CAFF-PAME: Protected Areas Index 2017

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

Arctic, Circumpolar

Conceptual framework, methodology and scope

Assessment objectives

Mandate for the assessment

Information on Arctic biodiversity, human stressors, and natural changes is widely scattered among scientists, government institutions, and northern communities and available only in a piecemeal fashion. An integrated picture of the status of and trends in key species, habitats, processes, services and ecosystem integrity in the Arctic and along relevant migratory routes is not fully known.

Conceptual framework and/or methodology used for the assessment

Other (please specify)

To facilitate targeted and consistent reporting, the CAFF developed via its Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring Program (CBMP) has chosen a suite of indices and indicators that provide a comprehensive picture of Arctic biodiversity, from species and habitats to ecosystem processes and ecological services. The suite of indices and indicators can be used to report on the current state of Arctic biodiversity at various scales and levels of detail.

URL or copy of conceptual framework developed or adapted

System(s) assessed

  • Marine
  • Coastal
  • Island
  • Inland water
  • Forest and woodland
  • Cultivated/Agricultural land
  • Grassland
  • Mountain
  • Dryland
  • Polar
  • Urban

Species groups assessed

Ecosystem services/functions assessed



Supporting Services/Functions

Cultural Services

Scope of assessment includes

Drivers of change in systems and services


Impacts of change in services on human well-being


Options for responding/interventions to the trends observed


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


Timing of the assessment

Year assessment started


Year assessment finished


If ongoing, year assessment is anticipated to finish

Periodicity of assessment


If repeated, how frequently


Assessment outputs


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

  • Modelling
  • Geospatial analysis
  • Indicators

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

Multi-stakeholder engagement through communication, meetings etc

Key stakeholder groups engaged

Scientists, Indigenous peoples, NGOs, policy and decision makers tec

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

A Strategy for Developing Indices and Indicators to Track Status and Trends in Arctic Biodiversity:

Assessment reports peer reviewed


Policy impact

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

Report delivered to a meeting of the foreign Ministers of the Arctic states in May 2017.

Independent or other review on policy impact of the assessment


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, Access to funding, Sharing of data/repatriation of data, Communication and awareness raising

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