (1921) in Norway, Midnattsolens Son (1939) in Sweden, and Noidan Kirot (1927) in Finland depicted Sámi culture as an exotic spectacle. These films typically featured non-Sámi actors and perpetuated stereotypes of Sámi people as “noble savages,” portraying them as disconnected from modernity and frozen in a romanticized past (Skardhamar, 2008).

Similarly, Greenland’s early representation in film was shaped by a paternalistic gaze that framed it as Europe’s “primitive Other” (Thisted et al., 2021: 21). Danish and other foreign filmmakers exploited Greenland’s spectacular landscapes, producing ethnographic and expedition films that emphasized exoticism while often reducing Greenlandic culture to simplistic stereotypes. These portrayals reinforced narratives of cultural inferiority and dependency.

However, the 20th century also saw shifts in both Sámi and Greenlandic representation. In the Sámi context, mid-century documentaries like Same Jakki (1957) and Same Ællin (1971) attempted to educate broader audiences about Sámi culture but continued to romanticize Sámi life. A more nuanced effort appeared with the television series Ante (1975), which incorporated Sámi advisors and actors to present authentic language and culture while confronting discrimination by the Norwegian state. By the 1980s, activist films like La elva leve (1980) and Mo Sámi váldet (1984) directly critiqued state policies, advocating for Sámi rights through collaborations between Sámi and non-Sámi filmmakers (Sand, 2022a). A pivotal moment came in 1987 with the release of Ofelaš (Pathfinder) by Nils Gaup, the first Sámi-language feature film. This milestone marked a shift toward Sámi self-representation in cinema, offering global audiences a narrative rooted in Sámi culture and asserting control over Sámi storytelling.

Greenlandic cinema followed a parallel trajectory. Early films, often produced by external filmmakers, were dominated by ethnographic traditions that presented Greenlanders as subjects of curiosity, reinforcing stereotypes of primitivism and isolation (Grønlund, 2023; Jørgensen, 2003; MacKenzie and Stenport, 2020). But the 1970s signaled a cultural awakening, driven by Greenland’s growing movement toward autonomy and self-determination. The band Sumé, with its politically charged music, became a symbol of Greenlandic identity and resistance to colonial narratives, inspiring cultural expressions that challenged historical portrayals (Montgomery-Andersen, 2021). Central here is the critical documentary film Nalagkersuissut okarput tassagok (And the Authorities Said Stop, 1972) directed by Danish Per Kirkeby and Greenlandic Aqqaluk Lynge covering the forced governmental closure of the settlement of Qullissat, arguably making Lynge Greenland’s first (documentary) director.

With the establishment of Home Rule, this created the basis of what is referred to as the “first wave of Greenlandic cinema” emerging in the mid-1980s, closely tied to the beginning of public service broadcaster Kalaallit Nunaata Radioa’s (KNR) TV production in 1982 (Grønlund, 2023: 122). KNR became a pivotal platform for early productions, providing opportunities for Greenlandic filmmakers to experiment with storytelling and address local audiences. This period saw the emergence of filmmakers such as Hans A. Hansen, who directed Takorluukkat Sisamat (Four Visions, 1985), a feature-length social realist drama. In the same period, KNR supported the production of Nissikkut (1985), the first Greenlandic Christmas TV series, made in collaboration with the theater group Silamiut. Directed and produced by KNR personnel and set a precedent for locally produced serialized fiction. Overall, this laid the foundation for the developments of the late 1990s and the rapid changes of the “second wave” beginning in 2009 (Thorsen and Péronard, 2021: 267).

Similarly, the Sámi public service broadcaster NRK Sápmi established its own media house in 1984, and has offered opportunities for up-and coming, young Sámi filmmakers to participate and develop a variety of productions. Several Sámi filmmakers now work with both Sámi television and film, and recently, the first Sámi youth series Oro Jaska (2024, developed by Vegard Bjørsmo and Silje Bürgin-Borch) was broadcasted on the national channel NRK1 and nominated for an Emmy. Today, both the Sámi and the Kalaallit continue to navigate the historical legacies and developments toward increasing self-government. Both communities increasingly turn to cultural expressions, including cinema, as powerful tools for reclaiming and -shaping narratives along.

In recent years, both Sápmi and Greenland have seen a surge in diverse film productions that reflect their unique perspectives and collaborations with SVoD platforms (Sápmifilm.com) have further broadened the scope of Indigenous storytelling, showcasing their culture on the international stage. From 2023 to 2024, five Sámi feature films and two television series premiered, and Sámi film production and the Sámi film industry are growing. Although development is more limited, three Greenlandic feature films have premiered since 2020 along with several feature films and TV series with formal Greenlandic co-productions. Furthermore, the recent signing of Greenland’s first film law by the Greenlandic parliament, Inatsisartut, on November 20, 2024, paves the way for a national film institute and production incentive scheme by 2026 (NFTVF, 2024). Together, these developments highlight a commitment to reclaiming and diversifying narratives, positioning Sámi and Greenlandic cinema as dynamic and sustainable contributors to the global film landscape.

