Recommendations

Project Type # Outcome Report Year FEC
Arctic Migratory Birds Initiative (AMBI)Action3Mitigate seabird and seaduck bycatch 3.1 Initiate an overlap analysis for seabird bycatch in circumpolar region 3.2 Continue discussions about mitigation measures with fisheries partners 3.3 Support efforts to develop best practices for bycatch data collection 3.4 Assess gill net bycatch for key species and regions AMBI Work Plan 2019-2025: Circumpolar Flyway2021
Arctic Biodiversity Assessment (ABA)Key finding9The challenges facing Arctic biodiversity are interconnected, requiring comprehensive solutions and international cooperation.Arctic Biodiversity Assessment: Report for Policy Makers2013
Arctic Biodiversity Assessment (ABA)Recommendation16Research 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 Makers2013
Arctic Biodiversity Assessment (ABA)Action12

Evaluate the range of services provided by Arctic biodiversity in order to determine the costs associated with biodiversity loss and the value of effective conservation in order to assess change and support improved decision making.

12.1. Prepare a scoping report on the potential for applying the TEEB (The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity) approach to evaluate the benefits people receive from Arctic biodiversity.

12.2. Evaluate ecosystem services.

a. Complete the TEEB scoping study.

b. Follow-up as appropriate on valuation of ecosystem services.

12.3. Enhance the use of both existing traditional and local knowledge and community-based monitoring approaches in the work of the Arctic Council.

Actions for Arctic Biodiversity, 2013-2021: Implementing the recommendations of the Arctic Biodiversity Assessment2015
AdviceDevelop targets to stimulate actions and against which progress can be measured.Arctic Biodiversity Congress 2014, Co-Chairs Report2014
Arctic Biodiversity Assessment (ABA)Action

CHALLENGE Funding is inconsistent, often leaving out the involvement of Arctic Indigenous peoples.

POTENTIAL ACTIONS AND OPPORTUNITIES Funding aimed at actively engaging Indigenous peoples and organizations in scientific activities and to improve the understanding and use Traditional Knowledge and Wisdom

Arctic Traditional Knowledge and Wisdom: Changes in the North American Arctic2017
Arctic Species Trend Index (ASTI)Key finding8Due to data limitations, this report is a first step towards developing detailed knowledge of macroecological patterns in Arctic breeding migratory birds. Trends may differ from expert knowledge until data gaps are filled. In addition, we did not examine if abundance change is attributable to factors other than the loss of individuals, e.g., shifts in seasonal ranges.Arctic Species Trend Index: Migratory Birds Index2015
Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW)Key finding7The 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 Recommendations2021
Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW)Recommendation10Develop 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 Recommendations2021
Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW)Advice1Documenting 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 actionsArctic Wetlands and Indigenous Peoples Study: An assessment of Indigenous engagement in wetland protected areas2021
Arctic TEEBKey finding3.1Governance: Key Finding 3.1. Incorporation of Arctic ecosystem services into policies and governance practices is akey method for the integration of environmental, economic, and social policies.The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) for the Arctic: A Scoping Study Executive Summary2015
Arctic TEEBAdvice2

A number of additional options, some of which address fundamental issues and challenges to the application of the TEEB approach in the Arctic context. 1. Guidance, methods, tools and information to support policy

1.1. Raise awareness of the roles and value of ecosystem services among Arctic communities with the aim of empowering communities, grass roots organizations and local administrations for better discussions/negotiations with sub-national/federal governments and corporations on policy related to Arctic development.

1.2. Through collaborative processes, raise awareness of the ways that Arctic Indigenous Peoples value nature. For example, facilitate discussions between Indigenous Peoples and economists, aimed at informing ways to accommodate indigenous values in economic policies and practices.

1.3. Make the role of natural capital and ecosystem services explicit in relation to adaptation and adaptive capacity. This is best done through bringing results from this scoping study into, and working in collaboration with, Arctic Council initiatives, for example, bya) considering adaptation options for policy makers that include the non-monetary and economic aspects of biodiversity, through the Adaptation Actions for a ChangingArctic (AACA); and b) creating resilience indicators that would encompass ecosystem processes (building on the human development indicators) through the Arctic Resilience Report.

