GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Grønlandsudvalget 2016-17
GRU Alm.del Bilag 51
Offentligt

WWF Arctic Council

Conservation Scorecard

ASSESSMENT REPORT

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

For more information, please visit

panda.org/acscorecard

Published in 2017 by WWF Arctic Programme.

Any reproduction in full or in part must mention the title and credit the above-mentioned publisher as copyright

holder.

Text © WWF Arctic Programme

Recommended citation

WWF Arctic Programme. (2017).

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

(Rep.). Ottawa, ON.

Acknowledgements

This scorecard was prepared with the assistance of Ecologic Institute EU (www.ecologic.eu), and was a joint

WWF-Canada

WWF-Denmark

WWF-Finland

WWF Baltic Ecoregion

Programme

WWF-Netherlands

WWF-Norway

WWF-Russia

WWF-Sweden

WWF-United Kingdom

WWF-United States

Thank you also to Alexandra Abram, Lawson Brigham, Kathryn Lupton, Tyler Murray, and Daria Shapovalova

for their contributions to the project.

About WWF

WWF has run a programme focused on the circum-Arctic for 25 years.

WWF’s mission is to stop the degradation of the planet’s natural environment and to build a future in which

humans live in harmony with nature, by conserving the world’s biological diversity, ensuring that the use of re-

newable natural resources is sustainable, and promoting the reduction of pollution and wasteful consumption.

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

CONTENTS

Context

From words to actions

Measuring progress

Rating system

Incentives to act

The WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard 2017

Limitations of the Scorecard

Conservation Areas

Arctic States Assessment

Arctic Council Assessment

Conclusions

Biodiversity

Arctic States Assessment

Arctic Council Assessment

Conclusions

Shipping

Arctic States Assessment

Arctic Council Assessment

Conclusions

Cooperation on Oil Spill Prevention, Preparedness and Response

Arctic States Assessment

Arctic Council Assessment

Conclusions

Black Carbon and Adaptation

Arctic States Assessment

Arctic Council Assessment

Conclusions

Ecosystem-based Management

Arctic States Assessment

Arctic Council Assessment

Conclusions

The way forward

Overall recommendations

Focus for further implementation

Annex 1. Indicators and criteria

Annex 2. Acronyms

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

iii

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

CONTEXT

For more than 20 years, the Arctic states, through the Arctic Council

environment.

preparedness and response; pursue early actions to reduce black carbon emissions; develop and adopt

ecosystem-based management principles; and many other actions.

tial to good Arctic governance, greater environmental protection, and sustainable development in the

region.

mitments made at the AC, and to enhance Arctic governance, environmental protection, and sustainable

although as a collective body the AC has delivered results, all eight Arctic countries rarely live up to the

The Scorecard is designed to assist the AC and member states to:

•

environment;

•

achieve a strengthened, more transparent and open AC system;

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

What the Scorecard does not do

The Scorecard is an assessment of the implementation of conservation-

and biodiversity-related agreed direction for the period of 2006-2013. WWF

"Current knowl-

edge of many Arctic

species, ecosystems

and their stressors

is fragmentary,

making the detec-

tion and assessment

of trends and their

for many aspects of

Arctic biodiversity.

An accurate account-

ing of the status and

trends of the majority

of species of Arctic

impossible except for

relatively few well-

known vertebrates.

For many species or

species groups, we

have data on distri-

bution and sometimes

also density, but lack

the record through

time to assess trends.

In addition, many

short-term trends

terns rather than

long term increases

or declines."

Arctic Biodiversity

Assessment report

•

their implementation of conservation commitments made outside of the

Arctic Council;

the state of the Arctic environment within their respective jurisdictions;

direction.

WWF realises that this gap may produce contradictory messages

environmental protection and sustainable development. We also believe

that the value of this Scorecard is to encourage discussion about how we

can all do more to safeguard the Arctic.

resources. As the Arctic Ocean opens, it is increasingly vulnerable to industrial

the planet. Current trends suggest that economic activity in the Arctic is likely to

that incorporate an ecosystem-based management approach.

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

FROM WORDS TO ACTIONS

Arctic countries have committed to implementing AC direction by taking action both collectively, and

ambitious implementation on the ground.

MEASURING PROGRESS

the biodiversity and conservation-related commitments made by Arctic states through the AC.

•

ment

•

the iterative roadmap and reporting process set up by the

Actions for Arctic Biodiversity

(ABA);

measures in the

Framework Plan on Oil Pollution Prevention;

Arctic Marine Strategic Plan;

the

Report on the Status of Implementation of the Ecosystem Approach to Management in the

Arctic;

Arctic Marine Shipping Assess-

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

The Scorecard assesses the following six areas of the AC’s work:

Conservation Areas

Biodiversity

Shipping

Cooperation on Oil Spill Prevention,

Preparedness and Response

Black Carbon and Adaptation

Ecosystem-Based Management

(collective implementation).

mance in implementing its commitments.

mentation.

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Example of measurable direction

“The Arctic states should identify areas of heightened ecological and cultural sig-

and, where appropriate, should encourage implementation of measures to protect

these areas from the impacts of Arctic marine shipping, in coordination with all

stakeholders and consistent with international law.”

Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment 2009

“Arctic states should recognise, in accordance with the recommendations from

the Arctic Council EBM Expert Group and the PAME lead Ecosystem Approach

expert group, the importance of the following elements when implementing marine

of the ecosystem, description of the ecosystem, setting ecological objectives,

assessing the ecosystem, valuing the ecosystem and managing human activities.”

