Arctic Council's CAFF Working Group Green Paper on AMAP-CAFF Coordinated Monitoring Effort

Arctic Council , Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna Working Group

Arctic Portal Library

- 1 -Green Paper on AMAP-CAFF Coordinated Monitoring Effort1.1 IntroductionAchieving sustainable development within the Arctic rests on the ability to maintain theintegrity of Arctic ecosystems in light of rapidly increasing stressors such as climate change,contaminants, and economic development. In order to support science -based policy anddecision-making for the sustainable use and conservation of the Arctic’s living resources it isnecessary to conduct sustained monitoring of key environmental variables. From it’s beginning,the Arctic Council has identified monitoring as a key activity, coupled with assessments thataddress issues of importance to the Council. Two of the Working Groups of the Arctic Councilhave a monitoring mandate, the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Program (AMAP) and thegroup on Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF). AMAP’s monitoring program isbased on ongoing national and international monitoring activities. These are harmonized to themeet AMAP specifications for implementing a coordinated circumpolar monitoring programthat is capable of delivering the data to meet AMAP’s assessment needs. CAFF’s monitoring isimplemented through the Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring Program (CBMP). The purposeof this paper, is to further explore how AMAP and CAFF can look for opportunities tocoordinate their monitoring programs to further strengthen our understanding of the processesdriving change across the Arctic and the effects of these changes on Arctic ecosystems, and toidentify possible actions to compensate for, or reverse the effects of these changes, withsustainability and sustainable use of Arctic ecosystems as the ultimate goals. The main part ofthe AMAP – CAFF Coordinated Monitoring will be implemented through National Programsthat fulfill AMAP and CAFF needs.1.2 AMAP monitoringPriority issues covered by AMAP monitoring activities include the levels, trends and effects (onbiota and humans) of specific contaminants (persistent organic pollutants – POPs, heavy metals,radionuclides, etc.) that are present in the physical environment or carried in the tissues oforganisms. AMAP monitoring priorities also include the environmental consequences andeffects of global climate change, stratospheric ozone depletion, the effects of pollution onenvironment and human health, and the combined effects of pollutants and other stressors onecosystem components and humans. 11 A Strategy for Coordination of Monitoring Activities between CAFF and AMAP. Submitted to ACMinisters, November 2004. This document began the process of coordination by outlining the generalapproach to be used.- 2 -1.3 CAFF monitoringThe priority for CAFF’s monitoring activities is monitoring species, their habitats andecosystems, including population sizes and distributions; reproductive health and survival; foodweb and ecosystem integrity - including marine, terrestrial, coastal and freshwater; migrationpatterns; and assessment of the effects of climate change and other impacts both natural andhuman-induced, on biodiversity. This type of monitoring provides an overall view on the statusand trends of species that live and breed in the Arctic and their habitats, on different/varioustemporal and spatial scales, and ecosystem health at large.21.4 An ecosystem -based approach to monitoringIf the monitoring strategies of the two Working Groups are viewed from the perspective of anintegrated ecosystem-based approach (EBA), the manner in which the two monitoring programsfit together becomes clearer.CAFF has the responsibility for monitoring ecosystems from the standpoint of species, theirpopulations, habitats, and impacts on biodiversity resulting from a suite of stressors. AMAP ismonitoring many of the relevant stressors, and their effects on Arctic ecosystems, e.g. climatechange parameters, contaminants and UV radiation.By bringing data series for the two monitoring programs together, a strong approach that canforge to maintain ecosystem health and structural integrity, resiliency, and sustainability.AMAP assessments of 1997 and 2002 demonstrated the potential for linkages betweencontaminant transport pathways and fate, and changes in climate and UV radiation. The ACIAreport demonstrated that climate change will cause changes in biodiversity, but also noted thatlocal human actions can be more influential on biodiversity in some cases than broad scalepressures of climate change.3 To most accurately assess the changing state of the Arcticenvironment, and evaluate the causes for change, simultaneous measurement of physical climatevariables, contaminant loadings, and biodiversity are essential.Ultimately, this type of ecosystem-based approach relates back to the Indigenous and other localpeople, and sustainability