Arctic Council Working Group Recommendations
| Project | Type | # | Outcome | Report | Year | FEC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | |
| 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 | 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 | 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 | 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 | ||
| 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 | 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 | 7 | Community observations from local and traditional experts have much untapped potential as ‘early warning systems’ | Project Summary: Bering Sea Sub-Network II | 2015 | ||
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Key finding | 1 | Arctic wetlands provide important ecosystem services to Arctic and global communities, including cooling the global climate. They provide clean water and buffer floods and droughts, support fisheries and hunting, support biodiversity, and act as long-term sinks for atmospheric carbon. Wetlands are an integral part of many Indigenous Peoples’ lives; they provide and sustain food security, including grazing for traditional reindeer herding. Recognition of wetlands’ importance, including in the Arctic, is growing as their role in sustaining a wide range of ecosystem services becomes better understood. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands: Key Findings and Recommendations | 2021 | |
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Key finding | 2 | The substantial ecosystem services provided by Arctic wetlands should be recognized at the international level. Presently, there is limited coordination on how ecosystem services from Arctic wetland management are reported to international frameworks or conventions on climate change mitigation and biodiversity. Common guidelines on how ecosystem services gained from wetland conservation and restoration actions are reported internationally could increase their global recognition. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands: Key Findings and Recommendations | 2021 | |
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Key finding | 3 | Anthropogenic climate change is a serious threat to Arctic wetland ecosystems and exacerbates many other threats. Widespread climate change impacts in Arctic wetlands are ongoing and projected to increase in this century and reducing greenhouse gas emissions is necessary to limit these impacts. Climate-driven permafrost thaw and increased drought conditions impacting wetland ecosystems will cause greater fire occurrences and shifts in hydrological flows, affecting wetland ecosystem services and biodiversity. Sea level change and declines in sea ice are driving increases in coastal erosion that threatens many coastal wetlands. Thawing permafrost is projected to transform peatlands from a net sink of greenhouse gases to a net source lasting for several centuries. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands: Key Findings and Recommendations | 2021 | |
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Key finding | 4 | Although the majority of Arctic wetlands remain relatively intact, changes are already occurring across the Arctic and wetland resilience is needed to buffer further damage. Wetlands are vulnerable to substantial indirect damage e.g. through global warming, changes to p recipitation patterns, altered hydrological flows, and environmental pollutants. Such damage also constitutes a broader threat to migratory animal populations. These diverse threats to wetland ecosystems emphasize the need for landscape scale management with a focus on conservation, protection and maintained resilience. | 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) | 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 | |
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Key finding | 7 | The extensive scientific, Indigenous, institutional, and local knowledge on Arctic wetlands could inform broad and rapid actions to protect, conserve and restore wetlands if supported by policy. Noting the stewardship and wealth of knowledge of Arctic communities, and existing science, the key obstacles to scaling-up research or case studies are not due to lack of knowledge. Multiple case studies and research projects have demonstrated that protection, conservation, or restoration of degraded Arctic wetlands offers substantial benefits for water-centric ecosystem services, biodiversity, and climate change mitigation. In addition to Indigenous, institutional, and local knowledge of wetlands, there is a considerable and broad scientific knowledge base on wetlands protection, conservation, restoration, and management which dates back many decades. All of this knowledge is crucial for adaptive and holistic management of wetlands. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands: Key Findings and Recommendations | 2021 | |
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Key finding | 8 | Improved public and policy maker understanding of wetland functions and vulnerability would likely foster greater interest in protecting and conserving Arctic wetlands and strengthen involvement in promoting sustainable wetland use. Yet, the ways in which public opinion and networks of interested commercial and civil society organizations influence the development and implementation of wetlands conservation, restoration and stewardship in the Arctic are poorly understood. Systematic knowledge of the array of interest organizations’ relationships to wetlands and how they engage on questions of balancing conservation and use would support the development of more coherent and effective policies. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands: Key Findings and Recommendations | 2021 | |
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Key finding | 9 | Policy inconsistencies and practical difficulties with implementation are obstacles in wetland management or restoration efforts. Goal conflicts or gaps in policies undermine successful implementation of good wetland management or restoration practices. Key challenges include: (i) inconsistencies or conflicts between different national-level policies or between national and sub-national policies, (ii) the organization of responsibility between multiple agencies with differing mandates, and (iii) challenges in ensuring effective coordination and communication between agencies and the public. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands: Key Findings and Recommendations | 2021 |