Development of Indigenous production cultures

Greenland, with a population of 56,000, and Sápmi, with an estimated Sámi population of 50,000–100,000, represent examples of ultrasmall screen industries, characterized by their small domestic markets, limited infrastructure, and reliance on external collaboration (Grønlund, 2023: 57, 2026b). Both regions face unique challenges due to their Arctic locations and small population bases, which constrain their ability to sustain independent, commercially viable screen industries with limited support.

The geographical and linguistic diversity of these regions plays a central role in shaping their film industries. Greenland’s primary languages are (West) Greenlandic (Kalaallisut) and Danish, while Sápmi features multiple Sámi languages, with Northern Sámi being the most prominent. Active use of the Sámi languages is regarded as a very important element in the further development of Sámi culture. The right and possibilities of Sámi pupils to learn Sámi language is promoted in the Nordic countries, although there are great differences in terms of resources and accessibility (Broderstad, 2022; Ministry of Labour and Social Inclusion, 2014). To promote Sámi languages was an important argument behind the establishment of the Internašunála Sámi Filbmainstituhtta (International Sámi Film Institute, ISFI), and for funding of Sámi films. Their mission is “Through our own stories and films, we fight for the survival of Sámi culture, values, and languages. By telling our stories, we create our future” (https://isfi.no/about/). When applying for funding from ISFI, the project must be developed in Sámi in its entirety, and the main language in the manuscript must be Sámi (ISFI, n.d.).

Both regions have historically attracted external filmmakers due to their dramatic Arctic landscapes and the allure of their unique cultures. This interest has often resulted in portrayals shaped by outsider perspectives, ranging from exoticized ethnographic depictions to representations rooted in the concept of the Arctic sublime (Morgan, 2016); an idealized and mythologized perception of the Arctic, portraying it as a space of untouched beauty and grandeur. This fascination often intersects with broader narratives of nationalism, framing the Arctic as a symbolic frontier tied to cultural or territorial identity, while simultaneously reflecting imperial ambitions that cast the region as a domain to be explored, claimed, or conquered. Acknowledging this history is crucial, as recent developments in both Sámi and Greenlandic screen industries have focused on reclaiming narratives and addressing these outsider representations while retaining the opportunities that international foreign-led collaborations create. Despite structural disadvantages such as limited capacity, restricted professional ecosystems, and limited local markets, the industries in Greenland and Sápmi have leveraged Indigenous collaboration, community engagement as well as external interest and collaborations to foster growth.

The emergence of Indigenous production cultures is thus partly a response to the historical dominance of outsider perspectives in the representation of Arctic landscapes and peoples. This involves not only choosing what stories to tell but also ensuring that the process of filmmaking aligns with cultural protocols and ethical considerations. Furthermore, a focus on collaboration and mentorship is central, ensuring that production processes reflect local priorities and engage Indigenous perspectives. The production cultures emerging in Greenland and Sápmi thus represent a shift toward more autonomous, ethical, and sustainable models of filmmaking defined by their commitment to Indigenous leadership, cultural authenticity, and collaboration, offering a blueprint for other small and marginalized screen industries seeking to balance local values with global opportunities. By prioritizing these principles, Sámi and Greenlandic filmmakers are not only reshaping the Arctic screen industries but also contributing to a broader reimagining of what production cultures can look like in a decolonized context globally.

In the following sections, we will explore key areas of development for both screen industries, focusing on funding and support, strategic approaches to industry growth, and the role of collaboration and external partnerships in fostering their advancement.

Narrative sovereignty, ethics, and the political dimensions of filmmaking

The development of the Sámi film industry is deeply intertwined with the political history of the Sámi people, including their ongoing struggles for recognition, self-determination, and rights. These political dimensions permeate all aspects of Sámi cinema, from the stories told on screen to the ethical frameworks guiding production practices and the industry’s lobbying efforts for systemic change. Film, as both an artistic and political medium, has become a critical space for exploring truth, addressing historical injustices, and strengthening Sámi identity.

