Recommendations

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.

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

Collaboration and cooperation:

5. Encourage and assist the development and implementation of national murre conservation plans.

6. Coordinate initiatives among circumpolar countries to address shared murre conservation issues.

7. Ensure the involvement of other jurisdictions and groups necessary to effectively implement this action plan.

Ensure Indigenous Knowledge is incorporated into white geese impacts research and mitigation measures

3.1 Continue to include Indigenous Knowledge in future work through co-development of management priorities for western geese.

Advance the protection of large areas of ecologically important marine, terrestrial and freshwater habitats, taking into account ecological resilience in a changing climate.

a. Build upon existing and on-going domestic and international processes to complete the identification of ecologically and biologically important marine areas and implement appropriate measures for their conservation.

b. Build upon existing networks of terrestrial protected areas, filling geographic gaps, including under represented areas, rare or unique habitats, particularly productive areas such as large river deltas, biodiversity hotspots, and areas with large aggregations of animals such as bird breeding colonies, seal whelping areas and caribou calving grounds.

5.1. Provide input and assist with international processes underway to complete the identification of ecologically and biologically important Arctic areas and promote measures for their conservation as appropriate.

5.2. Develop and follow-up on a framework for a Pan-Arctic Network of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) that sets out a common vision for regional cooperation in MPA network development and management.

5.3. Analyse existing Arctic protected areas data to identify gaps and priorities, including identification of the most climate-change resilient Arctic areas, connectivity gaps, and missing buffer zones, making use of new information and new analytical tools.

c. Promote the active involvement of indigenous peoples in the management and sustainable use ofprotected areas.

5.4. Develop guidelines for including Arctic indigenous and community values into protected areas planning and management, including exploring how best to promote and facilitate multiple values.

5.5. Analyse the results of ICC’s review of global protected areas schemes that promoteindigenous management practices, strong co-management schemes and supportindigenous food security for consideration by CAFF.

Consumptive use:

1. Ensure that consumptive uses of murres are sustainable.
2. Monitor harvest levels and assess their impacts on populations.
3. Harmonize management and harvest regimes for shared populations.
4. Involve local and Indigenous people in the management of consumptive uses.

Improve conservation and management of shorebird sites throughout the African-Eurasian flyway

1.1 Secure intertidal habitat of Arctic-breeding shorebirds in Bijagós Archipelago, Guinea-Bissau

1.2 Ensure identification and documentation of key sites for shorebirds in available format as a tool for national/international sustainable site management

Implementation plan for ABA recommendations (Actions for Arctic Biodiversity).

a. Prepare, track, and update biennially the plan.

b. Review and update actions in plan by all Working Groups and Task Forces related to ABA recommendations.

c. Evaluate progress on implementing the ABA recommendations and produce recommendations for follow-up work.

d. Encourage states to develop national implementation plans consistent with this implementation plan for the ABA recommendations as an essential adaptation measure.

Recognize the value of traditional ecological knowledge and work to further integrate it into the assessment, planning and management of Arctic biodiversity. This includes involving Arctic peoples and their knowledge in the survey, monitoring and analysis of Arctic biodiversity.

14.1. Develop recommendations for the integration of traditional and local knowledge intothe work of the Arctic Council.

14.2. Complete traditional knowledge component of the ABA by preparing a report on traditional knowledge on biodiversity change in the North American Arctic.

14.3. Prepare a report on lessons learned on the inclusion of traditional knowledge in CAFF.

14.4. Improve understanding of biodiversity change.

a. Explore the potential of developing a case study centred on walrus to demonstrate the use of an Inuit food security lens and ecosystem approach. The project would focus on walrus and bring together representatives of AMAP, SDWG, CAFF and Traditional Knowledge holders to look at indicators that cross over social and natural systems, paints a holistic picture and brings together discussion on biotic and abiotic systems.

b. Explore the development of the Salmon Peoples project.

14.5. Develop the community observation network for adaptation and security (CONAS) to increase the contribution of community-based monitoring and knowledge from Arctic peoples to existing knowledge.

14.6. Work to develop methods and techniques to survey the use of the Arctic marine ecosystem by Indigenous peoples to better assess the impact of shipping (Survey of Arctic Indigenous Marine Use AMSA IIA).

14.7. Seek ways to enhance the integration of traditional and local knowledge, including follow-up to the recommendations from the Iqaluit Declaration (Action 14.1), and encourage co-production of knowledge methodologies.

CHALLENGE Institutional structures can marginalize other forms of knowledge.

POTENTIAL SOLUTION/AUTHOR RECOMMENDATION Work to remove institutional barriers and improve processes for the effective use of Traditional Knowledge and Wisdom and involvement of Arctic indigenous peoples.

Ecosystem-based Monitoring and Reporting: Monitoring and reporting should encompass all key taxonomic groups and their likely relationships, linking responses to main biotic and abiotic drivers of change.

