Recommendations

Develop and implement mechanisms that best safeguard Arctic biodiversity under changing environmental conditions, such as loss of sea ice, glaciers and permafrost.

a. Safeguard areas in the northern parts of the Arctic where high Arctic species have a relatively greater chance to survive for climatic or geographical reasons, such as certain islands and mountainous areas, which can act as a refuge for unique biodiversity.

7.1. Develop options for safeguarding potential marine and terrestrial refuge areas, including areas that will maintain multi-year ice (related to AMSA IID).

b. Maintain functional connectivity within and between protected areas in order to protect ecosystem resilience and facilitate adaptation to climate change.

7.2. Assess options and recommend most effective methods to manage connectivity, in light of climate change, including identification of sub-populations, species and regions for which connectivity is most critical (including for increasing genetic resilience).

7.3. Identify management actions that will enhance resilience of species in adapting to rapid change.

Develop and implement mechanisms that best safeguard Arctic biodiversity under changing environmental conditions, such as loss of sea ice, glaciers and permafrost.

a. Safeguard areas in the northern parts of the Arctic where high Arctic species have a relatively greater chance to survive for climatic or geographical reasons, such as certain islands and mountainous areas, which can act as a refuge for unique biodiversity.

b. Maintain functional connectivity within and between protected areas in order to protect ecosystem resilience and facilitate adaptation to climate change.

Develop communication and outreach tools and methodologies to better convey the importance and value of Arctic biodiversity and the changes it is undergoing.

17.1. Implement CAFF’s communications strategy and update as needed.

17.2. Develop tools to raise awareness of Arctic biodiversity, and the multiple challenges it faces, for example Through the Lens photography competition, and create publications, articles, films, social media, media campaigns and educational kits.

17.3. Provide status and trend information to international fora and national agencies to promote the importance of Arctic biodiversity and to facilitate reporting through multilateral environmental agreements and other international processesa. Reframe the results of the ABA as a regional biodiversity outlook for the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and as a contribution to the biodiversity and ecosystem services regional reports for the Americas and Europe and Central Asia being prepared for Intergovernmental Panel on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services.

b. Report to the CBD on progress of the Arctic region towards achievement of the Aichi Biodiversity Targets.

17.4. Develop educational materials based on the ABA (in several languages).

a. Pilot: educational toolkit on Arctic ecology for children ages 9-11.

17.5 Develop and implement outreach products to communicate the outcomes of this plan

Develop guidelines and implement appropriate spatial and temporal measures where necessary to reduce human disturbance to areas critical for sensitive life stages of Arctic species that are outside protected areas, for example along transportation corridors. Such areas include calving grounds, den sites, feeding grounds, migration routes and moulting areas. This also means safeguarding important habitats such as wetlands and polynyas.

6.1. Provide technical information, including mapping areas of high species abundance, unique Arctic diversity and those important for sensitive life stages, at a scale appropriate for use in planning.

6.2. Develop, where needed, guidelines or other tools, for safeguarding sensitive areas for biodiversity (outside protected areas) that are vulnerable to human activity and/or contribute to international processes developing such guidelines, including potential refugia that will maintain multi-year ice.

Difficulty establishing clear processes for engaging Indigenous Peoples and utilizing TK. A need exists to work together with Indigenous communities in a meaningful way that respects and utilizes TK along with science to inform decisions regarding biodiversity (e.g., key research questions informing biotic and abiotic monitoring decisions). There are existing examples of design, operations, and reclamation plans of some mines located in the Arctic region that have been influenced by TK and through consultations with local communities, but there is not a consistent or systematic way for gathering and utilizing TK and science so outcomes are useful, credible and benefit communities and the mining industry to the greatest extent possible.

Government agencies could:

• Ensure that TK is considered as part of data collection needs and other relevant permitting requirements for Arctic mines.
• Facilitate and engage early in co-production processes where TK is valued and used.

Mining industry could:

• Engage early in co-production processes where TK is valued and used.
• Share examples of where industry has engaged with TK holders in a meaningful way and collaborate in developing good practices that can work effectively for all involved.

CAFF could:

• Engage early in co-production processes where TK is valued and used.
• Help facilitate meaningful utilization and understanding of TK at multiple levels (e.g. local, national and international) through guidance from the Permanent Participants.
• Continue work with Permanent Participants to develop good practices on how to implement coproduction of knowledge approaches to planning and decision-making (e.g., publish and share with the mining industry the approach to the co-production of knowledge outlined in the Arctic Coastal Biodiversity Monitoring Plan).

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.

Encourage equal partnership and participation at the outset and throughout research projects that affect Arctic Indigenous peoples.

Enhance data collection and data input into habitat protection initiatives

1.1 Raise awareness and facilitate protection of key marine bird habitats that intersect with human activities using various regulatory and planning processes as appropriate to protect marine birds while they are at-sea.