One prominent example of this intersection is the role of ISFI in Norway’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC). In 2023, ISFI actively contributed to the reconciliation process by organizing the Indigenous Film Conference in Guovdageaidnu, titled Reconciliation and New Futures. The conference highlighted the transformative potential of Sámi films in fostering collective healing and work through collective and individual memories of injustice, raising awareness among majority populations. Discussions centered on how cinema can serve as a platform for truth-telling, making visible the experiences and histories often silenced or misrepresented in mainstream narratives. The TRC’s final report underscored the importance of Sámi films and series in fostering Sámi identity and raising awareness among the broader population about Sámi issues. In response, ISFI launched initiatives like the Arctic Indigenous Screenwriting Workshop, which integrates traditional Sámi storytelling into filmmaking practices, ensuring that narratives remain rooted in Indigenous perspectives while contributing to transnational collaborations. The workshop offers participants from across the Arctic a chance to refine their narrative and character development skills. With 12 participants selected from 47 applications, the workshop brought together mentors from Sápmi, the US, and Canada, demonstrating the power of trans-Indigenous collaboration to nurture narrative sovereignty.

In Greenland, Indigenous fiction production has largely avoided directly addressing colonial themes. Instead of engaging with historical misrepresentation or overtly political narratives, Greenlandic filmmakers have focused on entertaining local audiences through genre films such as Malik Kleist’s horror or Marc Fussing Rosbach’s fantasy feature films. This focus on genre cinema reflects a broader trend in Arctic Indigenous filmmaking but also underscores a distinct Greenlandic effort to produce relatable, Greenlandic-language content aimed at local audiences – a prioritization of entertainment over education, in contrast to the historical, colonial narratives often seen in Sámi cinema.

This production ethos stands in contrast to Danish films such as Eksperimentet (The Experiment, Louise Friedberg, 2010) and Kalak (Isabella Eklöf, 2024), which directly explore and convey colonial history (Grønlund, 2026b), often accompanied by undertones of scanguilt. This term, coined by Oxfeldt (2016, 2018), refers to a Scandinavian sense of guilt arising from the recognition that the region’s happiness and privilege have historically come at the expense of others, a feeling tied to colonial legacies. Greenlandic filmmakers, by contrast, appear focused on filling an entertainment gap previously dominated by foreign content, prioritizing stories that resonate with Greenlandic audiences rather than aiming to educate international viewers about colonial or political issues. Critical, identity-seeking screen production in Greenland has instead been primarily channeled through documentary formats. Films like And the Authorities Said Stop and Sumé – Mumisitsinerup Nipaa (Sumé – The Sound of a Revolution, Inuk Silis Høegh, 2014) offer reflective explorations of Greenlandic identity, though films have not been explicitly tied to political initiatives such as the Greenland Reconciliation Commission established in 2014. This stands in contrast to Sámi filmmaking traditions, where activist films such as La elva leve (‘Let the River Flow’, 1980) and Mo Sámi váldet (The Taking of Sámiland, 1984) emerged as direct critiques of state policies, advocating for Sámi rights through collaborations between Sámi and non-Sámi filmmakers. More recent productions like Sameblod (Sami Blood, Amanda Kernell, 2016) and Kautokeino-opprøret (The Kautokeino Rebellion, Nils Gaup, 2008) revisit historical injustices through narratives of personal and collective resistance. Rather than channeling a retrospective guilt from a majority perspective, these films articulate Indigenous self-representation and political agency, rooted in lived experiences of marginalization.

In this context, the concept of narrative sovereignty – the ability to tell one’s own stories on one’s own terms – has been a central focus for Sámi and Greenlandic filmmakers. This stems not only from a desire to correct the misrepresentations and stereotypes perpetuated by outsider depictions but also to assert control over how Sámi culture and people are portrayed. To this end, the Pathfinder Guidelines for Responsible Filmmaking with Sámi Culture and People were launched in 2021. Developed by ISFI in collaboration with the Sámi Filmmakers Association and the Pathfinder Filmmakers Reference Group, the guidelines provide a comprehensive framework for filmmakers who wish to incorporate Sámi themes, stories, and characters. They emphasize the importance of collaboration and mutual respect while outlining clear steps to avoid misrepresentation and cultural appropriation. Comparative initiatives have emerged elsewhere, underscoring a broader international movement toward ethical Indigenous storytelling; in New Zealand, Te Tumu Whakaata Taonga’s (2018) (New Zealand Film Commission) Te Rautaki (Māori strategy) outline principles for respectful collaboration and cultural consultation; in Australia, Screen Australia’s Pathways & Protocols: a filmmaker’s guide to working with Indigenous people, culture and concepts (Janke, 2009) establish similar requirements for productions engaging with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. Likewise, in Canada, the Indigenous Screen Office’s Protocols and Pathways (2022) provide a model for equitable partnerships and culturally grounded production practices; and in Canada, imagineNATIVE’s On-Screen Protocols & Patways: A Media Production Guide to Working with First Nations, Métis and Inuit Communities, Cultures, Concepts and Stories present similar initiatives and directly discuss narrative sovereignty and the “ability of the nations to have some measure of control over the stories that are told about themselves” (Nickersson, 2019: 7). However, consciousness about being Indigenous came later to Greenland than to Sápmi, and hence Greenland has not (yet) developed similar official ethical guidelines.

