°CAFF 2015: Arctic Species Trend Index: Migratory Birds Index

Geographical coverage

Geographical scale of the assessment Regional
Country or countries covered Canada, Denmark, Greenland, Russia, Iceland, Norway, United States, Finland, Sweden
Any other necessary information or explanation for identifying the location of the assessment, including site or region name

Conceptual framework, methodology and scope

Assessment objectives

This report aims to describe the broad-scale trends necessary for designing and targeting informed conservation strategies at the flyway level to address these reported declines. To do this, we examine abundance change in selected Arctic breeding bird species, incorporating information from both inside and outside the Arctic (Figure 1) to capture possible influences at different points during a species annual cycle. The inclusion of trend information from non-Arctic locations confers a number of other advantages: data are readily available from key sites where individuals congregate in large, easy-to-count flocks; and adding these data allows for better disaggregation of trends due to larger data set size, thus providing the opportunity to elucidate the regional differences that have already been reported in the literature (Zöckler et al. 2013). Importantly, this addition also makes sense politically as the selected species are dependent on interconnected sites across the globe, meaning that suitable and effective conservation strategies can only be devised through international collaboration.

Mandate for the assessment

Conceptual framework and/or methodology used for the assessment

URL or copy of conceptual framework developed or adapted

http://caff.is/asti

System(s) assessed

Species groups assessed

Ecosystem services/functions assessed

Provisioning

Regulating

Supporting Services/Functions

Cultural Services

Scope of assessment includes

Drivers of change in systems and services

No

Impacts of change in services on human well-being

No

Options for responding/interventions to the trends observed

No

Explicit consideration of the role of biodiversity in the systems and services covered by the assessment

Yes

Timing of the assessment

Year assessment started

2015

Year assessment finished

If ongoing, year assessment is anticipated to finish

Periodicity of assessment

Unknown

Assessment outputs

Report(s)

Communication materials (e.g. brochure, presentations, posters, audio-visual media)

Journal publications

Training materials

Other documents/outputs

Tools and processes

Tools and approaches used in the assessment

  • Geospatial analysis
  • Indicators
  • Scenarios

Process used for stakeholder engagement in the assessment process and which component

Key stakeholder groups engaged

The number of people directly involved in the assessment process

Incorporation of scientific and other types of knowledge

  • Scientific information only
  • Resource experts (e.g. foresters etc)

Supporting documentation for specific approaches, methodology or criteria developed and/or used to integrate knowledge systems into the assessment

Assessment reports peer reviewed

Yes

Policy impact

Impacts the assessment has had on policy and/or decision making, as evidenced through policy references and actions

Independent or other review on policy impact of the assessment

Yes

Lessons learnt for future assessments from these reviews

Capacity building

Capacity building needs identified during the assessment

Actions taken by the assessment to build capacity

Network and sharing experiences, Sharing of data/repatriation of data, Workshops

How have gaps in capacity been communicated to the different stakeholders

Knowledge generation

Gaps in knowledge identified from the assessment

How gaps in knowledge have been communicated to the different stakeholders

Additional relevant information