Recommendations

CBMP remains relevant by providing high quality information about biodiversity trends to support decision making at global, national, regional, and local levels.

Objective 1.1: Through dialogue with Arctic States and Permanent Participants, identify and address priorities where CBMP information could support reporting and decision-making.

• Activity 1: CBMP Co-leads offer to arrange annual meetings with CAFF Board members, during each 2-year Arctic Council chairmanship period to gain direct input on priorities related to CBMP and to ensure progress is communicated and discussed nationally.
• Activity 2: Initiate a process to evaluate how CBMP is most relevant and can meet future needs for States, Permanent Participants, and other stakeholders.

Objective 1.2: Ensure that the CBMP Strategy is aligned with the new Action Plan for 2020-2030.

• Activity 1: Engage in the development of the new Action Plan for Biodiversity.
• Activity 2: Revise the CBMP Strategic Plan as needed to support priorities in the new Action Plan for 2020-2030.

Objective 1.3: Strengthen International Collaborations that enhance the use of CBMP products and data among others via the Arctic Biodiversity Data Service (ABDS), as well as support CAFF’s framework of agreements with international biodiversity-relevant conventions and organisations.

• Activity 1: Continue development of the Arctic Biodiversity Dashboard as a means for tracking and reporting target progress towards global biodiversity targets at national and regional scales.
• Activity 2: Take national, circumpolar, and global needs into account when planning follow-up to the SABR for example, by creating a case study to explore how CBMP can address other reporting requirements e.g., EU directives and the Global Biodiversity Framework, or Integrated Ecosystem Assessments.
• Activity 3: Deliver key findings and advice from the CBMP to CAFF’s partners.
• Activity 4: Ensure that data generated by CBMP are made available via the ABDS and are accessible to relevant international partners. Ensure data interoperability with these partners where possible, e.g., the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF) and the Ocean Biodiversity Information System (OBIS).
• Activity 5: Maintain strategic links with other Arctic Council groups, relevant organizations, and initiatives; and grow linkages as relevant.

Objective 1.4: Include where relevant Indigenous Knowledge and Local Knowledge in CBMP.

• Activity 1: Improve inclusion of Indigenous Knowledge within CBMP through a co-production of knowledge approach to inform better decision-making.
• Activity 2: Use the Arctic Biodiversity Congress in 2022/23 as an opportunity to consider how Indigenous Knowledge and Local Knowledge are used in CBMP and ways to enhance engagement, e.g., through associated meetings and sessions.
• Activity 3: Include Indigenous Knowledge and Local Knowledge where relevant in revisions of Arctic Biodiversity Monitoring Plans (e.g., when considering follow-up on the State of the Arctic Biodiversity Reports).

Objective 1.5: Promote awareness of the CBMP and its value towards improving decision-making, for example develop outreach material specific to each State and PP that presents nationally relevant key findings and activities of the CBMP.

• Activity 1: Ensure more effective, flexible, up-to-date, and interactive communication of CBMP products and outcomes, including e.g., learning materials, workshops and participatory approaches merging science and art.
• Activity 2: CAFF Secretariat will, together with CBMP Co-leads and CBMP Steering Groups, develop, test, and promote a toolkit for use by Arctic States and PPs for dissemination of products, which can be tailored based on the product, etc. If possible, the pilot-project will be made as a follow-up to the SAFBR and START.
• Activity 3: Where possible, support translation of key documents and findings from CBMP activities into languages other than English.
• Activity 4: Develop national one-page updates on activities related to each of the CBMP monitoring plans that include short, country-specific progress reports on SABR follow up, where relevant.
• Activity 5: Support development of peer-reviewed scientific articles based on CBMP efforts to ensure access in scientific literature of CBMP outcomes, e.g., through production of Journal Special Issues.
• Activity 6: Continue to produce headline indicators.
• Activity 7: Continue to produce annual newsletters to keep the scientific community informed of CBMP news, events, and initiatives.
• Activity 8: Facilitate increased meaningful engagement of Permanent Participants and the knowledge systems they represent.
• Activity 9 Facilitate increased participation of young scientists in CBMP activities, e.g., through internships.
• Activity 10: Continue improving networking and coordination for experts e.g., through annual meetings and supporting National and Expert Networks.