These ethical measures, combined with proactive efforts to expand Indigenous storytelling, reflect a larger vision of empowering Sámi – and other Indigenous filmmakers – to shape their own narratives. As ISFI Director Anne Lajla Utsi notes, substantial funding and support for Sámi cinema will not only strengthen its capacity to document and reflect Sámi experiences but also position Sámi filmmakers as key players on the international stage. This dual focus – preserving cultural integrity while enhancing global visibility – has become a hallmark of Sámi filmmaking, demonstrating how cinema can be both an art form and a tool for political and social transformation. Furthermore, ISFI expresses borderless thinking in their support, and a collective focus on other ultrasmall, Indigenous film nations that are not yet as developed.

International Networking and collaborations in the Arctic

The development of Sámi and Greenlandic film industries is inseparable from the broader political struggles of their communities, including the fight for recognition, self-determination, and cultural sovereignty. These industries have become vital platforms for reclaiming Indigenous narratives and addressing the historical injustices and misrepresentations that have long shaped their portrayal. Central to this reclamation is the principle of “Nothing about us without us,” for example, employed in the Pathfinder guidelines, which encapsulates a commitment to Indigenous participation and control over every stage of filmmaking. This ethos is not only a response to the exclusionary practices of the past but also a strategic framework for fostering ethical collaborations, ensuring narrative sovereignty, and building sustainable partnerships.

The emphasis on collaboration is not merely an ethical imperative but also a practical strategy. Introduced by Sámi filmmakers and later adopted by Greenlanders, “Nothing about us without us” as a guiding ethos reframes involvement as a necessity for cultural authenticity and ethical storytelling. This approach extends beyond Indigenous-led projects, influencing how external productions engage with Sámi and Greenlandic communities. For instance, Disney’s collaboration with Sámi cultural advisors during the production of Frozen 2, following criticism of the original film, marked a shift toward ethical filmmaking practices. The partnership not only ensured more accurate representation but also included workshops to support Sámi filmmakers, demonstrating how Indigenous involvement enriches both the cultural and creative dimensions of a project.

Similarly, Netflix’s partnership with Sámi filmmakers for the production of Stolen, its first Sámi feature film, highlights how collaboration can serve as a vehicle for narrative sovereignty. By involving Sámi actors and creatives in key roles, the project ensured that the story reflected Sámi perspectives while reaching a global audience. This collaboration has since expanded, with Netflix and ISFI launching initiatives like the ISFI x Netflix Writing Academy to provide Sámi filmmakers with professional development opportunities. Such initiatives underscore how the principle of “Nothing about us without us” is not limited to representation; it is a framework for building capacity and fostering long-term industry growth.

Overall, the Greenlandic film industry is similarly leveraging this ethos to address its unique challenges. Historically, Greenlandic stories have often been told by outsiders, shaped by colonial perspectives that exoticized or marginalized local voices. Although it has not resulted in a comparable proliferation of initiatives as in Sápmi, programs such as the Danish NORDDOK, which supports documentary projects about the Kingdom of Denmark, specifically emphasize Greenlandic (and Faroese) filmmakers, mandating their involvement in cases where the production is Danish. At the same time, the film industry has increasingly prioritized collaboration and learning, a development clearly reflected in recent Danish productions such as Kalak and Borgen: Power & Glory (DR/Netflix, 2022) (Grønlund and Waade 2024; Grønlund 2026b). Both productions explicitly highlighted Greenlandic involvement behind the camera in their early production materials (Grønlund, 2023).

This prioritization of collaboration has been realized through co-productions, co-directing arrangements, and the engagement of Greenlandic readers to ensure ethically sound and culturally authentic representations. Furthermore, this shift has created a growing demand for cultural consultancies capable of facilitating cultural translation on foreign-led projects. While this represents a positive development, it also underscores new challenges, including the significant pressure placed on the small number of Greenlandic filmmakers to act as cultural gatekeepers. This dynamic, coupled with the limited capacity within the Greenlandic film community, has led to issues of filmmaker fatigue; when a growing global demand for meaningful participation from community members exceeds the availability of film professionals to fulfill these roles (Grønlund 2023: 205, 2026b). In other words, while this development is a step forward, it also highlights the pressing need for capacity building within the Greenlandic film sector to support sustainable growth and participation. This highlights a key dilemma in Indigenous screen industries: while increased collaboration and representation are positive developments, they place disproportionate demands on communities with limited capacity. Sustainable growth therefore requires not only local investment but also supportive collaborative frameworks beyond the community itself.