• Better coordinate between disciplines and knowledge systems both within and among Arctic states and Indigenous organizations, including experts in abiotic drivers of change (the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program) and other monitoring initiatives.
• Promote long-term integrated studies across biomes and taxonomic groups for examining trophic dynamics and other key interactions.
• Improve integration of factors that underpin changes in phenology, demography, and abundance.

Establishment of a system that is acceptable, predictable and measurable for industry, stakeholders and authorities to manage ecological compensation6, taking into account the vulnerability of Arctic nature and the long timeframes and slow pace of renewal associated with cold climates. The process of ecological compensation for unavoidable impacts is based on many assumptions and is inherently uncertain. A primary challenge is predicting with certainty what biodiversity benefits will be gained through the compensatory action (e.g., protection or restoration of another piece of land) and then measuring actual benefits versus predictions. Compensation should be designed and implemented so that the benefits to nature in the compensation area are equal to or higher than the value lost in the affected area. Ideally, that benefit would occur prior to the development action, but practically, that is often not the case.

Government agencies could:

• Facilitate access to land (e.g., assist with agreements to access and ensure long-term protection of compensation sites).
• Develop legal and administrative provisions that allow companies to create compensation areas, ensuring their long-term conservation./li>
• Provide guidelines for monitoring of the effects of the compensation measures carried out and provide data infrastructure to publicly disclose the results to establish a growing knowledge base and create confidence in compensation and trust between the various stakeholders.
• Collaborate with CAFF on developing products described in the “CAFF could” subsection.

Mining industry could:

• Adhere to rigorous scientific standards when designing and implementing compensation measures and present expected results openly and realistically.
• Publicly disclose the design and implementation as well as the monitoring results of compensation actions carried out. This will establish a growing knowledge base and create confidence in compensation and trust between the various stakeholders.
• Collaborate with CAFF on developing products described in the “CAFF could” subsection.

CAFF could:

• Work with mining and other industries and sectors, government agencies and interested stakeholders to evaluate existing and emerging ecological compensation practices and programs and their usefulness in Arctic situations.
• Evaluate systems of measurement and monitoring (e.g., what values should be measured, how should they be measured and when, and how should achieved compensation values such as compensation credits be compared to impacts levels).
• Evaluate existing legislation and guidelines (e.g., what can be done to encourage good ecological compensation practices).
• Consider guidelines and good practices to assist in conserving and increasing biodiversity and ecosystem services through compensation measures.

Marine mammals

• Implement existing international monitoring plans such as those for ringed seals and polar bear, with adaptive management principles to address the eleven FEC marine mammal species.
• Expand marine mammal monitoring efforts to include parameters on health, passive acoustics, habitat changes, and telemetry tracking studies.
• Obtain more knowledge about population sizes, densities, and distributions of marine mammal populations in order to understand the relationships between sea ice loss and climate change and to manage Arctic marine mammal populations in an appropriate manner.
• Involve indigenous and local peoples in the design and implementation of monitoring programs so that scientific knowledge and TLK holders are working collaboratively.
• Pursue a multidisciplinary and multi-knowledge approach and a high degree of collaboration across borders and between researchers, local communities and Arctic governments to better understand complex spatial-temporal shifts in drivers, ecological changes and animal health.

Mammals: The START reports on half of mammal FECs including large herbivores (caribou/reindeer, muskoxen), small herbivores (lemming), and medium-sized predators (Arctic fox). Data deficiencies prohibited reporting on medium-sized herbivores, and large and small predators.

• Develop synchronized protocols that include more attributes and reduce geographical knowledge gaps.
• Establish or expand international monitoring networks for medium-sized herbivores and large and small carnivores.
• Emphasize spatial structure and diversity in monitoring efforts due to the northward advance of southern competitors and vegetation changes.
• For large herbivore, small herbivore, and medium-sized predator FECs:
• Agree on priorities and harmonize data collection across sites and programs;
• Share and standardize protocols, in cooperation with relevant partners including Indigenous Peoples and organizations, to include abundance, demographics, spatial structure, health, phenology and, for harvested species, harvest rates; and
• Ensure monitoring programs employ existing methods with new harmonized methods to allow data comparisons.
• Monitor health as an attribute and develop standardized health assessment protocols due to the anticipated impact of climate change on distribution and prevalence of disease.
• Monitor abiotic factors and drivers of change, across greater spatial distributions to assess the cumulative impacts of climate and other anthropogenic change on populations across their ranges.
• Conduct research on the vulnerabilities of populations to climate change and human impacts, and on genetic diversity and spatial structure of FECs.
• Increase collaboration using interdisciplinary and multi-knowledge approaches to share site- and population-specific information. This can improve monitoring and lead to better models to assess the vulnerabilities and resilience of specific populations.
• Address challenges in assessing abundance of FECs across the Arctic, including:
• reliability of abundance estimates, such as lack of precision and accuracy;
• changing baselines, such as changes in species distribution, sampling methodology, and areas monitored; and
• differences in frequency and spatial extent of monitoring.