| Project |
Type |
# |
Outcome |
Report |
Year |
FEC |
| Arctic Species Trend Index (ASTI) | Key finding | 6 | In the Wadden Sea, Arctic bird abundance is 75% higher in 2010 than in 1980, but the trend has been following a negative trajectory since 2002. | Arctic Species Trend Index: Migratory Birds Index | 2015 | |
| Arctic Species Trend Index (ASTI) | Key finding | 7 | A number of species in our data set showed declines across flyway regions, e.g., Red knot Calidris canutus. Others have increased more recently, e.g., Greater white-fronted goose Anser albifrons. | Arctic Species Trend Index: Migratory Birds Index | 2015 | |
| Arctic Species Trend Index (ASTI) | Key finding | 8 | Due 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 Index | 2015 | |
| Arctic Species Trend Index (ASTI) | Key finding | 9 | Due to time and resource limitations some data on abundance change was not included, accounting for some of the data gaps. Additional gaps are due to lack of access to data and the ongoing need for more data collection. It is hoped that this report will trigger increased interest and wider participation from all countries and organisations along the migration routes as international cooperation is vital to ensure the conservation of Arctic migratory birds. | Arctic Species Trend Index: Migratory Birds Index | 2015 | |
| 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 | | Comprehensive information on Arctic wetlands ecosystems is currently lacking but needed to adequately identify the location and type of wetlands with high levels of accuracy. Recent developments in the use of geospatial data and artificial intelligence provide the basis for substantial improvements in mapping of the extent and condition of Arctic wetlands, opening up valuable opportunities for pan-Arctic collaboration to improve wetlands inventories and keep them up-to-date. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands Phase 2 Report | 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 | | The key obstacles to scaling up and expanding wetlands restoration and management efforts in the Arctic are not due to a lack of knowledge about wetlands ecosystems processes and functions, or steps that can be taken to improve their status. Policy design and difficulties with implementation appear often to be obstacles, however, and accurate, up-to-date mapping is needed to target policy initiatives. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands Phase 2 Report | 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 | | There is relatively little comparative analysis of national-level policies that impact Arctic wetlands. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands Phase 2 Report | 2021 | |
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Key finding | | While policy pertaining to Arctic wetlands is expansive, preliminary evidence points to three key challenges for effective policy:
inconsistency and/or conflict between policies and goals addressed to different aspects of wetlands,
the distribution of responsibility for policy implementation into agencies and departments with differing, sometimes contrasting missions,
difficulties with good communications between responsible agencies and departments | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands Phase 2 Report | 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) | 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 | |
Arctic Council Working Group