These developments are part of a broader strategy that balances cultural integrity with commercial viability. The concept of “soft arguments” plays a key role here, framing Indigenous involvement as a moral and ethical necessity rather than relying solely on economic justifications. By emphasizing diversity, equity, and inclusion, these arguments resonate with contemporary global discourses, making them particularly effective in securing collaborations and funding. Sámi and Greenlandic filmmakers have used this approach to advocate for ethical storytelling practices that prioritize Indigenous voices while aligning with global industry demands.

Through interconnected strategies – narrative sovereignty, ethical filmmaking, transnational networking, and Indigenous ownership – Sámi and Greenlandic filmmakers are redefining their roles in the global cinematic landscape. The principle of “Nothing about us without us” serves as both a moral imperative and a strategic framework, ensuring that Indigenous voices are not only heard but also central to the storytelling process. By addressing historical injustices while creating space for authentic narratives, these industries demonstrate how cinema can be a powerful tool for cultural preservation, political advocacy, and artistic innovation.

Funding and support in the Arctic

A challenge for Sámi filmmakers has been the lack of a Sámi film institution, and funding for Sámi film production. The establishment of ISFI in 2009 has been a game changer in every sense; economically, politically, and last, but not least, culturally, and creatively. The founding of the institute was based on the argument that Sámi filmmakers needed a funding institution with Sámi cultural competence. Norwegian film policy from 2007 says that the state’s support is culturally founded, and it underlines that to develop and maintain culture and identity, film production in the Sámi language is necessary (Ministry of Culture and Church, 2007: 97). They have succeeded in increasing the production of films, and the number of filmmakers. ISFI has managed to gain political recognition which has resulted in a steady increase of public funding. In ten years, from 2013 to 2023, the amount of funding increased from 3 million Norwegian kroner to 16.8 million (Sand, 2026). Furthermore, Sámi film production is a central part of the Sámi Parliament in Norway’s cultural policy, and the Sámi parliament has contributed to funding of various initiatives, from film funding to film courses and dubbing of films. The increased funding has resulted in a creative boom, since the filmmakers increasingly have access to guidance, mentors with cultural competence, courses, network, and funding to develop and produce films.

While ISFI receives increased funding from the Norwegian state, the work toward neighbor states Sweden and Finland has not succeeded, only Finland contributes with a small amount of funding. It is therefore a challenge for ISFI to gain financial recognition for the institute as a cross-border project. This situation is an example of the disadvantages of being a people located across several states – the lack of coordination between the countries, from funding to archives and film infrastructure. Living across four states have geopolitical implications for Sámi filmmakers, since there is no autonomous, cross-border Sámi film infrastructure.

Although the Sámi filmmakers’ journey toward establishing a robust film infrastructure has been significantly bolstered by the creation of ISFI, their experience also highlights the broader challenges faced by Indigenous filmmakers operating across colonial and geopolitical borders. Unlike its neighboring nations, Greenland continues to lack an established, state-supported entity to drive the development of its film industry. A major challenge for Greenlandic filmmakers has been the absence of a dedicated film institution and the limited availability of funding for screen production. While cultural affairs fall under Greenland’s jurisdiction following the establishment of Home Rule, this autonomy has left Greenlandic filmmakers in an “economic no-man’s-land,” (Elmelund, 2018; Grønlund, 2023: 138) as filmmakers do not qualify for Danish public film funding unless they reside in Denmark, and those living in Denmark often cannot access Greenlandic funds.

In this way, funding and support have been central challenges for the development of Greenland’s screen industry, reflecting a history of fragmented policies and limited resources (Grønlund, 2023: 141). Initial government support began in 2003 with a joint funding pool for theater and film, which was later divided, allocating DKK 420,000 (€56,000) annually to film projects. This marked a modest start to public investment in Greenlandic cinema, with funds emphasizing artistic expression. Over time, the allocation increased, peaking at DKK 3.9 million (€520,000) in 2019, signaling a political interest in boosting the sector. However, the process lacked continuity and was often dependent on ministerial discretion, raising concerns over inconsistent funding and a lack of adherence to the arm’s length principle.

In 2022, a significant shift occurred when the film-specific fund was merged into Greenland’s Arts Fund, a pool of DKK 8.6 million (€1.2 million) shared among multiple creative disciplines. This move drew criticism from filmmakers, who argued that the new structure failed to recognize filmmaking as both a cultural and economic driver. With filmmakers now competing for a share of the broader arts budget, concerns emerged about the potential for reduced support and the marginalization of the film sector.

