Aningaasat politikiuvoq

While the focus has been on the recent geopolitical situation, in this column I want to focus on the families and singles in Greenland and their economic situation.

The reason is the following circumstances:

The reason is the following circumstances:

The Greenland Ministry of Finance has made it clear: The next ten years will be economically tough for Greenland. But for many families, this is not a future scenario. It is already everyday life. A high proportion of the population is economically vulnerable, including in Nuuk, where many live from month to month with very little money in the economy. This is shown in a report published on December 16, 2025.

At the same time, the Danish press can read about a strong Danish economy. Families will have around 30,000 kroner more in disposable income in 2026, over 2,000 kroner extra each month. That is money for clothes, holidays or just a little security. The contrast is striking. In Tasiilaq, the disposable annual income is around 145,000 kroner, before rent and fixed expenses. In Siorapaluk, it is less than 100,000 kroner. These are not figures from the distant past, but from the present.

As an economist, I have been trying for years to understand Greenland, not as a country, but as an economic structure. Every time I end up in the same place: Greenland's challenges cannot be explained by the models we normally use for small, open economies. Greenland is not densely populated, not cohesive, and not market-integrated. Greenland has few people spread over enormous distances. Cities and settlements are not naturally connected, and the economy does not function as one unified market. Our everyday life is largely characterized by long distances, harsh climate, and we are a society divided into many small units.

The question is therefore not whether Greenland should be able to do without support, but whether it is even realistic to expect it to. The answer is no. Not because of our culture or work ethic, but because settlement in the Arctic is not a market outcome. It is a political choice.

If Greenland is to be a modern society, with functioning healthcare, schools, housing and infrastructure, it requires ongoing structural redistribution. This is not a sign of weakness, but a reality.

Here the Self-Government Act and the Economic Agreement become central. Since they were concluded, the UN's human rights interpretation practice has developed significantly. Today, economic arrangements are assessed not only on the basis of intention, but on their actual and long-term consequences for the economic, social and cultural rights of the population. These rights cannot be waived, not even by referendum.

When the regulation of the block grant over time erodes the possibilities of ensuring health, education or housing for an entire population, it is not only a political issue, but also a human rights issue. It is not an accusation, but a necessary observation that both the Greenlandic Government and the Danish government have to address.

Because while the focus is often on bombastic statements from the outside, inequality is growing from within. That is where the most important debate should lie now. To strengthen society when it is under pressure.