CAFF 2011: Arctic Species Trend Index: Tracking Trends in Arctic Vertebrate Populations Through Space and Time
ASTI- Arctic Vertebrate Populations
Geographical coverage
| Geographical scale of the assessment | Regional |
|---|---|
| Country or countries covered | Canada, Denmark, Greenland, Russia, Iceland, Norway, United States, Finland, Faroe Islands, Sweden |
| Any other necessary information or explanation for identifying the location of the assessment, including site or region name |
Geographical scale of the assessment
Regional
Country or countries covered
Canada, Denmark, Greenland, Russia, Iceland, Norway, United States, Finland, Faroe Islands, 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
Arctic population trend data were compiled from both the Living Planet database, which contains vertebrate population trend data from across the globe (Loh et al. 2005; Collen et al. 2009, www.livingplanetindex.org), and the ASTI (Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring Program 2011), the Arctic component of the LPI. In total, the data set contains 890 population records from 323 Arctic vertebrate species (Table 1). Note that the term ‘population’ is not used here in an ecological sense—it refers to a sub-group of a species for which repeated abundance measurements are available at a specified location. Each population data set included geographical information which was plotted in ArcGIS. For some locations, population time series from more than one species were obtained, resulting in a total of 366 unique locations with wildlife trend data from across the Arctic.
See Page 8 in report
Mandate for the assessment
An assessment conducted by the Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF), the biodiversity working group of the Arctic Council and consists of National Representatives assigned by each of the eight Arctic Council Member States, representatives of Indigenous Peoples' organizations that are Permanent Participants to the Council, and Arctic Council observer countries and organizations. The CAFF Working Group operates by the Arctic Council Rules of Procedures.
CAFF serves as a vehicle to cooperate on species and habitat management and utilization, to share information on management techniques and regulatory regimes, and to facilitate more knowledgeable decision-making. It provides a mechanism to develop common responses on issues of importance for the Arctic ecosystem such as development and economic pressures, conservation opportunities and political commitments.
Conceptual framework and/or methodology used for the assessment
URL or copy of conceptual framework developed or adapted
Compared to non-spatial data analysis, spatial statistics are more complex due to the underlying effect of spatial autocorrelation and non-stationarity on the data. Spatial autocorrelation arises from the simple fact that measurements taken at geographically close points are more likely to be similar than those taken from locations further apart (Koenig 1999). Even ignoring external factors, a species’ distribution is always autocorrelated, due to the underlying processes of aggregation and dispersal (Beale et al. 2010). However, extrinsic factors that shape a species’ distribution or population characteristics, such as climate or soil type etc., are also spatially autocorrelated, so that environmental conditions at two adjacent localities are more likely to be alike than those at locations which are further apart (Beale et al. 2010). Analyses which ignore spatial autocorrelation thus run the risk of finding significant results between explanatory and response variables when, in reality, these are only a reflection of underlying spatial effects (Type I error). Stationarity assumes that the relationship between the predictor and response variable constant across space, yet stationarity is unlikely to be the norm in spatial contexts (Brunsdon et al. 1996). As a result, simplification of models into a single global regression equation may not do justice to the complex interplay between spatially distributed factors. While dealing with the problems of spatial autocorrelation and stationarity appears to be complex, there are tools incorporating spatial considerations available in ArcGIS thus providing a user friendly
System(s) assessed
- Polar
Species groups assessed
Mammals, Birds, Fishes
Ecosystem services/functions assessed
Provisioning
Regulating
Supporting Services/Functions
Cultural Services
Scope of assessment includes
Drivers of change in systems and services
Yes
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
2009
Year assessment finished
2012
If ongoing, year assessment is anticipated to finish
Periodicity of assessment
Repeated
If repeated, how frequently
The ASTI reports are updated every other year
Assessment outputs
Website(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
Process used for stakeholder engagement in the assessment process and which component
Böhm, M., McRae, L., Deinet, S., Gill, M. & Collen, B. (2012) Tracking Trends in Arctic vertebrate populations through space and time. CAFF Assessment Series No. 8. Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna, Iceland. ISBN: 978-9935-431-14-1
Key stakeholder groups engaged
CAFF, Arctic Council, World Wildlife Fund, The Zoological Society of London (ZSL)
The number of people directly involved in the assessment process
10-100
Incorporation of scientific and other types of knowledge
- Scientific information only
- Citizen science
Supporting documentation for specific approaches, methodology or criteria developed and/or used to integrate knowledge systems into the assessment
Assessment reports peer reviewed
Yes
Data
Accessibility of data used in assessment
Data is being made available on the Arctic Biodiversity Data Service (ABDS.IS) http://abds.is/
Policy impact
Impacts the assessment has had on policy and/or decision making, as evidenced through policy references and actions
The report is approved by the Arctic Council
Independent or other review on policy impact of the assessment
No
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
Sharing of data/repatriation of data, Communication and awareness raising