In addition to direct grants, Greenland introduced a tax rebate scheme in 2020, authorizing reimbursements of up to DKK 10 million (€1.34 million) annually for film productions. Although this initiative aimed to attract larger-scale projects and incentivize local production, its limited applicability and administrative challenges left many Greenlandic filmmakers dissatisfied.

Overall, Grassroots organizations have played a critical role in advocating for film funding and support. Film.gl, a volunteer-based organization established in 2012, has been a key actor, working to professionalize the industry, lobby for policy improvements, and create opportunities for Greenlandic filmmakers. Despite its achievements, the reliance on volunteer efforts has highlighted the need for a more formal institutional framework to ensure the industry’s sustainability.

A major turning point thus came with the recent passage of Greenland’s first film law by the Inatsisartut. This legislation includes the establishment of Kalaallit Nunaanni Filminstitutti (the Greenlandic Film Institute) and a production incentive scheme, set to take effect in 2026. These measures aim to provide the infrastructure and stable financial support necessary to professionalize the industry, support local talent, and increase Greenland’s visibility in global cinema. However, critical details remain unclear, particularly the size of the rebate scheme and the overall budget allocated to the film institute. These unknowns leave uncertainty about the extent to which the new initiatives will address the industry’s long-standing funding challenges.

Breaking colonial borders: Arctic Indigenous Film Fund

Beyond direct government funding, Greenlandic filmmakers have also benefited from Danish initiatives such as NORDOK and NORDOK II (and from 2025 to 2027, NORDDOK III), focusing on documentary productions in and about the Kingdom of Denmark (DFI, n.d.), as well as funding opportunities through Arctic Indigenous Film Fund (AIFF) and collaborations with the ISFI . AIFF stands as a key force of pan-Arctic development: Established in 2018, it represents a cross-border initiative designed to support Indigenous filmmakers across Greenland, Canada, USA, Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Russia (AIFF, n.d.). By providing grants, mentorship, and cultural consultation, AIFF aligns funding opportunities with Indigenous priorities, much like ISFI has done for Sámi filmmakers in Norway. Yet AIFF differs from ISFI in its explicit pan-Arctic scope, effectively challenging the fragmentation caused by national borders and offering a counterbalance to the dependence on former colonial states’ film policies.

This ambition draws on a broader movement in which Arctic Indigenous communities are reclaiming their narratives, not just in terms of esthetics and language, but through the restructuring of funding models that have historically been tied to dominant cultural and political centers. Overall, AIFF’s ability to function as a truly pan-Arctic institution and secure high-profile advocates such as Nikolaj Coster-Waldau and Nukâka Coster-Waldau signals significant momentum for decolonizing efforts. By placing decision-making power in the hands of Indigenous filmmakers and ensuring representation on all levels of production, AIFF not only funds specific projects but also reconfigures long-standing power imbalances. However, a report commissioned by AIFF reveals lack of suitable funding for the Arctic Indigenous audiovisual sector (Olsberg SPI, 2023) and AIFF actively seeks new funders.

In practical terms, AIFF’s approach encompasses more than just financing; it includes capacity-building programs, networking events, and the facilitation of cultural translation services. This framework helps new and established filmmakers navigate global markets while keeping creative control rooted in local communities. In so doing, AIFF embodies a dual mission: preserving cultural sovereignty and forging sustainable economic structures independent of outside gatekeepers. As Greenlandic and other Arctic Indigenous storytellers embrace these opportunities, many are beginning to articulate a vision of decolonization that goes beyond content to reshape the very infrastructure of production. Although challenges remain, AIFF stands at the forefront of a broader transformation in which Indigenous-led initiatives envision an Arctic film landscape that is culturally, politically, and economically empowered, rather than tethered to former colonial nations.

Altogether, Greenlandic and Sámi filmmakers benefit from various initiatives and partnerships which underscore the importance of both cultural and commercial collaboration in the industry’s strategy: By combining Indigenous-focused collaborations and international co-production opportunities, often intertwined with production service activities, these industries have demonstrated the potential for a dual approach that fosters cultural expression while leveraging global market opportunities. As we will present in the next section, this strategy highlights the broad possibilities for the industry to grow through partnerships that align cultural and economic goals.