Arctic Ocean Review report 2013

Example of non-measurable direction

“Members of the Arctic Council and governments at all levels in the Arctic should

work to... ensure that standards for environmental management are in place, or

can be adapted, to take account of cryospheric change. Develop regulations where

necessary.”

Snow, Water, Ice and Permafrost in Arctic assessment report 2011

“[The Arctic Council should] urge its Member States to implement adaptation strate-

to local and societal needs.”

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

RATING SYSTEM

Arctic countries and other institutions.

More than 80% of

the maximum score

Full or substantive

implementation of the

direction.

60-80% of

the maximum score

Encouraging progress

on implementation of the

direction.

40-60% of

the maximum score

Some progress on

implementation of the

direction.

Less than 40% of

the maximum score

Little progress on

implementation of the

direction.

INCENTIVES TO ACT

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

THE WWF ARCTIC COUNCIL CONSERVATION SCORECARD 2017

National implementation

Summary of scorecard findings

•

progress is rather slow for protecting these areas and for safeguarding

biodiversity.

•

National implementation progress has been rather slow to mainstream Arctic

biodiversity into Arctic development planning and to reduce human disturbance

outside protected areas.

Arctic national strategies generally fail to include clear, concrete objectives and

provisions for biodiversity.

Most Arctic countries have not implemented measures to reduce air emissions

from Arctic marine shipping.

Arctic states have successfully established an administrative system for oil spill

response, although concerns remain about a lack of on-the-ground capacity and

infrastructure.

Arctic states are progressing toward the implementation of a framework to address

black carbon emissions, and are taking early actions to reduce these emissions.

Arctic states have established observation systems to monitor changes in the

cryosphere.

Arctic states have been slow to implement ecosystem-based management as

developed and approved by the AC.

•

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Table 1 – Total Score for national implementation action progress in each assessment area.

ARCTIC

STATES

SCORE FOR ASSESSMENT AREAS

Conservation

Areas

Biodiversity

Shipping

Cooperation

on Oil Spills

Black

Carbon and

Adaptation

EBM

Canada

6/11 (55%)

5/17 (29%)

5/11 (45%)

19/24 (79%)

8/8 (100%)

7/12 (58%)

Kingdom of

Denmark

7/11 (64%)

6/17 (35%)

5/11 (45%)

22/24 ( 92%)

7/8 (88%)

3/12 (25%)

Finland

3/4 (75%)

7/14 ( 50%)

2/4 (50%)

12/12 (100%)

6/7 (86%)

4/6 (67%)

Iceland

2/8 (25%)

3/17 (18%)

3/11 (27%)

21/24 (88%)

4/8 (50%)

2/12 (17%)

Norway

7/11 (36%)

6/17 (35%)

4/11 (36%)

21/24 (88%)

6/8 (75%)

8/12 (67%)

Russia

6/11 (55%)

7/17 (41%)

3/11 (27%)

20/24 (83%)

7/8 (88%)

2/12 (17%)

Sweden

1/4 (25%)

7/14 (50%)

2/4 (50%)

12/12 (100%)

6/7 (86%)

3/6 (50%)

United

States

7/11 (64%)

10/17 (59%)

3/11 (27%)

23/24 (96%)

6/8 (75%)

3/12 (25%)

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Implementation of collective actions (as the Arctic Council)

The AC consistently delivered on its commitments. These results demonstrate that Arctic states’ coopera-

Table 2 – Total Score for Arctic Council action progress for each assessment area

SCORE FOR ASSESSMENT AREAS

Conservation

Areas

Biodiversity

Shipping

Cooperation on

Oil Spills

Black carbon

and Adaptation

EBM

1/1 100%

2/6 33%

12/12 100%

7/9 78%

5/5 100%

1/4 25%

More than 80% of

the maximum score

Full or substantive

implementation of the

direction.

60-80% of

the maximum score

Encouraging progress

on implementation of the

direction.

40-60% of

the maximum score

Some progress on

implementation of the

direction.

Less than 40% of

the maximum score

Little progress on

implementation of the

direction.

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Examples of National Implementation Deliverables

Conservation Areas

Finland completed a comprehensive gap analysis of its protected-area network during 2013-2016 through

the Natura 2000 process. Earlier studies showed that conservation gaps existed only in southern Finland;

no gaps have been found in Finland’s Arctic areas (including Lapland).

Biodiversity

provide science-based input on the state of the environment in Greenland and the Arctic for Danish,

Greenlandic and international policy development, adaptation and administration.” GEM also acts as an

early-warning system for the world regarding climate change and its impacts.

Shipping

Canada established the Tarium Niryutait Marine Protected Area in the Beaufort Sea in 2010 and enacted

regulations prohibiting shipping in that area. The Marine Protected Area also aims to preserve traditional

hunting in the Inuvialuit Settlement Region.

Cooperation on Oil Spill Prevention, Preparedness and Response

The United States has a system to monitor oil pollution incidents under its jurisdiction and authorises the

US Coast Guard to monitor all marine pollution, including oil spills. The State of Alaska’s Prevention and

Black Carbon and Adaptation

Russian Hydrometeorological Service monitors sea ice and a wide range of other parameters in the

Russian Arctic.

Ecosystem-based Management

Norway’s marine-management plans for the Norwegian and Barents seas contain a holistic and

comprehensive set of ecological objectives and include ecosystem-status reports. The objectives are part

of the larger review of the plans, which occurs every 4-10 years.

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

LIMITATIONS OF THE SCORECARD

Lack of speciﬁcity in direction

Consistency of reporting data

Lack of Arctic-speciﬁc information

reports regarding ecosystem-based management.

