Recommendations
| Project | Type | # | Outcome | Report | Year | FEC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CBMP Freshwater Biodiversity Monitoring | Key finding | Available long-term monitoring records and research data indicate that freshwater biodiversity has changed over the last 200 years, with shifts in species composition being less dramatic in areas where temperatures have been more stable. | State of the Arctic Freshwater Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring | 2016 | ||
| CBMP Marine Biodiversity Monitoring | Advice | Methods: Increased attention to methodology allows for more precise and comparable results, standardized data collection, and ability to link regional monitoring to circumpolar efforts: -- Ensure that Arctic monitoring programs are ecosystem-based and include as many CBMP FECs as possible to include functionally important taxonomic groups and improve our understanding of how the ecosystem functions, and how its components are related. Such monitoring programs can serve to underpin management of human activities in the Arctic marine environment.-- Standardize methodology, including taxonomic identification in order to allow production of comparable data and results. -- Ensure training of personnel performing sampling and analyses. | State of the Arctic Marine Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring | 2017 | ||
| CBMP Terrestrial Biodiversity Monitoring | Advice | 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.
| State of the Arctic Terrestrial Biodiversity: Key Findings and Advice for Monitoring | 2021 | ||
| Arctic Biodiversity Assessment (ABA) | Key finding | 3 | Climate change is emerging as the most far reaching and significant stressor on Arctic biodiversity. However, contaminants, habitat fragmentation, industrial development, and unsustainable harvest levels continue to have impacts. Complex interactions between climate change and other factors have the potential to magnify impacts on biodiversity. | Arctic Biodiversity Trends 2010 – Selected indicators of change | 2010 | |
| Inspiring Arctic Voices Through Youth | Goal | Youth voices and perspectives are empowered to advance the goals of CAFF in the conservation of Arctic biodiversity, international collaboration, and raising public awareness of Arctic issues. | CAFF Arctic Youth Engagement Strategy: 2021-2026 | 2021 | ||
| CBird: Seabird Expert Group | 1.9 | Monitor occurrence ofdiseases in seabird populations. 1.9.1. Monitor bird flu and other diseases and minimize their impacts. | International Black-legged Kittiwake - Conservation Strategy and Action Plan | 2021 | ||
| CBird: Seabird Expert Group | 4.6 | Increase the knowledge base on damages made by kittiwakes breeding on man-made structures and the potential conflict. 4.6.1. More research is needed in order to reduce damage by kittiwake on construction and reduce conflicts with operators. | International Black-legged Kittiwake - Conservation Strategy and Action Plan | 2021 | ||
| CBird: Seabird Expert Group | Action | 5.2 | Collaboration and cooperation: 4. Prepare "National Implementation Plans", 5. Enlist the participation of regional and local governments, 6. Obtain assistance from local residents and eider specialists | Circumpolar Eider Conservation Strategy and Action Plan | 1997 | |
| Mainstreaming Biodiversity in Arctic Mining | Advice | 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:
Mining industry could:
CAFF could:
| Mainstreaming Biodiversity in Arctic Mining Challenges and Proposed Solutions | 2019 | ||
| Arctic Migratory Birds Initiative (AMBI) | Action | 3 | Development and dissemination of information and awareness materials addressing priority target 3.1 Support the development of communication products (in collaboration with flyway partners and communications experts) showcasing migratory connectivity, knowledge gaps, and threats in the African-Eurasian flyway area. | AMBI Work Plan 2019-2025: African Eurasian Flyway | 2021 | |
| Arctic Migratory Birds Initiative (AMBI) | Action | 2 | Secure intertidal and associated habitat for AMBI priority species at key staging and wintering sites in the Central and East Asian Flyways. 2.1 (Russia): Ensure improvement of protection of the Russian Far East coastal shorebird stopover sites, by providing information to support local and national decision making on key habitat identification and conservation, including consideration of the new Nature Park in Chukotka and prioritising recovery of closed protected area at Moroshechnaya river mouth in Kamchatka. 2.2 (United States): Gather better information on the abundance, distribution and habitat use of Dunlin and Bar-tailed Godwits at spring and fall staging sites in Alaska. 2.3 (China): Enhance protection of Jiangsu Coast ecosystem, especially the Rudong and Dongtai areas for Spoon-billed Sandpiper and other Arctic-breeding shorebirds considering World Heritage Site Nomination requirements. 2.4 (China): Enhance protection of the Luannan Coast especially Nanpu, Tangshan for Red Knot and other Arctic-breeding shorebirds. 2.5 (China): Enhance protection at Yalu Jiang, Liaoning for Bar-tailed Godwit, Dunlin, Great Knot and other Arctic shorebirds. 2.6 (China): Increase knowledge of key staging and wintering Arctic-breeding shorebirds sites in southern China (Guangdong, Guangxi and Fujian provinces) and improve conservation status of these sites. 2.7 (Republic of Korea): Support efforts to reverse declining trends of AMBI priority species (SBS, Great Knot, Dunlin and other) and improve habitat conservation along the flyway through sharing knowledge and international cooperative projects. 2.8 (Republic of Korea): Promote the importance of conserving Korea. | AMBI Work Plan 2019-2025: Central and East Asian Flyways | 2021 | |
