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 |
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
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
2016
Year assessment finished
2017
If ongoing, year assessment is anticipated to finish
Periodicity of assessment
Repeated
If repeated, how frequently
Irregularly
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
- 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
10-100
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: https://www.caff.is/monitoring-series/58-a-strategy-for-developing-indices-and-indicators-to-track-status-and-trends-in-a
Assessment reports peer reviewed
Yes
Data
Accessibility of data used in assessment
All data available here: http://geo.abds.is/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/search?resultType=details&fast=index&_content_type=json&from=1&to=20&sortBy=relevance&_cat=Protected%20Area
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
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
Network and sharing experiences, Access to funding, Sharing of data/repatriation of data, Communication and awareness raising