Applicability of direction

•

Conservation assessment

human health, culture, telecommunications, economic development and social issues. WWF

designing the Scorecard.

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Effectiveness of implementation

on Arctic environments.

Assessment of commitments

to AC direction. WWF recognises that these commitments are sometimes simple, unambitious,

paredness and response or climate change mitigation. WWF considers that the commitments

Relative importance of scores

another.

National-level assessment

Limited timeline for implementation and actions taken prior

to Arctic Council direction

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

LET’S TALK ABOUT

IMPLEMENTATION

panda.org/acscorecard

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

CONSERVATION AREAS

habitats, marine shipping, oil and gas development,

and mining all have negative impacts on Arctic

biodiversity. Furthermore, climate change

represents the most serious threat to Arctic

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

National Indicators

Protecting Areas of Ecological Importance

Mechanisms to Safeguard Connectivity

Arctic Council Indicators

Cooperation on Biologically, Ecologically

and Culturally Important Areas

To reduce threats to Arctic biodiversity and communities dependent on biodiversity, conservation areas

Oil and Gas Assessment,

the

shore Oil and Gas Guidelines

policy recommendations. Given that these recommendations are less than three years old, WWF recog-

nises that AC member states have had little time to develop policies and establish conservation areas.

ARCTIC COUNCIL REPORT

TERM

Sensitive areas

Ecologically and culturally sensitive areas

Large areas of ecologically important marine, terrestrial and

freshwater habitats

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

ARCTIC STATES ASSESSMENT

Results are presented in Table 3.

Indicator 1: Identiﬁcation of Conservation Areas

•

marine areas.

Indicator 2: Protecting Areas of Ecological Importance

tion areas:

•

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

•

ecosystems.

Indicator 3: Mechanisms to Safeguard Connectivity

ARCTIC COUNCIL ASSESSMENT

Results are presented in Table 4.

Indicator 1: Cooperation on Biologically, Ecologically, and Culturally Important Areas

received one point.

Framework for a Pan-Arctic Network of Marine Protected Areas

and con-

AME MPA Network

Toolbox - Area-based Conservation Measures and Ecological Connectivity).

Arctic Protected Areas: Indicator Report

conservation areas.

connectivity and representation.

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

CONCLUSIONS

connectivity and strengthen resilience to climate change.

and protect the most important ecological and cultural areas. All countries need to speed up the process

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Table 3 - Total Score - Conservation Areas: National Implementation Progress

ARCTIC STATES

POINTS FOR INDICATORS

TOTAL SCORE

RATING

Protection of Areas

Canada

Kingdom of Denmark

Finland

Iceland

Norway

Russia

Sweden

United States

3/5

4/5

1/1

1/4

5/5

4/5

0/1

4/5

3/5

2/2

1/3

2/5

1/2

3/5

Connectivity

0/1

6/11

7/11

3/4

2/8

7/11

6/11

1/4

7/11

More than 80% of

the maximum score

Full or substantive

implementation of the

direction.

60-80% of

the maximum score

Encouraging progress

on implementation of the

direction.

40-60% of

the maximum score

Some progress on

implementation of the

direction.

Less than 40% of

the maximum score

Little progress on

implementation of the

direction.

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Conservation Areas: National Implementation Progress

INDICATORS

Table 4 – Total Score - Conservation Areas: Arctic Council implementation progress

POINTS FOR INDICATOR

TOTAL SCORE

RATING

Arctic Council Action

1/1

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

BIODIVERSITY

Biodiversity conservation in the Arctic is a major

challenge, given ecosystems are in climate-driven

to provide ecosystem services to Arctic peoples.

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

National Indicators

Mainstreaming Biodiversity

Reducing Human Disturbance outside

Protected Areas

Sustainable Management of Living

Resources and Habitat

Biodiversity Research and Monitoring

Arctic Council Indicators

Arctic Biodiversity Assessment

Implementation Plan

Mainstreaming Biodiversity

Common Measures for Reducing Threat of

Invasive Species

Pan-Arctic Conservation and Management

Plans for Shared Species

Researching and Monitoring Biodiversity

Stressors and Drivers

Arctic Biodiversity

Assessment Key

Finding 1:

"Arctic biodiversity is

being degraded, but

decisive action taken

now can help sustain

vast, relatively undis-

turbed ecosystems of

tundra, mountains,

fresh water and seas

and the valuable ser-

vices they provide."

legislation, and management practices.

monitoring systems.

ARCTIC STATES ASSESSMENT

Life

Linked to Ice

Results are presented in Table 5.

Indicator 1: Mainstreaming Biodiversity

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

change into its Arctic strategy, and received one point.

Indicator 2: Reducing Human Impacts Outside Protected Areas

Indicator 3: Sustainable Management of Living Resources and Habitat

•

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Indicator 4: Biodiversity Research and Monitoring

sity change and trigger conservation actions.

ARCTIC COUNCIL ASSESSMENT

Results are presented in Table 6.

Indicator 1: Arctic Biodiversity Assessment (ABA)

policy recommendations based on the ABA. By ministerial decision, all Arctic states are encouraged to

Indicator 2: Arctic Biodiversity Assessment Implementation Plan

Actions for Arctic Biodiversity 2013-2021

Indicator 3: Mainstreaming Biodiversity

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Indicator 4: Common Measures for Reducing Threat of

Invasive Species

Actions for Arctic

Biodiversity: Action

Encourage states

to develop national

implementation

plans consistent with

this implementation

plan for the ABA rec-

ommendations as an

essential adaptation

measure.