1.4. Make visible (in economies) the wider value of Arctic biodiversity conservation and sustainable biodiversity use schemes, and identify financing opportunities for such schemes that are based on recognizing ecosystem services.

1.5. Apply economic analysis with the goal of a) accommodating the multiple value systems underpinning mixed and livelihood economies in the Arctic, such as reindeer herding and community economies based, or partly based, on subsistence hunting, fishing and gathering; b) capturing Arctic social and ecological resilience in economic information and valuation; and c) facilitating investment in the insurance value of Arctic natural capital.

2. Knowledge base.

2.1. Complete and maintain the Arctic Ecosystem Services Inventory. A draft ecosystem services inventory was prepared as part of the scoping study (see Ecosystem services section above). The inventory is a start on a structured and synthesized literature review of Arctic ecosystem services, the ecosystems they are derived from, their associated benefits, status, trends, threats, uncertainty, knowledge gaps, and what work has been done on valuation. To be a useful source of synthesized information, and a basis for further information tools, the inventory requires further work. The inventory could a) be a ready resource for information and overviews of available information on ecosystem services and what is known about them in relation to beneficiaries, threats, trends and valuation, both to raise awareness and to provide an entry point for policy-related assessment work; b) serve as a metadata center and service through CAFF’s Arctic Biodiversity Data Service; and c) provide input to research and monitoring plans and agendas, and potentially also to industry monitoring and research planning

2.2. Take steps to capture or present new research results in ways that make them useful to ecosystem-services-based policy development. This could be awareness raising through research meetings of the need to make this connection, increased expert networking, such as through a community of practice on ecosystem services, and/or through changes to funding mechanisms for research.

2.3. Clearly identify knowledge gaps (both at the broad underpinning and methodological scale, and for specific geographic scales) and develop mechanisms to bring them into discussion of research agendas.

2.4. Facilitate and coordinate monitoring of the social and economic importance of ecosystems (through the Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring Program). 3. Synthesis, analysis and information products

3.1. Analyze linkages over scale, time and actors that affect when, where and to whom the costs and benefits of industrial development in the Arctic on biodiversity and ecosystems occur, considering also current and future use and spatial subsidies, to demonstrate the value and help frame the distributive impacts of decisions.

3.2. Prepare ecosystem services inventories with regular status reporting. Include interdisciplinary valuation of ecosystem services at the level of LMEs and national scales, but also initiate a regular review and assessment process at the pan-Arctic scale. Review and assessment would be in collaboration with existing Arctic Council processes, including the framework for assessment of biodiversity status and trends established through the CBMP.

3.3. Develop indicators to help describe the status of Arctic biodiversity and ecosystems. Include indicators that convey the proximity to potential thresholds or tipping points and attach confidence metrics to all indicators reflecting the level of knowledge and understanding. Development of such indicators needs to be done through co-production of knowledge based on a collaboration of Traditional Knowledge holders and scientists. (Indicator development is underway through the Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring Program.)

3.4. Develop resilience indicators that make explicit the role of natural capital and ecosystem services in building of adaptive capacity. These would have similar use for policy making but be more encompassing of ecosystem processes than human development indicators.

3.5. Develop and test tools to evaluate Arctic ecosystem services in local and sub-national EBM, marine spatial planning, land-use planning and management, and in co-management schemes where they can directly contribute to co-producing knowledge and adaptive governance.

