Arctic Council Working Group Recommendations
| Project | Type | # | Outcome | Report | Year | FEC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CBMP Terrestrial Biodiversity Monitoring | Key finding | The most urgent priorities for the future are to (i) improve our knowledge of population distributions to better inform our definitions of discrete flyway populations; (ii) implement effective mechanisms to at least periodically measure abundance for all northern hemisphere goose populations to assess trends over time; (iii) initiate research to identify factors responsible for declining trends in populations of concern, and (iv) evaluate potential negative effects of overabundant goose populations on habitat and sympatric species. | A Global Audit of the Status and Trends of Arctic And Northern Hemisphere Goose Populations | 2018 | ||
| CBMP Freshwater Biodiversity Monitoring | Key finding | In countries where routine government monitoring is limited or does not occur, data must come from other sources (e.g., academic research), where unsecure funding often leads to single-event sampling, meaning that change over time cannot be examined. | State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring | 2016 | ||
| Arctic Biodiversity Assessment (ABA) | Key finding | 3 | Develop effective partnerships and/or formalized systems of sharing among indigenous peoples and scientists to more fully engage this wide range of human intelligence to understand the complexities of managing biodiversity in the Arctic; for example, TK&W can provide early warnings of environmentalchange, indicate connections between phenomena, and fill data gaps. | Arctic Traditional Knowledge and Wisdom: Changes in the North American Arctic | 2017 | |
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Key finding | The key obstacles to scaling up and expanding wetlands restoration and management efforts in the Arctic are not due to a lack of knowledge about wetlands ecosystems processes and functions, or steps that can be taken to improve their status. Policy design and difficulties with implementation appear often to be obstacles, however, and accurate, up-to-date mapping is needed to target policy initiatives. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands Phase 2 Report | 2021 | ||
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Key finding | 12 | There is a need for new pan-Arctic wetland maps based on a uniform approach, thus ensuring comparable accuracy and data quality across the full Arctic domain. Such mapping efforts should ideally train and validate algorithms using existing national wetland inventories, relevant institutional data, inclusive of Indigenous Knowledge and/or input from Arctic communities. Maps are needed that show the spatial extent of discrete wetland complexes at high resolution and should separate mineral wetlands from organic wetlands (peatlands). On the shorter term, new maps of wetland extent will be bound to one specific classification system; it is not possible to address the diversity of existing systems. Over the longer term, boundaries between maps and monitoring dissolve. Spatial wetland data can be stored in spatial databases that allow flexible adaptation to different classification systems. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands: Key Findings and Recommendations | 2021 | |
| Arctic TEEB | Key finding | 3.6 | Governance: Key Finding 3.6. Mainstreaming of nature’s values by means of ecosystem services requires adjustments to existing policies and instruments as well as the development of new ones. | The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) for the Arctic: A Scoping Study Executive Summary | 2015 | |
| CBMP Terrestrial Biodiversity Monitoring | Key finding | “Grey” geese (Anser) comprise 35 populations of 8.1-8.4 million individuals, of which 15 have declined in the last 10 years, especially in East Asia. | A Global Audit of the Status and Trends of Arctic And Northern Hemisphere Goose Populations | 2018 | ||
| Key finding | 6 | Regulations that impact communities ought to be flexible to allow for adaptation to change and ought to include meaningful local voice through instruments such as co-management to support the food security and sovereignty of indigenous communities | Project Summary: Bering Sea Sub-Network II | 2015 | ||
| CBMP Marine Biodiversity Monitoring | Key finding | Northward movement is easier for more mobile openwater species. Open water species such as polar cod, are more mobile compared to those linked to shelf regions, such as benthic species including some fishes for which suitable habitat may be unavailable if they move northward. | State of the Arctic Marine Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring | 2017 | ||
| CBMP Terrestrial Biodiversity Monitoring | Key finding | Climate change is the overwhelming driver of change in terrestrial Arctic ecosystems, causing diverse, unpredictable, and significant impacts that are expected to intensify. | State of the Arctic Terrestrial Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring | 2021 | ||
| Arctic Biodiversity Assessment (ABA) | Recommendation | 14 | Recognize the value of traditional ecological knowledge and work to further integrate it into the assessment, planning and management of Arctic biodiversity. This includes involving Arctic peoples and their knowledge in the survey, monitoring and analysis of Arctic biodiversity. | Arctic Biodiversity Assessment: Report for Policy Makers | 2013 | |