Indicator 5: Pan-Arctic Conservation and Management Plans

for Shared Species

Actions for Arctic Biodiversity 2013-2021

indicates that the implementation

Indicator 6: Researching and Monitoring Biodiversity Stress-

ors and Drivers

Land Cover Change Index

Arctic

Migratory Bird Index

Arctic Biodiversity Trends

2010: Selected Indicators of Change

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

CONCLUSIONS

also continue to evolve.

Actions for Arctic Biodiversity 2013-2021,

as ini-

countries are taking some action to sustainably manage living resources and

habitats, and to research and monitor biodiversity.

The AC did not yet deliver all actions as directed by the ABA policy recom-

Actions for Arctic Biodiversity

2013-2021

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Table 5 - Total Score - National Biodiversity Implementation Action Progress

ARCTIC STATES

POINTS FOR INDICATORS

TOTAL

RATING

Mainstreaming

& resilience

Disturbance

outside

protected areas

Management of

living resources

Research and

monitoring

Canada

Kingdom of Denmark

Finland

Iceland

Norway

Russia

Sweden

United States

0/6

1/6

1/4

0/6

2/6

1/4

0/6

0/4

1/4

0/4

1/4

4/4

3/3

2/3

3/3

1/3

2/3

3/3

2/4

3/4

3/3

1/4

3/4

3/3

3/4

5/17

6/17

7/14

3/17

6/17

7/17

7/14

10/17

More than 80% of

the maximum score

Full or substantive

implementation of the

direction.

60-80% of

the maximum score

Encouraging progress

on implementation of the

direction.

40-60% of

the maximum score

Some progress on

implementation of the

direction.

Less than 40% of

the maximum score

Little progress on

implementation of the

direction.

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Biodiversity: National Implementation Progress

INDICATORS

Table 6 - Total Score – Biodiversity: Arctic Council implementation progress

POINTS FOR INDICATORS

TOTAL

SCORE

RATING

Arctic Council Action

1/1

0/1

2/6

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

SHIPPING

Arctic shipping – both destinational and transit –

This trend is projected to continue due to increased

environmental impacts.

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

National Indicators

Areas of Heightened Ecological and

Protection from Invasive Species

Reducing Air Emissions from Shipping

Arctic Council Indicators

Completion of the Arctic Marine Shipping

Assessment

Implementing AMSA Policy

Recommendations

Arctic Ocean Review

•

ARCTIC STATES ASSESSMENT

Results are presented in Table 7.

Indicator 1: Areas of Heightened Ecological and Cultural Signiﬁcance

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Indicator 2: Protection from Invasive Species

Arctic Marine

Shipping Assessment

"As climate and sea

ice conditions con-

tinue to change, the

timing and move-

ments of the animals’

activity will also be

predictions of the

potential interactions

between shipping

and animals increas-

ingly complex."

Indicator 3: Reducing Air Emissions from Shipping

•

criterion.

•

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Indicator 4: Arctic Marine Traffic System

ARCTIC COUNCIL ASSESSMENT

Results are presented in Table 8.

Indicator 1: Completion of the Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment

Indicator 2: Implementing AMSA Policy Recommendations

CONCLUSIONS

Status on Implementation of the AMSA

2009 Report Recommendations

Status of Implementation

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

be replicated in other areas.

Table 7 - Total Score - Shipping: national implementation progress

ARCTIC STATES

POINTS FOR INDICATORS

TOTAL

SCORE

RATING

Protection of

Areas

Canada

Kingdom of Denmark

Finland

Iceland

Norway

Russia

Sweden

United States

2/4

N/A

0/4

1/4

N/A

0/4

Invasive

Species

2/2

1/2

2/2

1/2

2/2

1/2

Air

Emissions

0/4

0/2

1/4

0/4

0/2

1/4

System

1/1

N/A

1/1

N/A

1/1

5/11

2/4

3/11

4/11

3/11

2/4

3/11

More than 80% of

the maximum score

Full or substantive

implementation of the

direction.

60-80% of

the maximum score

Encouraging progress

on implementation of the

direction.

40-60% of

the maximum score

Some progress on

implementation of the

direction.

Less than 40% of

the maximum score

Little progress on

implementation of the

direction.

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Shipping: National Implementation Progress

INDICATORS

Table 8 - Total Score – Shipping: Arctic Council implementation progress

POINTS FOR

INDICATORS

TOTAL SCORE

RATING

Arctic Council Action

2/2

10/10

12/12

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

COOPERATION ON OIL

SPILL PREVENTION,

PREPAREDNESS AND

RESPONSE

ecosystem health.

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

National Indicators

National Contingency Plans for

Preparedness and Response

Authorities and Capacity for Oil Pollution

Response

Oil Spill Monitoring and Compliance

Funding for Prevention and Response

Measures

Measures to Control Oil and Gas Activities

in Sensitive Areas

Oil Extraction and Conservation Areas

Arctic Council Indicators

Oil and Gas Guidelines 2009

Completion of Behaviour of oil and other

Hazardous Substances in Arctic waters

(BoHaSA)

Major Preparedness and Response

Deliverables

Oil Spill Prevention Cooperation

Completion of the Oil and Gas Assessment

Despite a recent drop in oil prices and recent decisions by some Arctic governments and international

Agreement on Co-

operation on Marine Oil Pollution Preparedness and Response in the Arctic

local communities.

