Arctic Council Working Group Recommendations
| Project | Type | # | Outcome | Report | Year | FEC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Advice | 1 | Documenting Indigenous Resource Use: Improving documentation of Indigenous resource use may allow management authorities to make decisions that respect and accommodate Indigenous resource use by ensuring that subsistence activities are not unnecessarily impeded by management actions | Arctic Wetlands and Indigenous Peoples Study: An assessment of Indigenous engagement in wetland protected areas | 2021 | |
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Key finding | Participation by indigenous and local communities in decision making, restoration and stewardship of Arctic wetlands is widely considered to be a crucial ingredient for success. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands Phase 2 Report | 2021 | ||
| 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 | |
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Recommendation | 19 | Support national and international evaluation and coordination of wetland inventory, research and monitoring programs as well as encouraging and strengthening interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary wetland research, Indigenous Knowledge, and citizen science within Arctic research networks. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands: Key Findings and Recommendations | 2021 | |
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Key finding | Research findings make it clear that restoration of damaged or compromised Arctic wetlands ecosystems offers substantial benefits across multiple areas of interest – water-centric ecosystem services, biodiversity, and increasingly over the past decade, climate mitigation. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands Phase 2 Report | 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 | |
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Recommendation | 12 | Strengthen wetland resilience through supporting meaningful engagement of Indigenous Peoples and/or Local Communities in wetlands inventories, and management plans. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands: Key Findings and Recommendations | 2021 | |
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Advice | 3 | Broadening Research Priorities: Pursuing critical knowledge gaps may bridge both Indigenous and conservation priorities. a) Conduct Research on Indigenous Knowledge of Wetland Ecosystems, b) Examine the Intersection of Wetland Biodiversity and Arctic Food Security, c) Prioritize Species of Conservation and Subsistence Interest. | Arctic Wetlands and Indigenous Peoples Study: An assessment of Indigenous engagement in wetland protected areas | 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) | 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) | Key finding | 1.2.1 | Arctic Indigenous Peoples and Wetland Protected Areas: Formal Indigenous representation in managementprocesses occurs in over one-fourth of the surveyed sites. | Arctic Wetlands and Indigenous Peoples Study: An assessment of Indigenous engagement in wetland protected areas | 2021 | |
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Key finding | A considerable and broad experience with wetlands restoration and conservation dates back many decades. Expressed in an extensive body of publications by government agencies, practitioners’ organizations, trade organizations and consultancies, NGOs and scientists, a significant portion of this literature is Arctic-specific or Arctic relevant. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands Phase 2 Report | 2021 | ||
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Key finding | 11 | Coordinated transboundary management of wetlands is needed, but different national systems for wetland classification challenge such efforts. There are crucial differences between wetland classification systems. A uniform system for comparing and harmonizing existing Arctic wetland classifications would help to better plan wetland actions that span borders, traditions, and cultures. New developments should consider the value and legacy associated with existing national classification systems and Indigenous Knowledge and Local Knowledge of wetland areas. Development of new classification systems, maps and databases should ensure that legacy data remains useful, allow for conversion between systems and link to Indigenous Knowledge and use of wetlands. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands: Key Findings and Recommendations | 2021 | |
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Recommendation | 14 | Support development of wetland classification systems and maps specific to different Arctic Indigenous Peoples based on the words and terms traditionally used to describe wetland types, properties, and functions. Such maps would support wetland stewardship and facilitate communication of their value locally and to policy makers. | 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 | |
| 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) | Recommendation | 7 | Inventory and review existing national policies relating to wetlands with an eye on using a watershed approach and identifying conflicting or inconsistent goals, overlapping or unclear responsibility among governmental departments and entities, and gaps in communication. Identifying and addressing these issues would enable more effective governance of wetlands and balancing conservation and Indigenous and other user needs to achieve more effective stewardship. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands: Key Findings and Recommendations | 2021 | |
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Key finding | 1.2.3 | Arctic Indigenous Peoples and Wetlands Management: Most management and conservation plans, as well as other official information on wetland protected areas, fail to document Indigenous resource use in a systematic or functional way and as a result, do not provide a complete picture of resource use and management within the areas. | Arctic Wetlands and Indigenous Peoples Study: An assessment of Indigenous engagement in wetland protected areas | 2021 | |
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Key finding | The ways in which public opinion influences the development and implementation of wetlands restoration and stewardship in the Arctic are important, but largely unresearched. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands Phase 2 Report | 2021 | ||
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Key finding | 13 | There are numerous models for providing financial support to conservation or restoration of wetlands. Each of the Arctic states has developed ways to provide financial support for wetlands conservation and restoration efforts. While some of the particular strengths and benefits of each set of policies, program or model are country context-specific, many lessons are generalizable and therefore useful for expanding collaboration across the Arctic states. A systematic review of these national-level restoration financing initiatives would provide valuable insights into development of effective tools. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands: Key Findings and Recommendations | 2021 |