The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (TEEB) for the Arctic: A Scoping Study Executive Summary2015
Key finding1Partnerships 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 II2015
CBMP Freshwater Biodiversity MonitoringAdvice

Traditional Knowledge (TK)

  • Engage with Indigenous communities to work towards identifying and integrating their TK into efforts to assess Arctic freshwater biodiversity, including change over time.
  • Incorporate TK as an integral part of circumpolar monitoring and observational networks.
State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring2016
CBMP Marine Biodiversity MonitoringAdvicePlankton• Follow standardized protocols for monitoring plankton, including sample collection and preservation, microscopic and genetic analyses with taxonomic harmonization.• Ensure that full data sharing occurs between scientists, and is deposited in publicly-accessible nationaldata centers. Continue to consolidate older data.• Train highly qualified personnel to perform plankton sampling and species-level analyses, including theuse of molecular techniques.• Establish long-term funded annual monitoring programmes of plankton from selected Arctic field stations or Arctic campaigns/cruises in Canada, the U.S. and Russia, which together with the ongoing monitoring in Greenland, Iceland and Norway will secure a pan-Arctic coverage. • Develop species indexes and if possible, identify indicator taxa for monitoring.State of the Arctic Marine Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring2017
CBMP Terrestrial Biodiversity MonitoringAdvice

Knowledge Gaps : Currently, there is some monitoring for all FECs, but it varies in coverage, duration, frequency and access to institutional support and resources.

  • Expand and coordinate long-term in situ time series across regions and across FECs.
  • Implement ecosystem-based approaches that better monitor and link biological attributes to environmental drivers.
  • Increase partnerships with Indigenous Knowledge holders and organizations.
  • Increase and support contributions from Local Knowledge holders and citizen science.
  • Work with Arctic Council Observer states to collect and compile knowledge on Arctic biodiversity.
  • Improve data collection on rare species and species of concern.
State of the Arctic Terrestrial Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring2021
Arctic Species Trend Index (ASTI)Key finding1

The Arctic Species Trend Index (ASTI): 2011 update.

1.1 Average abundance of Arctic vertebrates increased from 1970 until 1990 then remained fairly stable through 2007, as measured by the ASTI 2011.

1.2 When species abundance is grouped by broad ecozones, a different picture emerges, with low Arctic species abundance increasing in the first two decades much more than high Arctic and sub Arctic species abundance. The low Arctic index has stabilized since the mid-1990s while the high Arctic index appears to be recovering in recent years and the sub Arctic index has been declining since a peak in the mid-1980s.

1.3 The trend for Arctic marine species is similar to that of the overall ASTI, while the trend for terrestrial species shows a quite different pattern: a steady decline after the early 1990s to a level below the 1970 baseline by 2005.

The Arctic Species Trend Index 2011: Key findings from an in-depth look at marine species and development of spatial analysis techniques2012
Inspiring Arctic Voices Through YouthIncrease numbers of youth engaged and actively participating and strive for diverse representation of youth from all Arctic nations, and beyond.CAFF Arctic Youth Engagement Strategy: 2021-20262021
CBird: Seabird Expert Group2.4

Reduce the negative impact of commercial fisheries on breeding success.

2.4.1. Ensure industrial fisheries of pelagic forage fish such as capelin, herring and sandeel are not at a level that limits kittiwakes’ food supply.

2.4.2. Increase research into the resource competition between seabird and fisheries and how this should influence quotas.

International Black-legged Kittiwake - Conservation Strategy and Action Plan2021
CBird: Seabird Expert GroupResearch and monitoring Objective Provide reliable information about Ivory Gulls needed to implement the Strategy Actions• Develop a comprehensive research agenda foreach population specifying what informationis most needed, how it will be used, and which countries will be involved in doing the work. • Develop a research agenda that determines whether distinct Ivory Gull populations exist in the circumpolar Arctic. • For each major Ivory Gull breeding population, work to estimate population size, productivity, adult survival rates, and identify migration routes and wintering grounds. • Collaborate with the Arctic Monitoring Assessment Program (AMAP) to study contaminants that may be causing mortality or reproductive problems with Ivory Gulls and seek ways to reduce their adverse impacts. • Develop national and international monitoring plans for Ivory Gulls throughout the circumpolar Arctic.International Ivory Gull Conservation Strategy and Action Plan2008