ARCTIC STATES ASSESSMENT

Oil Pollution Preparedness and Response in the Arctic

Oil Spill Prevention

Arctic Oil and Gas Assessment 2007

Results are presented in Table 9.

Agreement on Cooperation on Marine

Recommended Practices for Arctic

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Indicator 1: National Contingency Plans for Preparedness

and Response

•

Agreement on

Cooperation on

Marine Oil Pollution

Preparedness and

Response in the

Arctic

contingency plan(s) include the organizational relationships among the

various public or private bodies involved, and take into account guide-

agreements;

•

"Conscious of the

threat from marine

oil pollution to the

vulnerable Arctic ma-

rine environment and

to the livelihoods of

local and indigenous

communities"

Indicator 2: Authorities and Capacity for Oil Pollution

Response

•

preparedness and response;

•

or to render assistance.

All Arctic countries earned three points.

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

•

dents

•

the State has established a mechanism or arrangement to coordinate responses to oil pollution inci-

Indicator 3: Oil Spill Monitoring and Compliance

states to monitor activities in areas beyond national jurisdiction.

Indicator 4: Funding for Prevention and Response Measures

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Indicator 5: Measures to Control Oil and Gas Activities in Sensitive Areas

Indicator 6: Oil Extraction and Conservation Areas

tices as a means to minimise environmental impacts. Countries that did not permit oil and gas activities

considers sound.

conservation areas.

ARCTIC COUNCIL ASSESSMENT

laration

Salekhard Declaration

Kiruna Declaration

Tromso Declaration

Nuuk Dec-

Results are presented in Table 10.

Indicator 1: Completion of the Oil and Gas Assessment

Oil and Gas Activities in the

Arctic

Indicator 2: Completion of the Revised Arctic Offshore Oil and Gas Guidelines

2009

lines.

Arctic ministers also urged all States to apply these Guidelines as a minimum standard throughout

the Arctic.

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Indicator 3: Completion of Behavior of oil and other Hazardous Substances in

Arctic waters report

Behaviour of Oil and Other Hazardous Substances

in Arctic Waters

Indicator 4: Major Preparedness and Response Deliverables

Indicator 5: Cooperation on Oil Spill Prevention

marine oil pollution (report on

Recommended Practices in the Prevention of Arctic Marine Oil Pollution,

Framework Plan for Cooperation on Prevention of Oil

Pollution from Petroleum and Maritime Activities in the Marine Areas of the Arctic

CONCLUSIONS

Arctic countries are delivering on their AC commitments regarding cooperation on oil spills preven-

throughout the Arctic regarding oil spill response capacity.

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

recommends that Arctic states consider enacting liability regulations to ensure that companies have the

Framework Plan for Cooperation on Prevention of Oil Pollution from Petroleum and Maritime Activi-

ties in the Marine Areas of the Arctic.

risk and it is imperative that Arctic states invest in pre-positioned response assets and local capacity, and

Table 9 - Total Score – Cooperation on oil spill prevention, preparedness and responses: na-

tional implementation progress

ARCTIC

STATES

POINTS FOR INDICATORS

TOTAL

SCORE

RATING

Authorities

Canada

Kingdom of

Denmark

Finland

Iceland

Norway

Russia

Sweden

United

States

4/5

5/5

3/3

5/5

4/5

3/5

3/3

5/5

7/7

Monitoring

6/7

2/2

6/7

2/2

6/7

Funding

0/1

N/A

0/1

N/A

1/1

Control

Measures

0/1

1/1

N/A

0/1

1/1

N/A

1/1

Conservation

2/3

3/3

N/A

3/3

N/A

3/3

19/24

22/24

12/12

21/24

20/24

12/12

23/24

Through the Council, Arctic states have agreed to implement measures related to oil spill response and

preparedness, but WWF believes these measures are inadequate to address the levels of risk raised by both

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Cooperation on Oil Spill Prevention, Preparedness and Responses:

National Implementation Progress

INDICATORS

Table 10 – Total Score - Cooperation on oil spill prevention, preparedness and responses:

Arctic Council implementation progress

POINTS FOR INDICATORS

TOTAL

SCORE

RATING

Arctic Council Action

1/1

2/2

2/4

7/9

More than 80% of

the maximum score

Full or substantive

implementation of the

direction.

60-80% of

the maximum score

Encouraging progress

on implementation of the

direction.

40-60% of

the maximum score

Some progress on

implementation of the

direction.

Less than 40% of

the maximum score

Little progress on

implementation of the

direction.

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

BLACK CARBON AND

ADAPTATION

Climate change is the single most important driver

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

National Indicators

Black Carbon Emissions Inventories

Black Carbon Early Actions

Emissions from Flaring

Climate Change Adaptation

Climate Change Observation

Arctic Council Indicators

Climate Monitoring and Observation

Coordination on Black Carbon and

Methane Emissions Reduction

Snow, Water, Ice and

Permafrost in the

Arctic, 2017

(Finding 1)

levels. WWF strongly believes that Arctic states must use the Climate Change

the Arctic.

"The Arctic’s climate

is shifting to a new

state. With each ad-

ditional year of data,

it becomes increas-

ingly clear that the

Arctic as we know it

is being replaced by a

warmer, wetter, and

more variable envi-

ronment. This trans-

formation has pro-

found implications

for people, resources,

and ecosystems

worldwide. "

climate change and Arctic countries plan to undertake their climate-change-

have regional, short-term impacts on climate, human health and the economy.

The AC also recommended actions regarding climate-change observation and

adaptation.

implementing early actions to reduce black carbon emissions.

