A sustainable Arctic: Making hard decisions

Trump, Benjamin D.; Kadenic, Maja Due; Linkov, Igor

doi:10.1080/15230430.2018.1438345

Cited by 32 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 47 publications

(57 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Many alpine areas already work collaboratively within regions, but greater national and international collaboration would be beneficial. This more collaborative and cooperative approach will be put to the test in coming decades in all cold environments as pressure mounts from exploitation of resources (e.g., Tolvanen et al 2019) and large increases in tourism (e.g., Kaltenborn 2000), requiring innovative approaches to developing these areas sustainably (Trump, Kadenic, and Linkov 2018).…”

Section: Planning For Alpine Arctic and Antarctic Futuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Moving up and over: redistribution of plants in alpine, Arctic, and Antarctic ecosystems under global change

Rew

McDougall

Alexander

et al. 2020

Arctic, Antarctic, and Alpine Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Extreme abiotic conditions, geographic isolation, and low levels of disturbance have historically provided alpine, Arctic, and Antarctic regions with low input of and relative resistance to the introduction of new species. However, the climate is warming rapidly, concomitant with intense and diversified types of human influence in these cold environments. Consequently, many plant species, both native and nonnative, are now moving or expanding their ranges to higher elevations and latitudes, creating new species interactions and assemblages that challenge biodiversity conservation. Based on our synthesis, many of the same nonnative species invade multiple cold environments, and many more could move up or over from adjoining warmer areas. Transportation networks and the disturbances associated with burgeoning development are responsible for many movements. Prevention and monitoring for nonnative plant species is of paramount importance, and management should be directed toward species that negatively impact ecosystem function or human well-being. Management of native range shifters is more complicated; most movements will be desirable, but some may be locally undesirable. Overall, plant movements into alpine, arctic, and Antarctic areas are going to increase, and management will need to be adaptive because species movements and assemblages of the past will not reflect those of the future.

show abstract

Section: Planning For Alpine Arctic and Antarctic Futuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Moving up and over: redistribution of plants in alpine, Arctic, and Antarctic ecosystems under global change

Rew

McDougall

Alexander

et al. 2020

Arctic, Antarctic, and Alpine Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Few SDM processes have been undertaken in polar regions, with most as exploratory demonstration projects led by researchers. These have included indigenous residents and researchers identifying trade-offs and actions related to subsistence harvesting in a changing environment (Christie et al, 2018) stakeholder interviews to show how a 'triage method' can link community monitoring with community needs and wildlife management priorities (Wheeler et al, 2018), and the application of multi-criteria decision analysis to address difficult decisions related to mining opportunities in Greenland (Trump et al, 2018). The Decision Theater North at the University of Alaska is also being explored as an innovative method of decision support (Kofinas et al, 2016).…”

Section: Structured Decision Makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Polar Regions

2022

The Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While the drivers of historical decadal variability are known with medium confidence, there is currently limited evidence and low agreement concerning causes of the strong recent decrease (2016)(2017)(2018), and low confidence in the ability of current-generation climate models to reproduce and explain the observations. {3.2.1.1} Shipping activity during the Arctic summer increased over the past two decades in regions for which there is information, concurrent with reductions in sea ice extent (high confidence). Transit times across the Northern Sea Route have shortened due to lighter ice conditions, and while long-term, pan-Arctic datasets are incomplete, the distance travelled by ships in Arctic Canada nearly tripled during 1990-2015 (high confidence). Greater levels of Arctic ship-based transportation and tourism have socioeconomic and political implications for global trade, northern nations, and economies linked to traditional shipping corridors; they will also exacerbate region specific risks for marine ecosystems and coastal communities if further action to develop and adequately implement regulations does not keep pace with increased shipping (high confidence).

show abstract

“…In other cases, spatial coincidence between minerals and biodiversity may lead to less significant impacts, because either extraction is infeasible, biodiversity is unaffected by mining, or mining causes less damage than alternative land uses [48]. Little is known about threats in extreme environments, such as mountaintops [24], karsts [49,50], marine systems [51 -55] and polar regions [56,57].…”

Section: Rethinking How We View and Map Mining Threats To Biodiversitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Mining and biodiversity: key issues and research needs in conservation science

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mining poses serious and highly specific threats to biodiversity. However, mining can also be a means for financing alternative livelihood paths that, over the long-term, may prevent biodiversity loss. Complex and controversial issues associated with mining and biodiversity conservation are often simplified within a narrow frame oriented towards the negative impacts of mining at the site of extraction, rather than posed as a series of challenges for the conservation science community to embrace. Here, we synthesize core issues that, if better understood, may ensure coexistence between mining and conservation agendas. We illustrate how mining impacts biodiversity through diverse pathways and across spatial scales. We argue that traditional, site-based conservation approaches will have limited effect in preventing biodiversity loss against an increasing mining footprint, but opportunities to improve outcomes (e.g. through long-term strategic assessment and planning) do exist. While future mineral supply is uncertain, projections suggest demand will grow for many metals and shift mining operations towards more dispersed and biodiverse areas. Initiating dialogue between mining companies, policy-makers and conservation organizations is urgent, given the suite of international agendas simultaneously requiring more minerals but less biodiversity loss.

show abstract

A sustainable Arctic: Making hard decisions

Cited by 32 publications

References 47 publications

Moving up and over: redistribution of plants in alpine, Arctic, and Antarctic ecosystems under global change

Moving up and over: redistribution of plants in alpine, Arctic, and Antarctic ecosystems under global change

Polar Regions

Mining and biodiversity: key issues and research needs in conservation science

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About