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Recommendation | 8 | Ensure that national conservation or development plans that impact wetlands meaningfully engage Arctic communities, Indigenous Peoples, and stakeholders to consider the broader landscape impacts of changes to wetlands, including developments that may affect wetlands within river basins. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands: Key Findings and Recommendations | 2021 | |
| Arctic Biodiversity Assessment (ABA) | Recommendation | 3 | Make more effective use of local and traditional knowledge in Arctic Council assessments and, more broadly, in ecological management. We need the best available knowledge to detect and respond to rapid Arctic ecosystem change. Local and traditional knowledge sources, by their nature, bring a depth of knowledge and understanding of ecosystems, as well as early warnings of change, that complement science-based studies. However, these knowledge sources are generally underutilized in assessment and management except at the scale of the knowledge holders | Life Linked to Ice: A guide to sea-ice-associated biodiversity in this time of rapid change | 2013 | |
| Arctic Biodiversity Assessment (ABA) | Recommendation | 7 | Develop and implement mechanisms that best safeguard Arctic biodiversity under changing environmental conditions, such as loss of sea ice, glaciers and permafrost. a. Safeguard areas in the northern parts of the Arctic where high Arctic species have a relatively greater chance to survive for climatic or geographical reasons, such as certain islands and mountainous areas, which can act as a refuge for unique biodiversity. 7.1. Develop options for safeguarding potential marine and terrestrial refuge areas, including areas that will maintain multi-year ice (related to AMSA IID). b. Maintain functional connectivity within and between protected areas in order to protect ecosystem resilience and facilitate adaptation to climate change. 7.2. Assess options and recommend most effective methods to manage connectivity, in light of climate change, including identification of sub-populations, species and regions for which connectivity is most critical (including for increasing genetic resilience). 7.3. Identify management actions that will enhance resilience of species in adapting to rapid change. | Arctic Biodiversity Assessment: Report for Policy Makers | 2013 | |
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Recommendation | 1 | Encourage Arctic cooperation to amplify efforts to reduce fossil fuel emissions both inside and outside the Arctic. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands: Key Findings and Recommendations | 2021 | |
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Recommendation | 17 | Encourage collaboration among Arctic States and with organizations representing Arctic Indigenous Peoples, to develop and refine approaches for reporting on the benefits of wetlands restoration to improvements in ecosystem services, in particular: livelihoods, food security, biodiversity, and climate change mitigation. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands: Key Findings and Recommendations | 2021 | |
| Arctic Biodiversity Assessment (ABA) | Recommendation | 16 | Research and monitor individual and cumulative effects of stressors and drivers of relevance to biodiversity, with a focus on stressors that are expected to have rapid and significant impacts and issues where knowledge is lacking. This should include, but not be limited to, modelling potential future species range changes as a result of these stressors; developing knowledge of and identifying tipping points, thresholds and cumulative effects for Arctic biodiversity; and developing robust quantitative indicators for stressors through the Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring Program. | Arctic Biodiversity Assessment: Report for Policy Makers | 2013 | |
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Recommendation | 10 | Develop and share between Arctic states outreach and communication strategies and tools to explain the values of wetlands, the threats to wetlands and provide examples of wetland restoration success stories. Material for the full Arctic region could be complemented with materials specific to knowledge from different geographic regions, communities, and Indigenous Peoples. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands: Key Findings and Recommendations | 2021 | |
| Arctic Biodiversity Assessment (ABA) | Recommendation | 9 | Reduce the threat of invasive alien/non-native species to the Arctic by developing and implementing common measures for early detection and reporting, identifying and blocking pathways of introduction, and sharing best practices and techniques for monitoring, eradication and control. This includes supporting international efforts currently underway, for example those of the International Maritime Organization to effectively treat ballast water to clean and treat ship hulls and drilling rigs. | Arctic Biodiversity Assessment: Report for Policy Makers | 2013 | |
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Recommendation | 3 | Initiate collaboration between Arctic states, Indigenous Peoples organisations and relevant stakeholders to harmonize how climate and biodiversity benefits reached through wetland management and restoration efforts are reported to international conventions on climate mitigation and biodiversity. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands: Key Findings and Recommendations | 2021 |