of Arctic communities where people depend on biodiversity andecosystem health for food, economic sustenance, and preservation of culture. Human healthdepends in part on stressors such as contaminants (e.g. in food), and UV radiation. Through abetter, more comprehensive understanding of species and their populations, and the stressorsaffecting change to these populations, we may also identifying the stressors affecting theeconomic, social and cultural fabric of Arctic communities.2 Ibid.3 Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (ACIA). November 2004- 3 -1.5 Goals of the Coordinated Monitoring Efort1. Form a more complete picture of the overall state of Arctic ecosystems, and their extentof structural integrity, resiliency, and sustainability.2. Identify and/or quantify stressors affecting sustainability of Arctic ecosystems, andtherefore the Arctic’s living resources.3. Seek efficiencies of operation as directed by the SAOsTo achieve these goals, the following objectives are proposed.1.6 Objectives of the Coordinated Monitoring Efort1. As far as possible take advantage of approaches already accepted by the Arctic Council(e.g., integrated ecosystem-based approach, large marine ecosystems) bring the existingdata of the two monitoring programs together where possible for analyses.2. To achieve a more cost efficient collection and storage of data, and a better use of thedata collected in assessments and research.3. Identify areas of commonality (species and/or sites and/or ecosystems), where datafrom the two programs already exist within national monitoring programs and analyzehow the data overlap, where the linkages are, what the data is signifying, and where thegaps lay.4. Based on the gap analysis, initiate projects to fill these gaps.5. Establish better linkages between the findings of this coordinated monitoring programwith those of other programs, within and outside the Arctic, in order to broaden thescope of understanding of the potential impacts of Arctic and global change.6. Communicate the findings of this coordinated monitoring effort in published reportsand maps, for use by policy-makers, environmental managers, indigenous people’sorganizations, international organizations, and the general public.1.7 Proposed Approach to Initiating the Coordinated Monitoring EfortFor practical purposes, the coordinated effort will be based initially on activities alreadyunderway. Most of these activities are implemented at the national level. However, it may benecessary to propose relevant new components, e.g. if programs found in some Arctic- 4 -countries are not found in some others. As the coordinated effort matures, there may beincreased opportunity for bi- or multi-national components.Completion and acceptance of this Green Paper by both AMAP and CAFF are the first steps ininitiating the coordinated effort.Within each of the eight Arctic Council Member States, the AMAP Head of Delegation and theCAFF National Representative have identified examples of relevant on-going nationalmonitoring activities. These activities are summarized in Table 1. Processing the informationwithin Table 1, may require a joint meeting of the AMAP HoDs and CAFF NRs, augmented asneeded by relevant experts, where the on-going activities of greatest relevance to thecoordinated effort will be decided and proposed as initial activities. Over the course of 2007, thecoordinated will continue to evolve and produce its initial products.1.8 Expected High Priority Activities for the Initial Coordinated EfortAt CAFF’s CBMP meeting in November 2006, and at the AMAP Climate Workshop in June2005, experts noted that use of “integrated monitoring sites” is one of the best approaches forimplementing monitoring of the type suitable for the coordinated AMAP -CAFF effort. Thedefinition of a “site” is flexible and should be left to the countries and scientists to define, asthey need. It will be clarified how the work can be coordinated with the ongoing work toestablish a Sustainable Arctic Observing Network (SAON). Another good approach is a speciesnetwork, for example projects on polar bears or reindeer, that evaluate the role of environmentalfactors, e.g. climate and contaminants, on their health and population trends in a way that allowsdata and information to come together and give a broader perspective.It should be easy for the AMAP and CAFF representatives to identify relevant existingintegrated monitoring sites or nodes in a species network that support the broad objectives of thecoordinated effort. Once identified, these on-going activities would be considered as highpriority candidates for inclusion in the coordinated effort.

CAFF Report - Green Paper on AMAP-CAFF Coordinated Monitoring Effort

http://library.arcticportal.org/447/1/CAFF_Report_---_Green_Paper_on_AMAP-CAFF_Coordinated_Monitoring_Effort.pdf

CAFF Report - Green Paper on AMAP-CAFF Coordinated Monitoring Effort

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Arctic Portal Library