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

ARCTIC STATES ASSESSMENT

Report of the Arctic Council Task Force on Short-

Lived Climate Forcers

Progress Report and Recommendations for Ministers of the Arctic

Council Task Force on Short-Lived Climate Forcers

Executive Summary: Snow, Water, Ice and Permafrost in the Arctic

Results are presented in Table 11.

Indicator 1: Black Carbon Emissions Inventories

Indicator 2: Black Carbon Early Actions

Indicator 3: Emissions from Flaring

Indicator 4: Climate Change Adaptation

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Indicator 5: Climate Change Observation

•

countries received one point.

•

instance.

•

cryospheric change on ecosystems and societies.

ARCTIC COUNCIL ASSESSMENT

Results are presented in Table 12.

Indicator 1: Climate Monitoring and Observation

Assessment on Changes in Arctic Snow, Water, Ice

and Permafrost

Indicator 2: Coordination on Black Carbon and Methane Emissions Reduction

•

establishing a process to submit periodic national reports and action plans;

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

CONCLUSIONS

the biggest threat to the Arctic environment. WWF did not assess actions taken by Arctic countries to

Countries submitted black carbon inventories to the AC and took early action to reduce BC emissions.

Adaptation Actions for a Changing Arctic

Arctic countries.

Arctic Council Framework

for Action on Enhanced Black Carbon and Methane Emissions Reductions

vision, national and collective action, and action by others.

WWF recommends that the AC and Arctic countries develop and implement coordinated actions to

gate and adapt to climate change.

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Table 11 - Total Score - Black Carbon and Adaptation: national implementation progress

ARCTIC

STATES

POINTS FOR INDICATORS

TOTAL

SCORE

RATING

Inventories

Canada

Kingdom of

Denmark

Finland

Iceland

Norway

Russia

Sweden

United States

1/1

BC Actions

1/1

0/1

1/1

Flaring

1/1

0/1

N/A

0/1

1/1

N/A

1/1

Adaptation

1/1

0/1

1/1

0/1

Observation

4/4

3/4

2/4

3/4

4/4

3/4

8/8

7/8

6/7

4/8

6/8

7/8

6/7

6/8

taken through the Council only relate to black carbon and adaptation, and should not be construed as an adequate

response to climate change.

More than 80% of

the maximum score

Full or substantive

implementation of the

direction.

60-80% of

the maximum score

Encouraging progress

on implementation of the

direction.

40-60% of

the maximum score

Some progress on

implementation of the

direction.

Less than 40% of

the maximum score

Little progress on

implementation of the

direction.

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Black carbon and adaptation: National Implementation Progress

INDICATORS

Table 12 - Total Score – Black carbon and adaptation: Arctic Council implementation progress

POINTS FOR INDICATORS

TOTAL SCORE

RATING

Arctic Council Action

2/2

3/3

5/5

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

ECOSYSTEM-BASED

MANAGEMENT

managing ecosystems and their services in

management plans, or management plans that

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

National Indicators

Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs),

Strategic Environmental Assessments

(SEAs) and risk assessments

multiple stressor

Applying the ecosystem approach

Cooperation in advancing implementation

of EBM

Arctic Council Indicators

Completion of AC EBM Expert Group

Report

Developing an Arctic EBM goal

Updating observed best practices in

ecosystem-based ocean management in

the Arctic

community interests, and addresses cultural and traditional economy needs.

political leadership.

ARCTIC STATES ASSESSMENT

Results are presented in Table 13.

Indicator 1: Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs), Strategic Environmental

Assessments (SEAs), and Risk Assessments

•

activities. All countries received one point.

•

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

•

"...Welcome the

report on Ecosystem

Based Management,

tion, principles and

recommendations,

encourage Arctic

States to implement

recommendations

both within and

across boundaries,

and ensure coordina-

tion of approaches in

the work of the Arctic

Council’s Working

Groups."

Kiruna Declaration,

2013

Indicator 2: Assessments of Combined Effects of Multiple

Stressors

land that discussed possible ecosystem-based approaches to the management

"EBM is the compre-

hensive, integrated

management of hu-

man activities based

on best available sci-

al knowledge about

the ecosystem and its

dynamics, in order

to identify and take

that are critical to the

health of ecosystems,

thereby achieving

sustainable use of

ecosystem goods and

services and mainte-

nance of ecosystem

integrity."

Ecosystem-Based

Management in the

Arctic, Arctic Council,

2013

develop appropriate monitoring programs.

Indicator 3: Applying the Ecosystem Approach

•

national boundaries.

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Sea region.

tional boundaries.

Indicator 4: Cooperation in Advancing Implementation of EBM

ARCTIC COUNCIL ASSESSMENT

Results are presented in Table 14.

Indicator 1: Completion of AC EBM Expert Group Report

Kiruna Declaration

Indicator 2: Developing an Arctic EBM goal

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Indicator 3: Updating Observed Best Practices in Ecosystem-based Ocean Man-

agement in the Arctic

agement in the Arctic to make it applicable to all environments, including marine, coastal and terrestrial.

Status of Implementation Draft Report

did not include this update. The

CONCLUSIONS

national circumstances.

terrestrial.

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Table 13 - Total Score - Ecosystem-based Management: National implementation progress:

ARCTIC STATES

POINTS FOR INDICATORS

TOTAL SCORE

RATING

EIAs/SEAs

Canada

Kingdom of

Denmark

Finland

Iceland

Norway

Russia

Sweden

United States

3/3

2/3

3/3

2/3

1/3

2/3

Combined

Applying

EBM

2/6

N/A

0/6

4/6

0/6

N/A

Cooperation

1/1

0/1

1/1

0/1

1/1

7/12

3/12

4/6

2/12

8/12

2/12

3/6

3/12

1/2

0/2

1/2

0/2

0//2

0/2

More than 80% of

the maximum score

Full or substantive

implementation of the

direction.

