Arctic Council Working Group Recommendations
| Project | Type | # | Outcome | Report | Year | FEC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mainstreaming Biodiversity in Arctic Mining | Advice | Lack of alignment among government agencies in regard to environmental permitting, particularly environmental review requirements. Local, state/territory and national permitting requirements can be perceived by industry to be arduous, repetitive and/or misaligned causing unnecessary burdens that do not clearly translate into useful information or benefits for biodiversity conservation or sustainable development. For example, excessive data collection and reporting requirements without strategic coordination and partnering that could benefit government agencies, industry and the public. This can lead to separate government agencies asking for the same information in different ways or seeking extraneous information that does not help inform decision-making, resulting in unnecessary time and resources expended. Government agencies could:
Mining industry could:
CAFF could:
| Mainstreaming Biodiversity in Arctic Mining Challenges and Proposed Solutions | 2019 | ||
| Mainstreaming Biodiversity in Arctic Mining | Advice | Difficulty establishing clear processes for engaging Indigenous Peoples and utilizing TK. A need exists to work together with Indigenous communities in a meaningful way that respects and utilizes TK along with science to inform decisions regarding biodiversity (e.g., key research questions informing biotic and abiotic monitoring decisions). There are existing examples of design, operations, and reclamation plans of some mines located in the Arctic region that have been influenced by TK and through consultations with local communities, but there is not a consistent or systematic way for gathering and utilizing TK and science so outcomes are useful, credible and benefit communities and the mining industry to the greatest extent possible. Government agencies could:
Mining industry could:
CAFF could:
| Mainstreaming Biodiversity in Arctic Mining Challenges and Proposed Solutions | 2019 | ||
| Arctic Migratory Birds Initiative (AMBI) | Advice | 3 | Monitoring temporal trends in plastic ingestion: The northern fulmar, thick-billed murre and black-legged kittiwake should be monitored for temporal trends in plastic pollution ingestion. | Plastic Pollution in Seabirds: Developing a program to monitor plastic pollution in seabirds in the pan-Arctic region | 2021 | |
| Arctic Migratory Birds Initiative (AMBI) | Advice | 5 | Monitoring microplastics and plastic-associated contaminants: Northern fulmars, thick-billed murres, black-legged kittiwakes and common eiders should be monitored for microplastics and plastic-associated contaminants. | Plastic Pollution in Seabirds: Developing a program to monitor plastic pollution in seabirds in the pan-Arctic region | 2021 | |
| Arctic Migratory Birds Initiative (AMBI) | Advice | 7 | Monitoring species of high conservation concern – Leach’s storm-petrels should be monitored where possible for potential effects of 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) | Advice | 2 | Monitoring temporal trends in plastic ingestion: The northern fulmar, thick-billed murre and black-legged kittiwake should be monitored for temporal trends in plastic pollution ingestion. | Plastic Pollution in Seabirds: Developing a program to monitor plastic pollution in seabirds in the pan-Arctic region | 2021 | |
| Arctic Migratory Birds Initiative (AMBI) | Advice | 4 | Monitoring nest incorporation and entanglement: Black-legged kittiwake and northern gannet (Morus bassanus) nests should be monitored for nest incorporation of and entanglement 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) | 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) | Advice | 1 | Methods to monitor plastic pollution in seabirds – Standardized methods (OSPAR 2015; Provencher et al. 2017, 2019) should be used where possible to make data comparable across spatially and temporally. | Plastic Pollution in Seabirds: Developing a program to monitor plastic pollution in seabirds in the pan-Arctic region | 2021 | |
| 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 | ||
| Key finding | 1 | Partnerships that engage indigenous communities, scientists and other organizations in the co-production of knowledge are essential in understanding environmental change and effects on indigenous communities. This knowledge can contribute to more relevant decision-making. | Project Summary: Bering Sea Sub-Network II | 2015 | ||
| Key finding | 3 | Observations from those spending much time on the land and sea are necessary in not only understanding local environmental change but also in understanding the effects of environmental changes on human well-being and traditional practices | Project Summary: Bering Sea Sub-Network II | 2015 | ||
| 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 | ||
| Key finding | 7 | Community observations from local and traditional experts have much untapped potential as ‘early warning systems’ | Project Summary: Bering Sea Sub-Network II | 2015 | ||
| Key finding | 2 | Research efforts relevant to indigenous communities should establish partnerships with them and contribute to building their capacity, for example by hiring local residents, and providing training and equipment | Project Summary: Bering Sea Sub-Network II | 2015 | ||
| Key finding | 4 | Different environmental changes are occurring within different cultural contexts creating diverse impacts; as such adaptive actions need to be based on local realities and priorities | Project Summary: Bering Sea Sub-Network II | 2015 | ||
| 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 | |
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Recommendation | 15 | Support the ongoing work with the Arctic SDI to develop a pan-Arctic wetland map making use of modern remote sensing and data processing methods but supported by existing national and local data and inventories. Work with individual nations on a plan for incorporating this product into their national systems. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands: Key Findings and Recommendations | 2021 | |
| 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 | 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 |