Protected Areas Monitoring

Permanent URI for this collection

https://arcticcouncil.dspace7.dspace-express.com/handle/11374/142

Browse

Recent Submissions

Now showing 1 - 5 of 13
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Connecting SIKU Indigenous biodiversity observations to CAFF global reporting
    (Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna(CAFF), 2024-11-05) Komangapik, Josh; McLennan, Donald; McLennan, Zoe; Price, Courtney
    This report is based on the expertise, knowledge, and perspectives of the CAFF Arctic Indigenous Canadian Youth Fellow and the Fellowship Advisory Group, and may not represent the views of Arctic Council members. Josh Komangapik and the Fellowship Advisory Group wish to thank the Qikiqtait Protected Area Program and the community of Sanikiluaq for allowing the use of their data for this Fellowship. Support for the CAFF Arctic Indigenous Canadian Youth Fellowship was provided by the Government of Canada’s Global Arctic Leaders Intiative.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Status and Trends for Arctic Conservation Measures
    (CAFF / PAME, 2023-11-01) Barry, Tom; Helgasson, Hólmgrímur; Guðmundsdóttir, Soffía; Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF); Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment (PAME)
    The Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF) and Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment (PAME) working groups of the Arctic Council developed this update on the 2017 indicator report (CAFF-PAME 2017). It provides an overview of the status and trends of protected areas in the Arctic and an overview of Other Effective area-based Conservation Measures. The data used represents the results of the 2020 update to the Arctic Protected Areas Database submitted by each of the Arctic Council member states. This report uses the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) definition for protected areas (Box 1) which includes a wide range of Management Categories – from strict nature reserves to protection with sustainable use. Consequently, the level of protection and governance of these areas varies throughout the circumpolar region.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Arctic Report Card 2011
    (2011) Richter-Menge, J.; Jeffries, M.O.; Overland, J.E.
    The Arctic Report Card reflects the work of an international team of 121 researchers in 14 countries and is based upon published and ongoing scientific research. Peer-review of the scientific content of the report card was facilitated by the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment (AMAP) Program. The Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring Program (CBMP), the cornerstone program of the Arctic Council's Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF) Working Group, provides leadership on the biodiversity elements of the report card. The Report Card is lead by an inter-agency team from NOAA, the Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory and the Office of Naval Research. Support for the Arctic Report Card is provided by the NOAA Climate Program Office through the Arctic Research Program.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    The State of Protected Areas in the Circumpolar Arctic 1994
    (1994) CAFF
    This report is divided into three main parts. Part one provides information on the various types of habitat classification in the Arctic countries and an overview of the Protected Areas System in each of the countries. Included are descriptions of the methods used for site designation and the legal and administrative instruments in place. Facilities and the types of activity within the protected areas of each country are also described, Several countries have identified gaps in their protected area system and these have been reported on. As well, part one introduces topics of threats, both actual and potential, to Arctic habitats and habitat conservation outside protected areas. Part two of the report consists of a directory of protected areas of the Arctic, on a country by country basis. Part three of the report consists of literature, references and appendices, and also includes a submission by the non-governmental organisation community on its recommendations for habitat protection in the Arctic.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    ECORA: Lessons learned
    (Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF), 2011-05) Larsen, Thor S.; Kurvits, Tiina; Kuznetsov, Evgeny; Láurusson, Kári Fannar; Barry, Tom
    The project aimed to secure the integrity of some of the world’s last remaining pristine areas and support the livelihoods of indigenous and local peoples. The development objective of the project was the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity in the Russian Arctic. The immediate objective was the adoption and initial implementation of integrated ecosystem management strategies and action plans in three Model Areas representing different ecosystems and anthropogenic pressures: Kolguev Island in the Nenets Autonomous Okrug (NAO), Kolyma River Basin in Sakha Republic/Yakutia, and Beringovsky District in the Chukotka Autonomous Okrug (ChAO) (see table 1 and figure 1). By building on national policies and priorities, the project aimed to demonstrate how IEM can be used to achieve ecological, economic, and social goals for local and global benefits. It was also important to develop processes that allow stakeholders to participate in an open and meaningful way.