with limited financial capacity. This also includes harvest of migratory wildlife. Many of the Arctic MEAs that have been most effective, such as the protection of polar bears, have been specific and targeted. The Arctic Council should play a more active role in supporting the development of specific conservation efforts of migratory Arctic wildlife with regard to binding agreements with such non-Arctic states, as a complement to existing global conventions. Non-Arctic states that share particularly high responsibility for migratory Arctic wildlife should be identified and prioritized for further collaboration on conservation efforts.

are impinging on the effectiveness of MEAs. With this in mind, the protection of areas still remains one of the most effective tools available in management of Arctic resources, and so is the development of co-management programmes.

Thirdly, increased monitoring of Arctic wildlife, and especially of migratory species of birds and marine life, is strongly needed. Much of Arctic breeding wildlife spend their winters in habitats outside of the Arctic region and are severely impacted and threatened by harvest or habitat loss far beyond the Arctic. The Arctic Council’s Circumpolar Biodiversity Monitoring Programme (CBMP) and Arctic Biodiversity Assessment (ABA) should address strongly the role of habitat loss and impacts on “Arctic” migratory species also outside of the Arctic, as many seasonal wintering grounds are located in (non-Arctic) developing countries

Fourth, many MEAs are based on the understanding of the past and may not be fully effective in protecting Arctic biodiversity in the coming decades where increasing exploration and receding sea ice will open up for new exploration of a wide range of terrestrial and marine natural resources. Many parts of the Arctic have previously been inaccessible to development. This is rapidly changing, and trade nations also outside of the Arctic region are increasingly interested in the Arctic for shipping, transport and exploration. Hence, the Arctic nations, with their long-standing history in the region, bear a particular role in understanding the fragile ecosystems of the Arctic. The Arctic Council should therefore provide an even more progressive role in ensuring and further supporting its work related to strengthened protection and sustainable use of natural resources in the Arctic. Further, cross-sectoral and interdisciplinary thinking by policy- makers, scientists, and other stakeholders is needed in order to efficiently address biodiversity loss. A holistic approach in dealing with the conservation of Arctic biodiversity could ensure governance systems and management practices that are resilient and quickly adaptable.

PROTECTING ARCTIC BIODIVERSITY 9