60-80% of

the maximum score

Encouraging progress

on implementation of the

direction.

40-60% of

the maximum score

Some progress on

implementation of the

direction.

Less than 40% of

the maximum score

Little progress on

implementation of the

direction.

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Ecosystem-based Management: National Implementation Progress

INDICATORS

Table 14 - Total Score - Ecosystem-based Management: Arctic Council implementation progress

POINTS FOR INDICATORS

TOTAL SCORE

RATING

Arctic Council Action

1/1

0/2

0/1

1/4

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

THE WAY FORWARD

in the region have come together at the Arctic Council to study the

implementation actions.

biodiversity; shipping; cooperation on oil spill prevention, preparedness, and response; black carbon and

adaptation; and ecosystem-based management.

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

plans and operationalise them on the ground.

OVERALL RECOMMENDATIONS

Better measurable Arctic Council direction

stronger decisions and recommendations are needed.

Strong national action

Better reporting

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

local policies and plans, and operationalise them on the ground.

Unifying forces for global outreach and impact

change, shipping, and biodiversity.

Conservation effectiveness of Arctic Council direction and follow-up actions

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

FOCUS FOR FURTHER IMPLEMENTATION

Conservation Areas

WWF recommends that Arctic countries:

•

climate-change scenarios;

•

tected areas.

WWF recommends that the Arctic Council:

•

nectivity and representation;

•

portant areas.

Biodiversity

WWF recommends that Arctic countries:

•

tions;

•

Arctic Biodiversity Assessment

•

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

•

develop and implement mechanisms to reduce human disturbances outside protected areas.

WWF recommends that the Arctic Council:

•

Actions for Arctic Biodiversity;

Shipping

WWF recommends that Arctic countries:

•

marine shipping.

WWF recommends that the Arctic Council:

•

mentation.

Cooperation on oil spill prevention, preparedness and response

WWF recommends that Arctic countries:

•

consider liability regulations to ensure that companies have the resources needed (either on their

invest in pre-positioned response assets and local capacity;

monitor activities in areas beyond national jurisdiction;

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

WWF recommends that the Arctic Council:

•

ers sound;

•

and other spatial measures.

Black carbon and adaptation

WWF recommends that Arctic countries:

•

and societies.

WWF recommends that the Arctic Council:

•

Ecosystem-based Management

WWF recommends that Arctic countries:

•

ongoing basis;

•

WWF recommends that the Arctic Council:

•

update and adjust

Observed Best Practices in Ecosystem-based Ocean Management in the Arctic

make it applicable to all environments, including marine, coastal and terrestrial.

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Although this Scorecard assessment is limited in scope and depth

implementation of Arctic Council direction to further

of its inhabitants?

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

ANNEX 1. INDICATORS AND CRITERIA

direction. Criteria represent an action contributing to implementing

the AC direction.

Conservation Areas:

NATIONAL

Conservation Areas

the high Arctic

of Ecological Importance

refuge for high Arctic species

management and sustainable use of protected areas

Safeguard Connectivity

ARCTIC COUNCIL

within and between protected areas in order to protect ecosystem resilience and

facilitate adaptation to climate change

Biologically, Ecologically, and

Culturally Important Areas

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Biodiversity

NATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION

Biodiversity

development in the Arctic for either terrestrial areas or marine areas

development in the Arctic for both terrestrial and marine areas

State has a plan (or plans) for Arctic development that incorporate resilience and

adaptation of biodiversity to climate change for either terrestrial areas or marine areas

State has plans for Arctic development that incorporate resilience and adaptation of

biodiversity to climate change for both terrestrial and marine areas

provided by Arctic biodiversity

ecosystem services provided by Arctic biodiversity

Disturbance outside Protected for sensitive life stages of Arctic species that are outside protected areas

Areas

outside of protected areas

in some important areas critical for sensitive life stages of Arctic species that are

outside of protected areas

for all important areas critical for sensitive life stages of Arctic species that are outside

of protected areas

Management of Living

Resources and Habitat

similar act

Research and Monitoring

associated biodiversity change and triggering conservation actions

issues where knowledge is lacking

of biodiversity in the Arctic through the CBMP

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

ARCTIC COUNCIL

Arctic Biodiversity

Assessment

Arctic Biodiversity

Assessment

Implementation

Plan

Biodiversity

support and implement the Arctic Biodiversity Assessment policy recommendations

Arctic Council work

Measures for Reducing

Threat of Invasive Species

reporting, identifying and blocking pathways of introduction, and sharing best practices

and techniques for monitoring, eradication and control of invasive alien/non-native

species

species that are, or will potentially be, harvested or commercially exploited

Conservation and

Management Plans for

Shared Species

and Monitoring Biodiversity

Stressors and Drivers

stressors through the CBMP

Shipping

NATIONAL

Heightened Ecological and

State implemented protection measures from the impacts of Arctic marine shipping for

Invasive Species

and management for Arctic waters

Emissions from Shipping

slow steaming, etc.)

