Arctic Council Working Group Recommendations
| Project | Type | # | Outcome | Report | Year | FEC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arctic Biodiversity Assessment (ABA) | Action | 5 | Advance the protection of large areas of ecologically important marine, terrestrial and freshwater habitats, taking into account ecological resilience in a changing climate. a. Build upon existing and on-going domestic and international processes to complete the identification of ecologically and biologically important marine areas and implement appropriate measures for their conservation. b. Build upon existing networks of terrestrial protected areas, filling geographic gaps, including under represented areas, rare or unique habitats, particularly productive areas such as large river deltas, biodiversity hotspots, and areas with large aggregations of animals such as bird breeding colonies, seal whelping areas and caribou calving grounds. 5.1. Provide input and assist with international processes underway to complete the identification of ecologically and biologically important Arctic areas and promote measures for their conservation as appropriate. 5.2. Develop and follow-up on a framework for a Pan-Arctic Network of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) that sets out a common vision for regional cooperation in MPA network development and management. 5.3. Analyse existing Arctic protected areas data to identify gaps and priorities, including identification of the most climate-change resilient Arctic areas, connectivity gaps, and missing buffer zones, making use of new information and new analytical tools. c. Promote the active involvement of indigenous peoples in the management and sustainable use ofprotected areas. 5.4. Develop guidelines for including Arctic indigenous and community values into protected areas planning and management, including exploring how best to promote and facilitate multiple values. 5.5. Analyse the results of ICC’s review of global protected areas schemes that promoteindigenous management practices, strong co-management schemes and supportindigenous food security for consideration by CAFF. | Actions for Arctic Biodiversity, 2013-2021: Implementing the recommendations of the Arctic Biodiversity Assessment | 2015 | |
| Arctic Biodiversity Assessment (ABA) | Key finding | 5 | Encourage equal partnership and participation at the outset and throughout research projects that affect Arctic Indigenous peoples. | Arctic Traditional Knowledge and Wisdom: Changes in the North American Arctic | 2017 | |
| Arctic Species Trend Index (ASTI) | Key finding | 5 | Waterfowl have increased across all flyway regions mainly due to geese, but there are differences in the underlying trends for geese/swans and for ducks. Geese and swans combined more than quadrupled in abundance between 1970 and 2011, showing positive change across regions (Figure 20), although coverage is too patchy for reliable conclusions. The increase in geese/swans is largely driven by geese, which make up the majority of this data set. Swans have been in decline since 1994. Duck abundance is 10% lower overall (Figure 19), but there are regional differences, with a halving in the Americas and a 70% increase in Africa-Eurasia. | Arctic Species Trend Index: Migratory Birds Index | 2015 | |
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Key finding | 5 | In some regions, Arctic wetlands are already degraded by human land use and an ever growing human footprint poses threats to wetland functioning. This damage occurs in both Arctic and Boreal zones and arises from a number of threats such as expansion of forestry, agriculture, hydropower, extraction of peat, fossil fuels or minerals, threats to coastal wetlands from increased Arctic shipping and construction of new infrastructure. Wetlands are also vulnerable to human disturbances to permafrost or adjacent upland habitats and changes to the water balance or hydrological connectivity that can transform wetland function. Drained wetlands release carbon to the atmosphere instead of storing it, and the negative effect lasts for decades to centuries. Other losses of function include loss of biodiversity, changes to habitats and reduced capacity to buffer floods or droughts. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands: Key Findings and Recommendations | 2021 | |
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Recommendation | 5 | Use short-lists of known northern wetland sites in need of protection, conservation or restoration to support national-level action plans. Such actions should be targeted to the most promising sites, including those that may be located outside the Arctic. Wetland protection, conservation and restoration would be more effective if done in direct collaboration with Indigenous Peoples, Local Communities and/or stakeholders and applied at the landscape level. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands: Key Findings and Recommendations | 2021 | |
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Advice | 5 | Connecting Beyond Wetlands: Exploring the interactions between inland and coastal wetlands broadens focus. Examining the opportunities between CAFF projects such as RMAWI, the Salmon Peoples of the Arctic, the Seabird Working Group, and the Arctic Migratory Bird Initiative may further facilitate research on Indigenous relationships with Arctic biodiversity, particularly as they relate to subsistence activities. | Arctic Wetlands and Indigenous Peoples Study: An assessment of Indigenous engagement in wetland protected areas | 2021 | |
| Key finding | 5 | Environmental changes are generally, but not always, resulting in negative effects to traditional harvests with impacts to food and cultural security | Project Summary: Bering Sea Sub-Network II | 2015 | ||