Monitoring Methods

• Harmonize sampling approaches among countries and select appropriate sampling methods andequipment to balance between maintaining consistency and comparability with historical data andalignment with common methods used across the Arctic.
• Use a regionalized approach based on ecoregions to guide the spatial distribution of sample stations and, ultimately, provide better assessments.
• Ensure spatial coverage of sampled ecoregions is sufficient to address the overarching monitoring questions of the CBMP across the Arctic and provide sufficient replication.
• Maintain time series at key locations, and fill gaps where monitoring data are sparse.
• Develop supplementary monitoring methods that provide better standardized estimates of biodiversity to maximize the likelihood of detecting new and/or invasive species.
• Make use of recent advances in emerging technologies, including environmental DNA (eDNA) methods and remote sensing approaches.
• Standardize data storage practices and provide access through a common data source like GBIF.

Sea ice biota

• Establish an annual monitoring programme from land fast sea ice at selected Arctic field stations in Canada (Resolute, Cambridge Bay), Greenland (Kobbefjord, Disko Bay, Zackenberg), Norway (Kongsfjorden, Billefjorden, Van Mijenfjorden), and the U.S. (Barrow).
• Establish a standardized monitoring protocol, including sample collection, preservation, microscopic and genetic analyses, taxonomic harmonization, and data sharing.
• Establish opportunistic monitoring from drifting sea ice during cruises of opportunity.
• Collect macrofauna samples in drifting sea ice via ship-based activities, scuba diving, electrical suction pumps, under-ice trawl nets, and remotely operated vehicles.

Local Knowledge and Citizen Science: Local Knowledge exists on a spectrum from long-term, place-based experiential knowledge held by local residents, including harvesters, to knowledge of more recent residents. As such, monitoring efforts to work with Local Knowledge must interact with a wide range of diverse knowledge holders.

• Dedicate more time to collaboration with Local Knowledge holders in monitoring design, analysis and interpretation.
• Encourage and support citizen science platforms that engage Arctic residents, as well as visitors. Platforms should reflect strong scientific goals, have transparent methods for evaluating data quality, build communities of observers, engage a strong volunteer base, and devote consistent efforts to communicating results.
• Identify and collaborate across existing platforms to increase awareness and participation in citizen science and consider new approaches to address knowledge gaps.
• Invest in digital infrastructure as a prerequisite for fully accessible platforms to inform biodiversity monitoring.

Increase opportunities for youth to engage meaningfully with the work of CAFF, including but not limited to:

• Education and training
• Cultural exchanges
• Professional growth development
• Involvement in projects, decision-making, policy, and diplomacy.
• Youth roles in professional convenings such as the Arctic Biodiversity Congress.
• Mentoring opportunities

Limit human disturbance to a level that does not decrease breeding success.

2.3.1. Identify significant risks of disturbance activities and sensitive locations.

2.3.2. Develop guidelines (codes-of-conduct) for potentially harmful organized activities near colonies e.g. tourism, research (all fields), harvest, air- and ship traffic as well as individual activities such as kayaking, fishing etc.

2.3.3. Introduce area restrictions for high risk activities and promote regulations in adequate formats.

2.3.4. Improve and standardize methods for Environmental Impact Assessments.

2.3.5. Increase the knowledge on impacts of marine installations on seabirds (noise, light, pollution etc.).

2.3.6. Execute spatial planning and environmental assessments taking seabird management priorities into account.

2.3.7. Create no-conflict artificial nesting sites in locations where kittiwakes have moved into human settlements.

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:

• Engage with industry as early as possible, outside of the permitting process, with the caveat that conflict of interest can be an issue during permitting so relevant laws and policies must be adhered to (Box 1).
• Align/organize internally and among different government entities who may need to be involved in particular projects and the permitting process. This alignment should happen from the outset of a project or permitting process to identify ways to streamline permit requirements without compromising the quality or integrity of the process or outputs.

Mining industry could:

• Engage with permitting agencies early regarding all aspects of the proposed project, including by offering ideas for how to streamline the permitting process while still delivering the necessary inputs.
• Ensure there is regular and meaningful communication with government agencies.

CAFF could:

• Share and gather information and report on good practices in environmental assessment/permitting and share broadly with Arctic States, industry and others.
• Continue to facilitate dialogue and information sharing among industry and government agencies regarding mainstreaming of biodiversity as a way to build common understanding and establish enduring relationships.

Establish a monitoring and evaluation framework for implementation of the actions for Arctic biodiversity.

4.1 Develop indicators to monitor implementation of the Actions for Arctic Biodiversity, assess and evaluate effectiveness of implementation, and report in relevant fora.

Harvest assessments and mitigation of unsustainable harvest of Arctic birds

2.1 Work with CBird to promote dialogue with authorities for management plans to combine the knowledge of status of hunted species between countries

2.2 Assess the population-level impact of seabird harvest in relation to other stressors

2.3 Conduct/update holistic harvest studies for circumpolar regions of interest using approaches tailored to regional contexts as appropriate