| Arctic Biodiversity Assessment (ABA) | Recommendation | 4 | Require the incorporation of biodiversity objectives and provisions into all Arctic Council work and encourage the same for on-going and future international standards, agreements, plans, operations and/or other tools specific to development in the Arctic. This should include, but not be restricted to, oil and gas development, shipping, fishing, tourism and mining. | Arctic Biodiversity Assessment: Report for Policy Makers | 2013 | |
| Arctic Biodiversity Assessment (ABA) | Action | C | Continue to improve and make available information and data. a. Review, evaluate, and update the CBMP and its monitoring plans, including the parameters and attributes, sampling methods, data management, and reporting in accordance with the CBMP Strategy. External review every 10 years, starting in 2020. b. Continue implementation the CBMP and its ecosystem-based biodiversity monitoring plans. c. Establish, develop and maintain the ABDS as the supporting framework to facilitate long-term data sharing and as a source of data for modelling and ecosystem-based management. d. Develop and apply standards of the Arctic Spatial Data Infrastructure (SDI) and further develop use of remote sensing. | Actions for Arctic Biodiversity, 2013-2021: Implementing the recommendations of the Arctic Biodiversity Assessment | 2015 | |
| Arctic Biodiversity Assessment (ABA) | Action | 16 | Research 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. 16.1. Analyse the state of knowledge and data on cumulative effects and identify priorities, adding the biotic parameters to abiotic work. 16.2. Consider impacts of stressors and drivers within the scheduled reviews of the CBMP ecosystem monitoring plans. 16.3. Continue to develop and report on key robust indicators of Arctic biodiversity, in particular ones that can be used to track and understand cumulative effects. a. Update the Arctic Biodiversity Trends 2010; selected indicators of change report b. Land cover Change Index c. Protected areas using data from CAFF and PAME d. Arctic Migratory Bird Index e. Invasive species. 16.4 Improve predictive capacity through increased observations, research, scenarios and models as tools for understanding of processes governing changes in the Arctic and influencing future decisions. 16.5. Update the 2011 assessment on Arctic Ocean Acidification, including the extent andbiological effects and case studies of impacts in specific Arctic areas (Assessment of ArcticOcean Acidification). 16.6. Assess the combined effects of contaminants and climate change. 16.7. Assess the effects on marine mammals of ship noise, disturbance and strikes in Arcticmarine waters and, where needed, develop and mitigation strategies (AMSA IIG). 16.8. Based on current work by the CircumArctic Rangifer Monitoring and Assessment (CARMA) Network, develop an example of an ecosystem approach to cumulative effects from a keystone species’ perspective, integrating, over the species annual range, effects from climate change, infrastructure and human activity. The emphasis is on: 1) the assessment framework, 2) standardized monitoring protocols, 3) model-based assessment tools, and 4) application to ecosystem-based management and sensitive habitat protection and management. | Actions for Arctic Biodiversity, 2013-2021: Implementing the recommendations of the Arctic Biodiversity Assessment | 2015 | |
| Advice | Include biodiversity as a fundamental component of Environmental Impact Assessment, StrategicEnvironmental Assessment and risk assessment in the Arctic. | Arctic Biodiversity Congress 2014, Co-Chairs Report | 2014 | |||
| Arctic Biodiversity Assessment (ABA) | Key finding | 2 | Create best practices through demonstration projects, and on-the-ground work, including an evaluation of past projects, what worked, and what didn | Arctic Traditional Knowledge and Wisdom: Changes in the North American Arctic | 2017 | |
| 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 | 11 | Coordinated transboundary management of wetlands is needed, but different national systems for wetland classification challenge such efforts. There are crucial differences between wetland classification systems. A uniform system for comparing and harmonizing existing Arctic wetland classifications would help to better plan wetland actions that span borders, traditions, and cultures. New developments should consider the value and legacy associated with existing national classification systems and Indigenous Knowledge and Local Knowledge of wetland areas. Development of new classification systems, maps and databases should ensure that legacy data remains useful, allow for conversion between systems and link to Indigenous Knowledge and use of wetlands. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands: Key Findings and Recommendations | 2021 | |
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Recommendation | 14 | Support development of wetland classification systems and maps specific to different Arctic Indigenous Peoples based on the words and terms traditionally used to describe wetland types, properties, and functions. Such maps would support wetland stewardship and facilitate communication of their value locally and to policy makers. | Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands: Key Findings and Recommendations | 2021 | |
| Resilience and Management of Arctic Wetlands (RAW) | Advice | 5 | Connecting Beyond Wetlands: Exploring the interactions between inland and coastal wetlands broadens focus. Examining the opportunities between CAFF projects such as RMAWI, the Salmon Peoples of the Arctic, the Seabird Working Group, and the Arctic Migratory Bird Initiative may further facilitate research on Indigenous relationships with Arctic biodiversity, particularly as they relate to subsistence activities. | Arctic Wetlands and Indigenous Peoples Study: An assessment of Indigenous engagement in wetland protected areas | 2021 |
Arctic Council Working Group