1.2 Support country participation on circumpolar collaborations to enhance Ivory Gull surveys and collection and synthesis of marine bird tracking data (including Ivory Gulls).

1.3 Knowledge gap analysis of circumpolar seabird tracking studies.

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.

Ensure sustainable harvest.

1.1.1. Regulate hunting/harvest of adults to ensure sustainable outtake, and to implement hunting/harvest moratorium for populations in decline.

1.1.2. Reduce bycatch in hunting and accidental harvest.

1.1.3. Monitor harvest of kittiwakes and conduct surveys to assess the impact on populations.

Ensure sustainable harvest.

2.1.1. Strict regulations of egg collecting; collaboration options with AMBI should be considered.

Ensure that new offshore energy development does not come in conflict with foraging habitat use by kittiwakes.

3.2.1. Use tracking and population data to prevent construction of offshore structures close to breeding sites/foraging grounds/wintering sites

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.

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.

Establishment of mutually beneficial partnerships with communities impacted by mining operations.

In order to operate effectively, the mining industry needs buy-in from impacted communities (i.e., Social License to Operate). This is especially important across much of the Arctic where Indigenous Peoples and/or local communities often depend on ecosystem services for food security, cultural and spiritual connections and other purposes. Because of differences in cultures and/or values, limited shared understanding and lack of trust, it can be difficult to meaningfully engage with Indigenous and/or local communities, develop positive relationships and work towards common goals. Although there are good examples of where the mining industry operating in the Arctic is working collaboratively with government agencies, communities and others to minimize their impacts on biodiversity, public perception of the mining industry in impacted communities is not always favourable.

Mining industry could:

• Engage in community partnerships where community members have real input and decision-making authority (e.g., co-management of resources) (Box 4).
• Provide tangible economic incentives for community residents (e.g., employment at mine or related support jobs and community enhancement efforts)
• Use of agreements (e.g., “good neighbour”/Impact and Benefit Agreements) (Tolvanen 2018) to attain social license to operate prior to mining activities taking place (Boxes 2 and 4). Agreements could designate, for example, how to monitor impacts and address compensation for unavoidable effects (Tolvanen 2018).
• Ensure protection of traditional uses of the surrounding area, including linkages to food security and the biodiversity it supports as an important consideration during all phases of the project.

CAFF could:

• Work with the mining industry and others to continue to develop and share good practices for community engagement and partnerships specific to mining operations.
• Continue to explore opportunities for further dialogue among Permanent Participants, government agencies and the mining industry to help identify and ultimately achieve mutually beneficial outcomes.

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.

Habitat protection and enhancement

12. Identify important murre colonies and designate them under national and international systems of protected areas.

13. Promote the establishment of marine protected areas in important pelagic habitats for murres.

14. Contribute to the "Important Bird Areas" system to highlight important areas for murres.

15. Explore the establishment of an international network to identify and protect key areas for murres.

16. Ensure that conservation action will benefit populations, by assessing causes of population declines from an ecosystem perspective.

17. Undertake specific restoration activities to assist depressed populations to recover.

Habitat protection

Objective: Protect key habitat to ensure continued viability of Ivory Gull populations that depend on them.

Actions

• Prepare summary of protected areas containing important Ivory Gull habitats.
• Evaluate the Circumpolar Protected Areas Network (CPAN) and other mechanisms to protect habitats important to the Ivory Gull.
• Identify important Ivory Gull habitat areas still requiring protection and designate them under national and international systems of protected areas (e.g. Birdlife International system, Important Bird Areas).
• Identify and implement any additional protective mechanisms such as treaties, agreements, regulations, and policies needed to protect Ivory Gull habitats.

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

Identify and secure important breeding and staging habitats of key AMBI Central and East Asian Flyways migratory bird species in Arctic Russia and Alaska, with a focus on Spoon-billed Sandpiper, Bar-tailed Godwit, Red Knot, Dunlin, Emperor Goose and Brant Goose.

1.1 (Russia): Improve conservation work on Spoon-billed Sandpiper (SBS) and other AMBI priority species in the breeding grounds including addressing climate change related threats.

1.2 (Russia): Identify important breeding and staging areas in coastal areas of Russia for AMBI priority species, and where possible encourage and assist their nomination as EAAF Partnership Network Sites with follow-up conservation actions, prioritizing areas in Sakhalin and Kamchatka (Ust' Khairuzovo, Moroshechnaya estuary, Bay of Tyk and others).

1.3 (United States): Undertake bird surveys and tracking studies to improve knowledge of important breeding and staging sites for priority species in Alaska.

1.4 (United States): Protect previously identified important breeding and staging areas.

1.5 (Russia/United States): Share experience and methodologies for surveying shorebird distribution, monitoring population size and trends, conducting demographic studies, and managing habitats of priority species and other migratory birds.

1.6 (Russia/United States): Explore the opportunity to initiate a seabird monitoring project in Chukotka and increase cross-Beringia information exchange.