Learning by doing and milieu-building transnationalism

The Sámi screen industry has emerged as a key driver of Arctic Indigenous collaboration and early education, fostering professional development through targeted initiatives. Projects like Sámi film industry and media education, a collaboration between ISFI and Kalix folk university, provide young filmmakers with hands-on training, offering traineeships on productions such as the NRK television series for Sámi youth, Oro jaska. These initiatives emphasize a learning by doing approach, allowing emerging filmmakers to acquire technical skills directly on set while being mentored by experienced Indigenous professionals like Amanda Kernell and Nils Gaup. Similarly, the Sámi Producer Lab, launched in partnership with Netflix, equips Sámi producers with critical expertise in project development and industry practices, addressing the need for robust Indigenous-led production companies. These efforts, supported by ISFI, are not only about skill-building but also, with the terminology of Hjort (2009: 18), about milieu-building transnationalism by fostering collaborative, cross-border strategies aimed at developing sustainable local industries by building networks, skills, and infrastructures through practitioner-led initiatives and thus creating networks that span Arctic communities and beyond.

Greenland’s screen industry has also embraced a ‘learning by doing’ ethos, blending formal education initiatives with practical, community-driven approaches. Filmiliortarfik, established in 2018, has become a cornerstone for nurturing local talent by offering workshops, access to production equipment, and hands-on filmmaking experiences (Filmiliortarfik, n.d.). This institution not only fills a critical gap in local professional training but also, like ISFI, supports milieu-building transnationalism by collaborating with international organizations and integrating emerging filmmakers in large-scale international productions. While formal media education remains limited in Greenland, with Ilisimatusarfik and high schools offering foundational courses, many filmmakers rely on mentorship and self-education to enter the industry. As producer Nina Paninnguaq Skydsbjerg (in Grønlund, 2021b) noted, the industry thrives on spotting potential and fostering talent through practical engagement, reflecting the necessity of grassroots approaches in smaller, resource-constrained environments.

Festivals like the Nuuk International Film Festival (NIFF) further reinforce these networks by creating platforms for showcasing Indigenous films and fostering cross-cultural dialog (Grønlund, 2023: 157). Since its inception in 2017, NIFF has grown into an internationally recognized event, screening films from across the Arctic and beyond. By positioning Greenlandic and Sámi films within a global context, NIFF exemplifies milieu-building transnationalism, connecting Arctic filmmakers with international audiences and collaborators. The festival embodies Greenland’s dual narrative: maintaining Nordic collaborations rooted in colonial history while forging “natural” partnerships with other Indigenous communities as part of a broader decolonization effort.

These efforts are supported by organizations like the AIFF and the Indigenous Cinema Alliance (ICA), which enhance funding, education, and collaboration across the Arctic. ICA’s recent announcement of the first 2025 ICA Fellows, Sámi-Norwegian filmmaker Espen Larsson and Greenlandic filmmaker Alberte Parnuuna, underscores the growing emphasis on transnational Indigenous partnerships (imagineNATIVE, n.d.). Such initiatives provide opportunities for mentorship, co-productions, and resource-sharing, enabling Arctic filmmakers to navigate the global market while maintaining cultural authenticity.

Through learning by doing, fostering transnational connections, and building creative and professional milieus, Arctic Indigenous communities are redefining their place in the global film landscape. Institutions like AIFF, ISFI, Filmiliortarfik, NIFF, and ICA illustrate how these efforts are not only about filmmaking but also about cultural resilience, regional identity, and political transformation. This model of collaboration and innovation across borders offers a blueprint for other Indigenous communities and peripheral regions seeking to overcome structural challenges and amplify their voices and influence in screen production globally.

A shared future?

The future of ultrasmall screen industries hinges on the deliberate strategies employed to overcome their structural and geographic challenges. These industries, exemplified by the Sámi and Greenlandic screen sectors, have demonstrated remarkable growth through targeted approaches that leverage collaboration, innovation, and cultural integrity. Yet, their continued success depends on aligning these strategies with broader ethical and sustainability discourses, even as inherent tensions emerge.

A key strategy for the growth of these industries has been the establishment of culturally competent institutions like ISFI playing a transformative role in the Sámi screen industry by providing funding mechanisms tailored to Indigenous filmmakers. These mechanisms prioritize narrative sovereignty, enabling Sámi storytellers to retain creative control while engaging with global audiences. Ethical guidelines, such as the Pathfinder Guidelines, further reinforce this sovereignty by ensuring that collaborations with external stakeholders’ respect Sámi cultural values and practices. This institutional framework has created an environment where Sámi filmmakers can produce culturally authentic content while gaining visibility on international platforms like Netflix and Disney.

For Greenland, institutional support is an emerging but vital strategy. The passage of the nation’s first film law, including the creation of a national film institute and a production rebate scheme, represents a significant step toward establishing a sustainable screen industry. These measures aim to attract large-scale productions to Greenland while simultaneously building local capacity. However, this strategy also risks prioritizing production service activities over Indigenous storytelling. To mitigate this, Greenland can draw lessons from the Sámi industry’s emphasis on aligning external collaborations with local priorities, ensuring that foreign productions contribute to rather than detract from the development of Indigenous narratives.