restrictions for all Arctic waters

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

waters

ARCTIC COUNCIL

the Arctic Marine Shipping

Assessment

AMSA Policy

Recommendations

I(C) Uniformity of Arctic Shipping Governance

I(D) Strengthening Passenger Ship Safety in Arctic Waters

I(E) Arctic Search and Rescue (SAR) Instrument

II(A) Survey of Arctic Indigenous Marine Use

II(B) Engagement with Arctic Communities

II(H) Reducing Air Emissions

III(C) Circumpolar Environmental Response Capacity

recommendations

Cooperation on Oil Spill Prevention, Preparedness and Response

NATIONAL

Contingency Plans

for Preparedness and

Response

preparedness and response to oil pollution incidents in Arctic waters

the various public or private bodies involved, taking into account guidelines developed

pursuant to MOSPA and other relevant international agreements

in the national regulations of Arctic oil and gas activities

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Capacity for Oil Pollution

Response

pollution incidents includes

the competent national authority or authorities with responsibility for oil pollution

preparedness and response,

the national 24-hour operational contact point or points, which shall be responsible for

the receipt and transmission of oil pollution reports, and

an authority or authorities entitled to act on behalf of the state to request assistance or

to decide to render the assistance requested

equipment, commensurate with the risk involved, and programs for its use

organizations and training of relevant personnel

to an oil pollution incident

response to an oil pollution incident with, if appropriate, the capabilities to mobilise the

necessary resources

Monitoring and Compliance

in adjacent areas beyond national jurisdiction

hazardous ice detection through

satellite services

production and dissemination of ice maps in real time

the installations and to see all relevant documentation and equipment at any time

of violations and noncompliance;

if the operator fails to react adequately to dangerous situations

Prevention and Response

Measures

to Control Oil and Gas

Activities in Sensitive Areas

and Conservation Areas

and response measures, including enforcement of these measures

spills

a mean to minimise environmental impacts

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

ARCTIC COUNCIL

the Oil and Gas Assessment by the Tromso Ministerial meeting

and Gas Guidelines

Oil and Gas Guidelines

2009

Behaviour of oil and other

Hazardous Substances in

Arctic waters (BoHaSA)

Preparedness and

Response Deliverables

hazardous substances [BoHaSa Report]

pollution preparedness and response

Prevention Cooperation

prevention of marine oil pollution

Arctic Council established a mechanism supporting research to prevent release of oil

into Arctic waters

Arctic Council established a mechanism supporting technology transfer to prevent

release of oil into Arctic waters

Black Carbon and Adaptation

NATIONAL

Emissions Inventories

emissions

Early Actions

Flaring

Adaptation

appropriate to the scale and character of anticipated changes

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Observation

and the associated risks

cryosphere

the cryosphere

on ecosystems and human society

Arctic Council

Monitoring and Observation

since 2006

Black Carbon and Methane

Emissions Reduction

reports and action plans

information from national inventories

to achieve Black Carbon and methane emission reductions, which provides a report in

2015

Ecosystem-based Management

NATIONAL

Impact Assessments (EIAs), completed prior to approval of new exploration and/or exploitation activities

Strategic Environmental

Assessments (SEAs), and

completed prior to the approval of new exploration and/or exploitation activities

Risk Assessments

the approval of new exploration and/or exploitation activities

species and ecosystems

Multiple Stressor

stressors on marine species and ecosystems

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

Ecosystem Approach

aspects, and the legitimate stakeholders for each area

including management action for all their Large marine Ecosystems (LMEs)

Inventory for all their LMEs

ecosystems straddling national boundaries

Advancing Implementation

of EBM

ARCTIC COUNCIL

of AC EBM Expert Group

Report

Arctic EBM goal

supporting this goal

Observed Best Practices in

Ecosystem-based Ocean

Management in the Arctic

in Ecosystem-based Ocean Management in the Arctic” to be applicable to all

environments, including marine, coastal and terrestrial.

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

ANNEX 2. ACRONYMS

AAB

ABA

AACA

AMAP

AMSA

AOOGG

AOR

BWMC

BoHaSa

CAFF

CBD

CBMP

DFO

EBM

ECA

EPPR

GEM

GHG

IMO

LME

LOMA

MOSPA

MPA

NASA

NOx

OGA

PAME

SAO

SEA

SOx

SAON

SWIPA

UNFCCC

VTS

WWF

World Wide Fund for Nature / World Wildlife Fund

Strategic Environmental Assessments

Sulfur Oxides

Sustaining Arctic Observing Networks

Assessment of Changes in Snow, Water, Ice and Permafrost in the Arctic

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

United States

Arctic Ocean Review

Ballast Water Management Convention

Behaviour of Oil and Other Hazardous Substances in Arctic Waters

Conservation of Arctic Fauna and Flora

Convention on Biological Diversity

Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring Program

Department of Fisheries and Oceans (Canada)

Ecosystem-Based Management

Emission Control Area

Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and Response

Greenland Ecosystem Monitoring

Greenhouse gases

International Maritime Organization

Large Marine Ecosystem

Large Ocean Management Area

Agreement on Cooperation on Marine Oil Pollution Preparedness and Response in the

Arctic

Marine Protected Area

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (US)

Nitrogen Oxides

Arctic Oil and Gas Assessment

Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment

Particulate Matter

Permanent Participants

Actions for Arctic Biodiversity

Arctic Biodiversity Assessment

Arctic Council

Adaptation Actions for a Changing Arctic

Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme

Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment

WWF Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard - Assessment Report

GRU, Alm.del - 2016-17 - Bilag 51: WWF Verdensnaturfonden lancerer Arctic Council Conservation Scorecard

+100

WWF is in over

+5 M

supporters globally

1961

+5,000

For more information, please contact

Alexander Shestakov

WWF Arctic Programme

[email protected]