| Arctic TEEB | Key finding | 5.1 | Policy focus: Key Finding 5.1. Policy related to increasing and changing development patterns in the Arctic wouldbenefit from incorporation of consideration of ecosystem services. Participants in this scoping projectidentified a list of policy areas for further consideration, and two of these were assessed as ‘policyexamples’ through a TEEB approach, at a broad scoping level: expanding shipping and oil and gasdevelopment in the marine environment, and industrial development in the North American Arctic.) | The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) for the Arctic: A Scoping Study Executive Summary | 2015 | |
| CBird: Seabird Expert Group | Action | 5.1 | Priorities: 1. Identify and prioritize actions, 2. Emphasize causes of eider declines, 3. Establish international, national and regional eider monitoring programs | Circumpolar Eider Conservation Strategy and Action Plan | 1997 | |
| CBird: Seabird Expert Group | Action | 5.2 | Collaboration and cooperation: 4. Prepare "National Implementation Plans", 5. Enlist the participation of regional and local governments, 6. Obtain assistance from local residents and eider specialists | Circumpolar Eider Conservation Strategy and Action Plan | 1997 | |
| CBird: Seabird Expert Group | Action | 5.3 | Reporting: 7. Provide appropriate opportunities for communication between individuals interested in eider conservation, 8. Report annually to CAFF summarizing actions taken or planned under the Strategy | Circumpolar Eider Conservation Strategy and Action Plan | 1997 | |
| Arctic Biodiversity Assessment (ABA) | Key finding | 6 | Long-term observations based on the best available traditional and scientific knowledge are required to identify changes in biodiversity, assess the implications of observed changes, and develop adaptation strategies. | Arctic Biodiversity Trends 2010 – Selected indicators of change | 2010 | |
| Arctic Migratory Birds Initiative (AMBI) | Advice | 6 | Monitoring point sources of plastic pollution: Glaucous gull (Larus hyperboreus), great skua (Stercorarius skua) and other gull species that feed at landfills and other urban or rural sites, pellets/regurgitations should be monitored for plastic pollution near point sources to track local trends in plastic pollution. | Plastic Pollution in Seabirds: Developing a program to monitor plastic pollution in seabirds in the pan-Arctic region | 2021 | |
| Arctic Migratory Birds Initiative (AMBI) | Action | 6 | Mitigate habitat impairment from destruction and degradation of coastal habitats and productive landscapes 6.1 Evaluate the impacts of habitat loss and degradation from agriculture, aquaculture, renewable energy production and tourism development on shorebirds and their habitats in Latin America 6.2 Ensure mitigation measures are incorporated into development decisions 6.3 Designate important sites under appropriate international conservation frameworks (e.g. Ramsar Convention, WHSRN, World Heritage) 6.4 Work with communities and governments to protect important sites | AMBI Work Plan 2019-2025: Americas Flyway | 2021 | |
| Arctic Biodiversity Assessment (ABA) | Key finding | 6 | There are currently few invasive alien species in the Arctic, but more are expected with climate change and increased human activity. | Arctic Biodiversity Assessment: Report for Policy Makers | 2013 | |
| Arctic Biodiversity Assessment (ABA) | Recommendation | 6 | Develop guidelines and implement appropriate spatial and temporal measures where necessary to reduce human disturbance to areas critical for sensitive life stages of Arctic species that are outside protected areas, for example along transportation corridors. Such areas include calving grounds, den sites, feeding grounds, migration routes and moulting areas. This also means safeguarding important habitats such as wetlands and polynyas. | Arctic Biodiversity Assessment: Report for Policy Makers | 2013 | |
| Arctic Biodiversity Assessment (ABA) | Action | 6 | Develop guidelines and implement appropriate spatial and temporal measures where necessary to reduce human disturbance to areas critical for sensitive life stages of Arctic species that are outside protected areas, for example along transportation corridors. Such areas include calving grounds, den sites, feeding grounds, migration routes and moulting areas. This also means safeguarding important habitats such as wetlands and polynyas. 6.1. Provide technical information, including mapping areas of high species abundance, unique Arctic diversity and those important for sensitive life stages, at a scale appropriate for use in planning. 6.2. Develop, where needed, guidelines or other tools, for safeguarding sensitive areas for biodiversity (outside protected areas) that are vulnerable to human activity and/or contribute to international processes developing such guidelines, including potential refugia that will maintain multi-year ice. | Actions for Arctic Biodiversity, 2013-2021: Implementing the recommendations of the Arctic Biodiversity Assessment | 2015 | |
| Arctic Biodiversity Assessment (ABA) | Key finding | 6 | Work to remove institutional barriers and improve processes for the inclusion of TK&W and involvement of Arctic indigenous peoples. | Arctic Traditional Knowledge and Wisdom: Changes in the North American Arctic | 2017 | |
| Arctic Species Trend Index (ASTI) | Key finding | 6 | In the Wadden Sea, Arctic bird abundance is 75% higher in 2010 than in 1980, but the trend has been following a negative trajectory since 2002. | Arctic Species Trend Index: Migratory Birds Index | 2015 | |
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Key finding | 6 | Indigenous Peoples’ knowledge and stewardship is important for successful management of Arctic wetlands. Participation and leadership by Indigenous Peoples is needed for decision-making and management of Arctic wetlands. Indigenous Peoples’ hold extensive and unique knowledge regarding the wetlands in their homelands. Inmany places, long-term indigenous stewardship has partly shaped present-day wetland biodiversity and functioning, maintaining traditional land-use practices that acts to preserve wetland resilience. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands: Key Findings and Recommendations | 2021 |