Pan-Arctic collaboration has proven to be another cornerstone strategy for ultrasmall screen industries. Sámi and Greenlandic filmmakers have benefited from cross-border partnerships facilitated by organizations like ISFI and the Arctic Indigenous Film Fund (AIFF). These collaborations provide access to shared resources, mentorship opportunities, and funding pools that would be otherwise unattainable for small-scale industries. For example, Greenlandic filmmakers have participated in ISFI-led initiatives, gaining valuable experience and establishing connections within the broader Arctic film community. Such partnerships not only strengthen cultural ties but also amplify the visibility of Indigenous voices on a global scale.

International collaboration has played a vital role in strengthening Indigenous screen industries across the Arctic and beyond, offering access to resources, training, and global visibility. However, these international collaborative strategies are not without challenges. The ethical rationale for bringing foreign productions to Indigenous locations – often framed as a means of promoting authentic representation and respectful storytelling – can conflict with sustainability concerns. The soft discourse of ethical filmmaking through on-location shoots in places like Greenland and Sápmi stands in tension with the environmental costs of increased mobility and the carbon footprint of transnational co-productions. Navigating this dilemma requires strategic innovation and a critical reassessment of how ethical and environmental priorities are balanced in global partnerships.

Another critical strategy has been the emphasis on education and capacity building. The Sámi Producer Lab, developed in collaboration with Netflix, equips emerging Sámi producers with the skills needed to navigate global markets while maintaining cultural integrity. This initiative reflects the industry’s recognition that building local expertise is essential for long-term sustainability. Greenland has similarly invested in grassroots efforts, such as workshops and training programs through Film.gl, to cultivate local talent. However, Greenland faces the additional challenge of filmmaker fatigue, where a limited pool of professionals is stretched thin across multiple projects. Addressing this requires a more robust pipeline of talent through formal education and mentorship opportunities, coupled with policies that prioritize Indigenous production over external demands.

Economic strategies also play a significant role in shaping the future of ultrasmall screen industries. While production incentive schemes like Greenland’s aim to attract foreign productions, they must be designed to ensure that local industries benefit meaningfully. Sámi strategies offer a useful model here, as they integrate external funding with policies that directly support Indigenous storytelling. For example, ISFI’s funding priorities emphasize Sámi-language films and projects led by Sámi filmmakers, ensuring that external investments contribute to the growth of the local industry rather than overshadowing it. Similarly, AIFF aims to raise funding, increase work, and secure the future for Indigenous filmmakers across the Arctic.

Conclusion

The impact of Sámi film production on broader Indigenous and ultrasmall screen industries cannot be overstated. By successfully combining institutional support, ethical filmmaking, and strategic collaborations, the Sámi industry has set a precedent for how ultrasmall screen industries can thrive. Greenland’s screen industry is already adopting similar strategies, using Sámi approaches as a blueprint for its own development. This influence extends beyond the Arctic, offering valuable lessons to other ultrasmall screen industries worldwide. The emphasis on narrative sovereignty, for instance, provides a framework for balancing global opportunities with cultural preservation – a challenge faced by many marginalized communities.

Ultimately, the sustainability of ultrasmall screen industries will depend on their ability to refine and adapt these strategies. By continuing to invest in institutional frameworks, fostering collaborations that respect cultural integrity, and embracing innovative technologies, these industries can position themselves centrally in the global film landscape. However, this growth must be accompanied by a critical awareness of the environmental and ethical implications of their practices. As Sámi and Greenlandic experiences demonstrate, the alignment of strategic goals with cultural and environmental priorities is essential for ensuring that these industries remain both sustainable and impactful.

In navigating these complexities, ultrasmall screen industries have the potential to not only sustain themselves but also to influence the global cinematic landscape profoundly. By leveraging their unique cultural and political contexts, they can challenge dominant narratives, promote inclusivity, and set new standards for (ethical) filmmaking. The Sámi industry’s success offers a roadmap for achieving this balance, while Greenland’s ongoing developments underscore the importance of adapting these strategies to local conditions. As shown, these dynamics resonate with and mirror broader developments in global media industries and Indigenous media practices, from North America to the Pacific. The Sámi and Greenlandic cases therefore reflect and help to address wider questions of how ultrasmall and marginalized production cultures navigate globalization while maintaining cultural autonomy, ethical responsibility, and environmental awareness. In this sense, the Arctic experiences contribute to international debates on narrative sovereignty, sustainability, and the reconfiguration of screen industries far beyond traditional centers of production. Together, they demonstrate the transformative potential of ultrasmall and Indigenous screen industries to reshape global screen industries through stories and filmmaking grounded in locality, collaboration, and cultural resilience.